1986 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 33rd Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1986

Morning Sitting

[ Page

7933 ]

CONTENTS

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Municipal Affairs. (Hon. Mr. Ritchie)

On vote 59: minister's office –– 7933

Mr. Lockstead

Mr. Mitchell Mr. Blencoe Mr. Reynolds Mrs. Johnston Mr. MacWilliam Mr. Stupich

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1986

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

Prayers.

MR. REE: Mr. Speaker, this morning in the gallery above me we

have 19 young students from Queen Mary Community School, who were

probably up about five o'clock this morning to get over here for the

opening. They're under the guidance of their teacher, Mr. Smith. I

would ask this House to welcome the students from Queen Mary Community

School to this chamber and to Victoria.

Orders of the Day

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS

(continued)

On vote 59: minister's office, $189,745.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, yesterday in this House during debate on this particular vote – and I have in front of me the Blues

– the minister responded to questions from both the second member for

Victoria (Mr. Blencoe) and myself regarding the financial situation in

certain communities here in British Columbia, and I'm now referring

specifically to the community of Powell River, and the minister did say

in his remarks as quoted from the Blues that he stands to be corrected

if he is wrong. Well, Mr. Chairman, I have been in touch with the

administration and His Honour the mayor of Powell River since the

minister responded to our questions yesterday. It's now, I think, my

turn to correct the minister, and hopefully receive some answers and

perhaps some apologies to the community of Powell River, because the

minister was obviously not familiar with the situation there.

First of all, the minister indicated – as can be verified in the

Blues, which I have before me, and Hansard – that the administrative

staff in the municipality of Powell River were among the highest-paid

administrative staff in British Columbia. Not so. The top salary in the

administration side in Powell River is less than top salaries to the

local school board, the local hospitals, and municipalities such as

Prince Rupert, Port Alberni, Kitimat and so on. In fact, I have an

exact figure for that salary if the minister cares to hear it.

Powell River's management staff had salaries rolled back, Mr.

Chairman, in 1985 by 7.3 percent, and frozen completely in 1986. Has

any other municipality in British Columbia done that? Powell River

council knows that increases have been considered for municipal

management staff in other communities such as, once again, Kitimat,

Prince Rupert and Port Alberni, and for the administrative staff for

the Powell River hospital. Since 1981 the management staff has been

reduced in that municipality by 20 percent. Since 1982 the total amount

of money spent on staff salaries dropped as well, by about 20 percent.

The minister referred on two to three separate occasions yesterday

morning, as recorded in Hansard , to the recreation complex in Powell

River. First of all, what's the minister got against recreation? That's

what I'd like to know. The total difference between the municipal

budget for municipal expenses between 1981 and 1985 was only $100,000

over those four years – now that is what I call restraint, and the

minister should understand that.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

One other factor, Mr. Chairman. The municipality of Powell River has

quite a low debt factor at the present time, and its CUPE workforce has

been reduced by 13 percent since 1981. Their unionized staff has been

reduced by 13 percent.

Mr. Chairman, I have an extremely serious matter to raise with the

minister. I wonder if the minister understands and is aware that the

municipality of Powell River at the present time is technically

bankrupt.

Interjection.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Well, Mr. Minister, that isn't good enough. You'll get your chance to answer in a couple of minutes.

I have been informed that while there has been some communication

with the staff within your ministry, since the minister became aware of

this situation, not once has he bothered to respond personally as the

Minister of Municipal Affairs to the mayor or that council; not once

has he indicated that he would meet with them on this extremely serious

issue. There has not been a municipality in this province, since the

Great Depression, that has gone bankrupt. Here we have a minister who

sits here in Victoria, while we have communities in deep financial

problems because of the policies of that government and that minister.

The minister has not made one serious effort to contact the mayor or

the council in that community on a personal level.

Mr. Minister, as a result of your responses yesterday in this

Legislature, and the fact that you have said the government is in no

way going to come up with the $3 million shortfall, in spite of the

fact that you know very well of the financial situation of that

particular community.... I'm going to take my place and eagerly look

forward to your response.

[10:15]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, in response to the member's

remarks, first of all he is totally incorrect that I have not had any

personal communication with the council of Powell River since this

problem arose. I would suggest that because of such an open mistake,

it's quite obvious that he has either been misinformed for some reason,

or he hasn't done his homework. I recall quite vividly the last time I

was in Powell River, which isn't that long ago, when I met with the

mayor and with council and with many other people up there, all excited

about the visit, because we were there together, talking about what we

could do to help stimulate the local economy. The occasion was when I

spent some time in Powell River with the council, signing their

partnership agreement.

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Would you quiet nattering from the background. You'll have an opportunity a little later.

[ Page 7934 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You natter, natter, natter.

In any case, on that occasion, as we do on all of our visits to

municipal governments when we're signing, we sat down and discussed

other matters of interest and concern. The member points out that

council did move and, I believe he said, cut and froze salaries by 20

percent, a clear admittance that they were overspending. They were

overspending, and I will have the exact figures with me shortly. I've

asked my staff to locate the exact figures not only on the wages but

also on the large amount of money that has been spent in the recreation

facility.

Let me make it very clear that this minister and our ministry, like

our cabinet, are very, very supportive of recreation facilities.

They're required, they're essential, and they will be provided, and

we'll continue to provide them; but there is no room, particularly in a

community such as Powell River where they rely on one taxpayer for

about 60 percent of their total taxation, for them to go and spend as

freely as they did. I am concerned about it.

You talk about the way that they've been able to balance the budget.

Oh, great! There was only a hundred dollars difference between what was

spent and what came in, or a thousand, or whatever — some minute

figure. Well, let me assure you, Mr. Member, that the technique in

managing the affairs of the local community is not having the ability

to spend all the money that's possibly available to them. The

management skills of those people should be challenged by way of them

determining exactly how much money they need to carry out the essential

services for the people, not how much they can grab off. Just because

the Assessment Authority places a high assessment on buildings, that

doesn't mean to say that council should just take that money down and

spend it. If the assessment values go up beyond what is needed for the

essential running of the municipality, then the rate per thousand

should come down. They should not take it and spend it and take credit

for living within it. That is what has been happening in a number of

places, and it has created a lot of problems.

Let me assure you, Mr. Member, that my concern is not for that

member over there; it's not for the council; it's for the people of

Powell River, because I am concerned about the way money has been spent

up there in the past. I am concerned for the people of Powell River. I

am also concerned for the people who are employed by that company up

there, because that kind of spending, that kind of tax load on that

company, weakens the company, and by weakening the company you are

jeopardizing jobs.

Interjections.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Tomorrow morning at 7 o'clock, Mr.

Chairman, I will be speaking to quite a large audience in the

Esquimalt–Port Renfrew constituency, as I do periodically, and you're

welcome to come there as the MLA and make that statement. Be my guest.

But, Mr. Chairman, on September 30 I was in Powell River.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The second member for Victoria

will have his chance to stand in his place on the estimates. In the

meantime, the Minister of Municipal Affairs has been recognized. Will

the minister continue.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: So I want to come through very clearly:

indeed it is not a case of being critical of the council or the

administration of Powell River, but rather....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Why don't you go oil your voice, or keep

quiet? It's irritating. You know, it's squeak squawk, squeak squawk. Go

get some oil and oil it, or keep your mouth shut.

The fact is that we are concerned for the people of Powell River,

because the people of Powell River carry the load. They carry the load

either through having to pay more property tax, or they carry the load

because there is going to be more unemployment if they continue to

place the tremendous financial pressure that they have been placing on

that major employer in that community.

My first concern is not for you, Mr. Member, through you, Mr.

Chairman, nor for the council, but rather for the people of Powell

River, the taxpayers.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, that was a very interesting

tirade by the minister, who didn't answer all of my questions and

obviously can't stand to be corrected.

First of all, one of the questions the minister did not answer was

whether he will undertake this now in this House to the person who is

elected to this House to represent the people of Powell River, along

with many other communities in my riding.

