British Columbia Hansard — Tuesday, May 13, 2003

H0513pm-11

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Tuesday, May 13, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 15, Number 11 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.................................................................................... ..............................Hon.

John van Dongen Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon. Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon. George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon.

Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon.

Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon. Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon.

Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon.

Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon.

Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management.................................................................................... ..................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon. Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

George MacMinn Clerk Assistant ................................................................................................................ ................................................................... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .................................................................................................. ........................................................ Ian D. Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees........................................................................................ ............................................Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) .....................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Harris, Roger (L)......................................................................................Skeena Hawes, Randy (L) ............................................................ Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Hon. Sindi (L).......................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon. Gordon (L) ........................................................

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ...................................................................................Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)...................................................... North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L)............................................................ Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L).............................................................. Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L).................................................

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)....................................................................... Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................ Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ...................................................... Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, Hon. John (L) ................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon.

Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)........................................................................... Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................... Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman ..............................................Hon.

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

Susan Brice Shuswap .............................................................................. Hon. George Abbott Skeena.............................................................................................Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................. Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ............................................................................... Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................. Hon.

Gulzar S. Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .......................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ...................................................................... Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock ...............................................................Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview............................................................... Hon.

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Tuesday, May 13, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 6725 Introduction and First Reading of Bills ........................................................................................ ......................................... 6726 Provincial Revenue Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 42) Hon. B. Barisoff Integrated Pest Management Act (Bill 53) Hon. J.

Murray Water, Land and Air Protection Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 55) Hon. J. Murray Flood Hazard Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 56) Hon. J. Murray Environmental Management Act (Bill 57) Hon. J. Murray Health Professions Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 62) Hon. S. Hawkins Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 6728 Revelstoke Community Forest Corporation W. McMahon Youth in Action awards I. Chong Family caregivers G.

Trumper Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 6729 Softwood lumber border tax T. Bhullar Hon. M. de Jong Children and Family Development ministry reorganization J. Kwan Hon. G. Hogg J. MacPhail Hon. G. Collins Employment standards in agriculture industry K. Stewart Hon.

J. van Dongen Reports from Committees ........................................................................................................ ............................................... 6732 Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations, first report K. Stewart Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 6732 Industry Training Authority Act (Bill 34) (continued) J. Kwan Hon. S.

Bond Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 6752 Industry Training Authority Act (Bill 34)

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 6752 Estimates: Ministry of Health Planning (continued) R. Hawes Hon. S. Hawkins P. Nettleton G. Trumper L. Mayencourt B. Suffredine Estimates: Ministry of Health Services (continued) Hon. G. Cheema R. Masi B. Locke

6725 TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members Hon. G. Cheema: I would like to welcome someone who is a passionate advocate for mental health in our province. She's a dedicated and hard-working patron of British Columbia's health system, and we are very lucky to have her as a part of our team. Irene Clarkson, the executive director of mental health and addictions for the Ministry of Health Ser- vices, has joined us in the House today. I would ask that all members please make her feel extremely welcome. S.

Orr: Today I have the pleasure of having three very special friends of mine in the House, who are not only great supporters politically and personally but great friends to our entire community here in the capital region. Firstly, we have Mr. Benj O'Connor, who is abso- lutely no stranger to this House. He's past chair of the Hospital Foundation, and he's now chair of the capital campaign Together We Care. Their goal is $17 million, and under Benj's incredible commitment, they're al- ready at $12 million. [1405] Secondly, with Benj we have Eric Charman.

Eric is the recipient not only of the Order of B.C. but also of the Order of Canada. Eric has fundraised in this com- munity for nearly 50 years — he's only 51 — and he's fundraised in the arts, education and health care. They've never determined how much money he's actu- ally raised for this community, but we know that it's in the tens and tens of millions of dollars. Lastly, we have with them their guest, Bob Bard- agy. Bob is very special to us, because he's moved here from Chicago. Bob made his money in the high-tech industry, and he is an entrepreneur, as is his wife, Pauline.

Bob is actually in the high-tech industry; his wife, Pauline, is an entrepreneur in her own right. The wonderful thing about Bob and Pauline is that they have huge contacts in the U.S. market, and they bring these very, very wealthy, influential business people to stay with them at the weekend in their fabulous home on Beach Drive. They're doing more for U.S.–Canada trade than most of us realize. Interjection. S. Orr: I haven't finished. Thank you, member. They are philanthropists — unlike Minister Bruce — in our community, and we are blessed to have people like these in our community.

They not only give of their volunteer time, but they give tons of their own money. Would the House please make them all very welcome. Interjections. Hon. G. Bruce: I've been called by popular demand before. Well, kidding or not, we're here, and I'm getting notes already. You know, there's the Masters, there's the Grey Cup, there's the Stanley Cup, and there's Wimbledon. And then there is that classic tennis match between the press and the members of this august body here. It is about to be rescheduled again for later in June of this year.

Today in the House are a number of people respon- sible for putting that together. They've had lunch with the Speaker and the Clerk — the Clerk being, of course, the coach of our team. Just in case anybody forgot, and particularly the press, they have never won this tour- nament — at least, not legitimately. This tournament is being sponsored by Hayes log- ging. Hayes logging has been around the Cowichan Valley as long as or perhaps longer than the Bruce fam- ily. In the House today the principal of Hayes Forest Services, Jeff Hayes, is here.

We certainly appreciate Jeff and the Hayes family sponsoring this tennis match. Incidentally, any of you who can play any calibre of tennis should let the Clerk know. You'll have to dem- onstrate that probably through a very gruelling exer- cise at the Clerk's house. Along with Jeff Hayes is Rick Jeffery, vice-president of corporate relations for Hayes Forest Services, and Allan Case, who is the president of the South Cowichan Lawn Tennis Club. It is the second-longest housed lawn tennis court in the world. Finally…. This is very important. I'm getting to a question shortly. [Laughter.] I was only kidding.

I was only kidding. No, really, I was only kidding. Along with this, on the Friday night before the Sat- urday, is the Providence.… Interjections. Hon. G. Bruce: Come on, give me a break. I'm new to this. The Providence Farm Hoedown is a great facility for the mentally handicapped and a number of other people that come in our community. Joining us here today is Jack Hutton, the director of Providence Farm, and also Chuck Johnstone, who is the tournament co- ordinator and director. With that, ladies and gentle- men, would you please make them all very, very wel- come. R.

Hawes: I notice in the gallery today a longtime community advocate from my riding — from Mission — Kathleen Mcdonald, who has recently moved to Victoria. I'm sure she's looking to get involved in this community. So would the House please make her wel- come. [1410] G. Trumper: I certainly would like to recognize Eric Charman, who I know is a very good fundraiser for finances, and I would also like to recognize Jeff Hayes. They have come into the Alberni Valley as one of our largest employers in the forest industry.

W i t h u s t o d ay we h av e , f ro m A l b e rni D i s t ri c t S e c - ondary School, 27 students visiting with their teacher,

6726 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 Brian Lavery. They have Ms. Croteau with them and also Matt Lucas. Would the House please make them welcome. Hon. S. Hawkins: Sitting in the precincts today is the province's chief nurse executive, Anne Sutherland Boal. I think it's very appropriate to recognize her to- day and all the accomplishments we've made with her help over the last year and a half with respect to nurses in this province, as it is Nursing Week.

I'm sure all the members will join with me in conveying to all the n u r s e s a c r o s s t h i s p r o v i n c e h o w m u c h w e a p p r e c i a t e their commitment, their dedication and the work they do on behalf of patients across this province. L. Mayencourt: I'll just take one moment to intro- d u c e a v e r y g o o d f r i e n d o f m i n e , M s . M a r t i n e D o n a - hue, who is visiting the city here on a bike tour. Mar- tine is someone that has worked in my constituency as a volunteer and worked on my campaign. Would the House please make her very welcome. Hon. S.

Hawkins: I can remember over the last few years how I would sit here and be castigated by the member for Kamloops–North Thompson over the Blazers, the hockey organization in his town. Then last year I think I took abuse from the member for East Kootenay over Kootenay ICE. I have to say how proud I am of the Kelowna Rockets ice hockey organization — Bruce Hamilton, the GM. Our Kelowna Rockets are the WHL champions, and they're off to the Memorial Cup. It's on Saturday, if anybody has some spare time. I know I'm going to be watching and cheering very loudly.

As you know, or you may not know, Kelowna is hosting the Memorial Cup next year. I hope they come back as winners so we can defend it in Kelowna next year. Congratulations to the Rockets. Introduction and First Reading of Bills PROVINCIAL REVENUE STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2003 Hon. B. Barisoff presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Provincial Revenue Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003. Hon. B. Barisoff: I move that Bill 42 be read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. B.

