2005 Legislative Session: First Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2005

A fternoon Sitting

Volume 3, Number 9

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of

Bills

Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2005 (Bill 15)

Hon. G. Abbott

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act

(No. 2), 2005 (Bill 16)

Hon. W. Oppal

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

Tri-City Spirit of Community Awards

I. Black

Social and environmental responsibility

of Victoria businesses

C. James

Democracy

J. Rustad

Punjabi Canadian Roots Club in Merritt

H. Lali

Paths and Pathfinders program

R. Hawes

David Cameron Elementary School

M. Karagianis

Oral Questions

Potential closing of mills in B.C.

C. Evans

Hon. R.

Coleman

D. Routley

K. Conroy

C. James

C. Trevena

Protection of mountain caribou

S. Simpson

Hon. B. Penner

M. Farnworth

Government contracts with Maximus

D. Cubberley

Hon. G. Abbott

H. Lali

Reports from Committees

Select Standing Committee on

Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills,

first report

A. Horning

Committee of the Whole House

Civil Forfeiture Act (Bill 13)

(continued)

J. Brar

Hon. J. Les

C. Trevena

B. Ralston

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Civil Forfeiture Act (Bill 13)

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Advanced

Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology

Hon. M. Coell

G. Robertson

C. Wyse

B. Ralston

C. Trevena

N. Macdonald

R. Austin

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Transportation

(continued)

Hon. K. Falcon

S. Fraser

C. Wyse

G. Gentner

N. Macdonald

H. Lali

D. Chudnovsky

[ Page 1325 ]

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2005

The House met at 2:03 p.m.

Introductions by Members

C. James: It is my great pleasure to introduce a very special guest to this House today, someone who isn't unfamiliar to everyone in this chamber, having spent five years here representing the people of Kamloops from 1996 to 2001 — Cathy McGregor. Cathy did an exceptional job as Minister of Environment during that time and is an instructor with the education faculty at the University of Northern British Columbia in Prince George. I ask all members to join me in making her most welcome.

Hon. L. Reid: I would like today to pay tribute to two amazing women. One is Sheila Orr, our former colleague representing Victoria-Hillside, who I think served this province with enormous heart and distinction. Also to Debra Bell, an extraordinarily fine aboriginal artist who very kindly has just created this lovely scarf. I ask the House to please make them both very welcome.

D. Cubberley: I just would like to add a couple of words to those of the Leader of the Opposition regarding Cathy McGregor, someone I had the privilege to work with during that period of time when she was here.

[1405]

She was Environment Minister, and I want the House to be aware that it was Cathy who spearheaded the container deposit refund system in British Columbia, along with other product stewardship initiatives. That system, as you may know, is the gold standard for other jurisdictions. It got bottle glass out of the blue box, which opened the blue box up for recycling other products, and it got containers in general out of our landfills.

I just want the House to join me in thanking Cathy for her contribution.

H. Bloy: It gives me a real pleasure to introduce a strong advocate for women in this province — Norma Eaton, who is head of the B.C. Cosmetology Association and has been working hard on behalf of that association for over 18,000 members around the province. Would this House please join me in making her welcome today.

Hon. G. Abbott: I know I'm probably one of many members on this side of the House who would also want to pay respects to Cathy McGregor. There she is, over here.

She is very well remembered. A few of us were talking the other day about memorable moments. I know we don't talk about press gallery dinners here, but the former member did win an outstanding performance Oscar for some very memorable performances in that particular venue — outstanding.

I'd like to introduce an old friend of mine from my university days. He taught me, so I'm amazed he is still teaching, actually, after all those years. In fact, it's quite unusual that he actually looks younger than me now, despite having taught me. Paddy Smith is here. I know, because he recently taught my son some political science at Simon Fraser, that he continues to teach there. He also — and I don't know if that's why he is here — has been a motivating and coordinating force for the legislative internship program these past few years — something I was a part of 30 years ago, which is still doing well today. Please welcome Paddy Smith.

L. Krog: I'm delighted to notice in the gallery today two constituents of the member for Nanaimo-Parksville now but good friends of mine and two outstanding small business people from Nanaimo — Jack and Mickey Daniels.

J. McIntyre: I'm delighted to introduce to the House today Ms. Edith Tobe, who is head of one of the local Squamish conservation societies — in effect, the streamkeepers society. I had the pleasure of actually meeting her this past Sunday at the opening of the Upper Mamquam independent power project, so we had a chance to exchange views.

I know I spoke with her at the time of the unfortunate spill in the Cheakamus River this summer, but she and others in the community have been working tirelessly on the remediation that's going on in the Cheakamus River. I hope the House will not only make her feel welcome but thank them for the great efforts they're making in Squamish to deal with a tragic situation.

Hon. I. Chong: Today I'm pleased to be joined by 15 nursing students from the University of Victoria, one of whom is a longtime constituent of mine, Sandra Rathbone. Would the House please make them all very welcome.

G. Robertson: I just wanted to welcome to the House today Paddy Smith and Kennedy Stewart, two professors at Simon Fraser University in the political science department. Please join me in making them welcome today.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

HEALTH STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2005

Hon. G. Abbott presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2005.

Hon. G. Abbott: I move that Bill 15 be introduced and read for a first time now.

[1410]

Motion approved.

[ Page 1326 ]

Hon. G. Abbott: Bill 15 supports two amendments to Ministry of Health legislation: the Health Authorities Act and the Vital Statistics Act. The first amendment excludes nurse practitioners from the bargaining unit established under

part 3 of the Health Authorities Act for registered nurses and registered psychiatric nurses.

Part 3, sections 19.1 to 19.93 of the Health Authorities Act addresses health sector labour relations.

With this amendment, a registered nurse who is also authorized to practise as a nurse practitioner by the College of Registered Nurses of British Columbia will be excluded from the nurses collective bargaining unit under the Health Authorities Act if he or she is working in a job for which that authorization is also a job requirement and actually providing services as a part of that job, which under the Health Professions Act a registered nurse cannot provide unless he or she is also a nurse practitioner.

The amendment does not impair the right of nurse practitioners to form a voluntary association that may discuss employment-related matters with health sector employees. It also does not prevent a union representing nurse practitioners from requesting the Minister of Labour to exercise his authority under

section 19.5 of the Health Authorities Act to create a new bargaining unit for nurse practitioners.

Nurse practitioners are required to operate in a manner more consistent with that of other largely autonomous professionals such as physicians, dentists and others. It is this reason — the high level of professional independence and autonomy — that has led us to this step.

The second amendment adds a new

section to the Vital Statistics Act. This is necessary because the current regulation-making authority in the Vital Statistics Act does not adequately support large-scale information-sharing nor does it provide adequate privacy protection.

We are moving ahead with this amendment now because the Vital Statistics Agency wishes to provide information about vital events from its database to Simon Fraser University. This would enable the university to develop its database for the purposes of health population research and education.

I move that Bill 15 be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 15, Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2005, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2005

Hon. W. Oppal presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2005.

Hon. W. Oppal: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 16. Bill 16 essentially amends various statutes and makes a number of minor housekeeping amendments. It specifically amends the following statutes: Business Number Act; Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act; Credit Union Incorporation Act; Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; Land Act; Land Title Act; Legal Profession Act; Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing Act; Oil and Gas Commission Act; Partnership Act; Private Career Training Institutions Act; Protected Areas of British Columbia Act; and Public Service Act.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 16, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2005, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) TRI-CITY SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY AWARDS

I. Black: Earlier this month the tri-cities Society for Community Development held their annual Spirit of Community Awards. First held in 1997, this celebration is an opportunity to honour ten individuals from our community who are community builders and to appreciate individuals who mentor and model actions that create healthy communities. These ten citizens exemplify the values and dedication that help make the tri-cities the best place in B.C. to live, work and play. Like every year, this year's recipients come from all walks of life and a broad range of ages, but they have in common key admirable traits.

[1415]

They teach by example. They value a balance in their lives which promotes the health of themselves, their family and the community. Their actions are motivated by altruism and respect. They welcome diversity of ability, culture and age. They encourage and support the vision and dreams of others, and they encourage others to expand their vision.

For example, Beth Hong has been heavily involved in her high school community as well as serving the city on the Coquitlam Youth Council and the Recreation and Cultural Services Advisory Committee. Hazel Postma has been a workplace leader at Eagle Ridge Hospital, building a strong and effective working community that benefits staff, management, patients and families.

This is just a brief taste of the accomplishments that were recognized on October 6. The recipients list also recognized Stephen Unser, Jisuk Hwang, Colleen Talbot, Blossom Broussard, Katrina Lennax, Ted Kuntz and Niall Williams. Please join with me in celebrating

[ Page 1327 ]

these community leaders who consistently seize the opportunity to enrich the lives of others.

SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

RESPONSIBILITY OF

VICTORIA BUSINESSES

C. James: I rise today to celebrate the achievement of local businesses in the Victoria and Greater Victoria area. First, I'd like to talk about an exciting project called Clean and Safe Block by Block. This is a partnership between local police, the city of Victoria and the Downtown Victoria Business Association. Working with inner-city social agencies, this program aims to assist marginalized people in the downtown area while working to enhance community safety and revitalize the downtown core.

Clean and Safe Block by Block was recently awarded the Solicitor General's crime prevention and community safety award for their efforts in improving our community. I'd like to congratulate them for their award and their efforts to make downtown a safe and inclusive place for everyone.

I also want to congratulate three businesses based right here on the lower Island, who were recently recognized for their contribution to social responsibility and environmental sustainability at the 12th annual Ethics in Action Awards. This year's winners have proven themselves to be leaders in corporate social responsibility.

Shady Creek Ice Cream Co., located in Saanichton, sells high-quality ice cream products. As active participants in the Values-Based Business Network, their operations are based on the triple bottom line, accounting for fiscal factors as well as social and environmental ones. Frontrunners Footwear is a Victoria business whose founder, Rob Reid, pioneered Runners of Compassion — a charitable organization that raises money to aid a wide variety of social causes. Rob is also the man responsible for the new Terry Fox statue that many of you will have seen at Mile Zero. Finally, Elite Earth Friendly Cleaners, based in Victoria, is the first chemical-free dry cleaner in British Columbia.

Would the House please join me in congratulating these local businesses for their leadership and dedication to the community and wish them continued success.

DEMOCRACY

J. Rustad: I rise today to talk about participation in democracy. Today in B.C. voter participation is only 57 percent, compared with 70 percent 20 years ago. Federally, the numbers are just as concerning. Among youth voters, participation is only 27 percent. People today often forget why we have the freedoms we enjoy — the freedom to voice our opinions and the freedom to vote. They often take for granted what some have fought and died to protect.

It's important to remember what some people went through so that we might have the freedom that comes with democracy. From the First World War, R.F. Knight of the Royal Engineers wrote: "We went across a piece of open ground, and they turned a machine gun on us, but thank God I had the presence of mind to lie down, or I should not be telling you this. After our side had found their position, we started shelling, and it was hell with the lid off, what with the gasping for breath and expecting to be blown to pieces."