Secondly, I would remind that minister that the council in Powell

River, which he obviously has very low regard for, have been duly

elected by the taxpayers in that community in democratic elections – we

still have those for a while at least. I don't think the council and

the staff and the taxpayers in Powell River are going to appreciate

those remarks from the minister.

Furthermore, the minister defends the company. Fine. The MacMillan

Bloedel Pulp and Paper installation there is, of course, the largest

single employer in that community. But let me tell you that the layoffs

that have taken place and caused much of the havoc in that community

are not because of taxes or anything like that; the company has spent a

considerable amount of money in plant modernization, as a result of

which 600 to 700 people have been laid off, terminated, whatever, in

that operation over the last six or seven years. In the meantime,

production at that facility has increased. So there you are.

Look, I'm not knocking the company. They have, by and large, been

good corporate citizens in that community. They've donated lands for

various parks and recreation centres, which is a topic I'll get to here

in a minute. But nonetheless, I want the minister to know that that

community has deep financial problems. The minister has had no contact

with that council for approximately six months, by his own admission

here in this House this morning. He has had no contact personally to

undertake solving the serious financial problems facing that community.

Is the minister condoning or allowing the possibility of that

municipality and possibly some others in British Columbia going

bankrupt? He didn't talk about that.

[ Page 7935 ]

One other item. The minister questions these figures — my research,

as he calls it. Well, the fact is that I received these figures, as did

one of my colleagues, directly from His Worship, Mayor Colin Palmer. We

checked them again this morning with His Worship, who left a meeting,

by the way, to give me this information. He's furious about the

high-handed way that the government is treating this particular problem

in that community. If the minister is going to treat that problem in

that community in this manner, then what can any other municipality in

this province expect from that government?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I think the least that member

should understand is that companies don't modernize in order to lay

people off. They modernize in order to compete in world markets. My

simple question to you is: would you rather see the plant fail as a

result of their inability to compete, and see everyone out of work, or

would you rather see a major taxpayer — a major employer in your

community — take the initiative and modernize in order to compete and

survive?

MR. LOCKSTEAD: That's not the question, Bill, and you know it.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Well, that's the

preamble that you used, and I responded to it.

We're talking here about a problem that has been created in Powell

River as a result of past spending. Mr. Chairman, I give credit to

Powell River for having cut back. But let me quote you some figures.

MR. BLENCOE: Changing your tune, are you'?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Why don't you either get out of the House or quit your squeaking.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. members. The Minister of

Municipal Affairs has the floor. Other members will have their

opportunity to stand and speak on these estimates. In the meantime

please allow the courtesy to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I had a terrible nightmare last night: I

dreamt that Blencoe and I had dinner. Now I understand why the Victoria

council campaigned to get him elected MLA – to get him out of council.

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I'll try to avoid the inexperienced youth....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You know, you're annoying your colleagues.

Most of them have left. You shouldn't chase out the three who are

staying with you now.

In 1984 the administrator's salary was $74,280, with a population of 13,243.

You said that Port Alberni were paying more. The same year the administrator's

salary in Port Alberni was $59,916, and the population was 19,894. So you see,

here is a salary of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $14,000 more to administer

a community with a population of 6,000 fewer. This is where we have to be concerned.

Interjection.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You can prove me wrong later. We have the records.

This is where we must concern ourselves. It's not the Member of the

Legislative Assembly or council member paying this bill; it's the

people of Powell River. They're the ones I'm concerned about, and if 1

have any apology to make at all, Mr. Chairman, it will be to the people

of Powell River — that I did not catch on to this sooner than now. But

again, I give credit to the council that they have acted swiftly and

accurately. I hope they will take another look at what they're spending

and make sure that they're not spending money that could be avoided,

and thereby make it easier for the taxpayers and that company that is

trying so hard to maintain jobs in the community.

[0:30]

MR. LOCKSTEAD: First of all, Mr. Chairman, a quick correction

of the salary figure that the minister refers to. That position is no

longer in existence in Powell River; it was done away with

approximately a year and a half ago. The top administrative salary in

that community at the present time is an even $60,000 per year — that's

$14,000 a year less than the minister quoted, I believe. Just by way of

comparison, that salary, for such a high administrative post, is lower

than the top administrative salary on the school board or hospital

board in that district, or as I mentioned earlier, in the communities

of Port Alberni, Prince Rupert and Kitimat. According to my

information....

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture and Food (Hon. Mr.

Waterland) will come to order. If the minister wishes to participate in

debate, he will have every opportunity to do so when he is recognized —

if he is still in the chamber. Please proceed.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, I just want to reemphasize that

Powell River's management staff had their salaries rolled back by 7.3

percent in 1985 and totally frozen for this current fiscal year of

1986. Has any other municipality done that? I don't know.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: They recognized their problem, and they acted on it.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Yes, but you see, Mr. Minister, the reason I

dwell on this point is that.... I very carefully underlined the

pertinent statements that you made in response yesterday. I can

understand that mayor and council.... I certainly hope one of the local

papers prints this — which they will. You're going to have a very angry

populace in that area.

Last but not least, in terms of that recreation centre, I wish to

remind the minister that it was his government that abolished the

recreation facilities fund for starters. That's neither here nor there;

that's old news and long gone. But the people

[ Page 7936 ]

of the district of Powell River and surrounding

areas have as much right to a recreation centre as any other community

in British Columbia, and I make no apologies for that. I'm sure most of

the people in Powell River would not either.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The RFAP is a different ministry.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Again, the action taken by council has to be commended. It is recognition that they did indeed have a spending problem.

As far as the rec centre is concerned, the removal of that

particular funding source at the time has absolutely no bearing on it.

You know, it's not the capital cost of these facilities that hurts the

taxpayer; it's the operating costs, and that's what they're suffering

under right now. We must, Mr. Member – you must, and I will help you –

pay more attention to your taxpayers and to those who are employing the

people in your community, so that we don't allow a council to fire off

and....

MR. LOCKSTEAD: I didn't mean to get up again, but there is

one very important question: will the minister undertake to meet with

the representatives of the council of Powell River, particularly to

attempt to resolve this technically bankrupt situation that currently

exists in that community, and perhaps in one or two others in the

province, but certainly in that community which I represent'? Will the

minister undertake to assist in resolving this matter and meet with His

Worship the mayor and council members and attempt to once and for all

resolve this $3 million shortfall that happened as a result of the

legal case undertaken by the company in the community in which they

were successful? A $3 million shortfall — a further taxation problem

that the taxpayers in that community are going to have to face up to if

that problem is not resolved by this government.

MR. ROSE: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. ROSE: I would like to introduce an old colleague of mine

from the federal House who now is a very successful Minister of Labour

in the Mulroney government, Mr. Bill McKnight. He is here to sign a

federal-provincial agreement. I would like the House to welcome Mr.

McKnight.

MR. MITCHELL: I wasn't going to enter into this debate, but

when I sat here and listened to the minister, his only answer to a

serious problem that the member for MacKenzie (Mr. Lockstead) brought

to this House — a problem that is affecting his community, a problem

that is affecting many communities because of the change in the

economic system and the change in the status of this government when

they took over the taxation for industry, and they took all that money

into their pockets....

This is a serious problem, and I don't say there is a simple answer;

there isn't. But it's something that we have to discuss, that we have

to sit down and come to a solution about. What is his solution? It is

to attack the rights of the people in that community to make a decision

to build a recreation facility because they are living in an isolated

area, they have a one-company town, they don't have the facilities that

they have in Vancouver or Victoria that they can share with employees

from other industries. He attacks that decision because those elected

people wanted to provide facilities for the children and the workers of

that community. Maybe the decision was wrong; maybe we shouldn't have

facilities for sports and for recreation for people who live in the

boondocks. Maybe that is his policy, but we philosophically believe

that everyone from every community has rights to some of the facilities

and some of the recreation that we in the larger communities have. To

attack that, and to make out that these people shouldn't have these

facilities, is going back into the 1880s.