Barisoff: Bill 42 proposes a number of amendments to the Motor Fuel Tax Act and the So- cial Service Tax Act, which are administered by the Ministry of Provincial Revenue. These amendments result from ongoing consultations with business. They are made to ensure fairness and equity for tax- payers, to reduce the administrative burden for busi- ness and to provide efficiencies in tax administration and collection processes. I will elaborate on the na- ture of these amendments during second reading of this bill.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 42 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ACT Hon. J. Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Integrated Pest Management Act. Hon. J. Murray: I move that Bill 53 be read a first time now. Motion approved. [1415] Hon. J.

Murray: This bill repeals the Pesticide Con- trol Act and replaces it with the Integrated Pest Man- agement Act to accomplish three important goals. First, the new act will promote the use of integrated pest management to ensure that pesticides are only used once all options have been considered. The goal of re- quiring integrated pest management is to reduce our reliance on such substances and, over time, reduce their use. Second, it will focus ministry activity on monitoring and enforcing environmental standards and provide significantly higher fines for those who do not comply.

Finally, it will focus provincial resources on activities and substances that pose the greatest risks to public health and environmental protection. Our goal with the legislation and with the require- ment of integrated pest management is a reduction in the amount of pesticides we use as a province. These changes will modernize the way pesticides are con- trolled in British Columbia. They will encourage re- sponsible pest control and provide for enhanced public safety in a protected environment.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 53 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. WATER, LAND AND AIR PROTECTION STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 Hon. J. Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Water, Land and Air Protection Statutes Amendment Act, 2003. Hon. J. Murray: I move that Bill 55 be read a first time now.

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6727 Motion approved. Hon. J. Murray: This bill amends a number of statutes administered by the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. The amendments include changes to update, streamline and clarify certain provisions of the Park Act and the Wildlife Act and to update the schedules to the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act. This bill also furthers this government's deregula- tion initiative by providing for the repeal of a number of statutes because they are outdated and no longer needed.

These acts are the Commercial River Rafting Safety Act, the Drainage and Dyking Adjustment and Repeal Act, the Park (Regional) Act, the Weather Modification Act and the West Coast National Park Act. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 55 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. FLOOD HAZARD STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 Hon. J.

Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Flood Haz- ard Statutes Amendment Act, 2003. Hon. J. Murray: I move that Bill 56 be read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. J. Murray: This bill amends a number of stat- utes governing flood hazard management in order to facilitate a comprehensive shift in the provincial ap- proach to flood hazard management in British Colum- bia. Its fundamental purpose is to establish more effi- cient, cost-effective and locally responsive means for ensuring flood protection.

It will reduce regulatory burden and protect public safety while achieving the strategic shifts presented in the service plan of the Min- istry of Water, Land and Air Protection. The amendments will enable the following changes. They will make possible increased local government control and accountability over land use decisions as- sociated with floodplain development. They will pro- vide communities and developers with increased flexi- bility in meeting flood hazard standards and will en- able the provincial government to focus its efforts in areas of the greatest interest to public safety and the environment.

In addition, the changes will facilitate — through the provision of appropriate tools for developers, local government and professionals — a cooperative ap- proach to flood hazard management in British Colum- bia. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 56 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT Hon. J.

Murray presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Environ- mental Management Act. Hon. J. Murray: I move that Bill 57 be read a first time now. Motion approved. [1420] Hon. J. Murray: This bill repeals the Waste Man- agement Act and the Environment Management Act, replacing them with the new Environmental Manage- ment Act. This new act will accomplish several goals. It will consolidate and better organize our environmental legislation. It will establish clear environmental stan- dards and tough penalties for violators.

It will allow ministry staff to spend more time in the field ensuring compliance with the environmental laws of the prov- ince, focusing on activities that pose the greatest envi- ronmental risk. It will enable the use of groundbreaking and inno- vative regulatory tools for waste management, includ- ing economic instruments, administrative monetary penalties and area-based planning. These tools will encourage compliance while making it easier to punish polluters. The act will harmonize our approach to special waste with that of other jurisdictions, eliminating du- plication and confusion.

The current contaminated- sites regime will be modified to begin implementation of the expert panel's recommendations and speed the rejuvenation of these areas. Finally, the new act will improve ministry consis- tency and accountability by making sure decisions are applied evenly across the province. These changes repre- sent the first comprehensive review of this legislation in over 20 years. These changes are overdue, and they will significantly improve this government's ability to achieve its goals: a safe and healthy environment and a robust economy.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 57 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

6728 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 HEALTH PROFESSIONS AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 Hon. S. Hawkins presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Health Pro- fessions Amendment Act, 2003. Hon. S. Hawkins: I move that the bill be intro- duced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. S. Hawkins: These amendments aim to im- prove public accountability, protect patient safety and provide a consistent framework for the regulation of health care professions by including all health profes- sions under one statute.

These amendments will repeal six stand-alone stat- utes that regulate chiropractors, dentists, physicians, optometrists, podiatrists and registered nurses, mean- ing a reduction of overlap and duplication as well as a net reduction of over 800 regulations. The amendments contained in this act stem from recommendations of the former Health Professions Council in its 2001 report Safe Choices: A New Model for Regulating Health Professions in British Columbia. Since last summer we have been working to develop these amendments in consultation with the colleges that regulate health professions in B.C.

These amendments aim to increase public confi- dence in health care professionals and to ensure that professional colleges have direct responsibility for en- suring patient safety. For example, the public will have greater access to complaints about individual health care practitioners, health care professionals will be re- quired to report to their professional college a health professional who poses a public safety risk, and the colleges will be required to implement quality assur- ance programs to improve health services for patients.

In addition, these amendments enable the designa- tion of a new health professional, the nurse practitioner, by the Registered Nurses Association of B.C. The nurse practitioner designation aims to expand the role of nurses in our health care system in order to better serve our patients and citizens as we renew primary care. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 62 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements (Standing Order 25

B) REVELSTOKE COMMUNITY FOREST CORPORATION W. McMahon: I rise today to acknowledge the Revelstoke Community Forest Corporation. On Satur- day, May 3, the corporation celebrated its tenth anni- versary with the community. I was there to join in the celebrations and had the pleasure of being handed a chainsaw to cut the cake as the rain poured down. Looking back on the past ten years, it is important to recognize that in 1986 the community was in a se- vere economic slump. Megaproject construction had ended, mills were shut down, and unemployment was over 30 percent.

The community developed an eco- n o m i c r e c o v e r y p l a n w i t h f o u r m a i n g o a l s , t h e f o u r t h one being to strengthen the local forest industry. [1425] From 1986 until 1993, when the Minister of Forests signed the transfer of TFL 56 to the newly formed Rev- elstoke Community Forest Corporation, the city lob- bied strongly for more processing of local timber, and many would say they aggressively pursued their fourth goal. The corporation shareholders are the citizens of Revelstoke, represented by city council.

In addition to profit motive, the company must support community objectives and values. According to the TFL, they are not allowed to own or operate a timber manufacturing plant. Fifty percent of the timber must be sold by open competitive bid to the highest bidder, and the other 50 percent goes to the three industry partners at cost. They must process an equivalent volume in the com- munity. While there were many, many individuals involved in the formation and successful operation of the com- munity forest, I would like to acknowledge Geoff Bat- tersby for his unfailing leadership.

Today Revelstoke Community Forest Corp is a success story. It has de- veloped into a stable and profitable company in the highly volatile and competitive forest sector while con- tributing to the city of Revelstoke's vision of achieving a sustainable community by balancing environmental, social and economic values. Congratulations, Revelstoke. Your foresight and determination are paying off. Your success is an exam- ple of what can be accomplished in British Columbia's forest industry. YOUTH IN ACTION AWARDS I.

Chong: It is my pleasure today to speak about an important program in Victoria, the Youth in Action Awards. This program was started in 1990 by the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce with the goal of celebrating the positive contributions that young people make to their communities. It recognizes youth in six categories: perseverance, practical arts, performing or visual arts, community service, athletics and academics. Students are nomi- nated for the awards by their teachers, and the presen- tations are made at a gala banquet in the springtime of every year.

I was fortunate to have attended this dinner last Thursday at which 18 outstanding young people were recognized for their achievements. This banquet repre- sents the culmination of the active efforts of the late Dr.

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6729 David Poole, who in 1994 convinced the chamber board to include an awards dinner as part of their pro- gram. One of the original sponsors, CIBC Wood Gundy, continues to be involved to the extent that they have enabled the awarding of not only plaques but also cash awards to the very deserving recipients each year. These awards are jointly sponsored by the Greater Victoria, Saanich Peninsula and West Shore Chambers of Commerce and include students from school dis- tricts 61, 62 and 63.

