1985 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 33rd Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 1985

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

6695 ]

CONTENTS

British Columbia Human Rights Code, 1985 (Bill M220). Mr. Gabelmann

Introduction and first reading –– 6695

Pacific Vocational Institute And British Columbia Institute Of Technology Amalgama-

tion Act, 1985 (Bill 59). Hon. Mr. Heinrich

Introduction and first reading –– 6695

Oral Questions

Westar Timber Ltd. Mr. D'Arcy –– 6696

Brunette River spill. Mr. Parks –– 6696

Mrs. Wallace

Ministry of Transportation and Highways ferries. Mr. Lockstead –– 6696

Kitimat school board. Mr. Howard –– 6697

OAP rent increases. Mr. Blencoe –– 6697

Wells Gray provincial park. Mr. Mitchell –– 6697

Presenting Petitions –– 6698

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Labour estimates. (Hon. Mr. Segarty)

On vote 51: minister's office –– 6698

Mrs. Wallace

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Tourism estimates. (Hon. Mr. Richmond)

On vote 65: minister's office –– 6700

Hon. Mr. Richmond

Mr. MacWilliam

Mr. Davis

Mr. R. Fraser

Mr. Blencoe

Mr. Lockstead

Mr. Howard

Mrs. Wallace

Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 1985 (Bill 61). Hon. Mr. Segarty

Introduction and first reading –– 6721

Tabling Documents –– 6721

The House met at 2:05 p.m.

MR. REYNOLDS: Mr. Speaker, in your gallery this afternoon are

Don and Eileen Campbell, visiting us from Australia. I wish the House

would make them welcome.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: There are two prominent businessmen

visiting with us today from Central Fraser Valley. They are Mr. Art

Spyker and Mr. Harry Bicknell. Would the House please make these

gentlemen welcome.

MRS. WALLACE: In the members' gallery today is the president

of the Cowichan Home and School Association, Eva Towner; Fran Darling,

the secretary of the Cowichan Home and School Association; and

Dominique Roclants, ex-trustee. I'd like the House to make them welcome.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased this

afternoon to ask the House to welcome representatives from the British

Columbia division of the Girl Guides of Canada. The Girl Guides are

celebrating their seventy fifth anniversary this year. I want the House

to recognize the valuable service the Girl Guides and their leaders

have given to the community. Through their service the girls learn the

value of community involvement, and this experience guides them to

become the leaders of the future. Will the House please join me in

welcoming Mrs. Dolores Racine, the provincial commissioner; Mrs. Pat

Leake, deputy provincial commissioner; and a class of Brownies, Guides,

Pathfinders and Rangers who are with us today.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to introduce, in your

gallery, my mother, from Lake Havasu, Arizona, the home of London

Bridge. Would the House please make her welcome.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I have several guests to

introduce. You know, in British Columbia we have one of the best local

fairs held anywhere. I would ask the House to please welcome today

members representing the PNE, Erwin Swangard, Gordon Chudberry, Len

Bawtree — directors and members of the board — and to thank them for

the excellent job they do of continuing to work on our behalf to put

forward this fair.

I would also like the House to welcome constituents of mine, George

and Muriel Galicz, as well as a very enterprising businessman from

Surrey, Leonard Friesen. Please make them all welcome.

MR. REE: Mr. Speaker, in the gallery today are constituents

of mine: a gentleman who looks after man's best friend, Dr. Richard

Earnshaw, a veterinarian in North Vancouver, and his wife Marilyn; and

with him other guests from Sydney, Australia, his brother Dr. Desmond

Earnshaw and his lovely wife Lorraine. Will the House please welcome

them to Victoria and British Columbia.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Speaker, in the members' gallery today are

a number of gentlemen from the city of Penticton, members of staff and board

of trustees of the Penticton Regional Hospital: Mr. Don Gray, Mr. Ron Mason,

Len Grant and Lavern Fox. I'd ask the House to bid these gentlemen welcome.

MR. REID: It must be the weather, Mr. Speaker, everybody

coming to Victoria. I'd like to introduce to the House today Mr. Marvin

Hunt, a member of the school board from Surrey, and 20 grade 11 and 12

students from the Bible Fellowship Christian Academy, from sunny

Surrey, who brought the sun with them. Would the House make them

welcome.

HON. MR. GARDOM: In the remote likelihood that there is

anyone in the galleries not yet introduced, may I wish them a very

cordial welcome to our Legislative Assembly.

Introduction of Bills

BRITISH COLUMBIA HUMAN RIGHTS CODE, 1985

Mr. Gabelmann presented a bill intituled British Columbia Human Rights Code, 1985.

MR. GABELMANN: Mr. Speaker, very briefly, this bill is an

update of a bill I introduced last year, the British Columbia Human

Rights Code, 1984, and at the time I indicated that I would seek

response from people around British Columbia in respect of the language

and drafting of that legislation. I received considerable response to

it, and as a result of that have made a number of major changes in

approach in terms of this particular private member's bill.

I think the most significant thing is that the language in the

legislation, as now proposed, makes human rights a positive rather than

a negative thing. We have, traditionally, in lawmaking in human rights

fields, said very clearly to people what they cannot do. What I've

tried to do in this particular legislation is describe what human

rights are in a positive way rather than in a negative one. I trust

that all members will have an opportunity to look at this. I trust that

members of the public, too, will have an opportunity to consider it and

to provide me with further feedback so that in the unlikely event that

the government doesn't bring in similar legislation in the meantime,

I'll be able to bring in an even better bill in 1986.

Bill M220, British Columbia Human Rights Code, 1985, introduced,

read a first time, and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for

second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

PACIFIC VOCATIONAL INSTITUTE AND

BRITISH COLUMBIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

AMALGAMATION ACT, 1985

Hon. Mr. Heinrich presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor:

a bill intituled Pacific Vocational Institute and British Columbia Institute

of Technology Amalgamation Act, 1985.

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, if I just may make one

comment, the bill is really very technical in nature, and it will

facilitate the amalgamation of BCIT and PVI. There are a number of

people who have been involved in its preparation — both the faculty and

the people charged with the administration of the institute.

[ Page 6696 ]

Bill 59, Pacific Vocational Institute and British Columbia Institute

of Technology Amalgamation Act, 1985, introduced, read a first time and

ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

[2:15]

Oral Questions

WESTAR TIMBER LTD.

MR. D'ARCY: This is a question that could go either to the

Minister of Forests (Hon. Mr. Waterland), who is not here, or to the

Minister of Environment, who is here. So you're the lucky guy.

Mr. Speaker, Westar Timber's Castlegar pulp mill for years has never

come close to meeting basic provincial minimum pollution control

standards for both atmospheric and liquid emissions, despite being

consistently one of the most profitable pulp mills in British Columbia.

As the five-year management plan for TFL 23 is currently being

reviewed, has the minister decided to require that basic pollution

control standard compliance be met as part of a condition for renewal

of a management plan for that company's access to a public resource?

HON. MR. PELTON: I thank the member for the question. I have found myself very popular over the last week or so in answering the odd question.

To the matter that has been raised by the hon. member, I would

certainly assume that my ministry would become involved under the

circumstances which he relates. However, I do not have any particular

details on this matter. In view of that, I would take the question as

notice and bring back a detailed answer to the member at the earliest

possible opportunity.

MR. D'ARCY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the minister, I

would have initially preferred to talk to the Minister of Forests about

this question.

For the minister's information, I discussed it with his ministry.

Yes, they are concerned about it, but they are not involved in

discussions or requirements around the renewal of the management plan.

I am wondering if the minister can give us all a commitment that he

will see that his ministry and the Ministry of Forests get together on

this and that the public interest, especially in the community, be

recognized.

I want to point out that this particular mill has been failing to do

what its competitors have had to do over the years. They're all selling

in the same market, so in fairness to their competitors as well as to

the general public, will the minister make a commitment that there be a

discussion between his people and Forests before this management plan

is renewed?

HON. MR. PELTON: I'd be pleased to make the commitment to the

member that my ministry will become involved and that the interests of

the public, which are always uppermost in our minds, will be taken care

of during the discussions.

BRUNETTE RIVER SPILL

MR. PARKS: I have a question to the Minister of Environment.

As the House is well aware, we've just experienced a disastrous fish

kill on the Brunette stream. But it appears that it wasn't an

accidental discharge, if the media reports are accurate; rather, that

someone intentionally discharged into the system a substance that found

its way into the Brunette creek. Can the minister advise this House

whether or not a police investigation has commenced with respect to

that assertion?

HON. MR. PELTON: The report I had just before coming into the

House in respect of this spill in the Brunette creek is that the

investigation, which is being made primarily by the federal Ministry of

Fisheries and Oceans, aided and abetted by personnel from my ministry,

is still underway. At this point they still are not...they don't know

what the toxic chemical was. As to whether it was done purposefully or

accidentally, I would be most reluctant to speculate on that until such

time as the investigation is complete.

MRS. WALLACE: To the Minister of Environment on a

supplementary. Inasmuch as there are many possible polluters in the

particular area that feeds into the Brunette River where the pollution

was found, what is the minister prepared to do to try to sort out who

is guilty? Is it not almost an impossible task, and does it not prove

that what we need is a hazardous wastes disposal facility in this

province?

HON. MR. PELTON: I'm not quite positive of the meaning of the

member's use of the word "polluters." I don't know whether she means

people polluting, or means tributaries that run into the main creek.

Any of these investigations are very difficult; I'm sure they'll come

up with some satisfactory results in the long run.

The question asked by the hon. member regarding the disposition of

toxic wastes: as I recall, she asked the same question yesterday. The

treatment and disposition of toxic wastes is a matter that is under

discussion at all times, and I think we're moving down the road to the

point where these things will be taken care of.

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION

AND HIGHWAYS FERRIES

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of

Transportation and Highways. Recently the minister announced that the

saltwater ferry fleet of the Ministry of Transportation and Highways

will be turned over to the B.C. Ferry Corporation. I might take this

opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to thank the minister for having

hand-delivered to me this morning a copy of a letter relating to this

matter. What assurance will the minister give that this decision will

not result in reduced services and increased fares for residents served

by these vessels?

MR. SPEAKER: The question implies, in part, hon. member, future action. The minister may wish to reply to part of the question.

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I guess we should reply. It isn't the intent to reduce the service. We have a

[ Page

6697 ]

committee working all those factors out, and I don't think that will be the case.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Supplementary, I appreciate the minister's

answer, and I hope this action does not lead to increased fares and

reduced service. Has the minister decided to assure employees of the

ministry's ferry service that no employees will lose their jobs as a

result of this transfer?

HON. A. FRASER: There are, I believe, around 400 employees

involved here, and it's not the intent that any of the employees will

lose their jobs. They'll go from the Ministry of Transportation and

Highways to the B.C. Ferry Corporation.

KITIMAT SCHOOL BOARD

MR. HOWARD: I have a question to the immediate past

Attorney-General in his capacity as acting Attorney-General today. In

light of the intrusions into the right of free speech in Kitimat with

respect to the school board there, will the Attorney-General or the

acting Attorney-General conduct an inquiry or a hearing into that whole

question of impingements upon free speech in that school district?

HON. MR. GARDOM: Mr. Speaker, I can't give the hon. member

that assurance, nor am I completely certain that the facts are

technically as stated in every respect. But I can certainly assure him

that I will draw it to the attention of my colleague. And if my

colleague is not back here in time, I'll make the necessary inquiries

myself, sir.

