1973 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 30th 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)

THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1973

Night Sitting

[ Page 1151 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Committee of supply: Department of Education

estimates Mrs. Jordan — 1151

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1151

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1151

Mrs. Jordan — 1152

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1155

Mr. G.H. Anderson — 1156

Mr. Brousson — 1156

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1157

Mr. Smith — 1157

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1158

Mr. Smith — 1158

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1159

Mr. McGeer — 1160

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1160

Mr. Wallace — 1161

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1162

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1162

Mr. McGeer — 1163

Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1167

Mr. Lea — 1168

Mr. Fraser — 1168

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1169

Mr. Morrison — 1170

Mr. Chabot — 1170

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1170

Mr. Gorst — 1171

Mr. Schroeder — 1172

Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1172

Mr. Phillips — 1173

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1173

Mr. Chabot — 1174

Hon. Mrs. Dailly — 1174

Statement

Alaska Oil spill. Hon. Mr. Barrett — 1174

Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1175

Mr. Smith — 1175

Mr.Wallace — 1175

THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1973

The House met at 8:30 p.m.

Orders of the day.

House in committee of supply; Mr. Dent in the chair.

ESTIMATES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

(continued)

On vote 45: Minister's office; $72,464.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for North

Okanagan.

MRS. P.J. JORDAN (North Okanagan): Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman. I would just like to advise the Minister, in going

back to our before dinner question period, that her response to

my request for a six month examination period in removing the

prerogative of judicially using the strap in the school system

wasn't satisfactory. I ask you again. How many authorities did

you consult with before bringing in this edict? What were the

geographic locations of these people? How many were

principals?

The Minister also did not answer my question in regard to a

summer training programme this summer on family life education

for teachers. Are you going to institute such a programme? Also

the Minister didn't answer my request as to whether or not she

would consult with the universities in British Columbia to see

that such a programme was incorporated in the training of

doctors and nurses and teachers. I hope she will answer those

questions.

I would like to move now to the Okanagan Regional

College.

HON. E.E. DAILLY (Minister of Education): On the matter of

consultation. For about the fourth time, I would like to state:

I consulted with the B.C. Teachers Federation executive, the

BCFTA executive, and with the Parent-Teachers

Association — which I may say your government never did

at any time before they even considered bringing in

legislation.

MRS. JORDAN: Well, I am sorry the Minister is so testy on

this subject. I don't think this is a very satisfactory

situation.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: For the fourth time.

MRS. JORDAN: Did you consult, through you, Mr. Chairman,

with the principals in this province? They are the people who

have the responsibility for discipline in the schools. They are

the people who your department and you as Minister will trust

with the basic carrying out of education in this province.

I suggest, Madam Minister, that this Member is right —

you did not consult with a wide variety of people in this

province. You did not consult directly with the principals.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please.

MRS. JORDAN: You are testy because you know that there is

considerable concern, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would point out to the Hon. Member, you may

ask the Minister for information but you may not demand the

information. I think you should…

MRS. JORDAN: I'm not demanding. I'm pointing out to her.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Does the Hon. Member have a

point of order?

HON. W.A.C. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition): Yes, the

Chair's ruling is wrong. It hasn't been in line with the

established practice in this House. You can ask a Minister a

question. The Minister doesn't have to answer, but you can ask

it or demand, but he doesn't have to answer it. That has always

been the understanding in this House.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. I recognize the Hon. Member for

Cowichan-Malahat on a point of order.

HON. R.M. STRACHAN (Minister of Highways): I agree with the

Premier…the former Premier.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I agree with the ex-Premier, the former

Premier, the man who doesn't yet realize that he is not the

Premier. A Member has the right to ask a question, the Minister

has the right to answer it or not answer it. In previous

occasions, as a rule, the Minister simply refused to answer

questions. In this particular case, the Minister has answered

the question four times.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. I recognize the Hon. Member for

North Okanagan.

[ Page 1152 ]

MRS. JORDAN: You know, that Minister out there, as I

mentioned once before, if he was as long on intelligence as he

is on…

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Would the Hon. Member proceed with her

comments.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Well, he started it.

MRS. JORDAN: But in spite of the debate over whether the

Minister should answer or not answer the question, I wasn't

asking her the question; I was pointing out to her that many of

the principals in this province are deeply concerned about the

edict that she has passed. She campaigned on, and she stated in

this Legislature that this was the new open era — that

she would make decisions based upon consultation with those

involved. Never has she answered the question about the number

of principals she consulted with. I point out that the reasons

she won't answer it, is because she…

MR. CHAIRMAN . Order please.

MRS. JORDAN: I'm just pointing out a point, Mr.

Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would point out to the Hon. Member, I would

rule that you are violating standing order No. 43 which means

that you are repeating a point over and over. I would ask you

to move onto another subject please.

MRS. JORDAN: Well, I'll get onto the next point. I think

that she is testy on this subject because she knows there is

growing apprehension in British Columbia.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please.

MRS. JORDAN: Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to discuss

the Okanagan Regional College. Up until this Government took

over and the Minister of Education (Hon. Mrs. Dailly) made

another stated principle and policy, regional colleges were

essentially under the jurisdiction of the local regional

college councils. These decisions ranged from the siting of

campuses to all operating procedures, curriculum and other

matters.

However, the Minister announced that she would be making the decisions for

regional colleges on siting and capital expenses, in line with her policy to

pay for the capital expenses of construction. On the point of capital expenses

of construction, I would say that while this is a help, it is hardly the impact

the people would like because the major cost in campuses is not the initial

capital cost but the operating expenses.

However, the point I wish to make is, in announcing she had

taken upon herself the right to make this decision, she has put

these decisions squarely in the political arena.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Before the Hon. Member proceeds,

I would just ask the rest of the Members who are being noisy to

be quiet so we can hear the Member.

MRS. JORDAN: When the Minister referred to Okanagan Regional

College at the time she made this decision, she made a

statement which I am sure she now regrets. Frankly, the people

of the Okanagan regret it too. She, on television, talked about

the problems colleges had been having and referred specifically

to a parochial attitude in the Okanagan. I would ask the

Minister tonight to withdraw that statement because it was ill-conceived and it certainly was ill-directed.

There certainly have been problems in the Okanagan in

developing a regional college. But if she understood the

background, I am sure she wouldn't have been motivated to make

what I think is a very uncomplimentary comment to the people

who have really shown a great deal of faith in the college

system, have tried very hard to develop a community college in

the Okanagan that would serve all the interests and needs of

the people in the Okanagan.

I would ask her as a first question, before going on, for

her definition of a regional college or a community college. I

would liken this to the Okanagan College. Is it in fact to be a

mini-university or is it in fact to be what the people

wanted it to be and voted for it to be, a multi-campus

community regional college with the central administrative core

in Kelowna and parallel campuses, not satellite campuses but

parallel campuses, in other parts of the valley?

The people have paid for this over the last five years,

believing that they were involved in a multi-campus system.

Believing that there would be campuses in the north Okanagan

which would not only be directed toward a first and second year

programme for students, but responsive to the community and

district interests and the community and district needs.

Surely we don't want satellite mini-universities

around British Columbia. Surely what we are aiming for is truly

this community-type college which will respond, not on

an ad hoc basis such as night schools do, but with a continuing

programme — with continuing resources on the multi-campuses which can offer a continuing programme and

offer security to the students when they go, whether they are

adults or whether they are young people. Colleges with the

flexibility to respond on one campus or another in

[ Page 1153 ]

the valley when there are special business programmes or

special interest year-courses that could be taken.

We feel this college has been functioning for five years and

it hasn't involved itself in the number of innovative

programmes that it should have. There are many reasons and I

don't really want to go over them in too great detail. But

certainly some of the responsibility must be laid at the

college council and the direct administration.

Tonight, I wish to advise the Minister, through you, Mr.

Chairman, that there are still grave concerns in that council.

There are members of that council who have been duly elected or

duly appointed to serve a multi-campus concept, to serve

the concept of community and first and second year education in

the Okanagan and they are not being involved in the decision-making. They are not even being informed of what is

going on in the quiet decision-making corridors of some

area of the campus.

We understand that the Minister has allotted funds for the

Okanagan Regional College and for the Kelowna campus. That's

fine. We're glad to see it. There certainly needs to be a core

there. But we want to know how much has been allotted, for and

what was allotted for the Vernon or the northern campus.

As far as the siting of the northern campus goes there's

just no question, when you look at the geography of the valley,

when you look at the interests of the people, that you must not

destroy the faith that they've had in you by destroying the

multi-campus concept.

There has to be a campus in the north. There is no way the

parents are going to let their teenagers commute up and down

the valley for daily sessions of college. The roads are jusht

not built for tis type of transportation of young people in

the winter weather. In addition there is a fact, as I

mentioned, that the north has proven itself faithful and

desirous of this campus over the years.

In the north as you may know, Mr. Chairman, or as the

Minister may know, the campus is functioning on what's known as

the DND property. This is an army camp. It's been fine for now,

in light of trying to get it started, but it is really very

inadequate for any continuing programme.

There are no recreational facilities. The students have to

wear mitts in the winter because the heating is inadequate. In

asking you what funds you have allotted for the northern

campus, we want to know if in this consideration it has been

allotted to renovate these present buildings, because we don't

feel that this is a desirable use of taxpayers' money; nor is

it going to meet the needs of the campus and the students

themselves.

There is the government property in the north known as the

Harvey property. It was bought by the Social Credit government

and it is committed within the Minister of Public Works' (Hon.

Mr. Hartley)

Department as land for some type of educational use. It's a

beautiful site. It's fully serviced to its border. It lies

within the city limits, It's 98 acres. It overlooks Kalamalka

Lake, which is one of the most beautiful lakes in the world. It

is absolutely ideal for an educational centre and the northern

campus.

On top of that, it is adjacent to over 1,000 acres of what

is known as the DND property, which can be utilized through

many months of the year for auxiliary activities. There's a

large service centre there that might well serve as a

gymnasium.

Madam Minister, the people of the North Okanagan, in fact

from Revelstoke to Kelowna, wish me to assure you that they

want the multi-campus concept and they want it sited on

the Harvey property, I would ask your commitment of this

tonight.

They recognize that the argument against the multi-campus system is that it's too expensive. But really it

has been analyzed and your own department has these figures to

prove that we can have a viable learning centre, a parallel

centre in the north at almost no extra cost.

We recognize that there will have to be such things as

travelling libraries and travelling science equipment. But the

teachers and the students in the community are well aware of

this and quite willing to go along with any convenience that

goes with it, The next problem that is concerning them and which has been

of an internal nature and now falls within your venue, because

of your taking on this responsibility, is that a campus cannot

really be viable, it cannot really be attractive to the full-time student, unless it offers a two-year programme.

Now we had a one year and partly two year programme in

Shuswap in Salmon Arm. This was a good programme and it was

meeting the needs of the people and the students. Your own

department's statistics will reveal that the students did

well.