We have to have rights for British Columbians, and we have to be

prepared to adjust for those people who are living in communities that

are not part of the central area. You know, in representing northern

communities, there are a lot of areas where you would like to bring up

the facilities for the children there, for their education. It is a

problem. But that area has produced millions and millions and millions

of dollars of revenue that has come to this province by the processing

of lumber, the processing of pulp. It is one of the generators of the

wealth of the rest of British Columbia. You know, we have to recognize

that, and we have to recognize the rights. It is a problem. We have to

come up with an answer, not attack the wages of one particular

administrator, who I imagine negotiated with elected people. We can

pick out isolated situations, where if you go through — which I have —

the estimates, there are all kinds of deputy ministers who get

different wage levels. They're not all the same. You look at the wage

that was paid to the previous Deputy Minister of Health, compared to

some of the other deputies.

But you don't attack individuals; we come up with solutions for

problems. You know, it bothers me when we have personal attacks made on

individuals, and that is the solution. That isn't the solution. We have

to come up with solutions, and as the member for Mackenzie said, all

he's asking is for the minister to meet with the council members and to

work out some kind of solution that is going to be just. It's just a

simple thing like that, and let's not get down to personal attacks. All

it does is add another list of reasons why we have to get rid of this

government.

When I talk to the kids, the children in my school district, I'm

always quoting that minister. He's the buddy MLA from my riding, and

I'm trying to make him something with some dignity. If they're going to

come into my riding, I want someone with dignity.

MR. CHAIRMAN: All members have dignity. Would the member please relate his remarks to the estimates?

MR. MITCHELL: All I'm trying to do is.... Let's not attack

personalities. Let's come up with positive solutions, and let's all

work together.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Briefly, we will continue to support rec

centres, and I am really pleased to indicate that to that member.

Unfortunately the member from Powell River is not here, but credit must

be given to Mayor Colin Palmer, who is quite new in the community. We

have to give him credit for his courage and ability to take control of

the spending and start doing something about it. It is as a result of

his actions that we're now seeing corrective measures taken, which

started in 1985.

[ Page 7937 ]

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I think what we've had since late

yesterday — the minister's attack on the council of Powell River and

his subsequent changing of his mind back and forth this morning in

terms of where he is coming from — is an indication of frustration the

municipalities have had with this current minister.

I have travelled across this province and met with many

municipalities and council aldermen, and consistently the theme comes

up that this minister confronts them all the time. We had a classic

example here where he incorrectly attacked the council of Powell River;

incorrectly he gave the wrong impression and indeed, Mr. Chairman, I

believe, misled this House.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Withdraw.

MR. BLENCOE: I withdraw the term "misled." Confused, shall we

say, the situation, and this is consistent of this minister. Over and

over again, in my meetings with mayors and aldermen and councils, I

have found this theme comes through. We've got a minister who is not

prepared just to sit down in an amicable framework, in a consultative

framework, but always wants to try to find some way to attack local

councils. He never seems to recognize the years of frustration they

have gone through in the last few years under this administration; the

lack of resources and finances that they have gone through, in terms of

Powell River, Tahsis and other resource communities; the frustration

they have with the lack of finances and the assessment changes.

He seems to take any request of him for some action as a personal

attack upon his abilities, which is an incredible kind of position to

always take.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, whatever. I don't know what his problem

is, Mr. Chairman, but all the local councils, mayors and aldermen

across this province are asking for is some basic understanding, some

fundamental understanding, of the critical issues facing local

government today. Over and over again it comes back to me and others on

this side of the House — the frustration local councils face with this

minister. Indeed, over and over again I have heard quite quietly and

candidly from hundreds of elected officials at the local level....

MRS. JOHNSTON: Name one.

MR. BLENCOE: I'll tell you what, Mr. Chairman: I daren't name

those people. You know why? Because this government is so vindictive it

would indeed go ahead and cut back or make some changes in those local

councils. You can't name people in front of you people; no way can you

name people. We know what happens to them. We know the phone calls

start....

Interjections.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, this minister has been very good at seek

and destroy missions in terms of housing and Expo tenants. We know

that. What I am trying to say is that there is a deep frustration with

this minister's competency, this minister's administration of his

portfolio, and we've had it again, symbolized this morning and

yesterday, in his attack on the community of Powell River and his

confused changes of position this morning. One minute he is attacking

the council again; then he's saying: "Well, they've done the right

thing." You know, he really doesn't know what's going on, Mr. Chairman.

That's the message that comes through to us over and over again.

Quite categorically I state in this House that many times people have said

to us: "When are we going to get a change in ministers? When are we going

to get someone that understands our real problems? When are we going to get

somebody who has actually worked at the local level, been elected at the local

level, struggled with the budget, struggled with the lack of resources, struggled

with the everyday sometimes very mundane but important issues that local governments

face today?" Yet we have a minister who comes into meetings — and

I've been there — and confronts them, does his political spiel about partnership,

which has failed in this province, and does not address the real, critical issues

facing local government today. He confronts; he attacks; he won't sit down.

He won't support a review procedure that's been asked for by local councils

for years, a normal review procedure, for example, of the Municipal Act, so

local government can work in true partnership with a senior government.

[10:45]

There have been years of frustration with this government and this

minister about its centralization and its erosion of traditions that

local government have always held high, in terms of being able to

administer themselves, an independently elected people. This minister

again said it today: "I'm going to step in and take care...." I would

remind that minister that those people in Powell River, and all those

other municipalities he attacks consistently, elect their people to

council. They elect their people. The democratic process continues at

the local level.

This minister and this government's continuous erosion of local

government and the traditions of local government is a major concern to

those who are at the local level. And how this government treats local

government has become, in the last few years, a really serious

situation about its refusal to deal with things like liability

insurance; its refusal to deal with some of the critical maintenance

problems and infrastructure problems; its refusal to deal with the tax

problems and the assessment problems; its refusal to deliver relief

programs to communities that are in trouble; its refusal to sit down in

a partnership framework, in an atmosphere of conviviality and

partnership with local government.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: "Conviviality," yes, a word you wouldn't

understand, I suspect, Mr. Minister; but I suggest you check it out.

That was the tradition, until this government came in, of the

relationship between local government and the provincial government.

They worked hand in hand; they had respect for each other. This

minister, over the last two or three years, has shown total lack of

respect for local government.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Why don't you sit down? You don't know what you're talking about.

AN HON. MEMBER: It's the truth.

[ Page 7938 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The members will come to order. The second member for Victoria continues.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, these members opposite don't like

to hear the reality. They don't like to hear what we're told in the

various meetings we attend across this province — meetings we attended

last year, and we're going to start this year to attend area municipal

association meetings. At the meetings I have with mayors and councils

and alderman, they quietly and discreetly ask me: "How can we deal with

this minister?" He won't even come to terms with some of the basic

problems that local government are facing. It's there; he knows it.

Unfortunately it appears the Premier doesn't recognize it, because the

alienation, Mr. Chairman, of local government from this administration

is enormous. They indeed do feel alienated. They feel that when they

come to Victoria to speak to the minister, they really don't know what

they're dealing with. It used to be, some time ago, that when local

representatives came to Victoria, they thought they were going to be

dealt with in a respectful way. They hoped that they would — and they

used to — sit down and try to work out their problems. I've attended

meetings with the minister, where it's always a win win situation with

this minister. How is he going to come out of this? Is he going to look

good or is he going to be able to look like the hero, never really

trying to settle the issues at stake? He's always playing petty

politics with municipal government, always being small minded with

municipal government. We've seen it with the infrastructure program,

Mr. Chairman: province after province supporting municipal

infrastructure in a national program, and this minister, because one of

the finest mayors in this country, Mayor Mike Harcourt, happens to be

involved, can't endorse that program.

Municipalities over and over again are saying financial problems are

their major criteria for trying to get problems resolved. We need the

resources and we need to start to take care of some of those basic

infrastructures. But we need the help, and we need understanding from

senior government. Sure, we're not going to solve the problems

overnight, Mr. Chairman, but we've got to start.

