1971 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 29th 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)

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 1971

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 167 ]

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 1971

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

By leave of the House, on the motion of the Honourable W.D. Black, Bill (No. 2) intituled

An Act to Amend the Civil Service Superannuation Act was withdrawn.

THRONE DEBATE

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister without Portfolio.

MRS. I.P. DAWSON (Mackenzie): Mr. Speaker, once again it is a

privilege to stand in this House and take

part in the Throne Debate on

behalf of the great riding of Mackenzie, the great coastal riding. I am

very proud, today, to pay tribute to those great fellows in Powell

River who last year took the Canadian championship for intermediate

hockey — the Powell River Regals. I'm sure the Members read about it in

the Weekend magazine. They are a splendid team, indeed, and we are all very proud of them.

I would like at this time, also, to commend the mover and the

seconder of the Throne Speech for the modest job they did a week ago

Friday. It's always good, if you apply yourself; if you can do that,

you must be good.

Mr. Speaker, as so many have said in this House before, we are all

aware that 1971 is our Centennial Year here in British Columbia. Not

only is it gratifying to feel the tremendous response of the citizens

of our Province to celebrations planned for commemoration of our

Centennial but, also, we already have indications that many of our

friends south of the border and from other Provinces in Canada will be

coming to British Columbia to join with us on this momentous occasion.

Tourism, as a business, plays an important role in our economy. The

expansion over the past six-year period to $470 million speaks for

itself. Such tremendous growth in the tourist industry is, in no small

measure, due to the combined efforts of the Department of Travel

Industry and interested citizens throughout the Province. I was most

impressed, indeed, with the programmes set up in both San Francisco and

Los Angeles last year — programmes which, besides promoting tourism in

the usual way, carried our story to factories, clubs of all types and

right into the community involvement areas, where large numbers of

people congregate. I think that the emphasis upon a four-season tourism

in our Province is certainly having a marked effect upon the growth of

this valuable industry. Great credit is due to those who pay their own

expenses and give of their time to promote an industry which they feel

is important and, while they may have a personal interest in the end

result, their efforts ultimately lead to more employment opportunities.

This, in itself, is a worthwhile consideration. I'm certain that

there's no other industry in this Province which provides more

employment opportunities for young people from university, colleges and

high schools during the busy summer months of the year than that of

tourism. The industry is continually expanding and broadening and, for

the most part, at very little expense to the taxpayers of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased indeed to see that, in the Throne Speech,

the Law Reform Commission of British Columbia expects to present its

next report to my colleague, the Attorney-General. Of particular

interest to many women will be the

section of the report dealing with

property relations between husband and wife. As of now, property

relations between husband and wife are governed by the common-law

principles of separate property. Where marriages are a going concern,

there are usually no difficulties. But the law is far from just in many

situations where the marriage comes to an end through death or divorce,

or, practically speaking, on separation. This is particularly so, for

all or most of the assets of the family are held by one of the spouses.

Even where there are joint holdings, such as joint bank accounts, the

law does not appear to be satisfactory at all. The functioning of the

present system of support, or of support obligations, that is,

maintenance payments, is also much in need of review, as many a mother

faced with the responsibility of supporting young children can testify.

The law on support is obviously closely related to the poverty

question. It is the intention of the Commission that, once existing

laws on these topics have been examined, the two subjects will be

treated together. This is a matter which concerns many women and I have

received a great deal of correspondence on the subject of law reform.

Those who have written to ask whether law reform in this area is

plausible, feel that a woman who is widowed, divorced, separated or

deserted, is often faced with great financial hardship. I am sure we

all look forward to any changes that may alleviate these hardships and

provide a more equitable arrangement in law for either marriage

partner, should the question of property division or support

obligations arise.

You know, Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member from New Westminster

got us on the bandwagon the other day on Women's Liberation and

declared that married women should have the right to be known as Miss

or Mrs., if they had a mind to. Well, I don't know about anybody else

but I'll stick with the Mrs. As Emerson said in one of his essays on

manners, way back in 1844, I believe it was, "The first point of

courtesy must always be truth." Let's face it, the truth of the matter

is, once you are Mrs., you can never become a Miss.

Mr. Speaker, Utopia was the imaginary island, invented by Sir Thomas

More, where the conditions of life and government were ideal. All of us

cherish a dream within us and strive toward our own form of Utopia,

whatsoever symbols and values that form may hold for us. Queen

Elizabeth II, on the occasion of her coronation, called upon her people

in many lands to cherish their way of life and to be mindful of those

symbols and values which have endured throughout the ages.

Utopia was represented as an ideal. We, as British Columbians and Canadians, are a practical people and, in

this Centennial Year, we can took with pride on our achievements and we

can see around us the results of the past one hundred years of wresting

a living from a land that was raw, rugged and unyielding. A land,

dramatic in its beauty, a land that left its mark upon our forefathers,

a land to which they brought all that was best in their way of life,

and a land that will surely leave its mark upon us. From our parents

and our grandparents, we have inherited a deep love of this land, a

burning pride in the country they helped to build and, most important

of all, we have inherited a way of life based on their symbols and

values, a way of life which has helped forge us together as British

Columbians and Canadians.

Let us then, not seek a Utopia but, rather, let us cherish our own

way of life. Our way of life, as well as our love of country, has been

handed down to us in many ways and should, I feel, be reconsidered

today and in the future. The old must always give way to the new. This

is progress. But it

[ Page 168 ]

is important to retain and reflect upon the symbols

and values of the past, as many of these symbols and values are what

have made nations great. Symbols and values cannot be cast aside

without replacing them with something of equal value and, if we are to

retain a national pride, we must retain some of the symbols of our

Nation.

For this reason, Mr. Speaker, I would ask our young people, to take

a look at some of the most remarkable people ever to walk the earth.

Parents and grandparents of those of our younger generation are the

people who, within the last century have, by their work, increased life

expectancy approximately 50 per cent, who, while cutting the working

day by a third, have more than doubled the per capita output. These are

the people who have provided the younger generation with a healthier

world to live in than the one they found and, because of their effort

and concern, we no longer have to fear the epidemics of flu, typhus,

diphtheria, smallpox, scarlet fever, measles or mumps, that they knew

in their youth. The once dreaded polio is no longer a medical factor,

while tuberculosis is almost unheard of. These remarkable people lived

through history's greatest depression. Many of them know what it is to

be poor, what it is to be hungry and cold. Because of this, they

determined that it would not happen to their children, who would

inherit a better way of life, would have better food to eat, would live

in a warm home, attend better schools, and would have greater

opportunities to succeed in life because of the improvements in

standards of living.

Today's young people are the tallest, healthiest, brightest and,

probably, the best-looking generation to inhabit the land. Because the

previous generation was materialistic, the younger generation will work

fewer hours, learn more, have more leisure time, travel to more distant

places and have more of a chance to follow their life's ambition. The

people who defeated the tyranny of Hitler had the compassion, when the

strife was over, to spend billions of dollars helping their former

enemies rebuild their homelands. These same people have made more

progress by the sweat of their brows than in any previous era and, in

turn, they hope that their children will make as much progress in as

many areas as they have, and that the newer generation will be able to

solve a good many of the world's remaining ills. The task will not be

an easy one. Young people may and can do it by hard work, humility,

hope and faith in mankind. This is quite a challenge.

By reason of the progress made by our parents towards a better way

of life, young people, today, move at a faster pace than did their

parents; therefore, parents of today's young people must learn to

re-evaluate their thinking. The symbols and values found in the home

environment are still the best basis for our way of life. Parents who

have earnestly and sincerely tried to inculcate in their children the

fundamental truths basic to our society, as we know it, must be capable

of understanding that, with progress and a faster pace of living, there

need not be a diminishing trust in their young people, that these young

people will, in their turn, still cherish our way of life, while

forging ahead, using all the means available to them to enable them to

make a still better way of life for mankind. Parents: this is your

challenge.

Just as symbols and values are important in the home environment, so

are they important in a nation. A nation without symbols and values,

without virtue as a central core, is bound to live in disunity and

isolated loneliness. We, as Canadians, have a responsibility to behave

as adult, democratic people. Our beliefs are considered by some to be

passe in this day. What those who would shoot arrows of scorn through

the myths of the ages fail to see is that, behind our beliefs and

symbols, lies an enduring strength, which enables those who hold to

them to endure, while others who have no beliefs of any worthwhile

kind, eventually wallow in the mire of their lack of purpose in life.

We have behind us in Canada, not only the splendid traditions and

annals of more than a century of growing and developing, but also the

living strength of customs old and new, of blending of races, different

in origin and history, all united in spirit and in aim.

While visiting Britain this past summer, I became very conscious of

the living strength of customs and of history, of the dignity and

mystique linking our Royal Family with our parliamentary system. There

are those who feel that the Monarchy and all that it represents is a

decadent entity in our society; however, there are a great many people

in our country who still believe that the Throne is an essential part

of our system of government, which is preferable to any other form. In

countries where a Monarchy, as such, does not exist, a president must

be elected every few years,

whereas the Monarchy is of enduring tenure.

It is to the Throne that the judges, the armed forces, the police, the

Government officials and public servants of all kinds, owe their sworn

loyalty. Not to the Parliament, not to the Government or the governing

party, not to the Prime Minister. Under our system, parliamentary

institutions with their free speech and respect for the rights of the

minorities and their broad tolerance in thought and its expression, all

this, we conceive to be a precious part of our way of life and of our

outlook.

These freedoms have been sustained and invigorated by the

contributions of language, literature and the arts, brought to us by

three groups of people: By our first citizens. By those who have made

Canada their country by choice, as well as those first settlers who

have hewn a path for us in earlier generations.

Those who would seek a Utopia, as well as those who cherish our

present way of life, might well re-examine their ideals in this

Centennial Year. They might, for instance, consider how fortunate we

are in our inheritance. An inheritance, recognized for what it is and

used wisely, husbanded for future generations, together with the

retention of our symbols and values and the cherishing of our way of

life, can help us go forward together in peace, seeking justice and

freedom for all men.

Mr. Speaker, when I was asked last year, to become involved in

working with our first citizens, our native Canadians, I was very

pleased, indeed, as I had already made a number of friends among the

Indian people and was aware of some of their problems. While fully

cognizant of the fact that Indian affairs are administered at the

Federal level, nevertheless, I knew that areas such as development of

culture, furthering of educational opportunities at various levels,

development of campsites and recreational facilities and opportunities

for economic development, could be and were being expanded through the

medium of the First Citizens' Fund. I was, indeed, pleased to see at

first hand results of some of these projects carried out through grants

deriving from the First Citizens' Fund. By making monies available

through this fund, Indian people can avail themselves of facilities not

at present open to them through any other funding. When discussing the

structure of the First Citizens' Fund with the Indian people and

bringing them information as to what was available through this fund,

many of them discussed their overall needs and the fact that it is

sometimes impossible to draw a line and say, "This is a

[ Page 169 ]

matter of Federal jurisdiction," when a situation presents itself for immediate solution.

Up to this time, I have visited some 80 to 90 reserves throughout

the Province and, during my visits, have had worthwhile discussions

with many of the people living on the reserves. In addition to visiting

with the people in their own areas, I have had a number of meetings

with nonstatus Indians and have attended conferences of both status and

nonstatus groups. These conferences covered a wide range of topics,

such as education, housing, health, welfare, recreation, preservation

of culture and economic development. From my contacts with the Indian

people, both on the reserves and at the conferences I attended, it

became clear to me that the native Canadian people are increasingly

desirous of having more jurisdiction in the management of their own

affairs.