Then on January 8, 1973, the college council voted to

disband it. There was a local kafuffle and eventually it was

reinstated. At the same time the second year programme on the

Vernon campus was also disbanded.

Now the president of the college said that they weren't

phasing out the multi-campus programme, they were just

adjusting it. He put back the programme in Shuswap in Salmon

Arm, but it's under continuing education and it doesn't have

the same impact or the same advantages.

The people are quite convinced that the internal council is

in fact going to phase out this multi-campus

programme.

The argument by your department and by others is that the

second year programme in the northern campus didn't really get

off the ground. It didn't attract enough students. We suggest

that if you go over the records very closely you'll find that

many

[ Page 1154 ]

second year programmes were proposed. We had the staff

living in Vernon, highly competent people.

One was in music, a most competent instructor. These

programmes were rejected or else they were shifted to the

Kelowna campus. This has swollen the enrolment in Kelowna by

means of the students being forced to go there rather than

having the opportunity to select.

There is no question, when you're out to sell a regional

college to students, they want more than a one year programme.

They want to know that they're going to be able to go there for

two years.

We don't expect that every two year programme would be on

all three campuses. There might be alternates. But at least tie

them together and give them some stability.

The design of the original multi-campus programme

allowed for about 900 students in Kelowna and about 300

students in the north. We feel this is a fair approximation,

but we also feel that there would be more students in the north

if there were the opportunity to gain more options.

At the same time that this was going on the counselors in

the school were not promoting regional college concept. They

were advising students to go to the universities. They were not

interested in the college, they were not helping the college

and we don't feel that they were giving the students sound

advice.

We've met with them and there's now a concentrated programme

in the north by the counselors to encourage students to go to

the regional college and to attend the northern campus in

September. We feel confident that if you can advise us that you

have earmarked money to put in portable buildings on the Harvey

property so that we can establish once and for all the

beginning of a campus, we can more than fill it with students

from the northern area.

We feel there are a lot of advantages in having the multi-campus concept. One is that you have the environment of

a smaller community. You have a more personal contact. You have

I think a better opportunity for integration of the campus

within the community and the community within the campus.

They've drafted, Madam Minister, a motion which is going to

the college council. They've asked me to read it to you and

present it to you this evening. It says:

"The building programme for the Kelowna centre should be

pursued with all possible speed; that the council once again request the Minister

of Education to make available the property in Vernon known as the Harvey property

or a portion thereof for the purpose of establishing a modest but permanent

college facility in the north; that in anticipation of a favourable reply from

the Minister, that Mr. Doug Cole, centre administrator for the Vernon or northern

campus, be appointed project coordinator for the development and that he be

instructed to work in an advisory capacity to the college council building committee.

"Recognizing the need for the continuity of programming

and the desire of the faculty and students to best utilize teaching abilities

and facilities, the second year programme be reestablished for September, 1973."

I would ask that this be given to the Minister now. You will hear from the

council. It will go at the next meeting. But I hope you'll be able to shed some

light on it before we finish your estimates.

In looking at the northern campus and what its future is,

there is strong reason to suspect that it could be made a very

desirable agricultural-vocational school. We've got one

of the greatest varieties of agriculture in the whole province

centred in one small area. It's a quality type of agricultural

development. We have quality dairying, quality poultrying, we

have the tree fruit industry, we have mixed farming, we have

cattle, we have swine, we have horses, we have a tree farm

nursery with the Department of Forestry. We're a very central

location to Calgary, to the Cariboo, for any specialized type

of visits or training.

It's quite obvious there's a need in British Columbia for an

interim agricultural programme between the degree in

agriculture and the on-the-job training or the

educational programmes that are brought about by the Department

of Agriculture and Manpower. It needs to be well diversified — a veterinary

assistance type of programme; basic farm management; simple

machinery repair, health care, crop management.

We've tended to think that people who went into agriculture

either were of a food technology nature or from agricultural

families. I don't think this is so. We feel very strongly that

there's going to be a greater move of young people who didn't

grow up on the farm and have never been on a farm, going into

agricultural industry.

If you took a census in the Okanagan now, you'd be impressed

with the number of young couples or young people, some women,

who are going into the agricultural industry. If they haven't

grown up with it, they need a basic type of programme. They

don't need a degree, but they do need some understanding and

some guidance. Irrigation alone, irrigation planning, water

management, is now a very important part of agriculture.

So I would ask the Minister if she would undertake to

investigate very seriously this type of an agricultural

programme — a certificate programme on the vocational

college level for British Columbia on the northern campus, the

Okanagan Regional College. I know there's one at Dawson Creek

and I understand that it's serving a very useful purpose.

There's no

[ Page 1155 ]

reason why there couldn't be coordination between these two

programmes. The students on the Okanagan campus could probably

benefit a great deal from some time in the north learning,

seeing grain growing, and the honey production that there is up

there. There could be an exchange. The same with the northern

students coming down to the campus.

Certainly there have been thoughts about maybe some kind of

an agricultural school in the Fraser Valley, and this may well

have merit, but we must recognize that agriculture basically is

going to be in a modular, rural, small municipal type

environment.

The City of Vernon and its district have undertaken what is

considered a model regional development plan. They call it "The

Year 2000." We have a complete study on an internal grid

system of roads, of green areas, of industrial development,

residential development and recreation. An agricultural college

or programme would fit into this extremely well, and you have a

framework within the regional district and within the community

as well as within the overall region to work.

So I would ask the Minister to comment on these, and to give

me specific answers on the monetary questions that I asked, a

specific answer on whether or not she has initiated money, or

initiated the Harvey property to be designed as the site for

the northern campus, and initiated money that can be used to

not repair those derelict old army camp buildings, but to put

in, if not permanent, at least temporary housing on this

site.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of

Education.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: I certainly appreciate the interest and

concern that the Hon. Member has for post-secondary

services in her area. I think we both share that concern. I

think where the difference comes in is our approach on how the

development of the post-secondary services should be

handled.

For one thing, I believe very strongly in local autonomy.

Yet the Hon. Member is asking me to commit myself here to

policies which I have not even discussed with the college

council itself, which really is the group which should be

coming to the Minister and making representations.

You've sent me a motion across here, but I don't see that it

represents the college council. It has your name on it, and I

don't know whether you're speaking for the college council. I

don't believe you're a member of the college council. I'm sure

you are a concerned citizen of the area, but I believe in local

autonomy.

The college councils are the ones that will come — I've met with a great number

of them — and will present their concerns, their requests for where they would

like to move as far as property and capital expansion goes, and programming.

We have a very special committee set up which deals with the programming that

goes into the colleges, at their request.

So I have no intention of unilaterally standing here tonight

and answering for you that this should be done and that should

be done. If you talk of local autonomy, Hon. Member, let's

practise it. That is not practising it, if you expect me to

make a commitment here tonight.

The matter of multi-campuses: here again, you and I

simply do not have the same understanding. I don't consider a

multi-campus policy one that will create another

establishment in Vernon, when 35 miles away we already have a

core campus. That is a multi-purpose campus in my

understanding. The way I would like to see it go, I would like

to see one core campus with satellite campuses around, using

the facilities that are available in the community. Why build

more structures? I see no reason for that at all.

That's my own personal opinion, but here again, I'm hoping

that this post-secondary commission will get out into

your area and right across the province, and make

recommendations on that. But I'm only one person with my own

ideas. I'm not going to impose them on anyone.

When it came to the matter of consultation and my first

announcement, certainly as a new Minister, people wanted to

know whether the new Minister has any ideas. You don't sit

mutely and not answer any question on your ideas on education.

When I was interviewed when I first came into office, I

expressed my concern about the Kelowna College Council, because

I still say there had been a lot of political bickering.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. That is not a point of order,

Hon. Member. Would the Hon. Member be seated, please?

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. There was no point of

order.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: The Hon. Member was not quite so testy

about the matter of a name. (Laughter). However, I think we'll

carry on so I can complete the point I was making.

The council is the group that I think you and I are most

concerned about seeing that they have their autonomy. When I

first mentioned my ideas on post-secondary education for

all parts of the province, I said that I felt we had to look in

new directions.

I want to say right here and now that I do not see

[ Page 1156 ]

any need for establishing and building for the sake of

building. There are a lot of facilities out there that can be

used. I want to reiterate that. I've met with a number of

college council members who agree that they need certain core

facilities which will be provided to them. But all I'm

suggesting is that you and I want to provide good post-secondary services — I know that.

What we have to do is to find out what is the best kind to

provide for the Province of British Columbia. You and I can't

sit here and make those decisions. Let's listen to the people

out there who are the consumers.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Kamloops.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I've recognized the Hon. Member

for Kamloops. I would rule, Hon. Member, that I gave you the

privilege of speaking first this evening after you'd spoken

this afternoon and I feel that I must give the floor to other

Members.

MR. G.H. ANDERSON (Kamloops): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I

won't take up much time. I just have a few brief remarks to

make and a position I'd like to get clear with the Minister on

this post-secondary education.

We also have a regional college in Kamloops, the same as

they have in other areas, It is also situated on DND land. It's

ex-navy instead of ex-army, which is I suppose a

little better classification. The previous government didn't

buy us another site to put the college on, but they did arrange

it so that we have a beautiful view, not of a lake, but almost

directly down into the stacks of the local pulp mill. The

scenery is a little different, but we can live with that.

But one of the things that did happen under the previous

administration, Madam Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, was

that right in the centre of some of the best cattle country in

the Province of British Columbia, they had a beef production

course for the ranchers and the children of ranchers in the

area, who wished to pursue the same calling as their fathers.

Last year this course was cancelled, apparently on the

recommendation of some advisory board they had then — I

don't know if it's there now — because the attendance

wasn't high enough.

I'd like to say tonight that when a new course like this is instituted in a

new college, it can't be expected to take off immediately. I think there should

be a little more patience allowed for it to catch on and get known. At the present

time, if anyone in the area wants to study beef production, they have to go

to the college at Dawson Creek, with the travelling and expense and room and

board that's involved in the extra cost. I don't think enough consideration

was given to leaving this course for a long enough time to see if it would catch

on or not and then make the decision, after a couple of years had been allowed

to see if it would be worthwhile to keep this course.

It just seems ridiculous that in the centre of some of the

best beef raising country in the province, the son of a rancher

or the rancher himself who wishes to upgrade himself, has to

take the time, the trouble and the expense to travel to Dawson

Creek to take this course, and return back to Kamloops again.

I'd like to have the Minister's comments on this, if she

doesn't mind.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: Yes, I understand that course was

discontinued. I also understand it has been reinstated.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for North Vancouver–Capilano.

MR. D.M. BROUSSON (North Vancouver–Capilano): I'll try to

avoid being quite as testy as the first two speakers this

evening.

I want to raise a very important matter to follow up some of

the things I've had to say earlier in the debate in this House,

and that's the matter of mortgage financing, credit agencies,

financial companies and some of these problems.

Mr. Chairman, I've told many stories of the problems of

these cases and I could give you many more examples tonight.

