2006 Legislative Session: Second 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)

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2006

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 6, Number 6

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Tributes

Canadian Olympic athletes

Hon. G.

Campbell

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order

25 B )

Mudslide in the Philippines

R. Lee

Stanley Daniels

C. Wyse

Investment in mineral exploration

Sultan

Heritage Day

Gentner

Preparations for 2010 Olympics

McIntyre

David Stupich

L. Krog

Oral Questions

Reinstatement of Children's

Commission

C. James

Hon. G.

Campbell

A. Dix

Hon. S.

Hagen

Action on recommendations of Port

Alberni inquest

L. Krog

Hon. J.

Les

Investigation of cases of missing

women on Highway 16

J. Brar

Hon. J.

Les

Funding for women's centres

Thorne

Hon. I.

Chong

Incentives for staff at Ministry

of Employment and Income Assistance

Trevena

Hon. C.

Richmond

Coverage of bank account charges

for income assistance recipients

Horgan

Hon. C.

Richmond

Committee on agricultural policy

Ralston

Hon. P.

Bell

Tabling Documents

Office of the Chief Electoral Officer,

report regarding 38th provincial general election, 2005, Referendum on

Electoral Reform

Reports from Committees

Select Standing Committee on Finance

and Government Services

Annual Review of the Budgets of the Independent

Officers of the

Legislative Assembly

B. Lekstrom

M. Karagianis

J. Kwan

Motions without Notice

Powers and role of Finance and Government Services Committee

Powers and role of Public Accounts Committee

Powers and role of Crown Corporations Committee

Powers and role of Education Committee

Powers and role of Health Committee

Powers and role of Aquaculture Committee

Powers of Special Committee to Appoint a Merit Commissioner

Powers of Special Committee to Appoint an Ombudsman

Hon. M. de Jong

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

L. Mayencourt

N. Macdonald

J. Yap

H. Bains

D. MacKay

J. Brar

D. Jarvis

[ Page 2333 ]

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2006

The House met at 2:03 p.m.

Tributes

CANADIAN OLYMPIC ATHLETES

Hon. G. Campbell: Let me start by saying that I'm sure everybody in this House sends our thanks and our congratulations to Canada's women's hockey team, who have come home with the gold. Now, I certainly don't want the opposition to read the wrong thing into this, but sometimes women do lead. We do hope that the example set will be followed by Canada's men's hockey team.

I'm sure the House would want to congratulate Denny Morrison of Fort St. John, who won silver, along with other members of his pursuit team. Of course, Sara Renner from the town of Golden — born in Golden — has also won a medal. Canada's athletes are doing extremely well, and I know everyone in this House would like to send them our congratulations.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Campbell: I'd also like to introduce in the House today Patricia and George Beatty from Markham, Ontario, parents of CTV's senior provincial political reporter Jim Beatty. I want both Patricia and George to know that Jim demands that we call him CTV's senior provincial political reporter. They are accompanied by their friends Jack and Linda Cohen, also from Markham, Ontario.

[1405]

I hope they'll let all of their friends from Ontario know that February is a great time to visit British Columbia. It's a lot friendlier; it's a lot warmer. It's a lot more hospitable than Ontario, so keep on coming back.

C. Puchmayr: I have in the gallery today a constituent of mine. His name is Chris Harwood, a new constituent of New Westminster. Please make him feel welcome.

Hon. J. Les: I have four guests in the gallery today. There is Kevin McIntyre, who is the president of the Insurance Brokers Association of British Columbia. He is also president of underwriters insurance group in Kamloops. In addition to him, there is Doug Guedes, who is the vice-president of the Insurance Brokers Association of B.C., and he is a partner in Seafirst Insurance Brokers Ltd. in Sidney. As well, we have Jim Barton, who is the president and CEO of Hub International Barton insurance brokers in the beautiful community of Chilliwack. Lastly, we have Chuck Byrne, who is the executive director of the Insurance Brokers Association of B.C. and who is located in Vancouver.

They will be inviting members to a reception later on today and are engaged in various meetings as well. I would ask the members of the House to please make these gentlemen welcome.

D. Chudnovsky: In the gallery today are two constituents of mine, Tali Roels and Maggie Rader. I first met Tali and Maggie during the election campaign last May when I knocked on their door. Tali, who is and was eight years old, questioned me rather seriously about a number of important issues. She did a terrific job. I think she will join this House one day. Would you please make Tali Roels and Maggie Rader welcome.

Hon. G. Abbott: I have three guests in the gallery today. My wife Lesley is here. She is accompanied by, for me at least, not one but two sisters-in-law: Kathryn Temple, who is from Creston, and Kathleen Johnson, who's from White Rock. I'd like the House to make them all welcome.

A. Dix: It is my pleasure to introduce in the gallery today a former member of this assembly, a former Member of Parliament and the person who was the minister responsible for sport when British Columbia, Vancouver-Whistler, won the Canadian Olympic bid in 2000. I would like to introduce my friend Ian Waddell.

D. Routley: Could I have the members of the House help me welcome a constituent and friend, Rob Dawes from Duncan.

B. Ralston: I would ask the assembly to welcome Alan Ip, who's a Vancouver lawyer appearing here today in the Court of Appeal. But more importantly for this place perhaps, he is an alumnus of the B.C. Youth Parliament and its current registrar.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) MUDSLIDE IN THE PHILIPPINES

R. Lee: The world reacted with heartache on Friday as a mountain on the Philippine island of Leyte collapsed and covered the tiny village of Guinsaugon in up to 30 metres of mud and debris. The 800-metre Mount Kanabag, weakened by two metres of heavy rain that fell in two weeks, was turned into a field of mud that covered 40 hectares of the village.

It's believed that only three out of the village's 300 homes were not buried by the mud. It is estimated that this catastrophe has cost over 1,000 lives, including 250 children and their teachers who were buried in their school. According to the most recent reports, only 100 bodies have been recovered.

This human tragedy has moved people all around the world. Pictures and reports describing survivors digging through the mud with their bare hands, trying to rescue their friends and families, are a poignant reminder of the fragility of our existence compared to the forces of nature.

[1410]

In Canada there are an estimated 350,000 people who trace their roots to the Philippines. Many of these

[ Page 2334 ]

Filipino Canadians call British Columbia home, and their communities have been in mourning since the events unfolded.

As parliamentary secretary for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and on behalf of my colleagues, I would like to offer my condolences to British Columbia's Filipino community for their loss. Our hearts go out to them at this time of tragedy and grieving.

STANLEY DANIELS

C. Wyse: Today I rise in the House to recognize a grade 12 student from 100 Mile House. In addition to having been chosen as the role model for first nations youth in the Cariboo-Chilcotin, he was chosen as one of nine youths selected from across Canada to participate in the Gemini Project. This project is a leadership training program hosted by Royal Roads University. Stanley Daniels is a member of the Canim Lake first nations community. Daniels's performance at another leadership program in Victoria placed him at the top of a list which included 300 other youth whose names were submitted for consideration for this project.

The Gemini Project is a reciprocal mentorship idea where people from two very different sets of experiences come together to learn from, challenge and support each other. Stanley was paired with the Deputy Minister of Forests and Range. The deputy minister brought forward the issue facing him at that time: getting to know a new minister.

I wish to quote this grade 12 student of Peter Skene Ogden Secondary School as he described his experience to the 100 Mile House Free Press . "All of these problems were real life. I worked with the Deputy Minister of Forests, coaching him on problems he was having with the minister. It was really intense because this was their real life, and here I was, a 17-year-old from 100 Mile, trying to help. I was holding onto a table to keep myself from running away, I was so scared."

I don't know whether he had any insights into what was about to unfold for all of us, but I also expect that the deputy minister may have chosen quite different words to describe the situation that they were both in.

Since then, Stanley has used his new-found skills to resolve a situation that developed in his home community, pulling youth and his chief and council together to….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, member.

C. Wyse: Please rise and recognize this individual for his achievements.

INVESTMENT IN MINERAL EXPLORATION

R. Sultan: A statement on the TSX Venture Exchange. When the Vancouver Stock Exchange disappeared into the east in 1999, pessimists believed entrepreneurial finance was permanently impaired in this town. Not so. Led by persons such as Brown, Giustra and Telfer plus Dickenson, Johnson and Catherine McLeod, not to overlook Tognetti and many, many others, Vancouver regrouped, determined to rebuild on the basis of its proven excellence in risk capital. They succeeded spectacularly.

Today Vancouver is the mineral exploration financing capital of the world, easily surpassing New York, London and Toronto. Last year well over $2 billion of mine exploration finance took place right here.

Is all of that mining money destined for B.C.? Well, actually, no. In the 1990s, facing a less than friendly government at home, our entrepreneurs and geologists simply switched their attention abroad through ventures ranging from Mongolia to Peru, from Africa to Spain. Today British Columbians create mines globally and, once again, in B.C. too.

They also extend their skills to other sectors. Today B.C. tech and B.C. biotech are backstopped by the self-same merchant bankers, lawyers and accountants as the mining industry. It turns out that using health sciences to discover gold in a test-tube is not so very different from using geoscience to find gold in a mountain range.

[1415]

What happened to the good old VSE? Well, it's alive and kicking under a new name — the TSX Venture Exchange. While domiciled in that other town east of the Rockies, almost half of its market cap is right here. Hats off to Howe Street — a good and respected name, creating prosperity for all British Columbians and the world.

HERITAGE DAY

G. Gentner: Today is Heritage Day, a day to celebrate and encourage the preservation and promotion of our significant historic, architectural, natural and scenic history. Heritage is our collective treasure given to us to bequeath to our children.

Contrary to what many may claim, B.C.'s heritage is very rich. In B.C. we have sites of great historical importance, but we cannot allow historically significant heritage sites such as Kilby Store or Barkerville to fall into disrepair. These are public cultural assets that need public attention.

In my community one very important archaeological site is threatened by development and neglect. In north Delta alongside the proposed South Fraser perimeter road, under the muck of the Fraser River, lies one of North America's oldest wet archaeological sites, Glenrose. When the ice age receded, the river along north Delta was the mouth of the Fraser. Eight thousand years ago there was no Richmond or Lulu Island or Ladner or a floodplain, but there was a fishing village. When the province built the Alex Fraser Bridge and changed river currents, the province mothballed the site by placing boulders where what now remains.

