2003 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 37th 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, OCTOBER 30, 2003

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 17, Number 14

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

Community planning and development in

Victoria

J. Bray

Doreen Lawson

R. Lee

Remembrance Day

I. Chong

Oral Questions

Youth crime

J. Kwan

Hon. R.

Coleman

Traffic fine revenue and funding of

municipal police forces

J. MacPhail

Hon. R.

Coleman

Changes to laboratory services

B. Locke

Hon. C.

Hansen

Traffic fine revenue and funding of

municipal police forces

J. MacPhail

Hon. R.

Coleman

Mountain pine beetle infestation

P. Bell

Hon. M. de

Jong

Government aid for B.C. cattle

industry

P. Nettleton

Hon. J. van

Dongen

Tabling Documents

Cross-government

expenditures under September 2000 federal-provincial-territorial early

childhood development agreement, annual report, March 31, 2002 to March 31, 2003

Second Reading of Bills

Youth Justice Act (Bill 63) (continued)

Christensen

R. Visser

B. Penner

S. Brice

M. Hunter

R. Nijjar

G. Trumper

A. Hamilton

Hon. G.

Plant

Committee of the Whole House

Pacific National Exhibition Enabling

and Validating Act (Bill 83)

J. MacPhail

Hon. K.

Falcon

R. Nijjar

[ Page 7669 ]

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2003

The House

met at 2:05 p.m.

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. G.

Collins: I would like to introduce somebody who is probably no stranger to

these buildings. Michael Geoghegan is in the audience today. He is now the

president and CEO of the B.C. Construction Association, which represents over

1,700 construction companies across the province. He's joined today by his

executive assistant, Lyssa Marcil, who is also no stranger to this House. I

would ask the House to make them welcome.

Chong: Joining us today in the Legislature, I am pleased to introduce five

very special guests: Victor E. Wong, Gordon Quan, Paul L. Chan, Philip Young and

Frank Lee. These men served in the Southeast Asia Command Force 136, a special

service, during World War II. They were chosen because of their Asian background

and appearance. Due to the nature of their unit, secrecy was vital, and

consequently few people knew of their existence. They were required to operate

out of uniform and were therefore not under the protection of the Geneva

Convention. Would the House make them all feel very welcome.

Nettleton: We have here today a number of ranchers, including Judy Nicholson

from Grassy Plains; Levi Knapp, a young rancher also from Grassy Plains; Sharon

Robertson, a rancher from Grassy Plains who has two children and six

grandchildren, all involved in ranching; and Denise Fawcett, representing the

Central Interior Feeders Cooperative Association, a third-generation rancher

from Vanderhoof. Please give them a big welcome.

S. Orr:

We have with us today 23 wonderful grade 4 students from a school in my riding,

St. Andrew's School. With them is their teacher, Mr. K. Pollard. Would you

please make them very welcome.

Sultan: In the House today is a very special friend of mine who enjoys

outings on my boat. She is active in cross-country, soccer and gymnastics. I

refer to Emily Driedger, the daughter of Melissa Nowakowski, one of our

hardest-working caucus assistants. She's here with her fourth-grade class, which

has just been introduced, from St. Andrew's School. Would the House please make

them welcome.

J. Bray:

I notice in the gallery somebody else who is no stranger here and no stranger to

anybody who calls to speak to government MLAs. It is our wonderful caucus

receptionist, Lisa Johnson, who really helps us keep things ticking here. I

would ask the House to please welcome her in the gallery.

Mayencourt: Some of us from the west wing of this Legislature have had the

pleasure of working with a legislative assistant by the name of Christine Lewis.

Christine is here today with her mother and her grandparents. Her mother is

Nancee Lewis, and her grandparents are Marian and Reg Ward. What makes this day

a very special occasion is that it is their sixtieth anniversary.

We're very

pleased to have you here today.

I would

just like the House to congratulate them by giving them a warm welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25b)

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND

DEVELOPMENT IN VICTORIA

J. Bray:

Recently Victoria city council voted down a proposed new development in an

area of my community known as the Cook Street Village — this after much work

by the Fairfield Community Association of Victoria and the neighbourhood. I must

say, the developer also worked hard to try and meet the neighbourhood's

expectations and meet the spirit of the Fairfield community plan. It was not

that the Fairfield Community Association is anti-development; it is just that

they felt the scale of the project was too big for the Cook Street Village and

that it did not conform with the 15-year-old neighbourhood plan.

Given this,

I say that democracy was upheld and the community won, but this process

highlighted for me some serious problems. Revitalization of Victoria, and

especially downtown, will be dependent on new development. That fact is

inescapable. In order for Victoria to maintain our services and therefore our

tremendous quality of life, we must expand the tax base.

[1410]

I'm not

saying Vancouver-style development. We can have a made-in-Victoria solution, but

density will ultimately be the key. The community plans are in some cases almost

20 years old. We must look to new plans to recognize the emerging needs of our

city to maintain and expand our tax base. I support neighbourhood planning. It

is a key to how our community operates, but the plans must be linked to

overarching goals. No neighbourhood should bear the full brunt of new

development, but no neighbourhood should expect to be exempt from development.

All cities that have reinvigorated their downtowns and improved their services

have done so in large measure by welcoming high-density development.

We need to

increase the tax base and make use of previously developed lands to avoid

continued urban sprawl and to stop the loss of additional taxpayers to other

areas of the region. Am I simply being pro-development for the sake of the

economy? No, but to maintain our quality of life, all neighbourhoods should

consider completing new plans that are linked to citywide goals. In my opinion,

to do otherwise is to threaten the sustainability of our quality of life.

[ Page 7670 ]

DOREEN LAWSON

R. Lee:

Today I rise in remembrance of Doreen Lawson, a former Burnaby councillor and

longtime community activist. Doreen was a remarkable individual who devoted her

life to the betterment of her community and to teaching others about the

importance of preserving the environment we live in. It was Doreen who lobbied

for years to have the Burnaby Lake area designated as an official wildlife

sanctuary, earning her a well-deserved nickname as the Lady of the Lake.

She was

passionate about every challenge she took on in life, especially municipal

politics. Doreen served on Burnaby city council from 1972 to 1985 and again from

1991 to 1999. Even in her mid-seventies, Doreen was still going strong, working

behind the scenes during the last municipal election. But what I respected the

most about Doreen was her lifelong commitment to teaching and learning. When I

first considered entering provincial politics, Doreen took the time to show me

the ropes and gave me a real sense of what I would be going into.

I remember

the day she and I took a canoe out onto Burnaby Lake so she could explain to me

why the wildlife in that park was an important issue to the residents of my

community. I also understand she recently enrolled in numerous art courses to

obtain a degree from the Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design and held several

exhibitions of her paintings of wildlife and nature.

I think

that sort of dedication to expanding one's horizons in the latter years really

speaks volumes to the character of the Lady of the Lake. She will be remembered

and sadly missed not just by those who knew her but by all those who in the

future will visit Burnaby Lake to enjoy the natural beauty that thrives there

today. That is her greatest legacy.

REMEMBRANCE DAY

Chong: We have reached that time of the year when Canadians everywhere will

soon be wearing on their lapels, jackets or other clothing an international

symbol for those who died in war — the poppy. Every year approximately two

weeks before Remembrance Day, November 11, the Royal Canadian Legion conducts

its annual poppy and remembrance campaign, a campaign whose object is to raise

funds for the needy Canadian ex-service members and their dependents as well as

Commonwealth veterans of World War II.

The poppy

is the symbol of tribute to the more than 117,000 Canadians who have died in the

service of our country in the military, the merchant navy or other wartime

agencies that supported the war effort. To that end, I would like to pay special

tribute today to a particular group of veterans: the Chinese Canadian veterans.

These were a special class of young men whose desire to serve their country,

their place of birth, was much greater than their desire to be treated as

equals.

Those young

Chinese men who enlisted back in the 1930s could not before that time call

Canada their homeland in terms of citizenry, yet that factor did not deter them.

They were born in Canada but not acknowledged as Canadians until they enlisted

and served. Their sense of pride and belonging to Canada in working alongside

other Canadian soldiers became very real and very important, and when they

returned home, they were welcomed as heroes. But now they faced another

challenge: to assist other Chinese born in Canada with full Canadian citizenship

and full voting rights. By 1947, the Chinese people were indeed granted that

right, and we are indebted to those Chinese Canadian veterans whose courage and

pride paved the way for so many others.

Remembrance

Day shall remain and be reverently observed on the eleventh hour of the eleventh

day of the eleventh month of each year as memorial services in communities

across the country honour and commemorate the sacrifices of men and women who

served and died in military service and the merchant navy.

[1415]

We are

indebted to all veterans and all those who have served and to the fallen, to

whom our debt can never be repaid. We shall honour all veterans — and for me

especially, the Chinese Canadian veterans — lest we forget.

Oral Questions

YOUTH CRIME

J. Kwan:

The Attorney General and Solicitor General went to a meeting this week with an

announcement about how they were cracking down on youth crime. Will the

Solicitor General please tell us today how many youth have been found guilty of

driving without a licence in 2002 and how many youth were found guilty of

trespassing on school grounds?

Hon. R.

Coleman: I don't have those numbers at my fingertips, but I will get them to

the member.

Deputy

Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant with a supplemental.

J. Kwan:

Well, it's not surprising, actually, that the minister doesn't have the facts.

It's a pattern this government has established, a pattern of actually hiding the

facts or ignoring the facts — whether it's increasing unemployment, a failing

economy or closed residential beds. Either they don't know, or they're not

saying it.

Can the

minister, then, at least tell us if he's satisfied that all youth who have

driven without a licence or trespassed on school grounds have been caught and

successfully prosecuted?

Interjections.

Deputy

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. R.

Coleman: I said I would get the member the statistical information. You

know, what we've done in

[ Page 7671 ]

the last two and a half years is actually listen to communities and law

enforcement, and we've started to build the tools that are necessary for us to

push back at crime in our communities, whether it be youth justice, whether it

be issues in and around street racing or whether it be issues around how we will

handle information management and modernize our police infrastructure in this

province — something that was never done under her government, something they

completely ignored. They spent their time not worrying about these issues. We're

spending the time worrying about these issues, and I'm proud of the fact that

this government is taking some stands on behalf of communities.

Deputy

Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant with another

supplemental.

J. Kwan:

Well, this minister is unable to say how many of those offences go unapprehended,

but clearly he thought the problem was bad enough that he needed to introduce

tough deterrence measures this week. Will the minister then confirm today that

no matter how tough the law is, if you don't have enough police on the ground,

on the streets, to capture the criminals, the toughest laws in the land are of

no use?

Hon. R.

Coleman: Isn't that incredible? The member used to be a member of the

Vancouver city council and actually is aware of the fact that the city police in

Vancouver are paid 100 percent by the city of Vancouver and that they set the

priorities and the numbers for the police in Vancouver. She's also aware of the

fact that in British Columbia, the law enforcement community has not had its

budget cut. She's also aware of the fact that this government has stood up

against crime and will continue to do so on behalf of all the people of the

province. She's asked for some statistical information, and we'd be glad to get

it. But you know what? If you don't give tools to fight back at crime, you're

making the mistake of ignoring crime and destroying our society, and we're not

prepared to do that in British Columbia.