But through all of these stories, Mr. Chairman, runs a common

thread. These People don't understand what happens to them.

There was one particular case where I told you about a

member who'd been a former worker I think for the NDP party.

Some of you may remember that case. That gentleman told me, "I

never knew what happened to me."

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. BROUSSON: Mr. Chairman, could we have a little order,

please?

This gentleman told me, "All of these papers were in front

of me. I signed them and I still can't understand what happened

to me."

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. BROUSSON: Seriously, Mr. Chairman…

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm waiting hopefully. (Laughter).

MR. BROUSSON: Mr. Chairman, I want to remind

[ Page 1157 ]

the House of the four-point programme that I suggested.

First there was adequate legislation, amendments to the

legislation and then enforcement of that legislation.

Secondly, there was a mortgage advisory council, people from

the industry giving advice to the Attorney General and

assisting him in this project.

MR. G.V. LAUK (Vancouver Centre): You're not driving

tonight, are you? (Laughter).

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: It was with great expectation and high hopes

that I was anticipating that the Member would get to the point.

But he has still not arrived at the point. Would you make your

point, please.

MR. BROUSSON: I thought you'd never get to it, Mr. Chairman.

(Laughter).

The fourth

part in my four-point programme was, of course,

education. Mr. Chairman, one of the very serious problems in

this area is the fact that the young people of British Columbia

do not receive any adequate training, education or courses on

the practical problems of credit financing. They go out into

the world and they're exposed to a tremendous amount of

merchandising programmes — "Buy it on credit. It's great

stuff."

We have to have credit. But these young people are not given

any explanation of the difficulties, the pitfalls, and how to

control the use of credit.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. BROUSSON: Your estimates are coming, Mr. Minister.

(Laughter).

What I have found, Mr. Chairman, is that the teachers are

asked, "Will you include some instruction on practical mortgage

and other kinds of financing in the curriculum?"

They say, "We don't know how to teach it because we've had

no instruction in this area."

So then you go to the teacher training programmes at the

various universities and you ask them, "Will you include some

instruction in this for teachers?"

They say, "Well, there's nothing about this in the

curriculum."

Quite seriously, Mr. Chairman, my question to the Minister is: will she ensure

that in the teacher training programmes and in the curriculum there will be

a practical series of courses in credit financing, mortgage financing and the

whole field of how to understand and how to use and control credit?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Education,

HON. MRS. DAILLY: This afternoon we were discussing curriculum, when

we were talking about the whole matter of a family life programme. I said that

it doesn't just mean discussing sex. It also means preparing young people for

their adult life, which certainly includes exactly what you're talking about.

So I will give direction to the curriculum committee to ensure that courses

on exactly what you're asking for are placed in our schools.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for North Peace

River.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a few brief questions to address to the Minister this

evening.

The first thing that I'd like to refer to is a newspaper

headline from the Vancouver Province . dated Saturday,

December 9. The headline reads:

"Dailly Drafts Plan to Rescue Chilly Children."

Of course, this refers to the fact that the Minister

indicated to a number of school districts in the province that

additional finance would be made available to them so they

would be better equipped and better able financially to provide

busing transportation for those children who live beyond walk

limits, I'm the first one to admit that this was certainly

acceptable to my part of the country in particular and anywhere

where we have climates that are not altogether the same as the

lower mainland.

The

article indicates that the Peace River South, Peace

River North, Fort Nelson and Stikine school districts will

receive the largest winter transportation subsidies as the

department has permitted them to seek expenses for five months

of the year.

I think this was an attempt by the Minister to solve a

problem which we have during the winter months. What I'd like

to now bring to your attention, and something that has been

brought to my attention by the members of the school board, is

that as well meaning as this particular move might have been on

your part, it solved one problem but it created another.

That problem is this, that the children who now have some

sort of assistance or bus service, whether it

[ Page 1158 ]

be by school bus or by taxi service or whatever that they've

had to arrange for the five months of the year that the

transportation assistance is available, are now looking to the

school board saying, "Well, you've hauled us in for five

months. What are you going to do for the rest of the year?"

So it has put the school boards into a bit of a bind in that

while the transportation allowance is available during the

inclement weather in the winter, which is really the worst part

of the year, it's like everything else — the students

become accustomed to having a bus pick them up and their

parents become accustomed to having a bus pick them up. They're

not altogether happy about the idea that just because the sun

is shining they're going to have to walk two miles to pick up a

bus when the spring season is upon them.

I think really the only real solution to the problem, Madam

Minister, is perhaps to review the walk limits that we have on

the basis of reduction and on a shareable basis, so that it

would be fair to all parts of the province for the full length

of the school season, not only during the winter months.

Another problem of course is coming up, and that will be

with us very soon. It is the problem of the school system being

extended to include kindergarten. I understand that this is the

policy and that before long, probably by next school term,

kindergarten will be part of the educational system. That's

going to create an even larger problem for the rural school

districts of the Province, mainly because of the fact that if

they bring in a system for kindergarten instruction, it's not

really a problem in the towns, villages or cities, But it does

create a real problem in areas like my own, which have a

combination of urban and rural population.

The children who qualify for kindergarten instruction in the

rural areas will be scattered over a radius of 50 miles. Trying

to set up a

schedule of busing for those children is going to

be a real problem. I don't know how it's going to be solved

because of the difference in the number of hours per day that

these children would go to school.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Would the Member be seated

while you state your point of privilege?

HON. MRS. DAILLY: To the Hon. Member. I appreciate your concern over

what will happen in northern areas. But I answered this this afternoon when

you weren't here. I said at that time that when we bring in the legislation

there will be regulations attached to the legislation which I hope will be able

to answer some of those questions. So I'd appreciate it if you'd hold that till

the legislation comes forward.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the Hon. Member continue?

MR. SMITH: I accept the Minister's statement, Mr. Chairman.

But as I think she realizes, there is a problem there. These

children are not large in number but they're scattered

throughout a large area.

Fine. As long as she realizes that there is a problem being

created in this respect.

I'd like to bring another couple of points to the attention

of the Minister. One of them has to do with the matter of the

permanent school records which we have in all the school

districts, as I understand it now, a cardex system for every

student in the public school system.

As I understand it, this cardex system and a report system

follows them right from the time they enter the public school

system until they graduate, particularly if they stay in the

Province of British Columbia.

One of the problems that has been brought to my attention

and I am sure it has been brought to the Minister's attention

as well, is the fact that parents or guardians have quite often

wanted to get information about their children. This has been

refused by teachers or principals. They don't like to show them

the system or the cards on file. There may be good reason for

not doing that. There is another problem involved, as I

understand it, and that is, quite often some of the decisions

at the secondary school level regarding the type of curricular

programme the student should go into is decided upon the basis

of some of the information included in those cards

— whether they should be in vocational, technical training

or whatever.

It would seem to me that at least it would be good P.R. on

the part of the school districts and the principals involved in

the school system…

If you two would like to talk, why don't you go somewhere

else.

This information I would hope would be available to the

parents or the guardians upon their request. At least enable

them to go into the office of the principal and discuss the

information on that card. It is not a big request, but I think

it is something that the members of the community and the

principals of the schools could take into consideration.

There is one other point I would like to raise this evening and this is with

regard to training in our vocational school system within the province.

[ Page

1159 ]

One of the things I have noticed over the past number of years is that because

of changing technology, there is a demand for training in certain areas where

we have not any technical or vocational facilities available. I am talking now

about new techniques, new jobs really, that are replacing those that may have

been involved in the vocational training courses in past years.

I would like to give you a few examples of jobs that apply

particularly to the exploration business of the petroleum

industry. I only hope that we still have a petroleum industry

in B.C. a year from now.

Regardless of that, over the last number of years we have

found there are certain specialized jobs in that field alone

where there is no vocational training available to these

people. No one teaches the trade — it's a matter of

learning on the job. You get a job with one of the companies

that is involved in a highly specialized field, and by trial

and error you learn that job.

I'll just give you an example of some of the people that are

very specialized in their field. The terms are common in the

Peace River area but probably in no other part of British

Columbia. For instance, there is no training programme for wire-line operators, for rat-hole operators, for mud

engineers, for seismic technicians, for battery operators, or

for instrument technicians. And that is a list of just six of

the specialized fields that are involved in the petroleum

exploration business anywhere that you go in Canada. To my

knowledge, I don't know of anywhere where you pick up this

training except on the job.

So there are two solutions. One is that perhaps, as the

demand grows, there could be a department within our vocational

schools that caters to this business.

Second, there could be some provision for assisting on-the-job training through the employers. It is

only reasonable to believe that a lot of young men, basically,

who go into this business will make costly mistakes and errors

in their first few months working on the job.

If there was some way of allowing the employer some type of

remuneration for training them on the job or setting up a

special department somewhere within the vocational school

training system to give these people the training that is

needed before they go out into that field.

I would just like to mention two other points with regard to technical or vocational

training. Both of these are the types of vocations that are almost a lost art

today. Yet they are becoming very popular in terms of the type of time that

people have to enjoy relaxation and time off from work. This has to do with

the growing industry of light horses in the province — saddle horses, show horses,

jumping horses and so on. These animals, as you know, have to be catered to

by specialized people.

One of the courses that we should have available to us in

British Columbia, in a far greater range than we have right

now, is a farriers course. Those are the people who shoe

horses. There is, as I understand it, one man now in the

vocational school in Dawson Creek who can teach this art. The

queer part of it is, that he had to go to a school in Oregon to

take his training because there was no one anywhere in Canada

that could teach the proper method of shoeing horses. Yet, if

this is going to be a growing recreational pastime as it is,

with thousands more people getting involved and thousands more

saddle horses coming into the area, certainly we have to have

people who know how to shoe a horse properly.

The other part of the same particular process is the art of

making saddles or harness. There are very, very few

people left in Canada today who know this art. Unless we

capitalize on their experience and knowledge very quickly, it

is going to be too late because they are going to be people we

remember in obituary columns. They are getting on in years.

Most of them are well up in their 60's now and beyond.

Surely before that art is lost to us completely, we should

teach younger people how to work leather, how to build saddles

and how to make harnesses, and bridles and this sort of thing.

It is an art that's lost and the last thing I want to see is a

few years down the road that we have to pick up a saddle with a

stamp on the back of the cantle reading, "made in Japan" out of

plastic.

This is exactly where we are heading unless we train people

in these particular areas. I have nothing more to add to that

at the present time, Madam Minister, but I do believe these are

areas that our vocational schools should be looking at because

they will be lost arts in a few years from now and we will

never be able to replace them.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of

Education.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: I just want to comment that every one of

those are lost arts, and in a few years from now we will never

be able to replace them. I have noted every one of them here

for consideration. The recommendations and points which you

brought up are very valid. I appreciate you

[ Page 1160 ]

bringing them up.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey.

Interjections by Hon. Members.