We may talk about new relationships and new freeways, but today let's think about preserving or at least excavating and documenting that valuable heritage we should so much enjoy. Today we should consider local governments that have incorporated suc-

[ Page 2335 ]

cessful conservation planning strategies, like Nelson and Revelstoke. We need to recognize a renewed strategy of incentives for preservation in light of record real estate prices.

Heritage is our responsibility — everyone's: all communities' and the province's — to preserve our culture. Today we must act before it is all gone.

PREPARATIONS FOR 2010 OLYMPICS

J. McIntyre: With the 2006 Winter Olympics underway in Turin, it marks only four short years until British Columbia hosts the world. A week ago Sunday I joined crowds in Whistler to celebrate the start of the countdown. However, the Olympics are about more than sport and competition. The Olympics bring people across the globe together to celebrate not only our athletes but our arts, cultures and our communities' volunteers.

Right across the province, February 3 to 10, over 70 groups hosted more than 230 events as part of their Spirit of B.C. Week celebrations. These activities develop local programs and events that demonstrate the five elements that define the spirit of B.C. — achievement, effort, inclusion, celebration and excellence.

Other related government programs are also benefiting our communities. The $20 million Olympic Live Sites program, Olympic viewing venues, recreation centres and sporting facilities in communities outside the Greater Vancouver and Squamish-Whistler corridor are now underway. Currently more than 70 live sites have been funded. Through the Arts Now program, 69 organizations in 23 B.C. communities are receiving funding to promote and celebrate their unique arts and culture.

In West Vancouver, I just had the privilege of attending the inaugural WinterSong Festival celebrating diversity in human voice.

Our hosting the games will also provide us an opportunity to showcase our unique first nations heritage and culture, and the Squamish Lillooet cultural centre in Whistler, for example, will provide a boost to our cultural-based tourism efforts.

Lasting legacies will be here for all British Columbians to experience. World-class sporting facilities will be created. Our Tourism Ministry will advance towards its goal of doubling revenues and creating 84,000 new jobs by 2015 through our enhanced reputation as a location for hosting vacations, conventions and sporting events, just like our very successful junior world hockey tournament.

The excitement is building to 2010 as we cheer on our 22 British Columbians and all Canadians in Turin. Go, Canada, go.

DAVID STUPICH

L. Krog: I speak today about a former member of this Legislative Assembly and former Member of Parliament. David Daniel Stupich was born in 1921 in Nanaimo to a Croatian miner father and Scottish Canadian spouse, thus uniting two of Nanaimo's most important communities. He served in this assembly from 1963 to 1969 and from 1972 until 1988.

[1420]

He, like other politicians, had a great reputation clouded by scandal. Sir John A. Macdonald, the Pacific Railway scandal. Even a former Premier of this province, by court proceedings that followed his premiership, Bill Bennett. He was more than a scandal.

He was the Minister of Agriculture who early in his days in this Legislature, long before he became a member of a government, advocated for the agricultural land reserve. It is probably one of the most significant pieces of legislation passed in the 20th century in this province, and it has left a lasting and positive legacy for British Columbians.

So I ask this House today to pay tribute to a man who, like all of us, was mixed but in sum paid a great price in the public for whatever sins he may have committed in his life. I ask this House to honour a man who left behind, in my view, a better community and a better province than he was born into.

Oral Questions

REINSTATEMENT OF CHILDREN'S COMMISSION

C. James: This past Friday saw recommendations come forward from the coroner's jury in Port Alberni. The jury made 19 recommendations, one for each month of the little girl's life. The last recommendation, number 19, was a direct recommendation to the Premier: reinstate the Children's Commission.

My question is to the Premier. Will this government acknowledge that getting rid of the commission was a mistake, and will they admit in principle that having the independent commission is necessary to protect children at risk?

Hon. G. Campbell: First of all, I appreciate the work that was done by the coroner's jury in examining this tragic case. But I think even members of the coroner's jury would say to us that they would expect us to wait for the report of the independent child and youth officer, to wait for the report of Mr. Ted Hughes. We will consider all of those recommendations, and then we will act on behalf of the children of British Columbia to do what's best for the children of British Columbia.

This is important. We all believe in this House that children should be protected. We all believe in this House that we have to have the kind of responses to these challenges that are comprehensive. I believe the most reasonable and responsible action for us to take is to wait in respect for the work of Ms. Morley and Mr. Hughes, as well as of the coroner's jury, to make sure we do what is best for B.C.'s children.

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

C. James: I'm pleased we finally, finally, have those reviews going on after months and months of other

[ Page 2336 ]

voices. The inquest jury was not the only voice. Those voices were added to social workers' voices, to foster parents' voices, to child advocates and to countless editorials. I will ask the Premier again: will he in principle acknowledge that getting rid of the Children's Commission was wrong and that putting in place an independent office will assist children at risk in this province?

Hon. G. Campbell: I join with the Leader of the Opposition and other members opposite in saying that this is a critically important issue. It's important enough that everyone understand what is currently in place in British Columbia. There is an independent officer. She is the independent child and youth officer in British Columbia. There are three reviews that are taking place, and we are going to pursue those reviews.

Let me simply say this. The Ministry of Children and Families has done some pretty exceptional work over the last four years in British Columbia. I think that the workers we have that have been providing us with advice and taking us forward in British Columbia have done very good work, just as others have done very good work. We owe them the respect. We owe all of those people who we've asked to undertake this review the respect that they deserve — that we wait for the reviews to come in. As a government, we will consider all of the recommendations, and then we will act in the best interests of the children of British Columbia.

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

[1425]

C. James: I would like to remind the Premier that when he was on this side of the House, he stood up and supported the implementation of an independent Children's Commission. In fact, he stood up and urged this House to put the resources in place now to assist children at risk, not to wait so that more children would be at risk.

We have seen a minister that is totally out of control of his ministry, does not understand what's going on in this ministry. I would like to ask the Premier: will he get control of his minister and the ministry, or will he replace him and put someone in the job who can do the job on behalf of the children…?

Hon. G. Campbell: First, let me say unequivocally to this House: I have complete confidence in this ministry and, equally important, in this minister. This minister would not be in cabinet if I did not have confidence in this minister.

Let's start understanding this. Every member in this House is concerned about the tragedy that took place in 2002 in Port Alberni — every single member. Let's be clear on that, and let's be clear on what the government has tried to do for the children of British Columbia. We've done what every international expert would tell us is the best thing to do: keep children with their families. That's exactly what this government has done. That's why there are 2,000 fewer children in care today than there were in 2001. That's 2,000 lives that we're providing support and opportunity to, who will have healthier, fuller lives as they go through the next number of years.

We have increased the support for social workers in British Columbia. There are more social workers being trained today. In fact, if you look back — and I think all of us should do that — you'll find that turnover in the ministry amongst social workers has been reduced by 30 percent over the last four years. Does that mean that we don't have problems? Of course there are problems. Does that mean we won't face tragedies? Unfortunately, on occasion there are tragedies that we have to face.

But this is what's important. Let's work together, let's look at the facts, let's invest in our kids, let's invest in the services, and let's make sure that British Columbia kids have the kind of future they all deserve by working together. That's what we're trying to do on this side of the House.

A. Dix: Well, my supplementary to the Premier, then. Since the Premier talks about international experts, can he name one international expert who would have said it would have been a good idea to cut the Ministry of Children and Family Development by 23 percent in January 2002? Can he name one international expert who would say it's a good idea when you're trying to keep families together to cut services to families? Can he name one international expert who would say that it's a good idea to lower child protection standards? Can he name one international expert who wouldn't agree with the jury in Port Alberni that we should reinstate an independent Children's Commission?

Hon. S. Hagen: Let me say, first of all, that we do respect the recommendations and will consider the recommendations from the jury, but in context with the other reviews that are going on by the Hon. Ted Hughes and by the child and youth officer.

However, let me say right at the start that we recognize how difficult the last two weeks have been for the people in Port Alberni. We recognize how difficult they've been for the family. We recognize how difficult it's been for the community and, most particularly, for the Nuu-chah-nulth Nation. I want to say that I've had discussions with the leadership of the Nuu-chah-nulth over the last while, several months, and we acknowledge how difficult it is. Having said that, the family has said to us: "Let's use this tragedy to learn from. Let's see what we can learn."

That's exactly what we're saying as government. We have Mr. Hughes out there examining the child protection issues in B.C. We expect to get some recommendations from Mr. Hughes. We have the child and youth officer as an independent person out there who has filed her report, which will become public in due course.

[ Page 2337 ]

[1430]

Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Kingsway has a supplemental.

A. Dix: I agree with the minister to this extent. The two weeks in Port Alberni were very challenging, and the courage shown by witnesses from the family and social workers to participate in that hearing and to tell the truth in a very difficult

chapter should inspire all of us to want to do better.

One of the many upsetting moments in the testimony at the coroner's inquest was hearing social workers describe the impossible challenge of implementing the negligent and impossibly flawed guidelines sent out by the Ministry of Children and Family Development in 2002. This is what happens on the ground, I say to the Premier, when the cabinet doesn't take these issues seriously.

Can the minister explain why, three and a half years later, all child protection social workers across B.C. have not received formal training in

section 8 kith-and-kin agreements?

Hon. S. Hagen: Let me talk about some of the improvements that have been made since 2002. We've already heard that there are 15 percent fewer children in care. That's good news. Those children are better off with their families. The number of adoptions in the province since 2001 has doubled. That's excellent news for those children.

Social workers now require kith-and-kin caregivers to undergo an additional record check through the B.C. Corrections CORNET database. This provides additional information necessary to ensure the safety of every child. Training and orientation precedes the implementation of new policies. A new audit process assures that every delegated agency presently has its own operational standards audited every three years. The core training and orientation period for delegated agency staff now meets that of ministry social workers.

ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS

OF PORT ALBERNI INQUEST

L. Krog: At the conclusion of the inquest, the jury made several other key recommendations, including the duty of police and other public officials to report suspected child abuse under

section 14 of the Child, Family and Community Service Act.

Additionally, they made specific recommendations with respect to the RCMP and the follow-up that they should have done in this case with the pathologist and social workers, especially in regard to the placement and leaving of a second child in an unsafe home. These recommendations echo the observations made in the director's case review of April 26, 2005.

My question is: as this case showed a clear and tragic failing to protect children as demanded under

section 14 of the act, what plans does the Solicitor General have to follow up with the RCMP to implement the recommendations made by the jury in the Port Alberni inquest?

