British Columbia Hansard — Tuesday, May 28, 2002 (37th Parliament, 3rd Session) (H0528pm-07) (H0528pm 07)

H0528pm-07

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

3rd Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Tuesday, May 28, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Volume 8, Number 7 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 3RD 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. Internet: www.legis.gov.bc.ca/hansard

Party Standings: Liberal 76; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 1. 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 (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 28, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 3647 Statements (Standing Order 25 B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 3648 Charitable and sporting events in Surrey D. Hayer Oak Bay Tea Party I. Chong RCMP campaign to preserve the St. Roch D.

MacKay Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3649 Rob Abbott's contract with Water, Land and Air Protection ministry J. Kwan Hon. J. Murray J. MacPhail Negotiations with physicians and delisting of services J. MacPhail Hon. C. Hansen Ministerial Statements ......................................................................................................... .................................................... 3652 Draft community charter Hon. T.

Nebbeling Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3652 Power for Jobs, report, 2000 Reports from Committees ........................................................................................................ ............................................... 3652 Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 3653 Hon.

G. Plant J. Kwan J. Les K.

Stewart Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3654 Labour Relations Board, annual report, 2001 Ministry of Labour, annual reports, 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01 Point of Order (Speaker's Ruling) .............................................................................................. ............................................ 3654 Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3654 Hon.

G. Collins Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 3654 Carrier Lumber Ltd. Forest Licence Compensation Act (Bill 58) Hon. M. de Jong

Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3655 Employment and Assistance Act (Bill 26) (continued) J. Kwan Hon. M. Coell S. Orr J.

MacPhail Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3676 Employment and Assistance Act (Bill 26) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 3676 Employment and Assistance Act (Bill 26) J. Kwan J. MacPhail Hon. M. Coell

3647 TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members J. Weisbeck: There is a very special guest today in the gallery from Cologne, Germany: Christine Meyer. Christine is here, in Vancouver, for the next four months working on her English skills. Would the House please make her welcome. Hon. T. Nebbeling: I actually have two introduc- tions to make today. The first one is a considerable list of guests that we have with us in the House today, so if you'll give me the time to do that…. W e h a v e w i t h u s H a n s C u n n i n g h a m , w h o i s t h e president of the Union of B.C.

Municipalities. We also have Frank Leonard, who is known as the mayor of Saanich and is also the president of the Municipal Fi- nance Authority of B.C. Richard Taylor, the executive director of the Union of B.C. Municipalities, is also with us. Don Lidstone, who is the legal counsel to the Community Charter Council, is known as a top expert on local government legislation.

We have Gerry King- ston, who is the president of the Local Government Management Association of B.C., and Debbie Comis, who is the Local Government Management Associa- tion's vice-president. [1405] We also have some CAWS staff in the gallery: Bob de Faye, the Deputy Minister of Community, Aborigi- nal and Women's Services; Dale Wall, the assistant deputy minister, local government department; Gary Paget, executive director of governance and structure division.

We have Janet Erasmus and Erin Faulkner, who both work for the Attorney General's office and who have been very instrumental in drafting the draft of the community charter. All these members have been either part of the Community Charter Council or have been advising the Community Charter Council in creating the document that will be tabled in the House right after question period. I ask the members to give them a very well deserved welcome. The second introduction is in the short form, Mr. S p e ak e r. W e hav e wi t h u s t he m ay o r o f P e m b e rt o n, a village in my riding of West Vancouver–Garibaldi.

She is accompanied by Bryan Kirk, who is the city clerk and treasurer for the village of Pemberton, and Lori Onyschtschuk, who is the development administrator for the village of Pemberton. They're here on an impor- tant mission, and again, I hope the House can make them welcome too. Hon. L. Reid: I am pleased to welcome to the pre- cinct today and to this chamber Mr. David Wells. David is leading up the British Columbia Business and Economic Round Table on Mental Health. I would ask this House to please make him extremely welcome. J.

MacPhail: I look around and see the gallery is full of a very good, healthy bunch of people, but there are two people sitting in this House today that look like they're the healthiest and the brightest amongst the bunch. They happen to be the young children of our executive director, Clay Suddaby. Olivia and Stanley are joining us for the first time, and we're so lucky to have them here. Please make them welcome. W. McMahon: It's a pleasure today to introduce two constituents, Phyllis and Elliott Pighin, who are proud ranchers from the Fort Steele area of British Co- lumbia.

Would the House please make them welcome. J. Kwan: I see that visiting us in the galleries today is Anne Edwards, a former MLA from the Kootenay area. I know that she is here busily working on inter- viewing the women MLAs particularly, in preparation for her book. Would the House please make Anne Ed- wards welcome. G. Trumper: I would like to announce to the Legis- lature that as of 3 o'clock this morning, there were two more young Trumpers born into the world. Jackson and Nicholas were born to my daughter-in-law Ronda and son Michael Trumper. Please welcome them into the country of Canada. S.

Orr: I notice a person in the House today who is a very special constituent of mine and who is also a very active member of one of my neighbourhood asso- ciation groups, called NAG. Her name is Laurie Macal- roy. She is also the mother of one of our Pages, Nouri, who assists and helps us in the House. I would be re- miss if I didn't also mention my mayor, Frank Leonard, who taught me everything I know. Would the House please make them welcome. A. Hamilton: I t ' s m y p l e a s u r e t o w e l c o m e t o t h e House Beth Gibson, mayor of the beautiful and won- derful community of Colwood.

Would the House please make her welcome. [1410] Hon. G. Bruce: In the House today are two fine young gentlemen from my former high school — the high school that I graduated from. Yes, I did graduate. They just recently won the BCAA/BCIT auto skills challenge. They are the B.C. champions. They can fix y o u r c a r i n a n h o u r a n d t h r e e m i n u t e s — not even knowing what's wrong with it. If any of you have a car that has anything wrong with it, they know how to fix it. They check the batteries; they make sure there's gas. In fact, they're on their way to the national champion- ship in Winnipeg.

You'll be happy to know that when- ever you drive through the Cowichan Valley, you get your car fixed lickety-split, because these guys know how to fix a car really, really fast. They are Ryan Woike and Arthur McKinlay. Would you wish them well in their endeavours.

3648 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 Mr. Speaker, I told you that I had ten friends, and I've introduced eight of them to you. I have here today the ninth one, who's a good friend of mine, their teacher and a guy that's led my high school to seven B.C. championships, I think, and three national cham- pionships: Mr. Tom Gavaghan, who I know is still proud — I hope — to be my friend. Tom? Mr. Speaker: Thank you. The House will be pleased to know there's only one left. [Laughter.] Statements (Standing Order 25

B) CHARITABLE AND SPORTING EVENTS IN SURREY D. Hayer: Today I would like to bring the House up to date on some very important functions in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead and speak of the impor- tance of giving. All these events are run by volunteers and include the very high profile PGA tournament at the North- view Golf and Country Club. This event puts British Columbia on the map of the golf world. It is a grand event, and I urge all golfers in the House to be sure to attend and sample the hospitality that Surrey has to o f f e r .

T h i s y e a r ' s t o u r n a m e n t r u n s f r o m A u g u s t 2 6 t o September 1. There are a lot more things to do, and I'd like to mention a few more of them. On June 2 is the Port Kells annual spring fair sponsored by the Port Kells Com- munity Association, followed on June 14 by the Fraser Heights fair. On September 7 there is the Fleetwood Festival and fun run organized by the Fleetwood Community Association, established in 1923. In addition, we have some important charitable events that exemplify the generosity of the people of my community. There is a big party tomorrow at the B.C.

Family Hearing Resource Centre. I have spoken about this centre before, Mr. Speaker, and about how important it is to children and families throughout Brit- ish Columbia for its assistance to hearing-impaired children. The final event I want to mention relates to the B.C. Hospice Palliative Care Association. Its Hike for Hos- pice is being held on June 23. The fundraising event in my riding is organized by the Surrey Hospice Society, but hikes are being held throughout B.C., and 90 per- cent of the money raised will go directly to the hospice organization in each community that hosts a hike.

This B.C.-wide organization does wonderful work. In clos- ing, I urge all members of this House to participate in the hikes in their communities and support this very worthwhile cause. OAK BAY TEA PARTY I. Chong: In my riding this weekend, June 1 and 2, an annual event is about to take place at Willows Park. This year marks the fortieth year running of the Oak Bay Tea Party, a fun-filled weekend community cele- bration of entertainment, a midway, fireworks, bathtub race and usually an air show.

The Oak Bay Tea Party began as a one-time event in the summer of 1963 when the late Allan Cox, QC, was the reeve — or mayor, as we now call it — of Oak Bay. It turned out to be such a success that it became an annual event. Originally, the Oak Bay Tea Party was run by a group of volunteers, most of whom were members of the Oak Bay Kiwanis Club, who called themselves the "Oak Bay Bored of Trade." However, in 1990 a non-profit society was formed — the Oak Bay Tea Party Society — which is dedicated solely to put- ting on the tea party on the first Saturday and Sunday of June at Willows Park.