MR. P.L. McGEER (Vancouver–Point Grey): Oh, there's

many winds to come.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister a question or

two about the appointment of the chairman to the public school

and post-secondary commission. The appointment came as a

surprise to most people who are associated with university and post-secondary educational facilities because the

gentleman in question has had most of his experience in

Philadelphia in elementary and secondary schools.

I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if the Minister could elaborate just

a little bit on the particular reasons for this appointment;

what she had in mind and what other people might be appointed

to serve as commissioners with this gentleman in examining the

post-secondary educational system.

Mr. Chairman, my reason for asking this is because we have

many people with very great experience in the post-secondary field in Canada, some of whom have quite a

familiarity with the British Columbia system.

Naturally I think of Dr. John B. Macdonald who has done the

one definitive study in British Columbia on this question.

Whether all the Members of the House agree or not, those who

have read his report will recognize it as one of the most

prophetic that has ever been written in this field in

Canada.

The predictions that he made have all come to pass. Because

of that, one would have thought that Dr. Macdonald would have

been the number one choice to do a study of this field in

British Columbia. Hon. Members will probably recall that after

he left British Columbia, resigning as president of UBC, he did

precisely this service for the Province of Ontario and

established that province on a course of post-secondary

education which is recognized today to be a dimension above

that which exists in any other province in Canada.

Another man too that comes to mind is one eminently qualified in the university

field. That is Professor Rocke Robertson, who is a renowned surgeon in British

Columbia and whose relatives sat in very responsible political offices in British

Columbia He was recruited as a dean for medicine at UBC, where we were unsuccessful

in retaining his services, and he went to become the dean of medicine at McGill

University; then principal of McGill, and finally consultant to the federal

government in matters involving education.

His history is in British Columbia. He cut his professional

and academic "eyeteeth" in this province. His heart is still

here.

[Ms. Young in the chair]

Finally, of course, one thinks of Dr. Neil Perry, who was

formerly Deputy Minister of Education for the provincial

government; who prior to that had been a dean of commerce and

business administration at the University of British Columbia;

and prior to that had been a consultant to the World Bank and

to the Ethiopian government. These are all people who are

native British Columbians, who are experienced in this

province, whose curriculum vitae towers above the man who was

appointed; who understand the system here in British Columbia.

It's difficult for us to understand how they could be set aside

for the gentleman who has been selected.

I must confess, Ms. Chairperson, that it's a very fine

curriculum vitae; perhaps not too much in Canada and what there

is is in eastern Canada; a lot of experience in the public

school system in Philadelphia.

Obviously, Ms. Chairperson, if we're going to set a

direction for the 1970's and 1980's in the fields of

universities and community colleges, we're going to need people

who have experience and familiarity with this province, who

have academic qualifications to the extent that they have been

there and they know and they understand.

Ms. Chairperson, my question to the Minister of Education

is: how are we going to be certain that this quality is

provided in this commission that she is about to appoint?

HON. MRS. DAILLY: Ms. Chairperson, to the Hon. Member.

First of all may I say I think you've done a great

disservice to this post-secondary commission before it

is even started. If you're truly concerned, through you, Ms.

Chairperson, Mr. Member, with the new directions we should be

taking in education in this province, you have started off in a

very negative manner.

To start already accusing the credibility of the man whom I

selected, as my prerogative as Minister of Education of this

province, before you have even met him, before you have had an

opportunity to give the man a chance to get around and talk to

people, I think is a disgraceful thing to do here tonight.

I could understand your making that sort of statement after

the passage of, say, two years and we had found nothing

resulting from the chairmanship; we had found that there had

been no new changes

[ Page 1161 ]

brought about through this province. But to start here this

evening, before the man has even been given the opportunity, is

despicable.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. McGEER: Point of order, Ms. Chairperson.

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: What is your point of order?

MR. McGEER: Ms. Chairperson, they're not even listening to

my point of order, I'm sure that you will.

Ms. Chairperson, I merely asked the Minister of Education a question; to say,

"How was this decision arrived at and how is it that people in general are to

accept the qualifications of the person?" Nobody questions your prerogative,

Ms. Chairperson, but I think that it's our prerogative as elective Members of

the Legislature to ask how she reached her decision

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: Order, please. That is not a point of order, Hon. Member.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: I already have discussed Mr. Bremer's

appointment. I had a Press conference with Mr. Bremer. I have

already discussed it in the House As a matter of fact,

yesterday afternoon when you weren't in the House, Mr. Member,

I mentioned the fact that Mr. Bremei. was chosen primarily

because I consider he will be one of the best communicators we

can find in this province. He will be a needed catalyst. He will

be able to go out into this province and help to get people

thinking and talking about new directions.

Your point about whether we're going to have a B.C. input is

certainly valid. But I also stated, at the Press conference and

I believe in the House, that there of course will be B.C.

input. I am going to have to repeat it again, Mr. Member,

because I do not think you either heard it or were listening at

the time When the post-secondary commission is set up,

naturally every person on that will be from British Columbia.

There's no question about it.

You spent 10 minutes suggesting names here. I consider that

a waste of time on the floor of this Legislature. People have

had an opportunity to present these names and you have too for

the last two months, Mr. Member.

I'm just asking you to give this man the opportunity to organize the commission,

to get moving throughout the province. I'm sure if we can have more positive

rather than negative support, we'll achieve something new in education in the

province

MR. McGEER: The Hon. Minister is very good at a verbal strapping. (Laughter).

Ms. Chairperson, there's a commission and I presume that it's not a one man

commission. No one questions the prerogative of the Minister to select a chairman

but, again, I think we could ask questions as to how that decision was reached.

I think, Ms. Chairperson, we could also ask questions as to the other members

of that commission.

I think if we were certain that people with extensive

experience in the university field, who had extensive

experience in British Columbia — if they were members of

that commission then of course we would be up applauding the

Minister.

Ms. Chairperson, as for myself, I regret that I hadn't taken

the initiative to suggest these names before this evening. But

I would have suggested them if the Minister of Education had

been in contact with me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: The Hon. Member for Oak Bay.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): Madam Chairman — and I

make no apology for the Chauvinist form of address — I

don't know why the First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey

(Mr. McGeer) doesn't quit when he's behind. (Laughter).

I couldn't help but think of the phrase, "Hell hath no fury

like a woman scorned."

Carrying on from the comments of the Member for North Peace

River (Mr. Smith), he was talking about teaching and training

people for certain industries where there is a limited number

of jobs. There was one of our vocational teachers, Mr. Ken

Warren, who attended a meeting at the Elizabeth Fisher Jr. High

School. He was pointing out one of the strange paradoxes of our

education system, that we're now reaching a point in society

where even for the simpler jobs we're asking grade 12

education.

He quotes Canada Manpower, for example. Under the heading of

taxi driver, the advertisement says: "it would be to the

applicant's advantage to have completed grade 12." Anyone

seeking a job as a truck driver would "find it an advantage to

be a grade 12 graduate."

One begins to wonder if we're not going overboard on the

academic demands for citizens who can carry out a perfectly

useful productive role in society at a lesser academic level.

But it seems to me that it is indeed very foolish if Canada

Manpower suggests that a man can only drive a truck after he's

had grade 12 education.

But to get to the point, he said that even grade 10 is being

demanded for fairly simple jobs. The quotation here on one of

the jobs — he's talking about the number of drop outs,

incidentally, and he stated that in 1970-71 there were

more than 18,000 drop outs in British Columbia but one of the

jobs that could be obtained is as a blacksmith, whose duties

are confined

[ Page 1162 ]

to shoeing horses.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. WALLACE: No, he needs grade 10 to shoe horses. But the

interesting thing is that he asks a question, "Where is anybody

going to get a job like that?" So the implication is that there

are no longer any jobs shoeing horses and obviously there are

many of them. I think that this is a point worth mentioning

because the whole point of educating people I think is not only

to make them well-adjusted citizens, but to suit them to

the jobs that are available.

Now I wonder if the Minister would care to comment on this

perhaps exaggerated attitude to wards academic education in

relation to the simpler jobs that are available.

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: The Hon. Minister.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: The Hon. Member for Peace River was

mentioning the same thing, and I think you're right. There has

been an over-stress obviously in the past on the

academic, and I think that many young people today are turning

more to the vocational. The problem that we have of course is

having the proper projections on what the marketability will be

for their skills and what those skills are.

You've mentioned some, of course, and this happened to be

the same one that the Member for Peace River mentioned. So

really, what is needed is a tremendous amount of research and

planning so we can prepare. And it can be done through the

universities right now. I'm not talking about long range

research.

I just want it available so that the Department of

Education, the universities and the vocational schools have

some idea of what the marketable skills are that are going to

be needed. Manpower is supposed to be doing this work, but we

don't seem to get too much fed into the Department of Education

on this.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: Yes, we do communicate with them. But I

think that this is an area where we could use our universities

and utilize them more — and use the people there to help

us to get some idea of the marketability of the skills that are

needed. I don't mean long time research — to wait for

years, because I know these students want jobs, they want to

work. We have to ensure that they are going into the ones where

they can get work.

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: The Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I know, I realize that. It's traditional

that I say a few words on education in this House. My research

consists of reading the transcript of last night's

proceedings, Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'm not quoting it, I just want to draw

to the attention of the first Member for Point Grey (Mr.

McGeer) that the question he raised about the qualifications of

the chairmen of these commissions was raised by his fellow

Member from North Vancouver–Capilano (Mr. Brousson) last

night.

MRS. JORDAN: Why can't he raise it?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That's right, but the Member didn't

know.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I just want to make a comparison between

two statements made in this debate.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: It didn't take me half an hour to…and

if you be quiet it won't take me an hour and a half, Member for

North Okanagan (Mrs. Jordan), to say what I have to say.

But the Minister last night, in answering the same question

that was raised by the Member for North Vancouver–Capilano and was

raised again tonight by the Member for Vancouver–Point Grey, indicated

that the person she had

chosen had wide experience in the public school system, does

have an academic background, is presently at Dalhousie and…

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (South Peace River): Where's that?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: It's in Canada, my friend, it's in

Canada. I'm a little concerned about what appears to be a lack

of understanding from people who have spent most of their life

in the academic field at the university level. They fail to

realize the relationship between the public school system and

the universities.

Part of the problem that faces our educational system today

is that for too long, people that have

[ Page 1163 ]

locked themselves up in the University of British Columbia

have been in charge of education and had too much control of

it, with the result that our whole educational system has

become inbred, ingrown and has failed to meet the needs of the

people of this province.

MR. PHILLIPS: Don't lose your cool.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'm not losing my cool. But when I hear

academics, who have not been outside the academic field in

British Columbia, criticize an attempt to break out of this

crystallized fixed mould which is destroying education in

British Columbia and people who don't realize the worth and

quality and need for a flowing, changing education, then I do

become a little upset.

Unless there are basic changes in our attitude toward

education in this province within the next five to ten years,

then the whole system will collapse from its own dead weight.