Our native Canadians are a proud people and have a culture of which

they may be justly proud. Their culture comes down to us richly endowed

with folklore, stories and legends fashioned from the fabric of this

great land we all love. Just as the European settler has brought to the

land of his adoption his culture, in the form of stories, folklore and

legends, all of which have blended with and enriched our culture, so

our native Canadians have a wealth of cultural background that is the

heart and essence of this country. Who can remain unmoved when

listening to the tales of the great thunderbird, the whale, the raven,

or other creatures, which form the very marrow and sinews of the

culture of this noble race. The tales that are told of brave hunters

and fishermen enduring almost impossible perils in order to provide

their families with food to eat, put figures such as Davy Crockett and

Paul Bunyan somewhat in the shade.

I am very pleased indeed that the Indian people are making a

determined effort to preserve their culture and, to this end, are

engaging themselves in activities which afford opportunities to their

young people to learn their language, their dances and their art forms.

The First Citizens' Fund, which I mentioned, is a tangible expression

of our desire to see that this culture, this heritage of a proud race,

is preserved for all to enjoy.

Canadians, as a whole, would do well to learn more of the culture of

the Indian people. To know the culture of a people is an aid to better

understanding of that people. There is a wealth of detail inherent in

Indian culture to prove that there is a great deal to be learned from

their way of life and that there is much for Canadians to learn about

it. The Indian culture can make an even greater contribution to Canada

than the considerable one it has already made. Just as the Greeks had

their Ulysses, the Romans their Alexander, the Britons their King

Arthur, so the Indian people had their Maquinna and other great heroic

figures. It is my feeling that the time has come to offer a broader

selection of reading material centred around the Culture of this proud

race to our school children. Who, may I ask, would be better able to

research and write of this culture than the Indian people themselves?

I've brought just a few selections of books that I think are tremendous

reading for young people today. There are many, many more. One is

called The Salmon People, Indian Lives and Legends, The Raven's Cry , and here is one, a tremendous book, The Art of the Kwakiutl Indians .

This one is tremendous. There are many, many books but I do think we

should encourage Indian people to write, research and write, themselves.

Indian people are interested in upgrading themselves and educating

their young people. Whether education be attained and completed through

our normal school system, vocational training or at the university

level, it is important for those involved in such education, to

recognize that the Indian student does not wish to be singled out for

any special attention in an obvious way and, while he or she may have

problems in some learning areas, these problems are no different in

spectrum than problems encountered by other children. It is important

that these children, who are in our school system, know that they can

achieve whatever goals they have set themselves and that they can

become whatever they wish to become and are capable of becoming, when

they are ready to enter the adult world.

Mr. Speaker, it might be interesting to know some of the programmes

that are going on throughout the Province in various areas with our

first citizens. Many reserves now are taking up programmes such as the

BTSD course, which is the Basic Training and Skill Development. I think

others are taking up fishermen's upgrading and power saw maintenance,

carpentry, Christmas tree pruning and employment orientation. I think

one of the finest things that I have seen here, though, is up at

Terrace at the new vocational school in that area, about 40 per cent of

the students at the vocational school are native Indians. This is

tremendous, indeed, and shows that these people are doing and trying to

come out. It's tremendous, indeed, and I think if anybody's out that

way they should drop in and see these young people at work.

I would also like to mention at this time, as a part of First

Citizens' Fund and because we are interested in young people, that this

year, for the third year, our native children's Musical Tattoo will be

travelling to twelve communities in the Province and taking

part in the

1971 Centennial celebrations. These young people come from eight

different communities in British Columbia and I hope that if they are

near your area this June you will take in the Tattoo. They're just

tremendous.

I found a distinct trend amongst the Indian people I've visited to

encourage their people to better their way of life so that many of

those on welfare rolls might, through training and economic

development, become gainfully employed and, by so doing, attain for

themselves and their children a better way of life. These people felt

that welfare monies are still issued at the whim of persons not

adequately trained in understanding the particular problems of the

Indian social welfare applicant. They spoke of discrepancies in the

basic allowable earnings, health and dental care areas, areas which are

not automatically the rights of Indian people who find themselves in

receipt of welfare monies for one reason or another. It was their

feeling that, in some cases, their people almost had to beg for even

the most basic of their needs and that the amounts dispensed, both in

cash payments and in benefits, did not equate with the Provincial rates

for non-Indians.

One suggestion put forth to me by the Indians themselves was that

the Department of Indian Affairs should purchase the services of

Provincial welfare agencies in order that Indian people in the Province

would be eligible for all benefits accruing to non-Indians, off

reserves, in receipt of welfare monies. Many women brought up the

subject of marriage counselling services, child care centres,

para-medical services, kindergartens, development of playgrounds and

recreational centres. Regarding the suggestion made by the Indians

themselves that the Province agree with the Department of Indian

Affairs that Provincial welfare services be introduced into the Indian

reservations, an experimental project programme was undertaken a few

years ago in two areas of

[ Page 170 ]

the Province. It became abundantly clear as the

projects went forward that, in order to help the Indian people

effectively, it is necessary to have an overall operating agreement

between the Province and the Federal Government in order to allow the

Province to assist the Indians to bring about the changes they

themselves desire. The Federal Department of Indian Affairs would not

agree to underwrite the necessary costs to carry out the provisions of

full services to Indians. Nevertheless, the Province has not ceased to

work with the Indian people in an effort to assist them in determining

and achieving their proper destiny as equal citizens in our society.

Mr. Speaker, I could name several examples of the welfare, but,

possibly, at a later time in the Sessions, I will do so. But I think

that the welfare situation, in some places, like up in Fort St. John,

where the welfare worker, who is assigned to the Indian people by the

Federal Government, had not visited there at all last year. I also went

to another place where an Indian woman had no wood in her house, no

phone, no power and, as a result of this, when I stopped at the nearest

place, I contacted one of our own social workers and asked them if they

would look into this and they did. The next day with the cooperation of

the Indians themselves and their Council, this woman had wood in short

order.

Another thing of interest to the Indians throughout the Province is

that of parksites, campsites and picnic sites, which are being

developed by the Indian people on their land and I was asked if

assistance could be given in the form of services of a parks planner.

To this end, I consulted with the committee of the First Citizens' Fund

and, as a result of these discussions, a young man of the Indian race

is undertaking training in a Parks Branch of the Department of

Recreation and Conservation, this training to embrace the laying out of

parks, campsites, and picnic sites and, possibly, even playground

areas. Upon completion of his training, he will be travelling

throughout the Province and getting together with his own people, with

a view to developing these facilities.

Realizing the economic potential of their land, there is a marked

trend among native Canadians to broaden their economic horizons. The

economic expansion is being pushed ahead in the following fields:

construction of canneries, stores of all types, boatbuilding, leasing

of land for industrial sites, operating mines and, in the field of

agriculture, growing wheat, oats and other staple crops. In addition,

vineyards are being established in the South Okanagan region; however,

these developments are only a beginning. There are many acres of land

on reserves with a potential for grazing and agricultural uses of

various kinds. These lands could be brought into use by employing

irrigation systems.

With this in view, I have discussed such future development with my

colleague, the Minister of Lands, Forests, and Water Resources. The

Minister has indicated that his department would be willing to conduct

a feasibility study into the irrigation potentiality of areas where

people express interest in utilizing their lands for agricultural

purposes. If further action is deemed economically worthwhile, the

matter would then be taken up with the Federal Government, as any

programmes which result from such a survey would normally be developed

through a Federal-Provincial cost-sharing basis. Already, a number of

bands, concerned that their lands could be utilized through

introduction of irrigation systems, have been contacted with a view to

obtaining information as to their ideas of agricultural development

potentiality, in order that feasibility studies may begin. Who knows?

In future years, when driving through areas where sagebrush and dust

now hold sway, we may see these dry lands rejoice and blossom like a

rose.

I would suggest also, to my colleague, the Minister of Municipal

Affairs and Chairman of the First Citizens' Fund, that he give

consideration to setting up a board, whose function would be to study

the spectrum of economic development among the Indian people, this

board to be structured to include members from the Federal and

Provincial jurisdictions, as well as representatives of the Indian

people here in British Columbia.

Like his brother, the white man, the Indian of today finds that,

whatever dimension his social development assumes, whether it be in the

field of education, health, welfare, recreation or economic

development, housing, be it large or small family units, is the number

one priority within the band itself. Although there are housing

Programmes, sponsored by the Federal Government in many areas, a number

of people whose homes I visited brought to my attention their feeling

that these programmes could be better structured to the needs of the

people. They also indicated to me that they wished more involvement of

Indian people in the planning of their own homes. The people were

specific on several points. For instance, floor plan, locations within

a designated area, colour schemes and living space requirements for

each family. Would any one of us here today willingly accept a new home

planned by someone who tells us, "This is the type of house you are

going to get." In other words, a package deal, with no thought being

given to the wishes of the prospective resident. The point was made

that district or tribal councils should have more jurisdiction in

planning and carrying out of housing programmes. One suggestion was

that, since the need for housing in the majority of Indian villages is

a number one priority, consideration might be given to a programme

designed to provide low-income rental housing on reserves. I was quite

intrigued with the ideas of some of these Indians. I think it's

tremendous. It shows that they are really thinking.

I was shown houses supposedly completed, where the workmanship left

much to be desired and the home-owners, who pointed out these

deficiencies, said that, had a building inspector made regular calls

during the construction period and had building regulations been fully

enforced, there would have been less likelihood of payment being made

for work not completed. Many of the Indian people are capable of

undertaking construction of homes, therefore, they reason that such

construction should be carried out by qualified persons on the reserve,

where at all possible. This is the pattern on some reserves but, as

yet, is by no means general. Such a pattern would be one way of

creating employment opportunities.

I'm just going to give you an example of what I mean — the houses

not being completed. I visited one place up in the Fraser Canyon area.

The people had a house completed, supposedly completed, a year and a

half ago. It has full bathroom fixtures, copper piping and a water tank

and yet there's no water in the home. They could not use the bathroom

fixtures at all; the septic tank has not been installed. This lady was

heating water on the stove, with all this. equipment in her house. I

could tell you many others. I could tell you about a place on Vancouver

Island where they gave them a two-bedroom home for 17 in the family.

The Indian counsellor-in-training programme, set up in cooperation

with the John Howard Society, the Department of Indian Affairs, and the

First Citizens' Fund, was designed to help meet a need for specialized

counselling services for

[ Page 171 ]

Indian people who find themselves in conflict with

the law for one reason or another. The first Indian counsellors to be

appointed under this programme spent a considerable period of time

studying the principles and practice of law enforcement and visiting

correctional and welfare agencies in the Victoria and Vancouver areas.

Thus, they were enabled to familiarize themselves with such procedures,

as well as getting to know the staffs in these fields. They have been

directly involved in counselling in problem areas such as Court

appearances, bail, legal assistance, presentence reports, obtaining an

interpreter, domestic difficulties and referrals to other agencies. It

is quite evident that this service, while still fairly new, could be

extended and become a valuable and important aid to the Indian people

in the Province. The major share of this programme has been borne by

the First Citizens' Fund. For example, in 1970, in Vancouver, they gave

$7,500; in Victoria, $7,308. In 1971, they granted $7,500 to both

places. For the Federal Government, last year was $2,892, half of the

actual salary paid for the Court workers.

