1990 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 34th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 1990

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

9667 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Structured Compensation Act (Bill 29). Hon. S.D. Smith

Introduction and first reading –– 9667

Oral Questions

Mail-order sale of lottery tickets. Mr. Sihota –– 9668

Relief from GST. Mr. Loenen –– 9668

Ministry of Highways land acquisition. Ms. Pullinger –– 9669

Silviculture funding. Mr. Miller –– 9669

Rent review policy. Mr. Blencoe –– 9670

Rental and social housing supply. Mr. Blencoe –– 9670

Mail-order sale of lottery tickets. Hon. Mr. Dirks replies to questions ––

Ministerial Statement

Impact of federal monetary policies. Hon. Mr. Vander Zalm –– 9672

Mr. Rose

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Advanced Education, Training and Technology estimates. (Hon. Mr. Strachan)

On vote 5: minister's office –– 9673

Mr. Jones

Mrs. Boone

Ms. A. Hagen

Hon. Mr. Fraser

Hon. Mrs. Johnston

Mr. Rabbitt

Hon. Mr. Dirks

Mr. Miller

The House met at 2:01 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. REID :

Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce to the

House today an alderman from the municipality of Surrey, the chairman

of the water and environmental committee of the Greater Vancouver

Regional District and a man who aspires to be the next mayor of Surrey:

Ald. Bill Fornich.

While I'm on my feet, I would also like

to introduce Mr. Ben Marr, a former deputy minister for the province of

British Columbia and now general manager of the Greater Vancouver

Regional District. It's a pleasure to have Ben back in the House.

MR. BARNES :

I would like the House to join me in welcoming a group of

in my constituency, along with their teachers Mr. Denis McMahon and

Shirlene Shelfontiuk.

While I'm on my feet, I would like to

remind the House that King George will be celebrating its seventy-fifth

anniversary this weekend, starting Friday, May 18, through to Sunday.

If anybody is around B.C. Place Stadium during that time, they would be

welcome to help them celebrate 75 years of successfully educating

students.

HON. MR. RICHMOND : I am pleased today to

welcome a group of 24 grade 7 students from Aberdeen Elementary School.

They are visiting the House with their teacher, Mr. Carl Gustafson, and

parents Sharon Parker, Karen Collins and Judy Littke. I would ask the

House to make them most welcome.

MR. HUBERTS : In the

gallery today we have a Miss Katy McLean, visiting our capital city

from Nunawading, Victoria, Australia. Katy is being hosted by the

Sidney and Brentwood Bay Rotary Clubs. Accompanying her is my

constituency assistant, Mrs. Jayne McCurrach. I'd ask the House to give

them both a warm welcome.

MR. ROSE : A school group

from my riding is with us today, a civics class from Moody Junior

Secondary School, with their teacher, Mr. Dave Maronuk. I'd like them

to be welcomed as well.

MRS. McCARTHY . In the gallery today are two friends who are visiting

our house: Inez Ridley and Dorothy Gray. They are members of the Esquimalt–Port

Renfrew constituency association, and I'd like to ask the House to give

them a warm welcome.

HON. MR. FRASER : Mr. Speaker and members of the assembly, I have two

introductions to make today. One is related to an intermediate-care facility

in Vancouver South, and representing them today are Mr. Felix Berg and 37 members

of the home.

also take great pleasure in introducing Mr. Christopher Richardson, who

is here on a conference. He's chairman of Youville Residence

intermediate care centre. He's also vice-chairman of the Vancouver

Parks and Recreation Board and, incidentally, has been a member of the

reserve constable force with the Vancouver city police for 17 years.

Would the House please make these guests welcome.

MR. SIHOTA :

Joining us in the galleries today are two individuals from Toronto, one

who has frequented this Legislature in the past and has worked here:

Dennis Robideau. And joining him is Nicki Davis. Would all members

please join me in giving them a warm welcome.

HON. MR. PARKER :

I ask the House today to welcome two friends from Smithers who are in

the gallery: Geoff Jackson and Tommie Trotter. Would the House make

them welcome, please.

Introduction of Bills

STRUCTURED COMPENSATION ACT

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

a bill intituled Structured Compensation Act.

HON. MR. SMITH :

This matter was introduced into the House last year and has been the

subject of a considerable amount of consultation with a number of

groups and individuals around the province.

Mr. Speaker,

with leave I move that the subject matter of Bill 29, intituled

Structured Compensation Act, be referred to the Select Standing

Committee on Labour, Justice and Intergovernmental Relations to

examine, inquire into and make recommendations on the matter of the

Structured Compensation Act, with particular reference to the purposes

of the bill and the policy considerations behind the bill; and to

report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment,

or at the next following session, as the case may be, and to deposit

the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

during a period of adjournment. Upon the resumption of the sittings of

the House, the Chairman shall present all reports to the Legislative

Assembly.

In addition to the powers previously conferred

upon that committee, I would ask that the committee have the following

additional powers: namely, to appoint of their number one or more

subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters

referred to the committee; to sit during any period in which the House

is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next

session, and during any sitting of the House; to adjourn from place to

place as may be convenient; and to retain personnel as required to

assist the committee.

I would now put the motion to refer the matter to the committee.

[ Page 9668 ]

MR. SPEAKER : Hon. member, for such a matter to proceed to committee, leave will be required. Shall leave be granted?

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Bill

29 introduced, read a first time and referred to the Select Standing

Committee on Labour, Justice and Intergovernmental Relations.

Oral Questions

MAIL-ORDER SALE OF LOTTERY TICKETS

MR. SIHOTA :

I raised a number of questions in the House yesterday with respect to a

report done by CLEU on mail-order operations selling lottery tickets

offshore. It has now come to my understanding that a second study was

done by the British Columbia Lottery Corporation.

question to the Provincial Secretary is this: could he explain why the

B.C. Lottery Corporation chose to do a second study on this issue?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I will take that question on notice.

MR. SIHOTA :

A question to the minister, who doesn't seem to know what's going on

with the lotteries in British Columbia. One must wonder what he does in

his office all day — play tiddly-winks or something? Could the minister

advise the House what matters were investigated by the British Columbia

Lottery Corporation in its review of mail-order-purchase operations?

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

Mr. Speaker, with due respect to you, I point out to the member that

that question was taken as notice, and his follow-up question is

clearly out of order.

MR. ROSE : I wonder if the

intervention wasn't out of order as well, because if you look at the

rules, my hon. friend.... It is still out of order that I'm up trying

to bring us back to order.

MR. SPEAKER : The

difficulty the Chair has in these matters is that where a question is

asked, and rephrased and asked again, it's a question of whether the

question is substantially different from the one asked previously.

would cite, for example, that where a motion is on the order paper and

a question is asked, the question is out of order. However, if the

question is asked in a different way, the question is not out of order.

Where

these questions seem to all run along the same lines, if the minister

chooses to answer the question, we will deal with it. If the minister

does not choose to answer the question, I assume it's being dealt with

by the question being taken as notice, and I will recognize the

next person standing. If the member for Esquimalt–Port Renfrew has a

new question, I'd be delighted to hear it.

MR. SIHOTA :

Mr. Speaker, I have another question, and this time it is to the

Solicitor-General. Could the Solicitor-General advise this House what

steps have been taken to determine that B.C. companies operating in

this field — namely, the selling of offshore lottery tickets — are in compliance with both British Columbia law and American law?

HON. MR. FRASER : Mr. Speaker, I believe that question was taken on notice yesterday.

MR. SPEAKER : The question is taken as notice. The member for Esquimalt–Port Renfrew has a new question.

MR. SIHOTA :

In all seriousness, Mr. Speaker, I don't think the minister took the

question on notice. He said that this question was taken on notice, but

it's a different question.

Let me put it to the minister

this way. I have in my possession a cease-and-desist order from the

state of Kansas in the United States.

Interjections.

MR. SIHOTA : Mr. Speaker, the members like to heckle.

Let

me make it very clear. This government is soft on crime, and the point

we're trying to make is that it has chosen not to respect foreign

jurisdictions....

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER : Order, please. I ask the member to take his seat.

The

interjections are only as a result of the fact that the member refuses

to ask a question. I've asked the member on a number of occasions if he

has a new question. There are a number of other people who have

indicated they wish to ask questions. I'll allow the member to ask one

more question, if he actually has a new question to a new person. But

if he wants to engage in dialogue prior to the question, then I can't

protect him from interjections.

MR. SIHOTA : The

question to the Solicitor-General is this: why is your ministry not

cooperating with the American jurisdictions who have shut down these

operations in the United States, and why are you continuing to allow

these operations in British Columbia?

HON. MR. FRASER : I'll take it on notice, Mr. Speaker.

RELIEF FROM GST

MR. LOENEN : Mr. Speaker, the question is to the Minister of Regional and Economic Development. In

[ Page 9669 ]

view

of this morning's report that Michael Wilson is considering some form

of relief from the GST for small business, will the minister make

representations to the federal Finance minister on behalf of tourist

and other small businesses in our province, which stand to suffer a

particular hardship as a result of this ill-conceived and punitive tax?

[2:15]

HON. S. HAGEN :

It's great to see that the federal government, and particularly the

federal Finance minister, is finally listening to the people of Canada,

to our Premier and to our Finance minister — listening to

complaints about the GST and about the harm it's going to do to small

business and tourism. He's finally listening and coming down with some

possible changes. I have to report to the House that I have not seen

the specific details of these changes, but I think that a reduction in

the GST rate for small business — if that's what he's going to do —

is positive. Also, the proposal to base the calculation on gross

revenues is encouraging. I think that will help to reduce the financial

sting and cut the red tape.

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the

question of tourism, this province, of course, is experiencing a very

positive tourism economy. Many of the tourists come from outside the

province. I'll be very interested to see how the federal minister plans

to deal with any GST relief with regard to tourists who come here from

other parts of the world.

MINISTRY OF HIGHWAYS

LAND ACQUISITION

MS. PULLINGER :

I have a question for the Minister of Highways. Can the minister tell

this House whether it's the policy of her ministry to legally acquire

title to required land before beginning highway construction work?

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON :

I am not sure that I entirely understand the question. Was the question

whether we normally acquire title to land before we do highways work?

Not

in every case. In some cases there are expropriations taking place; in

some cases there are negotiations. But an attempt to secure the

property by way of a title transfer is always undertaken.

MS. PULLINGER :

I have a new question. Can the minister confirm that clearcutting for

the Vancouver Island Highway, immediately south of Mill Bay, has begun

in advance of the ministry acquiring the required property?

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON :

Mr. Speaker, it was my understanding that the members from Nanaimo

supported the construction of the Island Highway. The questions put

forward today would raise doubts about that. I can't confirm or deny

the present status of the title on those properties.

SILVICULTURE FUNDING

MR. MILLER :

To the Minister of Forests, Mr. Speaker. We are aware that the

government is trying through advertising to convince the public that

they know what they are doing. Could the Minister of Forests explain

why his ministry was not advised in advance that the silviculture

budget was being stripped, and confirm that his ministry is desperately

trying to process payments to silviculture contractors, and that it's

all being done manually?

HON. MR. RICHMOND : I think

somewhere in that political statement there was a question, Mr.