In the last three years, under this minister, there is a list as

long as your arm of issues this minister has continued to avoid. On a

daily and a weekly basis I am talking on the telephone or meeting with

local elected people of all political persuasions who feel a deep sense

of frustration with this minister. They want somebody who understands

their financial problems.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who does?

MR. BLENCOE: If you took a secret vote, Mr. Chairman, of the

representatives of those area meetings and those UBCM meetings, I can

tell you what would happen. They would want some changes.

AN HON. MEMBER: They'd want Hugh Curtis back.

MR. BLENCOE: Anybody would be better than this minister, Mr.

Chairman. It's time that local government gets someone who is prepared

to quietly and effectively show leadership in municipal affairs.

He went on a crusade against planning, Mr. Chairman. Staff in

Municipal Affairs these days are scared to show their planning degrees

— years of work that have gone into gaining academic credentials so

they could help their province and their communities through the

planning process in Municipal Affairs. They're scared to show those

planning degrees anymore. You daren't whisper the word "planning"

around Municipal Affairs today. You daren't, because they know that

minister has some sort of naive, simplistic view of planning, that

somehow if you plan regions and communities, you frustrate development

and you frustrate communities and you frustrate the people who live in

those communities.

Mr. Chairman, we have planning legislation on the books, and if

there was frustration before, the legislation this minister brought in

last session is an absolute disaster. Councils have to meet far more on

planning issues. I tried to get this before the minister a day or two

ago, but of course he didn't want to answer any questions.

I think it's a sad day when dedicated public servants, planners in

Municipal Affairs, have to hide their degrees in their drawers, in

their cabinets at work. They have to hide their credentials, something

they're proud of in terms of planning and organizing our communities

across this province. When civilized people get together in contiguous

areas, you do have to have planning, despite what this minister feels

and despite his simplistic attitude to planning.

That's just one area — and there are many areas that I've brought to

this House before — where he cannot drop his personal bias, his naive

kind of approach to issues. I suppose the one that's come to mind this

morning is the whole area of planning. He has staff in Municipal

Affairs who can't even be called planners any more, Mr. Chairman. What

are they, urban development officers or urban officers or something? I

don't know what you would call them. You've changed their name. They're

scared of you. Mention the word "planning" and you'll chop them off at

the knees.

You've got a staff there. I know many of them. I shouldn't admit

that, because this minister will go on some witch-hunt. They live in

this community. Municipal Affairs used to be a department of high

morale. They used to be proud of working for government. They used to

be proud to plan for the future of British Columbia. They used to be

proud to lead on economic development issues and to consult with

communities on future growth and regional planning, laying out the

foundations for the future of this province. They used to be proud.

This minister, Mr. Chairman, through his simplistic, naive, ignorant

ways, has gone on a hunt to damage that ministry and its approach to

planning in this province. We cannot support that, and we wait and long

for the day when this minister, or somebody else who takes over, will

bring back a sense of dignity and a sense of worth in that ministry.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, I thought it was very important to put

this stuff on the record this morning, because this minister continues

to attack local government.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Your time has expired. The member will take his place.

MR. REYNOLDS: It's always a pleasure to get up and give the member for Victoria a little bit of a rest.

I have an introduction before I get into a few of the things I want

to talk about. I won't need leave for an introduction because I'm

already on my feet, but a gentleman in the

[ Page 7939 ]

gallery, Mr. Bob Thompson, is the provincial

coroner for Pemberton and a very hard-working citizen of that

community. I'd like the House to bid him welcome.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I welcome our guest as well, but leave should

be required because we are in estimates and debate must be strictly

relevant. But it's done and over with, so please continue.

MR. REYNOLDS: It's interesting to listen — or maybe it's not

so interesting — to the second member for Victoria, who's been up here

now for two or three days. All we've really received is an excellent

exercise on the activities of the mayor of Vancouver, the Downtown

Eastside Residents' Association and their anti-American,

anti-everything Mr. Green, and also personal attacks on the minister.

I would hope that if there's one thing the second member for

Victoria would learn it's that the people of this province don't

appreciate those personal attacks on the integrity of people who are

elected to this Legislature.

MR. BLENCOE: I was questioning his administrative ability.

MR. REYNOLDS: If that member knew the abilities of that

minister in his private life and his private business to be a success,

he wouldn't question those abilities.

Interjection.

MR. REYNOLDS: The second member for Victoria says that's not contiguous with public success, well....

MR. BLENCOE: Coterminous.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, this government has had great success

with the public business, because we have success election after

election. Only his party sits there and gets elected for a short period

of time, and the public couldn't wait to boot them out of office. So I

would hope that this member and his party would get off these personal

attacks. Give us the alternatives. They talk about what is happening in

municipal affairs, but they don't really give us any alternatives.

MR. BLENCOE: They're all there.

MR. REYNOLDS: He says they're all there, Mr. Chairman, but I haven't heard them.

MR. BLENCOE: Liability.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, if we're going to have liability, how's

it going to be paid for? If we're going to have planning, how are you

going to do it? You know, it's interesting that he talks about

witch-hunts. Those things just don't happen, but they want to plant

those seeds in people's minds.

Interjection.

MR. REYNOLDS: I don't notice that member talking. Maybe this

will gear him on to talk about the Islands Trust, which falls under

this minister. When this minister took over his portfolio, one of the

first things he did was to take a close look at the Islands Trust to

see how they operated. He brought a piece of legislation before this

House which was passed. But we heard the second member for Victoria get

up and fight that to the bitter end. He yelled and screamed about all

the terrible things that would happen and how the Trust and people

living on the islands would never ever vote for this government again

because of that piece of legislation.

He said: "You just wait." Well, we waited. We had the elections last

November on some of the islands. We had the GVRD election on Bowen

Island, which is a good example. It's an island that used to be totally

controlled by members of his party. The GVRD rep, who is a

card-carrying member of the NDP, Mr. George Helenius, is very active in

supporting their causes, active against this government and what we

were doing with the Islands Trust. He ran for re-election again.

Another person ran, whose name escapes me at the moment.

A lady by the name of Gail Taylor ran, a very prominent Socred in

the Bowen Island area. She also happens to be a member of the board of

directors of the Social Credit Party. She fought on the principles on

Bowen Island and what we were doing with the Islands Trust and where we

plan to go in this province. Not only did she win but she got more

votes than the other two candidates put together, because the people of

Bowen Island were tired of the politicking in municipal affairs between

the government and the Islands Trust.

They got that message back to the NDP members in that community.

They voted in a person like Gail Taylor, who would stand up and say: "I

don't want to play these political games with our Islands Trust and

with what's happening on Bowen Island. I want what's best for all of

the people, not just a very small minority." Because she took that

approach, she won with that big majority. She won because of the way

she handles her job, which is not to send a copy of every letter she

writes to the local newspaper, because publicity is their game, not the

solving of problems. She has worked at solving the problems in that

area, and because of that their problems are being solved.

[11:00]

I think that's a lesson that the second member for Victoria should

learn, because I'm really looking forward to coming back to this

Legislature after the next election. He may still be here, he may not.

But if he isn't, I'll go find him somewhere, just to say: "See? I told

you so."

The people of this province like the job that this government is

doing. They like the job that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is

doing. You can see that by the number of municipalities that have

signed up for the partnership program, by the number of letters that I

get from my constituents that say: "Thank you for the revitalization of

downtown West Vancouver. Thank you for the downtown revitalization in

Horseshoe Bay," which is turning into just a phenomenal spot.

MR. REID: And Port Moody, and New Westminster.

MR. REYNOLDS: And other areas that are represented by NDP members — Port Moody, New Westminster. They're getting downtown revitalization.

This government, unlike the stories you hear from this member, who

says we only spend money in our own constituencies, we only promote the

spending of this government's money in their constituencies.... We're

spending money for revitalization in NDP ridings.

AN HON. MEMBER: Victoria?