All of these areas are important. Knowledge of a culture is an aid

to understanding a people. Working together in the areas of social

services, economic development and allied fields can go a long way

towards making sure that this proud and noble race of people take their

place in the world of today. As Canadians all, we have a common bond, a

love of living in a great and fine land, a land which has much to offer

the world, a land which has some problems, but none that cannot be

solved. We cannot turn back the clock. The useful, the important, the

right thing to do is to learn to master the environment that is. The

white man must not always play the role of the giver, thus placing the

Indian in the role of the receiver but each race, united in their love

of their country and its great potential, each learning from the other,

must strive together to solve problems common to us all as Canadians,

and endeavour to achieve, by such unity and understanding, a better way

of life for all of us, both as British Columbians and Canadians. By

working together, we can to quote from an old Indian story, "Progress

together and watch our brother Canadians stand tall, with the sun, the

moon and the stars in their faces and the wind at their backs."

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Member for Vancouver East.

MR. R.A. WILLIAMS (Vancouver East): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm sorry the Honourable the Premier has left. I wanted to talk about

his home constituency later on in my talk, so I hope that he makes it

back fairly soon so that he can learn what happens in that part of the

world while he's away.

I think it's rather interesting, Mr. Speaker, hearing what the

honourable lady Member had to say; however, I had a feeling, looking at

my friend on my right, that she might be preaching to the converted. I

thought of talking about resources, Mr. Speaker, because that's an

important matter here in British Columbia. I'd like the opportunity at

some time later in the debates to talk about Finland and Scandinavia, a

glorious part of the world that I was fortunate enough to spend some

six weeks in earlier this year. There are a lot of lessons to be

learned from that part of the world which has an environment, in many

ways, comparable to our own. Instead, I think it might be worthwhile to

look at the heartland of Social Credit, Mr. Speaker.

You get the idea, listening to the Honourable the Premier and other

Cabinet Members, that everything began in 1952 and that we formed a

kind of Eden here in British Columbia and that the centre of it might

well be Kelowna and the Okanagan Valley. In the Speech from the Throne,

Mr. Speaker, the Lieutenant-Governor talked about creating,

probably…. well, let's use his words. They're difficult to remember,

this kind of bureaucratic words. The words were these. "The main and

foremost policy of my Government is directed to the improvement of the

total environment of its citizens, to the end, that they shall all

enjoy the best ecological climate in the world." That is the goal of

the Government, according to the Speech from the Throne and we might

refer back to that, as we look at different developments in the Central

Okanagan.

I'd like to focus on Kelowna for various reasons. One, because it is

the Premier's hometown and two, because it probably represents what's

happening in the Province on a broader scale and, probably, there are

no more telling examples than exist in the Kelowna area in terms of

what this Government stands for, the kinds Of principles that this

Government holds, and the kind of limited goals they really hold for

the people at large. Kelowna is interesting to look at for a couple of

other reasons. There are a couple of recent developments, just on the

outer edge of the city of Kelowna, both of which are worth looking at

in some detail. One of these developments is a publicly-owned

industrial estate developed by the city of Kelowna. It's just on the

city's edge. The other is a private, commercial development being

developed for profit by a relative few, by a new elite and by an old

elite. The kind of image one gets of the Okanagan is the one the

Honourable the Premier likes to sell. It's an image that really exists

only in the travel folders. You stop at the floating bridge on the west

side of the lake and if you look around from there you get this kind of

picture — a beautiful lakeland in Central Okanagan. You get the

impression that it very well may be a kind of Eden. That's the kind of

impression that is sold by the Government, by the Premier, by the

Cabinet and, yet, it's really not valid.

We might look at a kind of simple, general map of the Okanagan, the

Central Okanagan. This map, Mr. Speaker, shows roughly the city

boundaries and here you see the floating bridge, one of the real

achievements of this Government, and enter the city at Harvey Avenue,

Highway 97 continues. The city boundaries move way up to the north and

take in Knox Mountain to the north, the lovely hill that you see on the

left as you're coming over the bridge. It sweeps up into the old

Glenmore irrigation district, a very pleasant developing suburban area

to the north. It even includes Mt. Gilworth, an undeveloped mountain,

to the north and to the east. But it's when you look to the south, Mr.

Speaker, at the boundaries of the city of Kelowna, that things look

strange because the natural geography of the area is such that there's

a big, flat valley to the south and to the east. One would think that

that should rightly be within the boundaries of the city of Kelowna.

Yet, you see what happened. At the southern edge of the city's

boundaries, the line jogs around, dog-legging all around various

individual properties, in what used to be known as the District of

Guisachan — which the Government found embarrassing a few years ago and

removed — and jogs up again and follows Highway 97 itself. Highway 97

becomes the city boundary and, north of Highway 97, the city has

control. On the south of Highway 97, the Province has control and, now,

the Regional District.

[ Page 172 ]

Now, that gives a general idea, and I might, if you'll forgive me,

give a kind of planner's view of the town, to some extent. Kelowna's a

kind of a north-south town, like Vancouver is an east-west town.

Kelowna has a lower income group living on the north side of town and a

higher income group living on the south side of town. The industrial

area is on the north side, just like my east end in Vancouver. It's

very comparable to Vancouver in some ways, except the difference is

that the wealthy west end of Vancouver is within the tax area of the

whole city and so it can, at least, benefit the east end of Vancouver,

to some extent. But in Kelowna, that's something else again. The tax

benefits that the city should be getting from the south area are, in

fact, not available to the city of Kelowna, in order to carry out all

the services that they provide for everybody in this part of the

valley. So, there is this strange kind of gerrymandered city boundary

that pretty well orients to the north side of town and leaves the south

side of town alone. If you ever talk to the Mayor of Kelowna he'll tell

you that, "It's a real shame that the city boundaries are the way they

are, because all the land speculators are out here on the south side of

town. They're holding up development, they're creating countless

problems for the city of Kelowna which, in the end, always ends up

servicing them."

Another interesting thing about Kelowna, Mr. Speaker, is that its

downtown hasn't really developed, and I'm still giving a bit of a

planner's eye view of Kelowna, as I see it (interruption) . As a

downtown, well, I don't question the honourable lady Member's

professional qualifications and I hope she won't question mine.

Nevertheless, I'll leave that to her. She's free to do as she likes, of

course.

The interesting thing, Mr. Speaker, is that this boundary creates

all kinds of problems within the city. I think, if we go on from here

and look at industrial development, new industrial development, as I

mentioned earlier, it should be worthwhile. The industrial estate that

I mentioned in Kelowna is out here. This green area, out to the east of

town, that is land that was bought by the city of Kelowna, with the

help, incidentally, of some millionaires who loaned the city money, in

order to go into the public land business, in order to develop an

industrial estate to create jobs, and in order to create an industrial

area which the city could control and which would not pollute Lake

Okanagan, in which they could have quality development, in which they

could control access to the highway and in which they could control the

zoning. They've done that and they did it with the help of some aid

from wealthy people in the town who do care about their community.

But there are two types of millionaires in Kelowna, Mr. Speaker.

There are the ones who have it made and there are the ones that are

still on the make. I want to talk a little bit about both of them. The

ones that have it made are serving the interests of that community in

the form of that industrial estate and my hat's off to them. The ones

that are still on the make represent the worst of Social Credit,

represent the worst of what's happening in British Columbia today. That

industrial estate, Mr. Speaker, that the city developed, includes the

new McGavin's factory, a new Crown-Zellerbach plant, a new White truck

plant, and a good many other industries. There's been rigid control of

pollution and waste within the industrial estate. Crown-Zellerbach, not

willingly at first, has spent a quarter of a million dollars on waste

control, alone, within its own site. That was for an activated sludge

plant that deals with the ink waste and the starch waste from the

industrial operation. It's a credit to Crown-Zellerbach, it's a credit to the city of Kelowna, but it's no credit

to the Province of British Columbia. That's one thing that should be

made clear. Much of what one sees and admires in Kelowna is created by

the actions of a concerned, capable, civic administration and local

council, with no thanks, whatsoever, to the Province of British

Columbia, this Cabinet, this Government.

So, in this industrial estate, Mr. Speaker, the profits are going to

the city of Kelowna, they're controlling the quality of development,

they're controlling waste and they're controlling access to everyone's

benefit. The only complication they had was with the Pollution Control

Board. The Pollution Control Board wanted Crown-Zellerbach to put the

waste into the civic sewage system which would end up in Okanagan Lake,

but the city pointed out it was far better for the waste to be dealt

with completely by the owners, rather than have the waste in Okanagan

Lake. The city was able to quash a decision by the Pollution Control

Board that would have added to the complications of Okanagan Lake.

We might just comment a little bit further on waste control in that

part of the Okanagan. The city does have some early industries within

the city boundaries on the north side, as I mentioned. These industries

empty into a little creek, known as Brandt Creek, which empties out

near Manhattan Point on the north side of town. The city has carried

out a study and it's clear from that study where most of the waste is

coming from, that goes into that creek and which is adding to the

eutrophication of Okanagan Lake, which is killing Okanagan Lake. This

little diagram in the report shows where the waste is coming from:

basically from two main plants, within the city, developed a long time

ago. One of them is Sun-Rype, which is B.C. Tree Fruits, a cooperative,

and that's producing 80 per cent of the waste problems in that creek

which is going into the lake. The other is Calona Wines, producing 10

per cent of the waste going into that creek, which is adding to the

problems in Okanagan Lake (interruption) . What's that? Spelled with a

C, not with a K. That's right.

It's interesting to reflect on Calona Wines, because the owners of

Calona Wines are also the major shareholders in another company — Westmills Carpets Limited, which is located in the central part of the

Okanagan. Westmills Carpets considered locating in the city's

industrial estate, but Westmills Carpets thought that the standards of

pollution control were too high and too costly and so they started the

pattern that has now mushroomed in the Central Okanagan of locating new

industries outside the city boundaries, outside of the pollution

control abilities of the city of Kelowna. They located some distance

outside. They got Federal aid for their development and they ended up

with residues of effluent in the same creek. It's interesting that that

happened, Mr. Speaker. It's clear that the reason was effluent control

and that it was cheaper. But, now, SunRype, the company that is

polluting Brandt Creek, along with Calona Wines, says that it's going

to do the same thing, that it likes it out there past the city

boundary, that regulations are pretty soft and easy out there, and that

that's where they want to be. Now that the city is trying to put the

clamps on these two old companies, that have both done very well in

Kelowna, they are saying that they want to skip out, too

(interruption) . Well, it is true and I think that it's been clearly

reported in the Kelowna press, as well.

So it is clear, Mr. Speaker, that what's happening in the Central

Okanagan, in terms of environment and ecological control, is that the

best work, in fact, has been done by the

[ Page 173 ]

city of Kelowna and it is only a second-rate or third-rate job being

done by the Province of British Columbia. I'd like some assurance, Mr.

Speaker, from the Members for the Okanagan, from the Premier, who's

always unwilling to attend when the Opposition speaks in this House,

from this Cabinet, that they'll see to it, that the same standards the

city of Kelowna applies, will apply outside the city boundaries for all

of these companies, so that there'll be no special treatment for the

second generation children of politicians, which has been the order of

the day in the Okanagan. Because, if this isn't done, Mr. Speaker, it

really means the end of Okanagan Lake, as people have known it in the

past. It's all very well for you people over there to say, "Well, the

Federal Government is carrying out a four-year study about the problems

and the possibility of a diversion and so on." In the meantime, the

lake is dying and is being killed as a result of your inaction.

