British Columbia Hansard — Thursday, May 2, 2002 (37th Parliament, 3rd Session) (H0502pm-03) (H0502pm 03)

H0502pm-03

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

3rd Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Thursday, May 2, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Volume 7, Number 3 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 3RD SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. Internet: www.legis.gov.bc.ca/hansard

Party Standings: Liberal 76; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 1. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) ..........................................

West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (L).........................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L).......................................................................

Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon. Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................

Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon. Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ......................................................

Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, Hon.

John (L) ................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon. Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)...........................................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTENTS Thursday, May 2, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 3149 Introduction and First Reading of Bills ........................................................................................ ......................................... 3150 Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 40) Hon.

M. de Jong Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 3150 Role of grandparents D. Jarvis Powell River Regals hockey team H. Long Seniors housing K. Stewart Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3151 Funding for mental health services J. MacPhail Hon. G. Cheema Negotiations with physicians J. Kwan Hon. C. Hansen Circuit court services D.

Chutter Hon. G. Plant U.S. softwood lumber duty R. Visser Hon. M. de Jong Kyoto accord J. Kwan Hon. R. Neufeld Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 3154 H.

Long Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3154 Workers Compensation Board, annual report, 2001 Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 3154 Legal Services Society Act (Bill 45) (continued) J. Kwan Hon. G.

Plant Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3159 Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act (Bill 23) R. Stewart Hon. G. Plant Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 3160 Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act (Bill 23)

Motions on Notice.............................................................................................................. ...................................................... 3160 Supplementary report to 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee report Hon. G.

Plant Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3161 Supplementary recommendation of the 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3161 McLeod Lake Indian Band Treaty No. 8 Adhesion and Settlement Agreement Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 10) Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 3161 McLeod Lake Indian Band Treaty No. 8 Adhesion and Settlement Agreement Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 10) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3161 Trustee Investment Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 30) Hon.

G.

Plant Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 3161 Trustee Investment Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 30) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3161 Securities Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 29) Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 3162 Securities Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 29) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 3162 Food Safety Act (Bill 37) Hon.

C. Hansen J. Kwan

3149 THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members Hon. S. Hagen: I'm pleased to introduce in the House today two hard-working staff members who make me look good. Hon. G. Collins: You need more staff. Hon. S. Hagen: Mr. Speaker, I think you heard the Finance minister say that I need more staff, so that's on the record. Anyway, I'm pleased to introduce Barb Caldwell and Heather James. Would the House please make them welcome. Hon. G. Collins: That was the most creative plea for more money I've heard in the last year.

I want to take the opportunity to introduce two people who are here visiting with us today. My mother is here. She comes not infrequently, but she's here to- day — Kay Collins, who lives in Sidney. With her to- day is someone who hasn't been here before. It's my eldest sister's eldest daughter. My niece, Megan, is here. I ask the House to make her welcome as well. [1405] Hon. G. Cheema: I have two sets of introductions today. First, today in the members' gallery I would like to acknowledge a special visitor from Slovakia. Please join me in welcoming His Excellency Dr.

Miroslav Mikolasik, the Ambassador of the Slovak Republic to Canada. This is the ambassador's first official visit to British Columbia, and I'm very pleased that he has travelled to British Columbia to discover the many opportunities our province presents. He is accompa- nied by his wife, Dr. Elana Mikolasikova, and Stanislav Lisiak, the honorary consul general of the Slovak Re- public at Vancouver. Would the House please make them feel welcome. I am very proud to introduce a very important member of my family who is in the House today. He did not want me to introduce him, but as his father, I overruled him.

Would the House please join me in welcoming my son, Anuraj Cheema. A. Hamilton: I t ' s m y p l e a s u r e t o w e l c o m e t w o dedicated members from my constituency, Val Terry and Marilyn McIldoon, who are visitors here today and are my constituency assistants. Would the House make them welcome, please. Hon. R. Neufeld: You'll know that it's not very often I get to stand up in the House and introduce someone from northern British Columbia, but it's my pleasure today…. An Hon. Member: How are the roads up there? Hon. R. Neufeld: They're terrible. It's 7 degrees below, and it's snowing.

It's my pleasure today to introduce someone who makes me feel really good — a lady that I will have the p l e a s u r e o f g e t t i n g m a r r i e d t o i n A u g u s t o f t h i s y e a r , Montana Currie. Mr. Speaker: The member for Malahat–Juan de Fuca. B. Kerr: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Interjections. B. Kerr: Maybe I should wait for the appropriate response. Before I opened my constituency office, I was ad- vised by people much wiser than myself to make sure that I got a very good constituency assistant. I'm proud to say that more by luck than by skill on my

part I ac- complished that objective. I would like to introduce her today, because she certainly forms the bulwark of the team that provides the effective and efficient service to the community. That's Linda Morton. Also, I have another important person in the House who's a member of our team. That's our assistant legis- lative assistant, Jessica Terry. She's here today also. J. Bray: Joining us in the gallery, too, is my legisla- tive assistant, Laura O'Connor. Laura does a fantastic job of keeping me on

schedule and keeping me organ- ized. She's not responsible for how I look, thank good- ness. She does a terrific job, and she really keeps things moving. I appreciate her hard work. Would the House please make her welcome. I. Chong: Joining us today, as well, is a constituent of mine who's a good supporter, a dedicated volunteer. He indicated to me that it's been some years since he's been here. I was happy to share lunch with him, and now he's here to watch question period. Would the House please welcome Mr. Ron Heaps. Hon. L. Reid: I'm delighted to welcome to the pre- cinct today Mr. Mehmood Alibhai.

Mehmood is the director of health policy for western Canada for Novar- tis and is someone who has worked actively in the community of Richmond on mental health issues for more than a decade. I would ask the House to please make him very, very welcome. J. MacPhail: I'm so delighted to be able to rise…. I think this might be the first time in this sitting that I'm a b l e t o r i s e a n d w e l c o m e s o m e s t u d e n t s h e r e f r o m Vancouver who are educated in my riding. They are 15 grade 11 and 12 students in the Spectrum Alternative Program.

They're accompanied by their teachers, Lau- rie Finch, Kathy Thompson and Chris Johnston. I'm

3150 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 just absolutely delighted that they're here. May the House please make them welcome. [1410] Introduction and First Reading of Bills FORESTS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled For- ests Statutes Amendment Act, 2002. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 40 be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. M. de Jong: Bill 40 includes a number of amendments to the Forest Act, both of a housekeeping and a technical nature.

More particularly, however, Bill 40 includes amendments to the Forest Act that will make provision for the certification of timber that is offered to licensees through the small business pro- gram administered by the Ministry of Forests. Beyond that, there are some technical and housekeeping amendments. Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be placed on or- ders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 40 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) ROLE OF GRANDPARENTS D. Jarvis: I believe it's time to begin a conversation in this Legislature on behalf of the youngest citizens of our province. We have, collectively, a responsibility to honour the 40,000 babies that are born in our province every year. Many of these babies will form durable relationships with their grandparents, and many will not. Building capacity in our communities will result in increased attachment between babies and their ex- tended families. We are on the road to building resil- ient families. The best outcomes will be stronger com- munities and stronger families. Mr.

