1972 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 29th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1972

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 533 ]

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1972

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister of Education.

HON. D.L. BROTHERS (Minister of Education): Mr. Speaker, I

would like you and my colleagues in the Legislature to bid welcome to

Mrs. Catherine Schoen and her executive of the P.T.A. About 150 ladies

and men of the P.T.A. are today on education day in the Legislature and

from many points of the compass. Even as far away as from Dawson Creek.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition.

MR. D. BARRETT (Leader of the Opposition): I rise to welcome

the P.T.A. delegation to this House on P.T.A. and I would like to make

special mention of 35 hearty P.T.A. members who came from the far flung

area of the province — Coquitlam — who are with us.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister without Portfolio.

HON. P.J. JORDAN (Minister without Portfolio): Mr. Speaker, I

would ask the House to join me in welcoming today in our gallery the

president of the North Okanagan Teachers' Association, Mr. Brian Usher

and his companion, a well-known teacher in British Columbia, Mr. Earl

Quesnel, and Vernon student, Don Nelson.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the first Member for Vancouver Centre.

MR. H.P. CAPOZZI (Vancouver Centre): I would like to welcome

also the P.T.A. members. I would also welcome a member of the

recreation group and representing the Canadian football league, the

former president of the Canadian football league, Mr. Al McEadiren, in

the Speakers' Gallery.

Introduction of bills.

Orders of the day.

ON THE BUDGET

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable, the Minister of Education.

HON. D.L. BROTHERS (Minister of Education): Mr. Speaker, of

the many new concepts and ideas that this government has brought forth,

I think perhaps one of the finest has been the establishment of the

perpetual funds. The interest of these can be used to improve the

quality and the style of life for present British Columbians and all

generations to come.

Perhaps in my opinion, one of the finest is the fund called the

drug, alcohol and cigarette education, prevention and rehabilitation

fund. As you know we passed this Act last year and it's been used for a

programme of education, prevention and rehabilitation in respect of the

problems arising from the use of drugs, alcohol and cigarettes. The Act

provided that a council would be set up to advise the Minister of

Finance on the expenditures from this fund.

On April 28, 1971, an order was passed appointing as members of the

council, Mr. Peterson, the Attorney-General; Mr. Loffmark, the Minister

of Health Services and Hospital Insurance, and two deputy Ministers,

Mr. Lawrie Wallace and Mr. Ron Worley, and myself as chairman. I would

like to tell the Members of the House what we have accomplished in the

intervening period.

At our very first meeting in May, we recognised the very serious

drug problem and we considered it advisable to proceed as quickly as

possible and we set various guidelines.

We decided that public information and education should receive the

highest priority. We felt that a comprehensive, long-term, public

information and education programme for all sectors of society should

be developed immediately. I noticed with some interest that this is

also one of the recommendations of the LeDain commission.

First attention was to be given to the drug abuse problem because

all the reports that we had been receiving showed that drugs had

reached epidemic proportions. We also found that there is scarcely an

area in our province in which the non-medical use of drugs has not

emerged.

Incidently, in talking to the ladies and gentlemen of the P.T.A.

several years ago, I pointed out this growing problem and I asked them

to provide us with assistance in combating this problem in their areas.

We found that 85 per cent of the new heroin addicts coming for

treatment to the Narcotic Addiction Foundation had a background of

multi-drug use. The council was also aware that with the problems

before us, the problem of alcohol and alcoholism may in the long run

prove even more serious. Between 1961 and 1971 there was a 30 per cent

increase in alcohol consumption in the province and estimates made by

the alcoholism foundation indicate an 85 per cent increase in the

number of alcoholics and predicted that if this trend continued, that

we can expect by 1981 to have 88,480 alcoholics in British Columbia.

Not only is alcohol a terrible problem for families but I think it is

noteworthy that alcohol is a factor in 50 per cent of all motor vehicle

fatalities.

The information, together with recent medical findings regarding the

effects of cigarettes, supported our decision to develop a programme

covering all three of these potentially harmful substances. While I am

on this matter, I can hardly see why we as a council and as a

government should be spending this kind of money in combating

alcoholism, tobacco and drugs, yet at the same time have the newspapers

in our province promoting the use of tobacco by ads. I'm certainly

going to recommend to our council that we take any of these out of the

Victoria Times and the Colonist .

We also concluded that the programme must include the provision for

new funds for the work being done by various voluntary agencies in the

area of treatment or rehabilitation. The council recognised that

expenditures of public funds were involved and felt it was therefore

necessary to devise effective procedures for reviewing applications for

grants and for imposing in certain cases some conditions.

The council also believed that in the long run an effective

prevention programme must involve effective education for the young

people in the schools and in the community.

In carrying out these guidelines, the first step taken was a

[ Page 534 ]

major public information programme using all media

— newspapers, radio, T.V. — and as far as possible covering all

sections of the province. The purpose of this programme was to alert

and to inform the public and particularly parents about the dangers of

drug abuse and the problem of alcoholism. We also prepared a

publication entitled, "Get it Straight." Copies of this have been

widely distributed. The last figure I have is that 14,000 copies of

this publication had been asked for. We intend to prepare a similar

publication for alcohol and for cigarettes.

The next step we took as a council was to set up a technical

sub-committee for dealing with the applications for financial

assistance from local and provincial groups and organisations. We are

awarding grants as quickly as we possibly can. A good example is the

one we issued just 10 days ago for a group to study glue sniffing. It

is a little bit difficult to give an exact accounting but I may say,

however, that as of January 25, the total committed expenditure of

$141,250 had been approved for these various grants to help these

groups.

These grants cover a wide range of projects including education,

prevention and rehabilitation programmes. I will be forwarding copies

of application forms to all members of the Legislature. So if Members

have any groups in their area who would like to apply for funds from

this fund for programmes in their areas, would they please complete the

forms by the groups and have the groups forward them to our

sub-committee?