During its 40-year history the tea party has had three chairmen: the late Fred Usher, the late Marcel Barsalou and currently Mr. Bill Murphy-Dyson. Volun- teers are still very much a part of contributing to the success of this annual event. In addition, local service clubs remain involved, such as Oak Bay Lions, Royal Oak Lions, Oak Bay Rotary and, of course, Oak Bay Kiwanis. [1415] Activities get underway, beginning with the Oak Bay Tea Party parade on Saturday morning at 10:30, when the parade winds through the streets of Oak Bay from Windsor Park to Willows Park, ending there in about an hour.

As with all parades, trophies are awarded for winning entries in various categories. Entertainment is plentiful, from school choirs to a rhythm and blues band, a jazz band and a big band. Clearly, there is something for everyone. At 10 p.m. at Willows Beach on Saturday night you can enjoy the magic of their fireworks display. A new event has been added this year: the floating teacup race between Oak Bay's mayor, Christopher Causton, and Victoria's mayor, Alan Lowe, which will take place on Sunday afternoon. Also on Sunday after- noon, weather permitting, the air show will take place.

That will include skydivers landing on the beach, mili- tary aircraft, aerobatic aircraft and a sea rescue demon- stration. Certainly, I encourage everyone to find some time this weekend to come down to enjoy Willows Park and enjoy hospitality in our Oak Bay community. RCMP CAMPAIGN TO PRESERVE THE ST. ROCH D. MacKay: Mr. Speaker, as you know, I was proud to serve with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for a period of 28 years. One of the least-known but highest achievements of the RCMP was in the sailing of its ves- sel, known as the St.

Roch , and its circumnavigation through the Northwest Passage for the first time. That historic event gave sovereignty of the north to Canada. Today this historic vessel is on display in Vancou- v e r a n d i s i n d i r e n e e d o f r e p a i r . I n r e s p o n s e t o t h a t problem, six members of the RCMP have recorded a CD in Nashville. The production of the CD was made

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3649 possible through a generous contribution from Trend- west Resorts, Inc. The proceeds of the sale of the CD will go entirely to preserve the St. Roch. One of the members of the band is my good friend o f 3 0 y e a r s , S t a f f S g t . G l e n M c R a e o f P r i n c e G e o r g e . I can vouch for the excellent music of the RCMP country band. At one time I have seen over 3,000 people danc- ing and enjoying themselves to the band's music. Fur- ther, this band's music has also raised money for bone marrow transplants.

I would ask all my colleagues in the House and people throughout the province to support this cam- paign to preserve the St. Roch. The name of the band is Steele Heart, named in honour of another famous RCMP member, Sam Steele. The release date of the CD will be June 6, 2002, at a ceremony to take place at the Vancouver Maritime Museum. Copies of the CD can be ordered direct online at cactusjacks@direct.ca. Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Oral Questions ROB ABBOTT'S CONTRACT WITH WATER, LAND AND AIR PROTECTION MINISTRY J.

Kwan: I n D e c e m b e r o f l a s t y e a r t h e M i n i s t e r o f Water, Land and Air Protection contracted with Rob Abbott to — and I quote from the contract — "support the success of the ministry in delivering its core review shifts and strategic priorities by providing support to the minister and deputy minister." The contract was for three and a half months. He was paid $52,900, and he's apparently on the payroll again. The contract stipu- lated that Mr. Abbott work a four-day week. To the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection: could she please inform this House just what Mr.

Ab- bott did to earn his $1,000 a day, and just what service is he providing to the minister? Hon. J. Murray: When this government took office, there were serious challenges in my ministry as well many of the other ministries. We asked Dr. Mark Jac- card, who's a well-known environmental expert and professor and also a former chair of the B.C. Utilities Commission under the NDP, who he would recom- mend to help us make the kind of changes we needed to make. Dr. Jaccard suggested several people, includ- ing Rob Abbott. The ministry undertook a process to interview the candidates and selected Mr.

Abbott, who was paid according to the consulting rates of the day. [1420] I am very pleased that we have Mr. Abbott working with us. I'll just let the House know some of Mr. Ab- bott's credentials. He was the sustainability adviser to the city of Seattle. He was a founding associate and director of strategy at the Centre for Innovation and Management at Simon Fraser University. He's been a sessional instructor at the school of resource and envi- ronmental management at SFU. He was the director of strategic environmental management services for Golder Associates, one of the firms most respected…. Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: He was the principal in charge of environmental services for Coopers and Lybrand, one of the world's largest and most respected business ad- visory firms. Mr. Abbott is helping us with a range of the change management, including changing regulations looking at…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …including the recreation stew- ardship panel that is reviewing park and wildlife rec- reation today. I am very pleased to have Mr. Abbott working with us. Mr. Speaker: Thank you very much, hon. minister.

The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: We're seeing massive cuts to the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. While parks are being closed, a former Socred minister has been ap- pointed to commercialize those parks that are left. Today we hear from the environmentalists that the results-based code will lead to less environmental pro- tection. The conservation service has been cut for the first time ever. There is no Drinking Water Protection Act. There is no agricultural regulation. There's no news on the pulp mill effluent.

The only thing that we know for sure… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: …is that the minister is spending $1,000 a day on a personal consultant. To the minister once again…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please, hon. members. Let us hear the question. J. Kwan: Does the minister think that spending $1,000 a day on a private consultant is a good use of the taxpayers' money, especially when it's becoming more

3650 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 and more obvious that her ministry simply can't do the job that it is mandated to do? Hon. J. Murray: Mr. Abbott is assisting all the assis- tant deputy ministers with a range of shifts that we're making now, including our product stewardship pro- grams and P2 planning. What I find particularly aston- ishing is that the member opposite would attack Mr. Abbott's credentials… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, hon. members. Hon. J.

Murray: …and the validity of using a con- sultant to increase effectiveness, particularly in light of the fact that Mr. Abbott was a consultant to the NDP. I have a note here that Mr. Abbott had a contract with the green economy secretariat. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: Obviously, the NDP was very pleased with his work, because he was contracted again. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Hon. J. Murray: Mr. Abbott actually also worked for the Ministry of Community Development, Coopera- tives and Volunteers. Of course, the minister of that ministry… Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …was none other than the member opposite. I'm sure that the member got as much benefit and satisfaction from the increased effectiveness of her portfolio as I expect to receive from Mr. Abbott's sup- port. Mr. Speaker: Thank you, hon. minister. [1425] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary. J. Kwan: You know what? The minister of envi- ronment — she's supposed to be the minister of envi- ronment — does not understand the point of the ques- tion.

The point of the question is: if we're spending $1,000 a day on a personal consultant for the minister, what results is she getting for the protection of water, land and air for this province? She has received noth- ing from this consultation. I want to ask the minister this question. The minis- ter is constantly…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. J. MacPhail: His record is impeccable; hers is a dis- aster. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. J. MacPhail: You don't even get the point. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Let us hear the ques- tion. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. members….

Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, let us hear the ques- tion. J. Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the minister this question. The minister is constantly de- fending her scientifically based approach to environ- mental management, but when it came to grizzly bears, it's shoot first and then look at the signs later. When it comes to aquaculture, its tough environmental stan- dards being watered down to keep the multinationals that run the industry and make them happy.

When it comes to logging in sensitive habitats like that of the spotted owl in the Chilliwack forest district, her scien- tists are being muzzled and then relocated so that the industry can have their way. Why is the minister so willing… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: …to kowtow to industry-first colleagues? Why is she so willing to abandon her ministry's man- date and her expert staff opinion? Is it because this is just the kind of advice that she is getting from her $1,000-a-day consulting services? J. MacPhail: Or are you ignoring his advice? An Hon. Member: Who's asking the questions? Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: There are a number of challenges that this government inherited, and my ministry is no

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3651 exception. I have a consultant with the highest creden- tials who is participating and assisting in a review process for the contaminated-sites regime, is working on the development of a permanent science advisory panel for government so that… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …we can increase the use of sci- ence in decision-making. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. Order. Question period will continue when we have a little decorum in this place.

Please continue. Hon. J. Murray: Mr. Abbott is assisting the ministry in developing a business case for sustainability in gov- ernment in support of the government's initiative… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …is assisting the ministry in long- term strategic planning and is working on the estab- lishment of long-term environmental goals and indica- tors. Mr. Speaker, this is a consultant who has a record of having worked with Alcan, B.C. Buildings Corpora- tion, B.C. Gas… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …B.C. Hydro, B.C.

Rail, the city of Seattle, Tolko Industries Ltd., Environment Canada, Crestbrook Forest Industries. This is a person with the highest…. Mr. Speaker: Thank you, hon. member. Hon. J. Murray: …who clearly was appointed again and again by the NDP because of his effectiveness. J. MacPhail: W e t o o k h i s a d v i c e . A r e y o u ? N o , you're not. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: We appreciate having someone of Mr. Abbott's calibre assist us… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. J. Murray: …in making effective changes and improvements to our regulations and policies. J.