Speaker, I am a grandfather, although you would never know it by looking at me. My three grandchildren are Jake, seven; Emily, eight; and Dian- dra, nine. I pay tribute to the joy and humour and the great curiosity that these grandchildren share with me on a regular basis. Research shows us that children's development from conception to age six is rapid and dramatic and affects lifelong learning behaviour and health. We know children's future success in school and as adults is largely dictated by the quality of emotional, physical, nutritional and intellectual care that they re- ceive in their early years.

As grandparents in this Legislature, I believe we have a special obligation and opportunity to be there for our youngest citizens. To all of you, I say: enjoy these moments. POWELL RIVER REGALS HOCKEY TEAM H. Long: Mr. Speaker, I rise today with another great hockey story — a good-news hockey story. I rise today to congratulate the efforts of the Powell River Regals hockey team. Recently, the very proud tradition of Powell River's sporting community showcased one of hockey's most prestigious amateur events.

On April 9 to 13 the Powell River Regals seniors hockey club hosted the Allan Cup Canadian hockey championships. The teams from Quebec, Manitoba, Alberta and our own Powell River Regals competed for one of the oldest true amateur titles left in the country. Replacing the Stanley Cup in 1908 gave a need for an amateur Canadian title that took on the name the Allan Cup. Of the 25 players on the Regals, an unprecedented 15 are locally born and raised in Powell River. After a hard-fought tournament, the Powell River Regals lost the Allan Cup championship this year to the Quebec Garaga.

However, they have taken the cup three times in the past. [1415] Followi ng thei r last win i n 2000, the y were chosen to represent Canada in Nagano, Japan, for the 2001 Nagano Cup Team Canada. That was the first time since 1960 that an amateur team was asked to represent Canada. Not only was this a highlight for the 25 play- ers on the team but also a proud moment for British Columbia. Our boys wrapped themselves in Canadian pride.

While pulling the red and white over their heads and wearing the maple leaf over their hearts, they showed the world once again that at a local and inter- national level, the determination of a small community in British Columbia can both thrive and excel at home and abroad against insurmountable odds. SENIORS HOUSING K. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, as the demographics of our community change, we see those on the front end of the baby-boom generation now entering their golden years, with the majority to follow. Our mature seniors are living longer and more active lives.

As our society changes, our housing needs also will need an adjust- ment. A majority of seniors now remain active and, hopefully, will continue to live in their own homes. Improvements in health care allow many seniors to extend their time and health to historical highs, but the reality is that at some time their abilities will diminish and their housing requirements will become more on- erous. With minor building adjustments and assisted living we will, as a society, be able to provide what

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3151 most seniors want: to age gracefully in their own homes. This government has committed to providing better care, more comprehensive care and more choices. We are not planning to do this alone. We are looking to our community partners. Along with traditional non-profit agencies such as the Legion, Kiwanis and Rotary, we will be looking for new partnerships.

I would like to touch on a few of those partners who have been very active in my community: the Legion branch 88, with 271 units and more on the books; the ECRA Society, 119 units built in conjunction with a new seniors cen- tre, which services many of the newer seniors residen- tial facilities that surround it; and Willow Manor, com- ing on stream on August 15 with 100 congregate care and 33 licensed care beds available.

We have to recognize that to meet the challenges of our aging population, we are going to have to change the way our health care delivery system works, work- ing towards improving the opportunities in housing. At the conclusion of this session, over the summer I will be meeting with seniors groups in my community to discuss these future needs.

I believe this government will live up to its commitment to build and operate an additional 5,000 new intermediate and long-term beds by 2006 and ensure that comprehensive transition plans are in place so seniors are respected while changes are made to improve their condition of life. Oral Questions FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES J. MacPhail: Last week mental health services were hit hard when the government announced its plans to reorganize health care in British Columbia. As part of that announcement, the North Shore branch of the B.C. Schizophrenia Society lost all of its funding.

For a small investment of $65,000 a year, the society provided a wide array of programs that help families, along with the patients, cope with the unbelievable stress of the mental illness. To the Minister of State for Mental Health: will he please stand today and show some leadership and step in and order the Vancouver Coastal health authority to reinstate the funding for the North Shore branch of the B.C. Schizophrenia Society? Hon. G.

Cheema: We have made it very clear to the Vancouver Coastal health authority that any reform in mental health must be consistent with this govern- ment's commitment to improve the lives of those with mental illness, and nothing else will be tolerated. J. MacPhail: Well, the North Shore branch of the B.C. Schizophrenia Society is just one of hundreds of mental health organizations around the province with their funding now in jeopardy. When the Minister of State for Mental Health fired the mental health advo- cate, many people predicted that that was exactly what would happen.

The Vancouver Coastal health author- ity alone is cutting about $7 million from mental health services. In fact, virtually every health authority is cut- ting funding for mental health services. [1420] Will the Minister of State for Mental Health stand up in the House and either put his money where his mouth is and have these funding cuts stopped, or, if he won't do that, why doesn't he just admit that he is cut- ting mental health programs to make up for all the other mistakes his government has made? Hon. G. Cheema: I don't think we need a lecture from that member on the mental health issues. Mr.

Speaker, if they were smart, can you imagine how much you could do with the $463 million they wasted on fast ferries? They could have supported 79,000 sub- sidized housing units for mental health. They could have supported 4,000 emergency response beds for mental health. They could have supported 2,000 day hospitals in this province. They could have supported over $1.5 million of respite care for the families. We made the commitment, and we are fulfilling that commitment. We will be spending $263 million over a period of six years to meet the needs of patients with mental illness. NEGOTIATIONS WITH PHYSICIANS J.

Kwan: T h i s m i n i s t e r k n o w s i t . T h e y h a v e t a k e n away $400 million from the basic budget for mental health from the Health budget. A month ago the Minister of Health Services made much… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: …about the agreement reached with the doctors. The Finance minister helped him out by hiking MSP premiums. Then he hiked the PST. The Labour minister helped him out by ripping up collective agreements. Now it looks like he's going to need some help again. Tomorrow specialists announce job action commencing on Monday.

Can the Minister of Health Services tell us what backup plan he has to assure patients that their health would not be jeopardized by any job action? Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, I just wanted to correct the member's comment about mental health funding. It has not been cut in this province; it, in fact, is being unenhanced. We're, for the first time, actually funding the mental health plan that the previous government committed to but then didn't budget for. The negotiations with the B.C. Medical Association have been proceeding well over these last number of weeks.

I recognize the fact that there are groups of doc- tors in this province who have been quite anxious about this issue for a year now, while the negotiations and mediation and arbitration process have been un-

3152 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 folding. I have certainly encouraged each of these groups of specialists and other physicians to contact the BCMA if they're anxious about the progress of ne- gotiations and they'd like to get an update. I'm very confident that we will be able to resolve these issues in the very near future. We put $392 mil- lion of additional money in the budget for physician remuneration, and we are in the final stages now of sorting out exactly how those dollars will be allocated. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J.