Hon. J. Les: I appreciate the fact that members opposite are very interested in the recommendations that the coroner's jury made the other day. I was, frankly, somewhat taken aback a few weeks ago when the member for Vancouver-Kingsway was very dismissive of the coroner's inquest process and publicly drew into question whether the process had any utility whatsoever. I think we appreciate the recommendations that were made the other day. They are being studied closely by both the coroner's office and the RCMP, and the appropriate actions will be taken.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Nanaimo has a supplemental.

L. Krog: If I can draw the Solicitor General back to the observations made in the director's case review: "When a child dies, and there is no immediate evidence available to confirm the cause of death, a team of pre-identified health and social workers should be available to be consulted to determine the appropriate course of action, if any, to be taken with regard to any other child welfare concerning the home."

My question to the Solicitor General, again, is: does he support these observations, and will he act on them?

[1435]

Hon. J. Les: As I have already said, these recommendations that come from the coroner's inquest are extremely important recommendations. We intend to work with all agencies to which they apply, such as the RCMP and such as the coroner's office, to ensure that going forward, children in B.C. are absolutely protected to the best of our ability.

INVESTIGATION OF CASES

OF MISSING WOMEN ON HIGHWAY 16

J. Brar: About three weeks ago I met with a number of representatives of various organizations in the Prince George area to discuss the women missing on Highway 16, which is also known as the highway of tears. The people told me very clearly about their disappointment with regard to the inaction by the Solicitor General's ministry. Last week we saw the body of another young woman who had gone missing on the highway. My question is to the Solicitor General. Can the Solicitor General explain his plan to increase the safety of these women living around Highway 16?

Hon. J. Les: Like all British Columbians, we certainly are shocked at the murders and apparent murders that are occurring along Highway 16. It is a priority of the authorities to get to the bottom of this and find out who the perpetrators are and to bring them to justice. At the moment some 22 members of the RCMP are dedicated to this investigation, as well as a considerable number of other members who are reviewing all

[ Page 2338 ]

of the files that have occurred along that corridor over quite a number of years, to see whether there are any commonalities in any trends or anything at all that might be learned from any of those files. So it is very much a priority of our government. It is very much a priority of the RCMP to get the facts and to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge has a supplemental.

J. Brar: I understand exactly what the RCMP is doing. In fact, I also met the regional chief of the RCMP when I was in Prince George. What I don't understand is the priority of this government. I am not asking what the RCMP is doing. I'm asking: what is the vision of this government? That's my question.

Again to the Solicitor General. I would like to ask: what additional and proactive measures are being taken to ensure the safety of these women around Highway 16?

Hon. J. Les: I can report to the House that our government has actually been a national leader in terms of the integration of police resources. In fact, when we look at an investigation such as this one around Highway 16, for example, the Integrated Homicide Investigation Team will be very much involved in that. We have made it a priority of our government to ensure that all of the police resources that we have across British Columbia are as integrated as it is possible to be, in order to get the results that we need for the people.

As well, we have invested significant new resources in policing — to $125 million, which was just announced by the Premier less than a year ago, which over time will result in the addition of 400 more police officers across British Columbia. I think our government has taken the lead in terms of keeping our communities safe in British Columbia.

FUNDING FOR WOMEN'S CENTRES

D. Thorne: My question is to the Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Women's Issues. Advocacy and prevention were two of the key mandates of B.C. women's centres. Advocacy and prevention are part of the work that needs to be done to prevent further tragedies around the highway of tears. Will the minister commit today to restore funding to the women's centres across this province?

[1440]

Hon. I. Chong: Our commitment to protecting women fleeing abuse and children witnessing abuse has been a priority of this government. Last year we provided an additional 30-percent increase in the funding for those direct essential services for women.

Also, recently we announced an initiative that would allow us to focus on prevention of violence, and more initiatives that the local communities can access, so that they can work towards providing some initiatives that deal with safety which target specific groups. We will continue to do that. Our commitment is about focusing services to protect women. We will continue to do that.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: Last year on March 31, all 37 women's centres in British Columbia had their funding cut by 100 percent — a paltry $1.7 million in savings to an uncaring government. Recently our caucus met with women in Prince George. They complained of the lack of funding to deal with the issues around the highway of tears. One-off and sporadic project funding, to which the minister has just referred, does not provide the resources for any ongoing and sustained advocacy and prevention work.

Again, I ask: will this minister commit today to the restoration of core funding to women's centres so that they can get on with providing the leadership needed on issues of advocacy and further prevention of violence towards women?

Hon. I. Chong: As I've indicated, we increased the base funding for women's services, direct services to women, by a record $12.5 million per year — the largest increase in a decade.

You know, the opposition can speak to increases for services all they wish. But when they had the opportunity to do so, when they supposedly balanced the budget, did they provide that increase? No, they did not. We did. We will continue to provide direct services focusing on women to prevent violence and to provide services for counselling. We've increased that. That is occurring around the province. I have visited a number of transition houses and a number of resource centres, and they continue to receive funding from this ministry to provide those services.

INCENTIVES FOR STAFF AT MINISTRY OF

EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME ASSISTANCE

C. Trevena: I have a question for the Minister of Employment and Income Assistance. I would like to ask him to confirm that his ministry staff are receiving incentives — rewards of free dinners or free luncheons — if they deny people the benefits and crisis grants that they are legally entitled to.

Hon. C. Richmond: I don't think I quite heard all of the question. It was something to do with free lunches or incentive grants to staff. Maybe if the member could elucidate and just be a little bit more explicit. I must have missed something.

Mr. Speaker: Member for North Island. This isn't a supplemental.

C. Trevena: This is not a supplemental. This is the same question.

[ Page 2339 ]

I wanted to ask the minister whether he can confirm that staff in his ministry offices around the province are receiving rewards of free lunches and free dinners if they deny people their benefits and their crisis grants.

Hon. C. Richmond: I didn't think I'd heard the question right the first time. Now that I have heard it right, I think it's absolutely absurd. If it is happening, it's certainly without my knowledge. But I doubt it very, very much.

Mr. Speaker: Member for North Island has a supplemental.

C. Trevena: Again for the Minister of Employment and Income Assistance. Minister, we know that in Port Alberni, Nanaimo and Powell River alone, staff have been offered incentives if they come in under budget — effectively denying people their assistance.

I would like to ask the minister….

[1445]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

C. Trevena: I would like to ask the minister whether he doesn't agree that moneys should be going into benefits and crisis grants, not into gimmicks and rewards.

Hon. C. Richmond: I honestly feel that the question is preposterous, but I would ask the member to name names. Give me the name of someone who is doing this, if you have such a name, and I will look into it.

COVERAGE OF BANK ACCOUNT CHARGES

FOR INCOME ASSISTANCE RECIPIENTS

J. Horgan: My question is also for the Minister of Employment and Income Assistance. It refers to last week's gimmick — the gimmick of free socks and travel mugs for income assistance recipients who would sign up for direct-deposit payments. My question is straightforward and simple, and if his seatmate wants to add some utility to this process, perhaps the minister can answer the question directly. Will he cover the costs of bank charges for those income assistance recipients who sign on for this new program?

Hon. C. Richmond: Once again, I think the members opposite have lost sight of what we're trying to do with this program. We are trying to keep their subsistence money out of the hands of those who prey on them every cheque dispensation day. If we can encourage these people to go to a direct-deposit system to keep these people who prey on them away from them by offering them five pairs of new socks, then I think it is well worth it.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Malahat–Juan de Fuca has a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Yes, again to the Minister of Employment and Income Assistance. I don't deny for a second that it would be a useful policy to get people away from direct cheque-cashing companies and other nefarious activities the minister touched on last week. But this is a simple question. It can be answered with a simple answer. Will your ministry cover the service charges? Banks are going to be making more money out of this, potentially, than the cheque-cashers. Will you commit to do that today?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. C. Richmond: First of all to the member, the money marts who now cash their cheques charge considerably more than the banks do to cash the same things.

Secondly, we have arrangements with several financial institutions around the province, and specifically in the downtown east side, to assist these people, and their charges will be minimal.

Perhaps the member is suggesting that we should open a bank down there. I think maybe he should look into the history books to find out how successful the Four Corners bank was in the downtown east side.

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURAL POLICY

B. Ralston: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Lands. On Friday his ministry announced the formation of a committee to begin the study of an agricultural policy, which would be accompanied by a provincewide consultation. The news release calls this committee a committee of the Legislature; however, the minister has appointed only Liberal MLAs to this committee.

Now, I welcome the Liberal Party's interest in agricultural policy, but shouldn't the Liberal Party pay for this provincewide tour rather than the taxpayers of British Columbia?

Hon. P. Bell: I am sure the member will recall the conversation I had with him in the hallway, suggesting that we would embrace the vision of the opposition in terms of the development of a long-term agricultural plan for the province of British Columbia. We take this business very, very seriously, unlike the opposition. It was mentioned seven times in our Speech from the Throne.

[1450]

This committee is going to go out and do some very, very important work for the province. We think it is appropriate, in fact, that our caucus funding process will work to support this along with some ministry work.

[ Page 2340 ]

But we look forward to the opposition bringing forward their recommendations, and certainly we will incorporate that as part of our plan.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey-Whalley has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: The reports, in the previous administration, of these Liberal-only committees which toured the province — mining, invasive plants and land use planning — ended up as reports to the cabinet and were confidential and never released to the public. Will the minister commit today to release that report publicly rather than holding onto it? Who knows what's in it? Perhaps some secret recommendations on the agricultural land reserve.

Hon. P. Bell: I would encourage the member to look at the work as an example of some of the other activities. The Small-Scale Salvage Committee — there's an excellent piece of work that was put up on the website. Certainly, some of the work that was produced through the Results-Based Code Committee was key work that's very, very productive and has led this government forward.

As I said — and I'm not sure what's complicated about this — I've encouraged the members, as I did last week, to bring forward their recommendations in terms of what they proposed for agriculture in the province, and we'll be incorporating their thoughts in regards to this in the report.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, I have the honour to present the report of the Chief Electoral Officer regarding the 38th provincial general election, 2005, Referendum on Electoral Reform .

Reports from Committees

B. Lekstrom: Today I have the honour to present the second report of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services for the first session of the 38th parliament entitled Annual Review of the Budgets of the Independent Officers of the Legislative Assembly .

I would move that the report be taken as read and received.

M. Karagianis: I stand as the Deputy Chair of that committee to say that the opposition is in support of this report, but I do have several issues that I would like to speak on today with regard to the report.