TRAFFIC FINE REVENUE AND

FUNDING OF MUNICIPAL POLICE FORCES

MacPhail: Well, we're just trying to figure out what the heck the Solicitor

General does know about. We agree that you need to give people tools. That's

absolutely right. Yesterday the Premier, in one of his rare appearances in the

House, confirmed what the government's own documents have intimated: the 75

percent share of traffic fines that he promised would go to municipalities won't

be included in the 2004 budget. If it does happen, it won't be until the 2005

budget — just days before the next election. The Solicitor General says they

need tools, but I must say, giving it to the municipalities in '05 sounds like

the worst kind of CYA exercise ever.

[1420]

Maybe

there's another explanation. Can the Solicitor General please tell this House

what he sees in his crystal ball that would make him think we will need more

police on the street in 2005 than we need on the streets today? Why do they get

the tools just days before an election and not today?

Hon. R.

Coleman: We've actually built a police plan in the province. We're actually

funding that police plan in the province. We're actually looking for

enhancements to police in the province. We actually work with all our member

communities to look at things like integration and amalgamation of services, the

improvement of communication — all of the things that were ignored for ten

years while you were in government, hon. member.

You sat

back and never did a thing with police in this province. You never built a plan.

You never had a discussion. You never built the criminal justice system, and now

today you think you can question it.

I'll tell

you what. We said we would give back 75 percent of fines. We said we'd give it

back in the New Era document, and it'll be given in this mandate. That's

meeting our commitment to a new era. At the same time we've made a commitment to

make our communities safer and stronger and better places to live, because we've

actually sat down with law enforcement to build a plan to protect our

communities, and we'll continue to do so.

CHANGES TO LABORATORY SERVICES

Locke: My question is to the Minister of Health Services. On July 9 the

government announced plans for laboratory service reform, which has resulted in

concerns being raised by my constituency. Many fear that these reforms will lead

to labs being closed, reduced patient access, and that doctors will not be able

to receive test results promptly. Can the Minister of Health Services outline

how the government's position of laboratory reform will benefit patients?

Hon. C.

Hansen: Lab reform is something that virtually every other province in

Canada has gone through, certainly west of Quebec. B.C. is finally getting to

the point where we're addressing that issue in this province.

We have a

system in this province that costs 50 percent more per capita than the Canadian

average, and we have a per-capita cost of about $115 compared to Ontario, for

example, which is in second place at $90. It's not just about getting better

value for the taxpayer so that money can be redirected into other patient care

needs. It's specifically about making sure that patients get better service as a

result of better information systems in terms of lab results, faster access to

the test results that come by and reducing the unnecessary duplication of tests

that we so often hear patients in this province complain about.

TRAFFIC FINE REVENUE AND

FUNDING OF MUNICIPAL POLICE FORCES

MacPhail: It took this government less than 24 hours to give away billions

in corporate and high-

[ Page 7672 ]

income taxes. They didn't have to calculate, equivocate, obfuscate,

negotiate. They didn't even cogitate. With one flick of the pen, it was done.

After two years, what's the result? Highest unemployment in years. We have the

worst economy in the country and the biggest deficit in history.

But the

Premier and the Solicitor General are taking their sweet time to help

communities fight crime. In fact, the Solicitor General doesn't even know what

crime he's fighting. He can't tell us. If they actually delivered on their

promise today, communities would see an immediate infusion of at least $65

million to fight crime. Why is $65 million in additional funding to fight crime

a good thing in an election year but not a good thing today?

Hon. R.

Coleman: This is the member whose government cut over $100 million in

community grants and downloaded resources onto communities. This is a member who

ignored the requests by law enforcement for years to upgrade the technology in

the province. We are actually putting in place the only jurisdiction in North

America, or any jurisdiction you'll find, where we'll have a real-time

information management environment for police…

Interjections.

Deputy

Speaker: Order, members.

Hon. R.

Coleman: …that will tell us what's going on in our streets, so we can have

the information that interacts with itself, so we can solve crime in every

jurisdiction in the province. That is a breakthrough. That's an incredible

breakthrough.

[1425]

I'm proud

of the fact that we have the guts to make the tough decisions with regard to

crime. I'm proud of the fact that I'm prepared to stand up, and this House is

prepared to support me. My colleagues support me in building an infrastructure

for policing that modernizes policing so we can protect our communities.

MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE INFESTATION

P. Bell:

My question….

Interjections.

Deputy

Speaker: Order, please. Leader of the Opposition, come to order.

P. Bell:

I can't hear myself, let alone anyone else.

My question

is for the Minister of Forests. As British Columbia has faced many disasters

this year, including the winds and the rain and the fires, we can't forget that

we face another major disaster in our interior forests — that of the mountain

pine beetle epidemic. Released today, the chief forester shows that the size of

the beetle infestation has nearly doubled since 2002 to over 4.2 million

hectares in the province now infested at some level or state. This means the

province could face a dramatic reduction in the long-term sustainable timber

supply. Can the Minister of Forests tell this House what steps are being taken

to assist the communities in the heartlands affected by this epidemic?

Hon. M.

de Jong: It is true that communities from Vanderhoof to Kamloops are now in

the midst of this devastating infestation, and it is growing. It's seven timber

supply areas, a number of tree farm licences.

As the

member knows, we embarked a couple of years ago on a program of concentrated

harvesting activity on the leading edge of the infestation. We created emergency

management zones that would allow for quicker access to the leading edge of the

infestation. Though there has been some impact, it has been a limited impact,

and the infestation continues to grow.

The chief

forester released his report, and it is a very troubling report. According to

that report, inside of three years 50 percent of the pine in the affected areas

could be dead. The AAC in the affected areas could be reduced, 15 years from

now, by upwards of 19 or 20 percent.

We are

going to have to, in my view, increase harvest activity, and that is one of the

options that will be considered at the symposium the Premier has called for

later in the month of November — I think November 12. There are strategies in

place, and they'll be discussed at the symposium — how to improve those

strategies and take account of what is the worst infestation in the country's

history.

GOVERNMENT AID FOR

B.C. CATTLE INDUSTRY

Nettleton: B.C. rancher Sharon Robertson, who I introduced to the House

today, has taken issue with the minister's statement that the main solution to

the ranchers' and producers' dilemma is to have the border open or to fill out

yet more forms for slow and meagre federal assistance. This is what she has to

say about that: "In my own personal situation, the border cannot be opened

tomorrow. It will do nothing for my situation or any other feeder member who

purchased cattle. I am still out $49,000 for all of the operating money I put

into those cattle, still out the shortage of the feeder loan and the loss of my

5 percent deposit, and with this I will soon be out of business."

I ask of

the minister: from the time the border opens, in his estimation, how long will

ranchers like Sharon Robertson — here today — have to somehow survive before

business recovers to the level prior to the mad cow disaster and shutdown? In

other words, has the ministry estimated how long the recovery will take, and

what will the provincial effort be towards alleviating their financial

hardships?

Hon. J.

van Dongen: Certainly, I've spoken the last two days about some of the

details of the provincial initiatives, including opening the border, which as

I've said

[ Page 7673 ]

is the only permanent solution. We are working through an adjustment period.

I want to assure the member and I want to assure the ranchers who are visiting

today that we as a province are making major financial commitments to the

assistance of the ranching community.

We have

sought to maximize federal dollars; that is correct. I want to say to this House

that we have budgeted for and expect to pay out up to $25 million under the CAIS

program. We have budgeted for and expect to pay out, under the BSE recovery

program and the proposed national cull cow program, another $10 million.

We expect

that if ranchers fill out their application forms in a timely manner, they will

receive hard cash from both the provincial and federal governments. We have seen

cheques issued. We are issuing cheques under the CAIS program. I can only

encourage ranchers to fill in their applications to work with us.

I was in

Vanderhoof on…

[1430]

Interjection.

Deputy

Speaker: Order, please. Let's listen to the answer.

Hon. J.

van Dongen: …August 27. I met with about 350 ranchers there. I encouraged

them to look at all of the programs. We had a workshop in Vanderhoof on

September 20 to assist them, and I'm certainly more than willing to meet with

Sharon Robertson and Denise Fawcett and the other ranchers today, with their

member, right after question period.

We will do

whatever we can to help get this cash out. There are major commitments. We will

get it out to the ranching community.

Hon. M.

de Jong: Mr. Speaker, a moment ago I inadvertently misled the House. The

symposium I was referring to takes place on November 21, not November 12.

[End

of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. L.

Reid: I rise to table the annual report on cross-government expenditures

under the September 2000 federal-provincial-territorial early childhood

development agreement for the period March 31, 2002, to March 31, 2003.

Early this

spring British Columbia will be the only jurisdiction in Canada to have a

provincial snapshot of the learning readiness of every single five-year-old in

our province. My thanks to Dr. Clyde Hertzman for his outstanding research in

this area, and I know we will continue to go forward from the base of the best

possible science.

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

Collins: I call continued second reading debate on Bill 63.

Second Reading of Bills

YOUTH JUSTICE ACT

(continued)

Christensen: Just prior to lunch I was speaking in favour of what Bill 63,

the Youth Justice Act, will do in terms of providing the framework for

addressing youth justice issues in the province. The gist of my comments has

been that what Bill 63 does is provide this broad framework and what I believe

is a broad and comprehensive foundation that will then allow government, on a

broad scale, to address youth justice issues.

listening to the debate over the last couple of days, I did certainly take

notice of comments by a number of members. I guess what stood out to some extent

was some of the comments of the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. She spoke

at some length about the need to support youth, and I think all members of this

House agree that we need to find the means to support youth, particularly where

it's in the interests of…. It always is in the interests of society to assist

youth in overcoming particular challenges they have at one point so that they

can become productive members of society. That is certainly the case, perhaps in

many ways more than it's emphasized in the case of youth who come into conflict

with the law.

I was

struck in particular by some of the specific comments that the member for

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant brought forward about some of the groups she had

talked to. She referred to the Victoria Boys and Girls Club. What she said was

that any approach…. What the club had said was that any approach to youth

justice has to be a multifaceted approach, and I couldn't agree more. It has to

include education, incarceration and support, and the most important piece of

that is intensive support for the youth, the family and the community.

Certainly, if we look at the Youth Justice Act and

section 28 of the act in

particular, it's clear that what this bill does is provide a broad mandate to

the minister to develop and provide programs that will broadly support youth.

The member

for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant brought forth comments from the B.C. Association

of Chiefs of Police that suggest that we don't gain anything by simply putting

youth in custody. Again, that's certainly in line with what this bill does. This

bill provides custody as an option where that's appropriate, but custody goes

hand in hand with a focus on rehabilitation. Anyone who's at all familiar with

our youth custody facilities will know that a major emphasis in those types of

facilities is rehabilitation of the youth who find themselves there.

[1435]

Further to

that point, what Bill 63 does is support and confirm the role of the Ministry of

Children and Family Development in providing youth justice services right from

the start — in terms of youth probation officers and the critically important

role they play in reviewing the circumstances that a youth in conflict with the

law finds himself or herself in and providing

[ Page 7674 ]

assistance to the court in dealing with that youth — through to the actual

treatment programs, for lack of a better word, that the youth can benefit from,

whether they have a custodial sentence or otherwise.