Kwan: J u s t a w o r d o f w a r n i n g . W h e n t h i s g o v - ernment says they're protecting services for you… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Order, please. J. Kwan: …what it means is reduction and cuts in programs that you depend on. Seniors feel that they have no recourse other than civil disobedience to protest being moved against their will. Last week we saw that "health care where you need it and when you need it" has become "health care down the road if you can get it." Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J.

Kwan: Now, once again, patients are being held hostage because negotiations with the doctors are fal- ling apart. To the Minister of Finance: it's almost been a year, and tax cuts have not increased government revenues. Just where is the money going to come from to pay for the settlement with the doctors? Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned in my earlier an- swer, $392 million of additional money has been put into the budget to provide for physician remuneration.

That has been funded out of increases to the Medical Services Plan premiums, which nobody wanted to do and nobody likes to see happen, but we needed to find a revenue source to fund the increases in physician remuneration. We also increased the tobacco tax in this province, and those dollars went to cover that $392 million. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. Hon. C.

Hansen: Before I leave the issue of the MSP premiums, I do want to also remind the members op- posite that there are 230,000 British Columbians who are going to see their MSP premiums actually reduced as a result of the changes that were introduced. [1425] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. CIRCUIT COURT SERVICES D. Chutter: My question is to the Attorney General. The Attorney General has indicated that he is looking to improve access to justice for all British Columbians through the expanded use of circuit courts.

Last week he announced that 100 Mile House had been chosen for the circuit court option, and today it is the city of Hope. Can the Attorney General advise my constituents of the arrangements that have been made in Hope? Hon. G. Plant: I'm glad to be able to confirm the announcement, which was made earlier today, that court services will continue in Hope through a circuit court model. Under the existing arrangements there are full-time staff, including a court registry, present in Hope, even though court sittings were about three days a week.

Under the new arrangements, the judges and Crown counsel staff will travel to Hope on an as-needed basis to ensure that court sits in Hope for those days when court needs to sit in Hope. I think it's good news for Hope. I want to thank the district of Hope for the financial contribution they made and thank the judiciary for the work they've done. In particular, I know all members of the House will want to congratulate the member for Yale-Lillooet for his strong advocacy on behalf of the citizens of his constituency. Mr. Speaker: The member for Yale-Lillooet has a supplementary question. D.

Chutter: The option of circuit courts has raised considerable interest in many communities across B.C. as a way to improve our justice system. Can the Attorney General outline steps taken to maintain access to justice in communities affected by courthouse closures? Hon. G. Plant: Yes, I'd be glad to do that. We are continuing to pursue circuit court as an op- tion in as m any communities as are interested i n hav- ing the conversation, recognizing that dollars are a real issue.

In communities where the local community is strongly behind the idea of circuit court and willing to contribute financially, that certainly raises the chances for success of that discussion. We're also particularly focusing on those communi- ties where the establishment of circuit court will main- tain a level of access for the region around those com- munities. We're continuing to develop policy initiatives around fax filing. We've got the agreement of the judi- ciary to expand the use of video conferencing.

There is more that we are doing and will continue to do in the weeks and months to come to ensure that we can maintain a reasonable level of access to justice for people across the province of British Columbia.

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3153 U.S. SOFTWOOD LUMBER DUTY R. Visser: My question is for the Minister of For- ests. This morning the International Trade Commission in the U.S. handed down its ruling on whether the U.S. lumber industry has been hurt by imports of softwood lumber from Canada. Could the Minister of Forests update British Co- lumbians on the ruling and what it means for our soft- wood lumber industry? Hon.

M. de Jong: The ITC, or International Trade Commission — which is in fact an arm of the American government — did make a decision this morning that is disappointing but not surprising when you consider that at every step along the way in this process, the forces of protectionism within the U.S. have prevailed in the face of what is supposed to be a free trading na- tion and ethic down there.

The decision — a finding of threat of injury — is significant because only six weeks ago American Sena- tors and lumber interests were crying out that because of action in Canada, their industry and mills were be- ing put out of business. Even the ITC has rejected that argument. That's good news for British Columbia.

What it should mean in the short term, of course, is the return and release of bonds that have been posted, d at i ng b ac k t o A u g u s t o f l as t y e a r, and i t p ro v i d e s u s with a short window of opportunity between now and the 23rd when the U.S. will actually be in a position to begin collecting duties from B.C. lumber interests. Mr. Speaker: The member for North Island has a supplementary question. R. Visser: These crippling American duties have devastated forest-dependent communities across B.C., including the ones I come from.

Today's decision is just a further blow to the many families in my riding that depend on the softwood lumber industry. Can the Minister of Forests tell us what the next step is for our government and what the next step is for these communities? [1430] Hon. M. de Jong: Well, it's clear that notwithstand- ing the nature of the decision — in fact, because of it — a bad situation is on the verge of getting much worse. We had a summit meeting earlier this week con- vened by the Premier. We had a good discussion.

We've had lots of good discussions with the federal government about the support that needs to be brought to bear for the people who are going to bear the brunt of this dispute if this matter is not resolved prior to May 23. The challenge now is to get beyond the words and actually have the federal government step up to the plate with a concrete offer of support — some real dol- lars that we can put in the hands of the people who, as I said earlier, are going to bear the brunt of this dispute if it continues unresolved. There are thousands of them.

It is time now for governments across the coun- try and, most particularly, in Ottawa to take decisive action in light of what has taken place in Washington today. KYOTO ACCORD J. Kwan: Yesterday the Liberal government was seen to be placing great stock in the results of a stale- dated poll. To the Minister of Energy and Mines: a Decima poll tells that fully 78 percent of the population back the Kyoto accord — a strong expression of the will of the people.

Perhaps, then, the minister can explain why his government refuses to back the Kyoto accord and, in fact, is setting the stage for a massive expansion of car- bon gas–producing industry in this province. Hon. R. Neufeld: The province of British Columbia — the Minister of Water, Land and Air and my minis- try — has attended about four meetings now where all provinces come together, all ministers, along with the federal government to talk about the Kyoto accord. The Kyoto accord is a federal government initiative that they have not put on the table yet. Interjections. Hon. R.

Neufeld: Well, if you know the answer, why do you ask it? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. R. Neufeld: I f t h e y w i l l a l l o w m e t o f i n i s h , what we have asked the government of Canada to do is put forward to British Columbians and everyone in Canada what is going to be in the Kyoto accord, what it's going to cost British Columbians and what value it is at the end of the day.

When we find that out and when the federal government lives up to its commit- ment to tell all Canadians what it is, then we will look seriously at what they're putting on the table. [End of question period.] Point of Order J. MacPhail: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to seek your assistance on resolving a question which is unique to this Legislature. It relates to a question of privileges of members and reports of committees funded out of the Legislative Assembly budget.