That

was dealing with a portion of the question of industrial development in

the Central Okanagan, Mr. Speaker. Let's talk about commercial

development and the way they handle commercial development in the

Central Okanagan, because it's much the same as the way they handle

commercial development elsewhere in the Province. The interesting

thing, Mr. Speaker, is that the city of Kelowna has carried out studies

on many occasions. They have carried out commercial studies and so on.

They found out that there was, in fact, a market for a regional

shopping centre in their area. The city carried out the economic study

that indicated that there was, in fact, a case for a new major regional

shopping centre somewhere around Kelowna. Ideally, if you're talking

about the new regional shopping centre, one which, in fact, will be the

new commercial centre for the whole Okanagan Valley, then we should be

talking about getting the best kind of development, the best quality of

development and maybe the best method in return for the public. But, in

fact, something very different happened. I think, Mr. Speaker, it's

interesting to compare this private development in the Okanagan with

the public development of the industrial estate, which I mentioned

earlier. The city did establish principles of quality and zoning and

access and wastes. What, in fact, happened on the question of a new

regional shopping centre for the city? Maybe we should look at the map

again, Mr. Speaker. The regional shopping centre is going to be located

out here, where this black circle is, at the junction of Benvoulin Road

and Highway 97. As I mentioned earlier, the city boundary is Highway 97

itself, so that the development takes place outside the control of the

city of Kelowna. The pattern probably began earlier with B & W

Development Limited in this area, because B & W, you may remember,

Mr. Speaker, has handled commercial development on other highways in

British Columbia, at other times, when we had another Highways

Minister. B & W developed in Blue River and the Yellowhead route

and so on. But, never mentioned at the time, was a development of B

& W's out there on Highway 97, near Benvoulin Road. That

development involved a new access to the highway and, with the access

and zoning, a sale developed. They sold to a CPR subsidiary — Husky

Oil. Now, when you go by that

section of Highway 97, you'll find a

Husky gas station at the site. That's really nothing new.

People in this House became familiar a couple of years ago, with the

pattern of road-running along the highways of British Columbia. We had

hoped, though, as a result of the debates in 1968 and, as a result of

having a new Highways Minister, the Premier himself, and then the

Honourable Member for Nelson-Creston, that the road-runners would

become a vanishing species. But they haven't, Mr. Speaker, they're

multiplying and that seems to be acceptable to the Government of

British Columbia. Adjacent to this land was a larger acreage, Mr.

Speaker,100 acres maybe, in fact, initially, 25. In terms of developing

a regional shopping centre at that site, it was really just a matter of

one, two, three. One: you could option the right land. Two: you've got

to get the zoning. Three: you've got to get the access. One, two, three

has happened, Mr. Speaker, and the fortune's been made.

Let's talk about the options. The lands were optioned in 1968. That,

as many may recall, Mr. Speaker, was the time, the year that the

debates carried on with respect to other people making fortunes along

the highway. That's the time the assembly took place. The assembly took

place by MacIntosh Centre Limited, which, by the admission of Messrs.

W. and R. Bennett, is a company that they are directors of and involved

in. They acquired land at Benvoulin and 97, some of it for $4,600 an

acre, some of it for as much as $20,000 an acre. They even acquired the

holdings of B & W, that is, the remaining holdings of B & W,

that B & W did not sell to Husky Oil. That, then, was the

acquisition. We might look at another map, Mr. Speaker, with regard to

that. The other map is out in the east end of town, this is Highway 97

coming out north to Rutland and to Winfield and, on this side of the

highway, is the industrial estate. The solid red area, Mr. Speaker, is

the 25 acres that is now becoming the regional shopping centre for the

Okanagan Valley. That's the solid red area. The areas that were

optioned included all of the red, the red square areas, as well. So

more than double, far more than double, was acquired. But only 25 acres

was to become the shopping centre site.

It was zoned, I believe, "rural," Mr. Speaker, and how was the

rezoning handled? Well, you know, rezoning now is a more complicated

process. It generally involves, in most of the regions, a review by the

Technical Planning Committee. The Technical Planning Committee involves

civil servants from the Lands Department, the Highways Department, the

Health Department, the Water Rights Branch, Municipal Affairs and

several other sections of Government. But, in this case, in the

building of a new regional centre for the Okanagan, there was no

consideration by a Technical Planning Committee. One, in fact, had not

been appointed, not for the Central Okanagan, at least. Yet, the

Honourable the Minister of Lands and Forests, Mr. Williston, and the

Minister of Municipal Affairs, both proudly talk about the Technical

Planning Committees and the jobs they're doing. As a result, the

rezoning was handled by the Department itself, and the Minister of

Municipal Affairs, on August 14, 1969, in the middle of a busy election

campaign, found the time to sign the rezoning for the property at

Benvoulin and Highway 97. That was without the benefit of the aid of

the Technical Planning Committee. It's one of the last ministerial

decisions, with respect to community planning area number one, because

not very long after that, community planning area number one was

disbanded and it became part of the Regional District of the Central

Okanagan, which had power to deal with these questions itself, at that

time. Just under the wire. The Honourable the Minister approved this

rezoning application, Mr. Speaker, and he did so with no discussions

with the city, after no discussions with the city of Kelowna, at a time

when there was no access yet provided to the site to Highway 97. He did

so. when there was no water supply to the site and when there was no

sewer system available to the site. That's the kind of town planning

the Honourable the

[ Page 174 ]

Minister carries out. So, anyway, the site got the Minister's

blessing and the land was sold, after the rezoning. It was sold to yet

another CPR subsidiary — Marathon Realty.

Then was the announcement made, Mr. Speaker, the announcement

regarding this great new shopping centre for the Okanagan. I have the

local paper here, which is the Kelowna Courier , and that's September 2,

1969. The Kelowna Courier headline is, "The Super Centre Slated." The

price tag reads $34,000,000. The subheading is that, "Bennett Announces

Plan for Huge Valley Complex." You can see the picture, here, Mr.

Speaker. One, the shopping centre, surrounded by office towers,

apartment buildings and so on, right around the whole complex. It's

interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, just when that date was. It was

September?. The Provincial election was the week before. It's clear

that the CPR, like the politicians in power in this Province, have a

delicious sense of timing. On September 3, there was another picture in

the Kelowna Courier . The headlines under the picture on page 1, on the

3rd, say, "Congratulations on the Big Deal." The people involved in the

picture are people from Marathon Realty, the Mayor of the city and

Premier Bennett. What was the big deal, Mr. Speaker? The big deal was

really the sale of the land. That was the big deal. The shopping centre

is coming later. What did the land sell for? The land sold for

$875,000, that's 25 acres at $35,000 an acre, some of it, land that had

been acquired for $4,600 only a year or 18 months before.

What about the question of water, Mr. Speaker? There's no city water

at the site and, now, if you drive down Highway 97, you'll see the

buildings, huge buildings in this complex, a year or so later, after

the earlier announcement and, yet, there's still no city water

available to this development. None, whatsoever.

A pattern has been set, Mr. Speaker, with respect to other land

speculation in the Central Okanagan near Kelowna. It was set back in

1965 by the Public Utilities Commission of this Province. There was a

case in 1965, with a group, a real estate group known as Townhouse

Developments and Carruthers Meikle, I believe. And we are again

involved in the old boundary game, the boundary question. The city was

being pressured to extend water to a speculative development half a

mile south of its boundary. They weren't getting that much cooperation

from the city but the city was willing to talk to these speculators, if

the city boundaries were to be extended at the same time that the water

was extended. A reasonable idea — that the city should be able to tax

the area that it services. That reasonable idea doesn't really prevail

in the Okanagan.

It's interesting to, look at some of the transcript, Mr. Speaker, of

that 1965 hearing involving the Public Utilities Commission. A question

on page 29 of the transcript was, "it would be correct to say, in any

event, the developers have done nothing with respect to attempting to

get these people into the city," and the answer from the city's

representatives was, "That is correct." Then there was a question to

the developers and that was, "Is there still any land available within

the city boundaries zoned for this type of development." The answer

was, from the developers, "If there is, it's very high priced, because

of the restrictions put on the areas by the city itself." Then the next

question, "And there are, of course, no restrictions, at the moment, in

your proposed area outside the city boundaries." The answer, of course,

was, "No." Then Alderman Angus, Mr. Tom Angus, at that time was an

Alderman in the city of Kelowna, he said this, in a transcript on page

82. He said that, "My understanding at the city's committee meetings

with the developers was that Townhouse Developments and Carruthers

Meikle would give their utmost cooperation to bring the south Pandosy

area into the city, which they didn't do. They didn't help us at all."

The Alderman carried on, "I asked them four times for a meeting. He

also said to me he would have, that is the developers, would have a

brochure made up, showing what he felt would be the advantage of this

area joining the city. But he didn't." The Alderman also said, "The

developers said they would have a man that would either be paid, or he

would do the job voluntarily, going around trying to convince the

people that joining the city was a good idea." The Alderman sums it up,

"We had no cooperation at all from Morris Meikle or Townhouse

Developers."

What happened, Mr. Speaker, on November 3, 1965? There was an order

by the Public Utilities Commission, requiring the city of Kelowna to

extend its water services, leapfrogging one half a mile to service

Lyle Wicks, Commissioner. As some may recall, Mr. Wicks is a former

Social Credit Cabinet Minister. Despite the fact that the city engineer

said that the water pressure in the area was unsatisfactory and would

cause problems for the city, despite the fact that these people clearly

didn't try to get the area within the city boundaries when they

promised to do so, your Public Utilities Commission required the city

of Kelowna to extend the water mains to serve the speculative

development.

I visited the Public Utilities Commission just last week, Mr.

Speaker, and I'm sorry to say it's the first time I was there. I found

it a rather quiet place, in which not very much is happening, in which

files are in disarray. That's the kindest thing one can say about them,

because I had phoned the day before, Thursday last, stating what files

I wanted to see and I arrived Friday morning to look at the files. I

subsequently waited half an hour to see the files that I'd requested

the previous day. But I also asked to see the correspondence files, the

kinds of letters that went back and forth between the city and the

commission, and the speculators and the commission, and I was advised

that the files of the Public Utilities Commission are not available to

a Member of the Legislature. I was advised, as you always are with

almost every department, now that you people have been the Government

for 18 years, "That nothing's public, nothing's public any more." You

are the Government that used to say, "We're the Government that keeps

people informed." Now the Government deals in secrecy day in and day

out.

My naivete may still remain, Mr. Speaker, but I was shocked when I

was told that the files are not available to an elected Member of the

Legislature. So I wrote, and I Wrote to Mr. Lyle Wicks, because I

thought he would understand a politician's concern with respect to

access to files. I wrote on Friday: "Dear Mr. Wicks: In conversation

with Mr. Mellish, secretary of the commission, this morning, I was

advised that none of the commission's correspondence files was

available to the public or Members of the Legislative Assembly. I would

appreciate it if you would confirm this policy in writing forthwith.

I'd appreciate confirmation by Monday, February 3." I received a

letter, Monday, Mr. Speaker, but it reads as follows: "Your letter of

January 29, addressed to one of the commissioners, is for

acknowledgement and reply. It is my understanding that, during your

visit on Friday morning, Mr. Mellish, secretary of the commission for

many years, extended every courtesy by providing you with the public

hearing transcripts and exhibits, decision and order,

[ Page 175 ]

with respect to Townhouse Developments in the city of Kelowna.

However, in accordance with the long established procedures of the

commission, he necessarily had to decline to actually deliver the whole

correspondence file into your hands." That's signed by Mr. J.F.K.