OAP RENT INCREASES

MR. BLENCOE: I have a question for the Minister of Lands,

Parks and Housing. This year and next the minister is imposing major

rent increases on low-income senior citizens through the B.C. Housing

Management Commission. When I asked this question before, the minister

gave information which wasn't totally correct. Stage 2 of those

increases is being implemented up to September of this year; stage 3

will start in September and end in September of next year, for a total

3.5 percent increase for seniors that the minister can change today.

Has the minister decided that he will now suspend these increases in

view of the federal government's decision to de-index pension income,

and at least roll back this 3.5 percent increase for senior citizens in

the province of British Columbia?

HON. MR. BRUMMET: The answer is no. The decision was made — I

don't know the exact date, but it was some time ago — to move up to 30

percent of income. Rather than do it at one time, it was decided to do

it in three stages; and that's proceeding.

MR. BLENCOE: The decision was made two years ago, but the

implications are still being felt, and the increases are still being

put in place. What we're asking is that you roll back the increases

still being carried out today and next year.

A supplementary question to the minister. Has the minister now been advised

of the combined impact of pension deindexing and substantial provincial rent

increases at the same time, and will the minister reconsider his decision and

show some flexibility for British Columbia's senior citizens?

HON. MR. BRUMMET: I don't think the member is listening. The

decision was made to move from the 25 to 30 percent; and rather than do

it at one time, it was decided to phase it in for existing tenants and

apply it to new tenants as it came up. Now he's talking about changing

the 5 percent decision. The answer is no. That decision was made, and

it was just spaced out over three years.

MR. BLENCOE: Another supplementary. The minister is missing

the point. He has the power to show some flexibility. He has the power

to roll back the 3.5 percent increase. He can do it today, yet he's

saying he's totally intransigent and won't move on this issue. Question

to the minister: why will you not roll back the 3.5 percent for British

Columbia seniors when the federal government is de-indexing pensions?

At least show some flexibility toward senior citizens in the province

of British Columbia.

WELLS GRAY PROVINCIAL PARK

MR. MITCHELL: A question to the Minister of Lands, Parks and

Housing. The government has commenced a public relations initiative to

promote the new master plan for Wells Gray park. Will the minister

advise why he has refused to convene full public hearings on this

question to provide for a meaningful dialogue with the public before

the new master plan is implemented?

HON. MR. BRUMMET: Well, again the member is inaccurate. There

have been public meetings on this. There are further public meetings

scheduled. If they don't happen to satisfy the one critic that seems to

be trying to get some press out of it or to make some political mileage

out of it, then I'm sorry. There will be public meetings. There has

been public input. There will be other public input.

The plan that is going ahead at this point is only the improvement

of existing facilities. There are no new initiatives being taken in the

park.

MR. MITCHELL: A provincial park official, Mr. Derek Thompson,

has said that the public input will end by early July. Why has the

government decided to oppose this arbitrary deadline? What is the

minister trying to avoid?

HON. MR. BRUMMET: Mr. Speaker, I certainly resent the

implication that we're trying to avoid something by saying that the

public hearings shall be held and completed by a certain date. I know

that member would like to see discussions go on for six years, and

nothing done. Well, okay —I'm not disposed that way.

[2:30]

MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Speaker, I personally resent that implication that I want this to go on for six years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh'.

MR. MITCHELL: I do.

My question is to the minister again. It is important, if we are

going to develop one of the largest wilderness areas that we have had,

with the tragic results that have taken place in the Wells Gray

area.... This park development must have public input. I ask the

minister again: why is there a mad rush

[ Page 6698 ]

to develop something without the consensus of the general public in that area?

HON. MR. BRUMMET: I withdraw the six years; he probably only

wants five. There is no mad rush. We're simply saying that there is a

time set for public hearings. We

schedule these public hearings and

then — I think you used the key word — we would like to get on with the

development not 10 years from now but as soon as possible.

MR. MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I would ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. MICHAEL: I would ask that the House make welcome a group

of students from the Falkland School. I should add that Falkland is the

home of the greatest rodeo in all of British Columbia.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Speaker, with leave I would like to present a petition concerning the reinstatement of fired school board trustees.

MR. SPEAKER: The presentation of the petition is in order, hon. member.

Presenting Petitions

MR. BARNES: I would first like to say that seated in the

gallery are a number of the trustees, the Vancouver School Board

chairman and other petitioners. The petition contains some 10,000

signatures from cities and communities throughout the province, and was

handed to me by Mr. Robert Poburko of the Trafalgar School Consultative

Committee. The petition is addressed to this honourable assembly and

states:

"The petition of the undersigned residents in the

province of British Columbia, who now avail themselves of their ancient

and undoubted right thus to present a grievance common to your

petitioners in the certain assurance that your honourable House will

therefore provide a remedy, humbly sheweth:

" That the legally elected trustees of the Vancouver

School Board (Pauline Weinstein, Phil Rankin, Graeme Waymark, Jonathan

Baker, John Church, Gary Onstad, Carmela Allevato, Ken Denike, Bill

Brown) be reinstated without delay in the name of democratic

preservation.

" That the legally elected trustees of the Cowichan

School Board (Jerry Joyce, Ann Andersen, Anne Murray, Jan Broadland,

Dave Garnett, Bob Rogers, Glen Ridgway, Dominique Roelants, Bill

McKenzie) be reinstated without delay in the name of democratic

preservation."

I would ask that the House receive the petition as read.

MR. SPEAKER: The presentation

part is in order. Hon. member, just submit it to the table.

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. GARDOM: Committee of Supply, Mr. Speaker.

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF LABOUR

(continued)

On vote 51: minister's office, $210,175.

MRS. WALLACE: As you will recall, Mr. Chairman, before the

lunch break I was just about to ask a few questions of the minister.

They all deal with workers' compensation. The one specific question

that I want to deal with is related to compensation for people employed

on the government work programs. They used to be known as EBAP, now

ERDA. Some of those are joint programs shared partially by federal and

provincial governments. Some are solely federal. What has happened, I'm

sure the minister is aware, is that when they are solely federal

programs, workers' compensation does not apply.

While it is true that the various people involved took out some

private insurance, it was certainly not adequate. I had a great number

of cases come through my office where people were injured on those EBAP

jobs, and I expect the same will be true of any of the ERDA jobs which

are not shared. There are some that are not shared, as I understand it

from the information that I have from the federal people. Those people

are discriminated against because they do not have the protection of

our Workers Compensation Act rules and regulations here in British

Columbia. They are working at forestry jobs in the main, where

historically we know it to be a hazardous job. The private insurance is

simply not adequate. It doesn't provide the same kinds of benefits, and

it is very difficult to substantiate a claim. It's a real hardship on

those people.

I would hope that the minister, in his much touted review of what's

going on in WCB — and he has made a lot of statements about the things

he's going to change there — will bear that in mind and ensure that

that coverage is extended to people working on those federal programs.

Because he has indicated that he is going to review....

Do you want to answer that one first?

HON. MR. SEGARTY: The employees working under the EBAP

program were covered under class 13. That's a provincial government

class. If you have any people having difficulty in that particular

area, I'd appreciate you maybe getting in touch with my ministry staff

or myself, and we may be able to help you out in that area.

MRS. WALLACE: I certainly will get in touch with the minister

then, because that was not the information provided to the EBAP

employees. In fact, private insurance was taken out. I don't know off

the bat what

section 13 is, but does that actually provide the same

kind of coverage that any other worker in the forest industry would

receive?

HON. MR. SEGARTY: It covers the same class as other

government employees across British Columbia — the same coverage. If

you wish, maybe afterwards I'll get my assistant deputy minister

responsible for that area to talk to you. Maybe you could provide him

with the information, and we may be able to help out your constituents

in that regard.

MRS. WALLACE: I hope that's retroactive, because the case in

point is dealing with Harman Wilson and Co., who were the solicitors

for a job creation project under

section 38

[ Page

6699 ]

of the UIC Act. They hired solicitors to deal with

this injured worker, in the main to prevent them from having to make

payments because it was a private company that was involved. So there's

something very strange going on here when that is taking place. I'll be

happy to discuss it with the minister or his deputy at a later date.

I know that WCB has been discussed at some length, but I think it is

important that the minister is aware of.... I know he's aware of a lot

of the problems, but I think it's important that he be aware of two or

three case histories, and I'll be very brief. They're the kind of

situations that develop as a result of problems within WCB. One of them

is when there's a conflict between WCB and ICBC — when there is a

vehicle accident which involves someone who is working. In one instance

it was in fact a self-employed person who had covered himself under

WCB. He presented all the information, all the details, to WCB. Several

months later, somebody else in WCB who apparently had never heard of

anything that he had provided got back to him and said that ICBC was

taking this thing to court, which is again a great expense — trying to

resolve a difference between two Crown corporations. ICBC was

maintaining various positions: that the man appeared to have ample

income, so why should he be complaining or trying to get a settlement;

that he had actually been working in his company — he was

self-employed, as I say — during some of the periods when he was

picking up benefits from ICBC. All that information had been provided,

but the person who had written the second time to this constituent had

never even heard that this was provided. I can tell you, my constituent

was mightily upset and mightily insulted at getting this kind of a

runaround.

So I would like to commend to the minister the idea of looking at

the situations when those kinds of differences occur. Do we have to go

to court to settle differences that are going to come out of two Crown

corporations? Isn't there some way that that could be settled? If one

or the other is responsible, surely the main concern should be to get

the benefits that are justly due to the injured person, rather than

spending all the time deciding who's responsible for it, one trying to

outdo the other and saying, well, you know, maybe it's not their

responsibility.

Another case that I have has been ongoing for, I think, 20 years.

This man has had several different accidents and has been appealing the

results because he has never been able.... He is not able to work. He

has been retrained in some instances. But basically what has happened

is that he appealed four different decisions that were made back in

April, 1984. The results finally came down May 23, 1985, finding

against him in all four decisions. There is something wrong with that

kind of situation. A man who is incapacitated.... I know the man

personally; he's been in and out of my office for the last ten years.

He is not able to work. He has tried everything the WCB has suggested,

and it just is not possible for him to carry out any of those things.

One of the reasons for turning him down was that he was injured during the

war. They're trying to say that it's a war-related injury. His first

injury occurred in 1961 — of these four injuries I'm talking about. That

was almost 20 years after his war injury. Yet the decision read that he was

accident-prone as a result of the war injury. There's something wrong, Mr.

Chairman, with WCB taking that kind of attitude — that a man who unfortunately

suffered four injuries was accident-prone because of a war injury 20 years before.

I think that that kind of a policy in a Crown corporation that's issuing

those kinds of decisions certainly should be reviewed.

The third thing that I want to deal with is another instance. This

man was an autobody painter. He had a WCB accident, and he had to take

physiotherapy. It was an approved accident; he took the physiotherapy,

but suddenly he was told: "You're only entitled to ten treatments, and

you'd better settle the rest of those with your therapist, because you

were cured after the ten treatments."

[2:45]

He was not cured, Mr. Chairman. He had extensive surgery to his knee. The surgeon

who performed the surgery indicated that he would not be able to return to his

original profession. He was taken over to the assessment centre in Richmond

and was examined there by a WCB doctor. He went to the rehabilitation clinic

for two weeks, and he was told to exercise the knee and see what happened. He

did gym and he did all sorts of running and weightlifting with his legs, and

his knee was getting sorer and sorer. What the therapist told him was: "Well,

if it starts to swell, come and see me. Now go and get dressed."

