H0523pm 05

H0523pm 05

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Friday, May 23, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Volume 34, Number 5 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR His Honour the Honourable Steven L. Point, OBC FOURTH SESSION, 38TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon.

Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ........................................................................................................ Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ................................................................................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon.

Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon.

Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General and Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations............... Hon. John van Dongen Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Regulatory Reform............................................ Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of State for ActNow B.C. ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................Sindi Hawkins Deputy Speaker ...........................................................................................................................................................................

Katherine Whittred Assistant Deputy Speaker.....................................................................................................................................................................Sue Hammell Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole................................................................................................................................................. Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .........................................................................................................................E.

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

James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk ..........................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ...................................................................................................................................................................Jo-Anne Kern Legislative Librarian ..................................................................................................................................................................................Jane Taylor Legislative Comptroller...............................................................................................................................................................................Dan Arbic

Party Standings: Liberal 46; New Democratic 33 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) .................................................................... Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP)............................................................................. Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP).................................................................. Surrey-Newton Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)..........................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Hon.

Pat (L) .............................................................Prince George North Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................ East Kootenay Black, Iain (L) ............................................................ Port Moody–Westwood Bloy, Harry (L)................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).....................................Prince George–Mount Robson Brar, Jagrup (NDP).....................................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Campbell, Hon.

Gordon (L) .........................................Vancouver–Point Grey Cantelon, Ron (L)..............................................................Nanaimo-Parksville Chong, Hon. Ida (L) .................................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Christensen, Hon. Tom (L) ................................................. Okanagan-Vernon Chudnovsky, David (NDP) ......................................... Vancouver-Kensington Coell, Hon.

Murray (L) .....................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...........................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .......................................... West Kootenay–Boundary Coons, Gary (NDP) ....................................................................... North Coast Cubberley, David (NDP)............................................................Saanich South de Jong, Hon.

Michael (L) ...................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Dix, Adrian (NDP) .........................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Evans, Corky (NDP).................................................................Nelson-Creston Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ...............................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Fleming, Rob (NDP) ..............................................................Victoria-Hillside Fraser, Scott (NDP) ..............................................................Alberni-Qualicum Gentner, Guy (NDP).......................................................................Delta North Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................ Comox Valley Hammell, Sue (NDP) ................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Hon.

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

Gordon (L).....................................................Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP)......................................................Malahat–Juan de Fuca Horning, Al (L)........................................................... Kelowna–Lake Country Ilich, Hon. Olga (L)...............................................................Richmond Centre James, Carole (NDP).......................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Jarvis, Daniel (L)..................................................

North Vancouver–Seymour Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................... Esquimalt-Metchosin Krog, Leonard (NDP)......................................................................... Nanaimo Krueger, Hon. Kevin (L) .....................................Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lali, Harry (NDP)........................................................................

Yale-Lillooet Lee, Richard T. (L)....................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L).............................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L)........................................................................ Chilliwack-Sumas Macdonald, Norm (NDP).................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................

Bulkley Valley–Stikine Mayencourt, Lorne (L).......................................................Vancouver-Burrard McIntyre, Joan (L).................................................West Vancouver–Garibaldi Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) .................................................. Peace River North Nuraney, John (L).............................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Oppal, Hon. Wally, QC (L).......................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...........................................................

Chilliwack-Kent Polak, Mary (L) ....................................................................................Langley Puchmayr, Chuck (NDP)...................................................... New Westminster Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ............................................................. Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................ Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L).............................................................

Kamloops Robertson, Gregor (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Roddick, Valerie (L).......................................................................Delta South Routley, Doug (NDP)..................................................... Cowichan-Ladysmith Rustad, John (L) ........................................................

Prince George–Omineca Sather, Michael (NDP).........................................Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (NDP)..................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ....................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sultan, Ralph (L) ....................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Taylor, Hon.

Carole (L).....................................................Vancouver-Langara Thorne, Diane (NDP) .................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L).......................................................Okanagan-Westside Trevena, Claire (NDP) ..................................................................North Island van Dongen, Hon. John (L)............................................ Abbotsford-Clayburn Whittred, Katherine (L)........................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wyse, Charlie (NDP) .................................................................Cariboo South Yap, John (L)...................................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman .......................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Bulkley Valley–Stikine ...........................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North ...........................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Willingdon................................................................... John Nuraney Burquitlam.......................................................................................Harry Bloy Cariboo North..............................................................................

Bob Simpson Cariboo South..............................................................................Charlie Wyse Chilliwack-Kent ..................................................................Hon. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas............................................................................... John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley........................................................................ Hon.

Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville..............................................................Diane Thorne Cowichan-Ladysmith ................................................................. Doug Routley Delta North ...................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ............................................................................. Valerie Roddick East Kootenay................................................................................

Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin.........................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops.....................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ............................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country.................................................................. Al Horning Kelowna-Mission ......................................................................

Sindi Hawkins Langley ...........................................................................................Mary Polak Malahat–Juan de Fuca .................................................................. John Horgan Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................ Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ..................................................... Michael Sather Nanaimo......................................................................................

Leonard Krog Nanaimo-Parksville .....................................................................Ron Cantelon Nelson-Creston .............................................................................Corky Evans New Westminster .................................................................. Chuck Puchmayr North Coast....................................................................................

Gary Coons North Island ...............................................................................Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour..........................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head ........................................................... Hon. Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon......................................................... Hon. Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside..............................................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Peace River North.......................................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South..................................................................... Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley .................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain ............................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Westwood.................................................................... Iain Black Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...............................................

Nicholas Simons Prince George North.................................................................... Hon. Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson ............................................Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................ John Rustad Richmond Centre......................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Richmond East........................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston...........................................................................John Yap Saanich North and the Islands ............................................ Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South ........................................................................ David Cubberley Shuswap............................................................................Hon. George Abbott Skeena.......................................................................................... Robin Austin Surrey-Cloverdale............................................................... Hon.

Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers ................................................................Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton............................................................................... Harry Bains Surrey–Panorama Ridge.................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey-Tynehead ....................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley...........................................................................Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ............................................................Hon.

Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard..............................................................Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................Gregor Robertson Vancouver-Fraserview .................................................Hon.

Wally Oppal, QC Vancouver-Hastings .................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington.......................................................David Chudnovsky Vancouver-Kingsway ......................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara ........................................................... Hon. Carole Taylor Vancouver–Mount Pleasant........................................ Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................Hon.

Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena.........................................................Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill...................................................................

Carole James Victoria-Hillside ...........................................................................Rob Fleming West Kootenay–Boundary........................................................Katrine Conroy West Vancouver–Capilano...........................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ........................................................Joan McIntyre Yale-Lillooet..................................................................................... Harry Lali

CONTENTS Friday, May 23, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ............................................ 12813 Tributes ....................................................................................................................... ............................................................ 12813 Michelle Stillwell R.

Cantelon Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ............................................ 12813 Tabling Documents.............................................................................................................. .................................................. 12813 Elections B.C. Service Plan: 2008/09 – 2010/11 Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ........... 12813 Korean War H.

Bloy Rick Hansen Wheels in Motion J. Horgan Down Syndrome Research Foundation R. Lee HIV/AIDS L. Krog Diana Johnstone R. Cantelon Insite safe injection facility D. Chudnovsky Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ....................................................... 12815 Retention and recruitment of corrections officers M. Farnworth Hon. J. van Dongen C. Puchmayr Retention and recruitment of sheriffs L. Krog Hon. W. Oppal A. Dix Condition of B.C. Place roof N. Macdonald Hon. S. Hagen D. Chudnovsky S. Simpson H. Bains J.

Kwan M. Karagianis Investigation into death in Maple Ridge M. Sather Hon. J. van Dongen

Committee of the Whole House................................................................................................... ........................................ 12820 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 33) (continued) M. Karagianis Hon. K. Falcon L. Krog Hon. C. Taylor Hon. M. Coell D. Chudnovsky Hon. S. Bond Protected Areas of British Columbia (Conservancies and Parks) Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 38) D. MacKay Hon. B. Penner S.

Simpson Reporting of Bills ............................................................................................................. ...................................................... 12829 Protected Areas of British Columbia (Conservancies and Parks) Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 38) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ................................................... 12829 Protected Areas of British Columbia (Conservancies and Parks) Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 38) Tabling Documents.............................................................................................................. .................................................. 12829 Environmental Appeal Board, annual report, 2006-2007 Committee of the Whole House................................................................................................... ........................................ 12830 Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act (Bill 18) (continued) S.

Simpson Hon. B. Penner G. Robertson Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................. 12842 Estimates: Ministry of Health (continued) G. Gentner Hon. G. Abbott M. Farnworth S. Fraser N. Macdonald D. Routley H. Bains J. Brar M. Sather

12813 FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 The House met at 1:33 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Introductions by Members H. Bloy: Today in the gallery are twelve veterans of the Korean War. I'd like to name them: John Bishop, Roy Borshalt, Ed Hidell, Gary Hall, Ken Hines, Philip Lee, Gary Miller, Victor Mumfort, Herb Pitts, Ray Renault, Glen Patrick and Len Desjarlais. I wish to recognize Neil Rhodes, also a veteran, who is unable to make it today due to illness. Also in the gallery is Guy Black, who has worked hard to promote the contributions of the Korean War veterans.

Will the House please make these true Canadians welcome. Hon. M. Coell: I have two guests in the gallery today: Joe Paling, the president, and Natalie Bocking, external relations coordina tor, of the Simon Fraser Student Society. Would the House please make them welcome. [1335] R. Lee: Visiting in the House today is a delega- tion from the Guangxi Charity Federation.

We are joined by the vice-secretary general of Guangxi Charity Federation, Xiang Sheng Zhang; chairman of Lojo city, the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, Jiang Chun Ji; chairman of Lojo city, south region civil administ ration, Lan Jie; chairman of Woushen County civil administration, Su Jiu Li; and vice-municipal director of south region, Lojo city, Chen Wen Min. They are accompanied by the chairman of the Cul- tural Regeneration Research (Worldwide) Foundation, Mr. Kenneth Tsang, chairman of the Culture Regen- eration Research Society, Mr.