Many people went through this hell so that we might be free. In the words of J. Hunt:

Out of this war, what shall our profit be?

Not as a whole, for here the gain is clear:

A war-torn world from tyranny set free,

A broader freedom — homes where love and

cheer

Shall sanctify our Souls at Eventide —

A world where Virtue shall no more require

The sword to shield her from men's lustful

pride.

In this Year of the Veteran, let us remember the sacrifices that many paid for our freedom. Let us remember it and celebrate the gift of democracy that they have given us. All of us should consider this and do our

part in reminding people and encouraging participation in the greatest gift anyone can give: the freedoms that come from a truly democratic society.

[1420]

PUNJABI CANADIAN ROOTS CLUB

IN MERRITT

H. Lali: The Punjabi Canadian Roots Club is a new club in Merritt, and I'm a proud member. A number of us talked about starting a Punjabi club back in the mid-1990s. In 2003 my good friend, Charanjit Randhawa, made a great big push. Then four of us, including Charanjit, Saug Sekhon, Surinder Momrath and me, met in 2003 to map out our goals and objectives. There are 12 of us in the club right now.

Our goal is to promote the Punjabi language and culture while not losing sight of our great Canadian heritage — rather, participating fully in Canadian society. Our first president was Rasaad Sikh Khan, whom we affectionately referred to as the million-dollar man, followed by Peter Samra, who is running for city council. Our current president is Harbinder Hara.

We, including our spouses and children, support multicultural initiatives in the Nicola Valley such as the annual multicultural society fundraising dinner. We wholeheartedly participate in Canada Day celebrations. Our kids perform Punjabi bhangra dances there. Plus, our club sponsors the annual tug-of-war competition, which we resurrected after a 30-year hiatus, at the July 1 event.

The PCR Club worked closely with the school board to support Punjabi classes in the schools. The club works closely with the Merritt Sikh Society, which manages the affairs of the Sikh temple, and also works with the Merritt Rotary Club's annual fundraiser for the eradication of polio.

We hold annual fundraisers at Vaisakhi and at New Year's. At our last Vaisakhi event 450 people attended. Erik Norgaard, a lifelong resident of Merritt and owner of Ardew Wood Products, told me that that was the

[ Page 1328 ]

largest fundraising dinner he had ever gone to in Merritt. The money raised has been donated for tsunami victims in South Asia, eye operations in India and to the Merritt food bank. Also, we collected clothing and blankets for the victims of the fires in the Louis Creek and Barriere areas.

I want to thank this House for giving me the opportunity to highlight the great work of the Punjabi Canadian Roots Club of Merritt, and I also take this opportunity to honour the other members in the Punjabi Canadian Roots Club who take valuable time out of their lives to help in charitable events.

PATHS AND PATHFINDERS PROGRAM

R. Hawes: This being Women's History Month, I'm going to risk entering foreign territory to talk about Paths and Pathfinders, an excellent program operating in the district of Mission. Paths and Pathfinders is an honour roll of the powerful women who helped build Mission by forging the paths that made the community what it is today. Every year, using Mission archives, a group of volunteers select six women to join this prestigious group, and 2005 marks the tenth anniversary of Paths and Pathfinders. The 30 honourees selected to date include mayors, councillors, nurses, teachers, businesswomen, native healers and even a hug therapist.

This year as one of the token males attending the celebration tea, along with several hundred women, I realized just how formidable some of these women are and how much they scare me. For example, Flo Erskine, one of this year's selections, is a hug therapist. She believes there is no evil that cannot be overcome with a hug. A few years ago on a sister-city exchange to Oyama, Japan, the rather staid and reserved mayor of that city was forced onto stage with about 200 others to perform the chicken dance while his city was transformed into a giant hug-fest. Such is the power of hug therapy. When Flo says, "Dance," everyone dances. When she delivers a hug, you smile. You just can't help it.

Incidentally, when you cannot deliver a hug up close and personal, you can send a hug over long distance by placing….

Interjection.

[1425]

R. Hawes: Oh, that's even better. But you can send a hug over distance by placing your forefinger and thumb on both hands together and interlocking them. That's how you send a hug by distance. I urge all members of this House to become advocates for a Path and Pathfinders program in their own community. They're going to find an army of powerful women who built the paths that made our province what it is today — the best place on earth.

DAVID CAMERON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

M. Karagianis: I'm sure we could all use a little more hug therapy.

I stand in the House today to talk about a very unique program that is occurring in David Cameron School in my constituency. I'm going to read from their mission statement, because it explains it all very well: David Cameron Elementary School supports a unique, caring and cooperative learning environment for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. It aims to foster the development of children of all cultures and needs. The programs offered and values modelled promote respect, celebrate diversity and encourage an active learning process. It is anticipated that each child will become a self-directed, lifelong learner.

The school was specifically built to accommodate the needs of hearing-impaired and deaf students. For example, many of the things that we are probably unaware of, those of us that have all of our hearing faculties, are things like carpeted floors to calm ambient noise, television monitors throughout the school to give visual announcements, and wide visual corridors so that those who are hard of hearing can see and hear what is going on around them at all times.

The school right now is host to 17 children who are currently going through this program. This is, of course, a middle school, and there is a keen desire in the Western Communities for a new secondary school. It is the hope of these students that in fact this school will be built with these same amenities.

This school, in fact, attracts students from all over the region who specifically go to this school because of these amenities that are offered. The unique thing about adding them into the school design as it's being built is that it's very cost-effective. It's actually a very low-maintenance addition to any construction project.

At this particular time, I think there is an opportunity here for us in the Western Communities to design our secondary school with these amenities. In fact, it would be an attractive option for deaf and hearing-impaired students from all over the south Island.

Oral Questions

POTENTIAL CLOSING OF MILLS IN B.C.

C. Evans: On Tuesday in the House the Minister of Forests, in an estimates process, advised the House that he expected further mill closures in B.C. I've seen this process in my own constituency, in Salmo and Nakusp and Kaslo. It's not an intellectual process; it's a smashing-up experience for a community. I wonder if the minister could tell us how many more mill closures his staff are expecting.

Hon. R. Coleman: We would hope for none. The indication from industry is that they feel there are some that they are having some concerns with, with some corrections. Those that have indicated to me that they're looking at those possibilities would obviously want to look at their workplace adjustment first and make whatever public announcements they would do or deal with them with regards to that issue as they went forward.

[ Page 1329 ]

The challenge, as the member knows, is that we're facing some situations, particularly in pulp, where we have an oversupply of pulp worldwide. The prices are down dramatically. Pulp mills are very concerned about their competitiveness. I'm waiting for some outcomes from the Competition Council with regards to pulp, which I should hope to see by the end of November, as well as a Competition Council report on forestry, which could help us guide some of the adjustments we may be able to make to rebuild the competitiveness on some of the issues with regards to it.

The other aspect of it is, of course…. I was speaking to one of the CEOs of a major corporation today, who advised me that the Canadian dollar has just actually hammered them because of how high it's gone and how that really affects their ability on the production side. So there are a whole bunch of factors, and I don't actually have an answer of how many mills, where, when and how.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. Evans: The words that the minister uses are appropriate for sort of a public policy discussion, and I understand them. But they don't help at all for people to be able to cope with the situation. The minister hasn't said how many, but he did say staff were working on it. So I assume staff knows precisely which towns, communities, mills are in trouble.

I wonder if the minister would name those towns which his staff find most threatened at present.

[1430]

Hon. R. Coleman: No, I won't. These companies are working, hopefully, for opportunities to stay open and are looking at competitive opportunities. I am certainly not going to scare people in individual towns, where I might speculate how things are going. If the member knows in his own riding…. There are a number of people in the business in his own riding and in ridings adjacent to him that are under significant pressure because of the millions of dollars they have sitting at the border in a softwood lumber agreement that we have no control over.

Tomorrow we are getting a de minimus decision that we are expecting out of the United States, which may change some of those economies of scale and those opportunities. We don't know what will happen tomorrow, but there is a significant decision supposed to come down tomorrow. It could go one of three ways. We have no control over that either.

Certainly, one thing I know for sure is that we've sat down with our folks in our ministry, and we've said we're going to take a look at the coast, and we're going to look at the coast quick. We've asked the people at the coast to come back with their solutions. They have. We're processing them now.

The people in the southeastern part of the province, which is a part of the member's riding, are seeing a significant pressure because of how — in the case of value-added — they're actually taxed with the countervailing duty. It really does disproportionately hurt them, because they don't get priced at first mill. They actually get at the value-added…. So there are challenges, and we're trying to work through those.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a further supplemental.

C. Evans: The minister is correct. I do have mills in my constituency — I think maybe seven of them — and I get at what my job is. It's to get up every single morning and see to it that in spite of the countervail, in spite of the value of the American dollar, in spite of environmental conditions — in spite of all of it — I'm supposed to work all day long until night to see to it that they keep running and the communities stay alive.

What are you doing every single day to protect those communities that find themselves at threat?

Hon. R. Coleman: I'm up every single day too, and I'm trying to find a solution in an industry that is facing some significant difficulties, not all of which have been under the control of the people of British Columbia.

I've sat down with those companies and looked at opportunities. I've already made pricing adjustments for them. I have adjusted things to do with stumpage. We're already looking at other aspects of the industry so we can do some innovative things for them.

We have been attracting investment into British Columbia, but it is not going to be easy, hon. member. Don't stand up for a second and think I don't believe in your community — every community in the province. I'm the one person who believes that this isn't a sunset industry. I believe there is a future in forestry, and we're going to work together to build it in British Columbia.

D. Routley: In recent years the CEOs of TimberWest, Weyerhaeuser and Interfor travelled this province petitioning the communities and this government for changes to the Forest Act, concessions from employees and adjustments to our regulations that would help them reinvest in sawmills in this province. But now in today's Vancouver Sun , there is an

article where the president of TimberWest is calling for more mill closures.

Again, to the Minister of Forests. This government knows and has known for some time about these closures and has not attempted to mitigate the impacts to our rural resource-dependent communities. My question is: has the minister spoken to the president of TimberWest, and can the minister tell this House what mills TimberWest plans on closing?

Hon. R. Coleman: I regularly meet with people in the forest sector. The first thing I did when I became the minister was start phoning everybody in every company that I could get onto a list to have one-on-one conversations about forestry, and I continue that dialogue.

[ Page 1330 ]

I will shortly be meeting with the B.C. Lumber Trade Council, which includes a number of the companies like the company the member mentioned. They have not identified to me mills that they're going to close. They have identified to me what they think may be short-, medium- and long-term solutions to assist the industry.

I have committed in estimates to the member for Cariboo North that I'd be looking at those, that we're actually moving on them as quickly as possible, that some information has already moved through the ministry and that we're going to work to find solutions.