In addition to the winner of each category, two honourable mentions are also awarded. The youth, although nominated in specific categories, are incredibly well-rounded. As each award recipient was introduced, we were provided with insight into their very many accomplishments in their young lives. I applaud the chambers for their initiative of this program, and it is important we recognize our youth for their positive contributions to our society. Programs such as the Youth in Action Awards help to inspire young people to have a positive role in their communi- ties and to set their goals high.

I wish to also say how proud I am that in my riding of Oak Bay–Gordon Head, nine of the 18 recipients hail from those schools. Congratulations to this year's award recipients: Jennifer Abel, Dean Pucsek, Katie Lochhead, Jason Rogers, Sara White, Brent Hodge, Steve Fallows, Graham Roebuck, Emily Heayn, Claire Jutras, Niki Hodgkinson, Lindsay De Leeuw, Stephanie Connolly, Colin Lundeen, Erin Little, Jennifer Ruskey, Yichuan Wang and Xiangning Fan. These high achiev- ers represent our leaders of tomorrow, and I wish them all the best in the future. FAMILY CAREGIVERS G.

Trumper: I rise today in recognition of Family Caregiver Week, May 11 to 17. This week family care- givers across British Columbia will be recognized for their enormous and selfless volunteer efforts that pro- vide high-quality care for adult family members or friends who may be chronically ill or disabled. A family caregiver is a family friend, a friend or even a neighbour who provides support to those who are physically or mentally challenged, chronically ill, frail and elderly, either at home or in a care facility.

Family caregivers provide care to all age groups re- gardless of the care receiver's disease, disorder or pal- liative situation. They come from all walks of life re- gardless of age or income. They can be spouses, part- ners, adult children, in-laws, siblings, young children and other extended family members. These individuals are distinguished from volun- teers through their own personal bond or connection to the care recipient. Accordingly, many family caregivers feel that providing a better quality of life for loved ones is their most important responsibility in life.

For those of us in the House who have been family caregivers, we know how stressful it can be at times. [1430] The prevalence of family caregiving in this century is unprecedented in history, due to the fact that we can expect to have third, fourth and even fifth generations still alive. Daughters and sons in this century can ex- pect their parents to live well beyond the age of 70. Add to this a declining birth rate, and it is apparent what the future trends will be. Currently, in British Columbia there are approxi- mately 152,000 caregivers.

Over one-half of these vol- unteer caregivers are in the paid workforce, and 73 percent are women. As we know, many of B.C. care- givers have either reduced their work time or left the workforce to provide full-time care, so the negative impact on their financial status when retirement age sets in will be tremendous. On this note, devotion given by British Columbia's family caregivers needs to be recognized and hon- oured. If families across Canada are not carrying out their responsibilities for ailing loved ones at home, the health care system, as we know, could not function for even half a day. Mr.

Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Oral Questions SOFTWOOD LUMBER BORDER TAX T. Bhullar: My question is directed to the Minister of Forests. Can the minister please impart to this House precisely how the border tax that has been proposed to solve the softwood dispute would function and whether this border tax is an interim measure pending the final ruling of the WTO? Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks to the member for a timely question.

He may know — and if he doesn't, I will tell him now — t h a t t h i s w e e k w e a r e e x p l o r i n g with our federal partners whether there is some basis for the resumption of more formal negotiations with the Americans, and that is tied to whether or not we think there has been sufficient common ground achieved to lead us to conclude there is some prospect for succeeding. His specific question relates to a temporary or in- terim border tax that might replace the existing tariff. In large measure, that is what the negotiation will be about — the structure, the amount, what items are cap- tured by it.

It is one of two key issues that remain unre- solved and stands between us and an interim agree- ment — the second, of course, being the $1.2 billion question, which is what happens to the significant moneys that have been left on deposit with the Ameri- cans. CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MINISTRY REORGANIZATION J. Kwan: Last week when we asked the Minister of Children and Family Development about the mess he has created for child protection, he said everything was under control. This week we learned how untrue that was. A private management resource team — rescue

6730 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 team, I should say — has been called in to save the minister's political skin. Will the Minister of Children and Family Develop- ment acknowledge that hiring a consulting firm to meet his budget targets is an admission that his plan to reorganize child protection has been a costly waste of money? Hon. G. Hogg: I want to reinforce that the first pri- ority of this government is the health and safety of children in this province. I also want to reinforce that… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: O r d e r , p l e a s e .

W e w i l l h a v e o r d e r during question period, or we'll end question period right here. Hon. G. Hogg: …when this government was formed and looked at this ministry, we realized that changes needed to be made — not just reorganizations that had taken place in the past, but that we had to transform this ministry to provide services. We were told that by international experts, we were told that by experience, we were told that by service providers, and we were told that by our staff. We are doing that, and we're doing that in a focused way.

We have brought in all the supports that we can h a v e t o l o o k a t a n d t o m a n a g e t h i s p r o c e s s . W e a r e looking at contractors in terms of being able to provide us better data and better information so that we can make the best decisions possible for the most vulner- able children of this province. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J.

Kwan: The best decision possible for this minister is to make sure that his budget is fully met so that there will be no cuts in the funding for child protection. [1435] The government is spending some $25 million on the botched transition to a new model of child protec- tion — $25 million that should go to programs for kids at risk. Now they're spending hundreds of thousands more dollars because the Minister of Children and Family Development has blown it.

When will the Minister of Children and Family Development admit that people on the front lines for child protection are telling him that his budget cuts threaten the child protection system, and with that, the system will collapse? When will he do the right thing and resign? Hon. G. Hogg: There has been a lot of talk about $25 million, and that's been a budget that has been out there. About $11 million of that was expended last year. None of it has been expended beyond that. That $11 million was expended to engage our communities in looking at service provision.

We've had over 14,000 people attending meetings and looking at a better service provision model for the people of this province. That involvement of those people is going to make a difference in terms of how we deliver services and how we move forward. Again, the people out there are talking about the change and the change being the right transformation. Every international expert that has looked at us, including people who were here last week, has said this transformation is the right transformation to ensure the health and safety of children and vulnerable adults in this province.

That will always be the number one priority of this ministry, and we will ensure that we focus our resources to make sure that does happen. Mr. Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary. J. Kwan: The best way for the minister, once again, to ensure children are protected is to ensure that the programs are funded. Maybe the minister hasn't actu- ally had a look at the risk registry. Citizens of B.C. al- ready spend millions of dollars on the minister and a senior executive team to run B.C.'s child protection system. They have failed — miserably, I might add.

The grand design is falling apart and is costing millions of dollars in wasted resources. Why should the Minister of Children and Family Development continue to earn one more penny in sal- ary as a member of cabinet when the government has hired a private rescue team to do his job for him? Hon. G. Hogg: I want to reinforce that we have the largest bureaucratic service delivery for children and families in Canada. It's inefficient, and it's ineffective. We have to go to a new model for doing that and pro- viding that service, and that's exactly what we're do- ing.

We have been saying, in our service plan, since day one that we had a plan in place and that we have a process in place to ensure that we protect and provide those services. We are still on that plan. We recognize there are some challenges in the year '04-05, and we're wanting to make sure that we deal with those in a re- sponsible, effective way. I know other governments have looked at risk needs and have looked at risk analysis and have looked a t p r o c e s s e s t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e y d o m a k e g o o d d e c i - sions.

We are doing everything we can to gather the information necessary to make the most positive and responsible decisions possible to ensure that we do make the right decisions for the people of this prov- ince. J. MacPhail: While this minister is incompetent and every day proves that, the real tragedy, of course, is not his incompetence. The real tragedy is that the services to protect vulnerable kids are being affected because of not only his incompetence but the incompetence of this government. As opposition leader, the now Premier told British Columbians he would spend more on child protection

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6731 services, not less. He said the government would spend whatever it took to protect kids. As it turns out, that's not true. Rather than throw good money after bad on a scheme that is completely out of control, why won't the Minister of Children and Family Development step aside and allow someone new to take over, who can fight for the resources they need for protecting kids — for doing the job that's needed and that's not being done now? Hon. G. Collins: In fact, the minister responsible for children and family has been doing exactly that.

The minister knows these are the priorities of govern- ment. When the Premier was in this House and Leader of the Opposition, he did say we would do what we needed, as opposition, to try and help and make sure that the transitions happened, make sure that the ser- vices were there for children when they needed them — a much different response than what we've seen from the Leader of the Opposition currently, I might add. [1440] The reality is that we have identified challenges in '04-05 to the financial plan for that ministry. We want to make sure….

While last year they came in on budget and on target and this year they will come in on budget and on target, we're concerned there may be risks in 2004-05. We're dealing with that now, eight months in advance — unlike what we saw with the previous gov- ernment, who didn't know until halfway through the fiscal year that they had challenges and problems in the ministry. We're getting ahead of it. We have brought in some outside consultants to help us improve the data collection for the ministry. So when we make a deci- sion, we're making it with good information.