[ Page 7940 ]

MR. REYNOLDS: We're spending money right here in Victoria —

convention centres, revitalization. We're building bridges. We're

building highways through NDP ridings in this province, because this

party just doesn't work for the few. It works for all of British

Columbia. We don't say: "Who voted for us? Who didn't vote for us?" We

say: "Is it worth doing? Should we do it?" Then we do it.

MR. BLENCOE: What did Bud Smith say about that?

MR. REYNOLDS: What Bud Smith said about anything doesn't

bother me. I'm sure the NDP member for Victoria is pretty naive if he

doesn't think his people say certain things in political meetings also.

The second member for Victoria will take something that somebody says

at a meeting out of context, and want to play it up in this House....

MR. BLENCOE: No, I didn't; newspapers reported it.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, newspapers can report it, but....

MR. BLENCOE: The Minister of Labour (Hon. Mr. Segarty) has

said it in Sparwood. You don't vote for Socreds, you don't get money.

Partnership in patronage is what you practise.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, what they may have been saying, you see,

is that if you don't vote Socred there won't be any money left to spend

in the province. That's because the people of this province know what

happened in the last term of the NDP after three years of patronage,

with all their buddies getting jobs that they weren't competent for.

They were just being pulled out of the socialist province of

Saskatchewan into here for jobs: jobs for their friends, jobs for the

party.

MR. CHAIRMAN: This debate is getting quite irrelevant, hon. member. To the vote, please.

MR. REYNOLDS: Mr. Chairman, it's very hard to stay on the

topic when you keep on getting the second member for Victoria throwing

in his little barbs about some of our great members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order!

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The second member for Victoria will come to order as well.

MR. REYNOLDS: I will close by saying that I really appreciate

the job that this minister is doing. The second member for Victoria can

talk about his witch-hunts and his patronage and all the things that

don't count, but what really counts is the election, when we're elected

because of the policies of this minister. I can't wait for the day.

MR. BLENCOE: As usual, we've had an intelligent response from

that member. I don't know what he added to this debate, however. What I

was expressing — and obviously it's resulted in some response from this

government — was the attitude of local government to this minister over

the last few years. Indeed, that member brings up the issue of money

being spent in ridings, and the facts are there. The media have done

the analysis of where the Socreds spend money in ridings in this

province, where Municipal Affairs spends money in ridings in this

province. We all know, and the people of British Columbia know, that

this government over the last ten years has set up the biggest

patronage machine in the history of this country.

[Mr. Chairman rose.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now just a moment.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The member for West

Vancouver-Howe Sound (Mr. Reynolds) was told to withdraw remarks like

that, and the same applies to the second member for Victoria. We are

discussing the estimates of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, and

debate in Committee of Supply will be strictly relevant.

[Mr. Chairman resumed his seat.]

MR. BLENCOE: The member for West Vancouver Howe Sound brought

up certain topics that had to be responded to. I have to tell you that

when you take a look at the numbers and the figures that come in from

this minister and other ministries, in terms of where they allocate the

people's dollars in this province.... We know where they go. We heard

the various ministers say: "If you want money for your riding, you've

got to vote Socred. You've got to have a patronage system in place."

That's how this government runs this province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. As the Chair has already

indicated, the member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound was called to order

on the same issue, and so will the second member for Victoria. To the

estimates, please. Please continue.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I think the record has to stand

about the attitude of this government in municipal affairs, and in

other areas, about how they allocate the resources of this province and

determine the priorities, and about how this minister determines his

spending priorities and where he puts the dollars. The people have seen

through it. They've seen through how this minister uses the ads for

partnership. The member for Okanagan North (Mr. MacWilliam) showed it

yesterday — showed those ads of manipulation, using taxpayers' money to

try to convince the people of British Columbia that this minister and

other ministers are doing a good job, that this province and this

minister in cahoots with his cabinet colleagues haven't raised the

province's debt to historically astronomical proportions. The record

speaks for itself, and the evidence is clearly stated in the estimates,

in the budget, and in this minister's estimates. The people of this

province can see what this minister and others have been up to in the

last few years. The people of British Columbia are tired of that

manipulation and those ads.

Partnership in enterprise. We don't know how many jobs.... How

many jobs? You heard the member for Comox (Ms. Sanford) report from

five councils in her area —

[ Page 7941 ]

not one job through partnership. What do you call

it? Partnership in patronage? No, Partners in Enterprise. Not one job.

But the machine rolls on. The manipulation rolls on. The ads keep

running, and the people keep being manipulated by a sad, manipulative

government.

It's time for change in the province of British Columbia. It's time

this minister and his way of carrying out his portfolio are removed

forever.

MR. SKELLY: Even his constituents are offended.

MR. BLENCOE: Yes, even his constituents are offended, and we hear that he's being challenged in his own riding.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That's not relevant, hon. member.

MR. BLENCOE: They don't want him anymore.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

MR. BLENCOE: They don't want him anymore, Mr. Chairman. They

want him out. He has blown his portfolio, he has blown his job, and

he's an offence to the province of British Columbia.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Before recognizing the next member, just let me quote from standing order 43 regarding relevance in debate:

"...the Chairman of the Committee... after having

called the attention of the House or of the Committee to the conduct of

a member who persists in irrelevance or tedious repetition... may

direct that member to discontinue speaking and, if the member still

continues to speak... the Chairman shall follow the procedures of

standing orders 19 and 20." Standing order 19 states that: "... the

Chairman of the Committee of the Whole shall order a member whose

conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House or

Committee of the Whole for the remainder of that day" — which is soon

going to happen if we don't maintain strictly relevant debate.

On vote 59, the second member for Victoria.

MR. BLENCOE: I want to cover a couple of other issues, and

try to get some answers from this minister. For three days now we've

been trying to get some answers.

MRS. JOHNSTON: You haven't asked a question yet.

MR. BLENCOE: Oh, this member for Surrey — Bose knows your number, Madam.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The first member for Surrey will

come to order, and so will the second member for Victoria. To the

estimates, please.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, for close to three days we've been

trying to get some answers from this minister, even though he doesn't

treat municipal affairs very seriously — he sees it as a way to stay in

cabinet; it's a way to stay in cabinet for this minister. That's the

only reason he's there. He doesn't care about local government, Mr.

Chairman.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Why don't you get up and say something? You haven't said anything....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The hon. member will refrain

from personal comments, and will address comments through the Chair.

We'll continue on the estimates.

MR. BLENCOE: I will address through the Chair. I'm pleased to

announce, though, that the first member for Surrey is going to follow

me in this debate. We'll be very pleased to hear what she has to say.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Chair would be very pleased to hear debate, also.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask the minister about

regional government and the election of regional directors. It was our

policy when we were in government that all positions, either municipal

or regional district, should be elected. People have the right to have

that elected kind of accountability. So far this government hasn't been

able to cancel elections in municipalities or to school boards.

Actually we know they have on school boards. They stepped in with their

Big Brother hand. College boards, hospital boards, the history of local

affairs, a Big Brother Socred government is a standing record, we know

that, but they haven't yet dared to step in and cancel municipal

elections for mayors and councils. The Premier of this province hasn't

quite dared to take that....

MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry, hon. member, but it appears the

Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Leader of the Opposition are

having a conversation. If they would please cease or have it outside,

it would be appreciated so the second member for Victoria may

participate in the debate in a responsible and courteous manner.

MR. BLENCOE: I was saying that this government, which has

cancelled elections in other jurisdictions and other areas like school

boards and college boards, has not yet dared to move in on municipal

councils. We all know that major decisions like that come from the west

annex over here, from Premier Bennett and Dr. No. But we used to have

elections to regional districts in the province of British Columbia.

The New Democratic Party believes in the autonomy and the traditions

of local government, in both municipal and regional boards, Mr.

Chairman. We believe in that process. We believe the people living at

the local level, either municipal jurisdictions or towns or villages

and regional districts, by tradition under the British parliamentary

system and democracy have the right to elect people to regional

districts. This government a number of years ago found a way-didn't

find a way, they just did it — to take away that democratic process of

electing people to regional districts. Now we have an appointment

process, which means that the people other than unorganized areas such

as we have in Langford, where they do elect members.... The majority of

directors now are appointed.