Commission (interruption) . Yes, the Public Utilities Commission has

secret files, just as almost every department of this Government has.

The reply didn't come from Mr. Wicks, Mr. Speaker, it came from the

chairman. That's fair enough.

Now, we really have to ask ourselves what's the prospect for water

in Orchard Park? Do we really doubt that the city is not going to have

to provide water to this development. Do we really? Aren't they really

faced with a fait accompli at the hands of this Government? Isn't it

really just like Utah Mines and Rupert Inlet? Well, we finally had the

Minister of Lands and Forests admitting that he was forcing civil

servants to make what are political decisions. Don't we have the same

thing here? We have a situation in which the Public Utilities

Commission is obviously going to require the city to extend the water

to this development. The city's had no say whatsoever regarding the

development and, in this situation, we have Messrs. Bennett as

directors of the company that was involved, initially, in this scheme,

who are directors of the company that hold the remaining lands

surrounding this scheme, who would obviously benefit from the extension

of water outside the city boundaries to service their land. We could

talk about the sewers and the sewer question and the waste problem with

respect to this development, as well, Mr. Speaker, but, suffice to say,

I'll just make a few comments. The developers, and that's Marathon

Realty, now, say that there'll be less than 50,000 gallons a day of

effluent from this development. Remember, this is the regional centre

for the Okanagan. As a result, it will be within the jurisdiction of

the local public health officer. By sticking below the 50,000 figure,

or at the 50,000 figure, they avoid having to have a pollution control

permit. Yet, what does 50,000 gallons mean? Fifty thousand gallons is

really something equivalent to only fifteen houses, it's the equivalent

of one laundromat. Does anyone seriously believe that that will be the

limit of effluent from this major development? I said that becoming a

millionaire, Mr. Speaker, was as easy as one, two, three. One was

optioning the land. Two, was getting the zoning. Three, was getting the

access.

What about the access question? Back in August of last year, 1970,

the city of Kelowna asked for a meeting with MacIntosh Centre and with

Marathon Realty and they wrote the Highways Department. They got no

action during the month of August. On September 2, the city of Kelowna

wrote the Highways Department again. I might note that prior to that

the centre officially had a sod-turning ceremony by the Honourable the

Minister of Industrial Development, Trade and Commerce, the Member from

Victoria, Mr. Skillings. So the sod was turned; there's no water;

there's no access, but they did have the zoning. September S, the city

of Kelowna wrote the Highways Department again, and they wrote and they

asked, "Is it reasonable to assume that access will be granted, in view

of the fact that construction is taking place?" They got a reply from

the Highways Department saying, "No, it wasn't reasonable to assume

that access would be granted because construction was taking place."

What a silly assumption! Twice more, in the month of September, the

city wrote the Department of Highways regarding this question. As late

as October 23, last year, the city was advised by the Department of

Highways that no firm decision, and I understand that the Minister

doesn't like to make firm decisions, no firm decision on access had

been made at that time, even though the sod had been turned and ground

preparation was under way. On October 23, the same day, there was a

telephone call to the Regional District from the Department of Highways

saying that access was, in fact, O.K. As a result, on October 23, the

building permit was granted and they were on their way.

How many accesses are talked about? Well, I'm not sure, because it's

very difficult to get material from the Department of Highways if

you're on the Opposition side of Government. What was proposed were

seven accesses, counting the Husky Oil site, seven accesses in that

small chunk of highway on that side of the street. It's interesting,

again, to compare it with the public development, established by the

city of Kelowna, the industrial estate. They have one access to the

highway and they, in fact, have a much longer highway frontage. The

reason they have only one access, Mr. Speaker, is because they're

convinced this is the killer chunk of Highway 97. There have been many

deaths, many fatalities in this

section of the Provincial highway

system and that's why they think they should have only one access and

control it, rather than as many as seven, as proposed in the private

development. Complaints were made by the city of Kelowna, Mr. Speaker.

They were made from civic staff, they were made from the Mayor of

Kelowna. I could quote the Mayor but I think that's public information

and has been seen by others at other times. I might also quote Judge

White (interruption) . I visited the Mayor and when I visited him, he

actually gave me a silver spoon, which is a very pleasant thing that

they do in the city of Kelowna. I think it's rather symbolic. It really

did belong, I think, on the Government side. Judge White is the head of

the Safety Committee for the Kelowna area and Judge White has expressed

his concern about this killer

section of the highway and the need for

controlling access there. The city engineer and the director of

operations for the city have also expressed their concern — qualified

people.

What did the local M.L.A. reply to the city's concern over the

access question in this chunk of highway? The local M.L.A., December

27, Colonist , was asked to investigate his sons' venture and that's the

request by the city of Kelowna in the open letter from the Mayor. In

the 29th Colonist , we had this statement from the Premier before he

left for Palm Springs. The Premier said on Monday, that, "The accesses

were granted by the Provincial Highways Department, only after the

action had been recommended by outside engineers, retained by the

Department to study the access application." The Premier went on to

say, "I'm sure the idea of having outside engineers in was to ensure

safety." What about that, Mr. Minister of Highways? Who did do the

study? Who did do the outside study commissioned by your Department? Do

you have any comments? The Honourable Minister is silent. Did in fact,

the Minister of Highways commission a study? Just yes or no. Did the

Minister of Highways commission a study on access at Benvoulin and

Highway 97? Just a simple yes or no. Any comment? (Interruption.) No

comment. Well, maybe since the Honourable Minister knows a little bit

about money, maybe he knows what they were paid. Does he know how much

he approved in the budget for this study? Yes or no? Does the

Honourable the Minister of Highways, in fact….

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The Honourable Member cannot question Ministers during a debate such as this. The

[ Page 176 ]

opportunity will present itself in estimates. Proceed.

MR. WILLIAMS: It's clear that the Honourable the Minister

considers the questions rhetorical, Mr. Speaker. Wasn't the study, in

fact, Mr. Speaker, carried out by consultants that have done quite a

bit of highways work — N.D. Lea and Associates? But wasn't, in fact,

the study carried out, not for the Province of British Columbia, not

for the Minister of Highways as the Premier suggests, but, in fact, for

Marathon Realty Limited? And wasn't, in fact, the study job No. 8038-81

for the Marathon project? Isn't that the one the Premier, in fact, was

referring to? I hope that the Honourable the Minister will find the

time on some other occasion to answer these questions. If, in fact,

that was the study, the study done for Marathon Realty Limited, a

subsidiary of the CPR, it's more or less understandable that the

Premier was confused, because this, really, is a Government that

believes that what's good for the CPR is good for the people of British

Columbia. The confusion is understandable.

I think we should be especially concerned about these questions of

access, Mr. Speaker, because we have a new Minister of Highways and he

should have kept in mind the promise of the former Minister of Highways

when he was Minister of Highways. You know what that promise was. It

was that, in the future in British Columbia, that it wouldn't be the

rip-off artists along the highways. We would have public bidding for

the major sites along the highways of British Columbia. The Premier

accepted our methods, those recommended by the Opposition that, in

fact, there would be bidding for these major sites along the highways.

In the same year, MacIntosh Centre was assembling land on 97.

It's interesting, Mr. Speaker, to hear Members on the other side

talking about free enterprise, because what do they really mean by free

enterprise? Does anybody really think that it takes any real

initiative, that it takes any real ability to get land option, to get

it rezoned and to get access rights to it? Does anybody really think

that that's difficult labour, that that's really tough brainwork? Does

anybody really think that? The reason may be that the honourable Member

is active in real estate. I can understand his belief.

Let's go back a bit, though, Mr. Speaker, and look again at the

question of city boundaries in the Kelowna area. Now we might look at

another map. Again, this is a map of the western part of the city,

showing the city park where the bridge comes in, and Harvey Avenue, and

so on. Again, you'll see that the city boundaries dog-leg around in the

south end. We should look at that because it's important in terms of

the kinds of taxes people pay in the Central Okanagan, as well. You

notice that a big dog-leg is made in one area, the real gerrymander. If

you look at the green piece of land there that has been outlined in

green, Mr. Speaker, this is the residence of the Premier of British

Columbia. A small strip of land remains within the city of Kelowna,

about 2.35 acres is within the city of Kelowna. But five acres, the

improved

section with the house and so on, is outside, and in

Provincial jurisdiction. Outside the city boundary.

It's important to look at these boundaries, Mr. Speaker, because the

people inside the cities pay high taxes in this Province and the people

in the Provincial jurisdictions pay low taxes in this Province, or

virtually no taxes (interruption) . You bet, it's high time the Premier

quit freeloading on the adjacent city of Kelowna and paid the bill

along with the poor people on the north side of town. The acreage in

the city, Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, is 2.35 acres. What does the city assess it as, the land alone? $17,830, but what

is it assessed at right next door, outside the city boundaries? There's

five acres there, Mr. Speaker. What's that assessed at? Same kind of

ground, if you go and look at it. Looks much the same to me and I'm

sure that anybody who's in the market to buy would feel the same way.

The five acres outside the city boundary is assessed at $7,795. Why?

Because it's called a farm for assessment purposes and you only have to

use it occasionally in an agricultural way, in order to get the free

ride. That's the difference. Business in the city, or assessments in

the city, are carried out fairly, Mr. Speaker. They're on the basis of

real value within the city. If the land outside the city boundaries

that the Premier owns, paid the same taxes as they pay, or rather was

assessed on the same basis as inside the city boundaries, it would in

fact be $37,600. What was it assessed at? $7,795. That's 20 per cent of

what it should have been. That's an 80 per cent write-off. An 80 per

cent tax write-off. The people of low income, on the north side of

town, the working people, the elderly, who are barely able to hold onto

their properties, are paying on the basis of proper value. The

speculators on the south side of town in Kelowna have a free ride and

the Premier is one of the riders.

Let's go back, Mr. Speaker (interruption) .

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

MR. WILLIAMS: Let's go back to the area at Benvoulin Road

again. Remember, that the land at Benvoulin Road was sold to Marathon

Realty from MacIntosh Centre for $35,000 an acre, and that information

is from Marathon Realty. Remember the picture that we saw? There's

going to be apartments and offices and high-density development all

around that centre. Maybe we should look at the map again. The solid

red area is Marathon. The adjacent boxed red areas are still owned by

MacIntosh Centre. What are those lands assessed for, for tax purposes,

Mr. Speaker? This big area here, just to the east of the shopping

centre, that's Lots 1 to 5 and 6 and 7, are assessed totally at $6,468

and there's over 40 acres. It's bigger than the shopping centre by far.

For tax purposes, it's assessed at $6,468. What's that per acre, Mr.

Speaker? $160 an acre for tax purposes. But if you're in the rip-off

business and selling to Marathon or others that want to develop the

land, it's $35,000 an acre. The new town centre for the whole Okanagan

Valley, the edge of it, for tax purposes, held by MacIntosh Centre, is

assessed at $160 an acre.