Speaker. I'm not sure, but I think that once again that member of the

opposition has his facts all wrong and is incorrect.

MR. MILLER : Mr. Speaker, the facts will speak for themselves. That in fact is correct.

new question to the minister. The budget documents boast about

increased silviculture funding. Could the minister confirm that one of

the largest spacing contracts in the province –– 1,200 hectares in the

Squamish forest district — remains unfinished, with 40 workers

languishing on UI, and that the contractor has been advised that there

is no money available to complete the contract?

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

I repeat, Mr. Speaker: on the first question, the member's facts are

totally incorrect. On the second one, I'll have to take that as notice

and bring an answer back to the House.

MR. MILLER : A

new question to the Minister of Forests, Mr. Speaker. Could the

Minister of Forests confirm that a 103-hectare spacing contract on the

Queen Charlotte Islands worth $170,000 –– I can give him the contract

number if he likes; and by the way, the previous one was a $1 million

contract — has been awarded, but the contractor has now been

advised that he can't proceed because there is no money available for

this spacing contract?

HON. MR. RICHMOND : Mr.

Speaker, I can neither confirm nor deny that, but going on the basis of

the accuracy of questions from that side of the House in the past, I

would not take what that member says as gospel, and I will bring a

report back to the House.

MR. MILLER : To speak of

accuracy, given the false advertising that they are perpetrating on the

people of British Columbia.... Has the Minister of Forests finally

decided to commit the necessary expenditures to intensive

silviculture — and I hope he knows the difference between that and tree-planting — which offers the only hope we have of meeting some of the timber shortages that we're facing around this province?

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

I know full well the difference between planting trees and intensive

silviculture. We recognize that by intensive silviculture —

[ Page 9670 ]

which is a formula we are following in this province — within

the next few years we will be able to increase the annual allowable cut

in this province and not decrease it, as is usually said by the members

opposite.

So the answer is: regardless of the member's comments about false advertising and misleading the public — which are unparliamentary —

we are on a course of intensive silviculture and reforestation in this

province. I would ask him to check some of his facts before he gets up

to ask his questions.

RENT REVIEW POLICY

MR. BLENCOE :

A question to the minister responsible for residential tenancy. The

minister said yesterday that the rental housing crisis was virtually

over in the province. Now the minister knows better; CMHC has provided

him the real facts and the real numbers. Tenants need help now. Has a

decision been made to help tenants by bringing in a fair rent

stabilization program? Or do tenants in this province have to be gouged

or forced to leave their homes?

MR. SPEAKER : I would advise the member that there is a Hansard , if he would like to see what the minister did say yesterday.

HON. MR. JACOBSEN : Mr. Speaker, you have corrected the member, so I don't need to do that.

agree that with the dynamic economy in British Columbia, we do have a

problem with rental accommodation, because so many people want to come

here to live and participate in the jobs that we have available. But I

still maintain that the indications are that the situation is slowly

beginning to improve There are many areas of evidence of that. I

understand that there has been a substantial increase in listings of

residential units in the greater Vancouver area. I realize that is not

necessarily affordable housing or suites immediately, but it is the

trend. There is increasing availability of housing, and that soon

begins to reflect in housing becoming available at a proper and

competitive price.

I think the situation is improving. I

think we will see it returning to more normalcy in a reasonably short

time. The type of government intervention the member is speaking about

doesn't really work; it hasn't worked anyplace else. Their own leader

has said that he doesn't support it, because it doesn't work. I don't

know why they would advocate that we try something that doesn't work

when they themselves admit that it would be, and has been, a failure So

the answer is no.

RENTAL AND SOCIAL HOUSING SUPPLY

MR. BLENCOE : Since the minister responsible for tenants in the province

refuses to take any action and have a rent review process, I'll ask this

question of the Minister of Housing. Would the minister confirm that only $36

million is being spent on social housing programs in the province this year,

and less than $5 million on the rental supply program? That is roughly 0.27

percent of the entire provincial budget being spent on housing. The housing

program you've announced is a real sham.

HON. MR. DUECK : Mr. Speaker, words are cheap, and you can call our housing plan a sham — you can call it anything you want. But the facts are....

AN HON. MEMBER : It's not working.

HON. MR. DUECK : It is working.

The

facts are that under our rental supply program, I have authority to put

up 8,000 units. It's up to the developer and the municipal authority to

give the zoning, and they can proceed just as quickly as they possibly

can.

Over and above that, last year we produced just under

2,000 social housing units; and above that, the private sector had

roughly 40,000 housing starts last year. That is the most that has ever

occurred in this province. It is the absolute maximum. Never before in

history have there been so many houses started, or so many units built.

But I will tell you another thing, Mr. Member. All your barking in the world isn't going to build a single house — not even a dog house.

MAIL-ORDER SALE OF LOTTERY TICKETS

HON. MR. DIRKS : Mr. Speaker, I wish to reply to questions taken on notice in this House yesterday.

During

question period yesterday the member for Esquimalt–Port Renfrew (Mr.

Sihota), in the guise of a series of questions to do with lottery

ticket sales, made some very serious allegations concerning the conduct

of business of the British Columbia Lottery Corporation and ministers

of the Crown.

Unfortunately, that member saw fit to further

embellish his allegations in comments to the press. The member created

the impression that he had a copy of a report prepared on this subject

by the Coordinated Law Enforcement Unit. Both in and outside this House

he purported to quote from the CLEU report. I have since obtained a

copy of what that member handed out to the media as excerpts from the

CLEU report of June 1988....

MR. ROSE : I wonder

whether this is really an answer to a question taken on notice or

whether it is a ministerial statement in disguise. I would just like to

point out to the House that the difference is.... This member has

refused to answer questions during today's question period on the same

subject. He has chosen to stonewall it, like many of his colleagues

have done, and he gets up in the guise of an answer to a question taken

on notice yesterday to give a ministerial statement which goes way

beyond the metes and bounds of what we would expect. And therefore, if

it is a ministerial statement in your judgment, this side intends to

respond to it.

[ Page 9671 ]

MR. SPEAKER :

Order, please. Hon. members, in the past, members who have been asked

questions and who have taken answers on notice often took the

opportunity to give replies to those questions during question period.

In that case, the opposition lost the opportunity to use the time that

was available in question period.

I was advised by the

minister, prior to the commencement of today's session, that he wished

to respond to questions taken on notice yesterday and to do so after

question period. The Chair was thankful to have the notice. Until such

time as I hear the reply, I can't determine whether that reply is an

answer to a question or a ministerial statement — and of course the colour of that general area of discussion is grey.

[2:30]

However, it is better for the House that answers to questions taken

on notice be given after question period, as opposed to being used to

filibuster during question period. On that basis alone, I would like to

hear uninterrupted the minister's reply. Now if the minister's reply

goes beyond the bounds of the answers to questions, the Chair will

determine at that time whether a reply will be allowed or whether we

will wait until the next question period for the next instalment of

this exciting adventure.

HON. MR. DIRKS : I must

advise the House that the member has deliberately misinformed this

House and the press on this issue. What he purports....

MR. SPEAKER : Order, please.

MR. ROSE :

Mr. Speaker, regardless of whether there's a statement or a thing taken

on notice, that's a pretty blatant charge, that the member deliberately

misled the House. That's a matter of parliamentary privilege, and I

think he should withdraw that statement.

MR. SPEAKER :

The minister has been asked for the withdrawal of a statement. It's

tradition in this House that when an unparliamentary statement or a

statement that other members find objectionable is made, withdrawal

takes place.

HON. MR. DIRKS : Mr. Speaker, I would

conform to your ruling. I will certainly withdraw the remark. I would

remind the member opposite, though, that the allegations made by the

member yesterday were very serious indeed. The member purports that

excerpts from the CLEU report — and my staff has been advised by the director of CLEU himself —

are not excerpts from the report at all; they don't even come close. I

find such conduct of a member of this House to be reprehensible,

As far as the CLEU report is concerned, the Ministry of Solicitor-General advises

me as follows: (1) the CLEU report was put forward internally in August 1988;

(2) the Solicitor-General (Hon. Mr. Fraser) does not have a copy and has never

had a copy, although he is aware of the issue; (3) the Attorney-General (Hon.

Mr. Smith) does not have a copy and has never had a copy, though he is aware

of the issue; (4) the Provincial Secretary does not now have a copy, nor has

he ever had a copy, though I am aware of the issue; (5) the report is a police

intelligence document which contains general observations and theories concerning

potential issues of concern in the lottery ticket sales business; (6) the report

does not contain evidence to warrant prosecution of anyone, nor does it suggest

prosecutions; (7) our legal opinion is, and has consistently been, that offshore

lottery sales are not a crime under current legislation; (8) neither the police

report nor the director of CLEU is critical of government; and (9) to release

such a report could indeed prejudice police intelligence and future works, and

unfairly slander people by innuendo.

I suspect that the member has nothing more than an

article that appeared in Equity

magazine in October 1988. In that article, the reporter makes a number

of inaccurate statements and inferences regarding the content and

distribution of the CLEU report. Following the publication of that

article, the director of CLEU, Peter Engstad, by letter dated November

7, 1988, wrote to the editor of Equity

magazine, pointing out the serious errors and unfounded allegations

contained in the article. I wish to read into the record pertinent

excerpts from Mr. Engstad's letter:

"In the

article...you make a number of inaccurate statements and inferences

regarding the content and distribution of the Coordinated Law

Enforcement Unit's (CLEU) offshore lottery report. These errors and

innuendo have done your readers, the B.C. Lottery Corporation,

ministers of the Crown and CLEU a serious disservice which deserves to

be corrected.

"For example, the supposedly

sinister recommendation that the B.C. Lottery Corporation not be shown

the contents of the report simply recognizes that the report contains

confidential information which, following accepted practices, cannot be

disseminated outside the law enforcement community. For the same

reason, and contrary to statements in the article, the report has not

been provided to the Hon. Bill Reid or his predecessor, the Hon. Elwood

Veitch.

"...I want to assure you and your

readers that the CLEU report contains no evidence or allegations of

criminality on the part of the B.C. Lottery Corporation or any of its

officers or directors."

That letter was published in the January-February 1989 issue of Equity

magazine under the title "CLEU Sets the Record Straight." Again, this

member's statements have not only misled this House but have also

misled the media. The piece of paper which he distributed yesterday

does not contain excerpts from the CLEU report or excerpts from any

other document produced by CLEU.

MR. SPEAKER : Order,

please. I appreciate that the member is probably reading from a

prepared document. Unfortunately, people who prepare these documents

are not always familiar with parliamentary practice, and we are not

permitted to say — whether we feel it or not; whether we even suggest it or not —

[ Page 9672 ]

that any member has misled the House. I would ask the minister to withdraw the remark that the member "misled the House."

HON. MR. DIRKS : I'll withdraw that remark, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER :

I'd better be absolutely sure. The question is that the member

deliberately misled the House. Obviously the House has been misled

unintentionally in the past, so I'd ask the member to withdraw the

words that the member "deliberately misled the House," and then

conclude the matter.

HON. MR. DIRKS : Mr. Speaker, my statement was that the member's statement has not only misled the House.... I'll withdraw that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER : Thank you very much.