I think, first and foremost, that it's very important for us to ensure that statutory officers of government are properly resourced. In each of these cases, these are bodies that act on behalf of the public. Therefore when they come to us with requests for resources, those are serious, and government should do its utmost to make sure that all of those statutory officers' duties are adequately funded and resourced.

There is a growing need and concern by the public for oversight of government activities. We will see that continue in the future, and in fact it will grow. The public has become more concerned, more interested, more attentive to government spending, and their demands for oversight of that will continue. It is a responsibility of both sides of this House to ensure that that oversight is provided.

Therefore, I would like to voice our concern about some funding requests that were not granted to a particular statutory department, and notice that in the future there will be a demand for those particular services within government. The Auditor General has in fact shown an inclination to provide the kind of oversight to the public that is requested by the public and that is the responsibility of government to give to the public.

It is my duty here to say that we have some concerns with the funding that was not granted to that office, and we'd like to be on record as saying that when the public comes and asks for that oversight and we are unable to present it, we have let them down.

Motion approved.

B. Lekstrom: I ask leave of the House to permit the moving of a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

[1455]

B. Lekstrom: I move that the report be adopted, and in moving the adoption of the report, I wish to make the following statements.

This has become an annual review by the Select Standing Committee of Finance and Government Services on the three-year rolling service plans and the budgets for each of the statutory officers. The committee deposited its report with the Office of the Clerk on December 20, 2005. Therefore, this is one of the earliest opportunities that the committee has had to present this report to the House.

I would like to thank the statutory officers for their presentations to the committee and work in this process. I would also like to thank all of the members who worked so hard on this committee to deal with this.

In responding, this is what I find a very important committee of this Legislative Assembly. We deal not only with the prebudget consultation paper, but as we see in this report, the statutory officers, which are independent officers of this Legislative Assembly who truly are the oversight for the public of British Columbia. As in all cases, we have budgets presented to us, our committee reviews them, goes through formal discussions with the independent officers and, through our deliberations as a committee, comes with our recommendations to this floor, being the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

It has been certainly a worthwhile project. I do want to point out that although the budgets have been

[ Page 2341 ]

presented here today in our report, we look forward to the budget of British Columbia being presented tomorrow. It's important to note — and I want to just respond to the issue of the Auditor General's request — there was a significant lift in the Auditor General's budget this year to the tune of half a million dollars. That's a significant amount, so I don't want to leave any British Columbian with the thought that the budget for the Auditor General was decreased in any manner. It was increased.

The Auditor General, as well, can approach our committee at any time throughout the year — and it's our duty as the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services — should he have any concerns with his budget, requiring additional funds to investigate further issues for British Columbians as they bring them forward. That's a very important point.

At no point can the Auditor General be held to the budget. If he wants, he can come and present to our committee again. We then as a committee — as we've done in the due process that we have taken on so seriously for this Legislative Assembly and for all British Columbians — will evaluate, determine and, through discussion with the Auditor General or any other independent officer of this province, make our decision and report back to this Legislative Assembly.

J. Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Finance Committee. I wish to also just respond to the report that has been tabled and, particularly, to respond to the Chair of the committee in his reporting out.

Let me just state very clearly — and let me also quote from the report — that the Auditor General actually came forward and asked the Finance Committee for two sets of funding increases. One was the $800,000 increase. That would simply allow the Auditor General's office to do the examination to the "rigorous quality assurance standards being implemented with the accounting and auditing community," which would allow the Auditor General's office to continue "financial statement coverage over the broader government reporting entity which now includes school districts, universities, colleges and health organizations."

Let me just pause from quoting from the report for a moment here. With that change, it increased the work to the Auditor General significantly, and therefore that $800,000 increase was essential for him to do the basic work that is required and expected of him from that office.

"The $800,000 also provided for additional tools and supports, such as training and development, to ensure the office retains the skills and expertise needed to carry out the work plan."

Let me just pause for a moment here because as we all know that across Canada now, we have a situation whereby we have a major skills shortage, and that is no exception amongst the accounting world as well. The Auditor General is experiencing that, and he needed some of that $800,000 to retain and to train the staff so that they could do the job that they are expected to do.

Last but not least, more timely audits in certain risk areas are essential for the government to be held to account. I think on behalf of all British Columbians…. For that's what the Auditor General's office does.

The Auditor General is an officer of the Legislature. His job is to ensure that the government is held to account on the things they say they will do — more to the point, on the $500,000 that the Auditor General's office asked for, which was denied by the committee that was comprised of the majority of the government members, just so that the Auditor General can do two risk audits in areas that are experiencing fundamental changes in the way in which the government operates.

[1500]

In the area of privatization we've seen fundamental changes in the direction this government wants to go in, but the government does not want the Auditor General's office to have the funding to look into those areas to see if they're delivering what they say they are.

The other piece that I would say is essential for the Auditor General's office to get funding for is, of course, this looming skills shortage, which impacts significantly on the capital projects and the cost overruns. Why wouldn't the government, which says that it's open and accountable and responsible, want the Auditor General's office to go in and make sure they're doing the work that they are doing to give British Columbians the kind of reassurance they want — that the government is, in fact, managing their resources well?

With that, I simply want to highlight these points. The Auditor General's office deserves that $500,000, and I urge the Minister of Finance to consider that for tomorrow's budget.

B. Lekstrom: As the Chair, I would like to close the debate with a couple of words.

I think, as I indicated earlier, all of our independent officers are vitally important to how our province runs and how it has the independent oversight for British Columbians of how government operates in the projects it takes on.

The Auditor General is no exception to that. He presented his report. We as a committee discussed it, we debated it, we talked with the Auditor General, we reached our conclusion within our committee unanimously to present to this House, we brought it to this House, and today we're presenting the report.

I'm going to reiterate my thanks to the members of the committee for the work they put into this. There's a great deal of learning. There's a great deal that has to go into the work of the Finance Committee in order to come to the point we're at today in presenting this report.

The issue I want to close on, though, is to make sure that every British Columbian is clear. The Auditor General in British Columbia received a significant increase in this year's budget. He also has the ability to approach the Select Standing Committee on Finance should he require additional funds to do the work of the province of British Columbia on their behalf. The issue is that committee will then make recommendations to the floor of this Legislature.

[ Page 2342 ]

Again, I'm proud to have been the chair of this committee. I'm proud of the work the committee members did on behalf all British Columbians, and I think it's a tremendous report.

Motion approved.

Motions without Notice

Hon. M. de Jong: For the information of members, I have a series of motions that relate to the committee structure. Just in terms of the procedural niceties of this, what I propose to do today, and I think my friend the Opposition House Leader is aware, is charge the committees and, in most instances, recharge the committees. A committee of selection will then meet later this week, assuming we can arrange that at a mutually convenient time, and deal with the task of assigning individuals to the committees.

Today these motions are designed to charge or recharge the committees, most of which, if not all of which, were functioning when we last met during the fall session.

POWERS AND ROLE OF FINANCE

AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: By leave I move firstly that:

[The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services be empowered:

1. To examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to the pre-budget consultation report prepared by the Minister of Finance in accordance with

section 2 of the

Budget Transparency and Accountability Act and, in particular, to

(

a) Conduct public consultations across British Columbia on proposals and recommendations regarding the provincial budget and fiscal policy for the coming fiscal year by any means the committee considers appropriate, including but not limited to public meetings, telephone and electronic means;

(

b) Prepare a report no later than

November 15, 2006 on the results of those consultations; and

2. (

a) To consider and make recommendations on the annual reports, rolling three-year service plans and budgets of the following statutory officers:

Auditor General;

Chief Electoral Officer;

Conflict of Interest Commissioner;

Information and Privacy Commissioner;

Ombudsman;

Police Complaint Commissioners; and,

(

b) To examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to other matters brought to the Committee's attention by any of the Officers listed in 2(

a) above.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, the committee shall be empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the

House is adjourned and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may

be convenient; and

(

d) to retain personnel as required to assist

the committee,

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment or at the next following session, as the case may be, to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

With further leave, it is the same motion that was passed previously, and I will move that that committee be charged with its task, as has become the regular format here.

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

[1505]

POWERS AND ROLE OF

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: Similarly, by leave I move that:

[1. The reports of the Auditor General of British Columbia deposited with the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly during the Second session of the Thirty-Eighth parliament be deemed referred to the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts, with the exception of the report referred to in

section 22 of the Auditor General Act, which is referred to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. And, in addition, that the following reports of the Auditor General of British Columbia be referred to the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts:

a. Government of BC and Office of the Auditor General Report An Assurance Program for BC: A Progress Report on the February 2002 Recommendations of the Public Accounts Committee of BC Related to Building Better Reports

(September 2004).

b. Auditor General Report No. 6, 2004/2005

Leading the way: Adopting Best Practices in Government Financial Reporting — 2003/2004

(November 2004).

c. Auditor General Report No. 8, 2004/2005

Follow-up of 2002/2003 Report 5: Managing Contaminated Sites on Provincial Lands

(November 2004).

d. Auditor General Report No. 9, 2004/2005

Follow-up of Two Health Risk Reports (December 2004).

e. Auditor General Report No. 12, 2004/2005

Third Follow-up Report of Management Consulting Engagements in Government (March 2005).

f. Auditor General Report No. 13, 2004/2005

Building Momentum for Results-based Management: A Study about Managing for Results in British Columbia (March 2005).

g. Auditor General Report No. 1, 2005/2006,

Follow-up of the Recommendations of the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts contained in its Fourth

[ Page 2343 ]

Report of the 3rd Session of the 36th Parliament:

Earthquake Preparedness; Performance Audit (May 2005).

h. Auditor General Report No. 2, 2005/06,

Joint Follow-up of 2001/2002: Report 1 Managing Interface Fire Risks and Firestorm 2003 Provincial Review (May 2005).

i. Auditor General Report No. 3, 2005/2006,

Audit of the Government's Corporate Accounting System:

Part 1 (June 2005).

2. That the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts be the committee referred to in sections 2, 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 of the Auditor General Act.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the Committee be empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the

House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may

be convenient; and

(

d) to retain personnel as required to assist

the Committee,

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

This, again, is the motion by which these reports are referred to that committee. The motion then, as is standard, provides the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts with the usual powers to conduct those examinations, and I with leave so move.

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

POWERS AND ROLE OF

CROWN CORPORATIONS COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: Next, again, a standard motion for the session with respect to the Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations — that it be appointed to review the annual reports and service plans of B.C. Crown Corporations and that its members be provided with the usual powers to do so. I move that:

[the Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations be appointed to review the annual reports and service plans of British Columbia Crown Corporations.