The minister responsible is doing exactly the thing he should be doing. The money that's being spent on the transition is money that's used to consult with those very people the member says have issues. We want to get out there and talk to the people. The minis- ter was in Penticton yesterday dealing with them. That's what the funds are for, and we'll continue to focus those dollars appropriately. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question? J.

MacPhail: Boy, an incompetent children and families minister being rescued by the most incompe- tent Finance minister, who's run the three largest defi- cits in the history of British Columbia. What's wrong with that picture? Why is the story changing on a daily basis? Not only is there a raft of quotes from the then op- position leader, now Premier, completely going against what the Minister of Finance is now saying, but what the Finance minister is saying is completely different from what this minister of children and families said just a few short weeks ago.

Over and over again the now Premier said, while he was in opposition, that the cost didn't matter — children were worth the money. Did he mean some- thing different when this incompetent Finance minister put in a three-year budget — cutting, cutting, cutting? What's changed? And he said — the Leader of the Op- position then, now Premier — he would work with government and those outside to spend whatever it took to protect kids. Here's a good quote.

He said: "Big changes to child protection cost money." After two years on the job we've got a lame-duck minister, an incompetent Fi- nance minister, a child protection system in danger of collapse and hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent on a private management system… Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Would the member now please put her question. J. MacPhail: …to try and clean things up. Mr. Speaker: Question, please. J.

MacPhail: If the minister refuses to step aside, will he at least put his reorganization on hold, live up to the promise made by the Premier, begin to involve the public and the child protection community in an open and transparent review of child protection to en- sure that vulnerable kids are not at risk, just like the Premier claimed he would do seven years ago? Hon. G. Collins: The seven years is interesting, because of those seven years, this government's been in power for less than two. Her government was in power… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G.

Collins: …for five of those years, and it's indicative of the challenges that remain in that minis- try, because they weren't dealt with five or seven years ago. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. G. Collins: In the last couple of weeks I've taken the time to go back and read every one of the comments of the now Premier when he was Leader of the Opposition in this House as it relates to this issue. What he said was that the resources that were required need to be available, and he offered to help in order to make that happen.

He also said he would be willing to help the government of the day look elsewhere in gov- ernment to find those resources. I've read all of the comments of the now Premier with regard to this issue, and the policy and the priori- ties remain. The first priority is to make sure that vul- nerable adults and vulnerable children receive the pro-

6732 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 tection that is required, and we will do what it takes to make that happen. But as the minister has said over and over again, we inherited the most bureaucratic, expensive delivery model in Canada. The system has to change. It has to be improved…. J. MacPhail: Independent officers, children and youth advocates — all of which you voted for — you've now dismantled. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. G. Collins: Those issues need to be pursued. The system does need to change. We need to get more of those services directly to the front lines.

The minister has been engaged for almost two years in open consul- tation — transparent consultation — with literally tens of thousands of British Columbians from one end to the other — service providers and families as well. We're going to put the resources required there in the most efficient way possible to make sure that those goals are maintained. [1445] EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS IN AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY K. Stewart: My question today is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.

In my riding of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows the agriculture industry, specifi- cally the blueberry and cranberry industry, plays an important role in the local economy. However, each year in British Columbia and across Canada there have been problems with workers' agreements and the payment of casual labour. Can the Minister of Agricul- ture, Food and Fisheries tell me what the government is doing to improve working conditions on farms and to attract more workers into this industry? Hon.

J. van Dongen: Every year as we approach the harvest season, we certainly have concerns about employment standards and, in particular, unpaid w a g e s , w h i c h w e r e g a r d a s a c o r e i s s u e . W e h a v e worked closely in the past year with the farming indus- try and the Ministry of Labour to address these issues. The Minister of Labour last year passed some clear employment standards rules with stiffer penalties to en- sure that employers comply.

We do have agreement of the industry this year to include site inspections as part of the enforcement regime, and we will also have a liaison offi- cer with the Ministry of Labour to work with the farming industry on education and compliance issues. T o s u m u p , w e w a n t t o b e s u r e t h a t w o r k e r s g e t paid and that we have working conditions that meet t h e s t a n d a r d s .

W e w a n t t o h a v e a n i n d u s t r y t h a t i s competitive across Canada in terms of the rules, and we want to have an industry that has the capacity to harvest its crops in a timely manner. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: In Committee A, I call Committee of Supply. For the information of members, we'll be discussing the estimates of the Ministry of Health Planning as well as the Ministry of Health Services as it pertains to the Minister of State for Mental Health and the Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care.

In this chamber I call committee stage debate of Bill 34, the Industry Training Authority Act. Mr. Speaker: Just before we go to that, we have a report to be tabled by the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows. Reports from Committees K. Stewart: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations. Mr. Speaker: Please proceed. K. Stewart: I move the report be taken as read and received. Motion approved. K. Stewart: I ask leave of the House to permit the moving of a motion to adopt the report. Leave granted. K. Stewart: I move that the report be adopted.

Motion approved. [1450] Committee of the Whole House INDUSTRY TRAINING AUTHORITY ACT (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 34; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:53 p.m. On

section 1 (continued). J. Kwan: We were dealing with the

definitions sec- tion under the bill, Bill 34. Could the minister please advise how a person will know what training to take for a defined trade? Hon. S. Bond: They will learn that procedure the same way they do now. Currently, a trade has a par- ticular set of criteria and requirements. It will be the same process. The good news, though, is that, over

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6733 time, students and learners will have the opportunity of choosing where they may take a particular course that leads to the certification. We hope to also look at things like on-line learning — so in essence, the same way. We will have a website. It will list a trade. The crite- ria will be listed there as well. [1455] J. Kwan: Will there be a system in place to obtain industry trends, to keep track of the relevant training and to make sure that they're current? Hon. S.

Bond: One of the most significant goals of the new Industry Training Authority is precisely that. I t ' s t o l o o k a t h o w i n d u s t r y c h a n g e s — what the re- quirements are. We want the system to be more responsive to that, so one of the tasks of the Industry Training Authority is to work with trainers and industry to determine new courses that are required and to better match how we train people to the needs of industry. One of the recent things that we've done in our ministry is that our curriculum is now on-line.

It allows trainers to work with educators and industry to actu- ally develop and update that curriculum on a regular basis. J. Kwan: In the definition of "trainee" it states in the act that it means "an individual registered as a trainee or apprentice under

section 9." Will the employer still have responsibility for indenturement of an apprentice? Hon. S. Bond: Yes, there is a requirement in the legislation that requires all apprentices — and we're now including trainees — to register. J. Kwan: How will legal issues — i.e., WCB, liabil- ity, etc., — be handled if the employer does not have…? How would it be handled? Hon. S. Bond: Nothing will change in that respect. In fact, employers will continue to be responsible for their workers' safety, and standards will continue to be in place as they are now. J. Kwan: Do the private trainers of apprentices in the province fall under the definition of "training insti- tution" in

part 1, or are they recognized as institutions under the College and Institute Act? Hon. S. Bond: Private trainers are defined as train- ers. Training institutions are the public colleges, uni- versity colleges and institutes. J. Kwan: The private trainers with private institu- tions — then they fall under the College and Institute Act? Hon. S. Bond: In fact, private institutions would fall under the definition of trainer. [1500] J. Kwan: The definition of trainer, according to the act, means "a person designated as a trainer by the au- thority under

section 8 (1) (m)." Then when you go to (m), it goes on to say: "The authority may do one or more of the following: (

m) designate persons as train- ers and define their duties." Private trainers, then, can just be made up and be sanctioned to do that work from the authority. Who will govern them? Who will provide the oversight of the private trainers to ensure that they're doing a proper job and to ensure that there's protection for the students? Hon. S. Bond: The Industry Training Authority will have a relationship with private trainers similar to the one they have with public institutions in the province. J.

Kwan: But the public institutions fall under the College and Institute Act, so there is a governing body that will oversee problems and make sure there is a standard that's being met. Is it the case, then, that the authority is going to be doing that? If there is a prob- lem with a private trainer, which would be a private institution, who would deal with those problems? Is it the authority? What is the process following that? Hon. S. Bond: Private trainers will be governed. Some of them will be societies; some of them will be corporations. Obviously, those would be governed by the Society Act or the Company Act.

They would also currently be registered with the Private Post-Secondary Education Commission. That will obviously have a successor pending the passage of current legislation. J. Kwan: What is the recourse available for students who are receiving training from a private company or private institution when that private institution goes belly up? What recourse is available for the students to recover their tuition fees, amongst other things? Hon. S.

Bond: Well, currently 15 out of the 17 pri- vate trainers are actually joint union-employer boards, so apprentices or workers that are in that particular situation are obviously protected by their unions. In addition to that, if they are registered currently with PPSEC, there is a bonding provision in place which takes care of students in that particular circumstance. In the legislation that is before the House now, there will be a student protection fund as well. [1505] J.