HON. MR. DIRKS :

But obviously, from what I've seen and the report I've got, offshore

ticket sales are not new, nor are they limited by any means to British

Columbia. The corporation will continue to closely monitor these

activities and take appropriate action wherever necessary.

MR. SPEAKER :

The Chair determines that such a statement is in fact an answer to a

detailed question given as notice. Members will have sufficient time to

digest the answer — read it in Hansard . And we will have other opportunities in the rest of this session to discuss it at another time.

MR. ROSE :

I've been reading the questions, Mr. Speaker. This diatribe has gone on

now for about ten minutes, and it seems to have gone way beyond....

Interjections.

MR. ROSE : Excuse me, I'm sorry to interrupt your heckling.

This

has gone way beyond the scope of the questions, which were rather

limited. I would be grateful if Mr. Speaker could take this under

advisement, when he's had a chance to look at it, and perhaps rule that

this is, in effect, a ministerial statement, and give this side an

opportunity to reply to some of these very serious charges levelled

against one of our members.

MR. SPEAKER : I believe the Chair dealt with that area of accusation of a member deliberately misleading the House.

terms of the other matter, as I told you earlier, this is a grey area.

The Chair would have to decide that, knowing full well that next week

and the weeks to follow will offer ample opportunity for further

questions on this subject, should the members decide that that's the

way to use question period. That's the way the matter will be dealt

with.

Ministerial Statement

IMPACT OF FEDERAL MONETARY POLICY

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM :

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a ministerial statement. I have

written to the Prime Minister on matters of great economic importance

and concern to all British Columbians and all Canadians. I would like

to advise the House on these matters by reading this letter. It's

addressed to the Prime Minister.

"Western

Premiers issued a communique on May 7, following our annual meeting in

Portage la Prairie, stating very strongly our concern about the

crippling impact of federal monetary policies on the Canadian economy

and on individual Canadians. Along with my western colleagues, I am

deeply concerned that the combined effect of high interest rates and an

artificially high Canadian dollar will lead this country into a 'made

in Canada' recession. Signs of such an eventuality are now apparent.

"The

federal Department of Finance and the Bank of Canada are persisting in

a high interest rate policy on the basis of current inflationary

pressures. Those pressures, as you know, are not spread evenly across

Canada, and where they exist, there are other, more appropriate fiscal

or other instruments to achieve correction. The high interest rate

policy is merely inflicting economic damage in the short term, and

perhaps an economic devastation in the longer term.

"In

the foreseeable future the most significant and predictable

inflationary pressure will flow from the goods and services tax. At a

minimum, it is estimated to have an inflationary effect of

approximately 1.5 percent; although in our view that is conservative.

"The

introduction next January of the goods and services tax will have

precisely the inflation-igniting effect federal policy now seeks to

avoid. I would be most concerned if the federal Department of Finance

and the Bank of Canada were operating in anticipation of the GST,

inducing an artificially high interest rate structure which could be

reduced on the introduction of the GST. The combination of interest

rate policy and the GST constitutes, in my view, an equation posing an

unacceptable threat to economic stability in our country.

would urge you, Mr. Prime Minister, to recognize and act on the need to

diminish interest rates, allow the Canadian dollar to decline to

appropriate levels, and abandon the GST. Our country cannot afford

these policies at this time."

Mr. Speaker, these are issues

of critical importance to all British Columbians, and I urge all

members of the House and the Leader of the Opposition to support me in

opposition to the federal high interest rate policy, the attendant high

Canadian dollar and in our unaltered and complete opposition to the

GST. I would urge your support.

MR. ROSE : Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased that the Premier has finally decided to join us

in our opposition to the GST, to the high dollar which cripples our

exports and also to a number of other things that affect our economy.

would have hoped this statement from the Premier would have come a

little earlier, because there was ample time when we saw this coming,

and

[ Page 9673 ]

nothing

was done. It seems to me that the high Canadian dollar and the high

interest rate policy of this country, adding to the GST, are

inextricably linked with the free trade and are designed principally to

beat down wages and cut social programs. That's what it's all about,

and that's all it's about.

To cripple the economies of eastern Canada — central

Canada is where the inflation is, western Canada is where the trouble

is, and our economy is so fragile, according to the Premier — in

order to dampen down the inflation in central Canada is un-Canadian. So

we have no difficulty at all in supporting the Premier on that score.

[2:45]

We are told that our economy is fragile. The Premier and the members

of his party, by uttering those phrases over and over again, are

destroying the confidence of investors in British Columbia. So like St.

Paul on the road to Damascus, I am pleased he has taken our point of

view after all these months.

HON. MR. RICHMOND :

Mr. Speaker, just before we go the regular House business, I would ask

leave for the Select Standing Committee on Tourism and Environment to

sit this afternoon at 2:45.

MR. SPEAKER : I would accept an amendment to make it 2:50, because 2:45 is past.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. RICHMOND : I withdraw my request for leave then.

MR. SPEAKER : Leave has already been granted. Next order of business.

Orders of the Day

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ADVANCED

EDUCATION, TRAINING AND TECHNOLOGY

On vote 5: minister's office, $270,100 (continued).

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

At the outset, I'd like to conclude a statement I was going to make

yesterday but didn't have an opportunity to, as my critic opposite

adjourned the House. My critic had made reference to the

auditor-general's report and student financial aid and how there

appeared to be a discrepancy between the auditor-general's statement

and what we were currently saying.

The committee should be

aware that auditor-generals' statements are always at least a year old.

The member was dealing with year-old information and could not compare

it with current information, and I'd just like to explain the reason

why. It's because the numbers are different. The correct funding is as

we described it in yesterday's debate, and the numbers that the member

is dealing with, particularly the equalization payments, the

discrepancy between $15 million and $25 million, are due to the fact

that he's using old and outdated material.

MR. JONES :

If the Minister of Advanced Education would take the time to read the

auditor-general's report, he would see that the figures roughly add up

to those he was referring to, except that $26 million for student loans

is mentioned in the auditor-general's report. The simple point I was

trying to make yesterday was that the $26 million for personal loans

comes from lending institutions. We talk about interest, defaults,

scholarships and all those things that are good and worthy programs of

the ministry and that provide assistance to students of this province

to help them pursue their post-secondary education careers. But in my

view, in no way does the $26 million loan package, the discrepancy that

I talked about, come from the government treasury; in fact, it comes

from lending institutions. It was a simple point of inquiry. I was not

trying to score any political points; I was after clarification from

the minister regarding the auditor-general's report. The minister was

unable to provide that, and that's fine. He's been in the portfolio a

short time. I thought that if he was going to raise it again today he

would shed some light on it. Unfortunately, what we traditionally get

from that side is more heat than light.

The minister made

reference to a term that I don't take exception to, but I'd like to get

clear that what happens between myself and the minister opposite is not

personal. This minister and other ministers keep talking about "my

critic." I am not a critic of any person; I am the critic for Advanced

Education, Training and Technology. I am not the minister's critic. The

minister is a spokesperson for that ministry, and that's the area I am

responsible for on this side of the House, to point out the many

shortcomings in government operations in that ministry. I've never

found any shortage of ammunition to do that, but it is not in any way

personal. So perhaps the minister could take to heart my concern and

not call me his critic. He could say, "the member opposite, " "the

critic opposite" or whatever he likes, but it is not personal. We're

here representing the interests of the people of British Columbia, and

it's far from something that personalities should ever enter into.

Having

said that, I'd like to move to the area of the ministry that this

minister is most familiar with, having been involved probably for many

years in being a northern representative, understanding the aspirations

of people in northern British Columbia and being part of a very

effective movement which has persuaded people all over British Columbia

to get behind the development of a university in northern British

Columbia. I have only a few concerns about that development, and one of

them has to do with the college system in that area.

The

minister is well aware that we have the College of New Caledonia,

Northwest Community College and Northern Lights College, which all

serve the educational needs of northern British Columbians at the

community level. In the development of the

[ Page 9674 ]

University

of Northern British Columbia, there is very clearly going to be an

impact on CNC, NLC and NWCC. We are going to see the second-year

university transfer programs at all northern colleges being taken over

by the university. As for Prince George, the prediction is that at

least 50 percent of the first-year university transfer students will

take advantage of the new university — which is clearly

understandable on their part. The problem, however, is that the

community college system in the north in many ways is disadvantaged in

competing for students. It will suffer a loss of students, will suffer

a loss of prestige as a result, and will not be able to offer the

well-rounded kind of program that we expect of our community colleges.

Does

the minister have concerns in this area? Has he taken any steps to

ameliorate the effects of the local community colleges in the north?

HON. MR. STRACHAN : First of all, back to this little debate we were having about the auditor-general and the current report.

I was dealing with the $25 million, which is 1990-91. The member — if he is dealing with auditor-general's numbers — can't be dealing with those numbers, because the auditor-general's report is always a year late.

Also,

with respect to the reference to personal pronouns by my critic, I take

that criticism with no problem at all. I don't prefer that term myself,

and I don't know why I said it. I guess it just slipped out The member

is quite right in that criticism.

With respect to the large

issue of the three colleges' relationships to the University of

Northern British Columbia, you are absolutely right. I will advise the

committee that when the implementation planning group report was made

public on January 9 of this year, it said that there should be

representation on the first board of governance from, first of all, the

aboriginal community — which was there — but also the northwest area,

the central interior area and the northeast area. The member will know

that I then spent some considerable time visiting communities from

Prince Rupert to Williams Lake to Fort St. John explaining the IPG

report to them; explaining how we saw representation on the university

board constituted, and assuring them that we would follow the

recommendations of the implementation planning group with respect to

this.

I would like to read into the record a letter that I

have. I am going to skip through this and send a copy to the member for

Burnaby North, but I will read into the record some highlights of

correspondence that arrived in my office May 14. It's signed by Mike

Caisley, the chairman of the Northern Lights College board. It says

that they applaud our efforts in developing the University of Northern

British Columbia.

"We thought we should keep

you apprised of current discussions among the three northern colleges.

To this end, subcommittees of each of the three boards recently met to

determine what common themes there are in local discussions among our

institutions. Those of note are outlined below.

"1.

All three college boards fully support the creation of the new

university and commit to assisting it in establishing its credibility

throughout the north. The boards envision one integrated post-secondary

system comprised of the four autonomous northern institutions, each of

which must work towards coordinating and facilitating the offerings of

one another. Complementary rather than duplicate programs, resources

and facilities should be the norm, and this integrated system should

allow for each of its elements to work with whatever post-secondary

institution can best serve its constituents.'

agree totally with that. You will recall my remarks yesterday when I

told of a comment I heard from the principal of the college when I

worked there — Dr. Fred Speckeen. He said, "No matter what

decision you make, always think 'student first,"' and that's obviously

the theme contained in this first paragraph from Mike Caisley of the

Northern Lights College board.

"2. All three

college boards endorse your decision to appoint a majority of members

of the interim council from outside the city of Prince George."