He went to get dressed, and his leg was starting to swell after this

two-hour workout. He went to see the therapist, and the therapist said:

"I'm going to lunch. Come back at 4:00." At 4:00, the swelling had

started to go down, of course, because he was taking it easy in that

period of time. He had no more tests, no more examinations, no more

anything; he was sent home and they said that he was ready to go back

to work, so no more therapy, in spite of the fact that his surgeon had

recommended that he not return to that particular occupation.

This was one of the instances that was interesting in that it was

not just the employee but the employer who came to see me, absolutely

shocked at what had happened to his employee as far as WCB goes.

The fourth and final one that I want to draw to the minister's

attention deals with another self-employed person. In submitting his

returns to WCB, his bookkeeper ticked off the wrong column. He showed

two employees, when actually it was the father and son who operated the

company. They sent in the same amount of dollars to cover the premiums

as they would have had it been shown under the proper column. He had an

accident. He's still on crutches. WCB has refused to accept that,

because the bookkeeper put it in the wrong column.

He appealed. The board of review had a split decision. The chairman

of the board came out in favour of the employee, because he said it was

just a bookkeeping error, the dollars were the same and the employee

should be paid. The other members of the board came out in the other

direction, so he lost his appeal. He has now appealed to the

commissioners. In the meantime, he is not able to work. He is

self-employed, as I say; he's going to lose his business and probably

his home if he doesn't get some payments.

He has another problem with the Minister of Forests relative to

payment for subcontracting that he did. That's probably also with the

Minister of Labour — on these subcontracts, which can be quite a

difficult problem for people who take a subcontract and then receive no

payment from the contractor.

That's his situation. He has a double whammy there. The contractor

hasn't paid him for the work he did, and he has a lien against the

logs, which are apparently non-existent or non-saleable; plus the fact

that he can't get his WCB payments. His wife has a job in a little

local store, and that's the

[ Page 6700 ]

only thing keeping bread on the table. This has

gone on for a long time. He appealed to the commissioners way back in

early February or late January, and there's still no response. I

suggest that's a pretty traumatic experience for someone to go through

and a very unfortunate position for a Crown corporation to place a

citizen of this province in.

I've drawn those to the minister's attention because I know he is

reviewing WCB. If he wants any further details, I would be happy to

speak with him about it. But I think it is important that he knows what

is happening to the average person out there in the workplace as a

result of the board for which he is responsible.

Vote 51 approved.

Vote 52: ministry operations, $54,027,722 — approved.

Vote 81: student employment programs, $10,000,000 — approved.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF TOURISM

HON. MR. GARDOM: Mr. Chairman, I call vote 65. Resolved: that

a sum not exceeding $151,996 be granted to Her Majesty to defray the

expenses of the Ministry of Tourism, the hon. minister's office. And

well do I know the minister, one of our better ministers. I'm sure that

very shortly the minister will be approaching the premises. As a matter

of fact, he's here now.

Mr. Minister, I was just extolling your many virtues, which would

take a great deal longer than the time of sitting this afternoon, so I

will turn the floor over to you, sir.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I appreciate that, sir. I was waiting for my critic.

On vote 65: minister's office, $151,996.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I just have a short opening statement to

read into my estimates. Then I'll be happy to take questions from the

opposition, I'm sure.

First of all, I am very pleased to report that the tourism industry

in this province continues to grow, providing in excess of 100,000 jobs

for British Columbians who work for more than 10,000 businesses.

Revenues rose from $2.15 billion in 1983 to more than $2.3 billion this

past year, an increase of 7.9 percent.

Substantial increases in the numbers of United States and overseas

visitors were recorded. Revenues from U.S. residents rose 12 percent,

while overseas visitor revenues increased 11.4 percent. The interest is

high: inquiries from prospective visitors increased 44 percent over the

previous year, the second straight year that inquiries have shown a

major increase.

It is particularly pleasing to note that British Columbia this past

year has consistently outperformed other Canadian provinces in its

ability to attract U.S. visitors, who bring to British Columbia not

only an adventurous spirit but also a strong currency. The continued

development of overseas markets is equally pleasing, for these visitors

bring aggressive spending habits which greatly benefit the people of

British Columbia.

The outlook for tourism in British Columbia can modestly be described as outstanding.

In the short term, 1985 appears to be building strongly toward the Expo 86 year.

I am confident that the Expo 86 Corporation's projection of 13.75 million

site visits will prove to be modest. There are always those, I suppose, who

will be negative and may see it differently. But people in the tourism industry

throughout this province are getting ready to host the world in style. Not only

will Expo bring significant benefit to downtown British Columbia, the lower

mainland, but it will also bring people and dollars to all points of the province.

Our province is truly gearing up for Expo. There are more than 80

Expo committees throughout British Columbia, each with exciting plans

and projects. Add to these efforts the major promotional initiatives,

such as Islands 86 here on Vancouver Island, the Go for the Gold

promotion in the Cariboo and the numerous other promotional campaigns

planned by tourism associations in B.C.'s nine tourism regions, and it

is evident that the industry understands the potential benefits of Expo

These are exciting times, but the real fun is just around the comer.

It's just coming. Expo 86 itself is in great shape. I am happy to

report that Expo is on time and on budget. To date, over 40 countries

have signed up and will have pavilions at the fair, while 26 major

corporations have agreed to participate. Foreign participation, Mr.

Chairman, from countries in our key tourism markets is excellent, with

the United States, Britain, West Germany and Japan, all vital to our

long-range tourism successes, making major investments in the site.

Major corporations such as General Motors, IBM, CP Air — yesterday we

signed up Xerox Corp. — and others are committed to spending well over

$140 million, either onsite or in promotional support of the fair. I

would add, Mr. Chairman, that the corporate participation now far

surpasses that of any other world exposition; it even surpasses the

corporate participation in the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles, except for

the television contracts. So we're well over $140 million in corporate

participation. The blend of foreign nations and corporations is a

tribute to the fair's management and is just one more reason for all

British Columbians to feel pride in their world's fair.

This May 2, one full year ahead of the fair's official opening, the

Expo Centre opened for business. It has started to provide people with

not only a sense of what this fair is all about, but is demonstrating

in the best possible way that Expo 86 will indeed be ready from the

opening day through to October 13, 1986. It has already had the

pleasing effect of demonstrating to a critical and demanding press

corps that Expo 86 and quality are synonymous, a notion that is now

being reflected in the media around the world, as a result of reportage

by more than 150 journalists who attended opening ceremonies at the

Expo Centre.

Promotional efforts for Expo 86 started in earnest earlier this

month and will build through the fall of 1985 and the spring of 1986 in

key market areas, including the U.S. west coast, throughout Canada and,

of course, in British Columbia. Over this past year both my ministry

and the Expo 86 Corporation have conducted aggressive trade sales

activities, designed to assure participation by wholesalers and the

trade. The outlook here is excellent. In fact, Expo 86 has already

attracted considerably more package tour business — and I should point

out that this is virtually guaranteed business — in advance of the

opening date than any world's fair staged in North America. As well,

group ticket purchases and employee payroll purchase plans such as that

conducted by the city of Vancouver are running well ahead of

expectations. My

[ Page

6701 ]

ministry has played an active role in these Expo activities and, as

well, has embarked upon a series of exciting and innovative programs

which have found wide favour with the public and the B.C. tourism

industry.

The ministry earlier this year commenced a thorough examination of

the market potential of British Columbia tourism. Extensive consumer

studies have been undertaken in British Columbia, Washington, Oregon,

Alberta, and in parts of California and eastern Canada. Using

sophisticated market research techniques, we have been asking consumers

what they like and, perhaps more importantly, what they don't like

about a vacation in our beautiful province. This research, which allows

us to do what any successful private sector business must do, asked its

customers what works and what doesn't, and has formed the basis for our

advertising and promotional activities, starting this spring.

Our major findings suggest that consumers are no longer attracted by

advertising which concentrates on British Columbia's rolling plains,

rushing rivers, majestic mountains or sweeping seascapes; rather,

consumers today are asking for more and more information about the

activities, events and celebrations taking place in our province.

Accordingly, the ministry's advertising has become much more specific

about opportunities available to visitors.

Evidence of that direction is best shown by distribution of more

than four million travel guides inserted in daily newspapers in key

British Columbia, Alberta, Washington, Oregon and northern California

markets. These guides, a first for Tourism B.C., are very specific

about activities, events and things to do in the province, and even go

so far as to suggest one-day to one-week driving tours. In addition to

the guides, Tourism B.C. will be featuring radio advertising this

summer, supporting the content of these guides. Later this year we plan

a follow-up guide of a similar nature, with a fall and winter emphasis.

Part of the thrust to more specific and localized promotion is the

introduction of our Partners in Tourism program. In essence, it

provides matching dollars for cooperative promotional campaigns, based

on a submission of regional marketing plans. The ministry will make

available at least $1.25 million for such programs, all of which will

concentrate on selling the specific merits of events, activities and

celebrations in B.C.'s nine tourism regions. The review of these

marketing plans concluded last week, and the ministry has been

impressed with the quality of thought and thoroughness of the plans

submitted by regional tourism associations. There is an abundance of

talent in our tourism industry in this province, and it is refreshing

to see it displayed in such a workmanlike manner.

[3:00]

With sound consumer research, marketing plans and programs targeted

to key markets of high potential, and spending levels which are second

only to Ontario, we feel confident that B.C.'s leadership position in

tourism marketing will continue to be enhanced.

The marketing operations of my ministry are where we are most

visible. However, it should be noted that in this past year the

ministry has been reorganized, and now has a strong industry

development component. It means that a major part of the ministry's

activities will now be directed towards human resource development, the

packaging of the industry's many travel opportunities, and bricks-and-mortar considerations.

I'd like to point out that it is in this arm of the ministry that we

have developed our Superhost program, an industry-related initiative

directed to upgrading service levels within British Columbia. This

program is directed at both entrepreneurs and employees of B.C.

businesses. We are asking entrepreneurs to sign a pledge to provide

quality service, fair exchange and a smile to visitors. We are asking

employees to take an eight-hour hospitality course to earn the right to

wear a Superhost pin. These employees will be trained by community

groups with an interest in training. Tourism B.C. will, in turn,

provide training for the trainers — all course materials, appropriate

promotional materials and support services. I am happy to tell you that

more than 50 groups and organizations have offered to run training

courses in their communities since we announced this program on May 13,

and the number is growing daily. We will be able to put between 30,000

and 50,000 people through the Superhost program before the opening of

Expo 86.

Details of the ministry's reorganization are undoubtedly of minimal

interest, but it is safe to say that we have strengthened the ministry

considerably. Today there is an expanded marketing group in Vancouver,

a new development arm and, of critical importance to the ministry's

success, a strong management services group based in Victoria. The

organization is peopled by some exceptional public servants at all

levels, and I am pleased with the rapid progress being made by the

ministry in tackling the many opportunities at hand.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

In closing, I would just like to comment on two small but highly

visible activities within my ministry. They are the Royal Hudson steam

train and our film promotion activities. The Hudson experienced a 12

percent increase in ridership on its North Vancouver-Squamish route in

the 1984-85 season, despite a newspaper strike, which limited promotion

opportunities. I am also pleased to report that we constituted the

Royal Hudson Steam Train Society just before the government's fiscal

year ended, and have turned the operation of the Hudson over to this

society. The people of British Columbia will continue to own the

priceless heritage that is the Royal Hudson through ownership of all

assets associated with it. However, it is our hope that, through the

formation of a society, a dedicated core of volunteers and others with

a very real affection for the Hudson will lend their considerable

talents to its further success.