In addition to the powers previously conferred

upon the Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations, the Committee be empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the

House is adjourned and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may

be convenient; and

(

d) to retain personnel as required to assist

the Committee,

and shall report to the House as soon as possible or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

Motion approved.

POWERS AND ROLE OF

EDUCATION COMMITTEE

[The Select Standing Committee on Education be empowered to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to address the specific challenge of adult literacy and, in particular, to conduct consultations to consider:

1. Successful strategies from other jurisdictions

on the promotion of adult literacy.

2. Specific strategies to improve literacy rates

In addition to the powers previously conferred

upon the Select Standing Committee on Education, the Committee shall be empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the

House is adjourned and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may

be convenient; and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to

assist the Committee,

and shall report to the House no later than November 30, 2006, to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

[ Page 2344 ]

Motion approved.

POWERS AND ROLE OF

HEALTH COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: Next, by leave, the Select Standing Committee on Health, again, originally charged in the fall of '05 to conduct an examination and inquiry and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to change behaviour and encourage children and youth to adopt lifelong health habits that will improve their health and curb the growing rate of obesity.

The committee is charged with four specific terms of reference which are duplicated in this motion from that which it was charged in the fall of '05. Again, the committee and its members are provided with the standard range of authorities and powers and asked to report to the House no later than November 30, 2006.

[The Select Standing Committee on Health be empowered to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to change behaviour and encourage children and youth to adopt lifelong health habits that will improve their health and curb the growing rate of obesity to achieve the great goal of leading the way in North America in healthy living and physical fitness.

The Committee is also empowered to conduct consultations and to:

1. Report on recommendations from the Select Standing Committee on Health Report from 2004 titled

The Path to Health and Wellness: Making British Columbians Healthier by 2010 .

2. Conduct research into other successful

childhood health and wellness promotion campaigns in other jurisdictions to analyze their potential effectiveness in BC.

3. Undertake discussions on how to promote

childhood health and wellness including the appropriate use of incentives and disincentives to help influence behaviour, particularly as it relates to healthy nutrition and physical activity.

4. Undertake discussions with experts and if

necessary undertake research into the factors contributing to unhealthy eating and physical inactivity in youth of today.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Health, the Committee shall be empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the House is

adjourned and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be

convenient; and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist

the Committee,

and shall report to the House no later than November 30, 2006, to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

Motion approved.

POWERS AND ROLE OF

AQUACULTURE COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: In the fall a Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture was charged. This motion, with leave, simply duplicates that assignment from the fall session. Members will know that this committee was asked to report to the House as soon as possible but not later than May 31, 2007.

I move that:

[A Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture be appointed to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to Sustainable Aquaculture in British Columbia and in particular, without limiting the generality of the foregoing to consider:

1. The economic and environmental impacts of the aquaculture industry in B.C.

2. The economic impact of aquaculture on

B.C.'s coastal and isolated communities.

3. Sustainable options for aquaculture in B.C.

that balance economic goals with environmental imperatives, focusing on the interaction between aquaculture, wild fish and the marine environment.

4. B.C.'s regulatory regime as it compares to

other jurisdictions.

5. Solicit and consider written and oral

submissions from any interested person or organization by any means the Committee considers appropriate;

The Special Committee so appointed shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and is also empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the

House is adjourned and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may

be convenient;

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to

assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible but no later than May 31, 2007 or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

Motion approved.

[1510]

POWERS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE

TO APPOINT A MERIT COMMISSIONER

Hon. M. de Jong: By leave again, this relates to a special committee that was appointed in the fall of '05, a committee of selection to unanimously recommend to

[ Page 2345 ]

the assembly the appointment of an individual to hold office as the Merit Commissioner — again, the standard set of powers for the committee of selection and to report to the House as soon as possible.

I so move:

[A Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously recommend to the Legislative Assembly, pursuant to

section 5.01 of the

Public Service Act , R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 385, the appointment of an individual to hold office as the Merit Commissioner for the Province of British Columbia, and that the Special Committee so appointed shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee, and is also empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during any period in which the House

is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be

convenient; and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment of the House, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon the resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative

Assembly.]

Motion approved.

POWERS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE

TO APPOINT AN OMBUDSMAN

Hon. M. de Jong: Finally. Again, last fall a special committee of selection was appointed to unanimously recommend the appointment of an Ombudsman to this assembly — the usual set of powers with the request that the committee report to the House as soon as possible.

I so move.

[A Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously recommend the appointment of an Ombudsman, pursuant to

Section 2 (2) of the

Ombudsman Act (RSBC 1996 c. 340), and that the said Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the House is

adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as many be

convenient; and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist

the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

Motion approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: For the information of members, all of the motions will be on deposit, and my friend the Opposition House Leader has them as well. If there are any questions….

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: I know some members are transfixed by my oratory when I deliver these and regret the passing of the moment, but I do not.

The motions will be available, and the committee of selection will, I hope, meet later in the week to confirm the names of members who are assigned to do these tasks. I think that's all.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued debate on the throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

L. Mayencourt: It's a great pleasure to rise and speak to the Speech from the Throne. This short document lays out a blueprint for where British Columbia is headed over the next year, and I want to say that I'm very, very proud to stand in this Legislature and speak in favour of it.

Before I begin, I would like to also thank my constituents. As the member for Vancouver-Burrard, I have the pleasure of representing about 90,000 people in the downtown peninsula. It's a great neighbourhood, and it's made up of several different communities. It is that mixture of communities that makes it so diverse and such a wonderful place to be.

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

Whether you're standing on the shores of Coal Harbour and looking at the lands that have been developed by the Bayshore community, where we now have the brand-new performing arts lodge being built or seaside affordable housing for our neighbourhood, it's just a great place to be. Of course, we've got a wonderful community centre there.

Coal Harbour is growing quite rapidly, and that means we will soon be needing to deal with some of the issues that come with a growing neighbourhood. One of those is that we've got a little bit of a baby boom happening down there, so we're going to be needing a school pretty soon. We already have a number of young children in that neighbourhood,

[ Page 2346 ]

but I expect that this trend will continue and that soon we will have need of a Coal Harbour elementary school somewhere.

Yaletown, by contrast, has already got its brand-new school. Elsie Roy is a school that I'm very, very proud of. It is named after a very wonderful teacher from the Vancouver school system. Elsie Roy has a wonderful principal. Isabel Grant is the principal there, a wonderful person that has made quite a difference in the neighbourhood. Elsie Roy Elementary School is home to about 400 new students right now. Many of them come through the early childhood development programs at the neighbouring Dorothy Lam Centre.

Yaletown has become really a model community. It's become a place where people know they are appreciated, where different views are understood, and it's got kind of an energy to it.

[1515]

One of the more traditional neighbourhoods in my neighbourhood is, of course, the West End. It is home to about 40,000 people — about half of the constituency — and a great community as well. We have a couple of schools there. I think it's important I note that one of our principals, Patti Lefkos, who has been instrumental in creating the Vancouver inner-city educators committee, retired this December. It is a great loss to all of us in the neighbourhood because Patty was a really great individual. She really understood inner-city education.

She was someone with a great passion for it, and she brought about a lot of change, not just in my neighbourhood but in neighbourhoods to the east and neighbourhoods to the south.

All of the schools that I've been working with in my neighbourhood — Elsie Roy, King George high school, Lord Roberts and Roberts Annex — have been working very, very hard together to make sure that kids in the downtown core are getting the very best opportunities as far as education goes. I've been very involved in trying to make sure that we do a good job as a province in dealing with some of the unique challenges that exist in the Vancouver school board.

I had the opportunity just recently to meet with individuals from an ESL consortium as well. The ESL consortium is composed of six school districts. North Vancouver, Vancouver, Richmond, Burnaby, Coquitlam and Surrey take almost 95 percent of the immigrant populations into the province, and so it means that there are lots of things that need to be done. There's a great organization, this consortium of ESL providers, working to make sure that we provide the right level of services there.

I'm also very pleased. We recently had the class-size survey, which was completed in this district of Vancouver. I was very glad to see that British Columbia was doing very, very well on class size but, most particularly, that the school district I'm in, Vancouver school board, was being very accountable to parents and that it had below averages for class sizes. I think that was really, really important.

I took the opportunity this last little while to work on a special project in Vancouver-Burrard. I've mentioned it once or twice before, and that is the Dalai Lama centre for peace and education.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

As many recall during the Dalai Lama's visit in 2004, I had the privilege of being able to work with the organizing committee to make his visit reach as many British Columbians as was possible, and I was very grateful for the opportunity to do that. It was a great experience to meet His Holiness, it was a great experience to work with a terrific bunch of volunteers, and it was a great experience to see 40,000 British Columbians get to see His Holiness the Dalai Lama over the course of a five-day visit.

Members of that volunteer committee have decided that they want to go a step further with the Dalai Lama, and we have started work with the province, with the city of Vancouver and with a lot of different community organizations, particularly colleges and universities in British Columbia, to create the Dalai Lama centre for peace and education in Vancouver.

[1520]

This is an initiative that I am very, very proud of, and I've been working with a large number of people to make sure that it happens. We've also been touched by the generosity of British Columbians that see this as a valuable initiative to have in our community.

The Dalai Lama's mission of recognizing basic human values has also been something that resonates in Vancouver, and it resonates in Vancouver because we've always been a community that really appreci-

[ Page 2347 ]

ated the issues of peace. We, of course, have been the location where a lot of peace rallies have occurred, so this is very nice to see this sort of work continuing on. I'm very optimistic that when the Dalai Lama returns to Vancouver in September of 2006 that not only will he be visiting here and engaging in wonderful dialogues with people in our community, but also perhaps we'll have the opportunity to take out a shovel and make a ground-breaking ceremony for the Dalai Lama centre.

While the Dalai Lama is here, we're going to be doing some very interesting things, and I'm proud that by working on that committee I'm able to help out in that. We're going to have a dialogue that will bring together 500 of the leading businesses in North America, bring them into a conversation with the Dalai Lama and other Nobel prize laureates so that we can talk about the role that business has in creating safe, caring communities. That's something that is very important to me, and it's very important to His Holiness the Dalai Lama as well.

The other part of this that's going to be very, very interesting is we're going to host a forum on mental health and addictions. This is something that…. Of course, in Vancouver there's no escaping the fact that we have issues around mental health and addictions and that we have to try harder. We continue to try very hard to ensure that we provide the services that people need so that they can deal with those addictions and so that they can get the services they need through the mental health system.