I think the

one thing that was sorely lacking in terms of the comments that the member for

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant made was…. There was no discussion of public

safety, and that's really what we must…. While we strive to deal with the

challenges that youth in conflict with the law face, we have to recognize that a

justice system is also there to ensure that there's protection of the public.

What Bill 63 does is provide a very critical balance between those two needs

when we're dealing with youth justice.

Bill 63, as

I've said, provides the foundation for doing both. Given the concerns, I think

if the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant reads through her comments in Hansard

and realizes what she said when she spoke to this bill, she should have no

difficulty when it comes time to vote on this bill to support it. The reality

here is that Bill 63 provides the foundation for everything we need to be doing

to properly deal with youth justice issues here in the province of British

Columbia.

I'm

incredibly proud to be able to stand in the House in support of Bill 63.

Certainly, those clear-thinking members of this House will support it

wholeheartedly, and we should have unanimous support for this bill here in this

House.

Visser: I wanted to spend some time today talking about Bill 63 and the

Youth Justice Act. Unlike some of my previous colleagues, I have actually little

or no experience — personal, as a lawyer or otherwise — with the youth

justice system. I was a stellar young man growing up and continue on those paths

of goodness.

But it is

something that has been drawn to my attention on a number of occasions, and it

is one of those topics that is in the public domain on an all-too-regular basis.

I think it often is one of those things that is a headline-grabber — something

that gets talked about around the coffee rooms, coffee shops and in other

places, the living rooms of British Columbia and indeed across Canada. What are

we going to do about youth crime? What are we going to do about those young kids

who get into trouble, and how are we going to help solve some of those problems?

When are we going to get tough on crime?

I think

this act actually speaks a little bit to that by addressing some discrepancies

or eliminating the disparity between the federal and provincial statutes, and

brings us into line. It gives us a chance in this chamber to just spend a few

minutes collectively thinking and talking about something that I think we see

oftentimes. Whether it's young people street racing or sex offence–related

crimes with young people, there are some issues that have provincial

consequences. I think it's okay that we as a Legislature start to come to terms

with the notion of serious consequences for serious offences and that we do have

the opportunity to see some of these young offenders spend some time in a

custody facility.

[1440]

Fortunately

and unfortunately, I have had the opportunity to tour a facility. We recently

closed the Lakeview Youth Custody Centre in Campbell River. It was a place I'd

visited a number of times and met with the staff, and we had been through it and

met with some of the youth that were there. We spent a lot of time talking about

the programs and what they were giving to those youth.

There are

some rather startling statistics out there that speak to the capacity we have in

this province to house youth in custody. The number is now half of what it was

in 1997. In fact, the number of kids on probation is half of what it was in

1997, so we had some extra capacity that we had to take out of the system. When

you have only 13 kids in a centre that can hold 40 or 50, you are not using your

plant wisely. We needed to address some of those issues and try to provide

services in a more managed and effective way. Now, nobody likes the notion of

closing, but I think there were some important efficiencies to gain there.

One of the

tracks that our country, our nation, has taken over the past few years is to

explore concepts of alternative justice, to provide a broader range of

alternatives to regular incarceration. Restorative justice, healing circles and

all of those kinds of things we do where we connect victims and offenders and

families and offenders, and we bring them together in a supportive environment,

have helped us to produce those reductions in numbers of youth in custody.

Those kinds

of things are important to us. We need the broad spectrum of tools. There are

going to be offenders out there. We see them in the newspapers; we see the

crimes they commit in the newspapers. From time to time there is a sense out

there in the public that we aren't doing enough to be tough on crime. So it's

okay to move, in some cases, from an offence structure that does not provide the

state or the justice or the courts with the ability to pull people or hold

people in custody. It's okay to go from that place to a place where they may

have 60 or 90 days to intervene with those youth. In our facilities today, as we

have consolidated them in the Ministry of Children and Family Development and

the youth detention centres, we do have those supports. We do have the

counselling. We do have the ability to intervene. We do have the ability to

reach out to them in a number of ways.

The numbers

of these kids that come into the system, who have been touched by alcohol or

drugs, is incredibly high. The numbers of these kids who may have a dual

diagnosis, where there is an alcohol or drug problem in combination with a

mental health issue, is high, and we need a way and a place to intervene or to

access or to provide those supports. Perhaps it's going to be that ten-, 30-,

60- or 90-day period where, in some of these kids' cases, we can actually reach

some of them with those supports, where we can actually make a difference in

their lives, where we can actually steer them a little bit.

[ Page 7675 ]

You know,

in these facilities they have schools. Maybe that's the place where some of

these kids get back to school. Maybe settling some of them down for a few days

provides them that opportunity to slow down, think about life and then try to

make some achievements. We don't try to teach them physics, although some of

them are perfectly fine at physics. But you do try to intervene in things like

wood shop, reading skills, literacy skills — all of those things that some of

these youth have missed in their formative days, in the days leading up to the

point where they find themselves in trouble.

I think

youth justice is something we need to spend quite a bit more time thinking about

and talking about as a government and certainly as a province. I appreciate the

work that the Minister of Children and Family Development has done. He's been up

to my area and visited with those folks, and he continues to be involved in the

process of making the youth justice system more supportive. He continually tries

to reach out to those providers and challenge them to be innovative and

creative.

[1445]

In the

separation of the Ministry of Children and Family Development into authorities

and the new approach to the aboriginal authority for children and families and

protective services, there's an opportunity here to introduce a cultural

component — really, something that I think as a province we should always be

concerned about and always be talking about — to the number of young people in

our system that need intervention who are of aboriginal origin. We need,

perhaps, to think about new cultural ways to intervene, new ways to approach

them. I think we've got a long way to go — there is no doubt in my mind —

but we're well on our way.

Anytime we

get the opportunity to harmonize or to be compatible with federal law that makes

sense for British Columbia and for British Columbia statutes, which gives us

more tools to intervene with youth and to provide for safer and more secure

communities, that's a good thing. I think that's something we should pursue.

I'm pleased

to support this bill. I think we'll have lots more to say on this subject over

the next few years in this province. We've done a great deal of work. The work

that the Solicitor General has done, the Attorney General has done, the Minister

of Children and Family Development has done — and certainly the Minister of

State for Early Childhood Development, where we're intervening as early as

possible with youth — is all providing some long-term solutions to these

problems.

We're

generating a long-term vision, because we know there isn't one right answer to

this stuff. There isn't one thing we can do today that will solve all these

problems tomorrow. They're going to take time, they're going to take creativity,

and they're going to take innovation. They're going to take a collaborative

approach by the government across ministries and, frankly, across jurisdictions

— federal and provincial and now down into first nations and municipal

governance. I think that if we can all work on these issues together over time,

we'll build a better system that serves our communities and our youth very

appropriately. Thanks for the opportunity.

Penner: I'm pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this debate.

I've had a chance now to listen to the remarks of a number of my colleagues, and

I want to salute them for their thoughtfulness in approaching this very

challenging topic of youth crime. It's one reason I'm so pleased that this

government has seen fit to not just talk about youth crime but to actually do

something about it. As indicated, this bill, Bill 63, will provide our law

enforcement agencies and the courts yet another tool in their arsenal to try and

get a handle on what in some communities is a very dire situation.

Specifically,

I'd like to just start with an overview of the act for those people in the

general public who may be just tuning into the debate. As you may know, the

Youth Justice Act, Bill 63, repeals the existing Young Offenders (British

Columbia) Act, makes changes to the youth provisions of the Correction Act and

consolidates relevant provisions from those acts into one new Youth Justice Act

written specifically for young offenders.

Three main

objectives are fulfilled by this act. First, it ensures that our provincial

statutes are consistent with federal terminology and are up to date with current

practice. Second, the act parallels the federal legislation by ensuring that

serious consequences are available as a sentencing option for six serious

provincial statute offences that previously could only attract non-custodial

sentences. Third, the legislation increases the maximum custody sentence

available for serious provincial statute offences, where the maximum penalty for

an adult is more than six months, from a maximum of 30 days to a maximum of 90

days.

By focusing

on the specific needs of youth in conflict with the law while increasing the use

of custody for the most serious provincial statute offences, this bill balances

the need to focus on rehabilitation of young persons while providing increased

consequences for those youth who pose a risk to public safety — another of the

actions taken by this government to ensure we have safe streets and communities.

[1450]

There have

been other initiatives undertaken by this government. I'll touch on them in due

course during my remarks today, but I want to just reflect on what it really

means to be able to impose a custodial sentence for a number of these offences

I've just mentioned, as opposed to mere probation.

Mr.

Speaker, as you and others will likely know, I spent a fair bit of time in

Provincial Court, not as an accused but as a participant in the process as legal

counsel. A major part of my legal practice involved young persons alleged to

have committed various forms of wrongdoing. It was my observation that for many,

but not all, of the young people, a period of probation was seen as a slap on

the wrist. It was seen as

[ Page 7676 ]

getting away with it — whatever it was they were alleged to have done. So I

think there is a salutary effect that will come from young people knowing that

for certain types of offences now, probation is not the only form of sentence

available to them.

There was a

Provincial Court judge that I spent a fair bit of time with before — his name

is Derragh Vamplew, now retired — who I thought was a very wise and astute

man. He had an ability to size up a young offender, look them in the eye, judge

them by their demeanour and at certain times impose a jail sentence on them when

they were not expecting it — not a long one, not lock them up and throw away

the key, not that kind of approach.

I can

recall one occasion when I was there representing a young person who, among

other things, refused to take off his baseball cap in the courtroom and appeared

to be joking with his friends from school who'd come along to watch and to — I

don't know — cheer him on or support him. Judge Vamplew realized what was

happening — that this young person, rather than taking the process seriously,

was actually showing off to his friends and thumbing his nose at authority. He

said to me: "Mr. Penner, we'll stand this matter down, and we'll resume

this afternoon at 3 o'clock. Mr. Sheriff, please take Mr. Penner's client into

custody." Well, you should have seen the look on that young person's face.

He couldn't believe he was actually being taken into custody and locked up in a

jail cell, but that's what happened to him. It didn't take more than a few

seconds for that brave façade, that youthful bravado to crumble and collapse

and disintegrate right in front of his friends' eyes.

That had a

very salutary effect. About an hour later I made my way back into cells to

interview my client and get some instructions from him, and he was in tears.

Just a few moments before, he had been acting brave and tough, like he wasn't

afraid of a thing in the world, and here he was in a jail cell, not a very

comfortable place to be — not in shackles but just sitting in a jail cell —

and he was crying. I asked him why he was crying, and he said: "Because I

can't do anything I want to do now. " He had lost control over his life, at

least for that temporary moment.

Without

divulging too much, I think my comments to him went something like this:

"If you're not careful with how you conduct the rest of your life, you will

lose ultimate control over the rest of your life, because you can expect to see

a lot more jail cells like this one if you carry on with your current attitude

and conduct." Well, when that young person was led back out into the

courtroom at 3 p.m., his friends had left. He was left to stand alone in front

of the judge, and he had a very different attitude about what he had done and

about the process that he was involved in, being before the courts.