[ Page 7942 ]

MR. ROSE: Like college boards.

MR. BLENCOE: It's like college boards; that's right. A nice

internal organization that makes sure the right people get to be

appointed to regional districts. Mr. Chairman, when we get elected we

will reinstate democratic elections at all levels of local government.

We will bring them back to hospital boards and college boards and

regional districts, because we believe in that democratic process.

[11:15]

AN HON. MEMBER: And accountability.

MR. BLENCOE: Accountability process, Mr. Chairman.

Regional districts are a very important level of government in this

province. They represent a lot of people. They make some big decisions.

They have big budgets, and they control a lot of resources. Here we

have in the province of British Columbia direct elections to regional

boards killed by the Social Credit government. Centralization and Big

Brother as usual in local government.

I'd like to ask this minister if he believes in the traditions of

local government, believes in the democratic system at the local

government level, believes people have the right of direct

accountability by people being elected to positions on regional boards.

Will he consider bringing back direct elections for regional boards?

Because I believe and our party believes that one of the basic reasons

why there is a lot of frustration with regional government is that

people don't know who their regional directors are. They don't have to

be elected, most of them.

Let's get back to some democratic principles — I know it is very

hard for this government- at the regional board level and have direct

elections for regional directors. Does the minister wish to comment?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, the administrative action of a

ministry is open for debate, but necessity for legislation and matters

involving legislation cannot be discussed in the Committee of Supply.

In future would you please contain your remarks to the administrative

actions and not necessity for legislation.

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, need for legislation is not even admissible

or in order in Committee of Supply; it's the administrative functions

of the minister's office. The need for legislation, existing

legislation or legislation presently on the table are not subject

matters for debate in Committee of Supply.

MR. BLENCOE: The minister wants to answer anyway because he knows....

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, we've seen another example of

the member's ignorance of what happens out there. Neither this minister

nor this government appoints anyone to regional boards. All directors

at the regional level are elected. I'm surprised, Mr. Chairman, that

that member, who's served on council, who's been in this House now for

a short time, doesn't know that. Why would he take the time of the

House to be critical of the government for not electing all members to

regional boards, when indeed they are all elected?

MRS. JOHNSTON: I think it's important, during the minister's

estimates, for the record, to indicate several of the very positive

actions that have been taken by this ministry. The revitalization

program that is in effect throughout this province is one of the most

exciting programs, I believe, that this government has undertaken. When

you visit a community that is participating in this provincial program,

there's no secret at all, from the expression given by each member of

the local council, that it is an overwhelming success. Even the famous

mayor of the city of Vancouver, who is mentioned so often by the

members of the opposition, supports that program.

In my role as parliamentary secretary, I had the opportunity to

participate in a sod-turning in Vancouver some weeks ago at the station

location on Cordova Street. Among the other members present with

Marathon Realty was Mayor Mike Harcourt. The words he used to describe

the provincial program could be nothing but supportive and flattering.

It was made very clear by the mayor and by the property owners involved

that this development, this improvement to the city of downtown

Vancouver, would not have been possible had this program not been in

place. The program certainly is a great credit to this ministry. That's

one of the programs that have received local government support, much

contrary to the comments made by the second member for Victoria (Mr.

Blencoe). One would wonder whether he does leave the Island to find out

what goes on in other regions.

I was also privileged to represent the minister at a sodturning in

Ladysmith very recently. This was for another revitalization program.

Mr. Chairman, the expression of support from the local business

community was so very evident that most of the shops that morning were

vacant of staff; they were all there to participate in the sod-turning.

Following the sod-turning, the mayor and the local community committee

invited any of the attendees to join us for lunch at one of the local

restaurants. The support is there. We visited many of the merchants on

the main street in Ladysmith. One of them was so supportive, they even

felt that they should be receiving approval for interior changes,

rather than just the exterior changes to their building. The interest

is there; the support is there. I think it's really a credit to this

minister and to the ministry staff that we have such a program in place.

Once again, contrary to the very negative comments made by the

previous speaker, there's certainly no lack of support in the province

for many programs put forward by this ministry. This is just one of

them.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, heeding your words about

legislation, if I may be permitted to ask the minister: does he support

direct elections for regional directors? Direct elections, not

appointments by councils.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, all directors on regional

boards are elected. In the case of those representing a municipality,

they are elected twice. Need I answer any more?

MR. BLENCOE: I don't think the minister quite understands

that a few years ago when you ran for city council you had the

opportunity to run directly for regional board. The minister probably

doesn't remember, because he has never

[ Page 7943 ]

been involved in local government. But when people

ran for local government, they ran for regional boards separately. On

the ballot you ran for alderman, and people also voted for who they

wanted for regional director. I know the minister may not remember

that, because again he hasn't had any history of local government.

Can I ask the minister this: does he support direct elections by

ballot — say, in the city of Victoria, regional directors to represent

the city of Victoria being directly elected by ballot by those people

who are going to be represented by that regional director? Does he

support that concept? I'll ask him again.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that the

member save the time of the House at the moment and come to my office,

and I'll explain how the election of all members to the regional boards

take place. They are all elected. I mean this is becoming absolutely

silly. Those representing....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Do you want an answer or don't you? Do you want to keep nattering?

It is becoming so silly, so I would suggest that in the interests of

the time in the House here, you come to my office and I'll explain how

they are all elected today.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, this is the minister of the Crown.

There is a process going on in this House where we are elected and

given a responsibility dutifully by the people of this province to act

as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to ask the minister questions. He has

the audacity, with a patronizing tone in his voice, to say: "Come to my

office, and I'll explain it to you." Well, we don't do the people's

business behind closed doors. We do it in this Legislature, Mr.

Minister; we don't do it behind closed doors where you can manipulate

as you usually do. It's the people's business; it's their right to

know. It's their right to know exactly where you stand on very

important issues facing people in the province of British Columbia, and

you're being patronizing. The audacity of your little comment: "Come to

my office, and we'll have a little chat"! This is where we do the

people's business, Mr. Member. This is the Legislature. We are elected

to do that business, and I won't go to your office for a little chat. I

will ask you questions, because that is our job.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Then don't come to my office. Go to the

office of Mayor Mike Harcourt. Go to the office of Mayor Don Ross. Go

to the office of Mayor George Ferguson. Go to the office of

Mayor.... I could go on and on.

What you are really saying here, Mr. Member — through you, Mr.

Chairman — is that you don't trust councils. That's what you have said.

This government does not appoint anyone to the regional board, no one.

They are all elected. The directors representing electoral areas are

elected by that community, and those representing municipalities are

elected in that municipality. So really, what are you saying here?

We'll make sure that the councils hear that you don't trust the

decisions of any one of the 144 municipalities in this province,

because you are claiming here today that they are appointed behind

closed doors in council. Member, please understand – and I don't intend

to rise to my feet again to answer you – that there are none of those

appointed; they are all elected. Those representing municipalities are

elected twice: first by the people; secondly by the council. You have

to trust the councils of our province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Chair's patience is being

tried considerably. The Chair has indicated a number of times that

legislative matters are not subjects of debate. The appointment,

election, or whatever, of regional directors is pursuant to existing

legislation. The Chair refers every member who wishes to check it to

section 778 of the Municipal Act. It is not an administrative function

of the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The Chair will not tolerate any

further debate on this issue. Will the members please confine their

debate to the administrative functions of the Minister of Municipal

Affairs.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I heed your advice. As far as I'm

concerned, I was only asking the minister for his opinion about how

directors get elected. He knows there used to be a ballot, and the

people directly voted. Again, he's trying to confuse the issue. But I

will leave it, with the understanding that the minister does not

support direct election of regional directors by the people. That used

to be the system — not just through the council. I will leave it there.