[1435]

What I said to the member for Cariboo North and I say to the members across the other side of this House is that we need to fix forestry in B.C. We need to do it together. We need to work together to do it. This isn't something about pointing fingers at anybody. I can tell you that the international markets have as much pressure on forestry in British Columbia as anything else, and we need in British Columbia to build a long-term strategy. We are going to do that and should be doing it together.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Routley: Indeed, our job is to point the finger at a government whose policies have led directly to this circumstance. TimberWest knows that mills are going to close on this coast.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Listen to the question, and everybody listen to the answer.

D. Routley: TimberWest and this government know that mills are going to close on this coast. This government knows that mills are closing all the way across this province. My question to the minister, again, is to state that you have an obligation, sir, to the people of British Columbia to tell us specifically which mills, which communities need to be supported and how you will mitigate the effects. To the minister again: how many and which mills are closing down in whose small communities?

Hon. R. Coleman: Like I said to the member for Nelson-Creston, that is up to the companies. They work through this with the ministry. But let me tell you something. We're coming with a very, very tight strategy that is going to give some changes to the coast that we can put it back into a balance with competitiveness. The challenge, the coast tells me, is this — and like I said earlier, one of the CEOs told me today: the Canadian dollar is killing us. At a 64-cent dollar where they were a few years ago, our companies were very competitive in the marketplace. But in an 80-some-cent dollar, just do the math and see what it does to your production.

But let's not get up and talk about the negativity, frankly. Let's get down to the fact that if any company chooses to shut a mill in British Columbia, they will sit down with the ministry and discuss it. At that point in time, when we think it is appropriate, obviously they would let the public know.

K. Conroy: My question is to the Minister of Forests and Range. All rhetoric aside, it's unfortunate that I think I'm quoting the minister when he says he doesn't want to scare people in their own town, as you just said. Can the minister confirm that at the UBCM convention, he spoke with the mayor of the village of Midway and mentioned offhand that he was sorry to hear that the sawmill that the village relies on as its core economic engine was closing?

Hon. R. Coleman: That's not exactly what I said to the mayor of Midway. I said that I'd heard there were concerns for the mill in Midway, which is a Pope and Talbot operation, that they were doing some assessment on over the next few months. I didn't specifically say to the member that the mill was going to close.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

K. Conroy: Again to the Minister of Forests and Range. I have a letter here from the mayor of Midway dated October 7, 2005. In that letter the mayor expressed his "extreme dismay to learn from the minister about the impending closure." The mayor indicates that the sawmill is the economic base of the village and that "its demise will have horrific consequences that go far beyond the village's capacity to mitigate alone."

This letter from the mayor was a formal request for immediate assistance. What has this government done since the date of this letter, October 7, to mitigate the impact of the potential mill closure and to save the village of Midway from becoming a ghost town?

Hon. R. Coleman: The company, long before that, approached us with some concerns about their fibre supply and some concerns about their operations and how they would gain efficiency between two mills that they have in the area — one in Grand Forks and one in Midway. They also just recently purchased a mill up in Fort St. James, I believe — somewhere in that area. They had some concerns on fibre supply and issues like that. The ministry has been working with them to try to solve those problems for them over the last couple of months. We haven't come to any final conclusions for them, but we have been working with the company all along.

[1440]

The mayor wrote me that letter, sure, and that's how he couched what I said to him. But I certainly said I had concerns about Midway because of the issues that have been brought to my attention by the company. I've been working with the company, and so has my ministry, to try and find solutions. We'll continue to do that.

[ Page 1331 ]

C. James: We clearly heard the minister state that communities will be facing mill closures. We also heard the minister state today that companies will sit down with the ministry and with the minister and discuss those mill closures. It appears, according to the letter, that the minister knew something about the closure of the mill in Midway, so I think there's a very simple question to the minister on behalf of communities in British Columbia.

How many more towns can expect a surprise call from the minister just before their community gets hit with another mill closure?

Hon. R. Coleman: The minister doesn't actually announce mill closures. It's companies that make the decisions about their mills, not us. When I was in the discussions with the critic, he asked about the future. I said there were concerns about some possible future mill closures coming at us. I'm trying to be honest with both sides of this House on the fact that the industry has told us there are some significant pressures in British Columbia on specific types of product and paper and that sort of thing.

While that's happening, at the same time we're about to see four pellet plants go into construction in the Cariboo because we've awarded a timber supply to C.H. Anderson. We have one of the largest OSB plants in the world opening up in January in Fort St. John. At the same time, the market is adjusting, frankly, on the investment and what products it's going to deliver to the marketplace. As that takes place and in the history of forestry, there has always been changes and movement within the industry. So I can't tell you for sure which mills will be there five years from now or not.

I can tell you this. We need to give them the competitive advantages so all our mills can make the right decisions to get the return on capital so they can invest in the future of forestry.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

C. James: With respect, the government may not be the ones who announce the mill closures, but the people of British Columbia and of communities expect the government to do something to assist those communities when the mills close.

Again, through to the minister: what is your government doing right now to prevent the same kind of economic disaster that we've seen happening in this province in other communities to communities in the future whose mills may be closing, according to your comments, minister?

Hon. R. Coleman: We're doing everything possible. As a matter of fact, we've probably come further on getting a national position on softwood with our colleagues across the country in negotiations in the last couple of months than we have in the previous ten. We're continuing a dialogue, frankly, that's going to hopefully have some long-term solutions with regards to where we sell our product.

Eighty-five percent of the forest products in British Columbia go into one marketplace — the U.S. market. The U.S. dollar has gone from 64 cents to well into the mid-80s. Ask anybody in the forest sector, and they'll tell you that their best competitive edge is a 75-cent dollar or less. They will tell you that. They'll tell you that because that's a real cost pressure on them. That's something we can't control.

What we can control is when they sit down with us, like they have in the last couple of months, and give us information about what kind of adjustments can be made. We'll get on with those adjustments so we can do what we can do for them to make them competitive.

C. Trevena: I, too, would like to ask the Minister of Forests and Range: when will those communities receive that call from government that they are going to help them move on?

Hon. R. Coleman: We're hoping it doesn't happen, frankly. We're trying to find a structure that doesn't.

[1445]

I'd like to know, under the NDP from May 1999 to May 2001, which minister phoned and told the companies that Kootenay Veneer Products Ltd. was closing, that CIPA was closing, that Youbou at TimberWest was closing, that PG Specialty Wood Products was closing, that Pacific Precision Wood Products, Somass Furniture Manufacturing, Nettletons, Merritt and Lumby were closing.

If the industry is in flux, we're doing everything possible. We're moving forward for the future of this forest sector, so get on board and work with us, and build a future for this industry in British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. Trevena: Again to the minister: we aren't talking about the past. We're talking about our future economic development.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, members.

Go ahead.

C. Trevena: Nobody on this side of the House denies that there are challenges in our forest industry, but what we want to know is what the government is doing to address those challenges.

Hon. R. Coleman: We're doing something that the NDP didn't do — that is, actually getting the information from industry, looking at how we do our costing, looking at how we could attract investment, and doing it in concert with the industry and the people in the bush. We're certainly not doing it by going to Prince George and, out of the blue, announcing a jobs and timber accord and saying that we're going to create

[ Page 1332 ]

21,000 jobs in forestry that never, ever appeared under the previous government.

PROTECTION OF MOUNTAIN CARIBOU

S. Simpson: The report, Mountain Caribou Recovery Options, was released this week. It presents options, quite frankly, that are unacceptable and at odds with the work of the Forest Practices Board and with others in this province in regard to mountain caribou, options that say, "Let the caribou expire" — either quickly, through a conscious decision, or more slowly, through what's being called a maintenance program, a program that we know from evidence will lead to the extinction of the caribou over the next 20 years.

We are the stewards of the last significant herds of mountain caribou in the world. The future of the last 1,700 animals essentially rests with us. Will the Minister of Environment commit today to set aside the options report until the mountain caribou science team has reported out? And will he call on that science team to expedite its work so that we can get down to real alternatives for the mountain caribou?

Hon. B. Penner: I haven't had a chance to actually receive the options report that the member refers to. But it's true: this government has taken action in terms of species at risk. We set up the species-at-risk coordination office, and we funded that last year. They're spending almost $1 million studying the issues of mountain caribou alone. In addition, we've established a moratorium on new commercial recreation tenures in the mountain caribou habitat zones, as well as providing variances to the Kootenay-Boundary land use planning process in the Revelstoke process on March 26, 2005.

We have set up an independent scientific panel that includes experts from the United States, Alberta and British Columbia to bring to government a range of options. I think that is the report the member is referring to. It's a draft report. It does not represent government policy. But the actions that I've just referred to — in terms of spending a million dollars studying mountain caribou, setting up the species-at-risk coordination office — stand in stark contrast to what that party did when they were in government.

I have a copy of the letter from a previous Environment Minister, stating that they had no intention of passing species-at-risk legislation.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: Well, I find it interesting to listen to the minister talk about how diligently the government is working to protect the mountain caribou, so possibly we could fix a little of the mixed messages and confusion coming out of that side of the House. While this minister is telling us this, about how he's going to deal with these matters, his colleague the Minister of State for Mining is quoted in the Globe and Mail saying some very, very different things.

On June 27, 2005, the Minister of State for Mining said: "Frankly, I am prepared to stake my position publicly that this herd is doomed and should either be moved or written off. Government should not be throwing good money after bad."

My question is to the Deputy Premier. Possibly the Deputy Premier could tell us who actually speaks for the government on this issue — the Minister of State for Mining or the Minister of Environment?

[1450]

Hon. B. Penner: As I've just indicated, the government has taken a range of actions in terms of protecting mountain caribou — things that the previous government never even dreamed of doing. It is the policy of this government that we are looking at options for how we can best preserve and protect and maintain the herds of mountain caribou.

I was trying to explain last time that that stands in stark contrast to a previous Minister of Environment named Moe Sihota, who wrote a letter dated February 13, 1996, in which he states quite frankly, "We have no intention of doing that," referring to species-at-risk legislation. This government did pass legislation to protect species at risk, and we're taking action, unlike that government.

M. Farnworth: From the comments that we've heard today from the Minister of Forests and the Minister of Environment, one thing is clear. It doesn't matter whether you're a small mill town or the woodland caribou, under this government you are on the road to extinction.

Given the comments that the Minister of State for Mining made about pouring good money after bad, will the Minister of Environment commit — before these recommendations are adopted — that the scientific studies will be allowed to be completed and that at the end of the day, science will make the decision and not the comments of the Minister of State for Mining?

Hon. B. Penner: As I've already indicated, this government set up a scientific panel that is operating independent of government to go out and collect the best data available. They are putting together a range of options for government to consider. That panel is comprised of individuals including scientists from the United States, Alberta and British Columbia, and they are looking at a range of options. That draft report does not represent the view of government.