The film industry recorded another banner year, with films valued at

$60 million being shot in British Columbia. The ministry's small,

three-person film promotion staff continually out-hustles and

outperforms similar units throughout North America, as evidenced by a

250 percent increase in requests for services and information in

1984-85 over the previous year. The coming 12 months will be better

yet. Three major movies with budgets of $5.5 million have already been

completed in B.C. this year. Another seven, including United

Artists' Rocky IV , Disney's Danger Bay and 20th Century Fox's Just

Another Missing Kid are either in production or pre-production, and we

are close to closing several others. In simple terms, it means we have

booked about $40 million worth of business, and there's lots more to

come this year.

In

summary, I am pleased with the industry's growth, satisfied that

my ministry is playing a significant role in the industry's promotion

and development, and excited by the

[ Page 6702 ]

prospect of Expo 86 and what it will do for B.C.'s tourism industry.

We are now laying solid plans for the post-Expo years, during which we

expect to further strengthen tourism's position in a strengthening

British Columbia economy. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your

indulgence, and I'd be happy to answer any questions pertaining to my

estimates.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Well, that was such a nice accolade. It's too

bad that more government members weren't here to listen to all the good

news, but so be it.

Interjection.

MR. MacWILLIAM: You've heard it, have you?

Just so the minister knows the direction I'm taking, I'd like to

have a look at tourism in general throughout the province of British

Columbia, and break it down into three areas: resource identification,

marketing and advertising. Then I'd like to make some comments in

regard to what has and hasn't been done in the past — directions the

ministry has taken. May I take this opportunity to compliment the

minister on the direction he is taking. It's very positive, and it's

the kind of stuff that I think will enhance tourism in the province,

but I'll get back to that later.

I'd like to then do an overview of tourism in British Columbia —

where we've been, where we're going, and some suggestions that the

minister might want to consider incorporating into his plan. Then I

would like to break it down, basically, into some of the regional

concerns. I'm going to be speaking in terms of the interior area. We'll

open it up at that point for some of my colleagues on this side of the

House to talk about concerns in their areas, and then break out into

some general questions that have come up over the past few months in

regard to tourism. That's

part 1.

part 2 I think we'll maybe have a look at what the minister has

been spending a considerable amount of time and energy on, and that's

Expo. I'd like to run through a bit of a financial analysis of Expo and

some questions in terms of the cost-benefit analysis that has been done

but has not been reported on from the ministry; and some general

questions that I think will be of interest in terms of the fair.

So let's go back then and begin, once again, with tourism in

general. I might say at the outset that I really don't know how long

it's going to take. It's my first shot at it, as the minister well

knows. I guess we'll fly by the seat of our pants. It could be quite

short if he provides the correct answers to the questions, or at least

provides answers. It could be quite long if he doesn't provide answers.

So I don't know. It might be a long, hot summer. Who knows?

Tourism in British Columbia at this point, I guess as a result of the economic

collapse in other sectors, seems to be in a position of being the second or

at least one of the major industries in British Columbia. I think revenues —

and the minister would agree — for 1983 exceeded some $2 billion. It's certainly

not nickel-and-dime stuff; it's big business. Because of its heavy reliance

on the small business sector and its labour-intensive nature, it's one of

the areas that has the most promise, I would say, for new employment opportunities

in this province. It's certainly an area that the government should be fully

committed to in terms of job creation strategies. It has great potential. British

Columbia — and I think everyone in this House would agree with me — is probably

the province that is the most endowed with the natural amenities to encourage

this type of industry.

However, when you look at the financial statements in the ministry,

I find it a little disturbing to see the lack of commitment — not from

this minister, particularly, but from the government as a whole — to

making tourism an even larger job-creator playing an even greater role

in this province's economy.

The Tourism budget is minuscule when you compare it with other

areas, even though it is at this point the second- or third-largest

industry in the province. The budget is very small; I believe it's

smaller than the government's advertising budget. I grant the fact that

there have been increases in marketing — I think about a 9 percent

increase this year — an increase in tourism development and a very

slight increase in research communications. I think there could have

been more emphasis on the allocations for research and communications.

But on the whole my criticism is that even though there have been

gains, the budget as a whole seems to be insufficient to generate the

amount of intense activity needed to really explore the potential of

this industry.

As the minister well knows, not only British Columbia but Canada as

a whole has been kind of losing ground in terms of competition for the

international tourist dollar. If you look at the ministry stats between

1979 and 1983, the volume of visitors to British Columbia has dropped

about 11 percent. It may have increased slightly in 1984; I don't have

those figures available. But generally speaking there has been a

decline. I think this decline has to be countered with a greater

commitment to an intensive marketing campaign. The minister is moving

in that direction, and I'm happy to see it.

One of the big declines in the province is the result not

necessarily of mistakes within the Tourism ministry at all, but I guess

a reflection of the general economic climate in British Columbia. There

has been a drastic decline in travel by British Columbia residents

themselves. The traffic coming across the border from the U.S. and

other areas seems to be in pretty good shape, but people in British

Columbia simply aren't travelling. Perhaps it's because they don't have

the disposable income. If you're unemployed, probably the last thing on

your mind is taking a holiday; you're more interested in getting food

on the table. I think as a province we've suffered in the tourism area

as a result of the poor economic conditions in other sectors of the

economy of the province.

I want to give you an example. Again, these are figures cited by the

latest ministry report on travel indicators. The occupancy rate in

hotels is still below what I'm told is the break-even point of about 60

percent. I believe that on the average the occupancy rate is around 57

percent. This indicates that we've still got a long way to go in terms

of a healthy industry, particularly in interior areas. Some of those

hotels and motels are in pretty tough shape. I'll be getting back to

that later and recommending some possibilities that would help this

area of the industry.

I made mention of the fact that the economic performance for tourism

is linked to the general economy. Really what we need here in the

province, above and beyond a greater commitment to tourism, is the

commitment to get British Columbia moving again so that we can take

some of that $36 billion in personal savings that's locked up in

British Columbia and start to generate some economic activity by

getting that money rolling and flowing through the economy.

In 1979 British Columbia's trade deficit was over $250 million; in

other words, we were losing more tourist dollars out of the province

than we were getting into it. Part of the

[ Page 6703 ]

blame lies in the fact that in the past we haven't been competitive

enough in developing and marketing our own tourism potential. I think

the minister would agree with that. He does seem to be on the track to

correct it.

We need an increased commitment to job creation through tourism and

development, a course that really requires a more aggressive and

flexible development strategy. I think such a strategy has to show an

increased commitment in three areas.

In the area, as I mentioned, of inventory identification, we've got

to take a little more time to sit down and find out what our natural

attributes are throughout the province, region by region, area by area.

And after we've identified those attributes — those historical,

cultural, natural, environmental heritages — we've got to set about a

strong program to develop them. We need more intensive marketing

research, marketing research that has a specific regional focus. We

have moved in that direction — I do give you credit for it — but I

think there is a lot more work that can be done in rectifying the past

mistakes. Of course, a very aggressive advertising and promotional

strategy that reflects the regional themes rather than — the minister

commented on this earlier — that vague idea of moose, mountains and

Mounties........ We have to be quite a bit more specific in promoting

an identifiable strategy, area by area.

Some criticisms. We've not done enough homework in the area of

resource identification and development. What are the natural heritages

and amenities of the nine different tourism regions? What cultural and

historical aspects can each of these areas offer? And how can we best

preserve and enhance these natural travel generators?

In the past, the entire process of market identification, as I

mentioned earlier, has suffered from ad hockery and the lack of

adequate market analysis. It's been corrected. We've got a long way to

go. We have to identify the consumers' needs and whether or not those

needs are being adequately met.

[3:15]

There are some questions that have to be addressed in this area.

Where do we draw from in terms of our national North American and

international market? The minister has mentioned that he's doing

marketing in specific target areas such as California, Oregon and

Washington. I would be most interested in seeing a

summary of those

studies. If the minister would make them available, either tabling them

in the House or simply making them available to us, I'd he happy to

receive that so that we can have a look at just what has been done.

I think the major question in selling ourselves to the different

markets is, what does that person down in California want? What are his

needs in terms of encouraging him to travel to British Columbia, and

how do his needs differ, for example, from the Japanese tourist or the

tourist who is coming over from Alberta and Ontario? They all have

different wants and different needs. We have to learn to identify those

and to develop the appropriate marketing scheme to attract them.

Some of the factors that seem to be inhibiting tourism development

in the past little while, especially in light of the economic

conditions, are for example the high gasoline cost in British Columbia,

especially in light of the fact that the recent federal budget has

tacked on another price increase. Perhaps the minister might address

that issue. I'd be interested to know if the minister has attempted, in

the interests of promoting tourism, to have his government colleagues

have a look at perhaps rolling back some of the provincial tax levies

on gas costs to reduce this burden, because tourism involves travel.

The majority of that travel involves highway transportation, and

certainly increased gasoline costs are dampening this.

Also, the accommodation costs. As I have mentioned time and time

again, the tax on hotel accommodation is a consumer tax and tends to

have a dampening affect on the use of these facilities. I would suggest

to the minister that the removal of these structural consumer barriers

might encourage tourism in general. Another area to look at is the

elimination of meal taxes. He may wish to respond on that. I think I'll

summarize at this point and then go into a few questions.

In

summary, the tourism industry has a great potential, a potential

for unprecedented growth. I think it could become possibly a major

industry at some time in the future. That's no reflection on.... I

guess maybe it is a reflection on the state of our forestry industry,

but certainly we've got an area of great growth here in the province,

one we can take advantage of if we have the commitment, the resources

and the funds to do the proper job.

Going to some specific questions, I wonder if the minister would

outline what steps he has taken to achieve a higher level of

professionalism throughout the tourism industry, specifically in the

three areas of tourism resource development, market identification and

advertising. He has mentioned that he's moved somewhat in that

direction, but I'd be interested to hear exactly where his plans are to

increase the professionalism in resource development, and to identify

these different areas and the markets. In addition, I wonder if the

minister would advise on whether he has any plans to coordinate the

promotion of our major travel generators, along with the federal

government and, as he has mentioned before, the different regions. He

hasn't mentioned any coordination between the provincial and federal

bodies in terms of an overall marketing strategy.

Perhaps I'll sit down at this point. The minister might want to respond on those.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Before I go any further, Mr. Chairman, I

was remiss earlier in not introducing — not only to the member but to

the House — my new deputy minister as of a year ago, Mr. Michael Horsey.

Just a couple of comments on the member's opening statement. I

appreciate a lot of his remarks. I think he realizes that we're moving

in the right direction in a lot of our strategies in tourism. As I say,

we've had Mr. Horsey on board now for about a year. He is a marketing

person, right out of the private sector, and has had a good deal of

experience in marketing, advertising and research, as I outlined in my

opening statement.