MacPhail: Well, let's see, Mr. Speaker. The minis- ter who we just had answers from was giving the past record of advice taken without saying anything of what she's doing with that advice. [1430] NEGOTIATIONS WITH PHYSICIANS AND DELISTING OF SERVICES J. MacPhail: There's also now other advice being given to the Minister of Health Services. The media is reporting that the Minister of Health Services said yes- terday that he would sweeten the pot if the doctors returned to the negotiating table. This morning, we understand, negotiations have resumed — good news for British Columbians.

Now, what advice is he receiving? Can he tell the House if the government or the doctors have put for- ward any plans to settle the dispute by delisting medi- cally necessary services so that doctors can make extra money by billing British Columbians for those services directly? What action is he taking in this area? Hon. C. Hansen: At no time yesterday did I say that we were sweetening the pot. What I did say was that we were prepared to show flexibility if the nego- tiations could resume. Certainly, there are some dis- cussions involving officials at BCMA and officials with government today.

We're hopeful that we can move this forward and resolve these issues and get back to providing good patient care. There is no discussion around any delisting. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question. J. MacPhail: Yes, this morning we heard that there was going to be greater flexibility in return for resum- ing negotiation. Given the increasing bitterness of this dispute, one would assume that he meant something more than his goodwill. One would assume that he has something concrete to offer the doctors.

If it's as the minister insists — that delisting medically necessary services is not on the table…. An Hon. Member: Did you not hear the answer? J. MacPhail: I just repeated the minister's answer. Interjections. J. MacPhail: Perhaps he might have been spending too much time out in that hallway; I don't know. Maybe his ears are cauliflowered.

3652 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 If it's as the minister insists — that there's no delist- ing of medically necessary services on the bargaining table…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. Let us hear the question. J. MacPhail: Can the minister please tell the House — his own colleagues — if the government or the doc- tors have put forward in any other venue plans to de- list medically necessary services so that doctors can make extra money charging directly for those services? If so, can he tell British Columbians how much those plans would be worth to the doctors? Hon. C.

Hansen: Certainly, in terms of the discus- sions with the BCMA to try to resolve this fee issue, there has been absolutely no discussion around delist- ing of services. As to whether or not the BCMA has put forward suggestions around delisting of services, I am not aware of it, but I would certainly check. I'll get back to the member if she's interested — but none that I am aware of. [End of question period.] Ministerial Statements DRAFT COMMUNITY CHARTER Hon. T.

Nebbeling: I rise today to make a ministe- rial statement and to table a White Paper entitled The Community Charter: A New Legislative Framework for Local Government. It is indeed an honour for me to pre- sent this draft of the community charter, a new legisla- tive framework for local governments, to the Legisla- ture and to the people of British Columbia. The community charter will change the way the municipal system works by providing for increased empowerment. Municipal empowerment means more self-determination and greater self-reliance.

Increased empowerment will be balanced by enhanced citizen accountability and protection of provincewide interests like public health, environment and economic devel- opment. It will set in place a new approach to the rela- tionship between the province and local governments based on cooperation and mutual respect. [1435] The community charter is one way in which the government will fulfil its commitment to developing a stable and predictable business environment for our communities.

The community charter, in its final form, will rewrite and remove hundreds of sections of the current Local Government Act and replace them with simpler and more concise legislation. With the community charter, British Columbia is moving towards the twenty-first century model of em- powering local government and involving citizens. For cities to function in a modern way, they need the au- thority to create the best environment for economic and social change to occur.

The community charter will enable municipalities to develop the tools they need to do their day-to-day business in a fairer, more modern and efficient way, and it will enable them to make local decisions locally. Under the community charter, municipalities will have more autonomy and better tools to reduce prop- erty tax pressures and enhance community stability. Mr. Speaker, there's been a long and hard road to travel to bring the draft of the charter to the House today, but it was worth every step on the way.

The community charter will be an important tool to improve the quality of life in communities and the things that really matter in people's lives on a day-to-day basis. Tabling Documents Hon. R. Neufeld: I'd like to table the year 2000 re- port on Power for Jobs activity. Reports from Committees B. Penner: I have the honour to present the second report of the Select Standing Committee on Parliamen- tary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills. I move that the report be read and re- ceived. Motion approved. Law Clerk: "May 28, 2002: "Hon.

Speaker, your Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills begs leave to report as follows: that the

preamble of Bill Pr402, intituled Sea to Sky University Act, has been approved, and the committee recommends that the bill proceed to second reading. "All of which is respectfully submitted. Barry Penner, Chairman." B. Penner: I ask leave of the House to permit the moving of a motion to adopt the report. Leave granted. B. Penner: I move that the report be adopted. I note that the member for West Vancouver–Capilano would like to also address this issue. R. Sultan: I move the Sea to Sky University bill be considered for the second time now. Mr. Speaker: We must adopt the report first.

The motion has been made by the member for Chilliwack- Kent — adoption of the report. Motion approved. R. Sultan: Is it appropriate that I move the Sea to Sky University bill be considered for the second time now?

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3653 Mr. Speaker: That will have to happen tomorrow. Bill Pr402 ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Petitions Hon. G. Plant: I table a petition addressed to the Victoria Legislature, signed by 566 residents of British Columbia advocating family law and justice reform. J. Kwan: I rise to table two petitions, one containing 181 signatures asking the B.C. government to include chiropractic doctors in the B.C. Medical Services Plan.

The second petition is a petition with 51 signatures from the Philippine Diamond Society of B.C., calling on the government to keep its hands off of medicare and to say no to privatizing health care. J. Les: I rise to present a petition on behalf of 10,717 residents of the Chilliwack area opposed to the closure of Parkholm Lodge. [1440] K. Stewart: I rise today to present two petitions. The first is a petition to the B.C. government to include chiropractic doctors in B.C.'s medicare plan on a basis equal to medical doctors, signed by 130 people.

The second is petitioning both the provincial and federal governments to take immediate action to support the employees and companies of the independent lumber remanufacturers who are being adversely affected by the unreasonable U.S. trade actions. J. MacPhail: I r i s e t o s e e k a d v i c e f r o m y o u a s Speaker about events that have occurred this week.

I am aware that Erskine May provides that select committees may consider and report to the House reso- lutions recommending an outlay of public money for a specified purpose, "without the previous signification of the Queen's recommendation." I am not, however, aware of the authority granted anywhere in the par- liamentary jurisprudence for a select committee to uni- laterally take action on its own resolution without first reporting to the House. I therefore seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, regarding the events and the actions taken by the Special Committee to Review the Police Complaint Process.

We know that discussions took place between the Chair and the former police complaint commissioner regarding his resignation and severance provisions. I'm seeking the advice from the Speaker to provide rec- ommended reading regarding the authority of the committee to actively engage in this kind of negotia- tion. The matter of expending public funds and from what budget — in this case, approximately $100,000 — should have been reported to the House, where the recommendation would have been considered and voted on.

As I understand it, the sum has been taken from vote 1, even though neither the Legislative Assembly Management Committee nor the Legislature has con- sidered that expenditure. I seek your advice, Mr. Speaker. I know you'll rule on this at a later date on how to proceed in examining this matter. Mr. Speaker: Thank you. The Chair appreciates your question and will respond in due course. Hon. G. Collins: If I could perhaps provide some input or suggestions on this issue and some comment. The severance and the accommodation that arose from the police complaint commissioner with his letter to you, the Speaker….

In order to move that ahead, the financial accommodations — it is my understanding — would come out of the vote that's already been appro- priated by this House to defray the expenses of the office of the police complaint commissioner. That w o u l d b e t h e n o r m a l p r o c e s s , a s i t w o u l d i f a n y o n e within that office were to be severed and require some sort of financial compensation for that.

If at some time in the future the commission de- cides that it cannot live within its budget, then the past practice of this House has been that those officers of the Legislature would present themselves to Treasury Board and request access to contingencies. This gov- ernment has tried to improve upon that process and the independence of the officers by having them pre- sent to a committee of the Legislature and for that committee to take that up with government if that's what they chose to do. My understanding is that the commissioner has left. There has been a severance that's part of that ac- commodation.

The letter was given to the Speaker, and any costs that are incurred as a result will come out of the previously voted appropriation for the office of the police complaint commissioner. I'm also surprised a little bit by the Leader of the Opposition's comments and her lack of certainty around this issue, given that the member for… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Please continue. Hon. G. Collins: …Vancouver–Mount Pleasant was a member of the committee and did not attend one of the meetings. She was kept informed diligently by the Chair, despite no need for him to do that.

He kept the member in the loop and informed on a regular basis. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. The Chair appreciates everyone's comments and will take them into consideration and bring back a ruling in due course. Interjections.