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS WITH MAXIMUS

D. Cubberley: A question for the Minister of Health: why did the government certify Maximus Inc. on April 1, 2005, to take over full responsibility for MSP and Pharmacare information services when the company was clearly not ready to implement the contract?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for the question. The issue of B.C. Health Information Line and its

[ Page 1333 ]

efficiency and effectiveness for the public in British Columbia has been an issue here for going on 20 years. It has been a long-term source of dissatisfaction.

I know the members reflexively oppose anything that is related to outsourcing, but I've got to tell you that what we have done in the contract with Maximus is actually drive way better results than have ever been the case in British Columbia before.

I know it is probably unfair, actually, to say that the NDP, during their ten years in government, didn't do anything about the B.C. Health Information Line, because that's not true. Back in 1998 they actually shut it down one day a week so that they could try to manage the balance of the work that was done by HIBC.

What we have been seeing under Maximus is continuous improvement in the results. I am still not satisfied, frankly, with the results of Maximus, but there are severe penalties in that contract that drive better results.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Cubberley: Well, effectively, under this minister, Maximus has shut down the service many days a week. You know, Maximus has been in charge of these services for five months. For each of these five months the company has been levied fines for failure to meet contract obligations. We don't know exactly how much it has been fined. But is it not true that starting this contract with Maximus before it was ready to go saved the company a fortune in penalties in their contract, the government was spared a political embarrassment going into an election campaign and British Columbians, especially seniors, have been paying the price ever since?

Hon. G. Abbott: It always both astonishes me and amuses me how quickly the members opposite ascend that grassy knoll of conspiracy theory every time they find something about the objective world that they can't agree with.

[1455]

In this case it is very clear. What we have seen from Maximus is continuous improvement in results. In June there was an improvement over May. In July there was an improvement over June. In August there was an improvement over July. In September, it appears, they actually met their service level requirement of a three-minute turnaround. I'm delighted by that. It is the first time in 20 years that anyone has met a goal in relation to this service.

H. Lali: One thing that is demonstrably clear is that the minister is misinformed. Wait times for seniors who are trying to get information are not measured in minutes; it's measured in hours. Seniors are not getting their medicine on time.

I want to quote from a release by Rudy Lawrence, who is a spokesperson for the Council of Senior Citizens Organizations of B.C. He says: "Seniors are put on hold for longer than an hour when calling to inquire about their medical coverage, and that's only if they can navigate their way through the complicated voice mail system. Others who try to communicate with MSP through the mail say it takes forever to get their letters acknowledged. We have heard horror stories about piles and piles of unopened mail sitting around for weeks."

Seniors are not getting the service they deserve from Maximus or from this government. My question, again, is to the Minister of Health. Does the minister believe that it is appropriate that seniors should have to set up their own hotline because of the failure of this government and Maximus to provide adequate service?

Hon. G. Abbott: I don't think we need to set up a toll-free line to find out that there has been 20 years of dissatisfaction with this service. What the public expects is good service. They're starting to get it under the very rigorous terms of the contract that we have put in place.

Now, it's always interesting to hear from Mr. Lawrence, because he and his organization are remarkably well connected to the B.C. Citizens for Public Power, the B.C. Federation of Labour, the B.C. centre for policy alternatives, the B.C. Health Coalition…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: …the B.C. Government Employees Union, HEU….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, would you just take your seat for a second. When there is quiet, you can continue. Continue.

Hon. G. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If I may ascend the grassy knoll of conspiracy theory for a moment, they're also linked to a shadowy political organization known as the B.C. New Democratic Party. So there are linkages everywhere here in terms of the criticism.

The fact of the matter is: we are driving better service. If the member doesn't like better service, then I guess we could go back to what we used to have.

[End of question period.]

C. James: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

C. James: Today in the gallery I would like to introduce Mr. Johnny Fong, a prominent business leader and dedicated community leader in British Columbia. He also has Mr. Mason Loh with him, who is a former SUCCESS chair and a community leader. They also have guests with them, and I would like the House to please make them most welcome.

[ Page 1334 ]

R. Lee: May I seek leave to make an introduction?

Leave granted.

R. Lee: I would also like to introduce some of the guests in the gallery today. Together with Mr. Johnny Fong is Ming Son Chu, Linda Qi, Feng Qi, James Soo, James Chen and Chung Ping Wong. Would the House join me to welcome them.

Reports from Committees

A. Horning: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills for the first session of the 38th parliament. I move that this report be received.

Motion approved.

[1500]

Law Clerk:

October 26, 2005:

Your Select Standing Committee on

Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills begs leave to report as follows: the

preamble to Bill Pr401, intituled World Trade University Canada Establishment Act, has been proved, and the committee recommends that the bill proceed to second reading.

All of which is respectfully submitted,

A. Horning, Chair.

A. Horning: I ask leave of the House to suspend the rules to permit the moving of a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

A. Horning: I move the report be adopted.

Motion approved.

Bill Pr401 ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In this chamber, continued committee stage debate on Bill 13, and in Committee A, continued estimates debate on the Ministry of Transportation, for the information of members.

Committee of the Whole House

CIVIL FORFEITURE ACT

(continued)

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 13; H. Bloy in the chair.

The committee met at 3:04 p.m.

section 16 (continued) .

J. Brar: I would like to go back to the question that we left before the break. This is about

section 16, of course, about the standard of proof. The concern here is that when it applies to Bill 13, the standard of proof which has been set is what we call the balance of probabilities as compared to beyond a reasonable doubt.

[1505]

Now, in many people's view, this is a much lower standard as compared to beyond a reasonable doubt. So my question to the minister is: what were the factors to decide for this particular act that the standard of proof will be the balance of probabilities?

Hon. J. Les: Mr. Chair, I would point out to the member that the standard of proof known as the balance of probability is consistent with that applied to civil actions generally. It is also consistent with the standard of proof that is contained in the similar legislation in Ontario and the three prairie provinces.

J. Brar: The concern I have is this: in criminal proceedings the Crown must prove a person's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. According to the Supreme Court of Canada, the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt has been enshrined as a part of the presumption of innocence granted by

section 11(

d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So my question is: how does this government respond to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on this particular issue?

Hon. J. Les: I would underline for the member that what we are talking about here is civil law, not criminal law. The quotation from the Supreme Court of Canada that he cites is clearly related to the standard of proof in criminal proceedings. It is the case that the balance of probabilities is used in all civil law, as far as I'm aware, in Canada. It is certainly the case that it is the standard of proof that is available in all other similar legislation in Canada.

J. Brar: Just for clarification, I understand that this

section 11(

d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as per the minister's statement, only applies to criminal law, not to civil law. Is that what the minister is saying? What I'm saying is the minister just said now that the standard of proof in civil court always — or in the majority of cases; something like that is the language used — is balance of probability. What I'm asking is…. The Supreme Court of Canada indicated, according to

section 11(

d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that proof beyond a reasonable doubt has been enshrined as part of the presumption of innocence granted under the Charter. Are you saying that

section of the Charter does not apply to the civil court standard of proof, which is balance of probabilities?

Hon. J. Les: The standard of proof known as proving beyond a reasonable doubt does not apply in civil proceedings.

[ Page 1335 ]

J. Brar: Let me put it this way: is the standard of proof, which is balance of probability under this act, in line with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or is there any contradiction in this one?

[1510]

Hon. J. Les: Similar legislation elsewhere in Canada has survived a challenge under the Charter. I would suggest to the member that, based on that precedent and others, this legislation is very much in order under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and should that not be the case, I would leave it to the courts to determine otherwise.

J. Brar: I will move on to the next question on this, which is pretty similar to what we have been talking about until now.

The Civil Liberties Association stated that it is not acceptable for the power and resources of the state to be marshalled against a person and then for the state to do nothing more than prove a case on a balance of probabilities. It further stated that: "The prerequisite for such action against any of our citizens is a court finding beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed by an identifiable offender and that the offender owns the property in question. Only a set of circumstances of that kind, in our view, would justify the kind of state-instigated procedures for seizing citizen property."

So I just wanted to ask the minister: have they taken into consideration the concern of the Civil Liberties Association which suggests that the standard of proof in this situation, probability — that beyond reasonable doubt is better than this one? Have they consulted that part — why they took the position of balance of probability as compared to the other one?

Hon. J. Les: We are certainly aware of the position of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. We have considered their submissions with respect to this bill. As the member knows, this bill has been in the public domain for quite a number of months. In that consultation process we came across a variety of different points of view and positions, and with respect to the position taken on this particular matter by the Civil Liberties Association, all I can say is that respectfully, we disagree.

J. Brar: Has the government consulted with the legal community, and what is the position of our Attorney General on this bill?

Hon. J. Les: In the course of considering this bill and bringing it before the House, we have consulted widely, and the result of that consultation is the substance of this bill that we have before us today.

Section 16 approved.

section 17.

J. Brar: Again, under the Criminal Code, a court may find a person to be not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, or NCRMD. An NCRMD finding means that the defence has proven that the person's mental disorder made him or her incapable of appreciating the nature of and quality of the criminal act and incapable of knowing that the act was wrong. Where such a verdict is rendered, the accused cannot be found guilty or convicted of the offence in question.

[1515]

Yet

section 17 of this bill would allow the government to bring forfeiture proceedings against a person who has been found NCRMD. My question is, as it relates to

section 17: what is the objective of this provision —

section 17?

Hon. J. Les: I appreciate the member raising this issue. I think it is an important one, and it is perhaps one that draws a very clear line around the fact that this is civil legislation. The proceedings that the member refers to in terms of someone who may not be criminally responsible would relate to criminal proceedings. In fact, it is often the case, or it does happen, that someone — by virtue of mental illness, for example — is found not criminally responsible, and for that reason, a verdict of not guilty can ensue.

However, that still leaves the case that unlawful activity may have happened. It is the position put forth by this legislation that one ought not to benefit from that unlawful activity. In that case, it would still be open to the director of civil forfeiture to follow that through and seek an order of the court to seize assets that were either the instrument of or the proceeds from that unlawful activity.

J. Brar: Does the government feel that it's fair to forfeit property from a person who is mentally disabled — under these circumstances which is defined in this act?

Hon. J. Les: Clearly, this bill includes scenarios where the court can exercise its discretion. We have already discussed earlier under previous sections where the court has options available to it such as taking into consideration what is in the interests of justice. We earlier discussed, as well, the situation involving uninvolved parties.

In a situation like this, clearly, if the member wants to put it in the context of, is it fair, I guess you could also look at the reverse of that question: is it fair that someone…? Although they may have been mentally ill at the time of the commission of certain activities, is it fair that they should be allowed to remain in possession of the fruits of those unlawful activities?

J. Brar: My difficulty understanding this

section of the act is pretty simple. This person is mentally disabled. That has been proven in the proceedings of the court. What we are saying here is…. What I heard from the minister is: the director may still apply for seizing his or her property under those circumstances.