Kwan: I want to canvass this a little bit because the concern, of course, is that some of the students in other areas, where they have engaged in private insti- tutions for training in whatever area, have actually run into problems because the institution that they are re- ceiving the training from has gone into bankruptcy. In some cases they've simply taken away the equipment and the resources in the classroom and reduced the standards in the classroom for the students. In those

6734 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 instances, a lot of the students actually don't have re- course. Is the minister saying that the students would be protected? Will they get a full refund, then, if they run into a problem in that instance? Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, and I'm sure we're looking forward to the discussion about the broader principles about this under the other piece of legislation, because it really is a broader issue of student protection with private training institutions and trainers.

In fact, there will be the creation, under the new legislation, of a student tuition protection fund which would ensure that students have two options. One would be the opportunity to train out with another institution, should there be a problem, and the other would be a tuition refund. J. Kwan: I just want to be clear. Is that a full refund? Hon. S. Bond: Dependent on the circumstances, but, again, that is an issue that will be covered under the legislation, under the new private career training authority act. J.

Kwan: The relevance, of course, to this act is that the private institutions could provide training, and then the trainers under the private institution are des- ignated by the authority under this act. Therefore, the protection for the students and the trainees needs to be made clear under this act, which is why I'm pursuing this line of questioning here. Yes, there's a broader con- text and other programming, but we're talking specifi- cally here about the industrial training components. How will the determination be made whether or not a person gets a full refund?

The minister advises t hat i t wo u l d d e p e nd o n t he s i t u at i o n. W hat d o e s s he mean by that? Is it institution by institution, and it de- pends on their own policy in terms of how they go about doing that? Or is there a provision within the governmental guidelines that would apply to stipulate t h a t a f t e r s o m a n y d a y s o f t r a i n i n g a p e r s o n h a s r e - ceived, if there should be problems after that, then a person gets a portion of the refund? How would that work? [1510] Hon. S.

Bond: Every training institution would have to have refund policies, and the provisions and guidelines around that policy would be outlined in the bill that we're not debating now. J. Kwan: But generally speaking, is the minister suggesting that it is up to the private institutions them- selves to set up whatever policy they will bring for- ward? Hon. S. Bond: That will be the bill that will lay out — and has already been tabled in this House — at least the procedure and the criteria for the student tuition protection fund. J. Kwan: Relevant to this area here, could the minis- ter advise what those rules will be?

Hon. S. Bond: Actually, I'm going to offer to bring that information when we address the other piece of legislation, because there are changes to the student tuition protection fund. I'd like to be able to bring back the accurate information about that. This is actually two bills that are crossing over here, in terms of stu- dent protection. J. Kwan: They do cross over, which is why I'm can- vassing these questions, as it is relevant to this sector. I'm not talking about the other sectors.

As long as I'm able to ask these questions, with the other bill and with the assurance from the minister, I'm prepared to table these questions until we deal with that bill. Could I just get that on the record from the minister? Hon. S. Bond: I'd be happy to address those issues when that bill does come to the floor, and it will give us a chance to be more specific about the changes that are being made. J. Kwan: Perhaps related to that…. I want to make sure also, in terms of the training costs associated for this sector…. Is there a grid or a set of guidelines that would apply in terms of the training costs?

What I'm trying to get after is, of course, the apprentices…. Is it anticipated that the costs for them to obtain the train- ing would increase under this new act? Hon. S. Bond: As of September 2002, apprentices in the province of British Columbia did pay a tuition fee. That will continue. We do not set the tuition fees, as we do not set tuition fees across academic public institutions either. I should just point out that currently the percent- age of a course fee attributed to tuition is 15 percent. J. Kwan: Does the minister anticipate that the costs will go up? Hon. S.

Bond: That is a decision that is in the hands of institutions, as we have looked at tuition completely in the sector. Tuition for apprentices is handled in the same way. [1515] J. Kwan: In other words, there is nothing that will control the tuition fee costs that trainees may be faced with. It's completely deregulated, and therefore there could be a substantive increase in the cost for someone to obtain the training. This is problematic, in my view, because part of the issue here is to increase the number of trainees.

With the skill shortage that exists in British Columbia, one would have thought that the govern- ment would bring in legislation that would ensure and maximize the number of trainees across the province. Having said that, I'm ready to go to

section 2. Just for the information of the House, the opposition caucus

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6735 has tremendous problems with Bill 34. Instead of vot- ing against each

section individually, to save time we'll be voting against the bill in a collective effort. So we won't be spending time on each section's vote. I'm ready to go to

section

Section 1 approved. On

section 2. J. Kwan:

Section 2 deals with the Industry Training Authority, and then within that there's the component about the Industry Training Authority and how it is established.

Section 2(1) states: "The Industry Training Authority is established as a corporation consisting of a board of directors appointed under

section 3." Could the minister please advise how the ITA will manage all sectors without an ITAC-like body between the ITA and industry? Hon. S. Bond: We are moving away from the for- mal trades advisory committee mechanism. As the member knows, there were 65-plus of those. Having said that, this legislation does not constrain the Indus- try Training Authority in terms of how they consult with a variety of sectors. They could choose to set up regional advisory committees. There's just a multitude of opportunities for the Industry Training Authority as they consult within the sectors. J.

Kwan: Could the minister please advise: how will small businesses have a voice on such a small ITA? Hon. S. Bond: The Industry Training Authority, as I mentioned in our earlier discussion this morning, will not represent particular groups. What we will be doing is appointing nine people in British Columbia who are experts and who have a vision for skills and trades training in the province. But it's important that the In- dustry Training Authority understand and fully appre- ciate the role of small business and the challenges they face, and we've certainly heard a lot about that with the current training model.

I know that as the advisory system is set up for the Industry Training Authority, the concerns and considerations of small business in- terests will be taken into account. [1520] J. Kwan: Well, then I go back to the problem that exists with this act, because it doesn't actually ensure that there's broad representation accordingly. I did mention this earlier this morning. Small business, as the minister knows, is a key component in this indus- try. One would assume that there would be some way to ensure that their voice is at the table, but it appears that there isn't.

It's just going to be some nine appoint- ments made up by the minister — and then end of story. The minister consistently says that everything will be fine, but there's nothing in legislation to ensure there's protection and broad representation to that end. So the minister is just asking people to take her word for it. As I mentioned, quite frankly, it's not good enough. It's not good enough. I don't trust much of w h a t t h i s g o v e r n m e n t d o e s , a n d s o s i m p l y s a y i n g i t doesn't need to be in legislation and everything will just be fine, I think, is problematic.

Now I want to ask the minister about budgets for the authority. Is there a budget established for the au- thority? If so, what is the amount? K. Stewart: Mr. Chair, I seek leave to make an in- troduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members K. Stewart: Today we have visiting, from the beau- tiful riding of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, a group from Fairview Elementary, and they are here with their teacher, Ms. Labelle. They've been touring the facilities for the day, and they just came in here to see how we conduct our business in the House. So would the House please make them all very welcome.

Debate Continued Hon. S. Bond: Well, certainly I do want to comment on the appointment process for the Industry Training A u t h o r i t y . W e h a v e i n g o v e r n m e n t a p r i n c i p l e o f a p - pointing boards, authorities and commissions on a principle of merit. I am delighted to have received doz- ens of names from across British Columbia of out- standing individuals who I know will lead and guide this process with a visionary and aggressive approach that will meet the needs of learners in this province.

We will be using the process set up by the board re- sourcing and development office and the principles that are used there, so I am certain we are going to have an authority that is outstanding and will do an excellent job. In terms of the budget allocation for the Industry Training Authority, in

section 16 of the bill it clearly outlines the fact that there is $78.438 million set aside for the authority. J. Kwan: Yes, I see it on s ection 16. Thank you for that. I j u s t w a n t t o g o b a c k a n d c o m m e n t . I k n o w t h e minister talks about the merit-based appointment, and I do want to point out that to decide on a merit-based appointment does not mean you cannot achieve the other goal of broad representation. Those two things are not exclusive. They can actually come together, and you can achieve both goals. That's the point that the minister consistently fails to understand.

Those things can actually come to- gether, and you can actually have the cake and eat it too, in this instance — have merit as well as broad re- presentation. That could be in legislation to ensure that those goals are achieved.

6736 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 [1525] I've already gone on about how I don't trust the minister's and this government's approach to appoint- ments, because the history has actually shown that the government, instead of basing it on merit, is actually basing it on partisanship. We've already seen that in the communications branch and in other areas as well. I won't belabour that and go into it again, but I do just want to point that out. One thing is not exclusive of the other, and that seems to be the point the minister is missing. Perhaps I'll ask the other question related to the budget.