Benjamin Li and project coordinator, CRRS (Worldwide) Foundation, Mr. William Chan. Will the House please join me to give them the warmest welcome. Mr. Speaker: Continue, Member. R. Lee: I would also like to introduce a group of grade 5 students from the Our Lady of Mercy School in Burnaby. Would the House please join me in wel- coming the students and their teachers Mrs. Barbara Fraser Tilley and Mrs. Linda Schubert to the Legisla- ture. R. Hawes: In the galleries today are two members of our excellent caucus research teams, Justin Molander and Sarah Elder. Could the House please make both of them welcome.

Tributes MICHELLE STILLWELL R. Cantelon: I'd ask the House to join me in con- gratulating an outstanding achievement by a constitu- ent from Nanoose Bay. Michelle Stillwell, racing in an internationally sanctioned wheelchair event, not only won the 100 metres and 200 metres — won the gold medal — she broke records in both, absolutely crushed the 100 metres and won both events. So Beijing, look out. Here comes Michelle. Introductions by Members Hon. I. Chong: Although this individual has already been introduced by the member for Burquitlam, I would like to add a personal welcome to Capt.

Gary Hall, a constituent of mine who for the past several years has graciously assisted me during the annual Remembrance Day ceremonies in Oak Bay, where he has accompanied me in the laying of a wreath on behalf of the province. So I ask the House to please give him a special welcome. B. Lekstrom: It's not often that for two days in a row I have the opportunity to introduce guests from Dawson Creek, but joining us today are two special guests in the chambers. We have His Worship Mayor Calvin Kruk f r o m D a w s o n C r e e k , a s w e l l a s D u n c a n R e d f e r n .

W i l l the House please make them feel welcome. Tabling Documents Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the Elections B.C. Service Plan: 2008/09 – 2010/11. Statements (Standing Order 25B) KOREAN WAR H. Bloy: I rise today to speak about an important event that affected our country and many others over 55 years ago, as our servicemen and servicewomen defended the people of the Republic of Korea. Hon. Speaker, 2008 marks the 55th anniversary of the Korean War ceasefire. The Korean War lasted three years, and almost 27,000 Canadian men and women served.

During this time 1,588 were wounded, and there were 516 Cana- dian war dead, including 36 British Columbians who gave their lives to an international campaign to stop a war of aggression. On July 27 British Columbia will declare Korea Veterans Day in our province. By issuing this procla- mation, we hope to pay tribute to our servicemen and servicewomen who brought gr eat credit and esteem to Canada and British Columbia by their matchless cour- age and professionalism. It is also the goal to raise awareness of the Korean War and bring together rec- ognitions to its veterans.

12814 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 I had the honour and privilege of having lunch today with Port Moody resident Guy Black, Lt. Col. John Bishop and Victor Mumfort. I enjoyed our conversation, and they are here in the gallery now with veterans of the Korean War. Guy Black has worked tirelessly to promote the contributions of veterans of t h e K o r e a n W a r , a n d I k n o w h e i s p r o u d t o s e e t h i s proclamation realized.

It is a tribute to the veterans of British Columbia. [1340] The Korean War has been referred to as a forgotten war and is a significant event in our history during the Cold War, but we will not and we must not forget. Today fewer than 3,000 Korean War veterans are still alive in British Columbia, and this proclamation displays that British Columbians have not forgotten the sacrifice made 55 years ago by these true Canadian heroes. [Applause.] RICK HANSEN WHEELS IN MOTION J. Horgan: It's been over 20 years since a young man from Williams Lake returned from the most in- credible world tour ever undertaken.

After two years, two months, two days, through 32 countries, over 40,000 kilometres, Rick Hansen wheeled into our hearts and minds. Spinal cord injury can happen to anyone at anytime. The impact of SCI on individuals and families is enormous, but because of Rick Hansen and his world tour, tremendous strides have been made in spinal cord research. Equally important has been the trans- formation in how the able -bodied address the chal- lenges of accessibility faced by citizens in wheelchairs.

June 8 marks the sixth year of the Rick Hansen Wheels in Motion event, wh ere Canadians from coast to coast come together to raise money and awareness for spinal cord research. Wheels in Motion is an opportunity for all of us to support the Rick Hansen Foundation and countless other organizations, like the SCI Solutions Alliance. Since the inception of the annual Wheels in Motion day, Canadians have raised over $7.6 million.

These funds have supported over 700 quality-of-life projects in communities like mine and others across this coun- try, to provide solutions for men, women and children with spinal cord injury. Wheels in Motion 2008 events will support quality- of-life programs that help ensure that people with SCI receive the support they need to fully participate in their communities and lead healthy, active lives. Projects also contribute to making communities more accessible.

They provide peer-support programs, equip- ment and assistive devices, sports and leisure activities, accessibility through community, transportation and housing improvements and many, many more initiatives. I invite all members of this House and those watch- ing at home to contact their local organizing commit- tees to sign up and participat e in this year's event. On June 8 you can wheel, roll, ride or walk in your local area to support research and community accessibility.

The Victoria event will be held in the riding of the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head at Willows Park on the eighth, beginning at nine o'clock. In Duncan people will be able to gather at the city square early in the day for the annual wheel- chair rugby event. If you need more information — www.rickhansen.org. DOWN SYNDROME RESEARCH FOUNDATION R. Lee: Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend a breakfast held by the Down Syndrome Research Foun- dation. They provide information on many research studies and programs offered by the foundation to assist individuals with Down syndrome and their families.

Down syndrome occurs approximately once in every 600 births. There are currently over 40,000 Canadians who have Down syndrome. Located in North Burnaby the foundation operates out of a world-class clinical research building that in- cludes a research lab equipped with western Canada's only magnetoencephalography system. Established in 1995 the foundation focuses on empowering people with Down syndrome to achieve their potential, lead independent and fulfilling lives and participate fully in their communities. I would like to mention the founder of the Down Syndrome Research Foundation, Miss Josephine Mills.

Miss Mills unfortunately passed away last week on May 19. Her vision and dedication to assisting those with Down syndrome will continue on through the development of educational and training programs, disseminating information and research results, provid- ing clinical support services, collaborating with other resource centres and community service providers and by raising funds to support a broad spectrum of re- search projects.

Last Friday I also had the opportunity to participate in an announcement that will help expand the offering of the foundation and help us meet the growing needs of the local children and fam ilies. The Minister of State for Childcare announced funding for 12 new child care spaces at the foundation. The foundation is able to ex- pand the program to 32 spaces that will help children develop a foundation of social and language skills that are required for lifelong learning and ensure successful integration and inclusion for all children taking part.

I would like to thank Dawn McKenna, the execu- tive director, and all of the staff, researchers and sup- porters of the foundation for their efforts in assisting all those afflicted with Down syndrome to have a better quality of life. [1345] HIV/AIDS L. Krog: May 18 to May 24 is Global AIDS Week of A c t i o n . I t i s a n o p p o r t u n i ty for activists around the world to stand together, generate political pressure and demand action from world leaders. The week starts with the International AIDS Candlelight Memorial day on May 18, when the world recognizes and remembers

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12815 those who have died of AIDS. The week of action is just two weeks before a high-level meeting at the UN discusses the progress made by every government in the fight against AIDS. It is more than 25 years since AIDS was first identified, and yet it continues to kill 6,000 people daily around the world — 6,000 people. Two out of three HIV-positive people still lack access to treatment. Current AIDS re- sponses do not begin to tackle the violation of women's rights, which is one of the key drivers of the epidemic.

Forty million people live with HIV/AIDS every day, and close to half of those are women. Sixty percent of all new HIV infections are amongst young people aged 15 to 24. With only two years unt il 2010, barely one in four people have access to HIV medicines that they need to stay alive. Worldwide only 12 percent of people who want to be tested for HIV are able to do so. Fewer than 10 percent of children affected by AIDS receive any support whatsoever.

UNAIDS estimates that it requires $20 billion to $23 billion annually to deal with this is- sue, but current commitments suggest that, in fact, it will be something in the range of a $10 billion shortfall. G8 nations need to lead the way. We are the wealthy p a r t o f t h e p l a n e t , a n d w e k n o w t h a t A I D S d o e s n o t r e c o g n i z e w e a l t h o r s t a t u s o r e t h n i c i t y o r f a i t h . I t i s a time this week to call on governments of all levels to do whatever they can to ensure that the scourge of AIDS is removed. DIANA JOHNSTONE R.

Cantelon: In every community there's usually a person that when the prestige or the pride of the com- munity is on the line — when they're hosting, say, a big event — that this is a person you go to, to make sure it's done right. In our community that person is Diana Johnstone. She was just recently recognized for a B.C. Community Achievement Award, and rightly so, for some of the things she's been involved with. She was executive director of the B.C. Summer Games three times; B.C. Senior Games; B.C. disabled games.

She sat on the board of the Port Theatre wh en it was in its growing phase and a difficult phase; the City Centre Associa- tion. She serves on the Park s, Recreation and Culture Commission. She was recognized with a positive achievement award by th e Economic Development Group, and she certainly is a very positive person. Now, you might think that this would be a sergeant- major type of person. Well , quite the opposite. She's beautiful in her presence and beautiful in spirit, but she has a very sensitive way of conveying to a person a sense of urgency.

She might put her hand on your wrist and say, "This has to be done" — no marching orders. She's been extremely successful. I hope that every community has such a person. You can't have Diana, though. She's not motivated by any personal glory. But as most of these individuals are, she genuinely wants to make the community she lives in a better place, and she certainly has made a difference. Let's all congratulate her and all those mov- ers and shakers that we all have in our communities. INSITE SAFE INJECTION FACILITY D. Chudnovsky: Insite is the first supervised injection facility in North America.

It's a clean, safe environment where those ill with addiction can inject their own drugs off the streets and under the supervision of nurses. Insite is supported by the city of Vancouver, the province of British Columbia, Vancouver Coastal Health, injec- tion drug users, community groups, local businesses, academic institutions, the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition and both parties in this House. Insite has been subject to ri gorous scientific evaluation, producing over 25 peer-reviewed papers and prestigious j o u r n a l s .