I would like to comment on the member's statement about the

government's apparent lack of commitment to tourism. I disagree with

his statement. Just by looking at the size of the budget committed to

tourism in this province, I think you will see that this government has

a very strong commitment to tourism. The member mentioned the

government's advertising budget. I would ask him to bear in mind that

if he's referring to the GIS budget, about one-half of that — $9

million — is tourism marketing dollars. It just happens not to appear

in my votes but in one of the votes of the Provincial Secretary. I'd

also ask him to bear in mind that we spend far more dollars promoting

tourism than most other jurisdictions

[ Page 6704 ]

in North America, Ontario being an exception; but then their population base is several times what ours is.

I would also ask him to bear in mind that a good deal of the

marketing for tourism is done by the private sector. Many millions of

dollars are spent by private corporations promoting this area. This is

not to say that Tourism shouldn't do its share of the load, and I feel

that we do. One of our main functions is to make sure that every area

of the province is promoted as equally as possible so that the motels

in the interior that he speaks of which have had a couple of rough

years can get their share of this promotional budget.

He is correct when he says there has been a decline in North

American tourism. This is a phenomenon that many people in this

industry, including our own federal government and the private sector

in Canada and the United States, are addressing at this moment. North

America as a whole is not getting its share of the increase in world

tourism. It's interesting to note that even in the very depths of the

worldwide recession that hit most countries, tourism internationally

was still growing at between 3 and 4 percent a year, but in North

America was not. So you are correct when you say North America's share

of the market is declining. It's something that is of concern to

everyone in the industry in North America.

There has always been a negative cash-flow position vis-a-vis inbound

and outbound tourists in British Columbia. British Columbians have

always traveled abroad more, and spent more money, than people coming

to British Columbia. We are naturally trying to correct that imbalance.

It has always been there. I suppose it comes from British Columbians

chasing the sun in the wintertime. It's very difficult to cope with

that, and I don't know if we'll ever reverse that trend. Hopefully,

though — and I think encouragingly — more and more British Columbians

are staying home and skiing in the winter. With recent success stories

such as Whistler, we hope to keep that trend going.

You mentioned, Mr. Member, the moose, Mounties and mountains aspect.

You mentioned that also when you were in my riding a couple or three

weeks ago. Let me tell you....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Well, I guess we both got a little bit of

press on that one. If we're talking out of context, the kindest thing

that I could say about that comment is that it's out of date. It's

maybe not out of context, but it is out of date. With all due respect,

the moose-mountains-Mounties image.... The research we have done by

very up-to-date research techniques tells us that the Americans don't

view us that way anymore. There are some, probably, who do. But for the

most part they do not. They are quite knowledgeable about British

Columbia. Many of them have been here many times.

We are constantly upgrading our inventory of resources. We haven't

published a piece on it since 1979, and we will do, either this coming

year or in 1987.

As far as the research that we have done, certainly you may have it.

You are welcome to it. I have made this commitment to the whole

industry. When we do this research, it's not to keep it secret. It's

available to anyone who wants a

summary of it. If you want the entire

thing, or if people in the industry want the entire research, we might

have to charge them a nominal amount for photocopying. But summaries of

the research are available to certainly any British Columbian who wants

it within reason, and I'll be glad to provide you with a copy of it.

You mentioned the gas, meal and room taxes. Yes, they concern me as

well. Nobody likes to put taxes on our accommodation sector, but during

a period of declining revenues such as we were in in 1982, 1983 and

certainly 1984, governments — not only ours, but governments everywhere

— were looking for every possible source of revenue. We don't do these

things lightly, and we do a lot of research into them before we impose

any taxes. We make sure that we are in line with the industry

throughout North America and the rest of the world. Although they are

distasteful to you and to me and to many in the industry, unfortunately

they are necessary. We still have to generate the dollars.

So we find that yes, our gasoline is highly priced and highly taxed.

It is still not nearly as highly priced or as highly taxed as in other

areas of the world. I would point to Europe specifically there, when

you look at the gasoline prices, and yet it doesn't seem to deter

anyone from driving. When I look at the meal taxes as compared with the

rest of the world, ours are not out of line. In fact, they're not even

out of line with the rest of Canada, nor are our room taxes. So while I

say they are distasteful to all of us, they are a necessary evil at the

moment.

You speak of a higher level of professionalism. We are indeed

endeavouring to do that, not just within our ministry but within the

whole industry. We have started with a complete overhaul of the

ministry and our directions and the thrust of what we do. I point to

some of the people that we now have on board in our ministry. I thank

you for the compliments on some of our efforts. We're just starting. As

they say, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Our travel planner is very well received. It's a first for us, and

for a first effort, I am very pleased with it. So is the industry. You

will see much more along that line. Professionalism in the trade

concerns us because our research tells us that the Americans in

particular love to come here. They like our country, and they like the

people. They think we're very friendly. One of the comments they make,

however, is that we could be more professional in our attitude and in

our service to the travelling public. So we realize that, and we are

trying to upgrade the professionalism in the industry through programs

such as Superhost.

The last question which you asked I will address briefly:

cooperation with the federal government is better now than it has ever

been in the past. I have had three meetings now with the federal

minister, Hon. Tom McMillan. The federal government, for the first time

since I've been the minister, is truly interested in cooperating with

us, trading information and making sure as far as possible that we are

not overlapping dollars and wasting dollars.

We are interested in getting the very best bang for the buck

possible. We're doing that by a free exchange of information, not only

at the ministerial level, but at the deputy and marketing levels. So I

think that answers most of what you had and your two questions. I'll

sit down and let you continue.

[3:30]

MR. MacWILLIAM: Mr. Chairman, a number of questions in terms

of inventory identification. I guess maybe we should make sure we're

singing off the same song sheet when we talk about inventory

identification. What I am meaning basically is the natural amenities,

the parks, the mountains,

[ Page 6705 ]

etc., as well as historical sites and cultural aspects. I wonder if

the minister could outline what specific programs of inventory

identification are presently in the field in tourism development.

Secondly, I wonder if the minister could answer if these programs are

developed in liaison with other ministries such as Environment and

Lands, Parks and Housing, and in terms of sports and recreation. Is

there a coordinated approach to identifying these tourism generators?

Thirdly, what steps has the minister taken to ensure that the

critical travel generators such as our park system and our wilderness

areas are being adequately maintained to facilitate the use and demand

from our tourists? I've had a lot of people mention the lack of

adequate maintenance of our present park system, possibly as a result

of the process of privatizing or contracting these out,

whereas the

government used to take care of the job itself. I wonder if the

minister would answer that question.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

Also, has the minister established a process of inventory

identification for selected cultural or heritage sites? In particular,

by way of example, the O'Keefe ranch has been identified. The minister

probably remembers the O'Keefe ranch; it's just north of the city of

Vernon. Other areas such as the Iblameen Valley, the village of

Coalmont, which has a lot of history involved.... What's going on

in terms of identifying these areas and expending funds in order to

develop them? Many of these areas are decadent. A tourist wouldn't want

to go in there and see just the dilapidated buildings and what not that

are left, but there is a real potential there to generate a tourism

attraction through upgrading and developing these heritage sites. Let's

see if I've got any more on that one.

The last question in that regard is.... I wonder if the ministry

has developed a regional profile, or a regional priorization, if you

like, of potential travel generators that are in need of development,

and whether there is any program for addressing this need. Again let me

cite a particular area in the North Okanagan: Kal Lake park, even

though it does come under Lands, Parks and Housing, is sitting there

fallow after being purchased over ten years ago as a class A provincial

park. We've got a real potential there in the Okanagan for a tourist

generator if we develop the park. It won't take much, in terms of

expenditures. I guess those expenditures would perhaps have to go

through another ministry, but I wonder if the minister has any programs

liaising with these other ministries to ensure that these are put on a

priority list.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Inventory identification. We are working

constantly with Lands, Parks and Housing, with the Municipal Affairs

ministry, with Environment, and the development side of my ministry has

identified over the last — I hate to put a time limit — few years over

50 projects from the TIDSA program that address many of the things you

were mentioning, such as historical sites, museums, etc. We're

constantly working with other ministries. For instance, even in the

mapping of the province we're now working very closely with Lands,

Parks and Housing so that we don't duplicate efforts and expense.

You touched on another: park maintenance, of course, which we're

very concerned with. It does not come under my ministry. That again is

either Lands, Parks and Housing, or in some cases the Ministry of

Forests, in the forestry campsites.

The member should know that many other ministries impact on the

Ministry of Tourism, and that when people are satisfied or dissatisfied

with a park, a highway, logging or the environment, etc. It is we who

get the letters. Much of the time it's not in our purview or

jurisdiction, but all the other ministries, it seems, impact on Tourism.

There is a need for us to work very closely with other ministries,

and we do. I work as closely as I possibly can with my colleagues in

cabinet to see that tourism is enhanced and not impeded, and also to

take a look at possible developments, as you have asked — the need for

development in certain areas. A good example of that is the new

Coquihalla Highway, which opens up a whole new area of the province in

which we, in conjunction with Highways, Lands and Environment, are

looking at possible new sites for tourism destinations or tourism

development. So I guess I can sum it all up by saying, yes, we do work

very closely with other ministries.

Another good example is that I work very closely with the Minister

of Environment (Hon. Mr. Pelton) regarding the restocking of lakes in

the interior especially, which is of vital concern to our tourism

industry in the interior. We stay in close touch on that.

There's not much else I can say except to answer your question in

the broadest terms by saying that we do work very closely with other

ministries.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I have a question in terms of funding by way

of grants or loans for specific projects. I guess this would possibly

come under the tourism incentive program as part of the ERDA agreement.

It's my understanding that it's about $25 million repayable over the

next five years. To break that down, that's about $5 million per year

divided over nine regions — about $600,000 a year per region. It

doesn't seem to be quite as pretty a package when you break it down

region by region. There's not a great financial commitment, but there

is one there.

I would like to ask the minister if he can expand, by way of

explanation, because it isn't terribly clear to me which projects can

qualify for funding under that agreement. I'm thinking specifically of

a problem that came up in the past, and again I refer the minister to

O'Keefe ranch in the Okanagan, which has been funded by both the city

of Vernon and the government. They are in danger of closing as a result

of lack of government funding in order to run the ranch. Would they be

able to qualify under this ERDA agreement? Would the development of

wilderness trails or other heritage sites qualify under this agreement?

And just to put it on public record, could the minister explain the

process of application through this ERDA program so that I can relay

that information to those interested.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: At this time, Mr. Chairman, I can't really

outline all the details, because the agreement hasn't been signed yet.

We've signed the umbrella ERDA agreement....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Yes, we will be signing the tourism

subagreement probably within the next 30 days. We've got all the t's

crossed and the i's dotted, etc., and we have reached an agreement with

the feds. I can tell the member that his overall number is not quite

correct, but he's

[ Page 6706 ]

pretty close, in the ballpark between $25 million and $30 million.

All the parameters and guidelines will be set out at the time it is

signed. It will, of course, be administered by a joint

federal-provincial committee. Probably within the next 30 days we'll be

announcing it and all of the guidelines and the breakdown of the

dollars — what they are committed for. It's not all to one area. There

are three different areas in the agreement. That will all be released

at the time it's signed.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I guess the minister has explained why I

haven't been able to find specifics. I have been asked that question by

various groups, and I haven't been able to give them an appropriate

answer. I assume, then, that the specific details will be forthcoming

shortly.