[ Page 1336 ]

[1520]

My question is: if somebody is mentally challenged or disabled, how can the director make a case of providing evidence that this person committed an unlawful activity when the person was mentally incapable?

Hon. J. Les: I think it's important to recognize here that although the type of situation that the member cites would involve someone who, at the time of the commission of the unlawful activity, may have been mentally ill, nonetheless, if the director of civil forfeiture were to proceed, he would have to assemble all of the usual evidence to the satisfaction of the court that unlawful activity had actually happened, and would seek to forfeit property as a result.

I think the member also would want to keep in mind that whether or not the perpetrator of the unlawful activity was mentally ill, someone or some people were still victimized. So I think in the interest of justice, generally, it is still very appropriate. Although someone was mentally ill and therefore did not suffer criminal consequences, it is still very much in the interests of justice, in my opinion, to ensure that that person is not able to retain the proceeds of unlawful activity.

J. Brar: I'll just make the comments for the record on this particular section, 17, and then move on to the next one. What I hear from the minister is that yes, the director of Bill 13 will proceed with actions, seizing property of the people who are mentally disabled or who have been defined by the court as mentally disabled — that it will happen. I understand the second part of the definition, but the answer is that it will happen.

So my comment is that this person has been basically defined by the court under the criminal justice system as incapable. Therefore, that court cannot penalize this person because of his incapacity for thinking straight about the act and about the laws. But what the minister is saying here is that under this act, which is Bill 13, the director will still proceed, taking action, seizing the property of the person who is mentally challenged.

So that's my understanding of this. With that understanding, I will move on to the next one.

Section 17 approved.

section 18.

J. Brar:

Section 18 is one which I think is an extremely important

section of this bill. Not that other sections are not important, but this is an extremely sensitive and important

section of this bill. This

section actually allows, under the act, for seizing a property of a person who has not even been charged under the Canadian justice system. That's the intent of this particular section.

I would like to start with asking the minister: doesn't this

section represent an end run around the Canadian criminal process?

[1525]

Hon. J. Les: Clearly, this in no way represents an end run around the Criminal Code of Canada or any criminal proceedings. This leaves it up to the court in a civil action to make a determination, and I would point out that in the first sentence of

section 18 it says: "…an unlawful activity may be found to have occurred…." So again, that's left up to the court's discretion if the appropriate evidence is presented to it by the director of civil forfeiture.

J. Brar: This is a very interesting question here. How does this

section accord with the presumption of innocence and crime in

section 11 of the Charter, if it allows the government to forfeit the property of a person who has been found to be innocent in a criminal court?

Hon. J. Les: Although the reference that the member made in terms of a presumption of innocence clearly relates to criminal law, this is civil law that we're discussing today. Let me try an example.

The member, coming from relatively the same part of the province as I do, will recognize that marijuana grow operations are a significant problem. I have seen and heard about cases of people being charged with running a marijuana grow op and being acquitted, sometimes on a technicality. With that acquittal in criminal court, however, the fact remains that an unlawful event still happened, unlawful activity still occurred, and it is quite within the ambit of this legislation for the director of civil forfeiture then to take note of the commission of that unlawful activity and to proceed civilly under this legislation to attach the proceeds and instruments of that unlawful activity.

C. Trevena: I, like my colleague from Surrey–Panorama Ridge, see this as very central to this piece of legislation, and I, too, am very concerned about it. I understand what the minister has been saying — that this is civil law; it's not criminal law. But it is civil law that is dealing with the profits from criminal activities, so drawing that boundary I think is a little difficult.

If a person has not been charged with an offence, what sort of guidelines will the director have in following up, in taking action on it and taking it to this civil proceeding — if someone has not been charged with a criminal offence?

[1530]

Hon. J. Les: In response to the question, it is clear that in every proceeding under this act the director of civil forfeiture is going to have to assemble information that is satisfactory to the court. Each of those cases, of course, will differ. The facts and the evidence in each of those cases will differ, but ultimately, the courts have to be able to arrive at a place on the balance of probabilities to determine that unlawful activity took place.

It may be that in some cases it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to find someone to charge and ultimately convict criminally, but that doesn't mean that it would

[ Page 1337 ]

be impossible to come to a conclusion that unlawful activity had occurred and that the proceeds thereof and the instruments thereof should be forfeited.

C. Trevena: We all have faith in our criminal justice system, I hope. I'm also concerned about the fact that if someone has been acquitted through our criminal court system, which we have faith in, that they can then be effectively tried again in civil court. I'd again like clarification on how we can get to that stage.

Hon. J. Les: I want to thank the member for the question. As I think we all know, as criminal cases go in the criminal courts, there are a variety of reasons for acquittals being issued by the court. They can be as varied as, for example, a case takes too long, and the judge finds that in the interests of justice in criminal court, an acquittal is appropriate. We've already talked earlier about how an acquittal can be arrived at in the case of a person who is deemed to be mentally ill. There are a variety of situations like that and other technicalities, as well, whereby a court will rule for acquittal.

However — I return to what I said earlier — it still remains that an unlawful act was committed, and it is still open, then, to the director of civil forfeiture under this legislation to proceed to have the instruments and proceeds of that unlawful activity forfeited to the Crown.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

C. Trevena: Thank you, minister, for that. I hear what you're saying. I don't like the answer, but I hear what you're saying.

I have one last question on this section. In the description of "person," does this include companies, corporations, businesses as well?

Hon. J. Les: Yes.

[1535]

J. Brar: This is very, very important, as I mentioned in an earlier

section of this bill. I want to know what kind of consultation process took place to make sure that

section 18 is in line with the standard laws in the country. Can the minister explain if there was any consultation process for this and, if there was, who the stakeholders or the list of organizations were?

Hon. J. Les: Again, I can reassure the member and members opposite that we consulted widely on this legislation, including the Bar Association, the Civil Liberties Association and the general public. As the member will know, this bill was introduced originally as an exposure document, I believe in April of this year. It has enjoyed, I think, the benefit of considerable input from a variety of sources. We made a few changes to the bill in considering it this fall before it was brought to the House as a result of that consultation.

Section 18 that we are discussing today also enjoyed the benefit of that consultation and input. I think, certainly on this side of the House, we are comfortable with this legislation and with the provisions of

section 18 as a result.

J. Brar: How long was the consultation process? Is it possible to get a copy of the list of the organizations and individuals who have been consulted in this process?

Hon. J. Les: It has not been our practice to keep a list of all the parties that we have consulted on this legislation. I have indicated earlier to the member some of the groups and associations with which we have consulted. The bill has been widely available in its earlier form since last April, so I would suggest to the member that that has provided a generous opportunity to the public and others who wished to comment on the bill.

I am aware that it received a relatively — or actually a very — positive response from the broader community. On the basis of the feedback that we did receive and on the basis of advice that we received consulting within government and the Attorney General's ministry and Crown counsel and other places, we've brought the bill before the House. So I think it has enjoyed good consultation and a good level of awareness.

[1540]

J. Brar: I missed the point, probably. What I hear, basically, is that the minister received quite good feedback from the general public as well as from some organizations, probably individuals and probably some submissions as well. My understanding is that the ministry and the department must have a list of people who made a submission for this bill. So is it not possible to have that list? Is there any list? Or is there no list of those individuals' organizations?

Hon. J. Les: I've already identified for the member a number of the groups from which we have received input. Further to that, of course, we have our own legal counsel within government, and as the member I'm sure would recognize, that would constitute privileged legal input that really is not for me to disclose here this afternoon.

J. Brar: I will take it that we don't have a list available of those people with whom the consultation was made, or who made the submissions for this particular bill.

I will move on to the next question. Was there any in-depth analysis done of similar laws in other jurisdictions, and can the minister provide some description of that?

Hon. J. Les: Yes, the member opposite is correct. We looked at a variety of legislation in a variety of different jurisdictions. As I indicated in my second reading comments, we are aware of legislation in Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United States. Frankly, we found it more useful for our purposes in government in crafting this legislation to look at the other Canadian examples.

We certainly became aware that there is civil forfeiture legislation in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I think it's fair to say that we found

[ Page 1338 ]

the legislation in Ontario more useful to us. So we did a good analysis of that particular piece of legislation, particularly more recently given the fact that it already withstood a court challenge. We made some changes to the Ontario legislation that made the legislation more suitable to us here in British Columbia.

[1545]

In

summary, I would suggest we looked at a variety of different kinds of legislation, and what we have arrived at here in British Columbia is, I think, what is most suitable for our circumstances here in this province.

J. Brar: I appreciate the answer offered by the minister. My deep interest, as indicated by the minister, is that the province…. That's a very similar jurisdiction we have and we can learn from — that is, Manitoba, Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan. The minister pointed out that after the homework or the announcement, this government chose to follow more the Ontario model, which, you know, sometimes makes sense, but I would like to know on what basis this government chose the Ontario model as compared to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta?

Hon. J. Les: To the member's question. After looking at the various pieces of legislation in other provinces in Canada, it became obvious to our staff that the Ontario legislation was preferable.

First of all, Ontario had put an extensive amount of work into developing their legislation — some significant work done that we thought was well-founded. We also saw aspects in other provinces' legislation that we found not as desirable. For example, the legislation in Manitoba provides for civil forfeiture to be

an act or an action that is driven by the police. We favour the model where we utilize a director of civil forfeiture over a police-driven process.

[1550]

Again, reviewing the legislation, we found that Ontario — because of the significant effort and research that had gone into their legislation, and also by virtue of the fact that their legislation was more exercised than similar legislation in other provinces — was, for us in British Columbia, the preferable model to follow.

J. Brar: I appreciate the response. The minister mentioned one thing which is more specific to my question. In Manitoba, for example, their act is driven by the police as compared to the director of civil forfeiture in British Columbia. On that particular example, can the minister explain what the benefits are of having the director of civil forfeiture as compared to handing it over to the police?

Hon. J. Les: Well, I suspect the member will readily agree that if you have a director of civil forfeiture available in the province, you're going to get more consistency in the administration of this act than if you have a variety of police personnel engaging this act all over the province.

I think it's also important to remember, and I would underline again, that this is civil legislation, and the police are most often involved in criminal investigations. I think that having the civil forfeiture legislation driven by a director of civil forfeiture, as opposed to police authorities, helps to draw the line between civil law and criminal law that I think is important to preserve in this piece of legislation.

J. Brar: I have a more technical question. I understand that we do already have existing the Criminal Code, under which the government can actually seize property. But for that the person has to be, of course, charged and convicted. This law is different from that one. My question is this: if both

section 490.1 of the Criminal Code and Bill 13 can be applied in a particular case, which legislation will the government use for forfeiture purposes? How will the government make that decision?