This is an attempt to get a fresh look at education, something

that has been badly needed in this province, for that matter

throughout Canada, for many, many years.

I suggest that the Minister has indicated that she is aware

of the fact, that education in this province cannot go up the

same old trail, the same old track we have gone to this point.

I suggest to Members, instead of attempting to destroy the work

of this man before it starts, he could have said, "wish him

well," because education in this province does need a

new look.

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: The Hon. First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey.

MR. McGEER: Well, Ms. Chairman, that was a very stirring speech from

the Minister of defence (Laughter) and, Ms. Chairman, he's changed his role.

He's still a very gifted debater. He's very defensive though about an important

question.

Ms. Chairman, I'd like to submit that if the educational

system is in danger of collapsing in the next few years, it

will be because of the Minister of Highways and some of his

colleagues, far more than any inherent fault that the

educational system might have.

Ms. Chairman, to go back to the question I asked, which was

a pretty simple one, and I'll ask it once more: who will the

other members of the commission be? That's really all we were

after.

We never questioned the prerogative of the Minister. I certainly said, and

Hansard will show this, that I'm sure that the gentleman that was selected has

very fine qualifications. All I asked, Ms. Chairwoman, was for other people

to be named to this commission who are known to the government, to the universities

and to the people of British Columbia — to have the outstanding qualifications

to carry out the job that needs to be done. Could the Minister of Education

please give us some indication of who these people might be?

MS. CHAIRWOMAN: Order, please. That is a violation of rule

43. It's a repetition of previous remarks.

I recognize the Hon. Second Member for Victoria.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): Thank you, Ms. Chairperson. I

trust I don't run afoul of the famous rule 43. The difficulty

is if you speak late in the debate, there are questions which

come up because perhaps questions may have been asked earlier

and answered in a manner which may not have given the Member

who was asking the second question adequate information.

If this is repetition, I would feel very concerned indeed.

After all, there are points of considerable interest to the

Members of this House — and sometimes through nobody's

fault the Minister doesn't reply very well or doesn't reply to

the satisfaction of a Member, and you feel you have to comment

again.

For example, there was a question asked by the Hon. Member

for Langley (Mr. McClelland) about Notre Dame University and

Trinity Western College. Now without somehow getting afoul of

rule 43, the Minister replied that there were separate Acts

that set up these two institutions, and somehow this made a

difference when it came to applying for the 50 per cent of the

operating money which the federal government provides.

We, as you know, Ms. Chairperson, at the provincial level

contribute 50 per cent of operating funds for universities and post-secondary institutions and the federal government

provides the other 50 per cent.

So the question asked by my Hon. friend from Langley,

unhappily absent this evening because I'm sure he'd be

interested in getting a second reply, was, "What is the basic

difference between these two institutions?"

The question was replied to by the Minister that somehow or

another they were set up under different Acts and this made

them separate birds. But both these institutions were set up

— I may be wrong, the Minister can correct me —

under Acts of this House. I fail to see why there's such a

considerable distinction between the two of them when it comes

to requesting the federal government to put up a few bucks.

[ Page 1164 ]

HON. MRS. DAILLY: That's the answer.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I have made the ruling before that you cannot

demand an answer and keep repeating your question. You must

ask your question.

AN HON. MEMBER: What about the Member who asked the 67

questions?

MR. CHAIRMAN: As in the past, I would anticipate the Speaker

or the Chairman would act accordingly. So I would request that

if you are going to repeat a question you do not repeat the

same question. If you are asking a supplementary question to a

supplementary, enlarging on the previous question, you could do

that.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: It's perfectly in order to question the

estimates of the Minister. What I would like to know, then, is

whether the Minister has any knowledge of the effect of this

very insignificant increase in the budget to the University of

British Columbia upon research projects taking place.

I trust that repetition of that question can be accepted,

because it was basically as a result of concern on my part

about the answer we received. We haven't had a proper

explanation of this. I trust it's not repetition to ask it

again.

The Minister a moment ago, before that stirringly irrelevant

comment by the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr. Strachan),

mentioned research. We are very interested in what goes on at

the University of British Columbia, particularly in research. I

trust that questions that we ask from this side, which is

actually our duty, Ms. Chairperson, to ask — as Members

of the. Opposition representing the 60 per cent of the people

who did not vote for the Government, Was our duty to ask

questions.

We're not suggesting prerogatives should not be exercised by

Ministers. But we do feel that when we ask fair questions,

trying to elicit information for the people in this room and

for the public at large by way of the Press gallery, we find it

unfortunate that we are sharply attacked for "disgraceful" or

"despicable" behaviour and accused of "grave disservice to the

higher educational system of the province," to which no

one in this room has contributed more than my Hon. friend from

Point Grey (Mr. McGeer).

I'm disturbed by this and by the replies of the two

Ministers. Either we have hit a particularly sensitive nerve

and they are aware of something they have yet to inform this

House, of something very wrong in this area, or else they

simply don't believe in the process whereby Members of the

Opposition ask questions and hope to get replies.

Ms. Chairperson, the Minister mentioned research in reply to

the question of my Hon. friend from Oak Bay (Mr. Wallace), now departed, from the House. Research is

a particularly important question.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: He may not be sick. I'm not quite sure

where he is.

Nevertheless, she mentioned research at UBC will somehow

discover answers to some of the questions raised by my Hon.

friend. Well, that's probably true. But I go back to the

question of the estimates and the fact that we are giving this

year approximately enough to cover inflation to the

universities of British Columbia — UBC, Simon Fraser and

UVic. It's 6 1/2 per cent.

I don't know how people judge what research should be done

and what research should not be done. I spent many years at

university — far too many probably for my own good

— and I just don't know, after studying at three

universities for many years, how you judge the value of

research in an area for example such as DNA or agriculture or

dentistry or elsewhere. How do you measure the value of these

things?

Unfortunately the very minor grant increase to the

universities will not only mean that education to students and

programmes for students Will have to be curtailed — and

mention was made yesterday about women's studies — but

research will also have to be curbed. Now I'm not suggesting

it's an easy task. I do worry enormously when I hear the

Minister as she did last night — and I took notes at that

time — when she talks about making all these programmes

relevant; when she talks about the justification as to how

moneys are to be spent on the basis of courses; universities

looking to themselves and seeing what is relevant to

students.

Research is often not relevant to all students. The students

sometimes rightfully object to the amount of research work done

by professors. But at UBC we have Jacob Bieley, who's doing

fantastic work in agriculture. Chickens are growing up healthy

and strong with far less time and yet with the same amount of

money devoted to their feed.

We have fine work being done by Harold Cobb, who's a world

famous person in the area of dental research. The product

Calcitonen, which he has isolated and worked upon for the

preservation of teeth, is really fine and splendid work. How

can this be measured?

Mention was made a moment ago about the need for educational

research to be done at UBC. This government and governments

prior to it, all governments, constantly call upon university

economists to make reports, do studies. Now this is all

valuable material. We have it in agriculture, in health, in

economics and many other fields. Energy is another

[ Page 1165 ]

one I did mean to mention, of vital importance to British

Columbia.

Yet this research is extremely difficult to fund. The people

responsible at UBC for deciding whether or not money will be

spent in any particular area of research have my sympathy and

my best wishes, because I know full well that I as a politician

would be completely incapable, as would every Member of this

room, except perhaps the Hon. Member for west Point Grey (Mr.

McGeer), in handling such problems.

How do you handle such problems?

It was a real omission, I find, on the part of the Minister not to mention

the role the university plays outside of straight education of children or young

adults. The importance of this is hard to overestimate. It's all very well to

have a forest industry, resource-based industries in British Columbia. It's

all very well for us in this House to talk about changing from that to something

better. But one of the ways of getting there is by way of research.

Yet we know full well that just as the regular budgets for

programmes have been cut back at our universities, so have the

research budgets. It's unfortunately inevitable and follows

from what was said last night by my friend from Point Grey.

Research is not the "salad dressing" on top. Research is

really, to continue with that analogy, the "meat and potatoes"

of change, improvement, of advancing society. We've not had a

word on this from the Minister and I really find it very

curious indeed.

I ask the Minister to put aside her unhappiness with

comments or criticisms or even with questions that have come

from across this side and address herself to a problem which is

outside her own experience to a great degree: that is the

effect of this very, very meagre budgetary increase on research

done at UBC and at the other two universities as well.

I think there is no question that it's important that

courses be relevant, that students write their anticalendars,

or whatever they're calling the assessment of professors these

days. I think it's as important for education to be as good as

we can possibly give it. But this whole other area of

university work is critical.

We have no B.C. science city, such as my friend from west

Point Grey has often suggested. We don't have it yet. I trust

we will in the future. But until then the only institutions we

have that have the scale, the labs, the resources, human and

otherwise, are the university communities. I trust that we're

going to hear why research is going to have to be cut back this

year in a year of budgetary surpluses, probably such as we've

never seen before.

I mentioned Trinity Western. I would like that question

answered too.

I would like now to ask a question on a subject on which the Minister has spoken

a number of times — namely French language education and the more than $1 million

that comes from the federal government to the provincial government for this

purpose here in B.C.; a question I often heard the other side of when a federal

Member.

I would like to ask the Minister of this subject whether or

not the students who are in the independent school system were

included in the information on the total number of students

sent down to Ottawa for the purposes of calculating the

$1,018,744 which apparently we got in the last year for this

programme. Because if these independent school students were

included, and we have received money on the basis of their

studying the French language in our schools in British

Columbia, I say it's only fair that that money which was given

specifically for those students goes to those students and to

the schools which teach them that language. That, I feel, is

only fair.

If, on the other hand, they have not been included in the

total, I'd like to know why not? Why aren't we applying on

behalf of British Columbia students, on behalf of British

Columbia educational institutions, to pick up money which as

far as this province is concerned comes without strings

attached. Why have we not gone, after these funds which are

available for the, I'm sure it's a minimum of 21,000 students

in independent schools?

I ask this question because there's been a lot of talk by

the Minister and others about the Coquitlam school district and

the French language programmes that there are in this school

district. This is well and good. We all encourage the idea of

these programmes there. I am sure no one in this House objects.

However, many of the students there go to independent schools

because they happen not only to be French-speaking but

also Catholic. They wish to have religion as part of the

education of their children.

So we are in the position of boasting about a programme in

an area which has a large number of French-speaking

people and yet as far as benefit to the students goes, is

slight because they're not picking up the benefit as a result

of being an independent school.

I'd like that question answered too. Why is it that our

pilot programme, of which there has been a great deal of

boasting, and in particular I refer to the Vancouver

Province

article of December 2 where it says: "Dailly

holds $1 million for French promotion." No "Ms." or "Mrs." just

"Dailly." I guess that's the way it is these days.

I would like to know why these students in Coquitlam are not

receiving the benefit of those federal programmes.