3654 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 Mr. Speaker: Enough, please. We have had quite enough informal discussion. Please address your re- marks through the Chair. Tabling Documents [1445] Hon. G. Bruce: I'd like to submit the annual report for the Labour Relations Board for the year 2001, the annual report for the Ministry of Labour for the fiscal year 2000-01 and the previously distributed annual reports of the fiscal years 1998-99 and 1999-2000, fulfill- ing my obligation as the current minister responsible. Point of Order (Speaker's Ruling) Mr.

Speaker: Hon. members, on Monday, May 27, the Government House Leader rose under the provi- sions of standing order 81.1 and advised the House that an agreement had been reached in relation to time allocation for the conclusion of government business. The Leader of the Opposition rose on what she charac- terized as a point of order, which in essence was a dis- agreement with the circumstances as outlined by the Government House Leader. The Government House Leader then responded to the objections raised by the Leader of the Opposition, and the Speaker advised that the question would be taken under advisement.

An examination of the transcript leads the Chair to conclude that the matter raised by the Leader of the Opposition does not constitute a valid point of order but simply a disagreement between two members in- volved, relating to the circumstances surrounding the motion made under standing order 81.1. Accordingly, no further action from the Chair is indicated. Tabling Documents Hon. G.

Collins: Pursuant to the Financial Admini- stration Act, I am pleased to present reports for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, on amounts bor- rowed by government for making loans to government bodies as well as the corresponding report on loans to government bodies, amounts reported in foreign cur- rencies and amounts borrowed for authorized dis- bursements. These reports provide an overview of the province's borrowing activity in the fiscal year 2001-02. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call second reading of Bill 58. Second Reading of Bills CARRIER LUMBER LTD. FOREST LICENCE COMPENSATION ACT Hon.

M. de Jong: I move that Bill 58 be read a sec- ond time now. I should say in my comments today that it is, of course, unfortunate that we would need to be here and that the House would need to debate a bill of this sort. I think the circumstances that give rise to the need for this bill and this settlement with Carrier Lumber Ltd. are fairly well known. The events date back a number of years.

Suffice to say, the Supreme Court of British Columbia rendered a judgment in 1999 wherein it found in favour of the plaintiff, Carrier Lumber Ltd., and assigned liability against the Crown for actions and activities that it described in a very unflattering way — terms like "deceptive practices" and "bad faith." We could spend a lot of time here today assessing and reviewing how that came to pass and the conduct of the previous government in placing the Crown and, more particularly, the taxpayers of this province in a vulnerable circumstance that gives rise today to the expenditure of significant resources from the public treasury.

I'm not sure what we would achieve by doing that. Suffice it to say that by virtue of introducing Bill 58 today, this government is resolved and is taking steps to end that long-running dispute, that long- running case with Carrier Lumber, and bring closure to this matter. [1450] The first thing I'd like to do is just put on the record the specific details of the settlement and then conclude by emphasizing what this bill does to give effect to those settlement provisions. The key question relates to the cost to the Crown of this agreement. We estimate that to be just shy of $75 million.

It consists of that settlement of $30 million in cash; two parcels of land transferred from B.C. Rail — that is, the Crown purchases that land from B.C. Rail and will transfer it to Carrier Lumber; and also a five- year forest licence to harvest 1.5 million cubic metres of timber, and significantly, that timber would be har- vested free of any stumpage charges. The province paid B.C. Rail, with respect to the B.C. Rail lands, $2.6 million to transfer those lands to Car- rier Lumber. Parenthetically, the land — the Tabor mill site in Prince George, as it is referred to, a neighbour- ing property….

Previously, Carrier had leased the mill site. They will assume ownership. As well, B.C. Rail has forgone some rail bed gravel on the property, which the Crown will replace from another yet-to-be- determined site. We have assigned a value of approxi- mately $1.1 million to the cost of that gravel replace- ment. The Carrier Lumber Ltd.

Forest Licence Compensa- tion Act, which we are debating here today, will au- thorize the government to directly award to Carrier Lumber a forest licence that provides 1.5 million cubic metres of green beetle-attacked timber in the Prince George timber supply area free of stumpage and rental charges. Happily, arising out of an obviously unhappy situation, that will allow us, I think, to bring some ad- ditional resources to bear on trying to slow the advance of the mountain pine beetle infestation. We have calcu- lated — and this is not a particularly exact science these

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3655 days — as best we can the value of that timber licence to be in the range of $41.1 million. This bill enables the government, as part of the set- tlement agreement with Carrier Lumber, to award this forest licence specifically in replacement for the forest licence that the B.C. Supreme Court ruled in 1999 the Crown had cancelled illegally. As was the case with the original licence, as I pointed out, the forest licence will concentrate on harvesting in the beetle-infested areas.

Bill 58 also contains a number of provisions which allow the government to implement the settlement agreement with Carrier. I will list them briefly. The bill a l l o w s t h e M i n i s t e r o f F o r e s t s t o d i r e c t l y m a k e t h e award. It also includes some special terms and condi- tions as part of the forest licence. Specifically, stump- age will not be payable. We will ensure that the licence provides Carrier with a guaranteed volume of timber.

The licence is not subject to any allowable annual cut reductions that may be imposed on other licence hold- ers located in the same timber supply area as the Car- rier licence. Carrier is not required to pay annual rent under the licence, and the licence must provide for the identification and special selection of timber harvested under it. That also assists us in allowing the licence to be directed at beetle-infested timber, while giving Car- rier some input in the location of timber harvested un- der the licence.

Bill 58 specifies that this forest licence is to be for a term of five years and is non-replaceable. On the positive side of the ledger, it bears mention- ing that according to Carrier Lumber, they believe the awarding of this timber licence will provide them with the means to employ an additional 60 jobs — some in the harvesting sector and some on the processing side.

People will see that the bill specifies that the law which applies to the licence is the law in place when the settlement agreement was signed. [1455] This legislation clearly would not have been neces- sary but for the exercise of political interference that the court has now ruled on and made decisions around. Those decisions have visited upon the tax- payer of the province in a very significant way. We estimate, as I've said, close to $75 million. We can't change the past.

We can move forward, but as we move forward — I think that is the intention on the part of Carrier Lumber; it is certainly the inten- tion on the part of the Crown — it bears repeating that when governments, any governments, abuse their au- thority, at the end of the day it is the citizens that lose and the taxpayers that pay. This is a significant settlement. These negotiations were not easy.

We think the settlement that has been arrived at represents a fair and equitable approach to resolving injustices identified by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, but at the same time it is a significant award of a lot of money. Those are my comments on second reading, and I do move second reading of Bill 58. Motion approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 58, Carrier Lumber Ltd.

Forest Licence Com- pensation Act, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. M. de Jong: I call Bill 26. Committee of the Whole House EMPLOYMENT AND ASSISTANCE ACT (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 26; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:59 p.m. On

section 2 (continued). [1500] J. Kwan: Earlier this morning we were engaging in discussions around the eligibility of family unit,

section 2 of Bill 26. I was asking the minister questions, particularly related to the issue around refugee claimants. I want to close off those questions with this letter that was sent to the minister. This is a letter from an individual who's received support as a refugee claimant. The letter reads: "Dear Sir:" I'm not going to say her name. It says: "My name is…." I'm not going to put her name on the record, for her privacy protection. It goes on: "I came to Canada with two children as a refugee claimant.

When I arrived in Canada and reported to Immigration Canada to make a refugee claim, I did not have any money for food or rent. I spent all the money and resources I had to come to Canada and arrived here with only my life. "I received some initial financial assistance from the Inland Refugee Society of B.C. in Vancouver, which helped cover costs of food, photos for immigration and transit for the first few days. I applied for and received welfare after a few weeks. "It is only with the help of the B.C. government that my life is where it is today.

I've been through the refugee claims process and have been determined to be a convention refugee. I've been able to live through the past year and provide for my two children because of the generosity of the B.C. government. "I want to express my thankfulness, but I cannot remain silent. There are many refugee claimants who will be coming to B.C. in the future, and I must speak for them. They need your promise of support and help. Please do not make it difficult for refugee claimants to receive financial support. "I want to thank you for helping my family and me. Please help those who are still coming.

"Sincerely" It's signed by this individual. The letter was written to the Minister of Human Resources.

3656 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 The reason why I want to put this letter on record is this. Prior to the lunch break I asked the minister, on the

section under eligibility of a family unit, whether or not refugee claimants will continue to receive assis- tance from government under Bills 26 and 27 and with the new regulations that we have not yet seen. The minister advised that he'll be engaging in discussions with the federal government trying to seek additional dollars from the federal government. I replied: "Fair enough, but irrespective of that, it is the government's responsibility to ensure those who need assistance re- ceive assistance.

In this case, we're talking about refu- gee claimants." The minister was unable to give con- firmation of that, irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations with the federal government. The reason why I want to put this letter on the re- cord is to illustrate the point that where assistance is provided, it does make a difference in people's lives. This individual has shared her own personal story on how it made a difference to her. She's now advocating for the future refugee claimants who may need gov- ernment assistance.