Or I can ask it now. I'll seek the advice from the minister relating to the budget: how does that com- pare to the ITAC budget formerly? Hon. S. Bond: In terms of looking at the budget, I want to compare apples to apples. As you know, there's been major transition in the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission, including offices, etc. But one of the most relevant features is the program budget, which is the actual training dollars. The 2002- 03 dollar amount, in terms of ITAC, was $71.250 mil- lion, and in 2003-04 the program budget will be $73.781 million. J.

Kwan: So then there's a substantive decrease in the amount in terms of the budget for this authority versus ITAC. No matter how you slice it, it's a substan- tive decrease — almost by half. Is that not correct? Hon. S. Bond: The reduction in dollars was simply in things like overhead. The numbers I quoted…. Let me give them to you one more time. Program dollars in 2002-03 were $71.250 million, and this year, in '03-04, it is $73.781 million. So in the program area alone, we're looking at a significant increase of several million dol- lars. J.

Kwan: The $70 million — is that for program- ming, or is that just for administration? Mr. Chair, I can ask those questions under

section 16 — whatever the minister prefers. Hon. S. Bond: The $73 million is the program budget. J. Kwan: The total budget is $78 million approxi- mately, and the program budget is $73 million. So is the administration the difference between — that is, about $5 million…? Hon. S. Bond: Yes, there is $4 million in addition to the money we mentioned in terms of program budgets. I should point out, too, that our pilot projects are in- cluded in the program budget of $73 million-plus.

So the costs out of the $4 million that exist in addition are the industry training centre in Burnaby, which will provide resources and support to apprentices and trainees, and also the industry training branch of my ministry. [1530] J. Kwan: Could the minister please refresh my memory in terms of the closure of the ITAC offices? Where were they, and how many were closed? Hon. S. Bond: There were 16 offices located around the province.

There was one in Vancouver, Burnaby, Coquitlam, Surrey, Abbotsford, Victoria, Nanaimo, Courtenay, Kamloops, Kelowna, Nelson, Cranbrook, Prince George, Terrace, Dawson Creek and Williams Lake — 16 in total. J. Kwan: There were 16 ITAC offices that were closed around the province. There will be one replace- ment in Burnaby in its place under this new model, under this piece of legislation. Given that the other locations are now being shut down, there's only really one centralized location. How will people access the information they were formerly able to access when there were the 16 locations available? Hon. S.

Bond: W e d i d n ' t s i m p l y c l o s e t h e o f f i c e s around the province without thinking about how we might provide services to students and learners in this province. In fact, we thought there might be a better way of doing that and with existing infrastructure. What we did is look at, for example, where a student could write an exam, for which they would have had to travel to one of those 16 locations in the province. We managed to work out an arrangement, an agreement, in the interim with the government agents offices around the province.

As I understand it, there are 58 government agents offices where we are now going to provide the opportunity for students to write exams and do a variety of things, for which they probably would have had to travel before to do. In addition to that, there are 15 colleges that we are working with who currently have counsellors, people who work with industry training all of the time. One of the things that's been extremely encouraging, as we've developed the model, is the role that colleges have taken as they've stepped up to the plate.

They are offer- ing more apprenticeship opportunities than we have ever had, as a matter of fact, in terms of options for students in locations all around the province. W h i l e o n o n e h a n d w e d i d c l o s e t h e 1 6 o f f i c e s around the province, we are providing a new network of support to students using existing infrastructure. J. Kwan: Of the colleges that the minister advises will be available to provide support to trainees — counsellors, etc. — could the minister please advise which colleges have signed on to do this work? Hon. S.

Bond: My staff is currently working with a consortium of all 15 colleges as they put together a ser- vice model and look at how they can provide services to trainees and apprentices. I can think of one in par- ticular — North Island College, for example — that is offering full apprentices in a number of areas where previously they were not able to do that. In fact, they

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6737 were limited to doing entry-level trades training. Now, with the new system, they are saying: "We want to of- fer full apprenticeship opportunities at North Island College." [1535] I should also say there's a consortium on Vancou- ver Island that's working together. My staff is working with all 15 colleges as a consortium.

In terms of who is sort of leaping to the forefront of this at the moment, we have great, exciting initiatives happening across the sector, but in particular at BCIT, Camosun, Capilano, Vancouver Community College, University College of the Cariboo, Fraser Valley, Kwantlen, Malaspina and Okanagan. We have some excellent work being done at College of the Rockies, New Caledonia, North Island, Northern Lights, Northwest and Selkirk. J. Kwan: Are these colleges given additional re- sources to do this work or not? Hon. S.

Bond: In fact, we did provide all the insti- tutions that were offering trades training with addi- tional dollars. We called it restructuring funding. Each one of those institutions that I mentioned did receive additional dollars in this fiscal to assist them in the restructuring process. J. Kwan: And those are dedicated dollars for this program only? Hon. S. Bond: To clarify that, Mr. Chairperson, I want to make sure I get it accurate. We provided a total of $2 million out of last fiscal — so that would be out of '02-03 — across that number of institutions.

I can certainly give the member the breakdown should she wish that. J. Kwan: Yes. If the minister could do that, that would be great. I am assuming that those dollars are dedicated dollars only for this program specifically. Hon. S. Bond: They were. It was called industry training restructuring funding. While we did supple- ment them with additional funds, which they had more discretion to use in terms of some dollars that we had available, this money was designated as industry train- ing restructuring.

Section 2 approved. On

section 3. J. Kwan: Will there be consultation with respect to the appointment of the board of directors for the au- thority? Hon. S. Bond: The process we'll be using is the board resourcing and development office procedure. Names have been given to us, as I said. We have doz- ens of names. Those will be vetted through board re- sourcing and development, and the recommendations will be presented to the minister. J. Kwan: The question is: will there be consultation? Hon. S. Bond: There will not be a formal consulta- tion process.

I can assure you that the individuals that have been recommended — and I have looked at lists of names — are all highly qualified, outstanding indi- viduals. Board resourcing and development will be continuing to work on that. The names will be pre- sented to me, and those appointments will be recom- mended to me as minister. J. Kwan: The concerns, then, that would be raised from the public relating to this area…. Would it be the authority's responsibility to deal with and address those concerns, or would it be the ministry and there- fore the minister who would be dealing with those concerns? Hon. S.

Bond: If the member could just clarify the question around the area of concern that people would be expressing, that would be helpful to us. J. Kwan: There is no specific area. I suppose I could make up one. I'm just asking generally in terms of the process where concerns or issues are raised. I'm not talking about complaints, because we dealt with that earlier. Would those matters be brought to the authority for the authority to deal with, or would they be brought to the ministry and therefore for the minister to deal with? What would the process be? [1540] Hon. S.

Bond: In the general course of operations, if individuals or people have concerns, obviously the place that they would take those concerns would be to the Industry Training Authority — to the chair of the board and ultimately to the chief executive officer. That's not unusual or unlike public post-secondary institutions, for example. Having said that, if there are issues concerning the legislative framework or large policy issues, those might be brought to my attention by either the author- ity itself or by individuals. J. Kwan: Maybe I will be specific.

There are a num- ber of issues that the public has raised, and I wonder, in terms of these issues: would it be dealt with through the authority, or would it be dealt with by the minister? Some of it actually relates to the changes of this act. Take, as an example, the mandate of the ITAC legisla- tion. I'm going to quote these recommendations from the public specifically for the minister to respond to. Under ITAC.

"The mandate of the ITAC legislation be extended for at least one year, and remaining ex- perienced staff — the system's brain trust — be main- tained to ensure a measure of stability to trades train- ing. The ITAC structures should be reinstated and spe-

6738 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 cific areas of concern dealt with within the structure and framework." That's one suggestion that's being put forward by CUPE, the B.C. division. In that instance, when those suggestions are being brought forward, would it be brought to the authority, or should it be brought to the minister for consideration? Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, my ministry and I did receive a formal request to reinstate ITAC. In fact, that decision isn't one that would go to the Industry Train- ing Authority, because I have made the decision.

The legislation on the floor of the House today represents a new model in the province. We will be moving forward on the successful passing of this legis- lation with a new model. At this point it is not contem- plated to reinstate ITAC. J. Kwan: What about the suggestion of governance? The recommendation from CUPE B.C. is: "Any new governance model must include equal representation from the four major stakeholder groups, including em- ployers, labour, government and public educators.

These representatives should be chosen to reflect an active involvement in and commitment to skills train- ing and apprenticeship." I know earlier the minister said she's received some 60 names and that it was going to be on a merit basis, but the recommendation here from the public is for there to be representation from four different sectors. Will the minister be re-contemplating that? Will the authority have the opportunity to review that matter and then, therefore, make recommendations to the minister for her consideration? Hon. S.