Just let me elaborate on that briefly. In my public meetings from Prince Rupert to Williams Lake to Fort St. John — it included Terrace and Dawson Creek and Quesnel —

there was a paranoia that exists in the north about Prince George the

same way we in the north feel about Vancouver: it's the big centre that

is always felt to be dominant. So I told all the communities that I

visited: "If I follow the implementation planning group recommendations

to the letter, that's going to axiomatically mean that there will be

more representation from outside the city of Prince George than from

within the city of Prince George." And that did happen. There are two

representatives from Terrace; there is a representative from Quesnel;

the chairman and one member are from Prince George.

There is an announcement I just made today: a student — Jean McFee, the president of the British Columbia Youth Advisory Council, who is from Bums Lake —

is going to be on the board, and there are two representatives from the

Northern Lights area. So Prince George members are in the minority in

terms of that representation. Of course, Edward John is representing

the aboriginal community, and there are two academics: John Chapman and

Ron Baker. Ron Baker's appointment was just confirmed by cabinet this

morning. That is what we have done, and we have ensured that there is

adequate representation.

[3:00]

Mike Caisley — I'll go on with his letter:

"It

is felt that this is an appropriate approach to maintaining a regional

mandate of the new university. There is also unanimous support for the

concept of having one university council member representing each of

the three colleges in the northern region, so that there will be a

continued inducement for all four institutions to maintain a

cooperative stance as the system evolves.

"In

addition, all three college boards recognize the need for the new

university to have representation on its governing body from outside

the northern region to ensure that its stature is equivalent to that of

the existing universities.

[ Page 9675 ]

"3.

The northern colleges wish to ensure students access to education

regardless of which institution delivers it, and it should be the

student's choice as to which institution he or she registers with.

"It

is further recommended that government be made fully aware of the need

for existing colleges to maintain first- and second-year courses as

integral components of their other services. It would also be

beneficial for the new university to develop a system of faculty

secondment for upper-level courses to best utilize existing resources.

"As

well, the notion of a credit bank at the new institution is encouraged

so that students' credits from all legitimate institutions are

acceptable towards credentials when requirements are met."

That

ends his three points. As I said, Mr. Member, I will send a copy of

this to you. In committee we can't table, so I'll just send it to you,

and it will be your property as well as mine.

It occurred

to Murray Sadler, the chairman of the interim board of governors, and

to myself, my staff and some other college people that I spoke to,

including the College of New Caledonia Faculty Association — I met with them on this issue —

that perhaps now that we've settled some of the fears in terms of

governance and representation from the region, from the aboriginal

community — and those members are now in place — before

deciding curriculum and who's going to do first year and second year,

and before we politicians start making those decisions, we should leave

it with the four presidents.

We should not make any hard

and fast decisions about transfer or who will do what until the four

presidents have had a chance to discuss those issues. We think that by

far the best way to manage it is to have the senior executives of the

four institutions — the three colleges and the university —

decide how they can manage those problems and questions. I think that's

a good position for government, the three current institutions and the

fourth board of a beginning institution to take. I'm sure that with

good management and willing people at the table, we'll be able to

address all of the concerns about who's going to teach what to whom and

for whom. I'm sure the bottom line for all of us is going to be "think

student first."

I know that's an area of concern for you,

Mr. Member. I hope the comments I've made in the last little while have

addressed some of your concerns. I assure you that in principle I agree

with everything that Mike Caisley has said here. I think I can speak on

behalf of Murray Sadler, the chairman of the University of Northern

B.C. interim board, as well, in terms of his acceptance of the

principles that Mike Caisley expresses here.

I think that

should satisfy the issue, but if you have more questions with respect

to this, I'll be more than happy to answer them.

MR. JONES : Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for that response, and I look forward to seeing that letter.

is a difficult area, and I think there are going to be jurisdictional

problems. I was not raising that as a matter of criticism. When I have

a criticism, I think I generally have a better way of doing it. That

was raised as a concern. I wanted to hear the minister's views and I

got those. Perhaps having the chief executive officers of those four

northern institutions develop a program that will meet the needs of the

students in the area is not an unreasonable way to proceed. So I'll

accept the minister's remarks and watch with interest the development

of both the college system and the University of Northern British

Columbia.

The minister has a background in school board

politics, and I'm sure he's aware that politics can play a minor role

in educational debate and educational discussion. I hope that was his

experience in his former life as a school trustee, and I think it can

play a role here too. I was saddened the other day by an exchange

between the minister and the member for Prince George North (Mrs.

Boone). I fully understand all of that scenario and the competition

there. However, that member made a very reasonable request and

expressed a concern which I support and which, perhaps down deep, the

minister supports too.

In my debates with the previous Minister of Advanced Education, he indicated in this House — and I quote from Hansard

of July 11, 1989: "1 believe that the implementation planning group

will be able to develop a staged proposal that will allow for

third-year degree programs to be offered by 1990." We had this promise

less than a year ago from the then Minister of Advanced Education.

few days ago, what we really had in this House was a request on the

part of the member for Prince George North to have the government live

up to that promise and to, in the minister's own words, "serve the

students as the primary objective, " to in your debates always put

students first in the discussion. That's what I felt the member for

Prince George North was doing at that time: asking the government to

both live up to a previous commitment and serve those students for whom

that promise had been made.

The minister responded by

indicating that not only was there a political situation between him

and the member for Prince George North but that there was a community

political situation. If he as minister went ahead with such a proposal

to seek to accomodate, through all the agencies at his power, the

interests of those third- and fourth-year northern students, the

community would — and I think I am quoting correctly here — "view that with some alarm."

seems to me that was a very inappropriate response to a request on the

part of a colleague, a northern representative, who was seeking on

behalf of the community that she represents opportunities for young

people to stay in that community and take third- and fourth-year

courses. I know the minister supports and has been part of that whole

movement, and it quite surprised me that he did not deal with that in a

sensitive, responsive and nonpolitical manner. He dealt with it in a

cavalier fashion.

Maybe it isn't something that is easy to do. If the minister wanted to deflect that kind of suggestion

[ Page 9676 ]

from

the member for Prince George North, he could have said, "I'll take it

under advisement," or "I'll look into it," or something else. But he

didn't even give that member the courtesy of suggesting that her

suggestion was a worthy and valid one and that it was in the interests

of the students of the north. The minister's response was inappropriate

and contradictory to much of what he believes and what he has said at

other times.

I'd like to repeat the request that the member

for Prince George North made earlier. The former Minister of Advanced

Education is now in the House, and he will remember his promise of July

11, 1989, in which he indicated there would be some accommodation for

third-year students "to be offered in 1990." We know that we don't have

a university of the north at this point in time, but we do have a

college system in the north in which it would be quite simple, on a

temporary basis if there were sufficient student numbers, to

accommodate those students.

Will the minister at this time

give any assurance to the committee that he will undertake to look into

the possibility of accommodating the needs of those third-year students

in existing facilities in the north?

MR. CHAIRMAN :

To interrupt the proceedings for just a moment, hon. members, the

Minister of Transportation and Highways asks leave to make an

introduction.

Leave granted.

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON :

Visiting us this afternoon are some students from Kelowna. On behalf of

our colleagues from the Okanagan constituencies, I would ask the House

to please welcome students visiting from Kelowna's Hudson Road

Elementary They are accompanied by their teacher, Mr. J. Holowchuk. I

would ask the House to please make them very welcome.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

With the greatest respect to my colleague from Comox, the former

minister, the committee must conclude that any comment made about what

the IPG was going to report in June would be inappropriate. I am sure

my colleague didn't say that.

The terms of reference given

to the implementation planning group in March 1989 were many, and

included a strong reference to an autonomous degree-granting

institution. The word "autonomy" was underscored. The implementation

planning group, under the guidance of those terms of reference, could

not consider a university college model. If they had, they would have

been at odds with their terms of reference, because you cannot have a

university college model and be autonomous. I am sure the members

opposite are aware of that.

On the basis of that, they began to look at many other models of degree-granting institutions — a four-year liberal arts college, a technical university and many other models —

and finally decided that instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, they

would simply offer us the model of what we know as a university in

North America: that is, an institution offering standard undergraduate

programs and professional schools; one having the capacity for graduate

work and hopefully offering graduate work as quickly as it could. You

will know, being an SFU undergraduate, that the first graduates from

Simon Fraser were graduate students who had come from other

universities with their professors.

It was recognized that

for an institution to serve the north and fit within the terms of

reference given to it by government, it would be autonomous and would

be a university in the North American sense of the word, offering

undergraduate, graduate and professional programs. Other

recommendations were also made, of course, Mr. Member: that it do

teacher education, social work, aboriginal studies and also have a

focus on resource management.

[3:15]

In respect to the suggestion that we immediately offer third year, I

don't know which mechanism you could use. If you invited one of the

current universities to come to Prince George immediately and offer

third-year programs, I think you'd probably have 15,000 members of the

Interior University Society awfully upset with you. They would see that

as a breach of faith, in that government was trying, for whatever

reason, to undercut them or pull the rug out from under their own

autonomous university.

I know it is a difficult situation for third-year students who face third year now, but it is the opinion of the community — a very large community —

that we cannot accept the branch-plant mentality that others have

suggested. This university must be autonomous, must have its own

governance — northern governance — and must be an

independent, autonomous university in the true sense of the word. We

are proceeding from that, and I think we are proceeding quite well.

MR. JONES :

What the Minister of Advanced Education is giving is a historical

explanation of a situation that doesn't currently fit. I appreciate

that the government made a decision to reject the university-college

model for Prince George. Fair enough.

The Interior

University Society very clearly indicated a desire for autonomy and

didn't want the branch-plant mentality. If I was a northerner, I would

feel exactly the same way; I have no problem with that. That doesn't

fully explain, nor is it in any way a response to, a request to do

something a little different.

Let's just suppose there were

20 people finishing second year at CNC right now who wanted to go into

teacher training, who wanted to carry on in education. Would it not be

possible, through whatever mechanisms have already been set up — through the implementation planning group or bodies that are already structured —

to do the first hiring and hire one or two people who could lead that

small group of young prospective teachers through third-year university

to become the first graduates of the University of Prince George?

[ Page 9677 ]

hear the minister saying that that would be perceived in the community

as a rejection of what the government has promised. The politics of it

seem to be what the minister is concerned about: the public perception

that this is not in the spirit of the announcement he made earlier this

year. Has the minister no faith in the people of the north that he has

credibility, and that they will believe that he wants to carry on with

the university that was promised, just because he accommodated a small

number of students who could be the first graduates of that university?

I can come to no other

interpretation, from the minister's remarks,

than that politics are far more important than the needs of third-year

university students from northern British Columbia.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

That's nonsense, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I'm amazed that the member

for Burnaby North, of all people, would use the example of second-year

students wanting teacher training. Have you not heard of the Simon

Fraser University PD program? Don't you know it has operated in Prince

George since the mid-seventies? Are you not aware of that?

MR. JONES : That's not the point.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : The point is, you picked a very poor example, particularly for an education critic.

You

ask the question: "Why don't you hire a few faculty and teach

education?" Who's going to hire them? There's not a president yet. Who

are they going to be accredited to?

MR. JONES : When is there going to be a president?

HON. MR. STRACHAN : One is being sought now. You don't immediately....

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Why September? There's a good question. There you go. That's why

politicians shouldn't meddle. That's why you guys had so much trouble

when you were government; you got in everybody's way.