As members will know, I've had a great affection for the downtown east side and some of the challenges that are being faced there. Of course, as we look at the issues of mental health and we look at the issues of addictions and stuff, I thought it was really important to see if we could do something a little bit differently. I had the opportunity over the Christmas break to visit a couple of intentional communities. By "intentional communities" I mean these are communities that exist for one specific purpose, one of them being an eco-village up in northern Scotland and another that I want to focus on for a few minutes — that is San Pietro, which is in central Italy.

San Pietro is a village of 2,200 recovering drug addicts. These drug addicts live in this village and work in this village. They stay there for three to five years. They work on their recovery, but in addition to that they become part of an active community, a governance community. They become engaged in how their community is going to look. They are all taught trades or are offered the opportunity to get grade 12 or to go through university or take an apprenticeship program.

San Pietro is a marvellous example of what people can do when they get out of the box, when they understand that there are ways of healing from addictions, healing from mental health issues, and part of that is just becoming part of a community.

One of the things that I noticed when I spent a few days on the streets of Vancouver was that many of the homeless people, many of the people with addictions, are completely disconnected from our community, and that's really something that stunts people's growth. It stops them from having the opportunity to participate. It stops them from being able to feel like they are valued in the community, and through low self-esteem and other things, they end up in a cycle of addiction and dependence and what have you. So I'm very interested in seeing us look at this kind of a model in British Columbia.

The past year meant that we had a civic election, as well, and I want to offer my congratulations to our new mayor, Sam Sullivan. Sam is obviously in Torino today because he's going to be accepting the Olympic flag for Vancouver and for British Columbia. I know that Sam is a great guy who has done a lot for the city of Vancouver. I want to pay tribute and also thank very much Mayor Larry Campbell, now Senator Larry Campbell, for his contributions to our city and also to individuals, such as Jim Green, who have done a lot of work in the downtown east side.

I'm sorry that they won't be sitting on city council, but I know that their legacy will live on, and I'm sure that we will have opportunity to hear from both of them in the future as well.

[1525]

I had the pleasure of looking over the Speech from the Throne, and I want to talk for a minute about some of the initiatives that are there. One of them that has really touched my heart has been our relationship with first nations. Just a couple of weeks ago we had a press conference, and the Premier announced the land use strategy for the north coast and for the mid-coast.

We had that event at the Pan Pacific downtown in Vancouver, and hundreds of people came to it. One of the great things was that there were a lot of first nations bands represented from all up and down the coast. I heard these individuals, leaders within their communities, talk about the importance of the cooperative relationship that has developed between our government and first nations.

I sat beside the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation and said to him as we were sitting there: "What a long way we have come." There's a new kind of attitude in British Columbia around first nations, and it's reflected in just as simple as the word "reconciliation." I'm really proud of what our Premier and my colleagues on this side of the House have done in regards to first nations.

It's a great triumph. It is the right way that we are heading — to make sure that all people in British Columbia are part of our community, that all of us have an opportunity to be at the table. That's something I'm very, very proud of.

I'm also proud of some of our Asia-Pacific initiatives. I think it's very important that we now understand we are reaching out to communities well beyond the borders of Canada to give us prosperity, to have us learn from their cultures, learn from their business practices, to be able to invest and trade with them, to share our culture. I think it's very important, and I'm very pleased with the initiatives that have been launched by this government on the Asia-Pacific.

[ Page 2348 ]

The Premier is often quoted as saying: "There's only one Asia-Pacific province in Canada, and that is British Columbia." We are the link between central Canada and China, Hong Kong and many other nations over on that side. I am particularly pleased because we have finally had an opportunity to work with our federal counterparts and work with civic leaders to create something called the Gateway project.

The Gateway project will be debated in this House many times, I am certain. We started off talking today about it, and I want to just say how inspiring it is to see that our government has moved from 2001, where we didn't really have much to work with, to a time when we can make a commitment of $3 billion to ensure that British Columbia actually benefits from the Asia-Pacific connection we have. We are able to get in there and trade with Asia-Pacific, not merely so that Vancouver can prosper but so that our entire province can prosper — so people in Prince Rupert, in Cranbrook, in Dawson Creek and all around the province can benefit.

Even more so, all of Canada benefits by our strong links to the Asia-Pacific. People in Sudbury will benefit from it. People in Nova Scotia will benefit from it. People all across Canada will benefit, because we have a link to billions and billions of people over on the other side in Asia-Pacific that want to do business with Canada, that need fast access to ports and markets not just in Canada but in North America. I'm very, very proud of the work that our Minister of Transportation and our Premier have done in regards to this.

I know that tomorrow is a big day for us. Tomorrow is the day that we'll be talking about our budget, and I want to say I have a lot of respect for the people that have worked together to make British Columbia prosperous. We've come a long way from 2001, as I said, when quite frankly, we were in the hole. We've had an opportunity to build up our strength, to grow, to become a have province instead of a have-not province, and it's a great privilege for me to wait for the budget tomorrow.

[1530]

I have great hopes for all of the opportunity that lies ahead for British Columbia, and I know our Finance Minister has worked steadily with people from every sector of our economy to ensure that what we are doing keeps us on the right track. We need a continued thriving economy in order to grow and be able to meet the challenges that are before us. We need to keep a strong economy so that we can afford to look after kids, so that we can afford to look after the homeless, so that we can look after those most vulnerable in our society.

We had a debate earlier this morning around homelessness. I want to tell you about a program that has been initiated in my neighbourhood, which has been very, very successful and that I hope will spread to other neighbourhoods.

As members will know, there are particular challenges in reaching some of the folks that are homeless in our communities. The Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance launched an initiative three months ago, and it's been a pilot in my neighbourhood. What happens is each night members of that ministry have gone into the streets in Vancouver-Burrard. They have talked to homeless people. They have said, "Listen, let's go have a cup of coffee or breakfast or a smoke" — whatever it takes to get them engaged in a conversation.

Once they've had a chance to establish a rapport, a chance to work with those individuals to gain some trust, they have taken them before the offices have opened over to the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. They've got them signed up and done an emergency intake on them so that they can get access to welfare, so that on that very same day they can find a place to live.

Now, this is a great project. It's called the homeless outreach program, and I think we just need an "e" on the end because what it stands for is hope. It's hope for people, and it's been very, very successful. As I said, it's modest, but in my neighbourhood we've taken 60 individuals off the street. Sixty individuals have been lifted up from their doorway in some abandoned building or a squat in some park or somewhere. They've been brought into a system that says: "Look, we can try and help you. We can be of help to you."

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

Of those 60 individuals, 53 of them today are still in housing. That's amazing. There are 53 of them still there. That's a big challenge. That's something that these people have not been able to accomplish in years.

I talked today with the executive director of the MEI program in Vancouver, and he tells me that we've still got some problems. Eight of those individuals are still at risk. They are not quite fitting in or settling into the housing that we found for them, and there's some fear that they might yet again end up on the street.

What it does tell me is that out of 60 people in three months, we have now 45 fewer homeless people on the streets of my community, and that is a triumph. That is a sign of a government that is willing to get out of the box and try and do something about homelessness in our communities.

I am also very excited to be part of a government that's been so tremendously influential in getting the Olympics here for 2010. I want to tell you, as was mentioned earlier today, I congratulate all the medal winners in the Olympics that represent Canada and in particular our women's hockey team. I think they did a terrific job. They could be very, very proud of the medals that hang around their necks, and we can be proud to be Canadians because of the efforts that they have made.

We have a number of representatives from Vancouver in the Olympics. We have Manuel Osborne-Paradis in the alpine skiing, the downhill combined and Super-G. We have Mira Leung who's in the singles in figure skating. We have Aaron Lowe from mixed-dance figure skating and Megan Wing. We have Jeffrey Christie in the men's singles, and many, many more British Columbians are part of this.

[ Page 2349 ]

We have a lot of companies that have joined in with us, as well, to be part of this. I'm very excited to be working with partners like Bell, Lululemon, Ainsworth Lumber, Culinary Capers, Electronic Arts, Instyle Ceramics — people that have made a commitment to our Olympic movement here in British Columbia.

I'm very proud of the work that we're doing on the Olympics. I'm proud of the work we're doing in reaching out to those that are most vulnerable. I'm proud of the initiatives we've launched in terms of making sure that ESL programs are available for recent immigrants.

[1535]

I want to talk about another program that I had the opportunity to be involved with, with many members, actually — the member for Richmond-Steveston, the member for Burquitlam, the member for North Vancouver–Seymour and many, many others. That was dealing with some of the issues around international medical graduates. People that were watching us last session will know that this has been an important thing for us. We had only six training spaces for those people, and we wanted to make sure we could expand that. We were able to do that this year. We now have an additional 18 spaces.

That means that a lot more people are going to be able to be trained in British Columbia, brought up to speed with our credentials here. That means people around this province will have greater access to primary care physicians as well as to specialists. I think it's important that people understand that we are not just bringing in general practitioners. We had the opportunity to make sure that we brought in specialists as well.

There are a couple of things on my agenda as we head towards the rest of this session. As you know, I have a couple of bills on the order paper that I hope to advance. The first one is the apology act. I introduced this bill initially last fall, and it was a very, very important step. I think that when you look at things like reconciliation, those things don't happen until someone says sorry.

When we have in some way harmed someone, it is a very natural, compassionate and moral thing to do to say: "I'm sorry." We've had opportunities here in this very Legislature to talk to people that were interned during World War II — the Japanese that were interned in British Columbia — and the Doukhobors who had their children taken away from them during the '50s and early '60s. We have certainly a lot of ground to cover when it comes to first nations.

The apology act is a piece of legislation that enables us to actually do those sorts of things, but it goes even further than that. It goes on to help people with a variety of other issues, and I think it's a piece of legislation whose time has come. Interestingly, the very first day of the session this past week the Ombudsman tabled a report recommending that British Columbia adopt an apology act. This is something that's been used in California, and of course, members will know that it's been used extensively in Australia.

It means that people have the opportunity to apologize without increasing their liability, without offending someone. I think it is very important for us to be able to do that.

The second act that I hope to introduce in this session is to deal with bullying, harassment and intimidation in our school system. I believe that it is time for British Columbia to act decisively and firmly about issues of bullying, harassment and intimidation in our school system. I had the opportunity to travel this province. I've met with thousands and thousands of kids in British Columbia, hundreds and hundreds of teachers. We all know we have to do something better to protect children from the very silly but dangerous things that happen to us in our school system.