I hope the minister will take this to heart because it is the government's responsibility to make sure that people who need assistance are provided with assis- tance. The regulations that are still to come will spell out who is eligible. The legislation does not indicate that, but the regulations will. The minister needs to make sure that when the regulations are before British Columbians for review, those regulations do not ex- empt refugee claimants from eligibility for income as- sistance. I now want to turn to another issue under

section 2 of Bill 26. Under the previous B.C. Benefits (Income Assistance) Act,

section 2 dealt with the Income Assis- tance Advisory Council. The Income Assistance Advi- sory Council is no longer in the new Bill 26. Could the minister please advise what's happened to that coun- cil? During times of such extreme changes, wouldn't it be beneficial to keep the Income Assistance Advisory Council to ensure that changes are not harming peo- ple? Hon. C. Hansen: I seek leave to make an introduc- tion. Leave granted. Introductions by Members [1505] Hon. C. Hansen: In the gallery just joining us is a grade 10 class from York House School accompanied by their teacher, Mr. David Kerr.

I hope the House will make them welcome. Debate Continued Hon. M. Coell: Under the former government the advisory council sat empty for a number of years, and no one was appointed to this council. But I will take the member's suggestion under advisement. J. Kwan: Actually, when the government was con- templating changes to the former income assistance act, the advisory council was put together, and a variety of p e o p l e we re o n t hi s c o u nc i l t o ad v i s e t he g o v e r nm e nt in terms of what direction they should or should not take.

So in fact, when changes were being brought about, that council was actually very active, contrary to what the minister is implying at this point. I just want to be clear on that. I want to add the point of the member for Vancou- ver-Langara with respect to the need for an advisory council. Here's what he had to say in 1996: "Since the government, in overall perspective, is very conscious that people who are using the services have a strong input to the services, is there a principle where a third, a half or a fairly high representation…? To say there's one or two token people there would not be satisfactory.

But is there a high representation of persons from across the province who would be able to tell you the urban and the rural and the other settings, who are recipients and can therefore reflect on how the service actually operates?

It would seem to me important that, on principle and in guidelines, there should be a certain guaranteed, if you like, representation of those people." This was during the debate in 1996 relative to the income assistance act, and the member for Vancouver- Langara was arguing that there should be representa- tion, particularly broad representation, for people across B.C. so that they could bring forward their per- spective on changes to income assistance. I do want to note that for the minister.

Section 2 also states that the entire family unit on whose account the assistance is provided must satisfy the initial and continuing conditions of eligibility. Without knowing the conditions of eligibility, what requirements will this impose on family members? And how will requiring all family members to submit information ensure that the applicant is receiving the support they need? [1510] Hon. M. Coell: This is a

definitions section. I'll just try and summarize for the member. The

section sets out a general rule respecting eligibility applicable to all sections of the act. It states that the eligibility of a fam- ily unit for a form of assistance is subject not only to the eligibility of each family member for whom the form of assistance is provided but also to the whole family not having been declared ineligible for some other reason. In other words, if assistance is provided for three people, all three people must maintain their eligibility for that form.

If the assistance is provided to o n e p e r s o n i n a f a m i l y o f t h r e e , t h a t i n d i v i d u a l m u s t maintain eligibility for that assistance. I could give an example, maybe, that would be helpful. Each individual receiving a benefit must be eligible. As an example, if a person receives a diet al- lowance that is individualized, they must continue to

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3657 be eligible in order to continue to receive that benefit as well. J. Kwan: Let me ask the minister questions relating to

section 2 for the issue around children in the home of a relative. I believe

section 2 may provide the legisla- tive authority for the Child in the Home of a Relative p r o g r a m . I f i n f a c t i t d o e s , I h a v e s o m e q u e s t i o n s r e - garding the proposed changes to that program. The Minister of Children and Family Development made it clear that when a child is placed in the custody of a family member on an interim basis due to child p r o t e c t i o n c o n c e r n s , t h a t f a m i l y w i l l b e a b l e t o a c c e s s support through the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

However, under the changes to the Child in the Home of a Relative program, legal guardi- ans or anyone who has entered into a written agree- ment with the director as described under

section 8 of the Child, Family and Community Service Act will no longer be eligible for the Child in the Home of a Rela- tive funding. This will impact families with little dis- posable income who have taken on the financial and emotional responsibilities of caring for that child. If there is no concern expressed to the Ministry of Children and Family Development about the protec- tion of that child, no funding will be available to those people. The effects of this change in policy directly and negatively impact children.

The Minister of Children and Family Development also said during the throne speech debate: "Time and time again, research tells us that the safety and well- being of children are better secured by promoting fam- ily and community capacity. In our ministry this means we will strive to keep children with their families where possible, by putting the necessary supports in place." That's directly from the throne speech debate. What alternatives is the Ministry of Human Re- sources developing to ensure that low-income working families receive income assistance when they need it?

Could the minister please advise on the progress he's having with discussions with the Minister of Children and Family Development on the possibility of main- taining the Child in the Home of a Relative program? Hon. M. Coell: I also have the Minister of Children and Family Development with me at this point. Children will still, of course, have access to the ser- vices of the Ministry of Children and Family Develop- ment. The Child in the Home of a Relative program is going to continue. We had proposed to make some changes with regard to legal guardians.

It was pointed out to us that that may be problematic, so we have asked both ministries to review that decision and to bring back some options for us at the end of June. J. Kwan: At the end of the June period, will the minister make that information available to the public and to the opposition? The opposition would be happy to work with the minister on this issue. It is a very im- portant issue. I think we both stand on the same ground — that children should not be jeopardized to save a small amount of money.

Therefore, the Child in the Home of a Relative program is essential to ensure that children are not put at risk. I would urge the min- ister to keep that program, and the opposition will of- fer any assistance we can to work with the ministers in achieving that goal. Hon. M. Coell: I was just going to thank the mem- ber for that observation. I appreciate it, and I'll take her up on the offer. Sections 2 and 3 approved. On

section 4. [1515] J. Kwan:

Section 4 deals with income assistance and supplements. Could the minister please advise the supplements that would apply for top-up of individu- als on income assistance? What are those supplements? Hon. M. Coell: This

section actually sets out a broad authority to provide income assistance and sup- plements that are the same as the BC Benefits Act pro- vision. The supplements are generally provided to families in receipt of assistance. Examples would be clothing moneys for persons in a care facility, diet al- lowances and moving costs. Some supplements are not conditional on receipt of assistance. These would include the bus pass and bur- ial costs. J.

Kwan: In the regulations that will spell out what those supplements are, given that we don't have the regulations before us, could the minister please advise: are there any items that will be deleted from the exist- ing list of supplements being provided to income assis- tance recipients? Will the amounts also change and, if so, in what way? Hon. M. Coell: It's similar to the list that I provided for Bill 27. I'll endeavour to get the list corresponding to this for the member if she wishes. J. Kwan: I want to be very specific around these is- sues, because time is of the essence.

The government has brought in closure. I'm feeling very anxious at this time, to be frank with you. I have less than three hours to de- bate Bill 26. There are many sections and many changes that will impact people's lives very fundamentally. We're not talking about the lives of people who are en- dowed with all kinds of supports. These are individuals who are basically just barely surviving, given the limited support that they can receive from government. I want to be very specific with the minister in terms of what changes British Columbians are going to be faced with in Bills 26 and 27.

In this instance where supplements are being referred to, I want to know spe- cifically what supplements will be eliminated, if any; what amounts will be changed, if so. And what are those changes?

3658 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 Hon. M. Coell: I will provide that list to the member. The regulations for that list are still under development. J. Kwan: You know, the answers that the minister is providing are not good enough. I have to say this in this House. Every question that I ask of the minister, he advises this House: "That work is being developed. Don't worry; everything is essentially, substantively, the same." But it's not going to be the same. Changes are com- ing. The minister himself has said that changes are coming.

There are substantive changes impacting peo- ple's eligibility and what they're eligible for. We're talking about supplements. I want to know what supplement supports will be eliminated, if any, and what amounts will be reduced, if they will be reduced. Surely the minister has some sense of what's com- ing before him. Or does he not know at all? If he does- n't know, then this bill should not be in this House for debate, and he ought to know that. He ought to know that, because he's got his budget, and in his budget he's made cuts.

He's anticipating that those cuts are going to come from reduction in services and eligibility for people on income assistance. [1520] Will he come clean and tell this House, on the is- sues around supplements, who will be cut off, what supplements will be eliminated and if the rates will change or not? Hon. M. Coell: We have tried to be, I think, as transparent as possible in the three-year service plan and with the changes announced. I gave the member examples of the supplements — the diet allowance and clothing allowance for people in care facilities, bus passes, funeral costs.

Those sorts of issues are there now and will be there afterwards. A lot of the detail you're asking is under development in regulations. J. Kwan: Let me ask the minister a specific ques- tion. What about seniors who are on Canada Pension? They're on the Canada Pension Plan, and the money which they receive does not reach the equivalent amount to those who would otherwise be on income assistance. Formerly, there would be a top-up under the supplements category. Would those seniors still be able to receive a top-up from this ministry? Hon. M. Coell: I think the member is referencing the seniors supplement.