T h e d a t a s h o w t h a t I n s i t e i s m e e t i n g i t s o b j e c - tives, reducing public injections, reducing overdose fatalities, reducing the transmission of blood-borne infections like HIV and hepatitis C, reducing injection- related infections and improving public order. But some insist on seeing Insite as a moral issue rather than a public health p r o g r a m . I n s i t e i s a t r i s k . The federal government has yet to extend the legal exemption it needs to continue. I'm proud that there is consensus in this House about the need for and the importance of Insite. [1350] The B.C.

Nurses Union is urging British Columbi- ans to forward a letter to the Prime Minister and the federal Minister of Health. It clearly expresses the need for Insite to continue to do its vital work of providing health care to people who need it. I urge every member of this House to send that letter to the Prime Minister. It would be a powerful statement of our common commitment. The letter can be accessed at www.communityinsite.ca/support. Insite saves lives. We need to save Insite. Oral Questions RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT OF CORRECTIONS OFFICERS M. Farnworth: Hon.

Speaker, a rare occasion — a question period on a Friday. On average, provincial jail s in this province are at 170 percent over capacity. The North Fraser Pretrial Centre was built for some 300 inmates. Recent numbers have put that to 667 people. In some facilities they're building huts to house the overflow. This government closed facilities across the province, and this increase in capacity is putting tremendous stress on correctional officers across British Columbia. When is the minister going to recognize the problems that this is causing corrections officers, and when is he going to do something about it?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The government recognizes that overcrowding in prisons is not acceptable. That's why we have committed to a $185 million capital plan to

12816 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 expand facilities for holding increased numbers of prisoners throughout British Columbia. That includes 135 new cells at the Fraser River Correctional Centre, 106 at the Alouette Correctional Centre for Women and an additional 20 new cells in Prince George. So there's a lot of capital plan in place right now. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. M. Farnworth: I guess that capital plan is so much in place that that's why they cancelled the announce- ment in Kelowna. It's not just about a capital plan.

It's about the human resources that we need in our correctional facilities. The policies of this government have resulted in significant understaffing and significant stress on corrections offi- cers in British Columbia. In the last month alone there have been two assaults in Victoria at the Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre. Some 47 assaults in the last six years, and the poli- cies of this government are only aggravating that. When will the Solicitor General admit that the rates of violence in our jail systems are too much, and what is he going to do about it?

When will he increase the number of corrections officers in British Columbia to the levels that are required to ensure safety? Hon. J. van Dongen: Issues of safety are paramount, and we do have management and union safety com- mittees in place that deal with those issues. The issue of recruitment and retention is a very high priority for management. We have hired increased numbers of staff in our correction facilities, and we have plans, along with the capital expansion, to hire another 93 officers as well. Mr. Speaker: The member has a further supple- mental. M.

Farnworth: Well, the ratio under this govern- ment has increased to one corrections officer to every 60 inmates. That is unaccept able. Hiring an additional 90 won't even come close to dealing with that. Again, my question to the minister is: what specific plans does he have to address the current staff shortage regarding corrections officers in British Columbia? And how does he intend to deal with it with proposed new facilities, when clearly he's not even able to supply and staff safely the facilities that we already have? [1355] Hon. J. van Dongen: In a competitive economy, people have choices.

Certainly, people do have options as to where they can work. That's why in our ministry in the last two years we've had a very active recruitment and retention program. We hired 249 new staff in 2007, and we will continue to hire new staff as required. C. Puchmayr: My question, too, is to the Solicitor General. The Solicitor General makes some comments about the staff that has been hired and about the reten- tion problem that we're seeing in that field. Wages for correctional officers in British Columbia last year were ranked ninth in Canada. They make $30,000 a year less than their federal counterparts.

In 2007 alone, the year that the minister boasts about, 144 corrections officers left the system. When will the minister take responsibility for the exodus of staff, and when wi ll he deal with the issues of retention and recruitment that are so necessary in the system today? Hon. J. van Dongen: In answer to the member's question, wage rates are the subject of a contract nego- tiation between the employer and the workers. We are following that contract in all respects. The contract makes provision for the application for a temporary market adjustment. The staff have done that on two occasions. Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Members. Hon. J. van Dongen: On one occasion management agreed to the temporary market adjustment. In my meeting with corrections staff a couple of days ago, they have indicated that they will make another appli- cation, and we will consider that, again on the basis of the terms of the agreement. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. The member has a supplemental. C. Puchmayr: You know, the minister claims that there are provisions.

There certainly are provisions in the collective agreement that allow opening the collective agreement and that deal with those very market issues that are affecting the system today. But the minister can take action to ensure that a competitive rate is put in place so that all of Canada and the corrections officers in B.C. are paid at a rate that is competitive. That is not happening right now. The minister needs to sit down with good faith, sit down with the associations and deal with the issue. He needs to do so before we end up with a further dangerous workplace that we're seeing there today. Hon.

J. van Dongen: I'm confident th at my staff and my management have full knowledge of the contract. They know the issues, and they are work- ing closely with our staff in corrections to negotiate appropriate provisions when the contract is up for negotiation and to apply the contract appropriately in between negotiations. Again, to the member, there's a proper process for doing this. I met with the staff, so I'm informed of the issues, but it's really my management, whom I have confi- dence in, who manage that contract every day with our staff.

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12817 RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT OF SHERIFFS L. Krog: We're not only facing problems with correc- tional officers. B.C.'s sheriffs are the lowest-paid enforce- ment officials in Canada, and that wage gap is taking a real toll. Right now B.C. has the worst retention rates for deputy sheriffs since the service was created in 1973 by the NDP. The sheriffs collective agreement has a specific clause to deal with retention issues… [1400] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. L.

Krog: …to allow them to be addressed, but the Attorney General has refused to do anything to address the problem here. Will the Attorney General sit down with the sheriffs and addr ess the problems around retention today? Hon. W. Oppal: The sheriffs perform a very critical role in the courts. They prov ide security in the courts. They are a very valuable pa rt of the criminal and the civil justice systems. We have had a retention problem. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. W. Oppal: I can run out the half-hour. Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney. Hon. W.

Oppal: We have had a retention problem. The reason for that is that the economy is booming outside, and we've had trouble retaining people. It's a problem they didn't have in the '90s, but I digress. What's happened is that we are losing a lot of younger sheriffs to the policing profession. The polic- ing professions are losing people as well because of a change in demographics. So this is a problem that's common throughout the justice system, where police are continually recruiting. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Attorney. Hon. W.

Oppal: The police are recruiting more and more members because they have a demographic prob- lem. More and more police are retiring. The RCMP, the municipal police and the sheriffs all have the same problem, and that is that we need more people. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. L. Krog: I'm delighted today. The government ad- mits they have a big problem and they're doing noth- ing about it. I commend the Attorney General for his honesty in this House, but the witnesses who go into the courthouses of this province deserve to be safe. The litigants deserve to be safe, and judges deserve to be safe.

The situation has reached a crisis point. Across B.C. there are courtrooms… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. L. Krog: …that have had to be shut down because there were insufficient sheriffs available, including family court in Nanaimo, and the Attorney General well knows it. So instead of smiling about this problem, pretending it's some other issue that can't be dealt with, will the Attorney General just admit he is putting safety in the courthouses at risk? It's undermining the integrity of the system, and is he going to do some- thing about it today? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. W.

Oppal: For the record, I was not smiling at the issue that we're dealin g with. I was smiling at the over-the-top, exaggerated comments being made by the hon. member there. As a matter of fact, the ministry has introduced a series of recruitment and re tention activities to pro- mote career opportunities amongst the sheriffs. There is now a $1,000 bonus program for any court services employee who can refer the ministry to a recruit. Thir- teen new recruits have just graduated from the Justice Institute in New Westminster. There are 24 more that are coming on board.

So it's a problem that we're aware of, and we're addressing the problem. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. A. Dix: Well, 71 sheriffs have left in 14 months. His job surely is not to give laconic analysis of the problem. His job as Attorney General is to try and address the problem. [1405] When is he going to sit down with the sheriffs and address this very serious issue of retention that is plagu- ing courthouses across Britis h Columbia?

When is he going to sit down with them and come to some resolu- tion about what can be done specifically to resolve the problems that are going to affect the administration of justice everywhere in British Columbia? Hon. W. Oppal: Well, in fact, we have sat down with the sheriffs. We had a number of meetings with

12818 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 the sheriffs. The member needs to do his homework. I know that's a strange concept. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Attorney. Hon. W. Oppal: We've had a number of meetings with the sheriffs. The people in the ministry have had meetings. We recognize that there's a problem. We recognize that we need more sheriffs, but I can assure this House that the standards of safety in the court- houses have not been compromised. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. A. Dix: He could assure us.

Well, let him table the reports that say they haven't been compromised. Let him table the reviews that haven't been compromised. Seventy-one sheriffs gone in 14 months. That's one in six sheriffs in British Columbia — a loss of experience, a loss of sheriffs. It has an enormous effect on the courtroom. So what is the Attorney General's plan? He's in charge. Surely he's aware of the issue. Surely he's in charge. Can he specifically say to us today…? He says that it's about the economy. That's what he says.

Does he not acknowledge that there's a serious recruitment and retention problem when other law enforcement officials are paid enormously more than sheriffs? Hon. W. Oppal: I don't know how many times I have to say this. We recognize that in the law enforce- ment area, as far as police and sheriffs are concerned, there is a problem. But I have news for the member opposite. You can't correct the problem overnight. What we have is that we've recruited people…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Attorney. Hon. W. Oppal: We've recruited sheriffs.

In fact, we've created an innovative program where we're now going to be paying for the training of sheriffs. That's never been done before. It certainly wasn't done in the '90s. So that's what we're doing now. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Attorney. Hon. W. Oppal: We're involved with the sheriffs. We've been involved with the BCGEU. We've had a number of meetings with them. We want to work with them. We work with the judges to ensure that the secu- rity demands and the security needs of all the court- houses are met. So we're doing our best. As I said a moment ago, the economy is strong.