Interjections.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Listen, we have developed this a lot more than you ever did or ever

could, I will tell you. It is on its way. So what do you suggest? You

just snap up a president like that? No way. We're not going to take

some political hack from Burnaby who is going to be the president.

Listen, my friend, we're going to establish our own destiny in the

north. We're not going to have someone from Burnaby, some so-called

expert, telling us what we're going to do. A president is going to be

hired by the locally constituted board of governors, which I have put

in place, which has $2.5 million for beginning money— and it's a good board of governors.

We're

not going to have some politician from Burnaby, from the lower

mainland, telling us how to do it. I know that's the New Democratic way

of doing things, but we're not going to accept that. A locally gathered

board of expert people representing our community — from the Northern Lights area, from the Northwest College area, from the Prince George area —

is going to make that determination on a president, and not you. For

you to say, just glibly, "Why don't you hire one tomorrow?" my friend,

points out to me exactly what the NDP stands for: concentration of

power by politicians, with absolutely no reference to local

determination; absolutely no reference to the people who live there; no

reference whatsoever to what the people of the north want.

You

ought to be ashamed of yourself. You never supported regional

development, and now you're insisting, as a politician: "Just go out

and hire a president." You ought to be ashamed of yourself, to have

that on the record. It is most unfortunate for you to make....

see the member for Prince George North is here for one of her two-day

visits to the Legislative Assembly, so I'll let her speak and see what

she has to say.

MRS. BOONE : The minister just made

an incredible rant there, but I won't respond to his rant and give it

any sort of credibility, aside from saying that I think it's rather

strange that you should comment on meddling in local businesses. Ask

Mr. McCaffray about meddling in local businesses. Ask the ex-president

about meddling in local businesses, and then find out what politicians

meddling in local businesses really means.

Mr. Minister, I

would like to talk to you about this issue, because this is something

that I think that you are having a blind eye about. I don't know why

you seem to have these blinders on. But after discussing it with you

last time, I phoned a few people. I talked with the president of the

University Society, Roy Stewart, and asked him if he would be adamantly

opposed to having as an interim.... The minister seems to have

difficulty understanding what "interim" means. It means in between:

before we get our university. I asked if he would be opposed to having

this third and fourth year available to our students on an interim

basis. He had no objections to it. His only comments were that perhaps

we should run this through Jim Blake and find out if it was possible.

I've

talked to some people at the college about the other concern that we

have and that I think the community and the college have right now:

that we are losing some of our existing staff. Some of our good staff

are actually putting in for transfers and leaving the community because

they're not sure of what their job stability will be. They're fearful

that first- and second-year arts are not going to be offered through

the college. They're not quite sure what their future is going to be,

so they're actually leaving. By

[ Page 9678 ]

having

third and fourth year there, we would be able to provide some kind of

bridging point. We would be able to keep the staff at the college and

perhaps give them a bridge to obtain employment within the university

structure. I know that you can't tell the university to hire these

people, and certainly that shouldn't be done — I wouldn't suggest that —

but there's a good chance that some of our existing faculty would be

hired by the university if and when that president does come on stream.

We have some top-notch faculty people at our college, and I don't think

the minister would disagree with that. We may be losing that faculty in

the next year or two while we wait for our university to come about.

When

you were speaking earlier, you said the student was the main purpose.

We have to look at maintaining educational opportunities for that

student, and that means providing third and fourth year for them as

soon as possible and also making sure that we have that staff there in

the meantime. I really find it incredible that the minister is not even

willing to look at this. If the minister will just take it on

advisement that he will review this; that he will discuss this with the

college; that he will find out if the college says it's possible, then

that is fine. If the college turns around and says, "We're not

interested, we don't have the staff, we don't have the facilities, we

don't have the ability to provide those services," then I would accept

that as well. But to arbitrarily discount that and to give no

credibility to that whole idea is doing our people a disservice, and

certainly doing the minister a disservice.

MR. CHAIRMAN : The first member for Okanagan South seeks leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. SERWA : On behalf of the second member for Okanagan South (Mr. Chalmers) — and while the Minister of Advanced Education is pondering the eloquently addressed question —

I would like to welcome to this Legislature the second half of a group

of students from Hudson Road Elementary School in Kelowna. I was

pleased to be with this group about a month ago when they held a

citizenship court in their school in which all of the students as well

as the teachers participated in those ceremonies. This group is

accompanied by its teacher, Mr. Gerry Kroeker, who is a graduate of

Kelowna Senior Secondary, was a basketball player for the Kelowna Owls

and is still an awesome player in central Okanagan. Would the House

please make this group welcome.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

At the outset, I don't know if I accept what the member says about her

conversation with Roy Stewart, and I'll talk to Roy about that to get

the real results.

The member, of course, wasn't

listening to my comments earlier with respect to governance and with

respect to articulation, which I had explained to the member for

Burnaby North. I read a letter from Mike Caisley, chairman of the

Northern Lights College board: "We have taken the position that there

should be no hard and fast comments or positions taken by politicians

or board appointees with respect to how the four institutions are going

to relate to each other until we have all four presidents in place." I

have taken that position. I have conveyed that to the CNC Faculty

Association, and they have accepted. They said that was probably the

best way to manage, because for politicians and board members to

operate in a vacuum, and in the absence of the presidents of the four

universities, is wrong. That points out the NDP philosophy of meddling.

Allow those people who are appointed, who have the expertise, to be

allowed to make those decisions.

I met with the faculty

association a couple of months ago, and later with Kathy Conroy,

president of CNC Faculty Association. They were aware of my position on

that, and they agreed that that would be the best way to go. IPG, as we

all know, made some recommendations with respect to who will teach

first and second year, and that may be the way the institutions arrive

at things in the final analysis.

I certainly don't think

it's appropriate for me to stand in this House, or for anyone else to

stand anywhere, and say that that's the way it's going to be, in the

absence of wise decision and good academic counsel from those

professionals whom we have hired to help us lead education in the north.

MRS. BOONE :

Lord knows I never want you to stand up and tell people how it is to

be. But I am asking you to give the college an opportunity to make a

decision on their own, and that's what I've specifically said to you. I

have said that we are losing faculty members. I have said to you that

these people are going elsewhere because they're not sure of what's

going to happen. I have said that if we give them an opportunity to

stay in Prince George, perhaps — not maybe, but perhaps — the president at that time may choose to keep them on.

[3:30]

We have to provide the opportunity. You as the minister are the only

person who can give that opportunity to have third and fourth years at

the college. They can't do that on their own; they don't have that

financial ability right now. I am asking you to give them that

opportunity. I am not asking you to tell them to do it; I am saying

approach these people and tell them: "We would like to give you an

opportunity to provide third and fourth year to the students of CNC or

to the students of Prince George." Give them that opportunity.

the college in its wisdom says no to it, so be it. But you, Mr.

Minister, are saying no before even giving them the opportunity. You

talk about centralized control; that's as centralized as you can

get — not even giving people an opportunity to say no to you. Give

them that opportunity to say no. If they say no, then the matter is

settled. But you won't even give them that chance.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : First of all, I am not a university; I can't be one. As a matter of fact, I can't

[ Page 9679 ]

even

be on a board. I can't offer third and fourth year; a university has to

offer it. You don't understand how the system works. A university has

to offer third and fourth year. You just don't snap your fingers and

have these things happen.

If you've studied at all the work

that was done at Camosun, Malaspina, Cariboo and Okanagan, you would

know.... And don't wave your hands like that. If you'd shown up here

occasionally and listened to the answer that I gave your colleague, you

would understand what's gone on. Kathy Conroy knows exactly what has to

be done.

A college cannot offer third- or fourth-year

university. A university has to offer that. This is British Columbia. I

don't know what you are thinking about or if you've read any of the

statutes, but you're so far out you'd think you were coming back!

You

haven't got the foggiest notion of what you're suggesting. Not only

that, but if you said that publicly in Prince George, you would be

laughed off the street — such as you are now — because you don't understand how it works.

However, it makes for good fodder....

MR. JONES :

Point of order. The debate has deteriorated when a minister of the

Crown talks about laughing an hon. member off the streets of Prince

George. I think it's a sad day in this House, and I would ask him to

withdraw that remark.

MR. CHAIRMAN : The Chair can't

rule that particular thing as being unparliamentary, but I think it

would help the debate considerably if.... I've noticed over the past 30

minutes or so that the hon members are not debating through the Chair;

they're debating directly across the House. If you debate through the

Chair, it will be a much more measured and pleasant debate.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : Thank you ever so much, Mr. Chairman. Your wise counsel is always listened to and always heeded.

MR. JONES : Mr. Chairman, I found the remark offensive. I asked the minister to withdraw. I still ask the minister to withdraw.

MR. CHAIRMAN :

Well, it's the habit in this House that if a member finds something

offensive to him, we do ask for a withdrawal, and I am sure the hon.

minister would be prepared to do that.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

You betcha, Mr. Chairman. I don't have any problem with that. If the

members don't understand the rules.... I'll withdraw whatever it was I

said that offended them.

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : It probably does.

summarize this whole issue.... I feel the relationship between the

three colleges, of course, is very good. I think this issue has brought

them together. The relationship between the college boards and the

interim governing council of the university is also very healthy, very

good and very positive.

They recognize that there is

probably one comprehensive education community that all four

institutions are going to deal with. I think it's a very, very healthy

approach they are taking in developing this. I can assure this

committee that I have had substantial and productive meetings with the

CNC faculty association. They had some concern at the outset, and I

can't say I blame them. I know many of them personally — friends

of 20 years now in many cases. But discussions since have indicated to

me that they are happy and pleased with the direction we're going and

with the fact that we can manage all these concerns, and that we're not

seeing a bogeyman under every bed.

Also, the member for

Prince George North mentioned that teachers were leaving. I haven't

seen any resignations yet, but I'll tell the committee one thing: I did

receive a phone call from the personnel officer of School District 57,

who said that many, many teachers have been applying to his office for

employment in Prince George.

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : No, teachers in a school district....

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : No, I'm talking.... Well, you missed my other point. I'll repeat what I said earlier.

Many

teachers from outside District 57 are applying to District 57 to teach

in Prince George, citing as their reason for wanting to move to Prince

George the fact that a university is coming there. That really

underscores the reason why we needed one in the first place. Teachers

don't need a university — at least not as much as other people do —

because they have a degree already. But the fact is they know that a

community with a university is a far better place to live. So in terms

of thinking of their children's education — and of course, in terms of thinking of their own upgrading eduction —

they are applying to District 57. I was pleased when the personnel

officer at the school district phoned me and advised me of that.

The

member for Prince George North (Mrs. Boone) made more comments about

faculty leaving. I can't accept that. Faculty move all the time. I

spent considerable time with a faculty member last Saturday morning,

while queuing up for the May Day parade — at which, by the way, the member for Prince George North was absent....

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : Well, if you're not going to be here, you should be somewhere in your own riding. You've got to be somewhere. You should have

[ Page 9680 ]

been in Prince George on Saturday. It was a good place to be on the weekend.

any event, I spent some time with a faculty member Saturday morning,

and he felt very positive about the University of Northern British

Columbia. He felt very positive about himself and about his own job.