Members will also be interested to know that we have not overlooked

the need for research in these very complex problems. One of the most

recent grants was awarded to the University of British Columbia which

in consultation with the Department of the Attorney General is

conducting special research into the effects of marijuana.

This is a $50,000 research grant and it will be used primarily to

discover the effects that the use of marijuana has on driving ability.

In addition the council has commissioned the B.C. Research Council to

survey the province to see what is being undertaken throughout the

province and in particular the area of treatment and rehabilitation

programmes. We also want the research council to identify the problems

being encountered and the effectiveness of the programmes.

In the area of education of young people we have commissioned the

production of a special film to be used in British Columbia and in the

British Columbia school system. We found that in the use of films and

printed materials on the market today, even if the one to be produced

is such that it may have considerable merit and appeal to some, it is

not necessarily equally effective for everyone.

For this reason we have encouraged the development of new ideas in

the production of educational aids of this nature. We have also asked

the film industry to prepare ideas for us. We have asked them to

support proposals for films. Ten submissions have been received to date

and it is hoped that at least some of them can be developed and

produced.

Secondly, the council has arranged for what might be called a

province-wide media contest for young people in the secondary schools,

colleges and universities.

We feel that young people today may have some very good ideas as to

the best ways of coping with the problems as they see them and there is

every reason to believe that a number of them have directly or

indirectly been affected by some of these problems. It is hoped that

the contest will be productive of some original and effective materials

which we intend to use in our educational programme.

Also, we have retained the services of a drug programme

co-ordinator. We had over 50 applications for this important position

and the council approved the recommendation of the appointment of Mr.

Peter Battisson who has had a great deal of success in working with

young people in this field.

I think it must be relatively obvious to everyone that the problems

that we face today in this field of drug dependency are by no means

simple. They are not confined to the cities and for that matter are not

unique to this province, nor is there any quick or magic solution to

them. I have no doubt that there are individuals who claim to have

solutions and who would disagree with at least some of the things that

are presently being done.

All that we have been able to examine to date, however, indicates

that the origins or causes of these problems are deeply rooted and do

not lend themselves to an easy remedy. It would therefore follow that

for the time being at least the council should take the approach of

encouraging every idea that seems promising. We should also promote,

foster and encourage every attempt that is being made at the community

or the grass roots level.

So with this idea in mind, the council approved the establishment of

community advisory committees. It is felt that persons in local

communities would not only be able to advise us on the effectiveness of

provincial programmes but would also be able to help initiate and

co-ordinate and assist the work to be done on these problems by people

right in the communities themselves.

Six of these committees have been established to date with the

nucleus of the membership being drawn from the fields of public health,

law enforcement and education. If any Members of the Legislature are

aware of any specific problems in their area, they might find it

helpful to contact the local committee. A list of these committees will

be forwarded to each Member.

May I report to you at the present time that a total of over

$250,000 has been extended on project grants, film production, school

media contests, research and a public information programme? Our

council does not view its work as merely engaging in a short-term

campaign. There is every indication that a programme of this

comprehensive nature must continue and must change from time to time as

the needs indicate.

It is hoped in the coming year to undertake a further study of what

is being done in other parts of the world and to try to make some

assessment of the effectiveness of new treatment programmes and new

educational programmes. It is also hoped that anyone who has any

particular proposals or ideas that may be of use or assistance in

combatting this major social problem will contribute them to the

council. The programme outlined is a sincere and positive attempt, if

not to solve, at least to curb and control a problem which if left

neglected will do more damage to the minds and bodies of our young

people than bombs or bullets can possible do.

In referring to the budget, this must be the finest budget brought

down by any government in Canada. Every other province in the Dominion

including the federal government is borrowing money and operating with

deficit budgets. Our government has steadfastly held to the rule of

pay-as-you-go with a balanced budget and a build-up of reserves against

the day when there may be an economic disaster.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. BROTHERS: Through very astute moves

[ Page 535 ]

we've been able to provide perpetual funds. I think

it's noteworthy that two-thirds of the budget is used for education,

health and social services. Provision is also being made for increased

home-owner grants, and a substantial assistance to senior citizens and

pensioners in the $50 home-owner grants for those over 65 years of age.

These additional grants will go a long way towards taking education

costs entirely off the homes of many thousands of British Columbians,

in spite of the fact that education costs are rising so rapidly.

I noted that the provision of $441 million for the Department of

Education is larger than the entire provincial budget as recently as

The increase alone for the Department of Education this year is

almost as much — just the increase alone — is as much as the entire

budget for education as recently as 1956-57.

A new item in the Department of Education's estimates this year is

the provision of $1 million for the payment of the employers' share of

federal unemployment insurance on behalf of teachers.

This is an item which the boards of school trustees had expected to

assume and the government is paying it on their behalf. You will note

as well that while the total of the grants to school districts is

substantially higher, there is also a large increase in the amount

being made available for post-secondary education. There will be $6

million more for grants to colleges and technical and vocational

schools, and $7.5 million more in the university operating grants.

I mentioned in my address during the debate on the Speech from the

Throne that I would spend the time in that debate on the public school

system, that on this discussion I would be devoting most of my time to

the developments taking place in the post-secondary field.

The Economic Council of Canada predicted that between now and 1978

there would be a large number of students entering into the field of

post-secondary education and thereafter the trend will be towards

levelled-off enrolment. In the meantime, the elementary population will

continue to decline. That is exactly why we have been preparing over

the last five years for this expected crop of post-secondary students.

Now we could probably spend hours and even days on debating

educational philosophy, as many educators are prone to do. There are,

however, two concepts which in my opinion are basic to the educational

enterprise and essential both for the individual and for the province.

The first is the belief long held by society that in pure education

there are direct values which transcend the mere training for a

particular job. Education must develop the inner resources of the

individual. His talents, his creativity, his awareness of his heritage,

his insight into his society and his sense of responsibility. So he can

lead a very rich, a cultured and joyous life.