There will be no decrease in the amount that people are receiving over the next three years, but there will not be an increase either. J. Kwan: Would the people who are applying now qualify to receive a supplement? Hon. M. Coell: Yes, it's based on income. J. Kwan: With the passage of Bill 26 and Bill 27 and the new regulations that would be in place, the people who then apply for income assistance on CPP, who re- quire top-up from the government, would continue to receive that top-up. Is that what the minister is saying? Hon. M. Coell: If the member means on top of the OAS and GIS, the answer is yes. J.

Kwan: I'll ask the minister this question, then, on the issues around supplements. There is a letter that has been written to the minister regarding child care subsidies. I'm going to put the letter on record, because this ties into the supplement piece: "I'm writing to voice my profound concern about the changes to subsidy eligibilities for low-income families. These changes are especially disappointing because they were implemented despite evidence of their detrimental effects. "Let me remind you of the impacts of the changes you have prescribed.

Reducing the income threshold for subsidy eligibility by $285 per month means that parents will implement cost-savings measures that will compromise the care of their children. "You further trivialize the hardships of low-income families by establishing a rule that abandons a subsidy claim of $50 or less. This amount of money or less can easily provide nutrient-rich foods such as milk, cheese and bread that are important for growth and development. Your changes will no doubt increase the number of hungry children.

Let me know why it is that you believe the above changes will actually improve the well-being of children in the province of British Columbia. [1525] "One of the barriers to employment for parents of young children is access to good quality, affordable child care. Their inability to meet child care needs greatly reduces their opportunity for success, the opportunity for them to move away from an income assistance–requiring existence. All children, regardless of their parents' income, have the right to quality care.

"Quality includes (1) caregivers who are able to develop healthy working relationships with parents and caring relationships with children; (2) a stable and stimulating environment that nurtures emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs of children; (3) consistent and educated caregivers; and (4) caregivers who are connected with the professionals and resources in the community." Could the minister advise, then, please: under the supplements category what changes are being made, particularly in the area of child care subsidies? And what are the rate reductions?

The information I've re- ceived indicated that at least we're looking at a reduction of the threshold for eligibility for subsidies by $285 per month, as has been pointed out by this letter from the Regional Child Care Council of the capital regional dis- trict. Also, in our discussions with the minister in the estimates, I understood that there would be a reduction in the threshold for eligibility for child care subsidies. Hon. M. Coell: The child care legislation is with the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Ser- vices. We administer that service.

There are no changes in either Bill 26 or 27 that would affect that legislation, but the member is correct: there was a change in the

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3659 criteria that we discussed in estimates of lowering the threshold by $285. That's already taken place. J. Kwan: By lowering the threshold, how many people does the minister anticipate will be impacted? Hon. M. Coell: That really isn't part of this legisla- tive package in front of us. J. Kwan: Y e s , i t i s b e f o re u s r i g ht no w. R i g ht no w we're talking about the income assistance and supple- ments and about who is eligible and who is not eligi- ble. Part of the supplement is for child care subsidies.

The minister has brought about changes in the thresh- old for eligibility for those who need child care subsi- dies; therefore, people would be impacted. Did the minister not know, before he even brought in legisla- tion, how many people would be impacted and how they would be impacted? Hon. M. Coell: The changes are a separate act. It's the child care subsidy act. The child care legislation is within the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. J. Kwan: You know, it's funny. When questions were asked of the Minister of State for Women's Equal- ity on these issues, you know what she said?

"It's not my responsibility. Go and talk to someone else." So here we are asking the Minister of Human Resources, who is administering this act, who is making people eligible or not eligible. It's this minister's responsibility to make that determination, and through his determination he's cutting the threshold of eligibility for people. Surely he must have some sense in terms of how it is impacting people in this regard. Surely he must.

Given that it is this minister's mandate to make sure and work towards helping people to get off of income assistance and into the workforce, he must understand that there's a relationship between getting to work and the availabil- ity of child care subsidies to parents who need those child care subsidies so that they could get to work.

If the minister has no understanding of that, then how could he say that these acts, Bills 26 and 27, that he's bringing forward in this House, and cutting eligi- bility thresholds for children and parents and families who need the child care subsidy, would not impact them in terms of their future opportunities of gaining employment? How could he possibly say that? How can he possibly say that Bills 26 and 27 and the changes that are being brought about are actually good for the people who need income assistance and child care sub- sidies from government? Hon. M. Coell:

Section 4, which we're on, of Bill 26 does not have supplements or subsidies in it for child care. That is clearly the child care subsidy act. That legislation is with another ministry. J. Kwan: I'm just going to read

section 4 into the record, "Income assistance and supplements." [1530] "Subject to regulations, the minister may provide income assistance or a supplement to or for a family unit that is eligible for it." I asked the minister the ques- tions around what the supplements are. Will there be changes to the existing supplements that are already available? What changes are in the rates and eligibility for those who would be eligible or need supplements? The minister was not able to give me a full list of what those supplements are, what those rate changes are and around what those eligibilities are.

He says those are all under development. The only way British Columbians will know or have any sense of what the intent of this government is, is for him to now say on record who's eligible and who's not eligible and what those changes are. For the minister to suggest that it is not his respon- sibility under this

section of the act is absolutely ludi- crous. It's ludicrous for the minister to say that, save and except that the minister has no sense of what his mandate is or how he is going to achieve that mandate. His only driver, then, is to cut programs, cut rates and cut eligibility, irrespective of what the impacts are. You know what? I'm afraid that's what we're seeing right now before us in this Legislature with this minister. Hon. M. Coell: I think the member fully under- stands the role of legislation and the role of regulations. Clearly,

section 4 gives the government or the minister the authority to provide supplements and income as- sistance for specific areas. I outlined the areas. A child care subsidy is not a supplement under this act. J. Kwan: You know, the minister says that legisla- tion is before us and that we're guided by what the legislation says. He says that regulations will accom- pany the legislation that will clearly define what falls within the legislation. The minister said during esti- mates that he would provide the regulations accompa- nying Bills 26 and 27 when they are before the House for debate.

Well, to date we have not seen the regula- tions before the House when we're engaging in debate. The opposition asked the minister to stand down the bill and wait until the regulations are before the House so that we can all know what this bill means relative to the regulations. You know what? The minister rejected that at every turn. It's not just me who wishes to know the answers to these questions. I see many people visiting the gallery today who are here seeking these answers from the minister as well.

And those who are not here in the galleries today want to know what the answers are, because the impacts of these changes are very funda- mental to people's lives. It makes a difference in peo- ple's lives. H e r e w e h a v e a m i n i s t e r w h o d o e s n o t k n o w t h e answer to the questions, and in spite of that, he wants to ram through legislation in less than two and a half hours. In less than two and a half hours the govern- ment is going to bring in closure to shut down debate

3660 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 on Bill 26, impacting hundreds of thousands of people who are on income assistance. Hon. M. Coell: We've had this discussion before. When B.C. Benefits came into effect, the regulations were not tabled until a year later. I've made a commit- ment to timely regulations so that people can see them. We're working on them, but I can tell you it certainly won't be a year, as the previous government took for their regulations for B.C. Benefits. J. Kwan: You know what? It's not the opposition who want to see the regulations before this House.

Your own members want to see the regulations before the House before it has been debated. The member for Vancouver-Langara asked for the regulations and criti- cized the government for not bringing the regulations before the House for debate. It's not just the opposition who have these criticisms. The government members — the government member for Vancouver-Langara — have criticisms. [1535] The minister can defend all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that before this House, the minister him- self does not know the answers to the questions.

I want to ask the minister how he can pass a piece of legisla- tion when he himself doesn't know what the ramifica- tions of it are.

Section 4 approved. On

section 5. J. Kwan:

Section 5 deals with hardship assistance. Hardship assistance is provided, subject to regulations, to families who are eligible for it and who are not eligi- ble for income assistance. Could the minister please advise how eligibility for hardship assistance will be determined? Hon. M. Coell: In short, the regulation will set out the circumstances in which persons who are ineligible for income assistance for specific reasons may be con- sidered for hardship assistance.

For example, a person ineligible for income assistance because he or she can- not supply a social insurance number may receive hardship assistance as it is today. The issuing of hardship assistance is and always has been discretionary. Hardship assistance is typically provided, as I said, where authorized by regulation when a person has no other resources and is taking steps to rectify the problem that made the person ineli- gible for income assistance. J. Kwan: Would the person applying for hardship assistance have to wait three weeks before they're eli- gible? Hon. M.

Coell: As the member has noted, hardship assistance is for those ineligible for income assistance. There is a separate process, which is an emergency needs assessment, which is done when someone shows up at one of our offices. Again, it's for people who are ineligible, and there's an emergency needs assessment done. J. Kwan: Is the minister then saying that there is no waiting time for someone who is in need of hardship assistance, and they would therefore be able to get hardship assistance immediately? Hon. M. Coell: I think I understand the question. If someone comes into an office, they would apply.