The act that was amended by this government stipulates that the $6,000 stipend for the chair of the offshore oil and gas government caucus committee is paid out of the Legislative Assembly global budget. My question is for consideration by you, Mr. Speaker. Are any of the privileges that are granted generically to all

3154 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 legislative members attached to the disbursement of legislative funding? Mr. Speaker: Thank you. The point of order is noted. I will bring back a decision in due course. [1435] Hon. G. Collins: On what I think was the point of order, but it's sort of a point of privilege…. I'm not sure. If the issue the member raises deals with privi- leges of members, which is what she said, then the ap- propriate way to do that is through a privilege motion.

If she has a question about the way the budgets of the Legislature work, she has been invited to be a member of LAMC to discuss how the budgets are determined and how they're allocated. Normally, the longstanding practice in this House is for those issues to be raised at the Legislative Assembly Management Committee, which is required by statute as well. I would just argue that that's a far more appropri- ate way to raise that issue. Those minutes are made pub- lic as well. I think the member knows that, but obviously she chose to do it in this way.

I know there are many issues which could be raised that way, if that's the way the member wants to have them raised. Mr. Speaker: Thank you, hon. member. Comments all noted. H. Long: I seek leave to table a petition. Mr. Speaker: No leave required. Please proceed. Petitions H. Long: I would like to present a petition that I re- ceived from Gibsons Chiropractic in my constituency. Collectively, I've received 132 signatures from Powell River–Sunshine Coast constituents. The petition urges the B.C. government to include chiropractor doctors in the medicare plan on a basis equal to medical doctors.

Tabling Documents Hon. G. Bruce: Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the annual report of the Workers Compensation Board for the year 2001. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call second reading, continued debate, on Bill 45. Second Reading of Bills LEGAL SERVICES SOCIETY ACT (continued) J. Kwan: Prior to the lunch break I was making comments regarding the bill that the government has introduced, Bill 45, the Legal Services Society Act.

The issues I raised before lunch centred around the cuts with legal aid services in British Columbia, the cuts in the courthouse closures, the impacts for the people who need legal aid the most, who would not be able to access it. Of course, the cuts are now accompanied with this bill, Bill 45, which takes away the independence, in my view, of the board of the Legal Services Society. It allows for the government to overturn the budget that is set out by the Legal Services Society Board.

It changes the representation of the board with the major- ity to be represented by government appointees, and it takes away community representation, whereby for- merly the community law offices and native law offices would have representation at a 15-member board. It is now a nine-member board with five members to be appointed by government.

In my view, it allows for the government to fire the board much more easily than the current piece of legis- lation, although even with the current legislation, it did not stop the Attorney General from firing the board when the board challenged the government on its cuts, when the board said that by making 38.8 percent of the cuts to legal aid, it essentially means that legal aid would not be able to meet the mandate as set out by the ministry.

That is to provide access to justice for all British Columbians. [1440] One of the most important pieces around the change in legal aid with this bill, Bill 45, is that it takes away the mandate of legal aid to provide services in the area of poverty law. The former Legal Services So- ciety Act, the original act, states: "The objects of the society are to ensure that" an individual, under item (d), "has a legal problem that threatens…." Let me just go back a little bit.

Let me read this into the record as well: "The objects of the society are to ensure that…services ordinarily provided by a lawyer are afforded to individuals who would not otherwise receive them because of financial or other reasons, and…education, advice and information about law are provided for the people of British Columbia." Then it goes on to talk about how it needs to be made available for a qualifying individual who meets one or more of the following conditions.

The conditions include criminal proceedings, proceedings that involve civil proceedings that may result in imprisonment and issues that relate to domestic violence.

The piece that is being taken out with this change of the legal aid bill, the Legal Services Society Act, is this: where people have "a legal problem that threatens…the individual's f am i l y ' s p hy s i c al o r m e nt al s a f e t y o r he a l t h… t he i nd i - vidual's ability to feed, clothe and provide shelter for himself or herself and the individual's dependents, or…the individual's livelihood." This area that is being eliminated from the mandate of the Legal Services Society essentially takes away the mandate of the Legal Services Society to provide pov- erty law assistance.

Other people may coin it with the term "administrative law." Essentially, it is taking away the mandate of the society to provide legal advice or legal assistance to individuals who, quite frankly, need it the most. The reasons why the individual would

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3155 need legal representation are because it threatens the individual's family's physical or mental safety or health; because it threatens the individual's ability to feed, clothe and provide shelter for himself or herself and the individual's dependents; and because it threat- ens the individual's livelihood. One would argue that that mandate is the most fundamental piece in terms of the individual's need to get assistance.

When you're unable to address issues of providing basic needs like feeding, clothing and pro- viding shelter for yourself or the individual's depend- ents, it threatens the well-being of the individual. On that basis, the former mandate of the Legal Services Society Act is such that in British Columbia, govern- ment is required to provide legal assistance to those individuals. Now, with Bill 45, the new Legal Services Society Act introduced by the Attorney General…. For this government to try and push through this debate with less than 24 hours of the debate for second reading….

The government is going to take away the most fun- damental piece that underlies legal aid for those who are faced with threats to their health and safety; to their ability to feed, clothe and provide shelter; and to their livelihoods. You may ask: "What is wrong with that picture?" There was an

article that was written in the Vancouver Sun by Ian Mulgrew. I'll just take parts of it to illustrate what is wrong with this picture. I quote from the arti- cle, which is entitled "Legal Aid Staffers Brace for Worst." [1445] "Attorney General Geoff Plant announced in mid- January sweeping changes to the face of justice and the virtual elimination of the province's legal safety net. "The number of staff lawyers and paralegals with the legal aid society is being axed to 12 from 75, and all but seven of the agency's 60 offices are being closed. As many as 40,000 people could lose legal representation and support.

"Until now, the province has provided legal aid to people facing any legal problem that threatens their ability to feed, clothe or house themselves. "To qualify, you must be without financial resources, have a bona fide legal problem that could leave you homeless or hungry, and have a reasonable chance of winning your case. "In the Vancouver poverty law clinic high above Robson and Howe Streets, 11 lawyers and paralegals work in teams specializing in particular areas of law. One deals with disability cases involving the Workers Compensation Board, the Canada Pension Plan or the Criminal Injury Compensation Board.

Another handles income security cases involving employment insurance, welfare or old-age security benefits. A housing team takes on landlord and tenant disputes, including evictions, and a flying team picks up cases that don't necessarily fit into any of the formal categories. "At any one time on the flying squad, Ward" — who is one of the lawyers — "juggles between 45 and 55 cases involving disability insurance, foreclosures, bankruptcies and professional licensing disputes involving day care, taxi licences and union complaints. "'You name it; I've got it,' she quipped.