The second concept is more concerned with utilitarian purposes — how

will the post-education system help the individual develop his

potential within the framework of his interests and needs? How can we

assure a student leaving the educational system that he possesses a

saleable skill or knowledge so that he can enter a satisfying and

rewarding occupation and contribute both to his own welfare and to the

welfare of society?

It seems to me, therefore, that given the kind of world we live in,

with all its technological complexity, with the terrible social

problems which urgently clamour for solution, with the increased

leisure time, that we must both emphasise the aspects of education

which contribute to the fulfilment of the individual and to assist him

in establishing a worthwhile place under the sun in our community.

In this context the challenge to education today is enormously

greater than any other time in our history. Because the level of the

technological advances of our age demands the most highly trained and

skilled personnel ever known. The sum of human knowledge doubles about

every 10 years. No previous generation have ever had to be…

AN HON. MEMBER: Not over there!

HON. MR. BROTHERS: …better prepared. As I describe the

developments which are taking place in our post-secondary education

services, you will see evidence of our attempt to translate both of

these concepts into reality. The developments which have taken place in

this province during the past six or seven years have been both

exciting and significant. We now have in operation nine public colleges

with approximately 14,000 students, the B.C.I.T. with 2,900 students

and three public universities with an enrolment of 30,940 students.

In addition, we estimate that there are some 250,000 adult citizens

in British Columbia who are presently engaged in various programmes of

continuing education. This means that one person in every six of our

population is engaged in some form of post-secondary education.

These figures attest eloquently to the interest of our people in

improving their educational qualifications and standards and in

attempting to improve upon the quality of their living. It augurs well

for the future of our province and of Canada. Surely this must be the

best record of any of the provinces in our nation.

I stated that several years ago we realised that our province needed

a much broader post-secondary educational system. We thought that we

should develop this as well as the university, because the university

concentrates on the traditional academic programme. We began to plan

for provision of a province-wide network of vocational schools. We've

been building these vocational schools at strategic locations

throughout the province so that people, no matter where they may be in

the province, would be able to obtain this type of training. Our tenth

vocational school came into operation last fall in Kamloops, and the

Chilliwack school is now in the active planning stages. This school

will serve the eastern portion of the Fraser Valley including

Abbotsford, Agassiz, Matsqui and surrounding centres.

The Members of the Opposition infer that this is a completely

unplanned development with no provision for needed programmes or

courses or an eye towards the future needs and developments.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. BROTHERS: May I advise them that we have 35

provincial advisory committees which we can call on when we are

planning new vocational programmes or considering modifications to

existing courses.

We also seek the views of a host of community advisory committees on

the types of courses which they feel would be of use in the various

communities. We maintain an effective liaison with labour and industry

and as a result our vocational programmes are well co-ordinated and

relevant to today's needs. I think this can be borne out when you look

at the graduates from the B.C.I.T. Their job-finding capacity was 96

[ Page 536 ]

per cent effective during the last year when the

economy of the province was suffering and unemployment rates were high.

The placement of vocational school graduates was 72 per cent effective,

even though many thousands of persons elsewhere were having difficulty

finding jobs.

The Member for Cowichan-Malahat (Mr. Strachan) noticed that some

B.C. industries were advertising for workmen in other provinces. He has

noted, no doubt, that the advertisements specify that they are looking

for experienced persons. I think it's unfortunate that more of the

British Columbia companies are not willing to recruit their work force

in our own province. I think it's unfortunate that they don't give our

own young people a break. We have the young people who are willing to

work and we can train them how to do a job, but we can't give them

experience in the school. They will gain experience only if somebody is

willing to hire them and give them on-the-job training.

Now, this is particularly true, for example, in the mining industry.

When a new mine opens in British Columbia, the company goes down to

eastern Canada and raids somebody else's company and then when a new

mine opens out here in the west the people from the east come out here

and rob the miners from the western mines.

I mentioned in my last address that the Department of Education

recently opened, in cooperation with Canada Manpower, the only open-pit

mining school in Canada. This school, at Red Mountain near Rossland,

has been such an outstanding success that we are now considering the

possibility of expanding the programme to include underground or hard

rock training and mine mechanics.

Now that the school for miners is operational we are also

considering the possibility of establishing in British Columbia a

nautical institute for the training of west coast mariners. Now, I'm

thinking in terms of a school where tug-boat operators, deep-sea

fishermen, B.C. Ferries personnel and merchant ship personnel can learn

various nautical skills.

The west coast waterways will become increasingly congested as our

province develops its port facilities with its overseas trade with

foreign nations. We are a maritime province and I think it is time that

we make it possible for our men who go to sea to take special training

in such areas as navigation, seamanship and the various aspects of

safety and rescue at sea. We intend to discuss this proposal with the

federal Ministry of Transport and the provincial advisory committee on

nautical training programmes.

If I may turn to forestry for a moment, most of the forest product

mills in British Columbia have extremely ultramodern equipment which

requires considerable know-how to keep things running smoothly.

It's essential that the men who work in these plants know how to

keep the machines running and, if trouble occurs, how to analyse the

problem and make a speedy repair. We hired a professional engineer to

conduct on-site training programmes. Our engineer visits the mills to

instruct supervisory personnel on the principles of hydraulics and

pneumatics and how to look after such vital parts as bearings and power

drive units. The supervisors, in turn, are expected to pass this

knowledge on to the men who run the machines. This engineer has already

been to mills at Tahsis, Port Alice, Elk Falls, Prince George and

Nanaimo, and he soon will be visiting mills in the Prince Rupert area.

We now offer in the vocational schools of the province 173 different

kinds of courses and more than 28,000 people were enrolled in full-time

in these courses last year. Some commercial and industrial courses are

offered in all of our schools. Some of the schools offer specialised

courses which are indigenous to the area. For example, animal husbandry

and crop science programmes are available at the vocational school at

Dawson Creek. Logging training is offered at Nanaimo and Prince George,

and commercial and applied art are taught at the Vancouver School of

Art and at the Kootenay School of Art at Nelson.