The effect

of these amendments in Bill 63 is that in the future, judges will have that

opportunity for a greater range of offences to impose a custodial sentence —

whether it's one day or an afternoon or a couple of days — on a young offender

to get their attention, to take that smirk off their face when they're trying to

show off to their friends about how uncaring or unconcerned they are. This will

give judges an important tool.

I know,

back in the 1970s, it was fashionable in England for people to talk about a

short, sharp shock to catch people's attention, and I think there is some merit

in that attitude. It doesn't work for all. I'm not advocating a

one-size-fits-all solution. But this legislation, Bill 63, provides the

flexibility so that in certain circumstances, judges can size up an individual

and determine if in fact they think it would be beneficial for the young person

to say: "I think you're going to spend some time away from your friends,

locked up in a jail cell, so you can be alone with your own personal thoughts

and decide what you want for the rest of your life."

[1455]

I think

that is a beneficial response to certain types of offences and for certain types

of young people. My studied view is that that does not take place often enough

in our system. Too often young people are given probation repeatedly for

consecutive offences so that they get accustomed to breaking the law, they get

accustomed to getting a slap on the wrist, and they get accustomed to being

reinforced by the joking gestures of their friends and getting that peer support

for: "Look what I'm able to do and get away with it and thumb my nose at

the world." If we can interrupt that process before they get too accustomed

to the praise of their peers for breaking the law and thumbing their noses at

our judicial system, I think we can set those young people on a better course

for the rest of their lives. That's one reason I'm so proud to stand here today

and support this initiative.

I heard the

previous speaker, the member for North Island, talk about some of the programs

that young people may or may not be entitled to — or that are made available

to them when they are in custody. There are situations where, in fact, at these

detention centres they receive education — often better than what they were

receiving before they were incarcerated. Why is that? Very often they tend not

to attend school when they're out amongst their friends and getting into

trouble. They skip out. They'll miss extended periods of school. When they're

incarcerated, they have really no option but to attend class.

I know a

little bit about this, because for the last few years of my father's teaching

career, he taught at a juvenile detention centre in the Chilliwack River valley.

He told me there was a remarkable difference in attitude that he saw even from

the junior high school he used to teach at in the Chilliwack area to the

juvenile detention camp. I anticipated — and frankly, the rest of our family

was a little concerned — that my father would have a more difficult time

handling the students in the juvenile centre than he did in the junior high

school he had taught at for many years. In fact, the students in the juvenile

detention centre in some cases had a better attitude. Their choice was that you

participate in the classroom activities and stay on track and

[ Page 7677 ]

focused in terms of the school work, or your alternative is to be locked up

in a cabin by yourself, separated from your peers. There is no penalty greater

for a young person than to be separated from their peers and their friends.

Those

students my father dealt with were well motivated to focus on their books and

the assignments and to do well at school. For some of them it was a

life-changing experience. Again, I don't advocate a lengthy custodial sentence

for all young people. Hopefully, the majority of them get the message early on

that it's not acceptable and not conducive to their own self-interest to engage

in that type of illegal activity that gets them in trouble. If it takes a longer

sentence, then I support that in order to get that message through.

The

Solicitor General talked about other things that he has done. Frankly, I was

shocked listening to question period. The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant

was somehow criticizing the Solicitor General and this government for

introducing new measures to get a handle on youth crime. I understand that there

are bleeding hearts out there who think we shouldn't impede anyone in their

desires to do whatever it is they care to do. Well, I'm not one of those people.

I believe there are limits, and I believe society requires us to uphold

standards. Without standards and without those standards being enforced, we lose

a civil society that we all desire. I was just appalled to hear the member for

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and, frankly, the Leader of the Opposition

criticizing the government for trying to get a handle on crime.

Now, this

isn't the only tool we've introduced over the last two years or so. I remember

that shortly after the election, this government introduced, in the summer of

2001, a new piece of legislation that allows for legal action against the

parents of young people who have committed various crimes where those parents

have not been sufficiently responsible in terms of monitoring the conduct and

activity of their children. Again, there are complaints from some quarters,

usually from the same quarters we're hearing from today, but it was one more

step towards getting a handle on a problem. It's a tool.

The bill

was called the Parental Responsibility Act, and the act functions pretty much

the way it's described. I understand from media accounts that there may now be a

court action underway in the province relying on that piece of legislation we

brought in — just one more tool to try and get control over what could be a

serious problem by making parents that much more responsible for the conduct of

their young people.

[1500]

PRIME-BC

was an initiative of this government in this session, back in the spring. I

don't think it's received the kind of publicity it deserves. It's really

bringing policing into the modern era. Today we talk about information

technology. Well, information is absolutely crucial if we're going to

effectively respond, in a timely fashion, to crime. Criminals don't wait.

Organized crime doesn't wait to hold government meetings or to do all kinds of

long-range planning or to get permission to operate across municipal boundaries.

This tool we've introduced through PRIME-BC will allow police to obtain

information from beyond their own municipal jurisdictions and boundaries to

respond quickly to crime and keep up with the conduct of certain evildoers, to

quote a certain U.S. politician, before they can inflict more harm on our

society. I support that.

Our

government is finding the resources necessary to implement the modernized

computer-based system so that right in their own police vehicles, police

officers will be able to have access to that information in a real-time way.

Before I

conclude my remarks on this topic, I'd like to talk about one other aspect of

Bill 63. Specifically, Bill 63 amends

section 177 of the School Act, which for

many years has prohibited certain types of activities on school property. I

think the general public supports extra restrictions on what can take place on

school property for obvious reasons: we treasure our young people, and they are

our greatest resource as a province. Until now, for various violations under the

School Act, the maximum penalty consisted of probation or community service or

fines and/or 30 days in custody. With this amendment, we are now increasing the

penalty to 30 days in custody for violations under the School Act for things

such as sexual exploitation or gang activity.

One of the

more troubling cases I was involved with as a lawyer prior to ending up here was

representing and working on behalf of a troubled female young person who was the

victim of repeated sexual exploitation at her school by kids older than her. My

client had a mental disability and was easily taken advantage of. It was,

frankly, heartbreaking to hear about what was happening to her essentially

beyond her control.

This bill,

in many ways, I see as a tribute to my client, and I'm very eager to vote in

favour of this bill if it comes to a vote, if for no other reason than to —

however late in the day — provide some assistance for people similar to my

client, who were exploited in ways that most of us don't even want to imagine.

So I think it's about time that we get on and we support a bill like this.

I'm sorry

that the opposition maybe feels differently. Hopefully, they will have a change

of heart and realize that it's time to leave politics aside, leave partisanship

aside and do what's right for our young people by providing them with an extra

measure of protection while we still can — before it's too late, before their

lives are ruined, before they embark on a life of criminal wrongdoing. It's time

to do the right thing, and I call on the opposition to acknowledge that fact.

Brice: I, too, take pleasure in standing in support of this legislation. I'd

like to commend the member for Chilliwack-Kent for his very comprehensive

overview of the legislation and also the anecdotal contributions he made to

actually put a face on this legislation.

It is

interesting how many of us have risen to speak to this particular bill. One

always asks when con-

[ Page 7678 ]

fronted with legislation: who are the stakeholders? Well, in this particular

case, I would say the stakeholders who have a stake in this particular bill are

the youth, their parents, the teachers, the police, the corrections community

and then the public at large. Youth obviously do, by dint of whom this

legislation is directed toward.

[1505]

As has been

mentioned, the youth who find themselves in conflict with the law are starting

down a path, which we as a caring and civilized society must deal with, with all

seriousness. We cannot afford to toss any young people out. Every single one of

them needs the full measure of the public resources in order to save their

lives.

This

particular legislation, of course, deals with an aspect of youth in conflict

with the law that is of very serious nature and therefore provides for some very

serious consequences. Some of the issues that are brought to our attention in

terms of youth in serious conflict with the law deal with very, very high-risk

behaviour and some very nasty consequences. Youth who are in this position have

to be given the widest range of consequences in order to correct it.

Parents

have obviously got a big interest in this legislation. All of us who have raised

children know that even good kids do dumb things. I think that for those kinds

of situations, generally speaking, the family, community policing and all other

resources are there to support them when they start to stray and to assist their

families in helping them make the very best of their lives.

One can

only imagine what it must be like to be a parent who has a child that has been

charged with a very serious offence. For parents, it must be an absolutely

stabbing experience to realize that your child — the child that you held in

your arms, the baby that came into this world looking to all intents and

purposes like every other baby — has somehow gone through some evolution, some

experiences, and has come out and is doing things that are dreadfully hurtful to

other people. I can't think of anything, as a parent, that would be more

devastating.

For those

parents as well, we need to have this type of legislation so the law can assist

in bringing this youth into some kind of compliance so that the family doesn't

have to endure the absolutely hideous, hideous consequence of having to stand

beside some of their family members when they ultimately — either as a youth

or as they grow into adult life — are confronted in a courtroom with a charge

of manslaughter, murder or some other offence. We see this. We see families

being absolutely dragged into the depths, having to stand beside a family member

who has committed some of the worst offences against society. Parents definitely

have a stake in this legislation.

Teachers

have a stake in this legislation. As a former teacher myself, I know it can be

heartbreaking when you see a kid going off the rails and you know that you have

to tap into all the resources possible in order to make sure this kid does not

continue to escalate until eventually some kind of act is committed that cannot

be just papered over — that in fact they've gone off and committed some truly

negative offence.

[1510]

Teachers

will find now that this protection, which will allow persons who are officially

trespassing on school property to be dealt with seriously, will be of great

assistance to teachers. School boards, I would think, would find this particular

legislation very helpful, because they know, too, that they've got to protect

the children in the schools and that there are people — perhaps even other

youths — wanting to come onto the school property in order to approach young

people, particularly in crimes where they will be sexually exploited. Up until

now, the police, school boards and others have not been able to invoke the full

force of the law, so this legislation will be of assistance to them.

Certainly,

the police will be interested in the fact that we as a Legislature have taken

seriously their calls for tougher penalties for the very serious crimes that

youth commit. If you talk to the police, they're committed to community

policing. They know where their resources have to go, but they also know they've

got some real tough characters out there who, if the police are not supported by

the assistance of being able to give some real tough sentences out…. I mean,

these are not even what I would put into the category of tough sentences. They

are another opportunity, yet another tool to allow the courts to assist the

police in keeping our communities safe.

I want to

commend the Solicitor General. I've had many discussions on my community of

Saanich South and the Saanich police, and I know the Solicitor General totally

supports community policing. He knows this is the best way to harness all of the

tools within the community to support all members — the youth and the adults

and children. Obviously, the corrections branch will have good interest in this

legislation and, I dare say, will support what we are attempting to do here.

I say

"attempting," because absolutely no document…. We don't simply take

printed words, all well-intended, spend time deliberating on them and ultimately

pass them in this Legislature and feel that's a panacea. If only life were that

simple. Obviously, it is not that simple. It is far more complex than that. This

document will provide yet one more opportunity for that safety net as we try to

make our communities safer for all citizens.