He's a 20-year employee of CNC and a fine fellow, a fine friend and a

fine instructor. So I can't accept what the member is saying. I think

the member is probably about four or five months old in her concern. I

think that during the last little while the faculty association has

realized that there is a good place for them. It's not going to be in

any sense a second-class institution, and there is always going to be

lots of opportunity for good instruction to be done at CNC.

MR. JONES :

I am very reluctant to raise another issue with respect to the new

university. I tried to inject a note of non-partisanship in the

introduction to this area — obviously very unsuccessfully. The

minister has been very animated, very testy, very defensive and, in

fact, very abusive of my colleague.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : I'm smiling.

MR. JONES : Doing it with a smile doesn't make it any more palatable.

Let

me try one more question, and then we'll leave this topic that's

obviously a sensitive one between the two members from Prince George.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : I feel fine.

MR. JONES : You don't sound fine.

am sure the minister is aware of the tremendous nursing shortage we

have in this province. I know it was a desire of many in the community,

as well as of the nursing profession in this province, that there be an

opportunity for nurses to train in Prince George. I know this is

projected as a future policy, but very clearly it was rejected. I am

wondering If the minister can explain that rejection and offer any hope

for the future of training of nurses in Prince George.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

I don't know where you're getting your information from. Nurses are

trained in Prince George. There's an RN program at the college which

has been in place since, I think, 1978. They graduate about 30 a year.

The university curriculum isn't decided yet. What do you mean by

rejection? Who has rejected what?

MR. JONES : The

minister indicated not more than a few minutes ago a number of

disciplines that will be carried on at the University of Northern

British Columbia centred in Prince George. Nursing wasn't one of those

mentioned. Very clearly there has been a decision — either by the implementation planning group, the government or whomever — not to do that at this time.

I know the RNABC is interested in degreed nurses and in having a nursing program

at the University of Northern British Columbia. Clearly, that is not going to

happen, to my knowledge — at least immediately. It has been promised "down

the road." I asked the minister, and I ask the minister again: were there

good reasons for that direction or for that decision? What were they? Can the

minister offer any hope that this matter will be considered in the future, and

that we will see degreed nurses trained in Prince George?

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

I don't see why not. I really don't know what the member is getting at.

There were some curriculum recommendations made by the IPG report, and

nursing was not expressly mentioned. But that doesn't mean that it

won't happen.

As I indicated, we do have a good nursing

program at the College of New Caledonia, which has been in place.... I

think it was just being started when I left, so that's a long time ago,

and they do very well.

In terms of the provincial stature,

we've increased 222 spaces this year. Whether or not the University of

Northern British Columbia wants to offer degree programs for nurses is

entirely up to them. I would recommend it. The government now.... Come

on, you don't ask a question, then cut and run; you stick around and

listen, because this is important.

MR. JONES : I'm listening.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Government does require now that nurses working for government in the

Ministry of Health are degreed nurses. Because of the public health

side, they do need degreed people, so there's every possibility — and I think it's a very good possibility — that

degree programs in nursing, BScNs, will be offered at the university. I

certainly can't accept the notion that I or IPG or someone has rejected

it. You can't use that word.

First of all, we don't do

curriculum development. It's awfully dangerous if we do, and I believe

that the board of governors and the senate will make those decisions,

when they're established in the present, when he or she is there. I

should also point out that on the Interior University Society is a

director of our health unit, Elsie Gerdes — as a matter of fact, I

was on the airplane with her the other day. I think there will be a

very strong lobby for a degree program at UNBC, so I will not accept

the member's criticism that I or anyone else has rejected that

suggestion.

MS. A. HAGEN : This is a good point for

me to enter the debate on the minister's estimates, because I want to

turn our attention to women and training opportunities for them in the

province.

The minister has just been talking about access

to one area, which is certainly traditionally an occupation with a very

large percentage of women. I would hope, as the minister has noted,

that in a very timely way we will have opportunities for training for

women through a full-fledged university in the north.

[ Page 9681 ]

want to preface questions to the minister by taking a look at some

situations that we face with women in the labour force and with the

need for training in ways appropriate to the needs of women to enable

them to participate fully in our economy.

[3:45]

First of all, it's important to note that the status of women in

education and training is still below that of men in terms of the broad

now seeing a reasonably equal number of men and women participating in

post-secondary education. But there are certain characteristics of the

profile of women in post-secondary education which need to be addressed

regarding policy, funding and strategic planning, and it's around some

of these issues that I want to couch my remarks this afternoon.

It's

fair to note, for example, that if you look at a profile of women in

post-secondary institutions, even though their number may now be

reasonably parallel with the number of men, we will find that there are

more women than men in what we consider to be privileged or

upper-socioeconomic level. Men tend to be represented right across the

socioeconomic spectrum in post-secondary institutions. Women from lower

socioeconomic strata are less well represented, which tells us that

women still lack opportunities for training and full-fledged degree

courses.

If we look at some facts of women's lives, it's

easy to know why poor women are still not as able to access

post-secondary education. If we look at our economic needs, however, we

need this sector of our society in order for our economy to be healthy

and prosperous. So we need to develop policies and programs that will

empower, enable and encourage women to take

part in post-secondary

education and in upgrading the skills they must have to participate

fully as people in the workforce.

It's fair to say that one

of the structural challenges that face women is that women in British

Columbia earn the lowest female-to-male earnings of anywhere in Canada.

In B.C., women are earning something like 62 cents on the dollar

compared to men. That's not significantly worse than the rest of

Canada; it's around 65 cents on the dollar for Canadian women as a

whole. But it means that women's earnings are smaller.

Put succinctly by a young woman in Douglas College, the outcome is that young

women seeking to enter post-secondary education or to enhance their skills are

trying to do so, first of all, on the 62-cent dollars that they earn to provide

them with savings to attend university; or if they do go to university on a

student loan, they are going to be forced to pay off that loan with 62-cent

dollars. Lest the minister say, "Yes, but once they have that higher level

of skill and training, they will be comparable with men, " that is not

true. In fact, even for people who have comparable skills and training, the

figures tell us that women are still earning significantly less than men — something

like 85 cents on the dollar. So women have a financial disadvantage, first off,

in terms of attending post-secondary institutions.

have, too, a figure that has improved some, but is still not at a level

that I think the minister or any of us would be satisfied with. We have

a participation rate in this province that is still well below Canadian

averages, and the proportion of women among undergrads — people who are attending university with the intention of getting a degree — is low in British Columbia as well.

we look at what the needs are in terms of women participating as a

result of having the education, skills and training that they require,

we know that the requirement for a much higher level of training is

increasing all the time. We are a much more sophisticated society in

terms of the jobs that are there. Canada Employment research tells us

that in the next decade, 50 percent of all new jobs will require four

years of post-secondary education. We know that about 40 percent of

women lack the education for those jobs. Yet women are participating in

increasing numbers in the workforce. Well over 50 percent of women are

in the workforce now; in fact, it's getting close to 70 percent. Women

across all family and socioeconomic circumstances — whether they're married, single or divorced; whether or not they have children — are in the workforce.

this stage of the game, I'm told, about 80 percent of the people who

are going to be in the workforce in the year 2000 are already there. In

other words, we're in a valley in terms of the number of young people

who are entering our workforce. We have 25 percent fewer young people

than we had five years ago to provide for our job needs over the next

ten years. So we have a need to look at this human resource, the

resource of women, to ensure that they can have opportunities to

participate fully in jobs that are economically viable — not

minimum-wage jobs, not jobs that keep them on welfare and not jobs that

don't allow them to support themselves and their families. It's

interesting that even where we have two-income families, only about 7

percent of the women in the workforce have spouses with incomes that

are over $2,000 a month. So the role of women, for the economic

well-being of their families and for their own satisfaction in terms of

the jobs that they have, is very much tied to training opportunities.

Mr.

Chairman, we still have a deficit in terms of women's ability, on the

basis of their current levels of education, to access post-secondary

education and to carry through to a training level that enables them to

have a good job that pays a decent wage. One of the ways in which we

might look to providing such programs for women is in the area of what

we usually call bridging programs. These are programs that take women

from where they are and, through a variety of strategies, programs and

resources, bring them to an educational level that enables them to

participate fully in training and educational programs according to

their aspirations and needs.

I think I mentioned a moment

ago that about 40 percent of women in our population lack an

educational status at the present time that would enable them to

qualify for the 50 percent of new jobs that will require post-secondary

education of four years.

[ Page 9682 ]

There

are another 24 percent of the jobs that we anticipate in the future

that will require some postsecondary education. There's a huge field

here, where there is a need for public policy on the part of the

minister's responsibilities, to be looked at.

I would note

here that it's not just this minister's responsibility, but this is the

first minister with whom we've had some opportunity to raise the issue.

I think the Education minister, whose estimates just finished, is also

involved with this kind of upgrading to continuing education in his

area. It's unfortunate that we didn't have some opportunity to discuss

it under his estimates. It's clear that the Social Services and Housing

minister will also have interest and responsibility here, for many of

the clients of that ministry are women with family responsibilities who

do not have adequate skills to enable them to participate in an economy

and support their families.

Of course, this requires much negotiation and consultation with the senior level of government — the

federal government. I believe the four-comers agreement is still

active, and this minister is still the lead minister in respect to that

agreement on behalf of his government. So it's appropriate that we

should be raising this issue with him.

Bridging programs

are not very well known by most people, and the reason is that very few

of them are available on any kind of a full-time basis. People know

about very few of them. However, this ministry has been active and is

to be commended for providing support for the program called "Women in

Trades and Technology," which is both a national and a provincial

initiative designed to provide women with opportunities to work in

trades and technology, where both the challenge of their jobs and the

income available to them is much greater than in the service levels.

I said earlier, we need these women, because our workforce will not be

adequately sourced without women working in these fields. Bridging

programs provide opportunities for women to improve on basic literacy

skills and adult basic education skills. In this year of literacy, it's

appropriate that we should be focusing on that need. They provide life

skills training. They provide academic upgrading, and that's

particularly important in the field of math and science where women,

through the public school system and into post-secondary, are still not

adequately trained. That's an area of very considerable need. There is

a need for programs to be both flexible and diverse, because in many

instances, women have family responsibilities and may not be able to

attend a post-secondary institution on a full-time basis There's a need

for counselling and support, strategic planning, academic planning and

the child-care needs of families.

The overall goal of such

bridging programs is to provide sustained and effective support

throughout an entire transition from home, through unemployment — if that's the status of women —

or underemployment, to a vocational training program or appropriate

employment in a job with a salary sufficient for the economic

responsibility of the participants.

To my knowledge, the

only full-time bridging programs at this stage are perhaps at Kwantlen

College. I don't know of other community colleges that have bridging

programs. There are a variety — a smorgasbord, if you like — of

programs available at almost any college in the province. But at the

moment, there is no really coherent program and plan in place that

provides women who are academically not adequately resourced or coming

from social, geographic or cultural backgrounds where there needs to be

support and bridging into the post-secondary area. There is no program

that I'm aware of to provide that on a full-time basis— or on a well-developed basis — across the province.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Sorry, hon. member, your time has expired under standing orders.