"Just about all of that work, however, is being eliminated by Premier Gordon Campbell's administration. "Even though Victoria imposes a 7.5 percent tax on lawyers' bills to their paying clients to fund legal aid, generating nearly $89 million a year, the province is diverting 40 percent of that money out of the system and into general revenue. "When the legal aid society board refused to implement the cuts because of the impact on the poor, Plant fired it and imposed a trustee." Just skipping some of the quotes, the

article goes on to say: "But Ward and Puga say axing legal aid is a false economy. "'You have to look at poverty law and ask: is it expendable?' Ward said. 'The government has said a lot of poor people will experience difficulty, and that's too bad, so sad. '"But if people lose their homes, are unable to feed themselves, to talk about efficiencies when you are talking about such basic rights and such basic subsistence needs, to even say, 'Well, could we save money over here,' is…." The

article goes on to describe: "She rolled her eyes. 'If we look at the economy and the number of layoffs, this is all happening at a time when demand for poverty law services is increasing. So the combination of those two trends will produce results that will be really bleak.'" The

article continues: "In Vancouver the only parts of the system that will survive are the intake clinic — someone still has to process the legal aid applications, even if no one is there to handle them — and the family law clinic, which will provide limited services in cases involving restraining orders or child apprehensions.

"Other work the legal aid staff does, such as providing supervision for community advocates with organizations such as the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre or delivering workshops or training programs across the province, is also being eliminated." From another lawyer: "'Clients are being assessed for intake, and if they are deemed eligible for our services, they are sent over to us. Hopefully, we'll get through their process far enough that they'll be able to carry it on their own.' "Ward added: 'There certainly are people going to be cut off midstream, and I don't know how they are going to manage.'" Then the

article has a little bit more to say in terms of the concerns around cuts to legal aid. That's the mandate that this act is taking away — the mandate to provide legal aid services in the area of poverty law. The minister, the Attorney General, said earlier this morning: "Well, that's creating flexibility. The society can decide what areas of law they want to provide legal aid services to." [1450] The Attorney knows very well that by underfund- ing legal aid, the only ability that legal aid would have would be to provide assistance in the areas of criminal cases and family law cases that involve vio- lence.

That's mandated in the act itself. But without funding, they are unable to provide for support in the a r e a o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l a w . B y d e l e t i n g t h e r e q u i r e -

3156 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 ment that that service be provided, the government, the Attorney General, is essentially saying: "We will no longer fund legal aid services in the area of pov- erty law." It's not creating flexibility. It's limiting ac- cess to justice. It is that simple. The Association of Community Law Offices of Brit- ish Columbia and the Native Community Law Offices Association of British Columbia have written a submis- sion to the Ministry of Attorney General, justice ser- vices branch, on the Legal Services Society Act amendments discussion paper.

I'm going to read some of their comments into the record, because I agree with these comments: "The Association of Community Law Offices of British Columbia and the Native Community Law Offices Association of British Columbia together represent 26 community law offices and native community law offices across the province.

On behalf of all 26 of their members' offices, the associations express their strong opposition to changes to the mandate of the Legal Services Society — in particular, any amendments to or removal of paragraph 3.2(d)." This was the paragraph that I read out earlier from the original act, which deals with the issues around ser- vices that will now no longer be mandated for legal aid to provide: where it threatens the individual's family's physical, mental health or safety; the individual's abil- ity to feed, clothe and provide shelter for himself or herself or the individual's dependents or the individ- ual's livelihood.

The submission continues: "This paragraph mandates the provision of what is commonly referred to as poverty law: the most disadvantaged of our citizens, including the aboriginal people, seeking poverty law services in order to obtain the most basic necessities of life. We fear an increase in homelessness and crimes if these critical services are removed." They go on to say: "Currently all legal aid field offices are to be closed as of August 31. Offices may be required to cease providing poverty law services even before then.

The removal of paragraph 3.2(d)" — which I read out earlier — "would eliminate the Legal Services Society's obligation to provide these services. "We point out that this may be contrary to the rights given to all citizens pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Any court challenges will be defended at public expense, which we anticipate will increase rather than decrease the ministry's overall expenditures." The submission continues: "The ministry comments that removing mandatory requirements will among other things leave the provision of legal aid services to the discretion of the Legal Services Society board. We point out that should another board be put in place, given the current level of government funding in legal services, the board's discretion will be illusionary only. [J.

Weisbeck in the chair.] "We also wish to comment on some of the proposed objects of the society. According to the ministry, legal aid should be administered in a cost-effective and efficient manner and priorities and policies should be established within the limits of available financial resources. We wonder what happened to the ministry's prior commitment to a fair and accessible legal system. "Further, in our view, service priorities and policies should not be established based on the financial goals of the ministry.

We're not arguing against the need to work within a reasonable budget, but the budget must be reflective of the legal aid needs. Service priorities and policies need to be based on those needs, not the ministry's financial goals. Again, the issues of independence and discretion of the legal aid system are relevant. [1455] "We do agree, however, that the definition of legal services encompasses many options between full and no legal representation. Our offices, some for upwards of 25 years, have been providing a full range of services to our clients and communities including

summary advice, public education, information and self-help material, referral to alternative services when appropriate, ADR, etc. Throughout the years, we have ensured that referrals are only made to lawyers when absolutely necessary. Our offices have always called upon the expertise of our paralegals whenever possible. Thus services have been provided in the most cost-efficient manner possible." On the issue around accountability, the submission continues to say: "Our member offices are each managed by an independent community board of directors.

They have demonstrated their willingness to be accountable for all aspects of service delivery to their clients, communities and funders. We agree that there is an expectation that the LSS board should also be accountable. In our view, however, what is being considered exceeds accountability and, in reality, speaks to more control of the LSS board by the ministry. This undermines the independence of the board and eliminates its discretion." It gives an example: "…the ministry is considering enforcing a requirement that the board's budget must be approved by the Attorney General.

This would clearly undermine the board's ability to allocate its resources according to the needs of the different communities throughout the province. Further, the Attorney General would be able to prescribe those services that cannot be provided.

Again, clearly, the board's independence and discretion would be illusionary only." On the issue around governance model: "The ministry refers to the appointing power to the now-defunct LSS board of directors and states that 'neither the size of the board nor the requirement of stakeholder nominees is consistent with the principles of effective governance.' We express the strongest disagreement with this statement. Many of our members have been involved with the legal aid system for numerous years.

In our view, the current appointment process, ensuring that the community has input into the decisions of the board, was a great step forward. Over the past few years we have seen much more effective and responsive governance than in the past. Yet the ministry would have us go backwards and remove the ability of the community through our associations to appoint members to the board. We voice our strong opposition to any move to allow only the Attorney General and the Law Society to perform this critical function." Then, skipping down a little bit, the submission continues:

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3157 "If the ministry proceeds in the direction stated in the discussion paper which is now the bill, we won- der why a new board will be appointed at all. It would appear to simply add an additional powerless layer of administration. The ministry may as well avoid this window-dressing and run legal aid as a di- rect arm of government." Then the society has some comments around reve- nue generation, which essentially states that they don't have a problem with revenue generation.

But let me just read their words into the record: "We support some of the revenue generation proposals. For example, we have been proposing for several years that the LSS be given the statutory authority to place liens on property in appropriate circumstances. We also support the LSS charging for products and services other than legal services for such things as public legal education materials for clients who do not meet the LSS's financial eligibility tests. "We are, however, opposed to any increase to the financial contributions of clients who are eligible for legal aid.