We're competing with other parts of the economy for people. CONDITION OF B.C. PLACE ROOF N. Macdonald: I have received information that the B.C. Place roof recently had a noticeable deflation and a deflation alert. Will the minister confirm that there have been recent problems with the roof of B.C. Place? Hon. S. Hagen: I'm afraid the member opposite must have found some old newspapers, because the deflation that took place was in December of '07. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. N. Macdonald: PavCo has just confirmed that the alert took place.

We've also been told that the roof defla- tion alert came on May 14, two days before the Premier and the minister held a news conference about the future of B.C. Place. Now, I would assume that, as the minister respon- sible, his expectation is that he would be kept informed about anything that happens to the roof of B.C. Place, since that is the site of the opening of the Olympics and will be a venue viewed by over a billion people. So my expectation is that the minister would know about this.

Can he confirm that that roof is not dependable and that that roof is not going to be the sort of roof that we should have when the Olympics open and that the reason we cannot make a decision on that roof that is appropriate is because this minister has bungled another file and that we do not have time to make proper decisions about what should happen with the roof of B.C. Place? [1410] Hon. S. Hagen: Let me inform the House of what was announced last Friday, a week ago. Last Friday I was pleased to be with the Premier at B.C. Place Sta- dium, where the Premier announced a whole new refit for B.C. Place.

Interjections. Hon. S. Hagen: The refit, Mr. Speaker…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Minister, just sit down. Members. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Minister. Hon. S. Hagen: There was a huge crowd of people there, including the member for Surrey-Newton, who was applauding with the rest of the people.

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12819 On top of that, a retractable roof will open to the size of the football field to let in that fresh air for foot- ball games. On top of that, it was announced that the Vancouver Whitecaps will be playing their games in- side of B.C. Place. On top of that, a new waterfront location for the Vancouver Art Gallery. D. Chudnovsky: There was a deflation alert two days before the announcement. Was the minister aware of that or not? Hon. S. Hagen: Why am I not surprised that the NDP is against the refit of B.C. Place Stadium?

Why am I not surprised that the NDP is against a new Vancouver Art Gallery? I can tell you, because…. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Member. Minister, just sit down. We're not going to continue. It's the minister's turn. We're going to listen to the question. We're going to listen to the answer. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Minister. Hon. S. Hagen: I was here when the NDP opposed building the original B.C. Place Stadium. I was here when the NDP opposed Expo 86. A previous NDP leader stood up in the media and said: "What happens if we throw a party and nobody comes?" Well, guess what.

Some 22 million people came to Expo 86. I was here when the NDP opposed SkyTrain. I was here when they opposed the Olympics, and they're still against the Olympics. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Member has a supplemental. D. Chudnovsky: There was a deflation alert two days before the announcement. Was the minister aware of it, or was he not? Hon. S. Hagen: I cannot believe the negativity that exudes from the other side of the House. Here's a list of the projects that the NDP have been against: Expo 86; the Expo line; SkyTrain; B.C.

Place Stadium, both times; the 2010 Olympics; the Canada line; the William Bennett Bridge; Sea to Sky Highway; the new Port Mann Bridge; the South Fraser perimeter road; the Golden Ears bridge; the Pitt River Bridge; Coastal Renaissance; Coastal Inspira- tion; Coastal Celebration; and the Northern Adventure. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. S. Simpson: On May 14 there was a deflation alert… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. S. Simpson: …on the B.C. Place Stadium roof. Was the minister aware of that alert? Yes or no. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. S.

Hagen: I am pleased to inform the member and the House that that roof is inspected every day of the year, and that roof has been pronounced safe by the people who inspect it. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. [1415] S. Simpson: The question that this raises is whether this minister has any grasp of his file or not. The minister should stop obstructing this House and answer the question. Was there a deflation on May 14. Yes or no? Was he aware of that? Answer the question. Mr. Speaker: Member for Vancouver-Hastings, the comment that you made should be withdrawn. It's unparliamentary. S. Simpson: I withdraw.

H. Bains: The minister is answering questions that haven't been asked. We are inviting…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Continue, Member. H. Bains: The question is very simple. The minister should be on his file. The question is…. There was a deflation alert issued on May 14. Does the minister know or not? Hon. S. Hagen: I want to apologize to the member opposite. I can't help it if I'm ahead of him all the time. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Minister. Hon. S. Hagen: I am very pleased to say that every report that's been done on that roof says that the roof is safe.

The roof will last until after 2010. After 2010 we will replace the roof with a new retractable roof.

12820 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 J. Kwan: PavCo has confirmed that two days ago there was a deflation alert at B.C. Place Stadium. Does the minister know of that alert, or does he not? Hon. S. Hagen: As I've said before, that roof is in- spected continuously. The roof has been pronounced safe and is certainly able to last until after 2010 opening and closing. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. J. Kwan: Has the minister been made aware that there was a deflation alert two days ago at the B.C. Place Stadium roof? Hon. S.

Hagen: I have been made aware that the roof is safe, and the roof will last until after the 2010 opening and closing ceremonies. Then we'll replace it. M. Karagianis: Two days before the government made a report, on May 14 there was an alert of a defla- tion of that roof. Will the minister confirm that in the House today for us, please? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. S. Hagen: You know, we've heard a lot of negativity today from the other side. My question is: where does the member for Vancouver-Fairview stand with regard to the refurbishing of B.C. Place Stadium? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members.

INVESTIGATION INTO DEATH IN MAPLE RIDGE M. Sather: The tragic death of Karen Beck at the hands of her estranged husband in November 2007 has raised some sobering questions. There has been conflicting information with regard to Mr. Beck having held a gun to Karen's head and her having flagged down a police car after fleeing in terror. We need to do everything we can to prevent domestic violence–related deaths. Will the Solicitor General direct the coroner's office to conduct an inquest into the death of Karen Beck? [1420] Hon. J. van Dongen: I do want to reconfirm our government's condolences to the family.

I believe that the family expresses some sincere concerns. The coroner's office, which is an independent office under the Coroners Act, is conducting an investigation. That will be a full and thorough investigation. I encourage the family to actively di scuss their concerns with the coroner. The coroner has the option under the act to call an inquest if they feel it's nece ssary. There will be a full, factual report to the family, to the public, including recommendations as the coroner feels are appropriate. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon.

M. de Jong: I call, in this chamber, continued committee stage debate of Bill 33, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, and in

Section A, Committee of Supply, for the information of members, the contin- ued estimates for the Ministry of Health. Committee of the Whole House MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2008 (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 33; S. Hammell in the chair. The committee met at 2:25 p.m. On

section 34 (continued). M. Karagianis: The minister and I were discussing

section 34 at the end of the day yesterday. In looking at this issue of designated use highways, lanes and traffic control persons…. I know that the minister said that this is still a plan that's being formed. Can the minister explain why this plan has not been completed before this? The Sea to Sky Highway has been under construction for some time. The govern- ment certainly has not been under any illusions that the Olympics were coming in 2010. Why are we plan- ning so late in the process, and why are so many of the plans so vague? Hon. K. Falcon: It's actually not too late at all.

In fact, we're very much ahead of things in British Co- lumbia, I'm pleased to say. In fact, I'm very proud to be part of the only jurisdiction, I believe, in history that's had all of its venues built this far in advance of the Olympics and built on

schedule and on budget — something that is certainly worth celebrating. In terms of the discussions we're having, we will have discussions not only wi th the Integrated Security Unit, with the policing agencies. We need to discuss with municipalities, VANOC and obviously the inter- ested groups, chambers of commerce, etc., to make sure we get things right. There's no particular pani c. There's no pressure on us at all. The highway is still under construction. As the member well knows, it's going to be opening ahead of

schedule and on budget, as have all of our major transportation projects to date — which is, again, an- other issue that's worth celebrating. While that construction is going on, we are natu- rally engaging in these discussions. We want to make sure that we have a transportation plan that…. As we

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12821 put it together, as we understand what the security requirements are, as we un derstand what the needs of the community are and as we understand what the public transit issues are, all of the partners will be at the table. We will prepare the plan . We will learn from the lessons of other jurisdictions. We will adopt our best practices.

This legislation, as I said yesterday, will allow us — it enables us, in fact — to make sure that we've got the tools to translate on the ground the kinds of actions and decisions that will ensu re that the transportation plan works out very well, not just for the Olympics but even post-Olympics. When we have any major events operating in the province of British Columbia, we will be able to utilize the benefits of these amendments. M.

Karagianis: I was just going back to what the minister said yesterday, which was that there was going to have to be a fair bit of work done to figure out what the likely traffic volumes would be and what the most efficient way of moving these people would be. So has n o n e o f t h a t w o r k b e e n d o n e a t t h i s p o i n t , o r d o y o u have models for traffic volumes that you are using for consultation purposes? If you're going to consult with communities and chambers of commerce, municipalities, etc., what are you using as a basis for that consultation? Hon. K.

Falcon: Certainly VANOC, the Ministry of Transportation and all the partners collectively are looking at the experience of previous Winter Olympics, whether it's Calgary or Salt Lake. They have a pretty good idea of the kinds of numbers of people that will come. The next issue then becomes: given that we ex- pect a large influx of people into British Columbia to celebrate the 2010 Olympics, we work with our traffic engineers and with our transit — B.C.

Transit, TransLink, police, etc. — to make sure we figure out the best method of utilizing the highway system to ensure that we can get people back and forth in an appro- priate manner. [1430] No doubt we'll have lots of time in the future to dis- cuss that. That goes a little bit beyond this.

But all this is saying is that we want to make sure that the ministry has the ability to designate a certain lane or lanes of a high- way temporarily to allow, for example, as I mentioned yesterday, perhaps from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., the athletes to be zipped through to their events without disruption or perhaps to allow time for members of the community to be going back and forth or whatever. Those discussions are still underway. As I say, there are a lot of parties involved. We want to make sure we get it right, so it's not a discussion we're trying to rush forward.