To go on a little bit further, I would ask again whether or

not we're picking up money for adult education programmes under

the same type of scheme. It has been brought to my attention

that in

[ Page 1166 ]

Vancouver, students are paying substantially more for

courses in the French language at adult education classes than

they are for courses in Spanish language. I have no objection

to people learning Spanish. It's a splendid idea. However, why

should there be this discrepancy, which in fact discriminates

against on of the two official languages of Canada? I think

we'd object if the same thing happened elsewhere in the country

where French is the major language.

Ms. Chairperson, I'd like to ask a question on counselors.

There are, of course, counselors in British Columbia schools as

there are in other provinces. However, we happen to be one of

the provinces, if not the only province, where there is very

little training in this area, apart from what is required for

the teacher's certificate. Other provinces have counselling

certificate requirements which require graduate study. Quite

often a two year programme leading to a master's degree. I'd

like to know why, in this very important area, we are not

either following suit or whether the Minister would indicate

what we're doing to catch up?

In the same line, if we're going to encourage teachers to

take time out to upgrade themselves, I would like to ask the

Minister a question on whether or not we have any programme for

sabbatical leave for educational purposes for teachers in B.C.?

What attempts are being made to improve the system so that

there can be increases in upgrading of this type of thing?

A few other individual questions. The B.C. Teachers

Federation, in its brief to the government, talked about

library service. It said, and I quote: "Standards of school

library service are almost universally dismal. Positive

encouragement to expand library service should be given." A

question to the Minister is what are we doing along that line

and how far have we got?

Another point in the same brief — a point repeated by

the Parent-Teachers Association in their brief

— the need to coordinate services to ensure that children

with learning disabilities are identified and treated as early

as possible.

This point has come up in more than one brief and I wonder

whether or not we could get some indication from the Minister

as to what steps are being taken to cure something that both

the teachers and the parents apparently feel is a serious

problem.

A few other quick things that there are here. I refer to the

School Trustees Association brief at the moment. I know other

questions have come on this. There is urging there that the

Minister of Education recommend that dental assistants or

hygienists be included as a part of the public health service

to schools. Perhaps there might be some comment on this from

the Minister.

Another recommendation was that provincial sales tax on school purchases be

removed. I think that again is a worthwhile proposal, although I must say I'm

not too hopeful of the reply from the Minister, because every effort of this

party to have either land taxes or education takes removed, or sales taxes removed

has so far met with the reply "no" and the "squirreling" tendencies of the

government to horde away as much money as possible, regardless of the effect

upon children, parents, taxpayers or anyone else.

Ms. Minister, through you, Ms. Chairperson, I would like to

say a quick word about the Bell curve on grading. I mentioned

this to the Minister privately earlier and I am led to

understand that certain elementary schools still use the Bell

curve for marking and grading students on an individual class

basis rather than on the results of the child itself.

The effect of this of course is that "A" grade is received

by 5 per cent of students, "B" by the next 20 per cent, C+ by

the next 15 per cent, C for the next 20 per cent, c - for

the next 15 per cent, a "D" grade is received by the next 20

per cent, and for the last 5 per cent they receive an "E."

Now since "D" and "E" are considered failures, the use of

the Bell curve demands a failure rate of 25 per cent of the

students, depending of course on where you adjust it.

As it's the belief of the British Columbia Parent Teachers'

Federation that this Bell curve is still being used in British

Columbia schools, I would like to know, as I mentioned to the

Minister earlier today,. what she is doing to make sure that it

is scrapped. Because surely, if we're to get away from the idea

of the competitive grading system, which my friend from North

Okanagan (Mrs. Jordan) talked about very well, I thought,

earlier today, we have to dispose of things like the Bell curve

system which insist that 25 per cent or 20 per cent of students

fail, regardless of how well they do, simply because their

brothers and sisters and cousins and friends do a little

better. That is something which worries me deeply.

As a final point, as a bachelor I rather resent the term

"family life" programmes being used when referring to whatever

it used to be called, "effective living" or "sex education" or

something.

MR. MACDONALD: "Bolt." Don't forget "bolt." (Biology of Life Today).

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: "Bolt."

Anyway, "family life" programme strikes me as not being

applicable to all of us and my Hon. friend from North Vancouver

suggests I throw in a few more words about mortgages, But no. I will stop here and see whether the Minister might

like to comment on those questions.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of

Education.

[ Page 1167 ]

HON. MRS. DAILLY: You have quite a list of questions there,

through you, Mr. Chairman, Hon. Member. I certainly don't get

upset answering reasonable questions. I just get somewhat

concerned when we have questions which can affect the

educational climate in the province in a negative way.

Your questions were all certainly very to the point. You

asked again, however — I thought I'd covered it but

apparently not to your satisfaction — on the matter of the

grants to Trinity College. I will repeat again to you, Mr.

Member, as you know under the former government in 1967-68 when the money was being paid directly to these

universities, direct grants were being made by the federal

government at that time. But when the federal government

withdrew and discontinued those grants, it resulted in the

financial penalty to the Vancouver School of Theology and Notre

Dame University, The former government at that time therefore decided that

financial aid should be provided to compensate these

institutions. That is the history of the grant for those

institutions.

Since 1967-68, provincial grants have been paid to

those institutions, I think I said that earlier today.

At the present time the Government is not considering grants

to Trinity College. As a matter of fact, I'm sure when the

public commission moves around the province there'll be

representations made to them on this matter and they probably

will make some recommendations to the Government. But at this

moment that is the present situation.

The matter of the money which the province received for the

French programmes, I can assure you I personally have not been

boasting about it. Perhaps that's the

interpretation you

received from reading the newspaper. But I'm very pleased that

we have the money and the opportunity to do something with it

in the teaching of French.

This money is not for independent schools. The decision is

for the government to make, and in B.C. the money is going to

the public schools of the province. That is the situation.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: The calculation? The money is based on the

enrolment in our public schools. Not private.

There were a number of things in your questions I recognized

from the PTA brief which was, I agree, an excellent brief this

time and it usually is. This one was particularly good.

That matter of the Bell curve grading. I had quite a few hours discussion with

the PTA over that very matter and I concur with you and with the PTA people

who spoke on it at that time. I think it's a ridiculous situation, particularly

if we want to move into a new type of learning in our public schools today.

I do know it is practised, yes. It is practised in some

schools in the province. There are some administrators that

still feel that that's the only way they can operate.

I hope that we can give some leadership and direction and

point out how it is working in other schools without that. In

time I would hope to see that removed from the schools in

British Columbia, that type of grading system.

As to the other point you made about your concern about

library services, certainly I have been concerned about that.

Under the former government we saw such stringent financial

restrictions that some of the districts had very poor library

services. When I released the emergency funds, I know there

were some school boards that were able to make use of them in

increasing their library services. I am hopeful that we will

see an increase with the budget allotments this year, maybe not

up to the standards as recognized by that committee, but we

must make that the objective to be reached, because I certainly

agree with you that the library resource centre is the very

core of the whole classroom situation.

You were talking about specialized services for children. I

mentioned earlier in the budget speech that we do have an inter-cabinet committee for children. As well of course in my

department I have a special superintendent of special services

who works very closely with the other officials from the other

two Ministers' departments so that we can combine services for

children in a coordinated, rational manner. There are a number

of these experiments going on right now. They are working very

well.

It is going to take time, but there were a lot of redundant

services before. I hope I have covered most of your

questions.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Perhaps I might point out that my list of

questions was lengthy and no doubt this was why some were

overlooked. The major portion, or at least the beginning

portion, was on research — how the effect of this

budgetary, rather grudging increase just matches inflation on

research at UBC and other universities, how this is being

calculated, and the effect of this unfortunate failure to grant

more money is going to affect research.

There was another point which was counselors and first aid,

but we will scrap that for the moment. Also sales taxes, if you

would comment upon that.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: Yes, very quickly. Again, I spoke on this

last night, Mr. Member. I did say at the time that we felt that

the universities must show fiscal responsibility when they

present their budget. If there were areas, and you have picked

the area of

[ Page

1168 ]

research, that you feel may perhaps cause a deterioration in

university environment — I said we are willing to hear

from UBC. The Member sitting right beside you said,

"Would you hear representations from them if they can

justify the need for extra budgetary allotment," and I

said "yes."

We seem to be spending the whole evening just repeating the

same questions, Mr. Member.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: We are repeating the same question quite

often because we don't get an answer.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. I would point out to the Hon. Member

that …

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Would the Hon. Members that are not

speaking be seated? Would the Hon. Member continue? I recognize

the Hon. Second Member for Victoria. Would you continue,

please?

AN HON. MEMBER: You should take these points of order in

order, Mr. Chairman.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Back to the subject under discussion,

namely the estimates of the Minister, may I ask the Minister

whether she has any knowledge, herself, of the effect of this

very minor increase in funds for UBC upon the research projects

taking place there.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: At this time, I have not had any

representations from the UBC on that particular matter. I am

open to hear them.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Prince Rupert,

followed by the Hon. Member for Cariboo.

MR. G.R. LEA (Prince Rupert): Mr. Chairman, I have listened

with a great deal of interest tonight to some of the complaints

about regional colleges throughout the province, and I would

like to complain also about our regional college in the Pacific

northwest. I would like to, but we don't have one. That is the

point that I would, like to make. Probably the most remote

areas of this province are my riding of Prince Rupert, your

riding, Mr. Chairman, of Skeena, the riding of Atlin and the

riding of North Peace.

MR. D.T. KELLY (Omineca): And Omineca.

MR. LEA: No, Omineca is very close to the regional college at Prince

George. We have no access really to any regional college and I would like to

point out, Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister, that it seems to me that

it would be a good idea, when we are looking at regional colleges, to have some

form of specialization from one regional college to another.

For instance, I can think of Prince Rupert as being a good

spot to set up a regional college for marine biology. I can

also think of the Okanagan being good possibly for agriculture,

and Prince George for forestry.

It would seem to me that if we take advantage of the

different spots throughout the province or the various spots

throughout the province to situate regional colleges, with

specialization in mind, that we could better utilize the

regional colleges that we have and ones that we may have in the

future.

The question that I would like to ask the Minister is: is

there any long range plan in the department to put a regional

college in the Pacific northwest in this province?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Cariboo.

MR. A.V. FRASER (Cariboo): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to Madam

Minister. We have heard a lot of discussion this afternoon and

this evening that seems to centre mostly around post-secondary.

I would like to voice an opinion here about elementary

schools, particularly as they apply in the rural areas. I refer

to the rural schools from one to three classrooms out in the

more remote areas of the province which educate the student

from grade l to grade 8.

Through my travels in the province, I find that most of

these buildings are most inadequate. In a lot of cases they

haven't any libraries, they have no activity rooms and no

proper playgrounds.

I think that here in the Province of British Columbia we are

supposed to be on an equal basis for all in education, and I

would suggest these students in the remote rural areas

certainly are second class citizens when it comes to education.

Looking over the estimates of your department, through you, Mr.

Chairman, to Madam Minister, I can't see that there is any

relief in sight for this situation.