As well as these other tasks our department through the vocational

branch has organised in cooperation with Canada Manpower, special

projects for training unskilled workers and upgrading others. During

the current year, we have organised 255 special projects which were

attended by 2,461 persons. Under this programme for example, we

conducted farm machinery repair training programmes at Alexis Creek,

Anahim Lake and Alkali Lake.

We had some 24 courses in basic training for Indians in the

communities of Bella Coola, Bella Bella, Clemto, Similkameen, Chetwin,

Alert Bay, Duncan and Merrit. Furthermore, it might be of interest

particularly to the Member for Atlin (Mr. Calder), that we are

initiating an argyllite carving course at Skidegate and a silver

carving course at Old Masset, in the Queen Charlotte Islands.

In addition to these advisory committees that I have mentioned

earlier, which bring forth proposals from various community and labour

groups, a provincial vocational technical consultative committee was

formed within the past year.

This committee, under the chairmanship of Saul Rothman, the

vice-president and the general manager in charge of production for

Cominco, advises me on all matters relating to vocational and technical

and career programmes offered at the post secondary level. It reports

on the effectiveness of current programmes and gives me an indication

of changing trends in provincial and national needs in technical and

trades training. The committee meets frequently and renders an

immensely valuable service to the citizens of this province. The first

Member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Capozzi) suggested this last year in

his address in the Legislature.

The newest addition to the educational scene of course is the

two-year college, the most recent one being the Camosun college in

Victoria, which commenced classes this past September. From the

beginning of the college movement in 1964, the provincial government

adopted the community college concept of local involvement through the

mechanism of school board participation. This approach is unique in

Canada and has much to commend it. Obviously we can't talk of a

community college unless we are prepared to allow real community

involvement in every aspect of college life. Such involvement must, of

course, take place within the context of realistic and responsible

fiscal policy.

It's our belief that the most visible and direct way of involving a

community in the first instance is to ask it to pay a share of the

operating and the capital costs.

Now it should be recognised at once that the desirability of local

cost-sharing goes beyond the matter of safeguarding institutional

autonomy or self-determination, although this was the major argument

advanced in the MacDonald report. Institutional autonomy can be

preserved without local contribution. For example, the universities,

they're certainly autonomous institutions — but the autonomy there is

enjoyed by the faculty and not by the local community. In the colleges

we must preserve local, not institutional autonomy, and this can only

be preserved if the college administration and the faculties feel a

direct responsibility to

[ Page 537 ]

the local taxpayers. Hence the need to continue the policy of local contribution.

A second means of community involvement is the establishment of

advisory committees for programmes in the colleges. Concerned and

knowledgeable citizens sit on these committees to give information as

to what the programme content should be for their area and that it

remains relevant.

College also finds uniqueness as an educational enterprise in two

fundamental concepts. The first of these is the so-called open door

policy. The college offers an open door to every adult citizen who

genuinely wishes to upgrade his educational qualifications and opens

the door to him regardless of his academic background or experience — and I might say at an economic cost well within his means.

Secondly, the community college is a comprehensive institution,

combining with equal emphasis high standards of excellence in

university transfer courses, one- and two-year technical courses of a

level comparable to those offered at the B.C.I.T., realistic and

practical courses in occupational or vocational education, upgrading

courses, preparatory programmes and community services of an

educational, cultural, or recreational nature.

Included in the last category are programmes being initiated in some

of the colleges — notably Cariboo and Camosun — for native Indians. In

the Kamloops area, the college is arranging to have courses given on

reserves.

It's with a desire on our part to develop completely comprehensive

institutions that our department moved during the last year to bring

together or to meld five colleges in the province with five vocational

schools. These amalgamations took place in Kamloops, Kelowna, Nanaimo,

Prince George, and Victoria. And the indications that I have to date

are these arrangements are working extremely well. As a matter of fact,

two of the colleges, instead of having a three-year programme to work

out the melding, as it's working so well they are applying to have the

melding brought about immediately.

Now I want to take this opportunity to commend the work of the

college councils, the principals, and the faculties of both of the

various institutions that were brought together because this has been

trying for them. But they have responded very enthusiastically and very

positively to this experiment.

In order to make the college programmes more accessible to students,

multiple campuses are operated by a number of colleges, including

Okanagan, Capilano and Douglas. Continuing education officers have been

placed in communities somewhat remote from the college in order that

such communities might be better served. Such officers have been placed

in Osoyoos by Okanagan College and in Williams Lake by Cariboo College.

In fulfilling its mission, a college serves four separate but

related groups. First of all it serves the individual by providing him

with an opportunity to achieve his maximum potential regardless of his

social station, financial status or geographical location. It helps him

to acquire these much-needed skills and knowledge. It gives him access

to a wide variety of educational experiences and programmes of

instruction. As far as possible it gives him a chance of correcting his

academic deficiencies through counselling.

College, secondly, must serve the community in which it is centred.

It must be concerned about the quality of life in that community and it

can best express this concern by contributing significantly to the

social and the cultural welfare of the area it serves. Also it serves

as a resource centre for this general area.

College also serves the province by producing a return to society

which ultimately will be greater than the cost of the services provided.

College, finally, serves the nation by helping to prepare an

informed and responsible citizenry dedicated to the perpetuation and

extension of the ideals of democracy and capable of participating in

and contributing to the democratic process.

It'll take some time for the colleges to fulfil their mission. Their

movement is new and is still suffering some growing pains, but it is

launched, it is here to stay, and it has a very promising future.

I want to conclude these remarks on the colleges by especially

paying tribute to the Academic Board of British Columbia. Because these

men on the academic board are being financed by the universities but

are spending most of their time in assisting the college development.

It's under the chairmanship of Dean Ian McTaggart Cowan of the

University of British Columbia. The board has done a great deal to

encourage and facilitate the development and the obvious success of the

colleges, particularly in the area of articulation between the colleges

and the universities in the way of transfer credits.

The board continues to give sound advice to the department on all

matters relating to academic standards and developments and is, in

every way, a most valuable and respected senior advisory body.