If I could move on now to an issue that we both touched on briefly a

little bit earlier, in regard to training programs in the tourism area,

it seems that at the moment tourist-related training or education

programs and professional development programs are fairly limited in

this province. Fewer than one in five workers have received any formal

training from a school or institution in the skills that they must

acquire in the service industry that is associated with tourism. Only

one in three get any formal training on the job specifically. The

observation here is that there really is no point in attempting to

create world-class attractions throughout the province if we don't also

supply top-calibre people to manage the resources and the services.

It's a complaint that I've heard time and time again. I've even

noticed it in travelling through different parts of the world and then

coming back to British Columbia. The service you get is often pretty

chippy in comparison with what is offered elsewhere. It's possibly a

result of the inexperience of the individuals involved and certainly

the lack of adequate training programs. The challenge we face is to

give education and training programs a top priority in this overall

process of tourism development.

I'll give you an example. There are doctoral programs in travel and

tourism now available throughout the United States. I don't believe — I

may be wrong, and the minister may want to clarify it — that these

opportunities are available here in British Columbia, nor do I think

they are made available throughout Canada. He may want to reflect on

that. Hundreds of U.S. Institutions offer courses in travel and

tourism-related subjects. We don't have many institutions with

credentials in tourism. What programs there are — for example, the

tourism-related program of BCIT — seem to be in danger of being cut.

Here are some specific questions. What steps has the minister taken to rectify

this situation, the situation being the lack of adequate training programs?

Second, is the minister liaising with colleges and post-secondary institutes

regarding the possibility of implementing diploma or degree programs in tourism?

Third, what steps has the minister taken to institute apprenticeship training

programs in the tourism industry? He talked about very short courses. They have

their place and value, but I think that maybe we ought to be looking at something

with a little more depth than just an eight-hour course. Fourth, what steps

has the minister taken to initiate cost-sharing programs for employment in the

tourism industry, such as career training programs in tourism? I've probably

hit you with enough, so I'll sit down and let you answer those.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I'll try to answer as specifically as I

can the member's questions regarding training programs. As I said, our

research has shown us that in many instances — and again, you can't

generalize and paint with a broad brush here — he is correct when he

says the level of service sometimes leaves something to be desired. Our

customers tell us that. Then you run into exactly the opposite many

times, where people write to me and others telling of the tremendous

service they have received somewhere.

On training programs, the Superhost program is, of course, not

designed to be a be-all and end-all in hospitality courses. It is the

first level of training, and, granted, it doesn't last very long —

about eight hours — but it is a start. Second, my ministry conducts

hospitality courses that are somewhat longer and go for five days. So

we have the second level of entry into a hospitality course — from the

Superhost course of eight hours to the hospitality course of five days.

Then, of course, there are courses offered at many of the regional

colleges and technical institutes which are one or two years in length.

I think specifically of BCIT, which has a course. I know Malaspina

College has an excellent course, a chef's course. I should add here

that they did very well this year in the international, I guess you

could call them, cuisine Olympics in Germany, walking off with several

first places. Then, of course, there is also a very well-respected

course at Simon Fraser University. So the tourism training programs are

there, and they are growing.

[3:45]

MR. MacWILLIAM: They're not degree-granting programs.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: No, you are correct, we do not have

degree-granting programs. But the courses are there for people to take

— anything from eight hours up to two years. I think the one at Simon

Fraser, if I'm not mistaken, is two years, but I could be wrong about

that. It doesn't offer a degree. Let me speculate, though. I feel very

sincerely that as the importance of the service/hospitality/travel

industry grows in this province, so will the opportunities for courses.

I would think that as the focus shifts — and it is shifting somewhat —

off our primary resource industries onto the service sector, institutes

of learning will pick up the need for such courses, as you say. It

wouldn't surprise me if within the next year or two, or maybe three or

four, we have degree-granting courses at some of the universities. The

tourism/ hospitality/travel industry — call it what you like — is going

to become increasingly important in our province, and someday in the

not too distant future it will probably end up being our number one

industry. As we shift that focus in this province, I am very positive

that you will see these courses expand, and expand to the point where

they are in some other areas of the world.

MR. MacWILLIAM: As highlighted in the recently announced

Partners in Tourism program, it is the ministry's intention to allow

each region to formulate a tourism marketing plan for its area. The

plan obviously is to include target groups as well as promotional

strategies. I wonder what assurances your ministry has sought from the

different regional associations, under this Partners in Tourism concept,

[ Page 6707 ]

to ensure an adequate degree of professionalism in the development

of these plans from the different regional associations in order to

ensure that the information that is coming to you is accurate and does

the job that you're asking it to do.

Accurate marketing, as the minister knows, is a statistical process

involving research. What facilities have been made available to these

regions in order to accommodate this task? Has the ministry considered

providing the necessary marketing expertise to these regional

associations in helping them to develop these regional profiles?

Perhaps the minister can address those few points.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Sure, Mr. Chairman, that's an easy one. On

the Partners in Tourism program, we introduced it for the very reasons

the member is talking about: so that we could literally force the

regions and the regional coordinators to come back to us with a plan on

how they're going to spend the money that they get from us.

We have hired a consultant to work with them and to analyze their

programs. Their marketing plans are gone through thoroughly not only by

the consultant but by the deputy and assistant deputy minister of

marketing in my ministry. All regions, by the way, have completed their

plans now. We are very pleased and surprised by a lot of them. The

level of competence is very high — some better than others, naturally,

and some that we had to do an extensive amount of work with to get them

where we wanted them. But we have provided the expertise that you ask

about from this consultant and through the marketing experts in the

ministry.

As for research, as I said before, any research that we do is

available to them and some of them have done considerable research on

their own. So all the research that I talked about that we have been

doing lately in our core area market is made available to them.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Just moving on to some general questions in

terms of tourism, the minister and I both agree that tourism promotion,

at least today, requires a far more focused effect, with the approach

to rely heavily on regional input — I don't think there has been any

argument there — in assessment of the travel generators, marketing

strategies and the areas potential.

It seems that the tourism council in British Columbia has to play a

fairly significant role in this, along with the regional associations.

I wonder if the minister would explain the exact nature of the B.C.

tourism council, as well as its composition, the level of expertise in

that council and also the mechanism through which the central council

integrates its activities with the regional associations.

With respect to the Partners in Tourism program, he mentioned that

the plans are submitted, but has the minister formed a review committee

to review the submissions from the different regional associations?

I have some other questions on that, but I'll sit down at this point and let him answer those other ones.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: To answer the second question first, Mr.

Chairman, the review is done initially by the outside consultant that

we've hired, and then it's done by the two senior people, the deputy

and assistant deputy of marketing in my ministry, and, of course, by

the regions themselves. It will be quite evident to any of the people

involved, because we are in such close contact with them, whether the

plan is being followed. So an ongoing review, I suppose you could say,

is being done on a continuing basis. We're in touch with them on a

constant basis.

As for PTAC, as we call it, the Provincial Tourist Advisory Council,

it was set up some years ago. I revamped it a couple of years ago and

made it a little bit smaller and a little more efficient, I think. But

it does represent every sector of the travel industry. All of the

associations are represented, such as hotels, restaurants, motels,

parks, trailer courts, B.C. Ferries, every region has their president

on the PTAC, an airline representative is on it, and I could go on and

on.

Every facet of the travel hospitality industry is represented on

PTAC. It has some 25 members, give or take a few. I can't give you the

exact number, but about 25 members. We meet twice a year. We just had

the last meeting about a month and a half ago, and had good input back

and forth about what the industry sees and expects and the same from

myself: what we see as being needed. It's an exchange of ideas and an

exchange of research, statistics, whatever. So PTAC, as far as I am

concerned, is a very important part of the ministry, and it is

functioning very well.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Going back again to the Partners in Tourism

program that we've been discussing, I was asking whether or not a

review committee has been established to evaluate the submissions from

the regional associations. If a committee has been established, I'd

like to ask if the minister has at this point drafted guidelines in

terms of submission criteria for the committee to follow.

Secondly, what about the limits of funding for regional advertising

built into the program? Can the minister expand on how much funding is

available on a regional basis?

In terms of the ministry's responsibility to handle the advertising

after the program is established, will the minister be tendering

contracts, or at least opening competition for contracts, to handle the

advertising, or will it be handled by the firm that is presently doing

much of the ministry's work?

There is another question that bothers me about the advertising.

This isn't directly related here, but I'll tag it on. Why has the

advertising budget for the Ministry of Tourism been moved over to the

Provincial Secretary? It seems that as part of your tourism development

strategy, advertising is an essential component and should be under the

Ministry of Tourism's control rather than under government information

services, which is also responsible for many other aspects, including

some of the polling research and what not that is done. I would hope

that that advertising budget is not being compromised in terms of

political polling. It seems that it would be more appropriate to have

it directly under the control of the ministry itself.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: As far as the review committee goes, that

committee is really made up of my deputy and assistant deputy and those

directors of marketing in my ministry. We do totally control the

Partners in Tourism program, of course, by the release of funds.

The member asked about advertising. We have authorized $1.6 million

in the partners program. That's our share of it. It's a fifty-fifty

partnership deal, where the region puts up 50 percent and we put up 50

percent. So it's a total of $3.2 million, and there's more to come. The

program has taken off like wildfire — beyond our expectations — and

this year will probably be oversubscribed.

[ Page 6708 ]

The answer to your other question is that the regions select their

own advertising firms. We have the signing authority to allocate those

dollars to them, but they make their own decision as to who they spend

it with in the form of an advertising agency.

though the dollars for all government marketing are in the one vote

under the Provincial Secretary, the Ministry of Tourism still allocates

those dollars. It is earmarked specifically for tourism marketing, and

we have the say on where it is spent, even though it does come out of

the other vote.

MR. MacWILLIAM: There is a particular concern that was

brought to my attention some time ago with regard to bed-and-breakfast

facilities, particularly in the greater Vancouver area, as expectations

build, I guess, for the large number of visitors that should be coming

to British Columbia during Expo 86. There seems to be a rapidly growing

number of bed-and-breakfast facilities crowding the market.

The situation seems to be more acute in the Vancouver area. In case

the minister hasn't seen this, there is in fact a $10,000

bed-and-breakfast franchise that was recently being offered, with the

lower mainland being divided into about 28 operational units. It was

reported that the estimated gross income will approach $19 million. It

promises to carve out a lot of revenue from established businesses that

are now highly regulated and pay a significant number of operational

taxes, including the accommodation tax we were discussing earlier.

Representatives from the B.C. Motels, Resorts and Trailer Parks

Association made a submission to the minister, I believe, as well as to

other ministries, with a copy also to me. They have urged the

government to recognize that the bed-and-breakfast places are really

legitimate businesses and that perhaps we should look at subjecting

them to the same codes and regulations and, of course, the same

taxation policies that other businesses face.

[4:00]

You know, when we get into a franchise operation, it's not

nickel-and-dime stuff any more. It's not little Granny down the street

offering her upstairs suite to a passerby in the night because it

happens to be available. It looks like it has the potential of being

big business. Although we don't want to come down with a heavy hand, I

think we should at least ensure that the businesses that do bear the

burden of tax structures and business costs they get a fair break, that

they are not being unduly regulated while another sector of the market

goes free. I think that's the real concern here. What has the minister

done to address these legitimate concerns? I wonder if he has discussed

it with the minister of Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mr. Ritchie) ? Does the

minister realize that presently there seems to be no standardization of

regulations with these facilities?