The current financial eligibility tests are extremely stringent. Any requirement for additional contributions would impede the ability of the LSS's clients to feed or house themselves and their families." Then the submission provides for some closing comments. I'll just pick a few. "We agree with the statement that the province has responsibility for the effective administration of the justice system and that legal aid is a necessary part of that system. Proper administration of the justice system demands that the poorest and most vulnerable of our citizens have access to it." [1500] Hon.

Speaker, the Association of Community Law Offices of B.C. and the Native Community Law Offices Association of B.C. have voiced a strong opinion on the proposed changes. Now the bill is before us, Bill 45, Legal Services Society Act. This bill, in my view, is fundamentally flawed, as it penalizes the people who are most vulnerable, who will now no longer be able to access justice. It takes away what was formerly in the Society Act to provide for, in my view, essential ser- vices for the poor — access to legal services and legal representation in the area of poverty law.

Some of the quotes that I'm going to put forward are from individuals who've made comments… Hon. G. Plant: I thought you said you were nearly finished. J. Kwan: …and have been reported in the paper. Maybe the Attorney General is frustrated with de- bate in this House, because he just sat in his seat and said: "I thought I heard the opposition member say she's nearly finished." Maybe he's frustrated because we're engaging in debate in this House. It is no won- der, quite frankly. What this government has tried to do is silence opposition at every step of the way. They try to do that every step of the way.

Is it any wonder, when a bill as important as this was introduced in the House less than 24 hours ago…? Now we're here doing second reading debate. An Hon. Member: It was 25 hours ago. J. Kwan: The House didn't rise until late in the eve- ning last night. We had less than 24 hours to look and see what this government's doing — not just the oppo- sition members but the public as well. They didn't have access to this bill until yesterday. Now the Attorney General's frustrated because there's debate in this House.

God forbid that someone challenge the actions of this government when they attack the most vulnerable British Columbians — the poorest of the poor, people who need to have access to justice, people who should have the right to access to justice. The Attorney General himself admitted that with the changes he's bringing about, there will be limitation to access to justice for some British Columbians. I thought we lived in a society where we pride our- selves, as Canadians, that what makes us so great as Canadians, as British Columbians, is that we have compassion.

We know what is right, and we know what i s wro n g . I n o u r he art s we k no w t he d i f f e re nc e . When we know the difference, we act on those differ- ences. Government steps forward to make sure that the poorest of the poor have their rights afforded to them. This act undermines that fundamental principle that makes me proud as a British Columbian. That is the issue we're debating today. It's not just my view — not just me who shares these opinions. Here's some other people who share this view as well.

The Law Society president, Richard Gibbs, said that the firing of the board had "terminated the independ- ence of legal aid in British Columbia." Bill 45 further erodes any sense of the independence of the Legal Ser- vices Society Act. That's exactly what this bill does — takes away the independence of the Legal Services So- ciety. Here's another quote: "We won't maintain the level of service. I expect there will be people who will have an even harder time finding access to justice than be- fore." Guess who made that comment: the Attorney General himself, who's sitting here making these cuts.

How could it be that we have the Attorney General, who is the person in this province who's been charged to ensure access to justice is provided for all British Columbians, making such a comment: "We won't maintain the level of service, and I expect there will be people who will have an even harder time finding ac- cess to justice than before"? Here's what a criminal lawyer who provides service in the community had to say: "There wasn't enough money as it was.

There's going to be all kinds of people facing jail, and no one will take them on." [1505] Another lawyer, a front-line person who provides the services: "The bottom line is that if someone does not have legal representation, they are being denied justice. The government has imposed an impossible burden on the poor of the province."

3158 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 These are just some of the comments. There are many other comments that British Columbians came forward and stated. The government and this Attorney General did not heed the words of the broader community — not from the opposition, not from anybody. They're simply go- ing to plow ahead with the cuts. They're going to take away legal aid services for the people who need it the most. Hon. Speaker, I intend to vote against this bill.

I think it's reprehensible that this government is attack- ing the poor the way they are today — this bill with a combination of others: Bills 26, 27…. The list goes on. I intend to vote against this bill and challenge the gov- ernment every step of the way and attempt to hold this government accountable, as they said during the elec- tion they weren't going to attack the most vulnerable. We now see their actions are different from their words during the election — yet another broken promise. Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, the Attorney General closes debate. Hon. G.

Plant: M a n y o f t h e r e m a r k s m a d e b y t h e opposition member go to funding issues rather than the new structure of the society that is proposed in this bill. The opposition member and I had a very long de- bate and discussion about those issues during the esti- mates debate. Many of the points the member made then she has made again today. I know these are issues that she feels strongly about. In terms of the changes proposed in the legislation, they actually open up the mandate of the society.

They open up the capacity, the powers, the objects of the society to ensure that the society has the greatest range of options available to it to deliver on the most impor- tant areas of responsibility in the provision of legal aid services. This bill preserves the independence of the society in those areas where the society needs to be independ- ent. I listened to the member's comments about that and, frankly, waited for her to explain what she meant when she talked about the way in which she believes the bill undermines the independence.

After all, it's quite easy to make the statement, but if you can't ex- plain it, then I guess people who hear the statement might wonder if in fact there's any foundation to it.

I tried to make quite clear in my second reading remarks the way in which independence is, in fact, an important value and how that value is preserved and enhanced in many ways, in my view, in this act; how, in particular, the issue of independence around the delivery of legal aid services is fundamentally an issue that says the society must be independent around the decisions to provide counsel to people who are en- gaged in matters where the government is on the other side.

If government were directly involved in the ap- pointment or selection of counsel for someone who has been accused of a criminal offence, I think there are people who could then say: "Well, the government is there appointing Crown; government's there appoint- ing defence counsel. That doesn't look very good." In- deed, the society will continue to have all the inde- pendence that it needs in relation to those aspects of its operation. When it comes to that fundamental question of how much money the society should spend, that is an issue for government.

We make a decision as government about how much money is available to the society. We have not just the right but the obligation to be at the table with the society, sitting down and discussing in broad terms the service priorities that the society should have. It is the taxpayers' money that is being spent by the society. In fact, what this bill says, which I think is a mar- vellous innovation, is that where the society has the ability to recover funds from other sources — which it has done, I should say, in some cases, but it will be able to do more of because of this bill….

Where the society has other dollars, they'll have greater freedom of ac- tion, I think, because of this bill, in terms of how they spend those dollars. [1510] The member made some comments about her con- tinued opposition to the spectre that there would ever be any commercial activity anywhere in the province of British Columbia, particularly her fear that the society would be in some way missing its function if it en- gaged in commercial activities. Well, the society has in fact been engaged in some forms of fundraising and other commercial activities for some period of time.

In fact, it was the society that came to government and said: "Look, we are leading-edge developers of infor- mation technology and management systems for how to manage the delivery of a wide range of litigation services. People come to the society all the time from other parts of the world and say: 'Can you teach us how it is you do what you do?

We think we have much to learn.'" I think that given that the taxpayers of British Co- lumbia have made the investment in creating that intel- lectual property, if you will, the society should be in a position to share that with other parts of the world, with other places, with other organizations. If there's an op- portunity for them to do that in a way that offsets their costs and gives them more tools to provide legal aid services to people who need it, I think that's a good step. I think all members of the House should applaud that part of this bill, which will give the society those tools.