I cannot leave the subject of colleges either without paying the

highest tribute to the work done by Dean S.N.F. Chant, who has been a

stalwart in the college programmes. I have sought his advice frequently

and found him always willing to oblige.

Turning to universities: in many ways the mission of the

universities is very similar to that of the colleges although their

responsibility is to serve a wider community, therefore, they cannot be

as intimately involved with a single municipality.

Part of their function, indeed, and perhaps one of the most

important functions, is to extend the frontiers of knowledge through

legitimate and worthwhile research.

A college disseminates knowledge and brings skills and develops

broad understanding. A university in addition to these very important

functions, must increase knowledge. It must fulfil this function

without relegating teaching, which continues to be of prime importance,

to a secondary position.

During the past year there has been evidence across the nation,

including the United States, of some decline in university enrolments.

Now, although this decline has been more marked in certain provinces

than our own, it is true to say in British Columbia that our university

enrolments have not increased at the rate that they, the universities,

expected.

A major reason for this development is the impact which the nine

colleges have had on university growth. A growing number of young

people apparently are electing to continue their post-secondary

education in the colleges, where the costs are lower, the classes are

generally smaller, admission standards are more flexible, and where the

opportunity exists to enter exciting and rewarding career programmes of

one or two years' duration.

But it would be incorrect to say or to assume that the colleges

account for all of the decrease. Employment for university graduates,

particularly for those in humanities or the social sciences, have

decreased markedly in these last two or three years. There appears to

be a doubt among an

[ Page 538 ]

increasing number of young people and particularly

their parents on the value of the university degree or education. This

feeling — and from the meetings I've held with student groups, I am

inclined to believe that is quite widespread — should signal to the

universities the need to re-examine their purposes and goals, and

practices — to re-define their objectives and to demonstrate to their

students the intrinsic as well as the utilitarian worth of a university

education.

It's frequently charged by students that university courses are in

large measure irrelevant. And I doubt if so general a charge can or

should be laid. But is surely the responsibility of the professor to

demonstrate the relevance of the work he is teaching.

It is sometimes charged that the standard of university teaching is

poor. Again, I would doubt the general validity of that statement. It

is my belief that for the most part the calibre of teaching in our

universities is high, and in a number of instances it's distinguished.

But universities should be prepared to evaluate teaching in a thorough

and systematic way and to maintain it at a high standard.

Another concern frequently voiced is that the modern

multi-university is too large and too impersonal. I can feel a good

deal of sympathy for this concern which really grows out of a condition

of modern day life. There is no easy solution to this problem.

So, an enormous challenge faces the universities in this next decade

as they struggle to find ways to so organise their instructional

patterns, and their time sequences, or the development of their

personnel to lessen the feelings of isolation, disaffection or even

alienation which seem to affect a number of university students today.

So I feel that the time is ripe for a re-examination by the

universities of their goals and practices. We've lived through some

pretty troubled times in the western world, when the restlessness and

militancy of students and faculty have sometimes erupted into tragic

violence and when the public's confidence in universities was shaken to

the foundations. Thankfully, this condition has subsided of late. We

hear once again the more restrained and responsible voice of the

academic community.

In my opinion it's vitally important that we hear that voice,

articulating the many positive and good developments which are taking

place on university campuses. Too often responsible academics — and I

still believe that they're in the majority — have allowed their voices

to be drowned out by the clamour of a dissident minority who voice only

negative and obscure complaints but who, nevertheless, project the

image the public has of the campus today.

Unless this is changed, and it's up to the academic community itself

to change it, that image can only continue to damage the universities.

Some of the events which have taken place in recent years on

university campuses have led to an increasing demand on the part of the

public generally, that the government should exercise more direct

control over inter-university affairs. All governments in all

jurisdictions have come under this pressure.

Our government has consistently taken the position that universities

must be autonomous institutions, that given the maturity of the

students they teach and given the fact that over the years many members

of the academic community have proved themselves to be responsible,

reasonable and concerned citizens, universities ought to be granted a

large measure of self determination. In taking this position, the

government believes it is upholding a vitally important principle of

democracy — that is, academic freedom.

So saying, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that on behalf of the people

of Rossland-Trail who have supported the government since 1952, I have

the honour of supporting this government and in backing this budget.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burnaby North.

MRS. E.E. DAILLY (Burnaby North): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In

taking my place in this budget debate I'd like to open my remarks by

quoting from the Premier's final statement of his budget speech. And

that was and I quote: "We now have here, another budget for the people,

providing many additional services by a government that cares."

Mr. Speaker, I contend that this budget presented to us by the

Social Credit government is one which neither provides essential

additional services nor shows it was produced by a government which

really cares about the people of our province, and particularly the

children of our province.

Therefore, my remarks today will centre mainly around vital areas of

children's needs in this province which are not being taken care of by

this budget. And I wish to make it clear, Mr. Speaker, in outlining

these needs today that I firmly believe that this budget shows that in

some areas the government is spending unwisely, and that in other areas

increased massive injections of money are vitally needed.

But I would first like to discuss educational expenditures. May I

say after listening to the Minister of Education's speech, Mr. Speaker,

that I consider that when he stood up and announced today that we had

over 200 members from the P.T.A. here that his speech was an insult to

those members of the P.T.A. who are sitting here in the gallery.

I say this because he purposely omitted discussing public school

education. This is primarily the concern of the parent-teachers of this

province and of most of our citizens. Of course, he dismissed

discussing it, Mr. Speaker, because it's a very, very hot potato today.

It's a very hot potato, Mr. Speaker, that the government is tossing

into the laps of the school boards of this province.

I listened very carefully to the Minister's speech in the province

throne debate and I waited very carefully to hear his comments on the

school system and the effects of his financial formula in the past,

that's the actual formula. And he really, Mr. Speaker, gave us very,

very little to go on. I have no remarks really on his remarks because

there was nothing in either speech.

But I intend, Mr. Speaker, to discuss public school education today.