I hope that members on both sides of the House will understand that this is an important piece of legislation and that they'll support it and that if they can find ways of enhancing it, they'll be able to offer that to us. It's a great opportunity that I've experienced to introduce a couple of private members' bills before. I think it's really wonderful that members, whether we're on the opposition side or on this side, have that opportunity, and I would hope that we will have a great opportunity to debate both of those bills in the near future.

I want to once again thank all of the people that were involved in getting me re-elected. As you'll know, this was kind of a squeaker for me.

Interjection.

L. Mayencourt: Yeah, I like the landslide tag.

I've got to tell you, winning by 11 votes is a very humbling experience. You get to have a real sense of how important each person is. I really feel that. I've got to tell you I love this job that I have here. I think some days I'm pretty good at it, some days I'm real good at it and some days I'm not. But on balance….

Interjection.

[1540]

L. Mayencourt: Yeah, thank you. I appreciate the love.

I think that this is a great job, and it's a great privilege. For those 11 people, I want to thank you. For the other 12,000, I want to thank you too. I want to thank all the people that live in Vancouver-Burrard. We have an opportunity quite often to get together and talk about things. Boy, I've got some really nice people in my neighbourhood — people that I'm really, really proud of, people that are community-minded and caring, people that are trying to make a difference, people that are trying to make our neighbourhood safer and better for the kids and the seniors and what have you. It's a great privilege to do that.

Some members will know that recently we had a little discussion in my neighbourhood around St. Paul's Hospital. I've got a fair bit of passion when it comes to St. Paul's. St. Paul's is a very important institution in my neighbourhood. As I said, we've got about 90,000 people that live in my neighbourhood. We've got another 150,000 people that come down to the downtown peninsula every day to work. I think that St. Paul's is a

[ Page 2350 ]

very important asset in my neighbourhood. It's an asset that I'm prepared to fight for, and it is something I believe my neighbourhood is willing to fight for. We had over 500 people show up on a very sunny Saturday afternoon to say: "We want to protect our hospital. We want to make sure that we're consulted about its development, and we want to make sure that it's improved and brought up to date."

It is time. British Columbians had a plan to redevelop St. Paul's that got a little halted in 1996, and I'd like to see that plan redeveloped. I'm fully committed to working with all partners in my community — everybody — to make sure we get to keep St. Paul's, to make sure it develops the way it should so we can continue to provide the very best of care that St. Paul's is already known for, for the people in my neighbourhood.

As I said before, it is great to be back in this House. I love being here. I love working with my constituents. I love working with all of the people, both sides of this House, to make sure that we look after the people in British Columbia and do the best that we can.

With that, I'd like to turn the floor over to a member on the other side who is eagerly awaiting the opportunity to speak. I know that they have a great deal to say, and it'll be important. I look forward to listening to it.

Deputy Speaker: The Chair wishes to remind members that should they wish to make a comment, they should do so from their own seats.

I recognize now the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke.

N. Macdonald: Thank you very much for the opportunity to respond to the throne speech. There are a few things that I want to touch on from the throne speech, in particular some conversation from a local perspective around health care and what is alluded to within the throne speech. There is talk about transformative change, about a fundamental change in health care, and I want to talk about that from a local perspective. I want to talk very quickly about education and then for the remainder of the time that I have available to me, I just want to speak about what I intend to do this session — what some of my goals are in terms of addressing the needs of Columbia River–Revelstoke.

To begin with health care, there are four concerns that I would ask government to consider as it looks at what it is describing as transformative change. These are things that people within Columbia River–Revelstoke will be concerned about.

The first is with health change at all. Over the last five years the Kootenays have gone through what was a significant change in the way health care has been delivered. The changes for the most part were handled poorly. If you were to ask people in my part of the province — and that's all that I can speak for, but certainly I know for sure, having gone through the election process and going door to door — the perception of the vast majority of people is that the actual management of change was very, very poorly done. You had facilities closed before other facilities that were to replace them were ready.

You had people displaced from the community. This is something I spoke to at length in the first speech that I gave to the House, so it's well documented. There is a fear that what can be expressed as bold, as something we shouldn't fear, on the ground it feels reckless and poorly thought through.

[1545]

As we look at what is described in pretty dramatic terms as another major change, I think we have to be mindful of the fact that the record on change is one that is, certainly in my part of the province, something that people are concerned about.

Now, having said that, I want to concede that change is not easy. I want to be clear that there are some things in seniors housing and in other health initiatives that have worked very well and are things that are to be commended, and that some of the directions the government was trying to go in are in fact logical. The point I'm making is around the management of change. That's the first issue that needs to be considered.

The second is around democratic decision-making with regard to health policy. The system that the government has put in place means that there's no direct accountability to rural communities through health authorities' board structure. That is something that was in place, and it's something that people felt there was value in. Over the last five years there have been a number of changes that the communities have tried to express themselves on, to make it clear that there were concerns they wanted the government to address.

For the most part, that felt ignored, so if there's going to be another dramatic change, clearly there has to be a structure in place that allows communities, especially rural communities, to be heard on health policy.

At a different level, but with the same topic as around the mandate for change…. If you look in the Liberal election platform, there were a lot of promises made around health, but there was no discussion during the past election about a fundamental change. The expectation that I would have, if there is going to be a dramatic change, is that there would be a mandate from the public that any dramatic change would be taken to the electorate, and that a clear mandate would be given to government to make the sorts of changes that they are talking about or alluding to.

Third, there is a concern about privatization in general, and the concern is this. A medical service should go to those who need it, based on need — not on where they live, who they are or, certainly, whether they're able to pay. Privatization can change things fundamentally. There is a suspicion, and I think the suspicion is warranted, that with a lot of money to be made, there are going to be interests and pressures on government to create business opportunities. While there's nothing necessarily completely wrong with that, there is the public good that needs to be looked after here, and it is our responsibility to make sure that the public good is looked after.

[ Page 2351 ]

Within the document and within the throne speech there was actually an attempt to calm people's fears about the private system that we see across the border, the system that we're most familiar with, which is the American system. Nevertheless, people have a justified reason for fearing privatization. I've spent most of my life in Canada under a system that, when I'm sick, looks after my own interests and those of my family. It's something that I greatly appreciated. I also spent six years in Africa, where I essentially dealt with a private system that looked at a privileged few and took care of the health concerns of those privileged few.

The experience I have from that is that even if you have access, as part of the privileged group, to health care, it's something that doesn't work well. It doesn't work well because you're in amongst people who are unhealthy. Therefore it's difficult to stay healthy yourself, and you see things that you are not going to be morally comfortable with seeing. I think as a people all of us want to make sure that if somebody is in misery or needs help, we're able to help them. The most efficient way to do that is through a public health system. The history of Canada putting together this system is something that we certainly don't want to take for granted.

There is also concern that a private system, if it is going to save money…. If you're going to get savings through privatization, you do that by removing services to certain people.

[1550]

Certainly with the Liberal government, there are many examples of the disadvantaged being treated poorly. The concern with health reform would be that you would again see services removed from poorer people, and that's where the savings would come from.

The fourth thing is around centralization in health care. The rural communities, through the Social Credit and the New Democrats, had social infrastructure subsidized. You don't have the economies of scale in a small rural community, so you did have services, and communities would find it difficult to provide those same sorts of services if you went to a strict business model. There was a concern then, as well, about centralization and the impact that it has on communities, especially the rural communities that I represent.

So those four things…. If we're talking about health care, the throne speech is, of course, very vague. We will get more details as time goes on. The four concerns are around how change is managed, around the democratic control of the direction, around the direction that privatization can take us, and around centralization and the impact that it has on rural communities.

With education there was discussion as well. It was the second issue. There again, this is something that we've had an opportunity to talk about at great length in the first session. I assume that in the second session, we will see some specifics that were referred to in the throne speech and that there will be an opportunity again to talk about those as an educator. It's a topic that, of course, I care a great deal about and that I look forward to talking about again as we look at specifics.

I can tell you that a trustee asked me if I had any sense of the direction that the government is going. I don't have a clear sense. I hope in this session to get a number of questions answered by government. I look forward to that.

For the remainder of my time — and I need to get to a meeting fairly soon — I would like to talk about the things I intend to do during the session and the objectives I have. These are, of course, of a local nature but are nevertheless very important to the people that I represent. I want to give a bit of credit to some of the things that I think are going very, very well. One of the things I intend to do is to give full credit to the Minister of Transportation, who is here, for the positive work that he's doing on the Kicking Horse project.

The Kicking Horse project is a project that most people within the Legislature will not see, but it is an incredible project. It is a difficult, extremely expensive piece of highway to fix. There has been a long time that people have tried to get this project underway. That it is happening is significant and important.

I would also like to commend the minister for his commitment to providing money to a divided four-lane highway from Kamloops to the Alberta border. If this were to happen, it needs federal funding to match it. If this were to happen, it would be significant.

The second thing I intend to show appreciation for is to the Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts for her active support for the Burgess Shale project, the Rocky Mountain earth science centre. This is a tremendous project and one that her efforts will be appreciated very much on.

The third thing, and this is the last of the things I intend to show appreciation for, is the….

Interjection.

N. Macdonald: I can stop right now.

It's the initiatives that came to fruition and that speak very well of my predecessor Wendy McMahon: the tourist visitor site, the new highway scales in Golden, two new schools in Revelstoke and the mine museum in Kimberley. All of these are moving along this session, and they are things I support a great deal.

Moving on to other things I want to work on. I want to advocate as strongly as possible for the community's health care needs. We've issued a health report, where we basically have put together all of the issues that were raised by constituents. There are a number of them to be worked through. It's our intention to do this every six months and to work towards improving the health care system that people depend upon in our area.

Next, I intend to work over the long term with people on both sides of the House to try to re-establish the idea of a social contract existing between communities and the resources that surround them. I hope to talk during this session about taxation for dams and reservoirs, something I feel is an important discussion to have.

[ Page 2352 ]

[1555]

I want to also look at some sort of form of return to appurtenance. I think it was a mistake to change that. I think it's important to have a community tied to the resource that's around it.

I intend to support B.C. border businesses. I'm glad that the Minister of Revenue moved away from the Costco plan. I'm sure that there are a number of people happy with that. I hope that the reaction was enough to dissuade any similar plan. The solution to the B.C. cross-boundary shopping issue lies with the government's will to solve it and in listening to the local government group that has put forward some very important ideas, as well as the local Chambers. That's something that I hope to continue to work on.