If they were, in their conversations, looking for hardship assistance, they would have that emergency needs as- sessment done that day. [1540] J. Kwan: Eligibility for hardship assistance. Is the minister then saying that the eligibility for hardship assistance under Bill 26 and the regulations that we have yet to see will not further limit people who are seeking hardship assistance from the ministry? That is to say, the criteria for eligibility. It would not be harder than what it already is right now for people to qualify for hardship assistance. Is that what the minister is saying?

He's giving the commitment that the regula- tions, when they come into place, will not make it harder for people to get hardship assistance from the ministry? Hon. M. Coell: I think the answer is that if there is an emergency need, they would receive hardship assis- tance that day. To give an example, if a refugee claim- ant comes into the office today and there is an emer- gency needs assessment done, that would be the same in the future as well. J.

Kwan: Is the minister giving me the assurance that there will be no changes then to the eligibility cri- teria for hardship under Bills 26 and 27 and the new regulations that will be brought before the House at a later date? Hon. M. Coell: I think the member knows that I'm not able to make hard-and-fast commitments on regu- lations that are under development. J. Kwan: Well, that's why we're in this process — for me to try and get answers from the minister. The minister has not been able to give me any answers to the questions that I've posed to him.

He wants to make it sound as though everything is the same, so don't worry because people will still be eligible for income assistance, and people would be eligible in this in- stance for hardship assistance — this when, in fact, things are going to change. What I'm trying to get at is this: what changes are forthcoming? The minister needs to give these answers to British Columbians. He needs to give answers to the people who are sitting in the gallery, watching the minister for the answers. The minister needs to give answers…

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3661 [Interruption.] The Chair: Excuse me. J. Kwan: …even to his own members. The Chair: Member, would you be seated, please. I have to remind the gallery that there's no interaction between the gallery and the House. In future, would you please keep your comments to yourself? Thank you. Member, proceed. J. Kwan: The minister needs to give the answers to his own members. I've got the member for Victoria- Hillside whispering to me, saying that things are the same and there's no changes. So I want to know if there are changes forthcoming. If so, what are they?

The member behind me, for Cariboo South, is saying that there are no changes and that people are able to get hardship assistance. Well, that is the case now, but with Bills 26 and 27 and new regulations coming for- ward, I want to know who's going to be impacted. Is it going to be harder for people to receive hardship assis- tance? If so, what is it? The minister needs to come clean and tell us in this House now. Hon. M. Coell: I think during second reading de- bate on both Bills 26 and 27, I was very clear as to the direction the government is moving.

We want to have a bill that provides assistance for those in need and opportunity through job placement and training programs. It provides independence. It develops the human potential. I understand the mem- ber's consistent desire for regulations that aren't devel- oped. We're dealing with legislation here. We're deal- ing with the principles of moving forward with assis- tance, opportunity, independence for people and de- veloping the human potential.

I understand where the member is coming from, but I think she has to realize that the direction of this bill, and the direction of Bill 27, is to enhance people's ability to be independent and to have the opportunities there for them. We're going to spend $300 million on job training programs over the next three years. As a matter of fact, in our mandate over the four years we'll spend $6.6 billion on income assistance. There are many people on income assistance who want to work. We're going to, I think, add to the programs that the member and her f o r m e r g o v e r n m e n t s t a r t e d .

W e h o p e t o s e e p e o p l e being able to access jobs through the training and placement programs that we have. [1545] J. Kwan: It's clear; it's becoming clearer and clearer to me that the minister doesn't have the answers. He does not know what the answers are. If he does, he doesn't want to tell the public. He keeps on trying to imply that there are no changes — so don't worry; be happy — w h e n w e k n o w t h e d i f f e r e n c e . W e k n o w what Bills 26 and 27 are going to do. A lot of people are going to be cut off income assistance. Their rates are going to be reduced.

Eligibility is going to be harder. There's no way of getting around it. All we want to know in this House as we engage in this debate is how people are going to be impacted. What's becoming clearer and clearer is that the minister has no idea whatsoever what the answers are. This is not good enough, minister. I have to say, because every time I look over…. I'm watching the clock. It's now a quarter to four, and I'm feeling increasingly anxious because I have so many questions.

I have binders and binders full of questions to ask the minister, and by 6 o'clock there will be clo- sure in this House, and those questions will not be asked in this House. British Columbians will not have an opportunity to find out what the intent of the gov- ernment is under Bill 26. I'm becoming increasingly anxious with that. On that note, Mr. Speaker, I want to say very clearly that I do have a lot of questions around income assistance relative to

section 5 on the hardship assis- tance eligibility, but I feel that I'm under much duress and that I'm not able to ask all of these questions be- cause of time limitations. I also want to say thank you very much to the people who have taken time out of their lives to come to the gallery today to witness this undemocratic process that the government has put before us, bringing forward closure and impacting people's lives. I very much appre- ciate them taking the time out of their lives to do that. I also want to say that we respect the rules that ac- c o r d t o t h i s H o u s e .

T h a n k y o u f o r g u i d a n c e f r o m t h e Chair that the gallery is not to participate in the debate by comments and the like. We appreciate that, and we will respect the rules of this House. But you know what? We also expect the minister to provide answers to the questions in this House. Sections 5 to 7 inclusive approved. On

section 8. Hon. M. Coell: I move the amendment to

section 8 standing in my name on the orders of the day. [SECTION 8, by deleting the proposed

section 8 (1) and substituting the following:

(1) For a family unit to be eligible for income assis- tance, at least one applicant in the family unit must have (

a) been employed for remuneration for at least the prescribed number of hours in each of two consecutive years, (

b) earned remuneration for employment in at least the prescribed amount in each of two consecutive years, or (

c) been employed for remuneration for a portion of two consecutive years and for the balance of those years either (

i) served a waiting period in respect of, or received benefits under, a claim under the Employment Insurance Act (Canada), or (ii) received income under a public or private income replacement program or plan.]

3662 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 R. Stewart: I ask leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members R. Stewart: I t i s m y p l e a s u r e t o d a y t o i n t r o d u c e some visiting students from my riding: Mr. Shong, their teacher, and 40 grade 5 students from R.C. Mac- Donald Elementary School, just a few blocks from my home in Coquitlam. I just had a tremendously interest- ing barrage of questions from these students, and I would ask the House to please make them welcome. Debate Continued On the amendment. J.

Kwan: Could the minister please advise: what is the difference with the amendment and what is out- lined in the bill? Hon. M. Coell: The former was too strict, and the amendment makes it easier for people to qualify. J. Kwan: Could the minister be specific? Hon. M. Coell: Simply, it allows an annual total rather than a number of hours per month. J. Kwan: Let me ask the minister this question. Formerly, under

section 8 the requirement was for two years of employment. Is the minister now saying that that two-year requirement is being reduced? If so, could he please advise what the length of time is now? [1550] Hon. M. Coell: There is still a requirement for two years, but the way you count up to the two years has been broadened. J. Kwan: In what way? Hon. M. Coell: It's the annual total of hours instead of a monthly total of hours. Amendment approved. On

section 8 as amended. J. Kwan: This issue has been brought up to the op- position by one community group in terms of concern around the changes. Here's what they have to say on the proposed years of continuing employment or EI eligibility prior to applying for income assistance. They say that this is outrageous and clearly discriminates against women so that now when a battered woman who has been doing unpaid work in her home tries to leave, there'll be nothing for her. They'd like to have the minister explain how this is not going to cost women their lives. Hon. M.

Coell: There are a number of exemptions, and I will go through them for the member. Exempt would be a person fleeing abuse, families with chil- dren, children in care at age 19, a pregnant person, per- sons with a two-year diploma or bachelor's degree, a person with a medical condition that prevented them from working, a person leaving prison after at least six months and a homemaker supported for at least the last two years. J. Kwan: How many individuals or families does this minister expect this change will impact? Hon. M. Coell: It is hard to say. The purpose of the

section is to reduce the likelihood of young people transitioning from home to welfare without having any employment attachment and, as a result, becoming dependent on welfare. J. Kwan: T h e m i n i s t e r s a y s t h a t i t ' s h a r d t o k n o w . Surely the ministry must have done some projections in terms of what the impacts might be before changes are being brought about. They must have some projec- tions and some sense of who's going to be impacted and how many people would be impacted in the com- munity. Hon. M. Coell: That's really speculative.

I think what we were looking at was getting young people into the job training and placement programs rather than leaving home and going on income assistance. It will more than likely affect that age group, but the idea i s f o r u s t o h e l p t h e m f i n d e m p l o y m e n t t h r o u g h g o v - ernment programs. J. Kwan: The people who I anticipate will be im- pacted by this are the applicants aged 19 and over, who will now be required to be independent for two years after leaving their parents' home to be eligible for in- come assistance.