Finally, as

I say, the public at large will have an interest in this. You can point to

statistics and say that youth crime is going down, but the very nature of some

of the crime that is taking place — the severity of it — sends a signal out

to the whole community that perhaps they're not safe. I find that seniors in

particular have a perception or a reality, depending on the area in which they

live, that they're not safe.

If people

don't feel safe, it's almost as bad as them not being safe, because then they

start to make their world smaller, to lock themselves into their homes, to be

fearful about going out, to be reluctant to interface

[ Page 7679 ]

with youth. They sense there aren't serious consequences for serious acts. I

think that portion of the public that we represent, the seniors, should be

heartened by the fact that we have taken their concerns seriously and are

putting more tools out there for those dealing with these youth who are causing

serious crime.

I see these

amendments as appropriate, balanced and timely. It has been mentioned that we

are harmonizing now with federal legislation. Just as the document passed here

doesn't guarantee anything, even harmonizing it with yet another level of

government's legislation doesn't guarantee anything either. It's enabling,

though, and it will allow, particularly for those situations where youth are

incarcerated, for some other professional to make contact. As kids go off the

rails, you never know when that moment is going to be that somebody can speak to

them in a way that they will hear.

[1515]

I found,

when I was chairing the school board, that when kids got into trouble and you'd

bring all the people together who had been involved, there were oftentimes the

parents, the probation officer, the teacher, the principal, the counsellor, the

family doctor. Many, many people had touched this young person before they got

into a situation, before they were being suspended from school. Sadly, it's the

coordination of these professionals that is lacking. They're oftentimes working

in isolation.

I know that

a lot of work is being done through the Ministry of Children and Family

Development. By putting the services out into the community, there's a greater

chance that all those who are interested in the future and well-being of our

youth will have a chance to work together. The amendments will, of course, as

has been mentioned, give another opportunity for those who want to make a

difference in the youth's life to come in and interact with yet another level in

the corrections system.

Public

safety is hugely important. When you talk to folks, they want to not only be

safe but also to feel safe. We want to keep our children safe, want a sense of

well-being. That is probably as much as anything a health issue too. I mean, if

our community feels safe, then everybody experiences a higher level of wellness

and security. Whenever we hear of any of these hideous situations, be it a youth

or be it an adult who has perpetrated some kind of a violent crime, there is a

reverberation throughout the entire community. Everyone's life is altered,

oftentimes negatively.

After one

of these events and after some publicity, there needs to be a coming-together.

The community needs to feel that not only is this youth going to have a chance

to get the kind of help they need, but also the community needs to feel safer.

Some of these young people who have had lots of interface with professionals get

pretty hardened. They can slough off a lot. They cannot react to all of the

usual efforts made to try and assist them. When that is the case, there must be

an opportunity for a longer period of incarceration, and this will allow for

that.

Safer

schools, safer communities, safer streets — that is a commitment we have made

to the public. In its own way and in harmony with a lot of other initiatives we

have taken, this legislation before us assists in that. That is why I will be

pleased to support it. I urge all members of this House — both on the

government side and the opposition — to come together and support our

legislation, which will give a greater sense of safety to our public.

Hunter: Mr. Speaker, I've got a bit of a frog in my throat today, so if I

have to pause for water, I hope you'll excuse me.

I'm

actually quite pleased to stand here today to address an issue that has to do

with the matter of public safety in our province and indeed in our country. I

was quite offended about question period today and the trivialization of this

very important issue that the opposition member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant

put on this subject. The timing of my intervention is, from my point of view,

appropriate, given that trivialization and, I thought, shocking intervention an

hour or so ago in this chamber.

[1520]

We are

debating the Youth Justice Act, Bill 63. The reason we're doing it, of course,

Young Offenders Act and replaced it with the Youth Criminal Justice Act. That

allows opportunity for us here in British Columbia to update our own

legislation, to bring it consistent with the new federal bill and its

terminology and indeed, and perhaps more importantly, with current practice in

the area of dealing with youth offences.

In a sense,

I'm not sure if I should say I feel uncomfortable, but I will say that I must

either have lived a sheltered life or I came from a generation and a place and

circumstances — family and economic — where youth crime, in my recollection,

wasn't an issue. So it's a little difficult, quite frankly, for me to understand

some of the forces at play in our society that have created the problem we have

and why we have to deal with this apparently on a continuing basis. I mean, my

recollection of crime was the odd stolen apple from across the neighbour's

fence. It was, I will admit — and this is not a confessional…. But I will

confess that I may have broken a window or two with a cricket ball, because that

was the sport I played in my youth. I may have run off and left some poor

homeowner with a bill that I should have paid.

An Hon.

Member: Mid on or mid off?

Hunter: The member asked mid on or mid off. That shows his knowledge of

cricket. I'm grateful for that. In my case, it was probably silly mid on,

member.

I guess as

young people we are rambunctious. We all probably did things our parents would

have died over if they had known about. Most of us got a lesson. We learned

lessons with relatively little personal effect or personal injury and,

hopefully, limited impact on

[ Page 7680 ]

others in our society or our families. The fact is that more and more today,

we see that perhaps those days I remember through rose-coloured glasses a little

bit…. Today I don't think young people who are growing up in our society in

many cases could stand where I am 45 or 50 years later and say that what I

experienced was their experience. We've had members of this government do

substantial and quite alarming work on bullying in schools, for example, and

recommendations made on that issue — a situation which goes way, way beyond

anything that I think any of us would have imagined until we saw the work our

caucus colleagues did in looking at that report.

We've had

to take action. The Solicitor General has had to take action during this term of

our government to deal with street racing, which in the lower mainland seems to

be more and more of a problem with younger and younger people. There are drugs

on the street that, frankly, weren't invented during my childhood. That's

literally true. The chemicals were not being put together the way they are

today.

These are

disturbing trends. They are trends which have troubled Canadians for well over a

decade. The federal Young Offenders Act, which has been amended and repealed and

replaced, has been the subject of a very intense national debate on the subject

of how to deal with youth violence and youth crime. British Columbians, as you

know, have been very well engaged and intelligently engaged in that longstanding

national debate.

preparing for my intervention on this bill, I did a little bit of research. I

find that we are not alone in this country. Those who are more familiar with the

issues, methodologies, problems and all the issues that go around youth offences

will know what I've just said: this is an issue elsewhere. It's always

interesting to see what other jurisdictions are doing. Certainly, in the United

Kingdom in the last few years, there's been a tremendous attack on youth

violence and youth crime. In the United Kingdom there is quite a stress placed

on the importance of involvement in helping youth, not just incarcerating youth

— and I want to come to that as part of the important feature of the bill

we're debating — but the involvement by members of the public to assist youth

and to reduce their offending in their own neighbourhoods.

[1525]

I guess, to

go back to what I said about my own background, family relationships were

different in those days. My mom did not go out of the house to work. She worked

at home. Today I don't know what the exact proportion is, but a significant

majority of mothers are working mothers. There is no question that has changed

the atmosphere and the environment in which many children have grown up.

My own

stepchildren were latchkey kids not so long ago in North Vancouver, and

thankfully, apart from the odd scrape and bruise and perhaps the occasional

fight with a tree or two, my stepkids and my own kids have survived those

difficult years and come through it. I sometimes wonder. There but for the grace

of God go…. I could have gone down the road that we're talking about today

with my own family.

There's no

question that this is a transnational issue. It's a national issue. It's a

transnational issue. It's an international issue. What I found in my research on

the subject is that where these subjects are being dealt with intelligently,

intervention with young people who commit crime before they become persistent

offenders is a methodology which is being used and which, according to what I've

been able to read, is actually coming up with some success.

We know

from evidence that early intervention with young people works. It intuitively

makes sense. If you give a child guidance, if the child is surrounded by values

that are anti-crime and so on, there is a better chance those people will grow

up with a set of values that does not lead them into the kinds of trouble that

some young people get into. Indeed, there is evidence that suggests that what

makes a difference to young people is the type and quality of the interventions

they receive — whether it be from family, from neighbours or from educators. I

think that's a lesson we need to learn in the context of this debate that we're

having this afternoon.

The other

conclusion I have reached in my own thinking and reading about this issue is

that sentencing for young people can't just be about punishment. Helping a young

person to tackle their offending behaviour is tough on them and should be tough

on them, but certainly it is in all our interests to pursue that.

I know many

members have spoken to the important changes in this bill from the current act

that would allow us to provide for stiffer sentences for youth who are offending

under British Columbia statutes as opposed to federal statutes, and I think

that's important too. I listened carefully to what the member for

Chilliwack-Kent had to say, and I think the lessons that he spoke about and his

experience in the courtroom are, without question, important. There is a time;

there is a place. There is a size of hammer, which is important. I think we need

to be intelligent and the judiciary needs to be intelligent, in the way that

member described, in applying those hammers.

What we are

looking at and what I am pleased about with this bill is that it does reinforce

the side of youth offences which talks to the issue of helping youth overcome

whatever it is that's creating the problem. I still believe, after all my years,

that people generally know good from evil. When you give them a choice and when

you set that choice in a framework and in an environment of consequences, people

do prefer not to have consequences or to have good consequences rather than bad.

[1530]

Actually,

the new federal act imposes on us the opportunity and the necessity to change or

to look at our own approach and to not only recommit to better sentencing, more

intelligent sentencing and tougher sentencing where it's needed but also to look

at the whole issue of education. This bill — and it's important that we

recognize it — conveys the message that incar-

[ Page 7681 ]

ceration of youth who are in conflict with the law is not the only option

that's open to us. The bill provides for supervision, amongst other things, by

adults who are capable of and trained in the art and science of supervising

youth who have difficulties with the law. It provides for residency, putting

youths who are in trouble in domestic circumstances that can perhaps help to

provide those kinds of values and the environment that most of us fortunately

enjoy as young people.

It provides

for employment. It talks quite extensively about the employment opportunities

for young people and how employers and they, as employees, would be expected to

behave in order to help them get on with their lives in a more productive way.

It encourages a return to school, where appropriate, and training. Again,

intuitively, this does not seem to be way out of line.

I would

like just to quote from a speech given in January of this year by Lord Warner,

who at the time was the chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and

Wales. He said: "What we now know absolutely clearly is that education

deficits in young people are closely associated with offending, and conversely

we know that engaging young people in education, training or employment programs

is one of the strongest protective factors available for reducing the chances of

offending and re-offending."

This a man

who is extensively experienced and very well recognized in this whole field of

youth justice and who was a senior executive with the Youth Justice Board in the

United Kingdom until he became part of Mr. Blair's government in the summertime.

He goes on to say: "…our research has identified the close association

between offending and levels of education engagement." The members who

served on our safe schools task force will be interested to know that he talks

about the new Safer Schools Partnerships that exist in England and Wales, which

provide 100 dedicated police officers in secondary schools and their feeder

primary schools in areas experiencing high levels of offending.

What we are

doing in terms of our encouragement for education and training is based on

experience and research elsewhere, as well as in Canada. Lord Warner says:

"…young people are worried about physical intimidation in or on the way

to school, which must make learning more difficult and increase the risk of them

staying away from schools." The evidence shows that staying away from

schools, whether it's because of that particular reason — that the child is

scared to go to school — or if there is some other incentive to stay away from

school — bored with the class, or somebody's got something better to do….