Mr. Speaker, the difference between the assessments inside the city

of Kelowna and outside the city of Kelowna is nothing short of a

scandal. The difference between the real market, what Marathon paid and

what MacIntosh Centre is assessed at, is also scandalous. This kind of

assessment scandal that prevails throughout British Columbia and

Central Okanagan is only just one example of the kind of thing that

means that the tax burden has to be carried by those who can least

afford it. The elderly, the people on pensions, the people on low

income, end up paying stiff property taxes, while this free ride is

taken by those in the speculation business. The free ride for the new

millionaires of the Okanagan, a free ride for the road-runners in the

Province. Is it really any wonder, Mr. Speaker, that school by-laws and

referendums for improving communities, in fact, fail, these days? Is it

any wonder that people vote down school by-laws, when you've got this

kind of rotten assessment practice going on across the Province? The

reason

[ Page 177 ]

they're voting down new schools, the reason they're voting down

community centres, is because they know they've got to pay. They know

that the new millionaires don't pay. They know that that's the kind of

system that you people stand for. The kind of fat gains made along the

highway, the sort of "wham barn, thank you ma'am," money that's being

made by a few along the highways is bad enough, but the insidious thing

is the drain on the economy over the years in the form of assessment

practices. Every year at tax time, across the Province, the small

property owners are taken for a ride and the others ride for free

(interruption) .

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

MR. WILLIAMS: That's bad enough, Mr. Speaker, but the

Honourable the Premier had the gall, the outright gall, to say that he

was going to bring in new legislation in the assessment field, as if

things weren't bad enough. The Premier is going to protect these people

more. This fall, he advised all the municipalities of British Columbia

that the system was going to change a little. It was going to get a

little worse. He said he was going to limit increases in assessments to

10 per cent. Now, that would mean, in the case of MacIntosh Centre,

which, as you recall, is valued for tax purposes at $160 an acre and

it's selling for $35,000 an acre, that their assessment could only go

up $16. That's the new kind of protection for the little people that

the Premier plans on bringing in this Session, Mr. Speaker. They buy at

$4,600 an acre, they sell at $35,000 an acre and they're taxed at $160

an acre. The Premier's not going to be content to just bring in a new

law, he's going to make it retroactive, so that we can be sure that

they won't be taxed out there at Benvoulin Road and 97. What that new

legislation will mean, Mr. Speaker, is that the scandalous pattern that

has already been established will be encouraged and things will get

worse.

Well, the question really, Mr. Speaker, is how do we clean up this

Eden, this Social Credit heartland? How do we clean up this

demi-paradise? There's a range of things we might do, Mr. Speaker, and

I would urge them all on the Government at this late stage. One, we

should have a Boundaries Commission in the Province like they do in

Ontario and Alberta, so that games cannot be played around city

boundaries. Two, we should have a Public Utilities Commission that is

public, with files available to all of the Members of the Legislature.

Three, we should have a Public Utilities Commission that does not have

retired politicians on it. Four, we should have an Assessment

Commission, that is free from political influence, that answers only to

the Legislature of British Columbia. Five, we should have an Assessment

Commissioner who is not a retired Socred politician. Six, we should

have a Highways Department that does not have one access policy for its

friends and another for its enemies. Seven, we should have a Premier

who really does live up to his promises. We should have a system of

public bidding for new developments along the highways of British

Columbia. Finally, Mr. Speaker, we should have

an Act of this

Legislature regarding conflicts of interest, so that these things never

happen again.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Cariboo.

MR. A.V. FRASER (Cariboo): Mr. Speaker, I am happy to be able

to take

part in this Throne Speech Debate on behalf of the riding of

Cariboo. I have listened, with interest, to all honourable Members, who

have spoken so far in this debate.

I have just recently listened to the Honourable Second Member from

Vancouver East; he seems to be very concerned about another riding in

the Province of British Columbia, namely, the South Okanagan riding. I

have a recommendation to him, that is, if he is so interested in the

affairs of the riding of South Okanagan, he should go up there and file

his papers in the next election and take on the incumbent Member of

South Okanagan. I'm sure we know what the results will be from the

people in the South Okanagan.

I would like to congratulate the mover and seconder of the Throne

Speech debate. They certainly put the idea across that I have regarding

the demonstrations that took place in this Legislature. As the

Honourable Member for Columbia River said, "They were deplorable and

despicable."

Unemployment has had considerable discussion. I realize that this is

a severe problem in our Province but I cannot understand the amount of

criticism that has been directed to this Government by Members of the

opposition parties on this subject. The real cause of this problem must

be laid on the doorstep of the Federal Liberal Government in Ottawa,

who deliberately embarked on a high interest and tight money policy

which caused all this unemployment. I can recall when another Liberal

Government headed by the former Prime Minister, Louis St. Laurent,

embarked on the same policy in 1956. Because of it, he was thrown out

of office in 1957, and I'm sure this is going to happen again to the

present Liberal Government because of their shortsighted monetary

policies. The people of this Province are victims of these foolish

Federal policies, and I am convinced that the majority of our citizens

realize this.

This year our Province is one hundred years old. I congratulate the

B.C. Centennial Committee for their efforts in organizing a full year

of celebrations throughout our Province. I'm sure these celebrations

will be enjoyed by all, and the Centennial grants made available to

communities throughout the Province will do much to enrich our Province.

I am aware that citizens in all walks of life in our Province are

concerned about the quality of our environment. In my opinion, this

interest has taken on increased importance for our citizens because of

the ever-increasing amount of leisure time available, and how to use it

effectively, enjoyably and constructively. A vital factor in ensuring

that the leisure world of the future is a place which we can enjoy and

which is worth living in is the careful preservation of our environment

in the cities, in the countryside, oceans, rivers, lakes, air, of

course, and wilderness. This Government has taken many steps to ensure

that our environment be preserved but there are a lot of measures that

still have to be taken. I am aware of the directive by this Government

that all municipalities must have primary sewage treatment facilities

by 1975. While this is a step in the right direction, I do not feel it

goes far enough. I feel this directive should be amended to call for

nothing less than secondary treatment facilities. Secondary treatment

plants will discharge effluent into the bodies of water that is much

higher in purity than those from primary plants. I do not agree with

many municipal councils in this Province, who say they cannot afford

secondary sewage treatment plants. Now, I am of the opinion, that the

citizens they represent want these facilities and are prepared to pay

for them. If the municipal councils of this Province don't pick this

up, I'm sure they'll end out on the street and won't be the councils.

With the substantial aid that is available now from the Federal and

Provincial Governments for sewage treatment facilities, it will not

cost any householder in the Province of British Columbia any

[ Page 178 ]

more than $100 per year to get secondary treatment facilities. I

recommend that the Provincial Government insist on nothing less than

secondary sewage treatment facilities in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, while I'm on the subject of the quality of our

environment, I would like to mention a serious pollution problem which

exists in my riding of Cariboo and is being caused by a Crown-owned

agency, namely, the Pacific Great Eastern Railroad. Due to the close

utilization policy of our Forestry Department, with which I completely

agree, all our timber must be completely utilized; that is, rather than

leave waste in the forest from logging operations, it is to be salvaged

and manufactured. In the case of the Cariboo lumber operators, they

have all installed barkers and chippers so that they would fully comply

with the close utilization policy of this Government. I might add that

these barkers and chippers represent a large capital investment,

something in the neighbourhood of a quarter of a million dollars for

each sawmill. The chips which are manufactured from this,waste are

loaded into chip cars of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway and

transported to the pulp mills at Prince George for manufacture into

pulp and paper products. However, a serious problem exists along the

Pacific Great Eastern Railroad from 100 Mile House to north of Quesnel,

where all the major timber industry exists in the Cariboo. The chips

are being manufactured but the mills cannot get enough chip cars from

the railroad to transport them. This condition has existed for a

considerable time. When the mill operators cannot get chip Cars, as

required, they burn the chips. Yes, Mr. Speaker, they burn the chips

and, in the process, create a serious air pollution problem in the

major centres of population in the Cariboo, where these large mills are

located.

Last year, the sawmills in the Cariboo were not able to get 725 chip

cars that were required and, consequently, these chips were burned,

causing severe air pollution and last, but far from least, causing a

dollar loss to the industry of some $230,000, as each car of chips is

worth $320. Mr. Speaker, this happened in the year 1970, when our mill

operators were experiencing probably the worst year they have

experienced in years, because of the depressed state of the world

lumber markets. This lost revenue of $230,000, because of the lack of

chip cars, would have helped some operators to, at least, break even on

operations last year, rather than experience severe losses. The Pacific

Great Eastern Railway has tried to remedy this bad situation by

acquiring more chip cars but, I feel, they have not done enough and

they should continue to resolve this wasteful situation until it is

completely eliminated. I might say that the general manager of the

Pacific Great Eastern Railroad has written some sawmill operators in

the Cariboo and suggested to them that they buy the chip cars at

$16,000 apiece, and then they would have adequate chip cars. I would

say to the general manager of the Pacific Great Eastern Railroad that

the sawmill people have enough problems and it's not their business — transportation — but that transportation is the business of the Pacific

Great Eastern Railroad.

Mr. Speaker, while I feel this Government has done very well until

now in an effort to ensure a proper environment for our citizens, the

time has arrived when a separate ministry of environment control must

be established, then, all efforts on this complex problem would be

directed by one Minister instead of the several we have at the present

time.

Mr. Speaker, during this debate, I am very surprised that very few

honourable Members have had any comment about the plight of our

municipalities with their problems on welfare costs. While I realize

this problem has been caused by the foolish fiscal policies of the

Federal Government, the cost of welfare is a very heavy burden on the

limited tax resources of our municipalities. In the past few years the

costs have almost doubled for welfare. As an example, out of a total

levy of 28 mills in taxes for general municipal taxes, that is

excluding school and hospital taxes, eight mills, or approximately 23

per cent of this levy, is going to welfare. How can our municipalities

perform all their other obligations with so heavy a load to carry for

welfare? Of course, they cannot keep up with the other necessary

services, such as building and maintaining streets, sidewalks, water

services, recreational services and so on. They cannot keep up and,

consequently, I'm concerned that these essential services are either

standing still or going backwards. I realize the costs of welfare are

up for the Provincial Government as well but I do not believe that they

have had the sharp percentage increases that the municipalities have

had. The cost-sharing… (interruption) . Just be quiet, Mr. Opposition,

I'm coming to that now. The cost-sharing formula, at the present time,

is 50 per cent Federal, 30 per cent Provincial, and 20 per cent

municipal. Not so long ago it was 50 per cent Federal, 40 per cent

Provincial and 10 per cent municipal. I would recommend to this

Government, on behalf of all our municipalities, that the cost-sharing

formula be restored to its original formula, which was 50 per cent

Federal, 40 per cent Provincial, and 10 percent municipal. I would

suggest that the increase that was given last year in the budget to

help the municipalities with their welfare, which was $2 per capita,

that the Province take that back and retain it to help them with their

increased costs.

The year 1970 was not the best year for our Province. In the riding

of Cariboo, the Provincial Government did complete some major items

which will greatly improve some conditions for the citizens of Cariboo.

The Fraser River Bridge at Quesnel was completed and opened to traffic

at a cost of $3 1/2 million. I believe, Mr. Leader of the Opposition,

when you were in my town you observed that you couldn't see the bridge.

Well, I invite you to come up now and have a drive over this wonderful

new structure. A new Provincial building at Williams Lake will be

finished and occupied this month at a cost of $1 1/2 million and 26

miles of Highway 97, which was referred to in the Throne Speech, were

reconstructed between Williams Lake and Quesnel.

The economy of the riding of Cariboo is certainly not as buoyant as

it was a year ago but, generally, conditions are much better in Cariboo

than they are in so many other areas of the Province. The year 1971

appears to be very promising. A new copper mine is being brought into

production at McLeese Lake, with a capital investment of $75 million. I

might say for the benefit of the Members that McLeese Lake is more or

less halfway between Williams Lake and Quesnel. This mine will be in

production by June, 1972. The pulp mill at Quesnel is under

construction and will be brought into production by the end of 1972.