I might point out that I did a little research in this a while back,

and Vancouver, which has now passed regulations in expectation of a

problem here, will allow no more than two bedrooms to a maximum of four

guests. It must be licensed, and it is subjected to a one-time

inspection. In Burnaby, however, no licence is needed for up to two

bedrooms. It allows two lodgers per unit and inspection only for the

licensed users. In the city of Vernon there is no inspection needed for

up to two bedrooms, and no limitation on the number of guests. Areas

such as the North Okanagan Regional District have adopted no

regulations whatsoever; it's totally open.

What I'm trying to point out here is that we have a real scattergun

approach. I wonder if the minister has suggested or provided any

directions in terms of standardization of licensing with respect to

health and safety concerns and the taxation aspect of it.

MR. DAVIS: I'll be brief, My comments focus totally on Canada

Place. Our new highways certainly are going to be a great attraction

for tourists, but another asset which will shortly be available is the

convention centre at Canada Harbour Place. I'd like to ask the minister

what the terms of reference are for what I'll call the Peter Hyndman

study or negotiation.

As I understand it, most convention centres across Canada have been

financed jointly by municipalities and provincial governments, often

with a large private sector contribution. It's rare that the federal

government has made a heavy investment in convention centres. The

province has been wise, and certainly fortunate, to negotiate an

arrangement whereby the federal government, as part of Canada Harbour

Place, is now in the process of completing a facility that can

accommodate as many as 5,000 guests — seating and dining capacity and

so on — in what initially will be the Canada exhibit for Expo 86, but

will ultimately be a fantastic facility. Were it separate, were it to

be built from scratch solely for that purpose, it would be of the order

of a $100 million investment. I assume that the federal government

wants to be clear of this investment after Expo 86 is over; that, in

effect, it is donating it to whoever will manage it. It is a unique

facility, but with some maintenance costs. I gather that the city is

prepared to put up some money, but not prepared to shoulder all the

costs of operating this large, unique facility, admirably located on

our waterfront.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

The city argues, I think rightly, that this facility will bring

business not just to the city of Vancouver but to other municipalities

and other areas of the province, and that the hotel room tax, which is

a provincial levy, should in some measure help to carry this facility,

and the meal tax, even the gasoline tax, which is collected

provincially, should help in some way to defray the ongoing costs of

this facility. As I understand it, it'll be a dual responsibility if

the federal government simply donates the facility to some entity to

operate, and that the province and city of Vancouver will have some

joint responsibilities.

As I said initially, it's a great opportunity. I assume that the

Minister of Tourism is involved in the current negotiations. Any

comments that he might make on the current state of affairs vis-à-vis

Ottawa or the city hall of Vancouver would certainly be appreciated,

and if he could let us know the terms of reference, deadline, whatever,

in the Peter Hyndman contribution, that too would be appreciated.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I'll respond and thank the member for his

comments and his question. I am not at liberty at this time to give you

a timetable or deadline on when and if such an agreement will be

reached, except to say that the Premier has made it very clear that he

is willing to sit down, and will be sitting down, with the federal

government

[ Page 6709 ]

to work out a satisfactory arrangement regarding the management of the convention centre at the conclusion of Expo 86.

The member is quite right when he says it is an unusual situation

that the federal government owns the facility — and they do. I should

maybe refresh everyone's memory that when this deal was made with the

federal government it was in concert with the provincial government

vis-à-vis Expo; that this would be their contribution. They would build

that facility, which would become a convention centre and cruise ship

facility, and the provincial government would put on the world's fair —

which is also a bit of an unusual arrangement as far as world's fairs

go, because it is always the host nation that really hosts the world's

fair. But in this case the provincial government is putting it on, if

you like, under the auspices of the federal government, so we have some

unique financial arrangements here.

I'm sure that Mr. Hyndman's terms of reference are to seek out some

sort of common ground with reference to the cost-sharing and

possibilities where the federal government, the province, certainly the

city of Vancouver and the private sector can sit down and come to an

equitable arrangement. I can assure you that that will be done, but I

cannot give you a deadline. I wish I could at this moment, but I can't.

Suffice it to say that we're working towards that end as quickly as

possible, and I'm sure that Mr. Hyndman will be reporting back to the

government with all due haste.

To answer the questions regarding bed and breakfast that the member

for Okanagan North put, bed and breakfast in this country and in this

province especially is a recent phenomenon. It's very commonplace in

the United Kingdom and in parts of Europe, and it's being hastened,

without any question, because of Expo 86 and the need for every bit of

accommodation that we can muster for next year. But I also hasten to

point out that it is regulated by the Municipal Act, in the case of all

the cities of the province except for Vancouver, which doesn't come

under the Municipal Act. I realize that Vancouver has made regulations

regarding bed and breakfast that conform, I think, fairly closely to

what is in the Municipal Act. It may not be exactly the same, but it's

very close. Just off the top of my head, I think the Municipal Act says

it's a maximum of two rooms in any house, and that's about it.

It is up to every municipality how they handle bed and breakfast.

You are quite right when you say it's different all over the province.

Well, I think that's probably the way it should be; that reflects the

atmosphere, if you like, and the lifestyle of a community. There is one

community in the province that doesn't allow bed and breakfast, period,

and that's their prerogative. The community is Kelowna, by the way. It

does not allow bed and breakfast, at least to the best of my knowledge;

that's the way it was six months ago. They have made a decision not to

allow it at all. So I think that that's the way it should remain: under

the jurisdiction of each municipality, to reflect the thinking of their

council.

You mentioned franchises. Yes, there are several bed-and-breakfast

groups — or, if you want, franchises — now operating within the

province. I know that the reservation system that we franchised last

year called ResWest is putting bed and breakfast into the reservation

system, but only in associations. They're not going to try to list

every room that's available under bed and breakfast. They're listing it

by association, and then that association in turn can hand out the

reservations to whomever, probably in a rotation order. That's really

where bed and breakfast is at: it's really a function of the

municipality.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I do realize it is a function of the

municipality. However, I think, in terms of setting at least minimal

criteria for health and safety standards, that perhaps the government

should have a look at at least drafting core standards. I think what

the industry is concerned about are the inequities in terms of

taxation: the fact that these bed and breakfasts, even though they may

be a franchise operation, really can skirt around the 7 percent hotel

room tax, which is an operational cost for the established businesses.

There seems to be some inequity there. I wonder what the minister's

position is in terms of the implementation of this tax also on the bed

and breakfasts. I point out that this is a recommendation. I simply

bring this concern to the minister from the industry itself; they're

concerned about this, about the inequity there.

There's another concern, however, in regard to these large-scale

operations: the fact that bed-and-breakfast registries and reservation

services are accepting advance bookings, and obviously accepting large

sums of money on deposit from those bookings. I wonder if the minister

can outline whether or not he has investigated the possibility of these

bed-and-breakfast registries registering with the registrar of travel

agents, to ensure that there's some protection for those consumers who

are putting their deposits on hand with these agencies. Again, I point

out that the minister has been in receipt of these very recommendations

that I've brought to him on behalf of the hotel, motel and trailer

courts association. I would ask the minister whether he's taken the

opportunity to act upon any of these recommendations.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: On the health and safety aspect of the bed

and breakfasts, that again is the purview of the municipality. It's up

to each municipality how they want to treat bed and breakfast, how

stringent they want to be in their regulations and inspections, and as

far as I'm concerned it can stay there.

On the taxation aspect, yes, even then, as far as business licences

go and that form of taxation, that again is a function of the

municipality. Advance bookings and pre-registering: I don't foresee us

putting these people under the Travel Agents Act, which again is not in

my ministry; it comes under Consumer and Corporate Affairs. But I would

say that they have to be treated the same as any hotel, accommodation,

campground or whatever. Yes, my deputy has had many meetings with the

B.C. motel, trailer park and campground associations. I have had

several discussions with them. I understand their concerns over bed and

breakfast. In one sense — and I've said this to them too — I think some

of their fears are unfounded. The bed-and-breakfast phenomenon is going

to peak in 1986 and then I think you will see it dwindle back down to a

very low or reasonable level. For the period they're concerned about,

1986, I don't think they need concern themselves whether their own

facility will be relatively full. Most accommodation, especially within

a radius of about 100 miles of Expo, I think will be virtually full for

the duration of Expo 86. So I really think a lot of their concerns are

unfounded, certainly for next year.

[4:15]

MR. MacWILLIAM: Another concern in terms of accommodation is

one that seems to be growing in the downtown area as a result of the

pressure for accommodation for Expo 86. I'll read a letter that has

come to my attention, or at least an extract from it. It's from a

particular hotel; I don't

[ Page 6710 ]

think it need be named at this point. It anticipates significant

rate hikes. It's a letter to a customer who uses the facility quite

frequently:

"As you know, downtown hotels will be extremely busy

during the above-mentioned time period. While we do not want to risk

your valuable loyalty to our hotel, we do anticipate the rates during

this six-month stretch" — involving the time period for Expo — "will

increase substantially. While we are estimating a rate of $140 to $160

for the regular travelers, there will of course be a significant

reduction maintained for our regular clientele."

According to the present rate structure, that jump to $140 and $160

is quite significant indeed. I know there's a lot of concern in terms

of the possibility, the potential, for price-gouging in order for these

businesses to rake off as much as they can from the increased tourism

generated by Expo. I think a real concern here — and I'm sure the

minister would agree — is that if you get stung on excessive or unfair

prices, you may not go back to that area. It's just simple human

nature. If you go to a restaurant and have to pay exorbitant fees for

poor service, you may not go back to that restaurant. I think the same

thing can happen to an area in the province, or to the province as a

whole. If we pull in people from California, all the way from different

parts of Europe or eastern Canada, and they get stung on accommodation

costs and everything else, they may not come back. I think that's a

significant danger. I'm sure the minister is aware of this. I wonder if

he has taken any action to guard against the possibility of this

happening.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Yes, price-gouging of any sort is a

concern to us during our Expo 86 year. There's no question. This is one

of the reasons we have introduced a program called Superhost, and I'll

dwell on that for just a second.

When a merchant, whether he be a retailer, restaurateur or hotelier,

decides to join Superhost, it's not just lip service that he's paying

to it. He signs a pledge that he will give fair value for the dollar,

fair exchange on foreign currency and as high a level of service as

possible, to which end he pledges to enrol his staff in the Superhost

training program. That's number one. If he fails to conform to the

criteria laid down in the Superhost pledge, then we'll take him out of

the program. It's made very clear that he will no longer have that logo

on his window and be able to call himself a Superhost. We intend to

market that. We intend to tell visitors to this province to look for

the Superhost logo, because it's their guarantee of good value for the

dollar that they're going to spend and a fair rate of exchange on their

currency.

By the same token, if we can prove that any hotelier is

price-gouging, he will instantly be out of the reservation system — the

ResWest system. So that's two checks we have on it, plus pledges from

the associations themselves that they're not interested in

price-gouging. This doesn't mean that it's not going to happen. I think

we all know that. There are going to be some — we hope very few — who

engage in this practice. But the industry, I think, is very cognizant

of the fact that they want these visitors back in '87 and '88 and '89,

and they say that quite openly at all of their meetings. There seems to

be a consensus in all the associations, including the B.C. Hotels

Association, that this is the direction they want to go.