It's those circumstances that certainly appear to be a breeding ground for, if

not encouraging, youth offences.

These

non-incarceration methods that this bill reinforces and encourages…. It

encourages the devolution, in these positive ways, to authorities, both

aboriginal and regional, and I think we know that aboriginal populations tend to

have statistical indicators that are worse than in the general population.

Getting these kids back into environments in which they are comfortable and

putting them into environments in which they can become comfortable are

important ways in which we are going to improve the whole situation around youth

offending.

This bill

also provides and stresses important steps that, again, offer alternatives to

incarceration: making restitution to the victims — something that's not novel,

but it's important; the provision of community service under supervision, and

only for those who are obviously judged capable of providing community services

safely — again, two other ways of instilling values into people who, I would

argue, need some instillation of values. If they had them, they wouldn't be

doing what we are dealing with and trying to deal with in this bill.

[1535]

Clearly, at

the end of the day, incarceration is part of the arsenal that we have as a

society to deal with young people who are not able to respond to more positive

stimuli. Again I note that the member for Chilliwack-Kent argued that

incarceration can indeed be a powerful stimulus to turn people around.

If we have

to incarcerate people, I think this bill adopts and encourages a humanitarian

approach. It talks about reintegration into the broader society as an objective,

and I think those provisions in this bill and the focus on things other than

incarceration are important. But as I've said, at the end of the day, bringing a

more strict regime of penalty into provincial statute in the case of offences

against laws of this province, trespassing on school grounds for the purposes of

sexual exploitation or gang activity…. I personally wish we didn't have to

talk about those kinds of things, but it's clear we do. I think it's clear that

the public of British Columbia, after the debate that took place around the

federal Young Offenders Act…. Clearly, people are expecting us to respond in a

stricter way.

I believe

that this bill, Bill 63, the new Youth Justice Act, will be a significant

contributor to our desire, our promise to promote and protect public safety in

this province. Again, for the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant to make some

of the accusations and to trivialize this issue, as she did earlier today, is

astounding. This should be a non-partisan issue. This is about the safety of our

communities. Frankly, whichever political stripe you come from should not lead

us into the kind of accusations and trivialization we saw today.

This bill

will assist us in our objective of providing safer communities. The Solicitor

General has had a very active year in terms of integration of police forces, of

introduction of new technology, of encouraging police across this province to

work closer together. Certainly, where we stand in Victoria and Esquimalt there

has been some visible evidence of that approach to safer communities. This bill

provides one that is perhaps not quite so obvious but that I think is equally

important. If we can deal with the issue of youth crime today and if we can deal

with it with some success with using new methods of assisting young people as

well as of more serious incarceration for serious crimes, then I think we are

serving our next generation well.

[ Page 7682 ]

We will get crime rates down, we'll continue that downward slide, and that's

what we're after.

To create a

stand-alone comprehensive piece of legislation, which this bill does, written

with youth specifically as its subject, I think will also provide some greater

clarity both in law and in clarity of purpose. The purpose here is to assist

young people who are having trouble with the law, and if they are still having

trouble with the law, then they are going to pay a price and a stiffer price

than they have done up until now. The message is clear. The federal legislation

moves us in the same direction with respect to federal statutes. We're following

suit in British Columbia, and I'm pleased about that.

conclusion, the striking of a balance in a piece of legislation — in an issue

as complex as this, with all the sociological, psychological, economic, family,

community issues that it evokes and questions — is always very difficult. I

think this bill finds that balance between serious consequences for people who

do not apparently share the values that most of us — the majority of our

society, fortunately — share and acknowledging that there are other

initiatives and methodologies that need to be utilized with young people and

also to reinforce the message, which again is intuitive, that young people are

treated differently and sentencing is different than it is for adults.

[1540]

I believe

that once again we are talking about a piece of legislation that assists us in

fulfilling one of our new-era promises. A new-era promise talked about safer

streets, safer schools and safer communities. In all of those areas, this bill

addresses that promise, and I'm confident we'll end up with some improvements

that make that promise not just a promise but actual fact.

Nijjar: It's my pleasure to stand up and speak to this bill brought in by

the Solicitor General. I, too, have a frog in my throat, but I wanted very much

to be here today, and I rested up so I could have this opportunity to speak.

Much of

what the Solicitor General has been doing for the past two and a half years, I

believe, is real commonsense Solicitor General work — commonsense work when it

comes to bringing in PRIME-BC, the coordinated policing computer systems, and

the graduated licence system. Our Solicitor General, I'm thankful, is a

commonsense type of guy. When you meet with him one on one in regard to

particular issues in your community or across B.C., when he speaks in caucus or

here in the Legislature, at least we know that what he says is resonating with

the people of British Columbia.

The people

of British Columbia are not looking for the most complicated things in the

world. They know what they want. We have youth that to whatever extent — maybe

more or maybe less than in the past, regardless of where the number is going —

are speeding. We have youth that are involved in gang activity. We have youth

that are recruiting on school grounds. It is our obligation to deal with those

issues.

The people

of British Columbia are not going around saying across this province: "Oh

no. What we want to see are fewer sentences." The only thing we want to see

is that you go up to that child and say: "Son, daughter, why are you doing

this, and how can we help?" Now, of course, as adults we are going to look

beyond what is just in front of us and look behind and see what the issues are

in children's lives and how we can help.

This piece

of legislation is not doing away with the other, more modern ways of dealing

with crime and having professionals assist youth and families, working with the

Ministry of Children and Family Development, the Ministry of Human Resources,

the Ministry of Health, etc. This is an added and commonsense component.

To argue

that a more severe sentence in no way plays a role in the pocket of issues that

legislation has to deal with is ridiculous. I'm not a lawyer — I don't need to

be; I have enough colleagues that are lawyers — but I can tell you that one of

the purposes of our law system is to protect society by apprehending and

incarcerating criminals once they're found to be criminals and convicted.

Another is to reflect the values of society. The laws we have should reflect the

values of the society. Thirdly, the law should be to the extent and of the type

that the society feels are its own values at that time. Of course laws are

changing as our society changes, but they have to reflect what the people are

saying. Justice is fluid in that sense.

[1545]

Regardless

of whether you're speaking to the member for Vancouver-Kingsway, who represents

eastside Vancouver, or the members from Victoria or downtown Vancouver or

anywhere from the heartlands of British Columbia…. You speak to citizens right

across, young and old. You speak to other teenagers. You speak to youth in

colleges. You speak to parents; you speak to seniors. There is a resonating

comment across British Columbia. The comments are that the sentences, or the

sentences that are given at least, are not reflecting the values of society. So

while we want to work with the professionals across this country and across this

province to ensure that we give all the assistance we can so those youth can be

healthy citizens and contribute to our society, we also have to send a message

to other youth.

That is a

reality. You can be as bleeding-hearted as you want about it. You can be as

modern as you think you may be, but one of the realities you are never going to

get away from, as educated as you might think or the members in the opposition

might think they are on this issue, is that a part of the responsibility of

legislation and of the judicial system is to reflect the values and send a

message as part of being a deterrent.

The member

for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant spoke in the House, and I'm reading from Hansard

here. She made a lot of comments that I circled, which I want to read, that did

not make complete sense. However, here's one. "That's what the government

has in mind, but the question is: in the real world, is this how it works? Do

youth about to commit a crime ask them-

[ Page 7683 ]

selves: 'Wait, I wonder if this is one of the six areas of the provincial

jurisdiction that the Solicitor General said in the newspaper that he was going

to come down on with a hammer. Gee, maybe I should rethink this.'"

What is the

member saying — that we shouldn't have legislation, that we shouldn't have

criminal legislation, even for adults? Is she going to argue that if an adult is

about to commit a violent offence, that adult doesn't say: "Oh my god, I

think I might be caught or I might end up in jail, so I'm not going to do

this"? The notion is ridiculous. Of course no one individual, at every

moment in time, is asking themselves: what is the law of the land? But overall,

a culture develops where the law of the land is at least generally known

throughout society, as we right now have a general knowledge of the laws of the

land.

I was born

and raised on the east side of Vancouver. I went to high school there. I went to

college there. I know many of the young people that we speak about as youth

here. I know youth who were involved in the car racing that led to so many

deaths. I know some of the drivers that drove other people to their death. I

knew some of the drivers and passengers that were killed themselves. I know of,

directly and indirectly, at least 12 people murdered in gang killings. I grew up

with that — some of them shot up in clubs. I went to school with them.

They go to

high schools. They recruit. That is part of the process. They know — they're

sophisticated enough to figure out — which young girl is new to Vancouver,

coming from some small town or from a reserve or from Alberta. They know who's

vulnerable, and they have a very sophisticated scheme of slowly integrating that

person into prostitution — first integrating them into drugs, making them

think that they're actually making money by sending their own people in to pay

for the services, buying them things. Really, it's just a business investment,

because that's what they are in their view. I've known these people. Some are

still out there.

[1550]

I'll tell

you, one of the common themes when you talk to these people, what they say….

It's nothing new for me. It's not like I'm the only one who hears this. One of

them is: "Hey, there's a lot of money to be made, and if we get caught,

what is the big deal? There really isn't that much of a punishment."

I heard two

young men speaking, one 18 and one 19. I used to take the bus up there — the

No. 3, which runs right through Hastings, the downtown east side — when I used

to go to Simon Fraser University. You get to know people on the bus, of course,

and I often used to stop at the downtown east side and go for a beer there, for

two reasons. First, it's cheaper, and second, it's probably the only time in my

life I'd get to learn that culture. It was a great social experience, and I

learned a lot. I actually became friends with young women who were prostitutes,

men who were drug dealers and bartenders who knew the whole culture.

I used to

sit there and talk to them. I fit right in, in the sense that I'm just a regular

guy from the east side of Vancouver. It really was no big deal. These two guys

were talking. One of them had just come out of youth detention, and he said to

the other one: "If that's what so-and-so did, why don't you just kill

him?" The other one said: "You know, I don't want to go through

that." The guy says: "Give me a break. What's the big deal? Look,

you're still 17." I think he was 17 at the time, or something like that.

"You kill the guy; you get caught. What's the big deal? You spend — what?

— 16 months, a year and a half in juvie. So what's the big deal?" And the

guy said: "Yeah, you're right." Then they talked about whatever they

were going to go talk about.

The point

is that there is a culture out there with a mentality that it's no big deal.

There are guys that go to university and go to college, and you'd think they're

well-behaved young men. In most respects they are. When it comes to driving 140

or 150 kilometres an hour on a Friday or Saturday night, the reason why they do

it…. I know. I've spoken with them; I've talked with them; I know who they

are. They live in my community. They're friends of my friends or friends of my

cousins or whatever it may be. One mentality is, of course: "I'm not going

to go flying off the road or kill anybody, because I know how to drive."

The other is: "If I get caught, what's the big deal? What am I going to get

— a fine of $175? So what?" Most of these men are dealing drugs, so they

can pay the $175 just like that. We have a lot harder time paying it than they

do.