The investment in this mill will be $80 million. While these two

projects will be under construction this year, it is anticipated they

will create 1,500 new jobs. The year 1971 will mark the largest year in

the history of the Cariboo for investment in new industries. This

Government can take full credit for these ventures. The pulp mill is

the direct result of the close utilization policy of this Government as

related to our timber resources. The Government can also take full

credit for the investment in the new copper mine at McLeese Lake,

because of the mining policies

[ Page 179 ]

that exist. While the Opposition say we're giving our natural

resource away, which we are not, they do not say what new taxes these

resource-based industries will create when they become operational. In

the case of these two large industries in the Cariboo, their

contribution in taxes to our area will be enormous and will be for ever.

Mr. Speaker, roads are still the main problem in my riding of

Cariboo, and in my riding there are 3,500 miles of all types of roads

under the jurisdiction of the Department of Highways. This is by far

the largest mileage of roads in any electoral district in the Province

of British Columbia. Most of these roads are secondary roads, which

were built many years ago to accommodate the small amount of traffic

that existed at that time; however, over the years, as the rural areas

became more settled and industry moved in, the secondary roads have

become less than adequate. As a matter of fact, several of these roads

have become very dangerous to the travelling public. The Forestry

Department has been awarding increased log quotas to our sawmill

industry and this has increased the heavy logging truck traffic over

these secondary roads. The logging trucks, which are operated on most

secondary roads in the Cariboo, are truck and trailer units weighing

90,000 lbs. gross and having lengths of up to 60 ft. These secondary

roads were never intended to handle this type of traffic when they were

built. On several sections of these secondary roads, with units of the

size I have described, the road is only adequate for the logging

trucks, and consequently, we have very hazardous conditions. What is

needed is a reconstruction programme to straighten out and widen the

most hazardous sections. I congratulate the Department of Highways for

what they have already accomplished but it is not nearly enough. They

were restricted by the amount of funds they received. Hopefully, more

funds will be made available immediately, so that these hazardous road

conditions can be eliminated. Mr. Speaker, as we enter into our second

century of Confederation, I am confident we live in the best Nation and

Province in the world and I see a great and glorious future for all of

us.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable the Second Member for Vancouver-Burrard.

MR. B. PRICE (Vancouver-Burrard): Mr. Speaker, I have a few

points that I would like to bring to the attention of the House, on

behalf of Vancouver-Burrard, along with my colleague who will speak

later tonight.

One of the things that I'm sure you've all noticed is that the

dentists have indicated by the press and radio that they're going to

increase their fees by 10 per cent. I cannot say that whether or not a

person is able to get more for their services depends on the need for

the service. If they're able to get it, there's no reason why they

shouldn't, except for the fact that doctors and dentists are different

from a lawyer or an engineer, because they deal in human pain and

suffering. If persons have problems with regard to their health, it is

accepted as being a humane right that they can be properly relieved of

that suffering, if it is possible. As far as dentistry is concerned, in

the lower mainland and in the Victoria area, there is really no problem

because you don't have to wait very long to see a dentist but this is

not so in the rest of the Province. Mr. Speaker, the University of

British Columbia has only turned out 223 dentists in the last four

years. The way the population is going up, the number who are

voluntarily retiring, it will mean that we will have no more dentists

now than we had that many years ago. I think the fastest way to get

more dentists is to train them and the fastest way to get more doctors

is to train them. I think UBC has been dragging its feet in this regard

and I don't think it's been giving the public a square deal for the

amount of money that's put in there to try to use it for the training

of professional people. I think the University should put the public

interest first. I'll tell you this much, Mr. Speaker, if UBC won't do

this, voluntarily, then I think the Government should act. We have the

young men and the young women here who are ready and willing to learn

and it seems to me that the Government should issue an ultimatum to UBC

to get busy or we will allocate funds which are specific for that

purpose and that purpose only.

Another thing which I would like to talk about for a few minutes is

pollution. We've been hearing a great deal about pollution. It's on

everybody's mind and there's one thing that I think could be taken care

of without a great deal of effort or trouble, and that is the noise

that comes from motor vehicles. There is more and more concern over

noise and its effect on humanity, now, than there ever was.

Motor-vehicle noise is one area which has been thoroughly neglected

and, yet, it's one of the easiest to control. The cost is not out of

the way. Mr. Speaker, I think there should be a regulation to give

police the authority to determine if a motor-vehicle is making too much

noise and tell the owner or operator to fix it and report. This is not

being done, at the present time. I think all new types of vehicles

should be approved from the standpoint of noise as well as other safety

features which are part and parcel of motor-vehicle acceptance today. I

think the present enforcement is actually a farce regarding the control

of motor-vehicle noise. It's just a question of whether a car is quiet

or whether it's noisy and I suggest that effective regulations are

needed, because the matter of noise with an automobile is just as easy

to control as headlights. All it needs is regulation and enforcement.

Another thing, too, which I think we might be interested in, as a

whole, in this House, Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the public, is to

try to do something to prevent advertising tobacco. We see what has

been done in the United States; they have banned radio and television

advertising. This will be defeated to some extent if the Canadian

stations are permitted to carry on with this type of advertising. I

think the B.C. Government should ask Ottawa to ban advertising over the

air, similar to what has been done in the United States. There's no

doubt about the effects of tobacco. It's bad (interruption) .

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just one moment. There is a Bill on the Order

Papers. Would the Member please refrain from dealing with that matter

at this time.

MR. PRICE: Well, I haven't read it. It may have something to do with advertising, but if it does, I hope so.

Another subject, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to comment on, and

one that I have spoken about many times in this House, is the high cost

of farm products in B.C. I'm talking, now, about locally-grown

vegetables. Somehow or other, there is no encouragement for the sale of

home-grown vegetables in this Province (interruption) . No, but a lot of

people buy them, my friend, and in large quantities, and this is one

reason why I want to speak. It's not generally known but, in British

Columbia, we don't supply enough fresh vegetables to supply our own

needs and if the supply were cut off from the United States, Mr.

Speaker, we would be short of food. I don't think this is right. I

don't think it's

[ Page 180 ]

necessary and, furthermore, the cost of food that is imported, even

though it's produced much cheaper across the line, there's no reason

why we can't produce just as good an

article and produce it just as

good and cheaply here in British Columbia as they can anywhere else. We

had a description here the other day of the difference in the cost of

lumber from the logs to plywood. Exactly a similar situation is taking

place with regard to fresh vegetables. I think that if our local

farmers were encouraged to grow more vegetables that, even in one or

two years, this would make a tremendous difference to the amount of

imports which are actually necessary today, because we need them for

actual food. We have a Minister who I know would help, would do

everything that he can and I think that money spent to encourage, even

small growers, would be well spent. Even in strawberries, last year,

the imports through B.C….

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm afraid the Member is anticipating a motion on the Order Paper.

MR. PRICE: What number, Mr. Speaker?

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Motion number 2.

MR. PRICE: You mean you want me to quit talking about it. Is

that right? Well, I'll come back to it. I'll come back to it in the

Budget Debate, because this is an important matter, Mr. Speaker. We may

take this lightly, about not producing enough food to supply ourselves,

but it's a very serious matter.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: No one is taking it lightly. The Honourable Member will have ample opportunity to deal with it.

MR. PRICE: Mr. Speaker, another item which I think deserves

consideration by this House is the question of fish production. Fishing

in our Province — is there anything about that on the Order Paper, by

the way? The production of fish at the present time is left entirely to

nature. The amount of artificial spawning beds that has been produced

is relatively small but it's well known that they can produce fish and

increase the production greatly by the use of prepared spawning beds.

This may be a small matter but I think it's something that should be

looked into and should be encouraged. The Government takes a much

greater interest in it than they do today. There's always going to be a

market for our salmon. It's one of the easiest products that we have to

sell of everything produced in British Columbia. Why not take full

advantage of it, Mr. Speaker? I'm quite sure that, at the present time,

full advantage is not being taken with regards to the preparation of

additional spawning beds in the Province. They're not expensive and

they would pay off in a big way.

Another item, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to comment on and that

is crime, which is increasing and increasing rapidly. In 1968, juvenile

crime went up 13 1/2 per cent. It has shown about the same rate of

increase for many years. Our present police system is not the solution.

Police are our only protection but, nevertheless, in spite of the

police on whom we're spending a fair amount of money, most of the

common occurrences are not cleared; that is, the reports to the police

on the matter of robbery, breaking and entering, the theft of

motor-vehicles, theft over $50, and theft under $50. According to the

DBS reports, the graphs show that 80 per cent of them are not cleared;

that is, they hear the reports and they never are able to go any

farther because they don't know who committed the crime. I think, Mr.

Speaker, that it's time, in view of these facts, and they are facts

taken from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics reports, that something

should be done to try to clear more cases that are reported. One thing

that I think might be done, on a much bigger scale than it is, is to

use volunteer police. Now, it may be that police are not in favour of

this, because they don't like anybody interfering with their line of

work. The RCMP use volunteer police a great deal but, I think, there's

room to use them a lot more. If we're going to fight crime, it must be

the public that's going to fight it. I'm quite sure that the public

will help the police if the police will only let them. So far this has

not entirely been the case and I'm quite sure that…for instance, we

hear police chiefs all over the country say that one-man police cars

are not that safe. In my opinion, it would be a simple matter to have a

volunteer citizen to act as a second man in a police car, which would

immediately double up the number of cars available for the number of

policemen, who were available to walk a beat or take another position,

which would help to clear up the matter of crime which is at present

uncleared. I think that this is something that should be given serious

consideration by the Attorney-General and his department.

With regard to vocational schools, Mr. Speaker, this is probably one

of the most valuable things to the next generation that this Government

has done, going into the number of vocational schools which we have.

Nine at the present time; 36,000 people, I understand, went to them

last year. There's great credit coming to the Government for being able

to see the need and to have done what they have. With these schools,

most of their courses demand or set a standard of Grade 10 for entrance

but, the truth of the matter is, and I'm speaking now of the one that's

in Burnaby because I hear about the situation there more than any

other, but I have an idea that they're. all in about the same

condition, the truth of the matter is, that there are so many Grades 11

and 12 students applying to get into these courses that there's no room

at the lower level. This is something that I think something should be

done about because Grades 9 and 10, they need the assistance to get

into these vocational schools, too. There's only one answer to that and

that is more classes. I hope the Minister of Education will give this

more serious consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for a great many years, I've considered that the

Government should try to find ways and means of acquiring money which

it can use for investment purposes. At the present time, in the Pension

Fund which we have, that takes care of the several in this Province,

the Superannuation Commissioner is taking care of hundreds of millions

of dollars and, I think, doing a very effective job of it. I don't see

why the Government can't extend this policy farther, so as to cover the

citizens of this Province, if they wish, with life insurance and

pension benefits. I'm of the opinion that the public would take great

advantage of a Government plan in British Columbia if one were

available. The insurance companies today are known as the financial

monarchs of the country and they have such control over money today,

that is investment capital, that they're in a position not only to loan

money but, in order to give it to you, they can demand a share in your

business. As a matter of fact, Fortune magazine carried an

article in

July, 1970, which indicated that the insurance companies of America

would soon become America's greatest landlords. This applies to B.C.