I intend to leave the matter of universities and post-secondary

institutions to the educational estimates.

In our gallery right here and as a Member said: "Playing to the

galleries," I most certainly am playing to the galleries, Mr. Speaker,

because those people represent the citizens of this province and they

have a right to hear a Minister justify why financial expenditures have

reached the critical state they have in this province.

And yet, Mr. Speaker, the Minister made no attempt to justify this, none at all.

Let's look at the financial expenditures. The Minister just stated

general terms — great increases since 1962, et cetera. But let's

actually look at the budget.

The 1972-1973 figures in the budget shows that educational expenditures are at 30.9 per cent of the total

[ Page 539 ]

budget. That's the '72-'73 figure. But as the

1971-72 budget had education taking approximately 31.1 percent, it

appears quite obvious that the latest growth in educational

expenditures has actually declined this year by 0.2 per cent of the

province's total budget.

I would suggest that you take the budget and compare it and work out

the percentages, Mr. Minister of Education, through you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: He needs a mathematics lesson first.

MRS. DAILLY: They have declined. Now, Mr. Speaker, this

decrease is not shocking, in itself, providing the Minister of

Education would get on his feet and justify this decrease to us and to

the members in the galleries today of the Parent-Teachers Federation.

He should have justified today why he has reduced educational

expenditures and why they are going to be reduced even further in the

future and yet still at the same time he is going to be able to offer

quality education to the students of this province.

I've listened very carefully to the Minister. No such justification.

As I said he leaves that justification up to the school boards of the

province, he gives them increased responsibility but no authority.

Another interesting thing to note in the budget is that the overall

increase for public school grants is 9.3 per cent. But let's remember

what school boards are faced with. First of all the general school

population increase alone is 3 per cent, and inflationary increases

amount to an overall 7.5 per cent.

That totals 10.5 per cent, and yet he is only allowing a 9.3 per

cent on increases to school boards. Therefore the school boards of this

province for this coming year are receiving grants from this provincial

government which do not even allow them to meet basic non-controllable

expenses — and here I'm referring to increased fuel costs, fire

insurance which they have no control over. And yet his budget has made

no allowance for this.

This means that the boards can't even stand still, they are going to

have to go backward and even worse, what board can possibly embark on

enrichment? And he talks about the need for development of a new

future, new goals in education and yet he provides nothing in the

budget so the boards can produce this.

You know, Mr. Speaker, this Minister pays lip service to the new

goals in education. He talks about preparing students for the future.

Now surely to do this we must have, for example, resource centres in

our schools well-stocked with books and audio-visual equipment. But the

financial restrictions imposed by this Minister and his department on

school boards are going to force boards to cut back on resource

centres, to cut back on library books, to cut back on audio-visual

equipment.

So you know, to stand up and say he believes in the new goals and

yet he does not provide the financial resources to my mind is shocking

to hear from this Minister.

You know I've heard the Minister speak — and he did today, the

Minister spoke on the development on each individual child's potential.

Very fine words.

But I want to ask the Minister: how can this be done in the public

school classes, in the elementary and secondary grades when his

financial restrictions are going to face teachers in this province with

increased class sizes? How can it possibly be done?

You know, Mr. Speaker, the Minister also announced increased

expenditures for development of post-secondary institutions. Certainly

this is necessary. However, I am and have always been vitally concerned

with the early years of a child's education. And it's been very well

researched and documented, Mr. Speaker, that unless a child receives a

good start in the early years of his education his chances of

progressing on to higher forms of education are very, very poor.

I'm shocked, Mr. Speaker, in checking this year's annual school

report, to discover there are approximately 20,000 five-year-olds in

our province today who are still not receiving public kindergarten

service. In the year 1972. You know some of the districts that don't

have them is…. Kelowna is one example. The Premier's own riding

doesn't have kindergarten. Here again it is this Minister's financial

restrictions on boards — and I want to really emphasise this point — the whole point is that with his formula which started in 1968 and

which is imposing a tighter squeeze on school boards year by year, does

he know what he is actually doing? He is aborting the development of

kindergartens in this province.

Mr. Speaker, there is no use the Minister shaking his head. I would

suggest that he phone Prince George and find out what situation they

are in. The Honourable Minister of Lands and Forests' own riding are

wanting to place them in kindergartens, intended to place them this

year, but with the money that he's allotted them this year and the

restrictions he's put on them, they're going to be faced with not being

able to put in kindergartens.

AN HON. MEMBER: Phone them up, phone them up.

MRS. DAILLY: You know, Mr. Speaker, if this Minister is

really concerned, is truly sincerely concerned with cutting down on

educational expenditures, may I suggest to him that he take the lead in

the expansion of necessary auxiliary services in our school system?

Now here, Mr. Speaker, I'm talking of drawing together in our school

districts social workers, psychiatrists, public health nurses,

psychologists in diagnostic service centres under one umbrella in each

regional district, which could serve children and parents in school

districts throughout the province.

Why I'm stressing this, Mr. Speaker — and I do hope the Minister

during the estimates will comment on this — is the future educational

accidents or juvenile delinquents in this province could be diagnosed

early and treated. But, certainly this requires human and material

resources. But this government does not put the resources into those

early years when they are needed. And we owe it to our children to

provide it to them.

Now I know that many briefs have been presented to the Minister. And

I can assure you that when we are on to the educational estimates we

intend to question the Minister on many of the points brought up in

these briefs, in these various briefs that we have received which

itemised, itemise in each school district the very essential services

that are being cut. And I hope the Minister has an answer for the

people of British Columbia on this.

I wish now, Mr. Speaker, to turn to other areas of needed services

for children. Because we are going to have many more opportunities to

discuss education when we debate Bill No. 3 and the estimates.

Mr. Speaker, I am very, very concerned about the state of day-care

centres in this province, and in particular I wish to discuss day-care

facilities for those children under the age of

[ Page 540 ]

three. And again I feel that day-care centres

should be correlated very closely with the Department of Education. I

am sorry that the Honourable Member for North Okanagan (Hon. Mrs.