In my area

of Vancouver-Kingsway, east-side Vancouver, right across New West, Burnaby,

Victoria — you name it — you look…. Marijuana grow operations are rampant,

epidemic across this province. I've been working very hard with the Solicitor

General to create deterrents against those who are growing in other people's

homes. When these marijuana grow operators get caught…. I'll remind you that

you can make about a million dollars profit out of one home. A crop takes three

months, so you get four rounds of crops. Each crop gets you about $250,000

worth. When you ship the marijuana to the States for coke, coke comes back up

here and gets sold in the downtown east side and everywhere else. That's about

how much they're making.

So when

they're caught by the police — and this is in no way the fault of the police;

their hands are tied on these things — what ends up happening…. There are a

lot of issues involved in why and how, but the end result is that they basically

spend no time in jail, are very unlikely to spend time in jail, and they get a

few dollars' worth of fine — $1,500 — or they get their equipment taken

away. How much does that cost? A few thousand dollars to replace. Maybe they get

a $5,000 fine. Even if they weren't doing a full crop in the house — suppose

they're making $500,000 in the year — if they get a $1,500 or $5,000 fine,

that to them is the cost of doing business.

[1555]

When we

have sentences that to the criminals is a cost of doing business, then yes, I

agree with some of the members in the opposition. Yes, we have to do things to

create a different situation in society so these things don't happen, but we

also have to create a deter-

[ Page 7684 ]

rent. We also have to do what the Solicitor General is working on doing,

which is having proceeds-of-crime legislation. Proceeds-of-crime legislation is

long overdue.

When people

are committing a crime for the sole purpose of making money, then we should hit

them where it hurts the most, which is in their wallets. They really don't care

about the other things. Our judicial system is so backed up, and it is so costly

to try to put these people through the court systems and so hard to prove the

case, that often we don't bother doing it. And quite frankly, we don't need to.

Hit them where it counts. Hit them at the dollars. Take those dollars and put

them back into society. It's society that deserves it, because it's society that

was violated in the first place by these growers.

Yet again,

even with these people the attitude is: "Hey, it's really no big deal if I

get caught. I'll go to jail for 12 hours, and I'll go in front of the judge and

pay my $1,500, and so forth." It's like having traffic fine violations —

right now $175 is the average — and reducing them to $5 and saying $5 should

be enough for a deterrent. I mean, that's ridiculous.

I'm sure

even the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant knows it. That's why, as I read

through her comments in Hansard …. Her comments are nothing more than

paraphrasing what other leaders of associations or other members of different

groups have said, who have not read the legislation but have made general

comments around incarceration and programs for juveniles.

In my

riding of Vancouver-Kingsway, yes, there are youth that go into the schools and

try to get other youth involved in prostitution and drugs. The member for

Vancouver-Hastings knows, I'm sure the member for Vancouver-Burrard knows and

the police know that there are young girls going to high school who, in the

evening, are prostitutes. They sometimes get to school at 9 o'clock when school

starts, and sometimes they don't because they're tired and they slept in. They

do end up coming to school, but they work as prostitutes.

That is a

sad, sad situation. That is not something we can go around blaming levels of

government or former governments for. That's a societal issue. That's what we've

come to as a country. When there are so-called pimps out there who feel there is

absolutely no deterrent for them to go into those schools and do these things,

then a part of our responsibility is to send a message that it is not tolerable.

One of our

jobs as legislators is to reflect, in the legislation we develop, the values of

our constituents. The reason why the member for Vancouver-Hastings and the

member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant really, in the end, had so little to say

on this issue was because they know, we know and everybody listening knows that

this is really a commonsense piece of legislation. Those that are joyriding and

driving 150 kilometres an hour down the streets of Victoria and Vancouver and

the lower mainland need to have sentences that are slightly more severe than

they've had before, because they weren't severe at all. Even now these are

nowhere close to being severe. From 30 days to 90 days — is that right? —

does not fall under the severe category at all.

[1600]

The member

for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant made comments about a divide in our caucus, and

of course the two members just wish that was happening. Clearly and obviously,

after two and a half years it's not even close. But one of the things she

alluded to was that there are some in the government caucus that are very much

in favour of what the federal government does and others that aren't so much in

favour of what the federal government does. Well, of course. We're allowed to

speak our minds. We're allowed to have our own thoughts.

Some of us

agreed to a great degree on some pieces of legislation we've brought in, and

some people agreed to a lesser degree. Some people have not agreed at all and

voted against it. Some of us are federal Liberals at heart, and some of us

aren't. But our job as representatives at the provincial level is to call

legislation coming from the federal government for what we believe it is and how

it reflects upon our province, so even those who are so-called federal Liberals

are going to stand up and say that's something that is not in the interests of

this province.

I have no

problem saying I agree with some of the opposition to the federal government,

which says we should not only have sentences that dictate the maximum in a

sentence but also have sentences that dictate the minimum sentence that has to

be given out. Why is there a push for that? Why has it resonated with many

Canadians that we should at least in the legislation have minimum sentencing?

Well, too often Canadians feel that the sentences do not reflect their values

for that crime.

There are

countless examples of brutal murders and irresponsible actions that have

resulted in the deaths of many people where the sentencing or the legislation

does not necessarily reflect the crime. While we all acknowledge that the new

legislation brought in by the federal government for youth justice is

sophisticated and that it takes into consideration all the avenues available to

us to rehabilitate youth, to reach out to them, to give them a base upon which

they can come back to society and live a healthy life, a part of it is and has

to be the recognition that we have to deter in the more general sense. We have

to have legislation that generally says across this country and across this

province that this is what we stand for, this is what we expect of our youth and

this is what we expect of each other.

I work on

crime issues to a large extent in my riding, and just recently I set a meeting

between the inspector of the Vancouver police, Kash Heed, who's the new

inspector for district 3, East Vancouver, with the member for

Vancouver-Kensington and the member for Vancouver-Fraserview. We had a long

discussion on the issues and how we can tackle them in a practical and

reasonable way. We know we're not going to save the world overnight. We know

crime isn't going to

[ Page 7685 ]

disappear. Prostitution is not going to disappear, and drugs are not going to

disappear, but our job is to live within the realities and try to work with that

and try to do what we can in a practical sense. We're working for long-term

solutions, and we're making short-term positive outcomes.

One of the

things this police officer, the inspector, said was that while there is

legislation out there that goes in the right direction, the police officers'

hands too often are tied. Their hands are tied because we don't give them enough

tools to get those criminals and incarcerate them. We've heard that over and

over again in our society. There's no doubt about it. I agree with that

wholeheartedly.

[1605]

We talk

about the four pillars in the downtown east side. We talk about youth justice.

We talk about marijuana grow operations or crimes in general. We cannot continue

to have police officers out there who — when they find and catch these people

— are so frustrated to the extent that they know that in bringing the person

to justice, all it means is maybe a fine of a few dollars or a reprimand by the

judge or some assessment of yes, that person committed this crime, but let's

only look at what factors were in that person's life. How is that person a

victim, which made them commit that crime?

We do have

to look at what made that person commit the crime. We do have to encompass what

the socioeconomic factors were in that person's life. We do have to, in the long

term, tackle those issues. But in the short run, that person committed a crime,

and that person must at least pay some respect for having committed that crime.

That is part of the package of creating the value system and reflecting the

value system across the province.

The two

members in the opposition are very close to the downtown east side. They

represent that area, yet they do not have a monopoly on the understanding. In

fact, after ten years of government we've seen — and ask any of the societies

down there; ask any of the service providers — that the conditions and

services actually got worse over the ten years during the 1990s. However, we

will conclude that they do know many things of their ridings and many things of

the downtown east side.

Clearly,

one of the things is that there's a sentiment among those who deal drugs —

there has been for years and years and years — that they can freely deal drugs

on the streets, and nothing is going to happen. There is a police station right

at Main and Hastings. There are police officers walking the beat of the downtown

east side. You can still drive by or walk down those streets — I do it plenty

of times — and see drug dealing going on right in front of your face. The

reason they give for doing it so blatantly is the same reason a young man going

to college and university and driving that BMW gives, which is the same reason

the marijuana grow operators give, etc., etc.

I applaud

the Solicitor General for doing something very practical, very commonsense,

which says to British Columbians that this is what we are standing up for, that

this is part of a package of many, many, many things.

One of the

things that the members opposite will say is that this one piece of legislation,

this one thing you're doing, will not stop the youth from committing crime, will

not stop the youth from going into schools or will not stop the youth from

speeding. Of course no one piece of action, no one step by any government or any

society or any group of parents, is ever going to stop a crime.

What you

want to do is create a package. What you want to do is create many different

roadblocks to, say, the marijuana grow operators, etc. You want to create as

many roadblocks and have all your pieces of legislation reflect your values.

Over time you want to chase away the ideas that speeding is glamorous; you want

to chase away the idea that Vancouver is a great place to grow marijuana; you

want to chase away the idea that school grounds are a free-for-all for getting

young girls and young boys into drugs and prostitution.

I looked

very closely at what happened over the ten years under the former government's

regime, and I don't see anything they've done to really tackle, in a practical

sense, these issues. It's very easy to say, "Oh, I am one of you. I'm from

the downtown east side, and therefore I understand, and we'll work together on

this," and then do absolutely nothing, deteriorate the societies, chase

away volunteerism — pretend that volunteerism is a crime, pretend that

volunteerism is taking away jobs from union members because a union executive

who funds a party tells them to say that. It's very easy to do that, but it's

another thing to stand up as decent, hard-working MLAs and say: "These are

the pieces of legislation we're going to bring in."

I'm glad I

have a Solicitor General like the one I do. I'm very proud of this piece of

legislation and the work that he's doing, and I support it 100 percent.

[1610]

Trumper: I rise to support this bill. The reason the bill was brought in is

to reflect the recent federal legislation, and it does mean that it brings

provincial young offenders legislation up to date with the current philosophy

and practice. I want to talk a little bit about the time I was mayor of the city

of Port Alberni, and I was mayor for a considerable period of time.

We are no

different from Vancouver, as a community. We are a microcosm of the issues that

take place in Vancouver. We have a drug problem with the young people in the

community. In fact, we had the unenviable position at one time of having the

highest number of B and Es in the province per capita, and a lot of that was to

do with the drug issues in the community. Unfortunately, a lot of those B and Es

were done by young people who were trying to deal with the issue of drugs.

The drugs

are in the school, I know, particularly with our high school. We have one high

school where we had to bring in security to deal with the issue of young people

who were out of school visiting the school to, obviously, do some illicit

dealings with the students. That certainly tells you that dollars are being

[ Page 7686 ]

spent in an area where they should not be spent. Instead, it should be spent

on education. Yet the school district was having to bring security into the

schools.

[H.

Long in the chair.]

We had an

incident a couple of years ago within the schools where a young man had brought

a gun into the school. I think it shocked our community because we feel that we

read about those in other areas in the province. We read about that happening in

the United States, where it appears that everybody has a gun. Obviously, that

young person needed some help. There were issues there. That young person needed

some help, and hopefully, with counselling and the other support services that

take place in the system, he did receive the help he needed.

We are

always facing these issues of young people in trouble, and I do believe it is a

change that has taken place over the last few years. As my colleague from

Nanaimo stated, when he was younger — and I was probably around that era as

well — there was not the issue of crime and young people. Life was different.