Other things are happening to these rural schools in remote

areas. Due to new pollution regulations and so on, they must

have better water systems and better sewer systems. Quite

frankly, I don't know where the problem is — whether it

is the school boards or getting the money from the Department

of Education and not allocating it property or whether they are

not

[ Page 1169 ]

getting enough money from the department for reallocation.

That's one question.

I would like to hear from the Minister as to what she thinks

about it. There are a lot of students going to grades 1 to 8 in

these rural, remote areas in our province — not only in

my riding but in all parts of this province. I really feel they

have inadequate facilities, and I would like to know from the

Minister what she is planning to do about it to upgrade these

facilities.

The other thing is to do again with rural students in the

interior of the province. I refer to the school bus situation.

Now, the formula that I understand that you have, Mr. Chairman,

for school busing is based on the same classification of roads,

whether it be in a rural or an urban area. It's very well and

good to have a bus formula for Vancouver where they have all

blacktop, even in their alleys, including the lower Fraser

Valley, but I can assure you that it costs a lot more to run a

bus in the interior, in the north of British Columbia, due to

the classification of the roads we have. There doesn't seem to

be any accommodation in your bus formula to look after this

high cost of operation of the vehicle.

I appreciate, Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister,

that she has done something to help with the bus costs when the

weather is severe for five months of the year. But I don't

think all the factors have been taken in, and I think the bus

formula is most unfair to the rural areas which haven't got the

quality of roads to run on. Of course the vehicle costs more to

operate and certainly has to be replaced a lot more frequently

than if they were running on all blacktop roads.

I would like to hear something from the Minister about this,

particularly in view of the fact that I understand that this is

in the basic formula of education to the different school

boards. They overrun their bus costs, and then they turn around

and steal it out of the basic education programme to pay for

this, or alternately they pass it on to the local taxpayer.

There is something radically wrong with this bus formula. I

know, Madam Minister, that you have heard this before, but I

think it is about time we did something to look into it and not

let bus costs make inroads onto the basic curriculum, which

obviously is happening.

The last question I have is on boundary changes. Mr.

Chairman, to Madam Minister, I don't mind stating this while

I'm talking about it, but I'm referring to School District 27

and 28, two of the three school districts in my riding, I'm

referring to boundary changes when we have an industrial or a

commercial development.

In the case of School District 28, Gibraltar Mines has been

established in the south-east corner of School District

28 and gone into production at a cost to that company of around

$80 million. They're in production and they're going to pay a

lot of school taxes. There's now an argument gone up from

School District 27, the next school district south in my

riding, that they should have the benefit of this taxation from

this mine, the reason being that most of the employees of

Gibraltar Mines and their children live and attend school in

School District 27.

Quite frankly, I can't see the difference here because if

local taxes are paid by Gibraltar to School District 27, it

will just reduce the grants from the provincial government. But

my question, through you, Mr. Chairman, to Madam Minister, is:

what is the policy of your Government? Do you intend to

gerrymander the school district boundaries where this happens,

anywhere in British Columbia? I would like to hear your views

on that. Thank you very much.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of

Education.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: The first question the Hon. Member brought

up seemed to be a pretty generalized statement on poor

conditions in some of the schools in the rural areas. I would

appreciate meeting with you if you could specify some of those

areas to me. It was a fairly general statement and I'd like to

know some of the specific areas you're referring to and some of

the services that are suffering. I'd be glad to meet with you

on that at any time.

As to the high cost of buses, particularly compared between

rural and city ridings: I think you have a very valid point

there, I've found since I came into my office that this whole

matter of transportation is one that has taken up a tremendous

amount of time, and rightly so. There are many problems in the

whole matter of school busing. We have to review the whole

situation. There are a lot of inequities there. We've made a

small attempt, I agree. We'll have to really try and make a

complete overview of servicing the children better in the

buses.

Boundary changes: This department has no policy at all with

reference to the matter you brought up. I've had a number of

letters written to me, as you can perhaps imagine, wanting to

acquaint me, as a new Minister, one side to the other with the

problems up there. I simply asked my officials to give me a

report on it so I can be acquainted with the problems. This

time the Government has not made up their mind on any

particular move in that direction until I get a full

report.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. First Member for Victoria.

[ Page

1170 ]

MR. N.R. MORRISON (Victoria): I should like to ask the Hon. Minister

of Education if she has given any consideration to increasing the number of

counselors that are available in grades 10, 11 and 12. Also, has the Minister

considered recommending to school boards a greater concentration of counselors

in the elementary and junior secondary schools?

HON. MRS. DAILLY: It's a very important question that you've asked.

I myself have spoken on that very matter. I think the elementary school counselors,

particularly, are very sorely needed. Certainly in the high schools, students

have had to wait a long time just to see their counsellor. Yes, I am attempting

— we can't do everything at once, as you know. But that is one area where I

hope we will be able to see that school boards will have the financial ability

to try and increase it. I think it's terribly important.

MR. MORRISON: Mr. Chairman, one additional question, if I might ask

it. Do we still use the global budget system as far as the school boards are

concerned? I believe that's where they are assigned the funds and they themselves

then decide how the teachers will be employed.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: That's right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Columbia River.

MR. J.R. CHABOT (Columbia River): Mr. Chairman, I'll be my usual brief

self. I want to ask a question about which I'm rather surprised because it's

a question that the Member for Kootenay (Hon. Mr. Nimsick) should also be interested

in. He hasn't asked it and I think that someone should speak on behalf of the

east Kootenays.

It relates to the establishment of a vocational school in the east Kootenays.

There's been considerable study and research on this very matter. I might say

that there has been an approval in principle by the former progressive government

on this matter. The matter has been actively canvassed for the last two years

— since 1971 — by the vocational school committee, who have gone into the Kimberley

area to look into the feasibility of the establishment of a vocational school

in that vicinity. There's been a fair amount of research done on the part of

the various school districts there, as well as by the teachers' association.

I believe that there is a need for a vocational school in the east Kootenays.

There has been a fair amount of growth. We've had that great corporation, Kaiser

Resources — an enemy of this Government, I realize. Nevertheless, we've had

an expansion at Crestbrook Forest Industries, not only in their sawmill capacity

but in the establishment of a pulp mill. Fording River Coal — there's been a

lot of growth in the Cranbrook area and in the Fernie area. Also, 50 per cent

of the students in the secondary school system are on vocational programmes.

We find today that 25 per cent of those students who do enter into vocational

facilities go either to the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology or the

Lethbridge Community College. It's rather difficult for people from the east

Kootenays — and expensive as well — to travel into Alberta or to find other

vocational schools in the provinces that are further away. Consequently, with

this handicap in acquiring vocational training, many of those students who should

be going to the vocational schools are not.

I'm wondering if the Minister could tell us just what the status is of this

vocational school, whether there are any plans for it to come on-stream, and

if so what its present position is — whether there are any prospects for 1973

for the matter to be started.

One other brief question: on the Okanagan Regional College, I'm wondering whether

there has been any approval for capital expenditure. If so, how much has been

allocated for it? That's the Okanagan Regional College. Have there been any

capital expenditures earmarked for either of the campuses?

HON. MRS. DAILLY: Yes, we agree there is a need for that post-secondary

service, particularly vocational, in the Kootenays. As a matter of fact, I've

met with quite a number of delegations, as you are probably aware. All of them,

of course, would like to have it in their centre. Of course, the Government

will have to decide, after weighing all this, where would be the place. There's

no question about it. They need that service. I can't say now that it will be

ready in 1973, but I would hope that we can service that area as soon as possible

— as soon as the decision is made as to where would be the best place.

I would also like to point out that it doesn't necessarily have to be centred

just in one area. I think perhaps we should be able to decentralize the services.

As I mentioned earlier, to do all this, we've been trying to get a master plan

going. I don't want to impede the servicing to the people in that area by waiting

too long for the master plan, as I said earlier. But we have to take into consideration

some pattern of how we're going to move into the whole concept of new post-secondary services.

In conjunction with that, I realize that this is a pretty priority area also.

We've had a lot of discussions and I hope we can get moving on it. Actually,

when I was speaking to the Minister from Alberta, I can see where there perhaps

could be co-operation so that, for a change, we can keep our students on this

side of the border. Then, perhaps up in the north, it can be in the reverse.

This is what we were talking about — that we can work together very co-operative

[ Page 1171 ]

ly, the two provinces. I think the Kootenays would be a good

area where the students from Alberta could come across to

B.C.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Esquimalt.

MR. J.H. GORST (Esquimalt): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would

like to …

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. GORST: Well, I guess that's the end of that. (Laughter).

Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to make two remarks on the

Department of Education and the Minister's vote.

First of all, I would like to say that I want to re-emphasize the remarks that were made here yesterday by

the Second Member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Lauk) regarding the

school buses and their community use. I would like to ask the

Minister of the department to consider making those buses

available for the students from all the Province of British

Columbia to visit both Victoria, their capital, and the City of

Vancouver, the commercial and industrial centre of the

province.

I'd ask the Minister in that regard to seek the co-operation of the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr.

Strachan) to make the free use of the B.C. ferries to transport

these students and their buses on this programme.

I say these things because it seems to me, Mr. Chairman,

that all our school students in the province at some point in

their education should be able to enjoy the cultural and

political heritages that belong to all the people of British

Columbia. I think it was well said here yesterday that many of

the students in the far reaches of the province just don't get

the opportunity to come down to these centres that we think

they should have, or at least I think they should have.

I'd also like to say something about what I think is a

necessity, outdoor environmental schools. I'd like to ask the

Minister if consideration could be given to that area. Most of

us consider ourselves to be environmentally conscious. We are

continually reading in the newspapers and hearing on the media

the many occurring confrontations between the conservationists

and the business and industry world — such issues as the

Nitinat Triangle, the oil tankers, strip-mining, et cetera.

There are very many other environmental issues that we are

continually being bombarded with, and we always feel that we

have no choice but to be aware of the environment and the

media, as I said, is continually reminding us of this.

But the unfortunate fact, Mr. Chairman, is that once we have assumed the environmental

concern, once we have it, the initial novelty wears off very quickly, and the

average citizen soon becomes bored with the environmental issue and problems

and they forget it right away.

Now, the right message of the need to understand and care

for the ecology and the well-being of nature's earth

then goes unnoticed. Books, television programmes, films and

emphasis on the outdoor recreation are all being used by the

adults to educate themselves to a problem that most of us

formerly never knew existed. The children, the next generation

whose success in relating to the environment may well be a

large determining factor in the on-going survival of the

human race, and I ask — what about those children?

I would suggest, therefore, the setting up of outdoor

environmental schools in various areas of the province. I know

there are already limited facilities directed to that kind of

programme in North Vancouver and in Kamloops. However, I think

it would be desirable to make this kind of programme, Mr.

Chairman, part of the school system.

I suggest to the Minister that this area of south Vancouver

Island offers the unique opportunity to have an outdoor

environmental school to help achieve in the young the basis for

ecological consciousness and an awareness of the natural

environment.