We've got lots of time and lots of op- portunity to conclude those discussions with all the different parties. M. Karagianis: I know that we talked a little bit about the kind of permitting that was going to take place here as well. While the plan is being formu- lated…. Certainly, this talks about designating the entire highway, and we've seen that this application is going to be most useful during the Olympics. I'm very interested in how the minister perceives that this permitting process might take place.

When we canvassed yesterday, the potential traffic that would want to access the Sea to Sky Highway would include athletes, would certainly in clude food providers, ser- vice providers, families, ticket holders, tourists that may want to use that route for other than Olympics purposes, the various communi ties there all along that corridor. How does the minister perceive that the permits will apply to the designated use of this highway? How does he envision that? Hon. K. Falcon: I think the member seems to be trying to create a situation that sounds ominous and should be something to be feared.

That's not the case at all. The member would be seriously misjudging the attitude of the municipalities that are involved in this — Squamish, Whistler, Vancouver. All of them were part of the bid process. They're so excited about host- ing the Olympics. The traffic management decisions are no different than what takes place today. We have a highway under construction. It's a mas- sive project, $600 million, th at's being delivered, as I say, ahead of

schedule and on budget. But during the period of time in which we're constructing those $600 million worth of improvements, there are periodic times where the highway will not be available for the public to travel. We work with the communities. We let them know that you won't be able to travel from midnight to 3 a.m. while certain rock blasting is being done or some kind of roadwork is being done. They're well aware of it. They're very comfortable with it. It just works because we communicate, and that's what we're going to be doing as far as managing the Olympics during the two weeks that that takes place.

As I mentioned to the member yesterday, people that live in these communiti es also understand that there will be a lot of people visiting British Columbia during that two-week Olym pic period and also, of course, in the follow-up Paralympic period. A lot of people make decisions around that. There are a lot of companies already that are making decisions on how they're going to create incentives for their employees to use transit, to arrive at work during off-peak period times, to leave during off-peak period times.

What we have seen in other Olympics that have hosted these events is there is a tremendous coming together of communities that say: "How do we make this work — not only for ourselves, but more impor- tantly, actually, how do we make it work for the tourists and the visitors that come and want to be part of the Olympics?" It's a positive experience, an uplifting experience, an experience that communities get involved in. What we are doing here is just making sure that we utilize, to the best efforts we possibly can, the ability to allow not only the community members to go up and down that

12822 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 corridor when they need to — obviously, that right will be preserved…. We want to make sure tourists that aren't maybe visiting the Olympics but might want to visit Squamish…. Naturally, we will have allow- ances for them to visit tourist spots, etc., but this will be done with the active support and cooperation of the municipalities. [1435] I just want to let the member know that so that she is not too fearful about this process. It's actually a very positive process and one in which we're enjoying our discussions.

They've been positive and very supportive from all of the participants thus far. M. Karagianis: I'm sure the minister wasn't trying to put words in my mouth, because I expect that the minister would want us to have clarity on the bill. There would be no reason in the world for him to not want to have us question the bill and not have his ability to provide clarity to the public of British Columbia on this. So I'm sure he did not mean in any way to put words in my mouth.

I know this analogy that closing the highway from m i d n i g h t t o 3 a . m . f o r b l a s t i n g p u r p o s e s i s c o n s i d e r a - bly different than trying to permit literally thousands of people to move up and down that corridor through municipalities and back again. I know the minister made reference to people ta king transit or changing their work hours. But this is not just within the metropolitan Vancouver area.

This is a highway that stretches through many communities, and we expect that they'll want to con- tinue doing business and carrying on with their daily lives despite the fact that there is an Olympic event going on. I did ask the minister how he envisioned the permit process working. I think yesterday when we canvassed it, we were pretty unclear about the permitting. Will permits be given out by the traffic control person when the lane designation suddenly changes?

Will those flag people or the police or the volunteers, as the minister has said, who will be in charge of traffic control be giv- ing out permits and making that judgment call on each individual vehicle as it comes up the highway? How does the minister envision that the permitting on a designated highway will work, especially during the Olympic event? Hon. K.

Falcon: As I mentioned yesterday, those are discussions that we're currently having with all the interested parties to make sure that as we build the transportation plan, we do it in a way that meets the needs of all those individuals and groups that the member mentioned. But the member should know that this isn't the first jurisdiction ever to host a major event. In fact, British Columbia has hosted major events many times in the past. The Olympics have been hosted successfully around the world many, many times. They all run into the same issues.

They have actually developed some practices that seem to work fairly effectively when it comes to moving large numbers of people to different venues and different areas, particularly Whistler. As we develop the plan, as I mentioned yesterday to the member, we will be utilizing those best practices. We will be in full and total consultation with all the different groups. We will figure out the best way in which the permit process can work so that it's efficient and works and meets the needs of the communities, the officials, the athletes and all the others that will be involved and the security requirements.

But that's part of an ongoing discussion, so we can- not give the member definitive answers to those kinds of questions at this point when we're still engaged in the discussion process that will go on for many, many months to come as we put together a transportation plan that works. All these amendments in the legislation do, Member, is allow the flexibility for us in British Columbia to do the kinds of things that happen in every other jurisdic- tion that hosts major events like this.

That will give us the tools to be able to allow these events and these highways to be used in the most commonsense, efficient manner to move the largest number of people in the shortest period of time. M. Karagianis: So the minister does not have an answer, and that's fine. I accept that. Certainly — you're right — we have hosted many events before, but this is the first time we've felt it necessary to amend the Motor Vehicle Act and designate highway use and define the ministry control over highway use.

I would think this is a bit unusual, and I'm sure the minister is happy to continue to discuss the need for this change to the Motor Vehicle Act. I do want to ask a little bit about prohibitions, though, because I know the minister talked yesterday about the fact that there cert ainly will need to be deci- sions made on how the highway is utilized. [1440] The prohibitions. The minister talked about…. He doesn't have answers. He doesn't have answers to any of the detailed information that I'm asking here.

When will we be able to see exactly what the details look like, what the permitting will look like, how wide the scope will be, how the permits will be delivered or not deliv- ered? How can you get a permit? If you're a tourist coming to British Columbia and suddenly discover, as you're trying to drive up the Sea to Sky Highway, that it's now a designated highway today and you don't have the right tools there to access that, how do you find out where and when and how you get those, and what kind of prohibitions will be in place? When will those details be available for the pub- lic to see? Hon. K.

Falcon: Obviously, it would be in our in- terest to make that information public once we com- plete the discussions that we're involved with, but those are important discuss ions. There are important security issues that have to be fleshed out. There are important access issues for members of the community,

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12823 for businesses, tourism, all those kinds of areas, and we want to make sure we get it right. I don't apologize for that. We've got lots of time to put this together. The highway construction, as I say, is well underway now and proceeding along extrao rdinarily well, and the discussions that we're having …. We're partnering with VANOC in those discussions and all of the other secu- rity agencies and all of the others — B.C. Transit, TransLink and municipalities.

As soon as those discus sions are completed, and we've got all of this information put together, I can as- sure the member that she and all members of the public will be made aware of what the transportation plans are so that we can make sure we have an Olympics in 2010 that everyone can be very, very proud of. I think that once again British Columbia will demonstrate that there is no better place in the world to host a major event, not only that but a major event that will be seen as a huge success, as I know that the 2010 Olympics will be. M.

Karagianis: The minister made reference several times yesterday to how these designations will be, not only on the Sea to Sky Highway but certainly in munici- palities as well. So how are the municipal designations being made? Are they being made by the municipalities themselves at the directive of the government, or is the government simply going in and designating these corridors? Hon. K.

Falcon: It provides municipalities with the same powers with respect to their own highways and roadways to make the same and similar designations in consultation with the Minist ry of Transportation, and as I say, the municipalities ar e part and parcel of these discussions that we're having. So this is consistent with the discussions that we're having to ensure that mu- nicipalities also will have the ability to make decisions with respect to the roadways for the benefit of large events, including the 2010 Olympics. M.

Karagianis: I take it that the minister, then, is saying, in the case of these designations, that the provin- cial government, the ministry, is going to give directive on where and when those will take place. You know, if the minister is going through the consultation process, obviously working with the Olympics planning struc- ture around when and where athletes will go, ticket holders, families, food and service providers, all of that….

Is there going to be a map that sort of indicates where that is so that municipalities can anticipate that, on these given days, these corridors will be designated in part or entirely for Olympics venue use? [1445] Hon. K.

Falcon: This simply says that on any by- laws that are being adopted by municipalities that im- pact on provincial highways that are going through other municipalities or are on any of their local roads and that are within 800 metres of a provincial highway, approval is required by the Minister of Transportation or the designate of the Minist er of Transportation, i.e., the ministry, to ensure that we're clear about what the impacts would be on the provincial highway. It's very consistent with the kind of things that has been in place for many years.

But this just anticipates, based on the discussions we have with municipalities, that if they're required to make similar types of bylaw amendments that have the effect of providing this kind of restrictions and it is on a provincial highway or it is on a roadway within 800 metres, approval by the min- ister is also required. M. Karagianis: Yesterday we did talk about the costs of this change and the costs that might be impli- cated by designating highways, and certainly about the reference to traffic control persons. I know that the minister has now introduced one other aspect of that, which is security.

The minister did say early on that there would be no cost to this, but I know that at the closing part of our remarks yesterday, the minister did make reference to: "We will be utilizing properly trained staff, prop erly trained volunteers, in some cases…Ministry of Transportation expertise." Public safety would be handled by police, for example — public safety officials. Of course, we do know that there are going to be enormous security costs, and not only at the Olympics site.

One would anticipate that there will need to be some consideration of security measures along the Sea to Sky Highway, certainly, as part of the overall security plan for the Olympics. Can the minister address what the costs will be for all of those personnel? Hon. K. Falcon: Obviously, with respect to security, there's a lot of work being done through another minis- try in terms of what the secu rity issues are going to be, so I haven't got a clue what those costs would be.