MS. A. HAGEN :

Perhaps I will let the minister comment on the matter of programs that

are available. I have some further issues that I want to raise on this

subject.

HON. MR. STRACHAN : My colleague wants to speak here.

MR. CHAIRMAN : The Solicitor-General.

HON. MR. FRASER :

Mr. Chairman, I must say how delighted I was to hear the member over

there talk about supporting women's programs because, in fact, it is

this government that is doing exactly that.

It was announced recently — for those of you in the gallery; it's nice to see so many —

that this government is committed to a program of pay equity. That is

not just a program of equal work for equal pay; it's equal pay for work

of equal value. There is a significant difference, Mr. Chairman, as I

know you understand and I know the minister understands.

[4:00]

There are a few things that the member opposite said that I think

should be corrected. Presumably the member should understand that if

someone decides to go to university and get a higher education, they

would have a full-time job at full-time pay. As you would also suspect,

if a man or a woman graduated from law school, you would expect that

person to practise law and get the same rate of pay. Engineers

certainly do, and I'm very proud of that, Mr. Chairman. That is exactly

why I stand here.

I also would like to point out to the

member that the ministry I have the honour to represent as minister has

a significant program for bridging positions for women. In fact, I

believe we're the leader in that respect. We are indeed encouraging

women to advance their careers in the ministry. I've said to them, at a

recent conference, which was mainly attended by the women in the

ministry, that we will be taking a course of action which will propel

them into management positions, perhaps before they are actually ready

to accept the jobs. But we will do so on the basis of the fact that

there is raw talent there that can be developed into full-time

administrative exper-

[ Page 9683 ]

tise, and we are willing to take the risk in this ministry with women who historically have not had the opportunity....

MRS. BOONE : A risk?

HON. MR. FRASER :

As you point out, if you are not trained for a job there is some risk.

I said we're prepared to take a risk with people who have not

heretofore been trained for such jobs, because we wish to have as much

expertise and talent working on behalf of the people of British

Columbia in this ministry as we can.

I have said for a long time — and will say again and again if I have to — that

I want all the women in classes in British Columbia to pursue careers

that interest them, whether it happens to be driving a truck, taking

engineering, medicine or whatever; and I know that they will.

There

is certainly a fundamental change in lifestyles in the province. The

modem woman now believes that there is a distinct possibility she will

be working all her life, with possible interruptions in her work career

for raising families and things like that. Now I think more girls in

school are planning careers based on the fundamental concept that they

will be employed most of their lives.

This, of course, is a

change. This is not an historical pattern in North America; however,

it's a pattern now. Everything that this government and that minister

will do will lead to a greater role for women to play in society in

employment, for better employment and pay opportunities and for all

those things that will improve the conditions of women vis--vis

men — whether it's work, pay or educational opportunities. For

that I commend the Minister of Advanced Education, Training and

Technology.

MR. CHAIRMAN : just before we continue,

hon members, the second member for Vancouver–Point Grey has asked leave

to make an introduction. Shall leave be granted?

Leave not granted.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

I am delighted as always to hear what the member for New Westminster

has to say with respect to women's issues. I don't think generally

there is anything I can disagree with in respect to her comments, but I

would like to make a few comments of my own, maybe point out a couple

of things and certainly discuss what we and the institutes are doing.

First

of all, I don't know where the member for New Westminster received her

information; maybe I misunderstood her. But I want to explain to the

committee that in undergraduate programs in the universities and

colleges there are more women registered than men. Women are the

majority. I am also advised that in the faculties of commerce, law and

medicine, women are at an equal participation rate; the gender split is

about fifty-fifty. That's something nontraditional, but certainly not

anymore.

It's interesting to follow my colleague, the first

member for Vancouver South, who is trained as an engineer. I'll relate

to the committee a comment I made yesterday about visiting a small

engineering school in Halifax, one that has a very high recognition

factor in Halifax and, because of that, has a higher percentage of

women attending an engineering school than is the national average.

I met the president of the student association of that engineering school — who is a woman —

and I asked her about that. She said it is just the awareness that this

school is very good. It is known among all students in Halifax that if

you're going to be an engineer, this is the place to go. It's known

among all the females in elementary and junior secondary schools that

women do attend and do very well.

Halifax has a different attitude — or I should say female elementary students in Halifax have a different attitude —

about attending a school of engineering, and I think that's probably

what makes the difference. There is simply the attitude difference, and

that, of course, is what causes more women to enter what are

nontraditional areas of training.

In terms of what we or the institutes are doing — and the member made mention of this — I

don't think there's any institution that isn't in one way or another

focusing on bridging programs. As a matter of fact, if you look at

adult basic education, that in itself is a bridging program.

Some

institutions do focus more on having women enter the workforce through

whatever programs they might have, and I think that's commendable. But

I would say generally — and I think the member would agree with me —

that we couldn't look at one institute under this ministry that isn't

in one fashion or another doing whatever it can to ensure that there

are bridging programs available and doing everything it can to have

women enter the workforce.

As well, I would like to mention

to the committee that on our Task Force on Employment and Training

we're pleased to have Thelma Plecas, president of Horizon College, and

Norrie Preston, coordinator of Ability Personnel. Both Mrs. Plecas and

Mrs. Preston are there because of the specific expertise they offer in

terms of having women in the workforce.

[Mr. De Jong in the chair.]

I'd like to point out one more thing — again,

in the nontraditional area. This was passed to me from the

apprenticeship branch. In some of the nontraditional trades — I'll just read three of them — we're seeing an iIncrease of females in apprenticeship programs. They are practical horticulture —

38 percent of the students in that program are now female; motor

vehicle parts, 20 percent; and industrial warehousing, 20 percent. I

think that indicates that in all areas — vocational, apprenticeship and university training — women are becoming more and more aware of nontraditional programs that they will be successful at.

The institutes, colleges and universities are becoming more and more aware of what they can do to

[ Page 9684 ]

ensure

that women are given every opportunity to attend any training program

they wish to. I don't think there is any discipline or field of

training that would preclude women from attending. I think, really, we

can see the post-secondary community truly into the twenty-first

century in terms of their attitude towards training for women, bridging

opportunities and programs for women, and generally recognizing that in

that field they have a responsibility. It would be my contention that

they are meeting that responsibility in a good fashion.

guess I'll close by saying that I don't think anything's perfect. The

member's comments are noted, and the points she makes are well taken. I

don't think anyone would disagree with her general concern and interest

in having women fare better in educational institutions and the

workplace. I certainly would not disagree with that myself. But I would

contend and have on the record the information and knowledge that in my

position as minister of this portfolio, we are seeing the institutions

react in a very positive manner towards the issues the member has

raised.

HON. MRS. JOHNSTON : I would like at this

point to make a few comments to the minister with regard to the

ministry activities in my constituency of Surrey. I would like to

commend the minister and the ministry for the activity we see,

particularly in Surrey-Newton, in the finalization of a permanent

college campus. Kwantlen College will be opening its permanent campus

in August. It is something that is certainly much needed and much

appreciated by my constituents.

There has been a great deal

of interaction and comment here with regard to females in our

workforce. I would like to say that we have a very capable female

president of Kwantlen College. Her involvement in not only our college

but the community of Surrey at large is certainly a credit to the

entire faculty at Kwantlen.

I would like to ask the

minister if he could update us on the major new campus requirements and

plans for both Richmond and Langley. Both of those areas are growing

very quickly, and the demands on the Kwantlen College facilities

presently in existence are stretching the available facilities to the

limit. Could we please have an update on what is being proposed for

Richmond and Langley with regard to Kwantlen College?

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

It's always a pleasure to be able to respond to the Minister of

Transportation and Highways. Speaking of bridging programs, I might

need a few myself.

The new Richmond campus is in place. We have a very good budget for it. As

I mentioned the other day to the second member for Richmond (Mr. Loenen), we

don't normally release our budgeted figures until such time as we have the

tenders in. But that is proceeding well. In terms of the Langley campus of Kwantlen,

that is an announcement that I'm going to be making on June 4 along with

the Minister of Transportation and Highways and essentially all of the other

Members of the Legislative Assembly from the Fraser Valley east to Hope. That

gives me an opportunity, Madam Minister, to advise the committee once again

that on June 4, in conjunction with the Members of the Legislative Assembly

who represent Delta, Surrey, Langley, Central Fraser Valley and Yale-Lillooet,

as well as Dewdney, I will be making that announcement with respect to what

we're going to have to do to accommodate the enrolment pressures in the

Fraser Valley generally. Probably half a million people will be moving there

in the next 20 years. The pressures on this ministry and many others to accommodate

that and provide an infrastructure are going to be extensive.

are proceeding. We recognize that we have a responsibility to continue

to build. We do not at any point want to cut back on our capital

building program, as another government did some 16 years ago. We are

going to continue to build our capital programs.

I can

assure the member that Kwantlen at Richmond and at Langley are

proceeding in a first-class fashion. I see no reason why they won't be

very successful campuses. I thank the member for her questions.

[4:15]

MS. A. HAGEN :

I want to comment on the remarks of the member for Vancouver South and

the minister as we proceed in our discussions about economic

opportunity for women through training.

First of all, on

the comment of the member for Vancouver South about pay equity, it

would be helpful if the member recognized that this is future policy of

the government. If we look at any of the longitudinal studies — meaning studies carried out over many years — on

women in the workforce, we know that there is no such thing as pay

equity. There is not equal pay for work of equal value in both the

professions as well as other jobs available to women.

haven't yet had an opportunity to read the recent federal study which

talks about the class ceiling, the point beyond which women find

themselves unable to go for a whole range of structural and attitudinal

reasons that have a very significant effect on their remuneration.

Recent studies have been done impeccably by very talented people in our

B.C. Employment and Immigration central offices. They tell a sorry

story of where women sit economically.

The reason for these discussions today is that I believe that this minister — and his ministry, which has training and technology as elements of it —

needs to be paying special attention to and be cognizant of the needs

of women and be developing policies, programs and funding to meet those

needs.

Let me just note the minister's comment about the

relative number of men and women in many programs. Yes, it is true that

the number of women equals and in some instances goes beyond that of

men in many post-secondary programs, but if one looks at the

demographic information on those women or at their socioeconomic

status, one finds

[ Page 9685 ]

that

the women in our post-secondary institutions are clustered in the

advantaged socioeconomic area of our society. They come from

backgrounds and homes that can provide the financial support to enable

them to continue their education.

Men, interestingly

enough, come from a broader spectrum, including a less-advantaged

socioeconomic spectrum. I would theorize that one of the reasons men

are able to access post-secondary education more readily across any

socioeconomic range is that they earn more when they go out to take

jobs to help them pay for their education. And when they get out of

school, they know that their jobs are going to pay them more, so that

if they have to borrow for their education — since we don't have grants in this province — they will earn at a higher level, thus enabling them to pay off those loans.

It's

a fact of life that women face. It's a structural fact of life which

has nothing to do with anything other than our failure, still, to

address the economic and training needs of women. My concern is that if

we don't do this, it's we, as well as those women, who will be

disadvantaged. We as a society will lose the product of their

participation and will perhaps have to support them through our social

services at a higher level than we might otherwise do.