Bond: No, I do not intend to tie the ap- pointment process to particular groups within the province. I have said that consistently and clearly. I want to find nine people who are visionary, who are experts and who have an incredible desire to see an improved training system in this province. We will be looking at their expertise. We will be looking at their leadership capability as we move forward with this model. [1545] I certainly am confident that the Industry Training Authority that is appointed will work with a variety of groups across the province.

As I've pointed out, they will have lots of flexibility and opportunity in deter- mining how and who they consult with over the course of the next number of years. J. Kwan: On the issue around public safety: "The proposed modularization of training and certification of less than fully qualified trades must be rejected. More trades must be made compulsory.

There should be no reduction to the levels of qualification such as those suggested in the proposed new Safety Standards Act, as such changes will be detrimental to public safety." Could the minister please advise how she will in- corporate this act and work with the Minister of Com- munity, Aboriginal and Women's Services, who has responsibility for the public safety component, the new Safety Standards Act? How will she blend the two and address the issue that has been raised in this recom- mendation from CUPE? Hon. S. Bond: J u s t a c o m m e n t .

I k no w i t 's no t t he main theme of the question, but in terms of modulari- zation, that is not unique to British Columbia. It's not something we're inventing — or even reinventing, for that matter. The process is in place and working ex- tremely effectively in a number of jurisdictions around t h e g l o b e , i n f a c t . W e t h i n k w e w i l l b e a b l e t o p u t a n incredible B.C. spin on it, and it will be even better than the current systems in other countries.

Having said that, the new Safety Standards Act, which my colleague the Minister of Community, Abo- riginal and Women's Services recently brought through the House, will require employers to have qualified workers to do restricted work in 75 trades and occupa- tions. The Industry Training Authority which we're debating here today will train to those standards. There has been a great deal of collaborative work done by my staff and my colleague's staff, the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services.

We intend for that to continue ministry to ministry, but we also expect that the Safety Standards Authority and the Industry Training Authority will work very closely together as we look at the issue of safety standards in the province. J. Kwan: The other issue that CUPE has raised also include mobility, which we covered a little bit earlier today. Just for the record, I'd like to put their statement on the record.

Their recommendation is for the gov- ernment to "retain a training model that will allow every potential tradesperson the opportunity to secure the national Red Seal certification and that the provin- cial government must work with federal representa- tives and other provinces to increase the potential for national standards and mobility of skilled workers, rather than pursuing the current proposals, which will reduce the overall skill level and restrict mobility." I know we canvassed the issue on mobility a little bit earlier, but I do want to put their concern on the re- cord.

If the minister wants to respond to that, I will look forward to it. I also want to put a couple of other items in terms of recommendations and whether or not these recom- mendations would be dealt with by the minister or dealt with through the authority. [1550] On the issue around qualification, the recommen- dation is that once indentured, apprentices must be supported both by employers and by government through provision of adequate training and necessary advisory services so that they can complete their full apprenticeship training and meet the total qualifica- tions within the specified time frame.

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6739 On the issue around the role of government, which is financing, the recommendation is that the govern- ment must continue to play a critical role in the coordi- nation and provision of skills training. Tax-derived funding must not be turned over to the business sector, thus becoming a subsidy. The government must be accountable to the public for the long-range provision of training, based on broad public policy interest — not the narrow, shortsighted demands of employers.

On the issue around tuition costs, there must be no tuition fees or further cost increases to apprentices who have chosen to pursue a skilled trade qualification. Such increases will further discourage the needed in- crease in trades enrolment and be a detriment to train- ing programs as a whole. Indeed, funding reductions for post-secondary initiatives are already negatively impacting access to ELT programs, and funding should be increased.

Finally, on the concern around equity initiatives, the government must continue initiatives put in place by ITAC to ease and promote the entry of women and minorities into non-traditional trades training, as well as provide specific assistance to first nations people wishing to enter skills training and apprenticeship programs. Could the minister please advise on all of these items? Should they be directed to the new authority to be reviewed and looked into, or is that a policy deci- sion that rests with the minister? Hon. S.

Bond: Well, those are certainly views that I am fully aware of, because we had consultation across the province. We received numerous responses to our website and to our discussion paper. Those are views and concerns that were taken into consideration both with the development of this legislation and with the model that is represented by the legislation on the floor today. I am confident and very optimistic about the new model. I know that it will begin to much more reflect the needs that we have in this province and be able to respond more quickly to the changes that are neces- sary.

I do want to point out that we have a number of pilot projects underway around the province, which will address some of the concerns that have been ex- pressed in the issues that the member read into the record. We also have a number of pilot projects that we will be awarding in the next number of weeks, which talk about things like transition and competency-based training. I do want to point out that as the model evolves, operational issues — issues that deal with the day-to- day operation of the new model — will absolutely be directed to the Industry Training Authority and not to the minister. J.

Kwan: Will the authority be required to set up a consultation process with the various stakeholders to ensure that there is consultation in matters and maybe, therefore, be in the position to make suggestions or recommendations to the minister for her consideration? Hon. S. Bond: Well, I guess we're going to take a different appro ach to this as we move forward. I sim- ply am not prepared to have legislation compel people to do those kinds of things.

I don't think that statute compels people to consult; I think common sense does. [1555] I think that this Industry Training Authority, com- posed of leaders who understand the needs of industry and who understand the needs of leaders, will consult as they see appropriate. They will design the system for consultation, and they will have their needs met through the system that they choose to use. J. Kwan: The problem here is this: one would as- sume that common sense would compel people to con- sult.

The reality is, though, that this Liberal govern- ment — this minister included — campaigned on openness and consultation and transparency, but so far the government has actually not delivered on those promises. On the issue around the authority, in terms of the role of the authority and how consultation will be met, the minister is basically saying…. You know what? She's not putting any stipulation around consultation, and it will just be up to the authority to deal with it. Even for this piece of legislation, consultation was lacking.

It was only at the last minute that various stakeholders were actually invited to the table, and their recommendations and suggestions for the minis- ter seem to have fallen on deaf ears. The consultation process that this minister had embarked on for this piece of legislation has fallen short. The authority is not required to do consultation. They can do consultation if they see fit. How will the authority and therefore the minister and the ministry attempt to deal with input from the public? Perhaps I can ask the minister this question as well.

Is the minister aware that in April of 1997 an industry- sponsored survey of some 300 building contractors, the majority of whom are non-union, found that some 73 percent of building contractors think apprentices should be required to learn all facets of the trade before being granted journeyperson status? Hon. S. Bond: Let's talk about the issue of consulta- tion first. I want, first of all, to thank my staff for doing an extraordinary job of consulting around the province.

I heard nothing but great things about how they man- aged during some very challenging discussions where, unfortunately, some people at those meetings were not able to express their views because they certainly weren't given that opportunity. But my staff did an extraordinary job under challenging circumstances. To begin with, we held eight regional forums around British Columbia, and when concern was ex- pressed that some members of the sector were not be able to actually be accommodated, we accommodated not only them but more than 700 people in eight re- gional forums. I would suggest that is consultation.

In addition to that, we had 165 written submissions, all of which were read and analyzed. At the end of the

6740 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 day I'm fully aware of the report that the member ref- erences. My staff did an excellent job over the last year and a half of not just analyzing that report but looking at current trends and looking at opportunities. The fact of the matter is that there has been limited growth in apprenticeship. The numbers have been static, in fact, over the last number of years. It is simply time for us to make the changes that we have represented and reflected in legislation today.

We would concur that we need high-quality, absolutely excellently trained work- ers in British Columbia. We certainly will see the ap- prenticeship program continue in this province, where it's appropriate, but the responsible thing to do is look at a system and how to enhance it, and ensure we have the quality and quantity of workers that this province needs now and in the future. J. Kwan: Maybe I can just add some other informa- tion that the minister has omitted in the process here. The consultation process that the minister has proudly said her ministry has engaged in.

One of the things she's forgotten is this. At every meeting that was held, yes, there was overflowing capacity, but at every meet- ing some 90 percent of the participants were against the proposed changes. [1600] It is a farce to label that process consultative. The minister, quite frankly, just didn't listen to the critiques that were made, didn't answer a single point that was made regarding the concerns that people have. [R. Stewart in the chair.] Yes, you can say you've gone out and had regional meetings. You can say you've done that process and say you've consulted.

But the reality is that when peo- ple participate in that consultation process and the ma- jority have problems with the direction that the gov- ernment is going, then one would argue that the con- sultation process is just an empty process. It's not lis- tening to people and addressing their concerns. I just want to make sure that is, in fact, on the record here. I'd like to ask the minister the question around the survey I had mentioned. She seemed to not have an- swered the question of whether or not she's aware of that survey. I'd like the minister to comment on that, please. Hon. S.