Jordan) is not here today because she spent considerable time

discussing day-care centres in a manner, frankly, which I found utterly

confusing. I could not understand the point she was making. But several

points did come through and I would like to discuss them.

Regarding day-care centres the Member yesterday from North Okanagan

— we hear this from the government Members in every area and it can

always be refuted — stated British Columbia leads in all of Canada in

expenditures for day-care centres. And then she went on to quote "our

expenditures amount to $1.25 million." She did not break down whether

that also included the federal subsidy. I would like to read to the

House a bulletin of October 14, 1971, from the Province of Ontario. And

this is from Premier Davis:

I would like to announce several major

advancements in the field of day care which will affect the people of

Ontario. As many of you are aware, last Friday the Ontario Government

announced it is allocating a sum of $10 million at this time for

building new day-care centres. This is part of the total programme of

our province to provide winter jobs and to stimulate an economy.

Here is a province that knows the needs for day-care centres doing

something about it, and also knows it's a way to combat unemployment — $10 million. And yet the Minister yesterday stood up and said, "British

Columbia is leading Canada." They spend $1.25 million.

I would also like to point out that that particular Minister has

accused me of taking a very radical viewpoint on day-care centres.

Mr. Speaker, my radical viewpoint is simply that government should

take the initiative in establishing day-care centres. It happens to be

the same philosophy that the Ontario Government has, which I understand

is a Conservative government. When we get to the whole point of

day-care centres this particular Minister — and I'm referring to this

Minister because she seemed to suggest that she was expressing the

philosophy of her government so this is really a rebuttal of philosophy

of the Social Credit government on day care centres.

The philosophy is that it is good for the local initiative of people

to establish these centres themselves and then: "If you can get going

we'll come in and help you." This means that young girls have to find

buildings, young mothers who are working all day have to go out and

find a building themselves to establish a centre and then they have to

raise $3,000 or $4,000 for capital equipment. Then if they show they've

got all that spirit then the government comes through and helps out.

It's a complete failure, Mr. Speaker. There are many areas that don't

have day-care centres because of this particular philosophy.

It was also stated that if the government initiates day-care centres

we might be brain-washing the children. Now the fear that children may

be brain-washed in day-care nurseries and centres is founded, Mr.

Speaker, on a complete misunderstanding of day care. Day care does not

take over, it does not take over the child-rearing functions of the

family. But it attempts to augment and strengthen the family's efforts.

And though I admit it's impossible to have a value-free environment the

values taught in day care are those which are acceptable to most

parents.

Ground rules to facilitate social living, attitudes of respect

towards self and toward others are a necessary part of a day-care

programme. The value for the child of searching out, manipulating, and

understanding his environment according to his own interests and style

of learning is made possible in a well-designed and well-equipped and

responsive environment. That is good day care and I will have to be

convinced by the present government that just because the government

steps in and gets these going then follows a brain-washing atmosphere.

Nonsense, Mr. Speaker!

I have heard across the floor of the House that day care encourages

mothers to go to work. Mr. Speaker, as a result of our current high

rate of unemployment.…

AN HON. MEMBER: That's not true.

MRS. DAILLY: This has been said by some Members. I'm not

saying that the particular Member said this. The fact is today, Mr.

Speaker, that most jobs held by mothers are either lower-paid than

men's or they involve skills that the unemployed male doesn't have.

Almost 10 per cent of the Canadian population are in families headed by

a woman. Almost 10 per cent. Another large number sustain themselves

just above the poverty level only because the mother is employed. Of

all the studies done in the U.S. and Canada there is no evidence that

failure to provide day care centres in any community has resulted in

fewer mothers going to work.

But there is evidence that failure to provide day-care services has

resulted in second-rate, often dangerous, care of children. And I

accuse this government of not taking their responsibility in getting

day-care centres established right across this province.

The particular area that concerns me when I started off discussing

day care — not only the lack of the initiative on this government — but

I'm very concerned about family day care. Which is quite different from

group day care. And family day care is the only area in which the

provincial government enters into in helping children under the age of

three. Now, family day care is a licensing day-care facility coming

under the existing community care facilities and regulations.

But you know, it's an irony here, Mr. Speaker, that none of the very

stringent regulations which apply to day-care centres for children over

three apply to children under three. And surely children under three

need these just as much as the children over three. Yet under the

present structure this government trusts our youngest, most

impressionable children to the well-meaning but generally inadequate

care of women whose main qualification is that they live in a single

dwelling family dwelling judged suitable by the municipal inspections.

Surely parenthood or substitute parenthood is a very demanding

profession, requiring a broad education, understanding and continuing

stimulation. Mr. Speaker, with few exceptions the children in family

day-care homes are receiving what can only be described as custodial

care or baby sitting while their total development needs are not being

met.

Mr. Speaker, I see no reason why a whole total range of pre-school

children could not be cared for in one centre — it has been done

successfully in other countries — under proper supervision. Mr.

Speaker, once again I'm going to call on the government to set up a

special child care board which is a recommendation of the Royal

Commission on the Status of Women. And again yesterday I listened to

the remarks of the Honourable Member for North Okanagan who said: "We

will

[ Page 541 ]

never establish a child care board in the Province of British Columbia."

Interjections by Hon. Members.

MRS. DAILLY: That's the way it came across here. Are you

considering establishing one? Well I'm glad to hear that. Because the

way it came across yesterday it sounded as if you were never even going

to look into it.

Well, I would hope then that the Honourable Minister will take the

lead with her government to see that we do get a child care board in

British Columbia. And would she also when this board is established

particularly look into the care of the child under three?

Mr. Speaker, I would now like to turn to another area, to another

area of needed services to children. Which I see no indication of being

provided for in this budget, and that is health services for children.

And first of all I'd like to discuss this afternoon speech therapy.

There's approximately 6 per cent of the population of British

Columbia who are in need of speech therapy. That means 120,000 people.