There were not so many pressures. Young people were not being bombarded every

day, as they are today, by all the things that somebody thinks they should have,

by looking at the crime programs that are on television, by looking at the video

games they're able to play. Some of those young people are being brought up with

the idea that that's the thing to do — to have gang wars, to be able to go out

with an instrument to do damage to someone, to people's property, to other

people.

[1615]

It's a sad

state in our society today, I believe, where we have young people who are out on

the streets appearing to have no responsibility by families. I'm not just

judging. It comes from right across society that our young people seem to have a

lot more free time than they used to have. It's tough when both parents are

working, when we have a higher number of single parents out there struggling to

keep their families going and to look after their children, but they're not

there all the time. There are huge pressures on young people, and it's tough for

them out there. Yes, they do run into trouble.

I have two

sons and two daughters, and I can tell you that until you've had children, you

probably think there are many easy answers to the issues they face. I'm sure

that when my children were young, they certainly faced some issues growing up. I

think they were fortunate, and probably we were fortunate that they didn't get

themselves into severe trouble. Probably because of the community we lived in at

that time, we were fortunate in having people who might say to us at one time:

"Did you realize that your…?" I'll say "son or daughter"

so that it doesn't fixate on one of them. "Did you realize that your son or

daughter is going around with a group in town that is known for shoplifting on

Friday evenings?" I got that phone call one day.

We had a

chat with that particular child of ours, and fortunately, that child at that

time discontinued going around with the particular group that was getting into

trouble on Fridays. It could have gotten worse, and that particular child of

ours could have been in trouble. We were lucky, because people knew we were

interested in our kids, and somebody would…. It infuriated our kids, actually,

because instead of being 20 steps behind them when they were growing up, we were

probably ten steps behind them. They always wondered how we knew what they were

up to and where they had been on a night and those various things.

You know

the time you go through when you're quite sure your child is at home in bed

asleep, and you suddenly find out that they weren't, because they could get out

of the basement window at night and were back home before mother or father

actually knew they had been away. It happened in our house, and I'm sure it has

happened in many other homes.

There are

many young people who, for whatever reasons, don't have that support, and it

tends to lead them into trouble — sometimes very serious trouble. We have been

really lucky in the community I live in and also in Oceanside, an area that I

represent, that we've had some programs for youth to help them through some of

their difficulties.

These are

the restorative programs. I know that in Oceanside there was a very strong

program, the restorative justice program, which has enabled youth who have

gotten themselves into trouble to maybe go that route rather than having to go

through the court system. I believe, for some of the issues that young people

get involved in, that is a very good way for them to go. It means that,

hopefully, they are able to address the issue and the trouble that they've

gotten into. In some of the cases I've known, they've been able to deal with the

individual that they did the injustice to. Hopefully, it has enabled them to get

sorted out and go on to fruitful adult lives.

We've

worked hard in the Alberni Valley to get a restorative program in place; a lot

of people have worked incredibly hard on that program. I think we need to see

far more of those right through the province to deal with some of the issues

that we deal with, with youth.

We also

have a very good program in Port Alberni which is called the Vast program. As

some of the members of the House know, the committee on school bullying met with

them, and my colleague from Vancouver-Burrard, who chaired that committee, met

with this particular group.

[1620]

Those kids

were all young people who for whatever reason were in this Vast program, which

is an alternative program for schooling from 16 upwards, and some of them were

over 19. Some of those young people had had really, really difficult times with

life, for whatever reasons — whether they had a home or whether they were just

living with a relative or living with a friend. They had run into really

difficult issues. We met some of those young people in this particular program,

which is geared to getting them through and

[ Page 7687 ]

getting them so that they have a Dogwood at the end and go on into life. They

were very, very open with the committee when it came to town, telling us why

they were in that program and some of the issues they had gone through such as,

as has been said in this House, drugs, prostitution with some of the girls —

all those things that they had got themselves into trouble with, whether it was

stealing in the community or whatever it was, just trying to get through life.

To hear them tell their stories and to hear of the circumstances they were

brought up in was really tough and was very moving for us, who probably hadn't

had to deal with those particular issues.

But you

know, they were strong young people, and I've seen some of them since they've

graduated from that program. There's a particular young man whom we actually had

given some help to and tried to get him through some very difficult

circumstances. He was living with a relative. He appeared to have no family. He

had no money.

He was

fortunate. He got into a situation in the community which caused another problem

for him and which we did help him through, and he did graduate. He actually won

the award that year for the student who had the most difficulties in getting

through to graduate. That was really encouraging to see, and it was a very

special time for him. He stood there at graduation. He had on a very special

suit that he had got for the occasion, and some of his family came from a fairly

long way away to be with him that night.

When you

see someone who's gone through all those difficulties as a youth actually

graduate from the program, it's very, very encouraging. The principal of the

Vast school, Tim McEvay, and his staff have done a huge job with that.

Just in

mentioning Mr. McEvay, he started a wrestling club in town which has become

provincially very well known and has won national competitions. When he first

started, he had a lot of young people who really didn't know where they were

going. They didn't seem to fit into the situation. Some of them had got into

trouble and were maybe heading in the direction that we didn't want them to go.

From that beginning he has attracted a large number of our students into the

system, into the wrestling program. It just shows, though, that when you have

somebody who's able to motivate kids and get them turned around to go in the

direction that will enable them to be young adults able to make a success of

their lives in whatever they do…. It shows how much depends on the guidance

you get, whether it's from your parents, whether it's from your school

principal, whether it's from a friend or a neighbour who takes you under their

wing. Those things are very important to young people, and so often our young

people today don't have that help.

We also

have tried to expand the program and the program of restorative justice out to

the west coast. I have a very large riding, and in many ways, because it's a

rural community, there aren't many of the support services that sometimes young

people need. There are efforts to try and expand that program to help those kids

out there. It really is the basis of what you get as a young person, as you go

through school and as you develop, and the direction and the influences that you

get when you're young, which map the road for the way you're going to go when

you become an adult. So many of these young people, unfortunately, don't have

the help and support that certainly many other young people have, and I think we

need to enlarge and pursue what we are doing with youth.

[1625]

I know that

the aboriginal people have had a great, great issue and a great problem with

some of the issues they have with young people. One of the things I was doing

before I became elected to the provincial government was actually quite a bit of

work with the aboriginal people in dealing with some of the issues they had with

drugs and alcohol, because unfortunately I always got involved when it had been

a very tragic, tragic incident. I know that at the time, in the discussions I

had with them, one of the biggest issues we'd talk about was alcohol with young

people and the troubles it brings to them.

One of the

biggest issues, not only in the aboriginal community but right through our

community, is the fact that young people are drinking. They are getting the

alcohol, and you often find that it's the adults who are buying it for them.

This has certainly become an issue in dealing with this, and I think that is

also a cause of a lot of the problems that young people get into.

Fortunately,

some of them are issues which are light and can be dealt with and hopefully set

them on the right road, but some of them get into really serious problems. What

has happened in the past is that the position has been that sometimes the courts

have become so crowded that it takes a long time for these young people to be

dealt with in court. Something happens, and they get charged, and it takes about

six months or so to get the charge brought forward. By that time, you know,

young people…. Life is instant, and they don't tend to think of the

consequences. That's just the way young people are.

It is

certainly my hope, as we go through the system and deal with youth and some of

the issues they have, that we are able to deal with them in a more timely manner

so that they are able to see the negative sides of some of the issues and things

they have become involved in.

I hope that

with the new act that has come in, which I certainly support, some of the

questions that are being talked about and raised when a youth trespasses on

school grounds for the purpose of gang activity, etc., or unfortunately sexual

exploitation…. I mean, that is something that has to be dealt with. The

frightening thing is that it is not just in the high schools, as we used to

think about ten years ago. It is now in the intermediate schools. It's even in

the elementary schools. That is really frightening to see — the effects that

are taking place. We need to have something in place to be able to deal with

these.

I believe

this new act is going to be enabling. It is going to answer a lot of the

questions and issues that

[ Page 7688 ]

have been raised for so many years by many people in the system who are

saying: "We're not doing it. What are we doing to help these kids? What are

we doing to deal with the very serious issues that they are sometimes charged

with?"

I have been

pleased to speak to this bill this afternoon and will certainly be supporting

it.

Hamilton: I also rise in support of the Youth Justice Act. My colleagues

have already eloquently risen and supported the act, as I do, but I must come

from a little bit of a different perspective, and that is my many years as a

police officer.

everyone here knows, I spent a few years — 32, to be exact — in the

Esquimalt police department. Through those years I observed the changes — the

Young Offenders Act, the jail detention. It progressed very slowly, in my

opinion, and now we're starting to see more results. Our government is

legislating to move it forward.

I was

involved in the investigation of a young man in my community by the name of

Nicholas Johnson. That young man was severely attacked by a gang. I dare say, if

you asked his mother and father what they thought of what we were doing today,

they'd be standing right here with me. I guarantee you that. You simply have to

see what I as a police officer have seen and what the victims' parents have seen

to realize that what we are doing is the right thing.

[1630]

After all,

this is all about the targeting of youth gang activities or sexual exploitation,

the serious offences. Obviously, some hard-core youth aren't listening. I must

emphasize that those youth are the minority. A major part of our youth, 99

percent of them, are great youth. They're great kids. I've dealt with them

throughout my career, and they've helped me a lot. I'm very proud of them.

When

breaking the law, the punishment must fit the crime. This act simply gives the

courts more options. Now, I know there's been criticism of such things as jail

time for youth who violate the Motor Vehicle Act when driving while prohibited.

Well, it doesn't make one think too far to realize that when common sense

prevails, that will only be used in those cases where there are habitual

offenders who need a stronger message. That message will be delivered by the

courts, as it should be.

In my

riding of Esquimalt I had occasion to deal with some of these gangs. I can

assure you that I saw the fright on the faces of the citizens of Esquimalt when

at nighttime I drove up in the police car and confronted these youth because

they wouldn't let some poor young woman walk through. Now, that's wrong. We

needed the legislation we have now. There are avenues under the Criminal Code,

as we're all aware, but that doesn't always fit. What we're targeting here is

schools. That's where they're actively recruiting.

I have

noticed that even with the young women…. Gangs aren't restricted to men or to

young boys. Gangs also have the young girls there — daughters, sisters. They

glorify what they believe a gang is all about. Well, we've seen the results of

what it's all about. We've seen Nicholas Johnson in a coma. I've seen him lying

on the ground — not a pretty sight. We have to tackle this.

In my

community we have organizations such as Rock Solid, which is an organization

that was put together by the Shamrocks lacrosse team and the police, targeting

bullying. I only have to point to Reena Virk. It's sad to say that I stand up

here in the House and have to talk about these types of violent crimes. That's

why I believe it has to stop and it has to stop now.

The

Solicitor General has done a lot. He's introduced PRIME, and our government has

fully funded PRIME. Why? So that every police officer in B.C. is connected and

knows, from one jurisdiction to the other, where these gang members may travel.

I can guarantee you, they don't have borders. Why should the police?

As a

government, we must support justice for all. As I have said previously, it is a

minority of youth that cause these serious criminal acts. The majority of B.C.'s

you