[11:30]

I want to move on to another topic: regional districts. When are we

going to get the Dan Campbell report on regional districts, Mr.

Minister?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. In future

would the member direct the questions through the Chair, not direct to

the minister.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Which report? There are 28 of them.

MR. BLENCOE: I'm wondering whether we are going to get a

collective report encompassing all the various things Mr. Campbell has

been doing. We've been hearing a lot about it through the media and

various other places. We've been hearing that some great things are

coming. I'm just wondering whether we can expect some sort of report,

because the taxpayer is paying Mr. Campbell's salary, I believe, and we

would like to have some report on his findings. Are we going to have

some report or any recommendations in this Legislature?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: The review of regional districts is quite

different from that of the past. Mr. Campbell has reviewed all regional

districts and produced a report on all of them, and if that member

would care to tell me which one of those he would like to have, I would

be pleased to do that. This is not done in the usual manner that he is

accustomed to — a great costly road show putting together reams and

reams of paper — but we have a report and a review of each of the 28

regional districts.

MR. BLENCOE: I can assume by what the minister is saying that

all these reports are being put together but there will be no action

following these reports. What kind of exercise has this been? Are you

going to have some basic recommendations for changes or processes in

regional district administration?

[ Page 7944 ]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: There have been changes taking place

throughout the regional system over the past two or three years. There

has been a great improvement as a result of this exercise, and I can

indicate to the member that there is a possibility that there may be

need for further change. However, only time will tell as it unfolds.

MR. BLENCOE: May I have the assurance of the minister that

this chamber and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition will be given every

opportunity to look at those changes and recommendations?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: It's normal procedure that anything that

requires the attention of this House comes here, and that's when they

have their opportunity.

MR. BLENCOE: Just a final question on this topic. It is an

important issue to regional districts because this thing has been going

on for two years, I guess, and no one quite knows where it's all going

to end up. Can I ask the minister if we can expect in the very near

future some final report and recommendations to this House on the

status and future of regional districts? Mr. Chairman, I'll leave that

there.

I want to quickly pursue another topic. One that often comes up in

municipal and regional jurisdictions is the whole question of sewage

treatment and municipal support and financial support for treatment

programs. There are some key communities that are very interested. The

member sitting here, the member for Okanagan North (Mr. MacWilliam), I

know is very interested in this topic. There are some key communities

that constantly face some rather unfortunate sewage problems. Victoria,

as I say, is one of them. I brought that to the attention of this

House, as the first member for Victoria (Mr. Hanson) has done many

times. In the last session the proposal was made by the New Democratic

Party in the Municipal Affairs Committee, Mr. Chairman — I think you

were there, as a matter of fact — that we in this province strike a

bipartisan, all-party research analytical group, whatever you want to

call it, to take a look at the sewage problem in key areas in this

province.

I don't think there's any bigger issue that raises public interest

and awareness and concern. I know in Victoria the dumping of virtually

raw sewage onto beaches and therefore the effect on the community and

the health and everything else.... Here in the capital of British

Columbia, I have to say, and I've said many times, it's a very sad day

when we continue to dump virtually unprocessed sewage and all the

ancillary things that go along with it out into the saltchuck out

there. If you've ever been in an aircraft, Mr. Chairman, you can see

it. That stuff, we all know, comes back in, and our children and our

families walk on the beaches. It really is quite an embarrassment and

quite a scandal.

We proposed — and unfortunately the Municipal Affairs Committee did

not go along with it and voted against it — a thorough review of sewage

treatment facilities, sewage treatment concepts, funding proposals or

inadequacy of funding. And we in this party on this side believe that

there is really a very definite need to deal with this issue as quickly

as possible. The member for Okanagan North may wish to talk to this. I

know he has some problems. We have tried diligently over the years to

get this government to recognize that this is not only a health issue

but a social issue and an environmental issue. We would like to

know.... This minister has these kinds of funds and support mechanisms

available. Obviously, Mr. Chairman, I recognize — and you could have

ruled me out of order, I suppose — that this is cross-ministry. We all

know that — Environment, Health — but there's no question the Minister

of Municipal Affairs does have within his mandate the ability to apply

resources, financial or otherwise; or research; or the Municipal

Affairs Committee to take on the job of really coming to terms with the

problem of sewage treatment and proper facilities in key areas of this

province.

I'd like to ask the minister if he has on his working agenda or his

staff agenda the topic or the task of starting to come to terms with

key sewage problems in the province of British Columbia. It's been

brought up many times, and we brought it to the Municipal Affairs

Committee of this House. Is any work being done in this area? Can we

look forward to, once and for all, some diligent work in sewage

treatment? Obviously the area I know best is Victoria, the CRD. Much

money is spent on big pipes, Mr. Chairman, but people of Victoria, and

I know in other areas, really don't agree with dumping virtually raw

sewage out into the saltchuck or any other place.

Can the minister tell this House that through his ministry, and the

work he does with other ministries...? Can we start to see some hard

work done in this area? And maybe we'll start to look at treatment

facilities in key areas of this province.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, in addition to having

announced additional funding for sewage treatment this year, the member

should be aware of the fact that there has been considerable work done

over the past year or two. For instance, in the Red Bluff area outside

of Quesnel a serious sewage problem for a number of years was resolved.

In Ganges, a serious problem that was fought by that party: 24 years of

frustrations, hardship, rising costs and all sorts of activities to

stop the sewage treatment plant on Ganges by that party.... They were

behind the opposition to it. We finally resolved that.

The east coast interceptor line here in this part of the community,

again something that was opposed by their party.... We finally come in

with a decision, and I'm delighted to think that the mayor of Victoria,

who doesn't hide the fact that she is supportive of their party — and

that's all right — commended the government for having made that

decision to get on with it.

Here we go. We keep marching on, working hard, and providing more

and more funding for that. The Okanagan Basin is another good example

of what's happening.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I want to make a few comments in regard to

the issue being discussed, but just before I get to that, I want to

clear up a few minor things that were left hanging over from

yesterday's discussion.

Going specifically to the municipal partnership program, where the

minister and I were discussing yesterday what the impact has been in

terms of renewed economic activity in the interior areas of this

province as a result of his program: if the minister can recall, I

asked him in the House yesterday if he can detail exactly how much

increased activity there has been in the north Okanagan specifically,

subsequent to the signing of the agreement. The minister's reply was

that he was unable to respond accurately to the question because there

has been

[ Page 7945 ]

so much activity throughout the entire province as

a result of this and other initiatives that it would be virtually

impossible for him to reply at that time. However, he did indicate that

he would be pleased to provide information to me in the near future. I

would like to ask the minister if he now has that particular

information available to him, specific to the north Okanagan area.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: That member knows that his colleague, my

critic, kept us in the House here until I believe after 6 o'clock last

night, and kicked off today with the same stuff; so no, there hasn't

been time to communicate there. But have faith, my friend. When people

come together in harmony and in partnership with a commitment to work

together, things will happen in spite of the negative attitudes that

may be with some.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I do take issue with the suggestion that it's

a negative attitude. Part of the mandate of the official opposition is

to look at issues in a critical manner and to ask probing questions.

Now if the minister wishes to respond that that is a negative approach,

so be it. But I think that is our responsibility on this side of the

House in order to get to the bottom of affairs.

I might add that I had mentioned yesterday that the year-to-date totals for

industrial development in the city of Vernon show that there was no new industrial

development as of the end of 1985, despite the signing of the provincial municipal

partnership program. The minister took issue with that, and suggested that things

cannot happen overnight — which I agree with; they can't happen overnight.

So I took the opportunity to place a few phone calls this morning to members

of the business community. I asked one particular individual who is involved

in some of the local economic development activity through the local chamber

if he could detail for me specific initiatives that have come onstream as a

result of the partnership agreement. Unfortunately, the only response I got

back was dead air; he couldn't recount any specific initiatives. But he did

agree that he would look into it in more detail. I think the reality there is

that these individuals, when asked a very honest question, gave me a very honest

answer, and that answer was that they couldn't come up with any specific initiatives

that have come onstream as a result of this.