In terms of traffic control people, anytime you have a major situation, anytime you have a major construc- tion project, you have traffic control people. Anytime you're moving major groups of people or large crowds, you're going to have traffic control people. Obviously, there is a huge, huge list of volunteers — of people that want to volunteer in the Olympics.

What I said yesterday is that those that wish to volun- teer or are assigned to volunteering on crowd control will be properly trained to make sure that they understand exactly what their responsibilities are and how they are to undertake the work that they do. Obviously, we'll have MOT staff involved, as we always do with major events and undertakings, to ensure that things are going well. But I don't know why this should be surprising at all to the member opposite. That's the way things always work when you have large events. It was no different during Expo 86. It won't be any different here.

It's just a larger volume of people. As I said yesterday, there are no additional incremental costs. Those are the same costs that you will see anytime you have a large event and you've got a large number of volunteers involved — obviously, properly trained.

12824 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 The police will do what the police always do. I have no idea what their costs are. That, I presume, will form part of the security cost of the Olympics, but that is another minister and ministry that deal with that. Sections 34 to 36 inclusive approved. [1450] On

section 37. L. Krog: Actually, hon. Chair, I was going to advise that we could, I think, move suitably through to

section 60, and I have some questions for the minister on 61. Sections 37 to 60 inclusive approved. On

section 61. L. Krog:

Section 61 adds a

section to provide statutory immunity for the superintendent, individuals acting on behalf of or under his direction, etc. I am just curious to know why this

section is being inserted. What's the purpose for providing statutory immunity, if you will, and if so, is it consistent with other provisions in other acts? Hon. C. Taylor: That is exactly the reason. The per- son who is the superintendent of pensions is also the same person who sits in different roles, and in all those other roles, the statutory protection is there. So this is just for harmonizing it.

Section 61 approved. On

section 62. L. Krog: Again, for the benefit of the Chair, we could pass, I believe — unless other members are anxious to debate the issues — all the way up to

section 70 inclusive. Sections 62 to 70 inclusive approved. On

section 71. L. Krog: Just some concerns around the abolition of the act. This, I take it, will have no effect on funding, no effect on qualifications, no effect on anything other than to basically put the administration of this under a single statute. Hon. M. Coell: That's correct.

Section 71 approved. On

section 72. D. Chudnovsky: I have some questions of clarifica- tion to help understand the practical result of the changes that are being made here in

section 72. So let me put this proposition to the minister and see whether I'm understanding what it says. Is it the case that the change means that a finding of incompetence of a teacher can be made with respect to actions or activities or things that that teacher does that are separate and apart from the teaching — from what t h e y d o a s a t e a c h e r ? A m I c o r r e c t i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g that?

Section 72 approved. On

section 73. The Chair: The questions were on

section 73. D. Chudnovsky: Right. Thank you, Chair, and thanks to you and the minister for helping us with that. Again, do I understand correctly that the changes will mean that a finding of incompetence can be made in application to activities that take place outside of the teaching activities of the teacher? Hon. S. Bond: The member is correct. This amend- ment was requested by the College of Teachers, in fact, and what it allows the college to do is consider the compe- tence of a teacher related to an issue that may demonstrate itself or be made clear outside of their teaching capacity. [1455] D.

Chudnovsky: Thanks for that answer. This is en- tirely for clarification. Would I be correct in saying that as of today — that is, before this passes — the college, if it wanted to deal with such actions, would have to deal with it under the aegis of conduct unbecoming — that is, under the misconduct

section of their regulations? Hon. S. Bond: Either under that provision or they may not be able to deal with it at all. I think that is the most significant concern of the college. This may be a circumstance where a particular issue for an individual will impact their competency in the classroom, but up until this point, there are cases where they have been unable to deal with it at all. D. Chudnovsky: Thanks for that clarification. So maybe I'll ask the question a little more narrowly. I think the minister has, in fa ct, answered it, but I want to ask it a little more narrowly.

If today the college wants to deal with actions of a teacher that are outside that teacher's teaching, the only provisions available to the college are the conduct unbecoming provisions. This would add to that the possibility of using the incompetence provisions. Am I correct in that? Hon. S. Bond: I think, actually, the member's de- scription of it is accurate. In fact, it would have to be dealt with in that way.

I think the concern of the col- lege here is that in some very unique circumstances there may be a physical or some other type of issue that occurs — if a teacher is on leave, for example, or somewhere else — and we know that it would impact them in a classroom and their ability to teach children.

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12825 L. Krog: I just want to clarify, because I need to be satisfied, myself. The behaviour, the conduct, whatever it is that's outside of the classroom, has to relate to competence in the classroom in a strict legal sense. Is that correct? Hon. S. Bond: I think perhaps the best way to ex- plain this for all of us, and I think it is important to clarify it, is an example of when this might be utilized. This is one that staff has provided me to help me better walk through this.

If a college member were to, for example, suffer a brain injury when school is not in session…. There can be catastrophic results as a result of that, and there are different manifestations. Let's suggest that the member suffers from some sort of impulse con- trol or tendency toward violence. This particular amendment would allow that, then, to be deemed incompetent, not because of what's happened in the classroom, but by an unfortunate set of circum- stances for that individual which would impact their capacity. D.

Chudnovsky: Thanks to the minister for this explanation, because it really clarifies for me where this is going. I just want to as k a question about the present tense and the past tense, if I may. I don't get to do that very often anymore, so it's a good opportunity. [1500] Were this provision to pass and become law, what is the expectation with respect to behaviours or activi- ties prior to now? How does this provision work into the past? Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, as we understand it….

Since it was requested by the college, we're also trying to think with their thinking and in the best interests of students, which I know that the member opposite spends much of his time contemplating as well. The circumstance we could think of where that may happen is if a teacher is currently on leave because of one of these very circumst ances where, previous to this, the college would be unable to actually use this particular type of criteria. So we don't see a major move to retroactivity, if that's what the member is considering.

It would, perhaps, capture some who may be on leave today who have a degree of impact in the classroom, but it currently would not be caught. D. Chudnovsky: Thanks to the minister for that answer. So far today the minister has used examples, almost entirely, of teachers on leave. I understand that. I'm not here to argue about that. I'm here to probe be- yond that. We could be talking about teachers on leave. I think that I understand very clearly what's being said, and I see the justification for it. You know, we'll decide whether it's a good thing or a bad thing. But what about people who aren't on leave?

What about the weekend? Having given the examples of people on leave, is the minister excluding other situations, or are there other situations as well? Hon. S. Bond: One of the things we want to be really clear to differentiate is that this is not about con- duct. I think that's a way of differentiating it, and maybe I didn't react to that early enough in this discus- sion. This amendment would allow the College of Teachers the flexibility it needs to deal with matters of competence that arise outs ide of the employee's capac- ity as a teacher. Maybe that's a better way to describe it.

But it is not about conduct, and I think that's an impor- tant differentiation. Sections 73 to 77 inclusive approved. The Chair: Members, the committee deferred sections 14 to 28 yesterday. Is the committee ready to consider these sections, or shall they be considered at the next sitting of the House? Hon. W. Oppal: They shall be considered at the next sitting. The Chair: So you've moved that motion. Motion approved. Hon. W. Oppal: I move we rise, report progress and seek leave to sit again. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:05 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Committee of the Whole (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. R. Thorpe: I call Bill 38, the Protected Areas of British Columbia (Conservancies and Parks) Amendment Act, 2008. Committee of the Whole House PROTECTED AREAS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (CONSERVANCIES AND PARKS) AMENDMENT ACT, 2008 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 38; S. Hammell in the chair. The committee met at 3:08 p.m. On

section 1. D. MacKay:

Section 1 talks about modifying "a not- in-force amendment to the description" of a Nisga'a area "consequential to an amendment to the descrip- tion of the same park by th is Bill." Can you tell me: is

12826 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 this actually increasing the size of the area or decreas- ing the size of the area or leaving it the same? Hon. B. Penner: My notes indicate that the net re- sult will be the removal of less than one hectare from the park in order to accommodate construction of a new road to the community of New Aiyansh. It's 0.0858 hectares, if anyone is keeping track. Sections 1 to 7 inclusive approved. On

section 8. Hon. B. Penner: I move the amendment to

section 8 standing in my name on the orders of the day. [SECTION 8 (a), by deleting the text shown as struck out and adding the text shown as underlined: HUCHSDUWACHSDU NUYEM JEES/KITLOPE HERITAGE CONSERVANCY All those parcels or tracts of Crown land, together with all that foreshore or land covered by water, situated in Range 3, Coast District and Range 4, Coast District and contained within the described boundaries as shown on the Official Plan deposited in the Crown Land Registry as Plan 11 Tube 1900; except (1) “Wekellals” Indian Re- serve No. 15; (2) “Kitlope” Indian Reserve No. 16;

(3) Mineral Claim “Goldmine 1” 325961;

(4) Mineral Claim “Goldmine 4” 326032;

(5) Mineral Claim “XK1012” 253947;

(6) Mineral Claim “XK1014” 253948; and

(7) Min- eral Claim “XK1212” 241411. The whole park conservancy containing approximately 322 020 hectares (321 572 hectares of upland and 448 hec- tares of foreshore).] [1510] Amendment approved.

Section 8 as amended approved. On

section 9. S. Simpson: I'll ask these questions as it relates to one of the conservancies covered in

section 9, because it covers a couple of items, and I'll ask a couple of other questions on

schedule F. We know that there are a number of conservancies that currently have private power projects proposed for them. They have enviro nmental assessments that are proceeding. That would be true in the Klinaklini, the Europa, the Cascade-Sutslem and a couple that are already there. I'll ask it within the cont ext of this question where Europa conservancy is listed. Could the minister tell us: if this passes, what will the status be of those as- sessments in terms of the n eed to put power lines or other activities through the scheduled conservancies? Hon. B.