The

minister talked in a very general way about the available bridging

programs. However, there have been extensive studies commissioned by

this ministry which tell us that those programs are not adequate to

meet the needs of women. In many instances, by the time women have got

through some of the bridging programs — if available — there is no further assistance for them unless they are going to borrow their way to a more extensive education.

I noted earlier in this House — it's simply a good representative example of what women face —

the story of a young woman in an adult basic education literacy program

at Douglas College. She has aspirations to enter a profession where we

have a shortage — teaching — and will have to do all that

work on borrowed money, where there is no assistance for her beyond

what will be available for the number of months she is attending the

upgrading program. That woman has a family. She will not have available

to her any resources other than borrowed money or whatever she might be

able to earn in the summertime to assist her into a profession where we

need to have her skills.

My concern is that we are not

looking at the needs of women in a way that relates to their lives and

their geographic, family and cultural situations. That has been very

well documented for this ministry on many occasions. Yet we see no

specific programs targeted to goals to enable women to have a higher

participation rate, whether it is in trades and technology, in the

professions or through apprenticeships. I want to ask the minister if

indeed he can tell us of any programs specifically targeted to women— recognizing their economic, family, geographic and cultural circumstances —

that give them, as we say, some kind of additional support and

recognition for the reality of their lives, to enable them to achieve

the training levels that are essential if they are going to participate

in society and be economically self-sufficient.

Let me ask

one other question before I sit down and give the minister an

opportunity to answer. I'd also like him to comment on the makeup and

work of the task force on employment and training, which he referred to

in his earlier remarks. That task force was established, I think, by

this minister's predecessor in August 1989. In the announcement of the

work of that group, it was noted that their first report would be

available on September 30, 1989, and that they would meet quarterly for

a period of at least two years. I have not been able to find any

information on the work of that committee or on what recommendations

they are making. Two years is a long time for such an important

committee to be working without any interim recommendations for action

by this minister.

I would also like to ask him why, in the

makeup of this committee.... The minister who announced it made this

comment: "The membership of the task force reflects the government's

commitment to a comprehensive and coordinated attack on structural

unemployment." First of all, why is two-thirds of this committee made

up of men and only one-third made up of women? Why are there no

representatives on the committee from women's organizations that work

in the sector of underemployed and unemployed women? In fact, we are

not looking at a representative group of women on the committee. I

recognize the calibre of those people who are there and am delighted to

see them there. But this committee is not well balanced in presenting

the needs of the women I am talking about.

Furthermore, I

note that there is no representation on the committee from community

colleges. There is representation from universities, government, the

private sector, labour, organizations representing people with

disabilities and youth. There are no representatives, though, from

women's groups and none from community colleges, which is the entry

point for the vast majority of the women I'm talking about, who need

bridging and flexible, accessible programs in order to do the laddering

that will enable them to participate in the economic life of our

communities; to have decent wages and, hopefully, pay equity at some

time, when some government — not this one, I'm afraid — is

prepared to deal with it; and to have the kinds of the opportunities

that need to be in place to make them full-fledged participants in the

economic life of communities.

On the issue, then, of more

detail about the goals of the ministry around special access and

opportunities for women, and on the status of the provincial task force

on employment and training — both its makeup and its reporting — I look forward to the minister's response.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

At the outset, the member asked me about specific programs. As I said

earlier, probably every institute and college in the province has a

specific program or an interest in

[ Page 9686 ]

training

and bridging for women. I would think there would be far too many to

mention, but any perusal of any college calendar would point out what

our various colleges and institutes are doing.

The member

makes a reasonably good point about community colleges not being

represented on the Task Force on Employment and Training, although I

really can't discount again the presence of Thelma Plecas and Norrie

Preston, who are, I am advised, experts in the field of training for

women and for that reason were specifically put on this board.

The

member also points out that out of the board, one-third are women and

two-thirds are men. I guess the member looks at a quota system. I've

never really thought too much about quota systems or that type of

affirmative action. I think it's awfully dangerous — the idea is to get people from areas of expertise, male or female —

because statements like that are sexist in themselves. If you accept

the notion that we're all equal and there is equality here, then one

doesn't look at that type of setting out in numbers — that there shall be this, that and the other thing in terms of women or men on a board.

Just

to give the committee a brief description of the Task Force on

Employment and Training, it was announced in the 1989 throne speech

that we would have a Task Force on Employment and Training and that we

would have it chaired by Dr. Kenneth Strand. Ken Strand is known in

B.C. and throughout Canada as being expert in this, a true scholar in

terms of good labour negotiations, employment and training, and

understanding the issues. There's no question about his credibility.

The

members of the task force were to represent a wide variety of

interests: Claude Heywood, Deputy Minister of Labour, Jim Matkin,

president of the Business Council of B.C.; Jean McFee from Burns Lake,

chairman of the B.C. Youth Advisory Council and a student at UBC,

Thelma Plecas and Norrie Preston, whom I've just mentioned; Hugh

Robinson, from Nanaimo, who represents IWA-Canada; Kathy Sanderson,

B.C. and Yukon director of the Canadian Federation of Independent

Business; Rob Sorenson, a member of the Premier's Advisory Council for

Persons with Disabilities; Ken Strand, the chairman, as I mentioned;

Dave Weller of the B.C. Construction Association and a member of the

Provincial Apprenticeship and Training Board; and Len Werden, president

of the B.C. and Yukon Territory Building and Construction Trades

Council and a representative of the B.C. Federation of Labour. I think

that's a board with some pretty good representation. It really does

capture the labour and the employer side, and it contains two experts

on training women for the workforce and a first-class, internationally

known chairman in Ken Strand.

I have met with Dr. Strand

and discussed his work with him. He's proceeding very well. This is a

large task that they have been asked to handle. As I said earlier,

there is no such thing as a perfect world, and nothing happens

immediately. But the fact that we did recognize that we had a concern

here that we had to address is something in itself, and I am confident

that this Task Force on Employment and Training is going to be of

significant benefit to the province and to those who need training,

including women.

One other thing I'd like to point out is

with respect to student financial aid. I talked about this the other

day to the member for Burnaby North (Mr. Jones); he was concerned about

it. We made the point that with so many students applying to attend

post-secondary institutions and with us having record enrolments now,

we have to conclude that there aren't too many impediments to

post-secondary education.

[4:30]

However, we do admit that our data is not complete. We know

inherently that there are students.... You've mentioned a class, Madam

Member. You're thinking that female students from a particular

socio-economic background may not be attending. You may have a point.

I'd like to see your data if you have it, because I have asked staff

and have set resources aside to begin assembling that data myself,

because I want to know too. I made that commitment to the Canadian

Federation of Students when I met them in January. I said that we

recognize that there may be some students who, for whatever reason,

have serious impediments to attending training and that we'd like to

identify them. It may sound glib, but you don't know who doesn't

attend. You know who does attend because they're there and the

registrars of the various institutions can tell you: "Yes, we have

registered Miss So-and-so." We can look at that data, and student

financial aid data will tell us the relative income and ability or

inability of her or her parents to assist her in university or

training. We have that, but we don't know who's not attending.

There

are ways that we can gather that information, and I am advising the

committee now, Mr. Chairman, that I have made the commitment to the

Canadian Federation of Students and to anyone else who would listen

that we are going to take some time in terms of spending money and our

human resources on identifying and establishing a better database in

order that we can better track and identify the concerns that the

member has presented to the committee this afternoon. As soon as that

information is available it will be provided, and from that we will

develop remedies. It could be in the area of better student financial

aid; it could be in the area of tuition-free in terms of some of the

ABE programs; there could be lots of recommendations that we could

undertake. Until we identify the database, until we identify those for

whom an impediment exists to attending post-secondary training, it's

difficult to say in this sort of vacuum. But I can assure the member

and the committee that we do know that there is more data we have to

develop, and we are working on that now.

MR. GABELMANN : I would ask the House for permission to make a very brief introduction.

Leave granted.

[ Page 9687 ]

MR. GABELMANN :

A very good friend of mine from Campbell River is in the gallery this

afternoon. I would like members of the House to welcome Mr. Jack

Chicalo.

MR. RABBITT : When a person attends a debate

such as we've had going here today between the minister and the critic,

you sit back and you certainly learn a lot about a subject on which

many of us, without that background, don't get the benefit of all the

finer details. It's appreciated.

I have some concerns I

wanted to address with the minister. The access for rural students has

been a concern of mine for the three and a half years I've been a

representative for Yale-Lillooet, and I certainly want to commend the

government for the movement they've made in that time. There's been a

substantial recognition in cash dollars of the problem that had to be

addressed. The problem, as I see it, is still there to some degree and

still will have to be recognized and identified, and I'm going to help

the minister do it.

One of the problems that I have

encountered in assisting students in obtaining loans for education is

that the funding formula, which I believe the province has negotiated

with the federal government.... The formula is based on figures and

cost-of-living standards dating back to the early eighties. In the

nineties those figures are totally inadequate. I would suggest that the

minister, now that I've identified the problem, beat a trail down to

Ottawa and make sure that that part of the agreement is renegotiated so

that we don't end up with problems being related to the funding formula

itself.

The other subject that I wanted to discuss briefly

with the minister is the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology, which

right now is British Columbia's best-kept secret. For those of you who

aren't aware — and I'm sure that the minister is very aware — NVIT

is a native post-secondary institution located in the Nicola Valley.

What makes it unique is the fact that its success rate with native

students is above and beyond anything else that's been experienced in

the province. We certainly have to take our hats off to those

individuals who had the intestinal fortitude and the vision to get that

institute off the ground. I would like to commend the ministry for

working with them as closely as they have in the past couple of years

to ensure that we keep that a viable institution.

The

native community is served well. We have students right through to age

60 years old and better who attend the institute. It serves the native

community very well. I know the ministry is watching the success rate

that I mentioned, and I suggest that by working with the institute we

can make it even better

The cooperation that we have

between Cariboo College and other universities and colleges in the

province has enabled NVIT to deliver a wide assortment of courses.

think one individual should be recognized, and that is Gordon Antoine,

who I commend the ministry for appointing to the board of Cariboo

College. With that appointment we've been able to bridge part of the

gap that has developed between our standard institutions in British

Columbia and that which the native community is bringing onside.

question to the minister on this subject is quite simple. I would like

a commitment from the minister and his ministry that they will

support — and continue to support — NVIT throughout the

current year and assist in developing programs to make sure that NVIT

will have a stable future and be able to continue to deliver quality

education to the native community and to those non-natives who wish to

attend in the Nicola Valley in the province of British Columbia. Thank

you, Mr. Minister, and I look forward to your reply.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

I appreciate what the member has said. I must admit that I was engaged

in another conversation with a member on the floor when I heard your

reference to the federal government, so perhaps I'll just.... What was

the issue again? Could you perhaps just whisper loudly— sotto voce?

MR. RABBITT : Funding formula for student loans.

HON. MR. STRACHAN :

Let me get to NVIT first, because I've written some notes about that.

Then I will respond to the funding formula for student loans.

Mr.

Chairman and members of the committee, what the member has said is

absolutely correct. NVIT is a model institute for native education in

the province of British Columbia. There is no question about that; I

hav