[1555]

Hon. J. Les: Let me say first of all — and I would seek your guidance, Madam Chair — that it seems to me that we are discussing

section 18, and a lot of this discussion, I think, strays considerably from what I see in

section 18. Perhaps we could get back in order at some point.

To the question of the member about proceedings under

section 490 of the Criminal Code and proceedings under this bill, I would remind the member again that this has nothing to do with criminal proceedings. Any action under this legislation would be completely separate and apart from any criminal proceedings. There is no overlap; there is no conflict.

J. Brar: I'm not, of course, a law student, but I see here very clearly one thing that I want to mention. First of all, I appreciate the minister indicating that this probably is out of it, but he still continued responding to my question. I appreciate that. I think I deserve asking the follow-up question on that one.

What I'm saying here is simple. I'm not talking about an action of the government against the criminal activity of an individual. I'm talking about seizing property. Now, the federal Criminal Code allows the same thing, but under that, one has to go through charges and conviction, and then that court applies to the person. At the same time, this Bill 13 can do the same thing to people who have not been charged at all.

My question is: if there's a person in British Columbia who has been charged and convicted, will this government apply Bill 13 or the federal law in that situation?

Hon. J. Les: I'm trying to cooperate with the member in his rather wide

interpretation of

section 18 of this bill. To his question, however, it would certainly be possible, in the event that someone had been criminally convicted, that there would be a separate proceeding under Bill 13 for the director of civil forfeiture to commence an action under this bill to obtain an order for civil forfeiture.

That certainly would be quite possible in the event that under the criminal proceedings

section 490 that the

[ Page 1339 ]

member refers to, there was not an application to forfeit any proceeds or any instruments of crime that had been established. There is certainly the ability, then, for the director of civil forfeiture in the province to make an application to the court for forfeiture of the unlawfully obtained assets.

Sections 18 to 20 inclusive approved.

section 21.

[1600]

B. Ralston: My question to the minister is this: is it contemplated that the director will be a person very much like the assistant deputy minister, criminal justice, in the Attorney General's ministry, who will have independent jurisdiction to act and to make decisions about whether or not to proceed with forfeiture cases?

Hon. J. Les: Madam Chair, the answer is yes.

B. Ralston: Should the legislative scheme pass, what specific level in the public service is it contemplated that this person would be hired at?

Hon. J. Les: There are still some ongoing discussions with respect to that question, but the intention is to have the director of civil forfeiture reporting directly to the deputy minister. So I think that gives some indication as to the relative placing of that position within the public service.

Section 21 approved.

section 22.

J. Brar: One of the questions we left when we were talking about some of the sections earlier was about 22. The discussion was about the instrument likely to be used. So my question at that time was…. I'm going to repeat that question now because at the time that question did not fit well under that section. It was indicated by the minister that the question falls under

section 22. So I'm following that.

[1605]

This is about the

section 1 definition under what we call the instrument "likely to be used." The question is: what process will the director of the Civil Forfeiture Act use to establish the case for future activities, and which instrument is to be used? Is there any process or are there steps to be taken to ensure that, you know, the case is made that's accurate and that does not hurt any innocent individual?

Hon. J. Les: I think the member opposite would be aware that every proceeding in a court of law is unique, and it is, frankly, not possible for me to suggest a cookie-cutter set of proceedings or procedures that a director of civil forfeiture would use. Clearly, at the end of the day, for an application to the court to be successful, the director of civil forfeiture would have to assemble information, facts and evidence in such a way as to be able to successfully convince the court that unlawful activity had occurred and that there were instruments of unlawful activity, to the satisfaction of the court, so that his application to the court would be successful.

I think it would be perhaps less than useful for us today to try to construct a scenario or a blueprint that would apply to all cases. I don't think that that works, frankly. Every case is going to be unique and have its own set of circumstances that will require different approaches by the director of civil forfeiture in terms of satisfying the courts that in fact the evidence is there to make an order.

J. Brar: Just a very quick follow-up on that one. I can understand it if we don't have that process or vision at this point in time, but I certainly disagree with the fact that there is no process at all and the director could go and do whatever — looking at the situation and what needs to be done.

At the end of the day the accountability is essential in this situation, and the director is accountable not only to the individual but to his or her job — to do things under certain criteria. I would suggest that there should be some direction somewhere or expectation to make sure that in the cases initiated in those situations where an instrument is likely to be used — because that's the difficulty that I have, to understand that — that there are some procedures and some steps to follow on those ones.

Having said that, I would like to move on.

Sections 22 to 26 inclusive approved.

section 27.

B. Ralston: I have a couple questions on this section. In

section 27(1)(

e) it refers to "other prescribed purposes." Is it contemplated that such forfeited moneys or proceeds might be paid out for family maintenance enforcement orders? It's not obviously in the legislation. Is it contemplated that that might be something that might be covered by a regulation?

[1610]

Hon. J. Les: Clearly, the

section is worded as it is so that we do have flexibility going forward to distribute proceeds in an appropriate way. I can say to the member that any distribution under the provisions of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act has not been contemplated to date. The member perhaps raises an interesting opportunity, but we do not have a position today as to whether or not that would be either appropriate or possible.

B. Ralston: Thank you to the minister for taking that under advisement.

I have another question relating to

section 27(2). In 27(1)(

a) it refers to payment for compensation of eligible victims, but in the next subsection, (2), any other payments, (

b) through (e), are only with the approval of the Minister of Finance. So I'm sure the minister is familiar with the debate about traffic fine revenue and

[ Page 1340 ]

how, using usually largely municipally funded police resources, revenue is gathered by the provincial Crown and not distributed back to the municipalities.

I'm wondering what assurance the minister might be able to provide that this is not contemplated as a cash cow for general revenue but, rather, that these other heads, (

b) through (e), will be taken into account and payments will be made in accordance with the priorities set out in the act — rather than simply sending the money to general revenue.

Hon. J. Les: I think the way we have set up this legislation clearly indicates the intent that the moneys forfeited would accrue, as is laid out in one of the previous sections, into a civil forfeiture account. Therefore, these funds will be accounted for separately and, I think — obviously, as a result of that — very transparently so as to enable the public to determine on an ongoing basis that, in fact, the money is being used generally for the types of purposes that are laid out in this act.

Sections 27 to 40 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

Hon. J. Les: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 4:15 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

CIVIL FORFEITURE ACT

Bill 13, Civil Forfeiture Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. C. Richmond: I call estimates debate, Committee of Supply, of the Ministry of Advanced Education.

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

ADVANCED EDUCATION

AND MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); S. Hammell in the chair.

The Chair: The committee will stand recessed for about five minutes.

The committee recessed from 4:17 p.m. to 4:23 p.m.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

On Vote 10: ministry operations, $1,898,297,000 .

Hon. M. Coell: It's with great pleasure that I rise to present the 2005-2006 spending estimates for the Ministry of Advanced Education. Before I begin, I would like to introduce the staff that are accompanying me here today. I have my deputy minister Moura Quayle and assistant deputy ministers Tom Vincent, Arlene Paton, and Ruth Wittenberg. I would also like to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of all the staff in the ministry who have worked hard to prepare for these estimates and also our post-secondary partners.

Today is a good day to reflect on our past as we focus on the future of post-secondary education in British Columbia. Many of you may not be aware of the modest beginnings of our post-secondary education system, so please allow me a brief time for an overview of some of the important events that set the stage for the direction in which we head today.

[1625]

You may or may not know that the original teacher-training facilities in this province were the model and normal schools. In 1908 the provincial government of the day opened the normal school. Its mandate was to train teachers in the norms or standards of educational theory. Next door, practical experience was obtained through the model school which was built in 1905 and served as a regular elementary school until 1963. Prior to the normal and model schools, teacher education was informal, despite the pressing need for teachers to improve their skills to meet the demands of a growing province.

Within a decade the University of British Columbia was established as the province's first public university.

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

Today these milestones are but a memory of our humble beginnings. They were great and important moments in time for us. To capture the true essence of why higher learning has adopted its modern character, we must look at what happened in 1962 when the McDonald report on higher education came out. The report carried two significant recommendations aimed at decentralizing education: to establish more universities outside of Vancouver and to create local two-year colleges throughout B.C. that would provide a broader, more diverse range of programs than existed at that time.

These two basic recommendations have stood the litmus test of time in British Columbia. They explain to a large degree how our system evolved in the manner it did. The fact is that post-secondary education is key to a strong, knowledgable workforce that drives our robust economy of today. That report's recommendation reinforced the reasons these opportunities should be made available to people in every region of the province.

[ Page 1341 ]

Last year, in 2004-2005, we reached new heights: 300,000 students, including part-time and full-time, enrolled in public post-secondary institutions in British Columbia. That's the highest number we've ever had in this province. So 2005-2006 brings even greater promise as we continue to implement our six-year strategic plan, leading up to 2010 and beyond.

Our strategic investment plan for post-secondary expansion is a driving force in attaining our government's first goal: to make B.C. the best-educated, most literate jurisdiction on the continent. The plan focuses our collective efforts in the pursuit of a number of major commitments.

First and foremost, we must deliver an excellent public and private post-secondary education system that meets the needs and aspirations of British Columbians.

We have already taken or are undertaking a number of important steps to meet that commitment. We have limited tuition fees to the rate of inflation, beginning in September. We continue to provide a comprehensive financial assistance system for students, and we are strengthening B.C.'s network of universities, colleges, institutes and on-line learning.

We are doubling the annual number of graduates in computer science and electrical and computer engineering within the next five years. We are increasing the number of medical school graduates and expanding post-secondary programs to graduate more care aides, licensed practical nurses and registered nurses. We are planning to maintain and improve the Knowledge Network.

We are also providing programs to support and complement our industry training system in lockstep with the Ministry of Economic Development.

The provincial government has committed to expanding our economy by developing a highly skilled workforce. In order to succeed, students need quality, accessible post-secondary education. The Ministry of Advanced Education's 2005-2006 budget builds on our commitment to enhance post-secondary education for students while balancing that need with taxpayers, and 2005-2006 is the second year of a six-year strategic plan which will create 25,000 new student spaces by 2010. This represents average annual seat growth of more than 2 percent at an average cost to government of $9,200 per space.

[1630]

To accommodate those new spaces, we have allocated $800 million in capital funding over the next three years.

We're investing more in post-secondary education by increasing our ministry's base budget of $1.83 billion. Our strategic investment plan will ensure the province has the ability to meet the social and economic needs of British Columbians. As well, we have put in place an accountability framework identifying the key performance measures of our post-secondary system. We continue to develop and improve this accountability framework for the ongoing betterment of the post-secondary system.

Ultimately, post-secondary education is a shared fiscal responsibility. From the beginnings, our commitment has been to ensure that the appropriate balance of cost is achieved among students, institutions, taxpayers, government and the private sector. Education is a good investment, but to compete, British Columbia's post-secondary system must ensure students are provided with world-class learning opportunities. We must be cost-competitive to ensure our students have the same ability as other Canadians to enjoy access to high-quality post-secondary education.