I should point out in defence of the hotels that they've had a

pretty rough go of it the last two or three years as well. Their

operating costs have continued to climb. To operate a hotel in downtown

Vancouver is a very expensive proposition. Their property taxes are

very high, their supplies both in alcoholic beverages and food are very

high in comparison to other markets and their labour costs are very

high. So they have built-in expenses that are really up there. I hasten

to point out that a lot of the travelling public over the last two and a

half to three years have been getting a pretty fair break from the

hotels in Vancouver, because they haven't been charging anywhere near

their posted rate. The rate that they were getting in 1981 was

considerably higher than the rate that they got for '82, '83 and '84.

So I think the first objective of most of the hotels is to get back

to their posted rate — to where it was in '81 — and then from there

there may be a modest increase in the price of their rooms. I say

modest; I think between 7 percent and 15 percent, hopefully around 10

percent maximum. I think if you take it from the rates they were giving

during the tough years when their occupancy rates were way down up to a

full rate, then yes, it will appear to be quite a bit. But again I

point out that there have been some tremendous bargains in hotel room

rates over the last two or three years.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Mr. Chairman, I want to move on to another

area of some concern here with regard to brochures on the B.C. Ferries.

There have been a number of questions regarding the tourism brochures

on the ferries. These questions have been on the order paper to the

Minister of Tourism for some time now, and I'll reiterate them.

Firstly, did the Minister of Tourism have a contract with Vancouver

Island Tourist Services Ltd. for the display of brochures on B.C.

Ferries? Secondly, was the cost of this service subsidized by B.C.

Tourism? If so, what was the cost? Thirdly, when did the contract for

1984 actually expire?

I've got a few more questions, but I think I'll break them up rather

than to top load them all. Then we can work our way through them a

little easier.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Chairman, the member is quite right.

He's had that question on the order paper for some time, and I've had

the answer — carrying it around — for some time, hoping to answer it in

my estimates. So I would like to go on record as answering a question

now that's standing in my name on the order paper. Yes, we did have a

contract with Vancouver Island Tourist Services Ltd. to subsidize the

display of brochures on B.C. Ferries. The answer was yes.

"When does the contract expire?" The answer is April 30, 1985. "What

sums are payable under the contract for the period January 1, 1985, to April

30, 1985?" The answer is $25,000. The fourth part of the question was:

"Has the ministry decided to renew the agreement? If not, why not?"

The answer is no, we have not decided to renew the agreement. In fact the agreement

is now totally finished, I believe. We are out of that contract and it's

the end of a five-year contract. We have just decided, after taking a close

look at it, that we could spend our money better elsewhere and leave the distribution

of brochures on the ferries for the private sector to the private sector.

MR. MacWILLIAM: The minister has answered the next question I was going to pose, which was the sums payable for

[ Page 6711 ]

the contract between the period of January 1, 1985, and April 30,

1985. Is the minister aware that this contract has now been entered

into through the B.C. Ferries? Is he aware that this contract is no

longer subsidized? I might also point out that as a result of the

Ministry of Tourism no longer subsidizing the contract, the cost to the

clients for this service has effectively doubled. Could the minister

clarify a little bit more his decision for cancellation of the subsidy?

In fact the industry itself was thinking of boycotting this whole

tourism brochure service as a result of the 100 percent escalation of

the cost to the industry. It was quite a jump that they had to

accommodate.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Well, briefly, we do provide free

distribution of brochures to the entire industry in roughly 130

information centres throughout the province — and I repeat it's free of

charge. We just decided that the cost of this very specialized

distribution service was just too great, and we have left the decision

to the entrepreneur as to whether or not he wishes to continue using

what is admittedly a fairly costly service. So we just made the

decision that our money could be better spent elsewhere.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I guess this brings us to the crux of the

issue. It seems that the Ministry of Tourism had a five year contract

up until April 1985, and that contract was renewed with B.C. Ferries as

of May 1, 1985, apparently with the same firm, Vancouver Island Tourist

Services. I wonder if the minister is aware, though, that while still

collecting the tourism subsidy, which he has identified as being

$25,000 from the period of January 1 to April 30, 1985, Vancouver

Island Tourist Services was in fact charging clients on the fully

unsubsidized price for those brochures on B.C. Ferries.

[Mr. Witch in the chair.]

HON. MR. RICHMOND: The answer to the last question is no, I wasn't aware of that. That's the first I've known of that aspect of it.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I'm not meaning to catch the minister by

surprise, but I did attempt to bring the questions to his consideration

through the questions on the order paper and was fully intending to

expand on them with further questions. But not receiving an answer to

the first ones, I couldn't do it until this point. I will bring to the

minister's attention a brochure, which I have in my hand, of Vancouver

Island Tourist Services Ltd. That brochure is dated January 15, 1985,

and basically it outlines the rate structure for the period from

January 1985 onward for the remainder of the year. So what this is

saying then — if I can reiterate the issue — is that they are charging

a full rate fee, according to this brochure, as of January 1, and yet

they're still receiving the subsidy from the Minister of Tourism up

until the point of April 30. So we've got a four-month overlap where

apparently the industry is receiving full cost from the client

receiving a $25,000 subsidy from the Minister of Tourism. I wonder if

the minister would like to comment on that.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Sure. We will have our legal counsel take

a look at this allegation, and I thank the member for bringing it to my

attention. If indeed the firm in question was in violation of their

agreement, I'm sure that our lawyer will tell us.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Yes, I think the overlap does raise some

serious questions in terms of the possibility of double billing taking

place. I was made aware of this by other tourist brochure services that

were competing on this contract to supply tourism brochures for the

ferries. They were most concerned about the increased cost and had

brought these questions to my notice.

The other concern that was addressed was that, as a result of that,

a number of clients had decided not to take advantage of the brochure

service. So I did a little research on a recent trip from Tsawwassen on

the Queen of Esquimalt ; I did a tally of the percentage of tourism

brochures available in the stalls being used. I would like to point out

to the minister that out of the 475 stalls available, fully 37 percent

were unoccupied. Now I think this is quite a drop from the usage under

the subsidized program within the Ministry of Tourism, and it does

indicate to me, at least, that the doubling of the cost to the client

has significantly reduced the service and their abilities to use this

form of advertising.

I'd also like to point out that it seems that this service is now

available to other tourist areas such as tourism firms in the States

that are, in fact, competing with our own tourism industry. It seems

that allowing these tourist brochures on B.C. Ferries — on a Crown

corporation ferry — for advertising or trying to draw tourists out of

British Columbia seems to be defeating our own best interests. I wonder

if the minister has any comments in that regard.

[4:30]

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Well, I have two comments. First,

certainly there are probably American firms putting their brochures on

our ferries the same as there are very many British Columbia firms

which have their brochures on Washington State ferries.

Interjection.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Well, I think that it's available to them.

If there are, as you say, over 70 percent or whatever — 60 percent of

the racks on the ferries — empty, then it points out that the service

is probably too expensive, which is probably one of the reasons we

decided to get out of it. Number two, if that continues to be the case,

maybe the operator on the ferries will sharpen his pencil and decide to

be more competitive so that the private entrepreneur can put his

brochures back on the ferry.

MR. MacWILLIAM: That does bring a good question to mind,

because apparently, although I haven't been able to get the details of

the various bids that were submitted.... They were not made

available to me, but I am led to understand that a number of other

contracts with a significantly lower cost structure were in fact

rejected. However, that isn't part of your concern. It does reside with

another ministry. I'll be taking that matter up.

But I think I want to go back and stress.... Before I do that I

should correct the minister. It was 37 percent, rounding off to 40

percent, of the stalls that were unoccupied. That's a fairly

significant drop in the usage of that service, which I think is really

a valuable service, because in scouting around when I was on the ferry,

and counting them up, a lot of people

[ Page 6712 ]

were looking at the brochures. Obviously they're getting heavy use.

The concern has been brought to me: why did the Ministry of Tourism

stop the subsidy? It was a good thing. It allowed the small

entrepreneur access to it,

whereas now it seems that only the bigger

guys are able to afford the brochures. Again, the critical issue here

is the.... The big question in my mind, the question that I have

not been able to resolve either through the Ministry of Tourism or the

Ministry of Transportation and Highways, is the question of that

overlap of the company charging a full rate structure for the four

months it was still receiving a full subsidy from the Ministry of

Tourism. I'd sincerely appreciate the minister having a close look at

that one. I think it's long past due that we got to the bottom of this

issue.

Moving on to the regional concerns, I'm going to open the floor for

my colleagues to address some concerns. But before I do, with reference

to the North Okanagan and tourism in that area, as the minister well

knows, tourism is one of the most important components in the north

Okanagan. It's a major component of the Okanagan's economic base. In

1983 about two million visitors went through the valley, with

expenditures of roughly $300 million. I might point out and remind the

minister that the tourism industry in that area employs about 2,800

full-time and part-time jobs, but it's been in quite a slump in the

past few years. The minister has already acknowledged that.

It seems that the North Okanagan, particularly the Vernon area, has

experienced a disproportionate decline in tourism revenues. It seems

that — I'm citing material from a report that has been commissioned by

north Okanagan Commerce Inc. on tourism — the north Okanagan has been

slow to act in developing appropriate facilities for tourism and

adequately marketing them. Climate and physical geography are principal

travel generators in the area. Of course, the lakes and the water-based

recreation are a high priority. In addition, I might point out that

evidence indicates that the visitors who are coming into that area

today are increasingly inclined to — oh, how can we say it? — natural

experiences: backpacking, nature walks, biking and stuff like that;

outdoor health and recreation activities.

This is where the report makes a particular concern. It addresses

the fact that the north Okanagan area in general is lagging very far

behind other areas in the Okanagan Valley in terms of its tourist

development. It's felt that this results from a failure to provide

access and develop the real potential for that area. I'm talking about

access to the lakes, adequate marina facilities, adequate campground

facilities, adequate stopover facilities for vehicle traffic, and

recreational areas, as well as the development of historical and

cultural aspects of the valley.

I mentioned the O'Keefe ranch before to the minister. We've

discussed that before, so I think I'll go over that point. But I'd like

to ask the minister if he's taken any action in terms of the proposed

development of Kalamalka Lake park. I'm sure he's aware of it. What is

his position on that park? Does he has any particular priority in terms

of the development of that facility?

Again, coming back to specific funding allocations for the

development of tourism resource things such as bike paths, cross

country trails, marina facilities.... Being specific, would these

funds qualify? I know that that final ERDA agreement hasn't been

brought down, but to take this back, would activities such as this

qualify for funding under that agreement? I wonder if the minister can

enlighten me on that aspect. I'll sit down now and let him answer the

questions. I think I'm pretty well finished.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Chairman, as far as the Okanagan Lake

park goes, no, I haven't interceded directly with the Ministry of

Lands, Parks and Housing. I have discussed it, as I have discussed it

with some community leaders in Vernon. But that's as far as it has

gone. I really don't have any intention of getting involved in, I

guess, interceding with the minister regarding parks around the

province. Suffice it to let people in those communities make their

wants and wishes known to that minister. If I can assist, I will, but I

don't intend to make it a cause of mind.

As far as funding for some of the activities mentioned is concerned,

I guess we would have to take a look at every individual application

and judge it on its own merits. So rather than try to say yes or no to

these bicycle paths and whatever else would qualify, we'll have a look

at each individual application as it comes to us. We will measure them

against the criteria of the ERDA agreement and make a dec