Is that the intent of this bill — target- ing that age group? [1555] Hon. M. Coell: The intent is not to target that age group in the bill. It is to give some incentive for that age group to take

part in job-training or placement programs or go back to school, if they have left school. J. Kwan: I just want to say on record that what the minister calls incentive, others would call coercion. The minister would like to say that it is a way to help peo- ple to get off income assistance. Others would say that what the minister is doing is creating further hardship for individuals who need income assistance, particu- larly in the group we're talking about. Those who are 19 years old who may not have lived independently for two years may not be eligible to qualify for income assistance.

This actually restricts their eligibility. That's what this clause is all about. You know what? I disagree with the minister when he says it is an incentive to help people to stay off in-

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3663 come assistance. There are situations out there in the broader community where I have to say: "Thank good- n e s s t h a t I h a v e n e v e r h a d t o e x p e r i e n c e t h a t . " T h e r e may well be people who are experiencing tremendous hardships, perhaps traumas, in the home, and other situations may be occurring to them. As a result of that, they may have to leave the family home. They may not be able to have employment. They may not be able to find work and maintain work for two years before they can apply for income assistance.

For the government to now put in legislation to say that those people will not be eligible for income assis- tance unless they've been employed for a consecutive period of 24 months is wrong. It is not an incentive at all. It is actually assisting people to live in hardship. That's what the government is doing. Let's just be clear about that. The opposition will not support the government's attempt to cause more hardship for the people who are in need of income assistance from government. Hon. M.

Coell: I just want to go over again the list of exemptions, because I think they go a long way to satisfying the comments that the member made. People would be exempt from that two-year requirement who are fleeing abuse, whether they be male or female; families with children; children in care at age 19; a pregnant person; persons with a two-year diploma or a bachelor's degree; persons with a medical condition that prevents them from working; persons leaving a prison from at least six months; and homemakers who have been supported in the home for the past two years. J.

Kwan: It's fine for the minister to say that he has a list that exempts certain categories of people, but what he hasn't put in place, of course, are the people who don't fall into that list. That those people don't fall into that list doesn't mean that they won't face hard- ships. It does not mean that at all. For the minister to pretend, just because he's got a list…. He says, "Here's the list of people who won't be impacted," but over here there's another, greater list of the people who will be impacted. The minister is just closing his eyes, and he can't even see that. Somehow he thinks that is okay.

You know what? For the opposition, it isn't okay. Income assistance is supposed to be there for the peo- ple who need it the most, irrespective of whether or not they are pregnant or otherwise. There is no justification to say only some people will qualify and others will not. If they are faced with the same kinds of financial challenges, they ought to qualify. It's as simple as that. I ask the minister to simply understand this princi- ple, a principle that's widespread. That is to say: for a country as rich as ours, there is no acceptable reason whatsoever for us to find anybody sleeping under a bridge.

It is a basic principle, and that basic principle applies to the people who need income assistance. For that, the opposition will be voting against this

section of the bill. [1600-1605]

Section 8 as amended approved on the following division: YEAS — 56 Falcon Coell Hogg L. Reid Hawkins Whittred Hansen J. Reid Santori van Dongen Barisoff Nettleton Masi Lee Thorpe Hagen Murray Plant Bond de Jong Nebbeling Stephens Abbott Neufeld Coleman Chong Penner Jarvis Orr Harris Brenzinger Long Chutter Mayencourt Trumper Johnston Hayer Krueger McMahon Bray Les Locke Nijjar Wong Bloy Suffredine MacKay Cobb K. Stewart Lekstrom Sultan Hamilton Hawes Kerr Manhas Hunter NAYS — 4 Anderson MacPhail Kwan Christensen [1610] [H. Long in the chair.] B. Penner: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted.

Introductions by Members B. Penner: It's my privilege to introduce to the House a class from the riding of Chilliwack-Kent from the Mount Cheam Christian School. Mr. Adrian Stout- jesdyk, at one time a teacher of mine, is here today along with 15 grade 12 students as well as some grade 4 advanced students, if I'm not mistaken. They're here for a tour, and I look forward to speaking to them in a few minutes. Would the House please make them wel- come. Debate Continued On

section 9.

3664 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 S. Orr: I just want to say a couple of things. I want to talk about

section 9, which is the employment plan, but I also want to say that I appreciate and understand the changes that are being made in this bill. I also rec- ognize that in a lot of the sections that we just went through, there are great similarities to what we had previously. The issue is that I took the time to go ahead and meet with the minister and his staff. That was open to everybody and not just to me. That was a very worthwhile thing that I did, and I did it over a long period of time. It answered a lot of questions.

I think in the essence of saying that there's no time, I find that quite frustrating because, in fact, there was a lot of time to get a lot of answers. What I want to get to now is the employment plan. I've read this very carefully, so my questions are quite succinct, and I don't need to go through each

section because I've looked over the whole plan. Where I'm having trouble is…. I'm assuming, Mr. Chair, it's okay for me to go to No. 7. The concerns that I've been getting from my con- stituents are twofold. One is the concern of the em- ployment plan not being appealable. I'll explain to you why the concern about the employment plan not being appealable. This is not a perfect world, and cli- ents don't necessarily always have a good relationship with their worker. I realize that they try, but it's life, and that happens.

My concern is that somebody goes to set up an employment plan with the worker, they have a bad relationship, and the worker basically, after so many attempts, says: "You will take this em- ployment plan, and if you don't take this employment plan, then you are cut off." That is my concern, be- cause that person has nowhere else to go — unless I'm wrong and the minister can explain to me for my con- stituents that there is some process if that situation happens. [1615] Hon. M. Coell: I'll try to explain this in a couple of ways.

The employment plan isn't appealable to the tribunal, but within the ministry we have a whole ser- vice quality process. In addition, the decision can go through a reconsideration which is in this act at the stage and the ministry will outline in administrative procedures. That shouldn't take place. Just to expand a bit on the new provision for in- come assistance, the Youth Works referral used to be formalized into an employment plan and extended to income assistance. It's similar to the Youth Works act, where a referral could not be appealed. J.

MacPhail: I'm making a request to the House and to the committee Chair to consider this. Given time allocation and the closure that's being brought forward on this bill, there is an incredible number of very im- portant sections on which we wish to register our vote. The fact of the matter is that if we did that, all of our time would disappear.

I propose this: that we name the sections upon whic h we wis h to vote by di visio n, that all be calle d together at a time where we may conclude a certain part of our debate on this before third reading and that division be called once we waive our time limits, but that each vote on each

section be held separately. The Chair: Is the committee in agreement on the request? Some Hon. Members: Aye. The Chair: Then we will proceed. Interjections. The Chair: Government House Leader? Hon. B. Barisoff: What's the problem? The Chair: There has been a request by the opposi- tion that we not have a division on each and every sec- tion of this bill, that we wait until the end of the bill a n d v o t e o n e a c h s e c t i o n a t o n e t i m e i n t h i s H o u s e without calling everyone back — with one division. Hon. B. Barisoff: That's fine. J.

MacPhail: I want to clarify that it's one time for division, but we name the sections — I can give you the sections right now — and call a separate vote on each one, but all at once without…. Waiving the time lim- its…. The Chair: I was well aware of your request, and now I think the minister is. Minister? Hon. B. Barisoff: That's fine. The Chair: There is agreement. J. MacPhail: Thank you, Mr. Chair. J. Kwan: On

section 9, which deals with the em- ployment plan, under

section 9(1) not only must the applicant in the family enter into an employment plan, but every applicant and recipient must do so at the request of the minister. How many people will now be required to enter into an employment plan? What problems may arise because of inadequate time and expertise of the gov- ernment worker to properly assess eligibility? This may well result in an employment plan that contains unhelpful conditions or conditions that are impossible for a person to meet. Could the minister please address the question of problems that could arise from this requirement?

How many people will be required to enter into an employ- ment plan? Hon. M. Coell: O n e o r b o t h a d u l t s w o u l d b e r e - quired to enter into an employment plan. It does not include children.

TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3665 J. Kwan: The minister may also require dependent youths to enter into employment plans. A dependent youth means a dependent child who reaches the age of 16. In what circumstances will a dependent youth be required to enter into an employment plan? Hon. M. Coell: Simply if the child is not in school. [1620] J. Kwan: I t ' s i r r e s p e c t i v e o f a g e , t h e n . I t i s j u s t whether or not the child is in school.

I'd have thought that if it's a school-age child who is supposed to be going to school but is not, in that instance that child would have to enter into an employment plan. Is that what the minister is saying? Hon. M. Coell: A child who is under 16 comes under the School Act, so there is a separate set of regulations and legislation. This is specifically for people 16, 17 and 18. If they've left school, then we would want them to have an employment plan. That employment plan could have an educational side to it as well as a training side to it. J. Kwan: If the dependent youth does not comply

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0528pm-07
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0528pm 07
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	82c95f9af0f3c7b0778d9434391943dad0ae5514

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