I intend to continue to raise the issue of the reorganization of the office of the fire commissioner. In fact, that's a meeting I'll be going to fairly shortly with the minister. It is a very poorly considered reorganization. Almost to a person in the Kootenays, certainly, fire chiefs have said that it is a mistake. The direction that the reorganization of the office of the fire commissioner is going needs to be reconsidered, and that's something that I will take forward.

I intend to push for the conservation officer in Golden, and I hope that's something that will take place. This was a commitment that was made during the election. It is something that is desperately needed. We have a tremendous number of issues resulting from the lack of a conservation officer in the area, and it's something that I hope to see changed.

Another issue that I'll be working on relates to Jumbo and Jumbo Glacier Resort. This is a land use issue that has been going on for over 15 years. In my part of the province it's one of tremendous interest. We have received over 600 people indicating how they feel about the project. Almost 20 to 1 are against. The principle that's at stake here is one of local control and local democracy. Jumbo Glacier Resort sits not in a pristine wilderness area but well away from any other development. What the community is telling me very clearly is that they do not want development in that area.

There are a number of reasons for that. What I hope to do over this session is make sure that people understand the reasons why the community and the communities feel so strongly. It's very rare that I receive…. Well, I have never received 600 indications of views — letters, e-mails and phone calls — on any particular issue, so it's one that needs to be considered carefully.

I'll also be working on a related land use issue, Columbia Lake Park. The idea that a class-A parks boundary would be changed to benefit a commercial interest is one that I feel strongly should not take place. It would set a disturbing precedent, I think. We'll be talking about that. I've heard strongly from first nations groups on the issue, from local government and, of course, from a lot of residents. So that's one that will come up in this session.

I intend to support efforts to protect caribou, but this is one that needs to be done with great care. There are potential social and economic impacts to communities within my riding, so I support the effort. But here again, government has to listen very carefully to people on the ground.

I intend to work on forestry issues. Forestry is of critical importance to the economy of most of my communities. This is something that the provincial government touches in so many different ways. It definitely needs to do things properly, whether it's with stumpage or worker safety, how it deals with pine beetle, the softwood lumber dispute and even with community transition if there are mill closures.

All of these are issues of crucial importance to my constituency. First nations issues; issues around fairness in my riding; the minimum wage; income assistance, especially for long-term disability; WCB; housing; post-secondary access and cost; mental health issues — all of these are things that have been raised by people in the riding. Over the session I hope to make progress on all of them.

[1600]

To finish, I just want to thank you very much for the opportunity to respond to the Speech from the Throne. I'm certainly looking forward to a productive session.

J. Yap: I am pleased to follow the hon. member for Columbia River–Revelstoke. He was starting to use words like "logical," "commended" and things that he liked. For a moment I thought there was a mixup in the speaking order and a government member was speaking before me. I thank him for those positive comments.

I am pleased to rise to speak in support of the throne speech as the member for the great riding of Richmond-Steveston. I am grateful to the people of my riding for the privilege to be here in this House, to represent them, to work on their behalf as their member and to participate in the debates on the important issues of our times.

I am proud of the accomplishments of our B.C. Liberal government. In just four short years our government has turned British Columbia around. In terms of our economy, we have gone from last place to first in Canada, leading the nation in job creation, with our credit rating restored to second-best among the provinces. British Columbia is once again a preferred destination for investment dollars and as a place to do business, live and raise a family.

In terms of health care, as a result of innovations fostered by our government, we have the highest-rated health care system among the provinces. We are number one. In terms of K-to-12 public education, we have achieved record high school graduation rates, and our students lead the way in mathematics, reading and science. In terms of advanced education, our government is undertaking the largest expansion of post-secondary positions in 40 years, with a goal of 25,000 new positions within a decade. In terms of governance, our government has been an innovator, leading the nation with such changes as fixed election dates, establishing an opposition Deputy Speaker, expanded ques-

[ Page 2353 ]

tion period, establishing an opposition-controlled parliamentary committee and renewing a commitment to revisit the single transferable vote.

Ours is a government of action, of getting results for the people of British Columbia. Our government has the courage to challenge the status quo. We are not afraid to ask the tough questions.

There is today a renewed sense of confidence and optimism in British Columbia, thanks to our government and the hard work of British Columbians. In my travels through my riding and beyond, I listen to the voices of ordinary folks: working people, small business owners, parents, seniors and youth — you know, the people we might meet with at the local coffee or donut shop.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

These people tell me that they are grateful for the changes our government has brought in to make our British Columbia a better place, whether it is in re-igniting our economy through sound fiscal policies, cutting red tape, encouraging investment, reforming social services, improving public safety or investing in our health and education systems. Real leadership, real progress — that's what our B.C. Liberal government has delivered and will continue to deliver.

The throne speech sets the stage for British Columbians to build on the successes of the past five years towards an even brighter future. Other members have already spoken about the emphasis made in the throne speech on transformation — in particular, the need for transformation of our health care system.

For as much as we can be proud of our health care system in B.C., we can do better, and we must do better. We must tackle the apparent health care conundrum, that being that despite spending billions and billions more on health care over the years, British Columbians' satisfaction levels with our health care system remain low.

Comparatively, Canada's health care system, as far as quality, access and outcomes, has been ranked 11th among developed countries in spite of spending on health care that is third among these countries as a percentage of GDP. Only Iceland and Switzerland spend more than Canada on health care.

[1605]

We all need health care at every stage of our life. However, the fact is that as we age, quite naturally we increasingly need more health care services. We know that the tidal wave of aging baby-boomers will place more demands on the health care system. Simply spending billions more without finding ways to improve the system is untenable.

As a junior member of the baby-boom demographic, this is a concern for me personally, as I'm sure it is for all members of this House and for all British Columbians.

I. Black: Junior member?

J. Yap: Yes, a junior member.

If we as a province are facing financial challenges when one in seven of us is a senior, it does not take a genius to figure out that when one in four of us is a senior, we face the prospect of financial calamity if we do nothing today and simply accept the status quo. We have the opportunity at this time in our history to make fundamental changes — changes which will strengthen our health care system so that it is there not just for our generation but for the next, changes which will incorporate the best practices of other successful health care systems in other jurisdictions by allowing certain health care services to be delivered by means other than the public system.

No developed country in the world — not one — with a publicly funded health care system outlaws access to a parallel private health care system except Canada. It just seems logical that if something is self-evident, maybe there is a correlation between having mixed public-private health systems and better health care. That's why that Canada Health Act needs to be revisited, and I'm proud that British Columbia is leading the debate here to ask the federal government to look at amending the act to include sustainability as a sixth principle of medicare.

Government members, including myself, are not afraid to embrace change, to consider transformative change, to position our great province to better meet the vast challenges that lie ahead for our health care system. Opposition members have made plain their disdain for considering change or transformation or innovation because it apparently scares them, or more importantly, it scares their special interest supporters.

The fundamental questions asked in the throne speech make such common sense that it seems to defy logic why the hon. NDP members of this House, without exception, are so vehemently opposed to their being asked. One can only draw the conclusion that the opposition is either generally stuck in some kind of suspended state of denial or that they don't really believe their rhetoric and are just speaking to a narrow audience which helped them to get elected.

I'm proud that the throne speech asks the fundamental and tough questions like: does it really matter to patients where or how they obtain their surgical treatment if it's paid for with public funds? Clearly, it did not to the NDP's national leader. Or questions like: why are we afraid to look at mixed health care delivery models when other states in Europe and around the world have used them to produce better results for patients at a lower cost to taxpayers? Studies have shown this to be the case, and yet there's a fear of asking these questions.

I would add another question: why is privatization such a scary word to members of the opposition when it's been shown to work in other countries? Why the knee-jerk, automatic, instinctive negative reaction on the part of the NDP and their friends to considering real reform of our health care system where publicly funded and for-profit health care can co-exist?

These are the questions that all British Columbians will be asked to help answer in a meaningful dialogue

[ Page 2354 ]

over the next several months. I'm looking forward to this dialogue, as I believe are most British Columbians. We need a dialogue that rises above the rhetoric of special interest groups and partisan politics. We need a reasoned debate which draws on factual information and input from as many sources of information and expertise as we can draw on. We then need to craft out of this dialogue a made-in-B.C. solution to bringing about the needed transformation of our health care system.

Instead of criticizing the plans of our Premier and Health Minister to go directly to the European countries to study their health care systems, which work well, the opposition should be encouraging this fact-finding exercise on behalf of all British Columbians. Instead of fearmongering that somehow this dialogue will change our health care system to one which is American-style health care when our government unreservedly commits to building on a strong public system in Canada, the opposition should take a moment to reflect that it was under the NDP that B.C. had its first private for-profit clinics to help improve the public system.

[1610]

The fact is that we already have a two-tiered system of health care here in British Columbia. There, I said it — we have a two-tiered system — and there's no bolt of lightning. I mean this tongue-in-cheek, of course, as it seems like it's heresy to suggest this fact when we have a two-tiered health care system — as some of the opposition would suggest.

If a British Columbian is injured at work and requires a surgical procedure, he or she can jump ahead of the wait-list and be treated at a private surgery under the auspices of WorkSafe B.C. If the same British Columbian were to be injured at home or at play, he or she would not have that access to the private surgery and would have to wait in line. Does it not follow that we should look at all options, including use of for-profit surgeries, to allow all British Columbians to have more timely access to quality medical procedures and other health services, not just those who have had the good fortune of being injured while at work?

I think reasonable folks not wedded to a particular policy dogma would say yes, as long as we continue to protect, to invest in and to improve our public medicare system. In light of the recent Chaoulli decision in Quebec, we must continue to act and to preserve public health care for all British Columbians for now and for the future.

As was mentioned in the throne speech, there was a 35-percent increase in the number of hip replacements and a 65-percent increase in the number of knee replacements performed in B.C. In spite of our success in providing more joint replacement surgeries in British Columbia, the backlog of people waiting for operations has grown. There is that coming tidal wave of baby-boomers. That's why I'm pleased to support the government's $60.5 million strategy to address this problem.

My community of Richmond has shown leadership in this area. In 2004 Richmond Hospital began the innovative joint-replacement-surgery pilot project. The provincial government, Vancouver Coastal Health and Richmond Hospital established this project to reduce wait times for hip and knee replacements, and the project has been an outstanding success. The government provided $500,000 to start this project, and th