Bond: First of all, I did clearly say that I was aware of the report. That report informed the crea- tion of the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission. When we became government, one of the things we said very clearly was that we were going to look at existing structures and services and see if they were actually meeting the mandate they had been cre- ated for. In fact, as I pointed out, despite the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission, the number of apprentices in the province was virtually static over that period of time.

Simply put, the system that was created as a result, partly, of the survey the member refers to was not reaching and fulfilling the targets and the expectations it was created for. So, yes, we're aware of it, and we are looking to a model that will see an increase not only in the number of trainees in this prov- ince but also IN the quality of those trainees. I feel absolutely compelled to respond to the fact that 90 percent of people at the forums were not in fa- vour. I want to point out that I received numerous e- mails and contacts. I met personally with groups of apprentices.

Many people said they simply didn't even have the opportunity to express their views because there was a particular opinion expressed repeatedly by a number of people at every single forum.

I do want to point out that through the 165 written submissions we have received as a ministry, there are the following industry sectors — not individuals but sectors in this province — that have expressed positive support for the new model as outlined: the aerospace industry, the automotive and recreational vehicle retail and services industry, the heavy industry in the prov- ince, horticulture and nursery, hospitality and tourism, manufacturing, motion picture and television, power line contractors.

In addition, the residential construc- tion and independent construction components of the construction sector are in support of the new model. We have support in terms of public institutions and private trainers. I want to make it clear, on the record, that we have significant support for a new direction for a look at how we train in this province in order to ensure we have the quality and quantity of workers we need now and in the future. J.

Kwan: The minister cites the people she says are supportive, but on the flip side of it, there are a signifi- cant number of people who are not supportive of that piece of legislation. Is the minister aware that there's a group of 88 elec- trical contractors who recently signed a petition voicing their concerns with this new model? Hon. S. Bond: Yes. [1605] J. Kwan: Who else has the minister received infor- mation from, who has raised concerns and objected to this new model? Hon. S. Bond: Well, certainly it's been clear that this discussion, legislation and change always bring debate and discussion.

I think that's healthy, and I think it's important. I think it's fair to say that organized labour has been generally opposed to this change and most changes related to skills and trades training in the province. I can also say that concerns have been expressed to me by the commercial construction sector. J. Kwan: Are those the only groups that are op- posed to the legislation that the minister is aware of? Hon. S. Bond: I think it's fair to say that these are certainly the two largest groups in terms of how I

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6741 might describe the people who have expressed con- cerns to me. I have met with both of those groups and sections of them on a number of occasions. In addition, anytime you change a system, anytime you look at a new way of doing things that changes the status quo, people express concerns.

So, in fact, there may well be individuals across a number of organiza- tions and sectors that are concerned about this bill, but I can assure you of this: the significant majority of peo- ple involved in trades training as we move forward have expressed the concern that we must create a sys- tem that is flexible and responsive to the needs of in- dustry and the needs of learners in this province. In fact, we have support, and we are going to move forward. This is going to be an exciting opportunity for us to look at a new way of enhancing training here in British Columbia. J.

Kwan: The minister keeps saying how exciting this is and that anytime there is change, there are bound to be people who are opposed to it. The issue is this: it's not about opposing change for opposition's sake but rather raising legitimate concerns that need to be addressed. Of course, the concern people raise is to ensure that when there are changes being made, you actually do it right. Do it right so that the development is, therefore, really in the best interests of all British Columbians, and I think that's the intent here for everyone.

I hope the minister is not of the view that the peo- ple who raise the concerns are somehow just opposing it because they oppose change, because that's not the sense I have at all. I'd like to ask the minister this question, because changes do take place from time to time. In fact, in the Bill Bennett era back in the 1980s, there was another similar experiment that was embarked on. It was called the trades access program known as TRAC, which was supposed to enable apprentices to direct their own studies at their own pace. It was a system that ended up in chaos and failure.

After two years, some $35 mil- lion was wasted in spending, and TRAC was then withdrawn. I'd like to ask the minister: has she learned anything from this experience of the Bill Bennett era? I'd like to have the minister's comments on that. [1610] Hon. S. Bond: I think it is important we learn from things that have happened in the past. Certainly, while there were challenges with TRAC, I think we should note for the record that part of what TRAC spawned was entry- level trades training, which is a significant component of the training system that exists today in the province.

One of the challenges with TRAC is that it was a classroom-based program. We're saying there needs to be a work-based component to any sort of training, and that is an important lesson that was learned. So while TRAC had some challenges, from our perspective, one of the components of the system that exists today came as a result of the TRAC system. In excess of $50 million, in fact, currently is in a system that was created through that particular initiative.

In addition to that, with regard to the comments about being willing to listen and wanting to make sure we get it right, I can absolutely agree with the member. We want to get this right. Really, one of the most dis- couraging parts of this discussion has been the fact that some people are simply saying: "It won't work. We don't want change. We're simply not prepared to work with you." That is very unfortunate. In fact, I continue to hope people will come and sit down and work with us as we ensure that the new model is rolled out effec- tively and appropriately in this province.

We are creating pilot projects around the province which will see new ways of training — opportunities for the young people of this province. You know, I am concerned when the average age of an apprentice in this province is 28 years old. We need to look at ways of encouraging and attracting young people to skills and trades training in this province. The most impor- tant thing is that the cornerstone of training in this province, the basic parameters, will continue to exist where that's appropriate.

What's been unfortunate is that often the informa- tion that has been shared simply does not line up with the information that has been presented by this gov- ernment. Red Seal will continue in this province. Over and over and over again, I heard people saying that Red Seal will be discontinued in the province. That is simply not factual. It's unfortunate when that kind of rhetoric is involved in this kind of a debate. So you're right: it is absolutely appropriate that we get this system right. That is what we're going to do.

The legislation today will allow for more flexibility and choice for training in the province. J. Kwan: Well, of the people who contacted the opposition caucus, none, in my view, have expressed an approach that would preclude them from participat- ing and working with the ministry. The problem rests with this: the government is simply not listening to the concerns that have been raised. The government is simply putting blinders on and then rejecting those concerns, because the government is of the view that somehow, when those concerns are raised, they're op- posing the new model.

When people raise concerns with respect to the new model, then there are issues with the new model. It is hoped, of course, that the government and therefore the minister would open her perspective to receive these concerns and then address them accordingly, and not just to reject the concerns outright, saying that somehow they are not intending to work with the government and have no goodwill to work with the government. [1615] Could the minister please advise: will a trainee or apprentice be able to complete their apprenticeship in less time than it takes today?

In other words, can an electrical apprentice complete in three years instead of four using the new method of testing or evaluating? Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, there will be the possibil- ity, we hope, in the future that apprentices will be able

6742 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 13, 2003 to complete their training in lesser periods of time. I want to make it very clear that neither the standards nor the criteria will change, but potentially some of the delivery models will. For example, British Columbia, unlike many provinces in Canada, currently does not use an on-line component in any sort of training model. That's simply a technique and tool that is used across this country.

W h a t w e w a n t t o d o i s n o t l o o k a t c h a n g i n g t h e standards or the criteria, but there is the potential — and I hope it will happen — that we can shorten the amount of time. We certainly will not lessen the com- petency or qualifications that are required, but as tech- nology changes, as we look at new delivery models, that potential will exist. B. Locke: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members B.

Locke: O n b e h a l f o f t h e M i n i s t e r o f S t a t e f o r Mental Health, who is currently in the little House, I would like to introduce to the House a group of stu- dents from Princess Margaret Secondary School. They are in the chamber, and I ask that the House please make them very welcome. Debate Continued J. Kwan: The minister advises that the period of time for the training may be shortened, but the compe- tence issue would not be compromised. Is that the view of the employers? In other words, have the employers been asked if they will then hire people as competent journeypersons? Hon. S.

Bond: Well, certainly there will be variables as we look at it across trades. Some trades will be able to make that adjustment, and some won't. We recog- nize that. Some employers will be in favour of that and some not. I want to point out another case example of where it's being done and how it works. In Ontario, for exam- ple, seven trades complete and write the Red Seal ex- amination after two years. We simply cannot do that in British Columbia. That's a disadvantage both to compe- tent workers and to employers in the province. J.

Kwan: Well, the issue around the consultation with the employers is key, because at the end of the day they are the people who will be hiring these train- ees. With the authority, who's been charged with this responsibility to bring forward and enact the intentions of the model…. Could the minister please advise: is the authority required to consult with employers to ensure they agree with the plan that would be devised under this model? How will they ensure that the employers actually buy into this concept and the

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0513pm-11
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0513pm 11
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7e2ec247337f1fc93069131c27e78a41462f0b9f

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).