[11:45]

Now I don't mean that in a negative fashion; I mean it in a spirit

of realism, to point out to the minister that maybe this isn't as far

as we should take it. I think that the concept of Partners in

Enterprise is valid, and I'm willing to give the minister a certain

amount of credit in that direction, but I want to say that I don't

think it goes far enough. I don't think that you have followed through

with the concept as adequately as you might have. I want to point out

that just to bring down a program and leave it at that is only taking

the first step and not completing the exercise. Throughout the province

in every community and every region there is a considerable amount of

energy and a considerable amount of talent that is going to waste. I

would like to suggest that the minister consider taking this concept

much further than he has taken it at present and get directly involved

with community groups and with action teams throughout every

municipality and area in British Columbia, to involve the people

themselves in coming up with initiatives and ideas for economic

development in those regions. It has to come from the bottom up, Mr.

Minister. The old-style bureaucracy, the top down hierarchy of making

up policies and programs in the smoky back rooms of Victoria, and then

expecting those programs to work, is no longer valid.

I would like to suggest to the minister that it's high time that we

harnessed the energies and the talents of the people throughout this

province and involved them in the process of local economic

initiatives, through this municipal partners in enterprise program.

Take it further than you've taken it. Involve the people. Involve not

only the people in the chambers of commerce — that's one sector of the

community, certainly, that has to be involved — but involve every group

in the community: involve the labour groups, involve the social

planning councils, the native peoples, the unemployed. Involve every

cross-section of that community, so that you begin to develop a broad

consensus of what needs to be done throughout the communities in

British Columbia. When you take that process, Mr. Minister, I think we

will find that we are able to harness these talents and energies, and

focus them in a positive direction, and actually do some good through

this program.

Perhaps the minister wishes to respond to that.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Quickly, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the

member's observations. I will be sure that he receives past copies of

our monthly update of the program, indicating what's happening, and

also indicating that we have only now come to the completion of step

one; there are many other steps in the process.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

MR. MacWILLIAM: In regard to another issue that was left

outstanding as a result of yesterday's discussion, I mentioned to the

minister a number of ads placed in regard to the municipal partnership

program in the papers in the north Okanagan. I showed one ad, which is

an average-sized ad that sold for about $300. The minister had

confirmed that about 130 partnership agreements had been signed. If you

use simple arithmetic, if only one ad was placed per agreement, we're

looking at a figure of $40,000.

When we're used to dealing in figures in millions, $40,000 may not

be a lot, but it is still a lot to the people out there who are

unemployed. I would like to suggest to the minister that in fact not

one ad has been placed for each partnership agreement signed, not two

ads, but perhaps three, maybe even up to half a dozen when you consider

all the different newspapers involved. You start adding up that

$40,000. For example, if you ran three ads, that's well over $100,000

that has been expended for what is really a purely political message.

I would like to ask the minister if he has perhaps had time to

review the figures, and if he can at this time let the House know what

his expenditure has been for the placement of those ads throughout the

province.

HON. MR. GARDOM: I'd like to respond to the question. It's an economic message.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Also there were 41 ads at a cost of $34,750 to advise people what is really happening out there economically.

[ Page 7946 ]

MR. MacWILLIAM: Are you saying, Mr. Minister, that there were 41 ads for a particular region in the north Okanagan alone?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I said 41 ads.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Forty-one ads for the entire province of British Columbia.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Forty-one ads.

MR. MacWILLIAM: For the entire province of British Columbia.

I leave the question as it stands. Is that a provincial perspective, or

just 41 ads for one particular region?

MR. STUPICH: There is a problem that arose in Nanaimo over

the assessment on a specified area with respect to a parking lot

development. The city council did appeal to the minister and came away

from a discussion with him some six months ago with what they thought

was a clear understanding that the required amendment to the Municipal

Act would be introduced in the late sitting in 1985. They were very

disappointed when nothing happened. To date, to the best of my

knowledge, we are still in that position where the minister has made no

progress in bringing in the necessary amendment. I understand there are

some 50 municipalities in the province that are waiting for this

particular amendment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Hon. member, the Chair has

advised the committee many times that the administrative action of a

ministry is open to debate, but the necessity for legislation and

matters involving legislation cannot be discussed in Committee of

Supply. I quote the seventeenth edition of Sir Erskine May, page 739.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, as I say, the minister gave the

city council of Nanaimo an understanding that necessary changes would

come in. This is my only opportunity to ask the minister whether indeed

he gave that undertaking and whether he has any plans to deal with that

problem. I've asked the question.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir Erskine May applies. Members have many

opportunities of discussing matters that are not subject to debate in

estimates. There are other opportunities in the Legislature for asking

questions.

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: I'm getting help from the Minister of

Intergovernmental Relations (Hon. Mr. Gardom). He tells me I can do it

in question period. Mr. Chairman, as you well know, this is the only

time that I can ask for an answer and hope to get one. In question

period I may or may not. Let the minister speak on something. He has

asked to be recognized.

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister is prepared

to answer a question about a problem that developed in Nanaimo, whether

it involves changes in legislation or not. I ask the minister: what

response does he have to deal with this particular problem? I'm not

asking for legislation at the present time. I'm simply asking him how

he's going to deal with this problem that is affecting, I'm told, some

50 municipalities in addition to Nanaimo.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I will not respond to any question on

legislation. But I'm aware of the problem, and yes, I did indicate to

the parties out there that we would be looking at it, and we intend to.

MR. STUPICH: I have an acceptance from the minister that he

will look at the question. I believe that's all he has said to this

point. He told the city administration some six months ago that he

would look at the problem. Are we as far ahead now as we were some six

or seven months ago, with the minister still saying that he will look

at the problem?

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure how to handle this.

The minister now tells me that we are further ahead. At the time that

this was discussed with the minister the solution seemed to be fairly

easy to come by. At least, that was the impression that the city

council and staff got in their discussion with the minister — that it

was a relatively easy solution. After some six months, is the minister

only able to tell me that we are further ahead, and he's still in the

position of simply promising to look at the problem, and he's a little

closer to looking at the problem'? Is that all he can say at this

point, Mr. Chairman?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Yes, it will be resolved in the fullness of time.

MR. STUPICH: I'm certainly satisfied now that it will be

looked at in the fullness of time. There will be an election; yes, it

will be looked at. Does he mean that after the next election it will be

looked at by a new Minister of Municipal Affairs? If that's what he's

saying, let him say so.

MR. MacWILLIAM: With respect to the sewage disposal program

recently implemented in the Okanagan area, as the minister will recall,

the Okanagan has been declared an environmentally sensitive zone, with

$26 million allocated for sewage assistance in that area. Could the

minister advise whether that funding is going to be made available

through his ministry, because that was not made clear at the time of

the original announcement.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: That, Mr. Chairman, will be dealt with through Environment, and you were made aware of that.

MR. MacWILLIAM: With respect to the funding recently

implemented for the Rutland sewer program just outside of the city of

Kelowna, that program went through apparently with 75 percent

provincial funding,

whereas the present funding allocation under the

sewage assistance program allows a maximum of 25 percent funding. Can

the minister explain to the House why there's the special dispensation

for the Rutland sewage program within the Premier's riding, when there

is $300 million outstanding in other sewage assistance programs that

have not been met?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, that member should know that

certain commitments are made in the course of administering these

programs, and that is one of

[ Page 7947 ]

those that was approved quite some time ago. Now

you wouldn't want us to go back on our word and deny the people of

Rutland the funding for that project that had already been approved,

would you?

MR. MacWILLIAM: Precisely my point, Mr. Chairman. There is

approximately $300 million outstanding in other programs that were due

to come on stream, apparently, before the funding was altered back to

the 25 to 75 formula. At least, that's my understanding. All I'm saying

is: why the special dispensation for the Rutland program, when there

were apparently other programs that had also applied?

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. Mr. Gardom moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1986,2001: Hansard Services, Victoria, B.C., Canada