Yes, the bill very much also gives the society the opportunity to engage in a greater degree of cost re- covery. I know the society will take that responsibility very seriously. There are many, many people who come searching for legal aid who simply have no re- sources whatsoever. There are, however, many other people who come for legal aid who do have the ability to provide some modest contribution either up front or later.

To give the society the tools to ensure that they treat people fairly and that they give the taxpayers value for money in terms of providing the widest pos- sible range of service to people who need it, I think, is a good part of this bill.

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3159 We did actually, as the member notes, undertake a discussion process with the profession and others. It was a fairly compressed process — I concede that — but circumstances required that we move forward quickly. In particular, the fact that the old board of the society decided by a majority that they could not im- plement a budget meant that we were put on a pretty accelerated timetable in terms of making sure there were changes made.

Many of the comments the member makes in terms of citing other statements made by people about whether the society could have delivered on that budget were in fact raised and dealt with by the courts, and all of the courts' findings are completely contrary to the member's statements. The board was in fact able to deliver on the budget. The fact that they chose not to put the government in a very difficult position, because our responsibility as government is to provide the ser- vice to the people who need it.

The board wasn't will- ing to do that, and that put us in a situation where we had no alternative but to appoint a trustee. We're now moving forward. We're moving forward to put in place a new governance structure, a new mandate, a new range of powers that I think will make British Columbia a leader in terms of the way we de- liver legal aid services, the range of services we pro- v i d e a n d t h e r a n g e o f p e o p l e t h a t w i l l b e a f f e c t e d b y and will receive a benefit from the provision of those services. I think this is a good initiative, and I'm glad to have heard the member's comments.

I look forward to con- tinuing to discuss some of those issues — not, of course, the funding issue, which has been dealt with in the estimates debate, but in terms of her concerns around the mechanisms of the bill. I'm sure we'll have a chance to pursue those in committee stage. I would move second reading. [1515-1520] Second reading of Bill 45 approved on the follow- ing division: YEAS — 42 Falcon Coell L. Reid Whittred Cheema Hansen Bruce Santori Nettleton Lee Thorpe Hagen Murray Plant Collins Bond de Jong Stephens Neufeld Penner Jarvis Anderson Orr Nuraney Long Chutter Johnston R.

Stewart Bray Locke Nijjar Wong Bloy Suffredine K. Stewart Visser Brice Sultan Hamilton Sahota Hawes Kerr NAYS — 2 MacPhail Kwan Hon. G. Plant: I move that the bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole for consideration at the next sitting after today. Bill 45, Legal Services Society Act, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. G. Plant: I call committee stage on Bill 23. Committee of the Whole House INTERJURISDICTIONAL SUPPORT ORDERS ACT The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 23; H. Long in the chair. The committee met at 3:24 p.m. On

section 1. [1525] R. Stewart: The concern we've got with this kind of issue…. I've got a constituent , for example, in my rid- ing who has expressed serious concern about the abil- ity to enforce maintenance orders and such when the spouse has left the country. In this particular circum- stance, the spouse is out of the country, and her ability to have those orders enforced she finds severely cur- tailed. I wonder if there is a process in place that would allow us to raise specific issues regarding the enforce- ability of orders.

In particular, she has a couple of concerns: her ability to enforce interest payment on an unpaid debt related to family maintenance. She finds that she has no ability to enforce that if the spouse has left the country. That par- ticular concern is one that she's raised on a number of occasions — that where the debt exists and the spouse is still in the country, there is interest payable, but where the spouse has left the country, there is some inability to enforce the interest payable on that. I wonder if such issues have come before the Attorney General. Hon. G. Plant: I appreciate the member's question.

The status quo as it may exist, in terms of entitlement to recover interest, will not be affected by this bill. I'm also told that British Columbia may be the only juris- diction — if not one of the only jurisdictions — where interest is recoverable on a debt for unpaid mainte- n a n c e . T h a t w o u l d , c l e a r l y , m a k e i t m o r e d i f f i c u l t t o recover it from someone who is resident in a jurisdic- tion that would not recognize the obligation to pay i n t e r e s t o n a n u n p a i d s u p p o r t d e b t .

F r a n k l y , t h a t i s something, at least at first impression, that is probably

3160 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 more an issue with respect to the substantive law in the jurisdiction where the paying party resides. There is only so much we can do here in British Co- lumbia to assist or even deal with those issues. What this bill is primarily concerned with is putting in place proc- esses that will make it a little easier to obtain and then register an order for support in a case where a party resi- dent in British Columbia wants to obtain an order against a party resident in some other province or jurisdiction.

The extent to which these processes would be of assistance to someone seeking to obtain and enforce a maintenance order against somebody resident in an- other country would depend, in part, upon whether or not the other country is a reciprocating jurisdiction. Many countries, as I indicated in my second reading remarks, are reciprocating jurisdictions with British Co- lumbia, but, of course, many are not. R. Stewart: Therein, I guess, is the crux of the issue.

I raise the interest as an example only perhaps to illustrate that, clearly, it's a very complex process to negotiate these interjurisdictional agreements to enforce the order of a court in British Columbia upon someone living in a country in Europe or Asia.

I wonder if the Attorney General could perhaps ex- plain the process that B.C. enters into as it negotiates these — or maybe it's not B.C. that negotiates such agreements — and how such agreements can be changed, altered or expanded to include items that aren't currently included in such agreements. [1530] Clearly, if we can identify an expense that ought to be enforceable within Canadian jurisdictions, it is just as likely that it ought to be enforceable when the spouse moves out of Canada into another jurisdiction.

I wonder: what is the process that allows us to influence the way in which they can be enforced in another country? Hon. G. Plant: I'm advised that British Columbia takes the responsibility for negotiating directly with other jurisdictions, even countries. The provisions that would lead to an agreement whereby the two jurisdic- tions would become reciprocating jurisdictions…. The member would, I'm sure, realize that to be reciprocating means that the other country will agree to enforce our orders, but we will agree to enforce their orders.

The likelihood of achieving an effective agreement for recip- rocal enforcement is probably enhanced when the legal systems are sufficiently comparable to make the dia- logue an effective one. I don't know whether and how the specific issue of interest recovery might arise in negotiations with other jurisdictions, but it's certainly something I would be willing to take up with staff, recognizing that we are dealing here with something that is going to always be a problem.

One party to a relationship leaves a jurisdiction and could be liable to provide maintenance and support to the party living here in British Columbia, or the other way around. The system whereby you get an order and enforce it and actually maintain its enforceability in a practical sense will always be much more complicated than it is if both parties are resident inside British Columbia. R. Stewart: I thank the Attorney General.

Person- ally, I believe in the orders of a court in British Colum- bia, and I believe that we have to, as a society and as a government, do everything we can to ensure that someone cannot escape the orders of a lawful court in British Columbia. In this particular instance, the exam- ple I cited, there are a number of other complex issues that my constituent faces. I've raised them with your ministry, and I've received some satisfactory responses. I appreciate the efforts of ministry staff in the past months to work through some of these issues, and I recognize the complexities of them.