To maintain our position in the marketplace, the provincial government will increase funding to the post-secondary system by $62 million in 2005-2006. As well, operating transfers to institutions will be increased by a minimum of $120 million in a three-year budget planning period, ending in 2007-2008.

Today in British Columbia tuition fees are close to the national average. In 2005-2006, undergraduate students in British Columbia's public universities are paying an average of $4,574 for their tuition. That's lower than Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. Only Manitoba, Newfoundland and Quebec are lower, and Quebec is actually higher for British Columbia students wanting to study there.

Now that balance has been restored to tuition rates, they are comparable to other provinces. We have taken the action to stabilize tuition rates for students and their families so they can plan for the future. To protect students this year, we have limited the tuition increase to 2 percent, based on the 2004 B.C. consumer price index. We worked in cooperation with the public post-secondary institutions to put in place a tuition-limit policy for this year, and it made sense to me to implement the tuition limit through policy guidelines rather than through the heavy hand of legislation.

Our message to limit tuition increases was heard and understood by the public post-secondary sector, and I was pleased by that. While most institutions are increasing tuition by 2 percent this year, several have decided not to increase tuition at all. These include Capilano College, Vancouver Community College, College of New Caledonia, Northwest Community College and the Institute of Indigenous Government. As a government, we are fully committed to the tuition limit.

Once again, now that B.C.'s tuition fees are at the national average, we are limiting future increases to the rate of inflation. Tuition represents a portion of the cost of education in British Columbia at our post-secondary institutions. For every dollar paid by students in tuition, taxpayers contribute approximately $2. Thanks to public support, half of B.C. grads finish without student loans today. Other students use debt to fund their education. British Columbia's comprehensive, flexible student assistance program relieves financial pressure for students in need so money is not a barrier to higher learning.

The budget update of 2005 provides $450 million in funding over the next three years for student financial

[ Page 1342 ]

assistance programs, including loan reduction for students most in need, grants for students with disabilities, debt relief programs and loan forgiveness programs.

[1635]

Over $300 million is also available annually for B.C. student loans. In addition, the B.C. loan reduction program was introduced in the past year, in partnership with the Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation. This new program will forgive a portion of the provincial debt each year for eligible students who successfully complete their studies. Additional enhancements will be introduced soon.

The province is also reducing the parental contribution for B.C. loan limits. This change will make it easier for students from middle-income families to go to college and university. We are also allowing students to claim up to $300 a year for computer-related expenses, increasing students' access to technology.

Where it makes sense, we help students overcome debt by creating opportunities to work in underserved communities in British Columbia. This includes loan forgiveness programs for nurses, physicians, pharmacists, midwives, speech therapists and other professionals who deliver publicly funded core services in underserviced areas of the province.

Students who invest strategically to earn their qualifications will end up ahead of the game, and I'll give you one example. Tony Burton has just graduated from a one-year certificate program at Malaspina College. As a result, he walked right into a $50,000-a-year job with NorskeCanada as a pulp and paper worker. This is what he told the Nanaimo News Bulletin : "I invested $5,000 in tuition to get a $50,000-a-year job. That's what I call a good investment."

More and more people in B.C. are thinking the way that Tony does, which is why in 2004-2005 the Ministry of Advanced Education put in place the six-year strategic investment plan to create 25,000 new seats in our post-secondary institutions by 2010. In the first two years we've funded 7,417 full-time-student-equivalent spaces in B.C.'s post-secondary education system, including 4,200 in 2005-2006. The total number of new spaces will increase to a total of 16,205 by the end of 2007-2008. Our commitment is to ensure that students with a "B" average or higher have an opportunity to pursue a university education.

In addition to seat growth at post-secondary institutions, we have created a web-based gateway called BCcampus. BCcampus enables students to take courses anywhere in the province to complement what they are learning at their home institution. Enrolment in BCcampus on-line courses in 2004-2005 was more than 10,000 — four times the number of students enrolled since 2002. I call that a great success.

Let me tell you about just one of the many BCcampus students whose lives are changing as a result of on-line learning. Sylvia Stephens lives in Greenville, a Nisga'a village of 650 people in the Nass Valley, 90 miles away from the nearest college, which is in Terrace. When she was a little girl Sylvia was sent away to residential school in Edmonton. She lost her home, her family and her culture. A few years ago, when she was in her early 50s, Sylvia decided she needed more education, but she wasn't willing to face those losses again. "I want to know my grandchildren," she said.

So three years ago, just about when BCcampus was launched, Sylvia began taking on-line courses. By her count, she's finished close to 30 courses now at Northwest Community College and another half-dozen at BCIT.

She's done the entire applied business certificate on line. She's now preparing to start her own business, a mini–art gallery with traditional Nisga'a arts and crafts for tourists, combined with a convenience store and a fast-food takeout that doesn't exist in her community. Right now she's enrolled at BCIT in performance management courses through BCcampus and is working on convincing family members to get their educations on line as well. "It empowers you," she says. "No one can take it away from you once you learn something."

Greater access means more options for people to pursue their hopes and dreams. We are leveraging our investment in post-secondary education to ensure future generations benefit from a top-notch education system in British Columbia. Greater expansion of the post-secondary system is essential to meet society's needs.

[1640]

By 2007-2008 the provincial government will allocate nearly $6 billion to the Ministry of Advanced Education's budget. To help offset the cost to students, three-quarters of this, or approximately $4.5 billion, will flow directly to public post-secondary education — approximately $1.5 billion per year beginning in 2005-2006. Another 14 percent, or $843 million, will flow indirectly in the form of debt service and amortization for the capital projects being funded by provincial taxpayers.

In three short years we have made meaningful, positive and significant progress. In Surrey and the Fraser Valley we are in the process of adding a total of 8,000 new spaces at Simon Fraser University, Douglas College, Kwantlen University College and the University College of the Fraser Valley. This growth includes the creation of the SFU Surrey campus and the new trades and technology campus for Kwantlen University College in Cloverdale, currently in design.

In the southern interior post-secondary enhancements abound. The new UBC Okanagan created access to a major research university quickly and cost effectively. To help fill skill shortages in the region, the new Okanagan College is expanding post-secondary training opportunities. Progress is ongoing and aggressive.

This spring we passed legislation to create the Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops. Thompson Rivers University offers a comprehensive range of programs to meet the education and training needs of that region. Thompson Rivers University also has a mandate to provide learning opportunities for students through distance education and flexible degree completion options. As well, we have adopted a multiministry approach to overcome shortfalls, particularly

[ Page 1343 ]

when it comes to health care professionals and the trades.

Advanced Education is helping the Ministry of Health develop a ten-year plan to recruit, train and retain more health providers for British Columbia. Capital investments of $134 million and additional operating funds have already been allocated to the University of British Columbia, University of Victoria and University of Northern British Columbia. By 2009 we will have almost doubled the annual number of medical school graduates to 224 from 128.

The world is moving at great speed. Innovation is essential, challenging jurisdictions everywhere to carve out a piece of the knowledge-based economy. We believe research holds the keys to our future: an innovative-based economy, a better health care system and an environment sustainable for future generations. The B.C. knowledge development fund and the leading-edge endowment fund for B.C. leadership chairs and regional innovation chairs are important initiatives.

Our research commitments are already supporting a range of important work, including sensory regeneration of the spinal cord, oceanographic research, forest genomics and forest products manufacturing, wireless communications, cancer research, and early childhood behaviour and development. Our reputation for excellence in life sciences is known around the world, especially since the Genome Sciences Centre unravelled the genetic code of the SARS virus in just one week.

Over the next five years hundreds of millions of additional dollars will be committed to research and innovation in British Columbia. We plan to enhance our quality of life, strengthen our society and economy and create a better environment. Today top researchers and students are choosing B.C. because they know it's the best place to further their goals.

To be truly successful, we must enlist the support of all people, including and engaging aboriginal students in post-secondary education. All of our institutions use some of their annual operating grants to deliver aboriginal programs. On top of that, the ministry's aboriginal special projects fund will provide $1.8 million in 2005-2006 to support the programs around the province that help aboriginal learners start and finish post-secondary studies.

Since 2001 the provincial government has supported approximately 150 projects, worth a total of $7.8 million in aboriginal special project funding. Over 3,000 aboriginal learners have benefited from this funding. The primary purpose of this program is to increase participation, success and retention rates for aboriginal learners in British Columbia.

[1645]

As well, two of British Columbia's six regional innovation chairs are dedicated to aboriginal early childhood development to support research into culturally appropriate services. The chairs are also raising greater awareness of the importance of children's early years in aboriginal communities.

We expect private institutions to offer quality that is comparable to their public counterparts. In November of 2003 we extended degree-granting privileges to private and out-of-province public institutions. We want institutions to offer quality programs while protecting the rights of students. That way, we maintain a strong reputation for British Columbia degrees.

We must take the steps necessary to ensure students benefit from their education so the they can continue to attract tens of thousands of international students each year. International education contributes significantly to the quality of our students' education. It enables our graduates to learn about other cultures and to develop skills needed to work in other countries, including our trading partners.

Our institutions are involved through activities such as student and faculty exchanges and the recruitment of international students. As well, the Ministry of Advanced Education will be developing a scholarship program to enable B.C. students to study abroad and foreign students to study in B.C.

Closely related to quality assurance is transferability, and in this regard B.C. is fortunate. Our transfer system is recognized as one of the most comprehensive and effective in North America and has been built over decades. A paper by the Higher Education Policy Institute in England goes even further, stating: "British Columbia has taken the California model and developed it into what is possibly the most extensive and sophisticated credit accumulation and transfer arrangement in the world."

The arrangement has long been a godsend to students like — and I'll give you an example — Glen Leonard, who was awarded last year's Queen Elizabeth II British Columbia Centennial Scholarship. Glen won the QE II because he was the province's top university graduate going on to further his studies in a Commonwealth country. He earned his honours bachelor's degree from UBC and was accepted at both Oxford and Cambridge universities. In fact, Cambridge offered him to go directly into a PhD program.

"At Capilano College and at UBC the level of academic standard was exceptionally high, preparing me thoroughly for Oxford and Cambridge," Glen says.

It's stories like Glen's that are ringing endorsements of the good work occurring throughout the post-secondary system and within the Ministry of Advanced Education. Together we are training more students than we ever have before. We're making a record investment in facilities on our campuses. We're limiting tuition rates to that of inflation, and we're doing our part to improve the health care system, training more nurses and more doctors. We're making important investments in research and innovation, and we're bringing out the best in people through hard work and the dedication of the entire post-secondary system.

[ Page 1344 ]

I would like to also thank the parents, the faculty and the staff who help make our students' dreams come true. Through their cooperation, the students of this province are realizing the true value of an investment in post-secondary education.