Further, I would like to say an ideal location on the south

end of this island for such a school would be in the Sooke

district, Esquimalt riding — that's because in that area

we have the sea, the beaches, the forests; there are marshes,

mountains, and much small wild life.

Now, all that area that I have referred to, and the

environmental qualities it has, is only one hour's drive from

any elementary school anywhere south of the Malahat in this

south end of Vancouver Island. Such a school in this area could

be used throughout the year by classes from the entire

district.

Now, there is such a school in Toronto. For example, the

facility there served only one grade — grade 6 — and

by having two grade 6 classes used the school each week, in the

course of one year every grade 6 class in Toronto is able to

use that centre. Here, with a smaller population, each class

could be given more time or else the school could serve more

than one grade.

Mr. Chairman, there is almost unlimited educational value as

it pertains to the environment and the appreciation of that

environment by our young people. And they can receive from that

facility that kind of appreciation.

I would ask the Minister to consider that kind of proposal

for British Columbia. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for

Chilliwack.

AN HON. MEMBER: Have you got the benedic-

[ Page 1172 ]

tion?

MR. H.W. SCHROEDER (Chilliwack): No, I don't have a

benediction for tonight.

Mr. Chairman, I noticed in the Minister's responses this

afternoon to some of the questions — in disclosing some

of the facts concerning the reviewing committee as it regards

teacher tenure, that there was disciplinary action taken on the

part of seven different teachers, I believe. Five in one

particular category and two in another category.

I'm aware of the fact that we have something like 22,500

teachers across the province. If only seven out of 22,500 have

required any disciplinary action, then one of two things has to

be true. Either we have one of the most efficient teaching

staffs to be found anywhere in the world; or else the process

by which we determine whether or not disciplinary action is

needed is not foolproof. Because according to my quick

determination, it looks like it is only 0.00031 per cent

failure.

Even at that, three out of the seven had been supported by

their reviewing committee who recommended an appeal even as far

as the Supreme Court, as I understood the Minister's remarks

this afternoon.

My question is this. Since a teacher's appointment is

something tantamount to a guaranteed lifetime tenure, I'd like

to know what is the screening process by which that tenure is

decided? You're smiling.

I'd like to know whether or not the Minister would consider

it a wise idea to make teacher tenure a five-year

tenure, renewable, and reviewed without embarrassment to the

teacher or without embarrassment to the school board —

renewable at any time during the five years for a further

period of five years. I don't know whether that is wise or not,

but I would certainly like to have the Minister's opinion on

it.

Now that's the only question, and since I would like to see

the Minister get her salary this evening, I would like to

commend the Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, on the way

that she has conducted this ordeal, I think she has answered

well. I would like to go one step further and offer to the

Minister of Education my assistance if I am able to help her at

any time during my stay here in the House.

If there were any word of wisdom that I could pass on at all at this time, I would say it in front of God and the whole

world — I detest any philosophy that is not consistent.

Therefore I think — would you please allow me one serious

minute, please. I detest any philosophy that is not consistent.

Therefore I would suggest, Madam Minister, that out of one side

of your mouth, please don't say that you are opposed to

unilateral decisions, and then out of the other side of your

mouth make unilateral decisions. That's the smartest thing I've

said all today and I hope you'll take it in the spirit in which

it is intended. God bless You.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Second Member for

Victoria.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr.

Chairman, earlier I was asking the Minister about research and

what might or might not be done in this area at our

universities. There is one specific question that I would like

to ask her about, one that obviously has been a great worry of

mine over the years and an area in which a great deal of

research is needed — namely that of protecting our

environment with relation to oil spills, particularly at

sea.

I ask this, Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence, because only

this evening…

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Will the Hon. Member continue, please.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: The Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr.

Strachan) is correct. If he wishes me to comment upon it I

will, so that we can explain that comment that he made to the

House.

There has been a 200,000 gallon spill in the south-west corner of Alaska, about 700 miles southwest of

Anchorage.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would ask the Hon. Member to confine his

remarks to the estimates.

AN HON. MEMBER: Right on, right on.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Well I was trying to indicate the

importance of research in this area and this happens to be an

area of education and research.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Do it under Health.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: If the Hon. Member can relate this to the

estimates, it would be appreciated.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: This is a point which is particularly and

extremely damaging, an indication of yet another in a series of

these things over the years; the fact that even without major

increases along our coast in numbers of ships and amounts of

oil carried, there are going to be things of this nature.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, I fail to see the connection between these

…. .

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: I'm trying to outline, Mr.

[ Page 1173 ]

Chairman, the need for research in this area.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. I think that it's a little farfetched.

I would ask you to be more direct.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman, with all due deference, I

don't think it's farfetched to point out an area in which more

research is needed. If I then return to the straight question

of education, Mr. Chairman, I will repeat the offers made to

assist in an educational way to the Premier and others who may

wish to take advantage of experience of others in the whole

area that I've mentioned tonight.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll recognize the Hon. Member for South Peace

River, if he promises to be brief. (Laughter).

MR. PHILLIPS: Mr. Chairman, I have no intention of delaying

the House and I would like to see the Minister get her salary.

I've been a good boy and I've been sitting in my seat all

evening. I haven't tried to get up. I've been…

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Would you continue, please, Mr.

Member.

MR. PHILLIPS: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister of

Education where she intends to put this new college for young

farmers. This has been mentioned by the Minister of Agriculture

(Hon. Mr. Stupich) at one of his open meetings.

HON. MR. BARRETT: It was answered yesterday.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

MR. PHILLIPS: Well, I'll have to ask it again. I'm sorry.

You haven't been in the House through the whole estimates

either, have you Mr. Premier.

HON. MR. BARRETT: There's a Hansard in this House

now.

MR. PHILLIPS: Is that right?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Would the Hon. Member address the

Chair.

MR. PHILLIPS: The reason I'm pointing this out, Mr.

Chairman, is that in the Peace River area, as the Minister

knows, we have an excellent vocational school complete with a

farm for practical learning of agriculture. It's an excellent

course, excellent facilities.

I wouldn't like to see a new college started somewhere and have this excellent

facility that we have — a lot of it is being used by young people from all over

the province — I wouldn't like to see this particular facility closed up. I

wouldn't like to see this course closed up. As I say, it's excellent and it's

been a great help to the local farmers.

It's partly used by some of the farmers, with excellent co-operation from the people who are teaching there,

experimenting with livestock. Through the teaching and through

the practical use of this farm, it has served the area well.

It's served, as I say, a lot of young people from all over the

province.

One instance: I would say that this vocational school farm

played a great role in getting the raising of lambs in the

Peace River area, which I hope will develop into a good

industry for the local farmer in that area. The area has

adapted to it, largely through raising lambs and teaching the

local farmers how to raise lambs. As I say, I would not like to

see a new college started and this facility packed up.

Those of you who think that the area is in the northern part

of the province, study your geography. Basically, it's in the

centre part of the province. It's not really north; it's not

really that far away.

I believe, there should be some move made to expand the

vocational facility there. I mentioned before during the

estimates of the budget about expanding some of the courses

that could be used there, such as petroleum technology and

mining technology. There is a great need for a practical

nursing course there. There are sufficient young girls in the

area who would take this course. With very little expenditure

of money, this course could be put into that vocational school

and would serve a very worthwhile cause.

The other thing that I mentioned and I'm very interested in

is how we're going to immediately assist to get dentists into

the Faculty of Dentistry at UBC from the outlying areas, so

that they will have a tendency to go back to the outlying

areas. I mentioned this before. Maybe the Minister would give

me her comments on those points, please.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: I will certainly take under advisement

your suggestion about the North Peace River. If there's a

situation there now where you think we could continue an

agricultural thing, fine. I believe in decentralization of

these facilities. That doesn't mean it just goes there. We can

also have another area. Perhaps you and I could talk about that

specific area.

Also, the second part of your question — the dentists.

How about leaving that for the Minister of Health tomorrow?

O.K.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 45 pass?

Vote 45 approved.

[ Page 1174 ]

Vote 46; General administration, $4,058,562

— approved.

Vote 47: Correspondence school, $707,334

— approved.

Vote 48: Curriculum Resources Branch, $5,650,196 —

approved.

Vote 49: Jericho Hill School, $1,318,092 — approved.

Vote 50: Post secondary education and training, $162,720,000

— approved.

On vote 51: Grants to school districts, $289,500,000.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey.

MR. McGEER: On a vote of $289 million, I just think we ought

to take 30 seconds over that one before we say "aye".

(Laughter).

Vote 51 approved.

Vote 52: Teachers' Superannuation fund, $9,560,000 —

approved.

On vote 53: Night school grants and training programmes,

$315,000.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Columbia

River.

MR. J.R. CHABOT: (Columbia River): On vote 53, Mr. Chairman,

there has been allocated a 50 per cent increase in the cost of

educating new Canadians. There have been some stringent

guidelines on immigrants coming into Canada imposed by the

national government. I think that at a time of high

unemployment in our country, we should be very careful in our

immigration policies and to ensure that we have sufficient jobs

for the people in our own country and our own province.

Now, my question is: If there is a substantial decrease in

people coming to Canada, what is the necessity of an increase

of 50 per cent for giving of courses to new Canadians?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of

Education.

HON. MRS. DAILLY: There isn't really that much decrease in B.C., I can

assure you, Mr. Member. I've met with the teachers, actually, who were teaching

the new Canadians. Apparently these courses are given right across the province.

They have to negotiate their salaries.

We're increasing the number of teachers because there has

been an increase in the number of immigrants coming to B.C.

That, of course, is federal government policy. If they're here

and want to learn the language, I do think we should provide

them with the facilities to learn.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 53 pass?

Vote 53 approved.

Vote 54: Educational development research and evaluation,

$750,000 — approved.

Vote 55 : One-year adjustment payment, $12,000,000

— approved.

Vote 56: Advances re rural school and library taxes, $10

— approved.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise,

report resolutions and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Speaker, the committee reports resolutions

and asks leave to sit again, Leave granted.

HON. D. BARRETT: (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the

House to make a statement between the motions.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, it has come to the attention

of the Government that an oil spill has occurred 700 miles

southwest of Anchorage, Alaska, at a point known as Kelp Point

by Coal Bay, right at the start of the Aleutian chain. This

spill occurred approximately two hours ago and was immediately

brought to the attention of the Alaska government.

The Governor of Alaska, who I attempted to contact by

telephone, is presently in Washington. I spoke to his

assistant, Mr. Will Lawson, who informs me that the U.S. Coast

Guard is now on the scene, with co-operation from the

Alaska Fish and Game Department.

I offered to Mr. Lawson any assistance that he felt we could

give in the Province of British Columbia, which is of course

limited and at some distance from

[ Page 1175 ]

the spill. Mr. Lawson will inform his own departments of our

offer of assistance. That includes any technical staff or any

other advice or equipment that he feels we may be able to

provide.

At the same time I have sent a telegram to the Prime

Minister urging him