The Attorney Gen- eral undoubtedly shares my desire to continue to ex- pand the way in which we as a society and as a gov- ernment can assist British Columbians in ensuring that justice prevails through the enforcement of orders of the court. Sections 1 to 56 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Plant: I move the committee rise and re- port the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:34 p.m. The House resumed; J.

Weisbeck in the chair. [1535] Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 23, Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act, re- ported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Motions on Notice SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT TO 2001 JUDICIAL COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT Hon. G. Plant: I m o v e M o t i o n 1 5 s t a n d i n g i n m y name on the orders of the day: [That the Legislative Assembly accept a supplementary report to the 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee report and recommendations.

The 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee report and recommendations were laid before this Assembly on August 2, 2001, pursuant to

section 13 (12) of the Provincial Court Act. The supplementary report has been prepared, signed and submitted to the Attorney General by the chair of the 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee, on behalf of the Committee.]

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3161 Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of that supplementary report, which I will seek leave to table at the conclusion of debate. The motion further is: [That this supplementary report will correct an oversight of the 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee in preserving the pay differentials between Chief Judge, Associate Chief Judges and the other Provincial Court Judges.] Motion approved. Tabling Documents Hon. G. Plant: I seek leave, if leave is required, to table the supplementary recommendation of the 2001 Judicial Compensation Committee. Leave granted. Hon. G.

Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 10. Committee of the Whole House McLEOD LAKE INDIAN BAND TREATY No. 8 ADHESION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 10; H. Long in the chair. The committee met at 3:38 p.m.

Section 1 approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Plant: I move the committee rise and re- port the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:39 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 10, McLeod Lake Indian Band Treaty No. 8 Ad- hesion and Settlement Agreement Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. [1540] Hon. G. Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 30. Committee of the Whole House TRUSTEE INVESTMENT STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 30; H. Long in the chair. The committee met at 3:41 p.m. On

section 1. Hon. G. Plant: I just want to make this one note here for the benefit of people who might be interested in this issue and this debate. This is an amendment act. What will happen if the House passes this act is that a variety of statutes will be amended to give ef- fect to the basic principles that are being implemented here. This particular bill will sort of disappear into other statutes of the Legislature.

The most important destination will be the Trustee Act itself, where sec- tion 15 is being repealed and a number of sections are being added that will give effect to the heart of the principles in the bill. Again, I'd like to express my thanks to the Law Institute and, frankly, my own staff in the ministry for having worked hard to bring this initiative forward, which I hope will make a difference in the business of trustee investment in British Columbia. Sections 1 to 26 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Plant: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:43 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 30, Trustee Investment Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Hon. G. Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 29. Committee of the Whole House SECURITIES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 29; H. Long in the chair. The committee met at 3:45 p.m.

3162 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 Sections 1 to 44 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. R. Thorpe: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:46 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 29, Securities Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Hon. S. Hagen: I call second reading of Bill 37. Second Reading of Bills FOOD SAFETY ACT Hon. C. Hansen: I move that Bill 37 be now read a second time. Mr. Speaker: Please proceed.

Hon. C. Hansen: British Columbia's food safety system is among the best in the world for ensuring safe, wholesome food for B.C. consumers. This bill en- ables government to maintain high standards for food safety while providing flexibility to meet the changing needs of consumers and the agrifood industry now and into the future. It consolidates the food safety aspects of the Milk Industry Act, the Fish Inspection Act, the Meat Inspection Act and the Health Act into one uni- fied statute.

This bill was developed by the Ministry of Health Services in conjunction with the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries to streamline and modernize food safety legislation to meet the needs of consumers and the agrifood industry. For con- sumers, the bill offers the assurance that government will continue to set and monitor strict food safety standards with clear direction to the food industry for meeting those standards.

For industry, the bill demonstrates that government is responding to its concerns about outdated regulations which some- times frustrate the ability of this vital and growing sector to improve operations in regards to both product and food safety. The sector has raised legitimate concerns about restrictions on trade imposed by varying food safety standards across the country. The frustration and cost of multiple inspections and the regulatory burden of outdated provincial regulations are all to be addressed within the scope of this bill.

It is time to move from overly prescriptive re gula- tions, which limit the sector's ability to perform at the highest standards of food safety and production, to outcome-based regulations, which focus on the safety of food and not the method by which the food is pro- duced. Outcome-based regulations reflect a shift from detailed, overly prescriptive regulations to simplified goal-oriented regulations that would allow industry more flexibility in how the goals are met.

A case in point is the regulation governing dairy production that specifies the distance between the milk tanks in a dairy and the walls on the outside of the building that the milk tanks are in. Those, up to now, have been governed by the width of a push broom when, in fact, the dairies have introduced new tech- nologies to perform the same function that meet higher safety levels.

From here forward, the dairy industry can decide whether to use a push broom, a vacuum system or some other technology to keep their equip- ment clean, as long as the standards are met. [1550] Revised regulations will reduce the regulatory bur- den to provide industry with the flexibility to use new technology and methods for production and process- ing. This will encourage industry innovation while ensuring that food remains safe. These outcome-based regulations will be developed in consultation with the food industry to replace the existing regulations gov- erning the dairy, fish and meat industries.

This bill also enables integrated federal-provincial inspection delivery systems. It provides for greater flexibility in the appointment of inspectors, which means that federal inspectors can be appointed to carry out provincial inspections in addition to their federal responsibilities when that joint kind of inspection is appropriate. This is already happening in the meat industry through agreements between the federal and the provincial governments.

This bill will assist our agrifood industry to stay competitive and effectively respond to changing tech- nology, consumer demands and the requirements of interprovincial and international trade. It will ensure that government has the legislative tools necessary to continue to protect the safety of British Columbia's food. The motion for second reading is on the floor. Mr. Speaker: We are at second reading stage of Bill 37. The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. J. Kwan: I just have a quick comment on this matter on the issue around consultation.

I would urge that the minister, when he goes about developing regulation on the food safety matter, not only consult with industry but rather consult with a broader group of individuals who would have an interest in ensuring efficiency but also that the standard of safety is maintained.

THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3163 That's the only comment that I have. The minister, I'm sure, will be eager to move to the next stage of this bill. Mr. Speaker: Second reading of Bill 37. The minis- ter closes debate. Hon. C. Hansen: The point that the member makes is a very good one, and we will be embarking on that very comprehensive consultation with consumers, with the retail outlets, with the restaurant industries as well as the agrifood industry itself. Certainly, that consulta- tion will be very important as we proceed with the drafting of those regulations.

We'll make sure that her suggestion is followed up on. Mr. Speaker: The question is second reading of Bill 37. Motion approved. Hon. C. Hansen: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 37, Food Safety Act, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for con- sideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. S. Hagen moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. The House adjourned at 3:53 p.m.

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0502pm-03
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0502pm 03
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ac0abeb15c50347616d3f552c83310401b5f4f95

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