Penner: My understanding is that once these sections come into effect and the legislation has passed, the proponents will have to make a decision about whether they want to continue to pursue an en- vironmental assessment review or not. That will be a decision, I think, that will be left to them. As the member will know, a number of first nations and others have made prop osals, as the member has noted, for Europa but also, I think, for one or two other conservancies as well. They'll have to make a decision at this point whether they want to down tools or con- tinue on with an environmental assessment.

What this legislation does is put in place the boundaries that were announced back in February 2006 by the Premier and first nations, local communities and environmental groups. S. Simpson: I appreciate the answer of the minister, so just a bit of a further affirmation. I think that I've got it from his answer. It would be the position of the minister that once this legislation passes or is adopted by the House, these are the boundaries.

As such, they wouldn't be com- promised for activities that were outside of what's al- lowable under those schedules — unless, of course, there was the boundary adjustment process, which would need to be brought at some further time through legislation. Would that be correct? Hon. B. Penner: Yes. Sections 9 and 10 approved. On

section 11. S. Simpson: I just have a couple of questions in relation to

section 11, particularly around the Klinaklini conservancy, which is included in sched- ule F. [1515] The minister will know that of all the schedules there, this is the one that probably has the most flexibil- ity in terms of allowing activities to go on around road development and other activities related to resource exploitation, resource extraction, etc. Of course, there is an IPP proposal there as well. We also know that this was one of the conservan- cies — it's about 37,000 hectares or so, I believe — that as part of the negotiation process was actually pared down a little bit in terms of its size.

That's fine. The question I have around this is: why was the decision made to put Klinaklini in

schedule F? Hon. B. Penner: Apparently, the proper legal name proposed for the conserva ncy to which the member refers is Dzawadi/Upper Klinaklini River conservancy. The member is close in his estimation of the size of the proposed conservancy. This legislation proposes that it's 39,303 hectares in size. The member's question is: why is this particular conservancy proposed to be included in

schedule F? The reason for this is that if it were not in

schedule F, it would have the effect of blocking access to all the val- leys and tributaries to the main valley of the Klinaklini River, which is an area…. Interjections.

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12827 The Chair: Shhh. Hon. B. Penner: Perhaps we'll just ask members to keep their voices down. Thank you, hon. Chair, for your assistance. I'll just repeat that. If this conservancy were not in this particular schedule, then the effect would be to block access to all the valleys and tributaries to the main valley of the Klinaklini River, which is an area of approximately 185,000 hectares. In effect, this would increase the protected area size by 154,000 hectares, or 4.9 times the actual area agreed upon.

That was not the direction of the LRMP process, the land and resource management plan process, that was recommended to government. The recommended area was the 39,303 hectares. S.

Simpson: If I understand correctly, this was pri- marily an issue of access to this much larger area that is outside the protected areas and didn't involve other values, necessarily, within that conservancy, but it was to provide some assurance for roadways or road rights- of-way for that. [1520] Could the minister tell us: if that's the case, why wasn't the decision made to provide a road allowance and protect the rest of it with a designated road allow- ance? The reason I ask this qu estion is….

Certainly, the concern that I've had raised to me around this area is that there is a variety of other activities allowable un- der the

schedule that people are concerned may be contemplated here — other than the question, necessar- ily, of road access into another area and, as the minister says, not wanting to essentially protect another area by stealth, of sorts. Why wasn't there a decision made to provide for a road right-of-way and provide the additional protection for the other space? Hon. B. Penner: I'm not sure if the member is famil- iar with the topography or geography of the proposed conservancy, but I've got a little map here. We're not supposed to use props, so I won't, Madam Chair.

If the member looks at th is, you'll see that the in- tended protected area as sketched or as coloured onto the map almost resembles a starfish in terms of its con- figuration. We don't know with any certainty in which d i r e c t i o n p e o p l e m a y w i s h t o t r a v e l o r w i s h t o h a v e access to, in terms of obtaining resources or having some kind of other economic activity in the area. That would, of course, be outside of the conservancy on the other side of the boundaries.

We would have had to know with certainty exactly where people were hoping to someday build an access road, in terms of its physical alignment. That can only be known through detailed survey work, and engineers, I g u e s s , w o u l d h a v e t o b e i n v o l v e d t o d e t e r m i n e w h e r e the appropriate place would be to build the road. By placing this particular conservancy in

schedule F, it does allow the government to issue — if it's con- sidered appropriate — a park use permit to authorize the construction of an access road to lands and resources outside of the conservancy. But again, if the member looks at the map of that particular conservancy, it's not entirely clear in which direction somebody may wish to go. There are multiple different valleys feeding off of this particular area. S. Simpson: I would agree with the minister. I have seen the map, and it's a ve ry unique boundary. There's no doubt about that. Just a question to the minister. If the purpose of including this particular conservancy in

schedule F is to ensure that without further challenges, there is the ability to build a road or two roads or whatever is being contem- plated here to be able to access those other areas…. Would it be a consideration or intention of the min- ister and the government, at the time that those deter- minations are made as to what that alignment might look like…? What may the government want to do in terms of road alignments so metime in the, hopefully, not too distant future as decisions are made about what to do or not with access?

If those decisions are ma de and the road is built, would there be any reason, then, not to provide the ad- ditional protections to that particular conservancy after the roads are in place by moving it to another

schedule with an acknowledgment of those road rights-of-way? Is that something that is a possible or doable thing? Hon. B. Penner: I'm advised that what the member is discussing is conceivable. It has been the practice of the ministry and B.C. Parks, once there is certainty, to make those kinds of conversions in terms of what shows up in different schedules. But I suspect that in this area, it will be several years before ther e is sufficient certainty to know exactly what the first nations in the area might have in mind in terms of possible access.

That is an idea we actually do adopt when the time is right. [1525] S. Simpson: One last question on this matter. Accept- ing that it will take some time before decisions can be made by the parties that need to be part of that discus- sion as to what those access issues might be and how they will be dealt with…. Is it the intention at this time that other than access questions, the other uses that might be allowable under

schedule F, which aren't allowable necessarily under other schedules, are not goin g to be contemplated by the government? In terms of use, I accept the minister's position that this is being done to deal with a potential complication around access. The other thin gs that might be allowed under

schedule F are not being contemplated by the government, other than addressing the access ques- tions. I think about some of the resource issues that are potential in this area. Hon. B. Penner: I'm advised that there's only one difference between

schedule E and

schedule F conser- vancy, and that does pertain to the possibility under

12828 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008

schedule F for B.C. Parks to issue a park use permit for the construction of an access road. But other than that, I'm told that there are no differences between a sched- ule E and

schedule F conservancy. D. MacKay: Just a point of clarification from the minister. I noticed that under

section 9 on page 13 of the bill, it talks about the Khutzeymateen Inlet Conser- vancy, and then we go to

section 11 on page 20, and it talks about the Khutzeymateen Inlet West Conser- vancy. I just wondered why it was necessary to…. We're talking about the same conservancy, except one has got the term "west" included in it. Why was it necessary to go from

schedule E for the Khutzeymateen Inlet Conservancy to

section F for the Khutzeymateen Inlet West Conservancy? Why the sepa- ration? Are they not contiguous? Hon. B. Penner: The answer to the member's question is not dissimilar to the topic I was just discussing with the member for Vancouver-Hastings. There is apparently a need for an access corridor, an access route in the conser- vancy, and B.C. Parks was able to determine, in this case and with relative confidence, the general area where such an access road may be contemplated. That's the area that's designated for

schedule F in terms of the conservancy designation. The remainder is intended to be in

schedule E. [1530] Sections 11 to 13 inclusive approved. On

section 14. S. Simpson: Under the commencement

section a significant number — sections 5, 7 and 9 to 11 — are not to come into force at royal assent but are to come in at a later time by regulation of the Lieutenant- Governor-in-Council or of cabinet. Could the minister tell us why those sections are being held back? [K. Whittred in the chair.] Hon. B. Penner: There are a couple of different things here. The new parks and cons ervancies are coming into force by regulation for a numb er of reasons. First, there are some mineral tenures that need to be expropriated from a number of the conservancies.

The note I have here is that some expropriation letters and notices need to be prepared. Those will be done upon passage of the legisla- tion, but they need to be prepared. Second, there's…. Sorry, I'm just getting distracted by the conversation around me. The ministry needs to undertake further consultation with first nations gov- ernments respecting the esta blishment of a number of conservancies and park additions where, in some cases, there is not unanimous ag reement about just where those boundaries should be drawn.

We're not intend- ing at this time to change those boundaries, but we do feel it's prudent to have further discussions with some of the first nations in the affected areas. Third, the member is likely aware that there are a couple of conservancies in the Sea to Sky land and resource management planning area where there was lack of unanimity, as well, amongst first nations about the name or names to be given to two of the proposed conservancies. This gives some time to have those issues resolved. S. Simpson: My apologies to the minister on this.

I got the first part of the answer and the last part, but I must admit I wasn't able to quite hear the other part. I was overcome by other noise in the chamber. I believe the minister gave three responses. The one in the middle I wasn't quite able to hear. I'd appreciate it if the minister could maybe repeat that. The Chair: Members, it's difficult for the minister and member to hear, and also the Chair. If you could keep your conversation down, please. Minister. Hon. B. Penner: Thank you, hon. Chair, and thanks for your assistance.

The ministry wants to co nduct some additional con- sultation with some of the first nations in the areas where some of the new conservancies are taking place and some park additions are proposed to take place. There's a situation where there's not complete unequivo- cal support from all of the local first nations, so the ministry believes it's prudent to undertake some further discussions and consultations. [1535] S.

Simpson: I certainly understand the comments the minister made about possible name changes to satisfy some concerns around names, and I think that's quite appropriate if a more appropriate nam- ing of the conservancies is identified that people are happy with. The question I have in regard to this is: is it possible that these negotiations or consultations could lead to a change of the boundaries in any of those areas? Hon. B.