Just as

[ Page 181 ]

much as it does to the United States. I know of one business, a

local business in the lower mainland, that wanted half a million

dollars for expansion and the only place they could get that much money

was through an insurance company, which refused to let them have it

unless they had a share in the actual business. The Crown Companies

which the Government presently operate are continuously going to need

more money for expansion and, if the Government were able to have an

insurance plan or a pension benefit plan that was working, it's quite

easy to see that even in ten years they would have sufficient money to

take care of the demands of the Crown Companies and they would be able

to go further and to loan money to municipalities. Right now, through

the Municipal Finance Authority, they have to go to the United States

or other places. I'm of the opinion that, considering all levels of

borrowing in this Province by the Municipal Finance Authority, they

don't borrow as much money as the insurance companies take out of this

Province. There are 83 of them operating in B.C., most of them are

foreign companies and, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is no other

way the Government could serve its people as well as by offering a form

of life insurance and pension benefits through its own Government.

Government Bonds are safe. Very often when funds are left for

beneficiaries, for young people growing up, by statute they must be

invested in Government Bonds. I think that this is a subject which

certainly deserves the honest and serious consideration of this

Government.

I'd like to say a word about public housing. In spite of the

home-owners grant, and the home acquisition grant, many families are

denied proper housing because they just can't cam enough money to

qualify. The gap between those earning enough to acquire a home and

those unable, through low wages or other cause, is steadily getting

wider. This low-earning group can only look forward to public housing.

If future living quarters are to be of a higher standard and the slum

conditions are to be done away with, public housing is the only answer

for a large percentage of people. As time goes on, I'm convinced that

more and more tax money will have to be spent on subsidized housing. At

present, in B.C., we have about 4,500 units of public housing, which

are rented actually at less than cost. They were built on a joint

ownership basis through agreement between Provincial and Federal

Governments, for which B.C. has budgeted $5 million a year, matched by

$15 million from the Federal Government on a 25 to 75 basis. It should

be noted, Mr. Speaker, that public housing projects must be initiated

from the municipal level. In my opinion, local councils are not moving

fast enough in presenting applications for low-rental homes. Units

built under the Elderly Citizens Housing Aid Act do not pay local taxes

but Provincial and Federal grants pay equal taxes through the

municipality. Because this low-cost housing is subsidized, it costs

money to the taxpaying public and this cost, if there is any, is 75 per

cent Federal, 12 1/2 per cent municipal, and 12 1/2 per cent Provincial.

I don't think that you're going to be able to beat that kind of

sharing. I don't have accurate figures on cost, and when I say cost I'm

talking about the operational cost of those units already built. I'm

not talking about the capital cost or the interest necessary to

maintain that capital cost. I estimate the overall cost on 3,400 units

to be near or less than $60 per person per year. If people can be

removed from the extremely low quality housing for that figure, in my

opinion, the cities and municipalities should move as rapidly as

possible and build more of them. Public housing is money well spent

and, whether we think so or not, it is the most economical way to house

any family that falls back on society for support.

Another group of people, Mr. Speaker, which has been recognized by

many Members and I want to add my voice because I think it's important,

and that is the care of the aged. The problem of the chronically ill

person. I've discussed this over many years in this House but this

group of people reach the point where they can't properly look after

themselves and they must have somebody else look after them. It's just

a question of whose money is going to pay the bill. I think it's rather

a shame that people, having lived their lives and been frugal and saved

all they can, should have to dissipate their entire life savings for

perhaps one or two years of service to keep them comfortable during

their last years. If they're on welfare and have no money, if they've

dissipated earnings, or never earned a nickel in their life, of course,

welfare looks after them at 100 per cent public cost. But if a person

has been able to take care of their own finances and carry on, they're

up against the cost today in a private care place of $400 to $600 a

month. Public care can cost less. There's no reason why we shouldn't

take advantage of that to give these people a break. There's a great

need and, I think, it would be a great blessing if the Government could

even share a part of this cost with many people. I don't think society

should neglect old people, whether they be rich or poor. All we've got

to do is ask Ourselves if these chronic cases are getting a square

deal. If the answer is no, we should do something to alleviate their

distress.

Mr. Speaker, I have appealed over the years, ever since 1953 in the

first Session that I came here, for the Government to initiate

metropolitan government in the thickly populated urban areas. I note,

now, that the Minister of Municipal Affairs has indicated that Burnaby

should, in a very short time, call itself a city. I'm only sorry that

the Government won't go a little farther and tell Burnaby to amalgamate

with the city of Vancouver and do away with the administration costs

that you can't get away from when you have two municipalities six miles

away from each other. I think the Government is to be very highly

congratulated for setting up the Regional District Councils, because

this is a step in the right direction. I think I can say quite frankly

that the areas around Vancouver have accepted the Regional District

Council as being a good thing for their future. I think they're working

together very well.

One of the things which has come before them, of course, is rapid

transit. They have come up with a proposed plan which may cost $300

million over the next twenty years. Over a twenty-year period, $300

million is not very much money for an area the size of the lower

mainland, with the number of people that it has. If you're going to

spend that much money you, certainly, have to be right, you can't guess

wrong and then find out that $300 million has gone down the drain. In

my opinion, Mr. Speaker, the movement of people in the urban areas

could be done cheaper and more effectively and, perhaps, more

comfortably by automobile. This is something which I think should be

studied much further than it has been. Autos, today, are travelling

with one and two thirds people per car and, whether you like it or not,

people are not going to leave their cars at home if they can avoid it.

I further note the fact, Mr. Speaker, that during the 1920's, when cars

were not nearly as numerous or not nearly as safe or drivers were not

as well trained as they are today, in the city of Vancouver and

vicinity we used jitneys, and private cars put a sign on the window for

the route they would be taking and they had a standard charge at that

time

[ Page 182 ]

of, I think, 10 cents a ride. I think that if this were done today,

you'd find out that you might not need a rapid transit system, because

the automobiles are there. There's no doubt in my mind that a great

number of people would be willing and, perhaps, very happy to have the

job of transporting people with their automobiles, if they could only

make enough to make a living out of it. This is something which I think

should be given some consideration and I think it might be tried.

Now, with regard to the Regional District Council, it has been given

a job, on a limited basis, to study this rapid transit proposition and

I think it has made with the facilities available a very good job of

publicizing it throughout the area that is interested. In my

estimation, rapid transit, on a $300 million basis, will not start

unless there's some definite idea of where the money is coming from.

There's no doubt that it has to be shared. I'm very glad to see the

Provincial Government indicate that they will put up $3 71/2 million as

a beginning, if the Federal Government will do the same. Now, whether

they will or not, we haven't been able to figure out yet, but, I don't

know (interruption) . You don't, either. But this may come because the

problem is not unique to the city of Vancouver, it's unique to many

other urban areas. From the standpoint of the lower mainland, it's all

very well to feel that Hydro hasn't got too much interest in transit;

nevertheless, it should be recognized that the lower mainland is

helping in quite a large way to subsidize power costs throughout the

rest of the Province. This may not be accepted too much but,

nevertheless, it is a fact. I think that, on that basis, there is room

for considerable consideration to be given to the Regional District

Council when they indicate that they can't go far without knowing where

the money is coming from. There's a great deal more studying to be

done, Mr. Speaker. When we say that there's a $300 million bill

indicated for rapid transit, there's a $200 million bill indicated for

the First Narrows Bridge, there's $85 million indicated for pollution

control, I know what will happen. The areas won't vote for it and we'll

be at a stalemate and we won't get any further. I only hope that as far

as rapid transit is concerned, the Government of B.C., through the B.C.

Hydro, doesn't make it impossible for the Regional District Council to

go ahead and work on this problem. I think they need encouragement to

venture, because if we can get this going it will certainly pay off in

the future.

I'd like to pat the Government on the back, Mr. Speaker, for making

some limitation on lotteries. This is something which is not popular

because, for some reason or another, people seem to be born with a

built-in gambling instinct. I think there are amendments necessary

because, as we've established and we've been told many times in this

House, that where you have permissive gambling, you have crooked

administration. This is one thing that we do not want here. I think

from the standpoint of the Government, it's far better to legislate for

the 50,000 losers, than it is to legislate for the one winner and I

congratulate the Government for taking the move that they have to

indicate some control.

I'd like to spend a few moments on a very serious subject to me and

this is, really, a turn-around from my own standpoint, because I'm

going to appeal to this Government to do something to conserve our

wildlife. You notice where Prince Philip made the statement a little

while ago in Great Britain that we must start taking action to save the

animals of the world. Mr. Murray Newman, the fish biologist from the

Vancouver Aquarium, who is recognized as a world authority on fish,

went as far as to say that it is time that we started to take care of

the world's fish. Mr. Speaker, B.C. Is one of the few places in the

world where we have wild game in its natural habitat. One of the things

that I'm concerned about is the fact that our present wildlife

management is related to economics. I read in the 1950 report by the

Attorney-General's Department on game that, in 1950, they indicated

that the $64,000 increase in licenses was, indeed, very gratifying.

This is something that bothers me, because it's been obvious to my

observation, for a long time, that the Game Department is particularly

interested in the number of licenses they can sell and the amount of

money they can get returning from that source. As far as the Minister's

concerned and perhaps many in his Department, there is, no doubt, a

very definite interest to conserve game life and, I'm of the opinion,

that perhaps we should separate the Licensing Department of game from

the Recreation and Conservation Department and move the licensing back

into the Law Enforcement Branch where it belongs and let the Recreation

and Conservation stick to the conservation and be able to do a better

job.

The difficulty with the game, and speaking from the standpoint of

the wild animals, there's no doubt that they cannot defeat the

population expansion. In 1950, there were 67,396 game licenses issued

in British Columbia and, in 1968, there were 145,052. From 67 thousand

in 1950, to 145 thousand in 1968. The nonresident licenses, in 1952,

there were 2,500; in 1968, there were over 7,000. Today, when we have

better roads that go everywhere in B.C., we have four-wheel drives,

boats and planes and snowmobiles, the animals just don't have a chance.

In 1950, there were 18,165 deer known to be shot, according to the Game

Department. In 1968, this had increased to the number of deer shot to

77,013. Moose, 1950, 3,330 killed; in 1968, 22,000 killed. The game

don't have a chance.

The unfortunate thing, Mr. Speaker, is that this game is not killed

for food, it's killed for sport. If you started to consider the value

of the game that's shot on a meat basis, it's worth so much a pound — 50 cents a pound, 75 cents a pound, $1 a pound. Put your own price on

what you think it should be worth. But, by the time you get that meat

home, from the standpoint of how much it costs that hunter to go and

get it, you've got a different thing altogether and to say that the

value of the meat is worth going after is just thoroughly uneconomic.

It doesn't add up. If that is a fact, Mr. Speaker, I would say why not

stop this killing now, because for every hunter that wants to kill an

animal, there are twenty people who would rather see it alive. I am of

the opinion that if we keep on killing at the rate we are, it won't be

very long before there are none left.

In that regard, I would just like to read a letter which I have

here. It says in this letter, which is just an ordinary letter, written

without any specific need to say this. It says, "The Game Branch, with

their policies of predator production and very long seasons, including

cow season, will soon have the edible game nearly extinct in that

region as well as any other accessible area of B.C." This is coming

from Vanderhoof. Mr. So-and-so has lived in the Germansen Landing

region since the thirties. He owns the lodge and for many years did

guiding in the Omineca region. He states that, "Formerly there was a

large population of deer in the valley; now, they are practically

extinct, killed off by wolves. Moose and caribou numbers are also

decreasing each year and is small compared to a few years ago, due to

wolves and heavy hunting pressure. Of course, there appears to be no

hope for the