With that, Chair, I look forward to comments, remarks and questions from members of the Legislature.

G. Robertson: I'd like to start with my thanks to the minister and staff for being here today, and I look forward to the process ahead of us, going through the estimates process and better understanding, on behalf of all British Columbians, what this government's commitment is to higher education.

[1650]

I'd like to start out with some questions on access and affordability, specifically around tuition. The minister mentions the tuition-limit policy and guidelines around tuition. What we've seen over the last four years of this government is tuition nearly doubling around the province for students between 2001 and 2004. We saw enrolment dropping at ten of B.C.'s post-secondary institutions last year. I think it definitely reflects that students are lacking confidence in unpredictably rising tuition. That cost is definitely a barrier, if you consult with students, to their pursuit of training and education.

The government — and I'm sure the minister recalls this clearly from last February's throne speech — committed to legislate a cap on post-secondary tuition and to limit tuition to the increase in the rate of inflation. Instead, we have a tuition-limit policy. We have guidelines and what I can only suppose amounts to an honour system with the institutions. The tuition this year that was supposed to be 2 percent — well-publicized since school started this year — was a 2.9-percent increase in the province, which is almost 50 percent higher than the 2 percent these guidelines were intended to fix it to.

My first question to the minister is: when can students expect the government to fulfil its promise and actually legislate a cap to ensure that students can be confident of the cost of their tuition being fixed to the rate of inflation?

Hon. M. Coell: The member raises a couple of questions. If you combine the private sector with the public sector, you get the 2.9 percent. We are able to cap the public sector at 2 percent, which is what we did. The private sector has the ability to raise and change their rates on their own. So we did cap at the rate of inflation, which was 2 percent.

When I was asked to be Minister of Advanced Education, one of the first things I looked at was the commitments we had made. I looked at the commitment for the 2-percent cap, and I had a choice of either bringing in legislation or talking to each one of the institutions and seeing whether they would agree on a voluntary basis to cap their tuition fees. They all did. I believe five of them are actually at zero, and the rest of them are at 2 percent.

What I wanted to do was develop a relationship with the institutions and with the faculty and students so that if we were able to work in a cooperative way, I didn't need to do legislation. I had the opportunity if the institutions didn't agree or didn't want to participate in that direction. I referred to the heavy hand of legislation, and that's there if necessary, but I don't think it will be necessary. I believe we have the cooperation of all our partners in keeping tuitions at what we would like to see, at the national average, which is about where we are now.

G. Robertson: I'm still very uneasy about the fact that it's relationship-based and guidelines-oriented. The reality is that students have no certainty here. There was a lot of pressure put on this government by students over the last several years, I believe, many of them whose ability to pursue full-time schooling evaporated as they had to work. They could not access and keep up with the rate of tuition increases we saw over the last few years.

The government's commitment in the throne speech, the promise to actually legislate that, was a very clear promise and statement to students that they would, in fact, enshrine in legislation rather than count on relationships and guidelines. When the minister speaks of the heavy hand of legislation, I think it depends on whether the legislation is created for people, to benefit people such as students, knowing that their education and costs are going to increase by a predictable amount — versus having alternate reasons to strip rights or be punitive, which is legislation that I think this government has chosen to focus on over the last number of years.

I don't see this as a heavy hand. I see this as reliability. Many of the students that I've spoken with in my role as critic continue to ask, first and foremost, when they can expect that promise on legislation to be delivered.

Hon. M. Coell: I understand where the member is coming from. I think what we've committed to do for this term of government is to keep the tuition fees at the rate of inflation and then to add in moneys as necessary to the universities to keep them whole. We want to develop partnerships for a number of reasons.

[1655]

The building on the campuses is unprecedented, and the request for 25,000 new spaces will be developed. We want to work with each one of our institutions to make sure that we're getting the most out of the investment. I think, from my perspective, the partnership is very important. I could have brought in legislation, but I think the building of the partnership and the trust amongst partners is more important, while making that commitment to students that they would for this government's term in office see the rate of inflation reflected in tuition fees.

G. Robertson: Will the minister make a commitment to the students of this province that if the in-

[ Page 1345 ]

creases to tuition by the public institutions is greater than the rate of inflation, the minister will pursue legislating that cap as promised?

Hon. M. Coell: I'm very optimistic that that won't be necessary. But as I said earlier, if institutions wanted to raise above what the government request and government policy is, there is the opportunity to bring legislation in to do just that.

G. Robertson: The ministry, in the figures in front of me, projects that the amount of post-secondary education fees collected per FTE, full-time-equivalent, over the next three years will increase. Will the increase per FTE…? This revenue item — will it be reduced in order to budget for whatever tuition fee freeze or tying that tuition increase to inflation…? Will you increase the FTE revenue that comes in?

Hon. M. Coell: I think you'll see revenues go up as we start to see the 25,000 new students join the campuses. That revenue will go up, but individual revenues will not go up more than the rate of inflation during that time.

G. Robertson: I'm not quite clear on that. I'm curious if the ministry will reduce the revenue item in order to budget for the cap to inflation. In other words, the FTE…. The fees revenues that are budgeted for — do they specifically account for a 2-percent increase in tuition? Or if the tuition moves beyond or above or below that, will the budget per FTE be adjusted in like fashion?

Hon. M. Coell: I'm not sure I understand the question, but I'll answer it the best I can. If I need to be more specific, I will.

What we've committed to do with the universities is to, over and above what the rate of inflation is…. Sometimes the cost to universities will be more than that. Like, a medical school rate actually could be more than that, but they're going to keep medical school tuitions at the cap of 2 percent. What we as government will have to do is make up the difference, and we're committed to doing that and to working with the university sector and also the college sector to identify their needs and to add in that money in the budgets that come forward.

G. Robertson: When you say you "add in that," based on that…. Is there a provision for that in the budget that we have in front of us?

Hon. M. Coell: There was a commitment made by the previous minister of $15 million over and above that, and that was a starting point to let the institutions know that we were serious. Then we'll work with them to find a number that is agreeable to them and to us at the end of this year and going into the next year as well.

G. Robertson: Thanks for that. I am going to pass the torch here to the member for Cariboo South for some questions and to some of my fellow MLAs on this side for questions specific to their regions. I look forward to coming back for more questions when we next meet in the House.

[1700]

C. Wyse: Minister, I have one specific question for you with regard to the nursing program in Williams Lake. First, I would draw the attention of the House, as a reminder of the statement that was made by our colleague from Bulkley Valley–Stikine in talking about health in the northern part of the province. Both of us pointed out in our presentation the increased retention for health care workers when they have received their training in the area where we hope to have them locate. We know that from the great success with UNBC.

For the minister's information and reminder, of course, there is already an existing one- or two-year program for nursing that is run out of Williams Lake through TRU university. I would go on to point out further information here simply to assist in building my case. There is a shortage already of health care providers — nurses, specifically, in this case. It is anticipated that there will be an increase in this shortage hitting us in North America — B.C. in particular — in three to five years, which happens to be approximately the education period of time for nursing. The city council of Williams Lake is in support of this program being expanded to four years.

With that backdrop, hon. minister, my question to you is: does your ministry intend to provide the necessary funding to expand the nursing program to four years for the Williams Lake campus portion?

Hon. M. Coell: Since 2001 we've actually increased the number of nursing students by 2,500, and our commitment is to continue to increase as need be. I quite agree with the member. When you are able to take courses closer to home or at home, you're likely to stay in that area, and that's specifically what we're trying to do. At Thompson Rivers University, of course, you could do the first two years in Williams Lake and then go to Kamloops for the second or the third and fourth year.

I think what will happen over time is that they'll assess that. It's not something we would force them to do, but they would have the funds necessary to make that change if the demand were there. It's very much up to the university to make that decision, but it's something I think you're seeing with the Thompson Rivers University. They're going to be reassessing how much of each program they can deliver at different campuses. I agree that if you could do all four years in your home town, that would be the best of all worlds.

C. Wyse: I appreciate your response. I guess I would also share with you the information that the local community is beginning to develop and further strengthen their case with TRU for that. I guess I'm serving notice that next year we'll be looking for those

[ Page 1346 ]

funds to be appearing in your budget, and I will be looking for your affirmative support at that time.

[1705]

B. Ralston: I have a couple of questions that concern Simon Fraser University–Surrey campus. In a recent meeting with some senior officials from Simon Fraser, they advised of their enrolment projections up to 2015. The anticipated enrolment in 2015 is 5,000 students. It's approximately 2,000 or so right now.

Now, my question to the minister is — I just wanted to confirm that, and secondly: is the minister of the view that what would seem to me a very slow rate in the growth and the enrolment of the SFU Surrey campus, which is consistent with the funding allocation, I'm advised…. Does that remain the ministry's target for 2015?

Hon. M. Coell: I think that's within the planning parameters. The year 2015 is quite a distance off, but I think what they're doing is planning for that date. The ministry will continue to monitor and work with the university as we get closer to that date to make sure they hit their targets. They may not hit them all in one year. It may be a slow year one year and a heavier year the next year. I think it's a viable target.

B. Ralston: As the minister, I'm sure, is aware, there's another post-secondary education institute in Surrey: Kwantlen University College. I'm wondering if the minister regards that enrolment projection as sufficient to meet the growing needs of the city of Surrey, which is widely reputed to be the fastest-growing city in the country, certainly in the province — closing in on 425,000 in population. Certainly, the projections for the region south of the Fraser over the next ten years project rapid growth in the population.

My question to the minister: is he prepared to contemplate a further request from the university that would accelerate the enrolment in the Simon Fraser University at the Surrey campus beyond the projected 5,000 for 2015?

Hon. M. Coell: What we're planning for right now are the six years. I guess, as we — or whoever is minister at that point — get to the six years, then they'll be looking out at the next. In the strategic plan there are 8,000 seats available in Surrey, in the Fraser Valley area. But you're right. Of all the parts of the province, that is definitely the fastest-growing. It's the fastest-growing with young people of college and university age as well.

B. Ralston: Just to continue — and I appreciate the minister's comments — what we were advised in this meeting was that in terms of post-secondary enrolment per capita within the region, perhaps because of the lack of spaces, that percentage is lower than most other regions in the province, which would probably not be what one would expect, and particularly among young men aged 18 to 25. So again, what would be the mechanism, staying within the six-year projection, for accommodating a request from Simon Fraser University–Surrey to expand beyond the projected enrolment that's presently funded?

Hon. M. Coell: It's actually a good question because I've been asked it by a number of the institutions. When the initial allocation was made as to how we thought the 25,000 would be put out there, some people said: "Well, I think I can do better." What we're seeing is that buildings are built on campuses for the influx of students over the next few years. Some are saying — and I think SFU is one: "We could do more." I think what we'll have to do is balance that off around the province with the other 26 institutions as to who can do more. Maybe there will be some shifting around, but it's probably too early to say because you're just beginning a process.

[1710