Penner: I f t h i s b i l l i s p a s s e d a s p r e s e n t l y worded and described, it would take a subsequent act of the Legislature to amend any of the boundaries as currently proposed. S. Simpson: If my understanding of the minister's comment is correct, and I believe it is, then once Bill 38 is adopted, essentially there can be no changes. How- ever, would it be correct that the boundaries or the areas that are in question would essentially have the status that they have today and not as protected areas or conservancies until such time as it's brought into force by regulation by cabinet?

Does it have whatever the status is today, or does it actually have a protected status, though it's not been brought into force? The concern is, as I'm sure the min- ister appreciates, that while it might not mean a change to what's in Bill 38, Bill 38 may not actually apply until

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12829 such time as cabinet deems to bring it into force by regulation. Hon. B. Penner: I believe the member is technically correct, but what the member may or may not know is that since the announcement back in February 2006, other gov- ernment permitting agencies have taken notice of what government's intention is with respect to those areas.

For example, I don't believe the Ministry of Forests would have issued any cutting permits or made any award of harvesting rights in the areas that are pro- posed under the agreed-to midcoast and north coast land and resource management plans. My expectation would be that there would not be any permits granted while we're conducting further consultations with the first nations and the affected areas.

According to my notes, if I'm adding this up right, there's something in the order of six new conservancies that may fall into that category where we want to have some additional consultations with first nations with respect to the conservancie s themselves. There are an- other two where we've got the issue about the naming of the respective conservancies. I'm being told that there may be some additional ones, too, in a different

section of the act that I didn't catch immediately. In any event, it is the government's desire to have these areas proclaimed into force — and I think the deadline is the end of June — so that we meet the ob- jective that was established back in February 2006, which is to meet the requirements for what's referred to as the CIII funding. Th at's the $60 million contribu- tion, I think, from various foundations. [1540] The provincial government has made a commitment o f t o p p i n g i t u p w i t h $ 3 0 m i l l i o n .

T h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n - ment has matched us in terms of another $30 million, and a certain quantum of land has to be set aside — I believe it's by June 30, 2008 — in order for that funding arrangement to kick in, for the conditions to be met. S. Simpson: Just so I can be clear. I appreciate that the minister is saying that the government is moving forward on a commitment, and I know that the Minister of Agriculture and Lands affirmed that commitment — that the boundaries would be the 2006 boundaries that were agreed to.

I certainly know, from discussions with people who are keenly aware of those boundaries, that the boundaries are essentially the boundaries that were agreed to. So that's not at all in question. Now, though, as the minister says, technically…. This is maybe a two-part question. It'll move us along. Technically, changes could occur. I accept the minis- ter's word that that's not the intention, but technically, they could occur. Could the minister confirm that?

The second is: can the minister confirm that the intention, or at least the aspiration, is to be able to in fact bring sections 5, 7, 9 and 11 into force by the end of June? Hon. B. Penner: The member's premise is correct. It would take

an act of the Legislature again, once this is passed, to amend the boundaries that are contained herein. T h e s e c o n d p a r t o f m y a n s w e r i s t h a t i t ' s t h e g o v - ernment's desire and objective to have these conserv- ancies established by June 30. We anticipate that it might take longer than that for the issue to be resolved around the names of the two Sea to Sky conservancies, but we are going to continue to work on that as well.

Section 14 approved. Title approved. Hon. B. Penner: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:44 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills PROTECTED AREAS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (CONSERVANCIES AND PARKS) AMENDMENT ACT, 2008 Bill 38, Protected Areas of British Columbia (Con- servancies and Parks) Amen dment Act, 2008, reported complete with amendment. Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be reported as read? Hon. B. Penner: With leave, now. Leave granted.

Third Reading of Bills PROTECTED AREAS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (CONSERVANCIES AND PARKS) AMENDMENT ACT, 2008 Bill 38, Protected Areas of British Columbia (Con- servancies and Parks) Amendment Act, 2008, read a third time and passed. [1545] Tabling Documents Hon. B. Penner: I beg leave to present the 2006- 2007 annual report of the Environmental Appeal Board. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. Hon. B. Penner: I'll just table that document. I now call committee stage on Bill 18, Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act.

12830 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES F RIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 Committee of the Whole House GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION (CAP AND TRADE) ACT (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 18; K. Whittred in the chair. The committee met at 3:47 p.m. On

section 1 (continued). S. Simpson: It's good to be back on this bill. Where we left o ff, I t hink , is we we re dis cu ss ing s om e of the

definitions in the bill. We had just been down discuss- ing those matters related to B.C. allowance units and B.C. emission reduction units. I believe I had been ask- ing questions about the emission reduction units. Could the minister tell us how he anticipates the offset credits being valued or being used? How is it going to be determined what the value and volume of those credits are and how they're in fact going to be used? Hon. B.

Penner: As is consistent with the concept behind a cap-and-trade syst em, the value of the B.C. emission reduction units will be determined by the market — by market forces and by trading activity. So I don't know what that price ultimately will be. That will have to be determined by the market. In terms of how they can be used or for what they'll be used, they'll be used in accordance with the provi- sions outlined in the act and any regulations to follow.

But they are intended to al low companies to help meet their reduction requirements through the acquisition of these legitimate offsets, which would have to be verifi- able and incremental — that is, attaining reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that are in addition to some- thing else that otherwise would have happened. [1550] S. Simpson: I recognize that there is not certainty about what limits there migh t be on these units as we determine what they are.

I do note that when I look at the WCI draft design recomm endations on elements of the cap-and-trade program ar ound the quantity limits for credits, it discusses ensu ring that meaningful emis- sion reductions take place within the sources covered by the cap-and-trade system. I think that is a positive recommendation. What I hear that suggesting to me is a recognition by the peo- ple who put the recommendations together that the purpose of offsets or credits is not to supplant the ac- tual reduction of emissions and that that shouldn't be the purpose under a cap-and-trade-system.

The question I have in terms of those units I will ask here. It may be that we'll end up asking it more appropriately in another area. Is there an expectation with those units as defined that they will have limits put on them not just in te rms of the number but in terms of how they can be used so that they don't just become a cost of doing business? Hon. B. Penner: If the member is correct, there is a draft document with some recommendations that have been put out for discussion purposes. That was re- leased on Wednesday through the western climate initiative at a meeting held in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Un- fortunately, I was not able to attend as I had some commitments here, as did the member. However, I'm told that more than 300 people par- ticipated either in person or through what's referred to as a webinar process — watching things through the Internet and via teleconference. There has been wide- spread interest in that meeting. That's good to see, because the whole purpose of releasing the draft recommenda- tions is to stimulate public comment and discussion and to get some comments back from people for the various members of WCI to consider. If you look ahead in the bill to

section 39, you'll see that the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council can make regulations pertaining to how the B.C. emission reduc- tion units can be used and applied. The idea, as I've said, is to attain addition al incremental greenhouse gas emission reductions through offset projects. What in- cremental means is that thos e are emission reductions that would not otherwise have taken place.

With respect to the member's comment about it not just becoming a cost of doing business, actually, the whole idea behind putting a price on carbon either through a carbon tax — as we're doing with the revenue- neutral carbon tax — or through a cap-and-trade system is to put a price and a cost on business for the carbon emissions that they generate and allow to go into the atmosphere. [1555] By putting a cap in place on the total amount that will be permitted into the atmosphere in British Co- lumbia, that obviously imposes a cost on business.

Then they have to make a decision on whether it's most cost-effective for them, from a business per- spective, to meet their legal obligations to operate within the set allowances either by reducing their own emissions or by purchasing credits from other companies that have more than sufficiently reduced their emissions or, thirdly, by acquiring these B.C. emission reduction units. They'll have to make a business decision on what makes the most sense for them, but that's what makes a cap-and-trade system a market model. Businesses have to make a decision about how best to proceed in the most economic way.

But fr om the environment's per- spective and the atmosphere's perspective, the end result is lower greenhouse gas emissions — whether those come about through ve rifiable and incremental offset projects or through reductions at source from a particular company's facility. S. Simpson: Hon. Chair, I appreciate the minister's comments that emissions pricing is about putting a price on carbon, whether it be the tax or to some degree

FRIDAY, MAY 23, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12831 through a cap-and-trade syst em, though I believe the cap-and-trade system is somewhat different. That may be a tool, but it's clearly not our objective. The objective here isn't the price on carbon. The objec- tive here has to be the redu ction in emissions. That's got to be the goal. That's where we're going. I certainly know that when we view this, the meas- ure we see as the measure of importance is: how do we reduce emissions?

If putting a price on carbon simply creates a situation where people are prepared to pay and continue to emit, then it's not working. If they are in fact changing behaviour and reducing emissions, then it's working. That's probably why we're of the view that a little bit more emphasis on a regulatory regime will be important in the long run.

Having said that, the reason I'm referencing back to the WCI draft design recommendations — and I cer- tainly appreciate that we have a ways to go before those are finalized and before the cabinet and the Premier make decisions about when and how we will proceed with those — is that at this point they give us the only insights or the only place that we can open that discussion with a piece of legislation that is largely a blank cheque, as the minister said when he referenced sections in the bill where regulations will make all of these decisions.

Part of our criticism of this bill is that it creates a bit of a blank cheque in terms of the ability of government to deal with these things. That's part of the reason that I'm looking to have some discussion with the minister, and I'll look to have some significant discussion ov er all these issues in the bill as we lead through here. As the minister said, he is hoping for, and I'm pleased to hear the minister say that he's looking for some dialogue and discussion around the recommendations from the WCI. I believe that is important, and I'm hopeful that it will be a vigorous discussion.

But I think an important part of that discussion may be what we talk about here in this House in relation to Bill 18, to see if we can gar- ner some insights from the minister about what his thinking or the government's thinking might be about the directions that they will be supportive of in terms of the WCI. I'll tell the minister now that I'm going to try to en- courage him to provide those insights so that people in British Columbia do have the opportunity, when they look at these recommendations, to have some idea about the pe

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0523pm 05
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0523pm 05
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c3ee392aef58a80d32aca0ef0af10d0853666188

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