I'm sure I don't need to explain to the Members of this House the very

damaging effect a speech defect can have on a young child's emotional

development. And yet at the present time in the Province of British

Columbia there are only 40 qualified speech therapists active in this

province. This means, Mr. Speaker, that only approximately 2 per cent

of the people of British Columbia who need help are getting it. It's to

the shame of this government that there are qualified speech therapists

available. I know of speech therapists who have applied for positions

with the government. But they are not working because of the failure of

this government to hire them for local health units. We don't want to

hear of any excuses of them not being available. They are fine, but

they are not being used by the government.

Another area where government fails in speech therapy is that it is

not provided under medicare — treatment for speech therapy. And I call

upon them to seriously look into this. You know another great omission

in this budget particularly in reference to children is the fact that

this government has given no indication in their budget that they are

looking into a dental care programme — a programme where care of

children's teeth could be covered under medicare.

You know, there are thousands of children in this province today who

are not receiving dental care. This particularly affects the children

of the working poor.

You know, other provinces in Canada are moving in this direction.

What is wrong with the Province of British Columbia? This is the

province that is supposed to care about people.

You know, Mr. Speaker, in the area of treatment for emotionally

disturbed and juvenile delinquent children, here again, this government

is failing to provide funds for proper treatment centres with necessary

staff. I am sorry the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Brothers) has

left because it was most interesting hearing his dissertation on the

council that has been set up on drug education. Certainly he made some

very interesting points and there are some constructive things being

done there.

But the one area the Minister did not hit on and which shows a

glaring, glaring gap in this province is that we know, we know, that we

have a problem of drug addiction but what are we doing about it when it

comes to rehabilitating the children who presently are drug addicts?

That's the question.

We're doing nothing for them. Is there any treatment centre in this

province that actually takes care of children who are drug addicts?

Where do you send a child who is one?

AN HON. MEMBER: Jail.

MRS. DAILLY: Probably. That seems about the only alternative.

So, it's all very well to talk about drug programming, T.V.

advertisements. But what about the child who is already an addict? What

are we doing for them?

AN HON. MEMBER: Is there any programme anywhere?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes. Yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: New York.

MRS. DAILLY: I am suggesting that at least set up small

treatment centres where perhaps you can get people in who can relate to

these children and find out what's put them on drugs, and work with

them. But right now, this just isn't being done.

AN HON. MEMBER: California, New York, Illinois.

MRS. DAILLY: California, New York and Illinois would be good

areas for this government to look into to see how they are

rehabilitating young drug addicts.

Earlier in my speech, I also mentioned the great need for proper

diagnostic services in the early years because of this government's

failure in providing these services. Of course, because they fail,

they've had 20 years to do this. They haven't done it. Because they've

failed in the early years today they are vitally needed for our

teenagers who are in trouble today.

In the throne debate, I used Willingdon Girls' School as an example

of the great need for proper treatment centres for young girls. I

pointed out — and I had hoped that the Minister without Portfolio for

Mackenzie (Hon. Mrs. Dawson) would understand what I was saying — I was

trying to make clear to her that the very fact that this Minister has

spent several days living in the institution, it was unbelievable that

she left that institution and failed to see the lack of essential

treatment services needed by those young girls.

This Minister said, I believe, the sheets are clean and the food was

good. You know, we've got to get some understanding over there on the

other side of the House and if cabinet Ministers who are supposed to

influence the cabinet don't even understand what is needed in the field

of treatment facilities, there is no hope with that government.

Not only are these services urgently needed but there must also be a

considerable increase, Mr. Speaker, in probation officers. Because of

the whole new concept brought in — no longer sentencing children the

way it was done before — it puts a great burden on probationary

officers and I do hope when the Attorney General's budget comes up that

we will see a definite increase in probationary officers in this

province. But frankly, in looking at the budget and comparing the

figures with last year, I do not see any hope in that area.

Mr. Speaker, in the area of services to the handicapped again this

government's record is disgraceful. Particularily when it comes to

handicapped children. I'm going to give an example of this. I don't

know what reaction some Members of this House had, but frankly I was

sick around Christmas

[ Page 542 ]

time when I kept reading in the Vancouver Sun

a plea to the citizens of the lower mainland and the province. "Help us

to get a hydro-therapy pool for the children's treatment centre in

Surrey. Only $80,000 is needed."

Here we have a government with a $1 billion budget and we needed

$80,000 to provide an essential therapy pool for these children in

Surrey. What do they do? They left it up to the citizens of the

province to produce the money. Do you know why? Because this

government's philosophy is always this: apparently it's good for the

soul and the spirit of our citizens to raise this money ourselves. What

happens if the citizens don't raise the money, or can't raise it? The

children don't get their pool. That's how much this government cares

about the essential needs for children.

AN HON. MEMBER: Charity for many.

MRS. DAILLY: You know, Mr. Speaker, I've spoken in previous

speeches on the need for an adequate forensic clinic in this province.

You know, the problem of sexual assaults on young children is

ever-increasing in this province. All parents are concerned about it.

I've brought this question before this House for several years. I've

brought to the attention of the House letters I have received from

young sexual offenders in the B.C. Penitentiary who are crying out for

treatment and help. Three, four years ago, I brought this up. I see no

change whatsoever in this government's policy. They are doing nothing

in this area from what I can see. They are doing nothing to

rehabilitate and find out the cause of these men having these sexual

problems.

You know, when I repeat this problem of the need for a forensic

centre it reminds me of listening the other day in the morning to a

hot-line programme in which a woman phoned in to express her complete

disgust at the fact that the Hon. Member for Kootenay (Mr. Nimsick) was

criticised for speaking so long in the House.

He was criticised for repeating. Someone across the floor called

across to him: "We've heard that over and over again for 20 years."

But, Mr. Speaker, this woman said: "I think that points exactly to

what's wrong with this government. For 20 years they've been hearing

these problems and they've done nothing about them."

AN HON. MEMBER: What about the victims?

MRS. DAILLY: What about the victims? I'd like to get back to

this forensic clinic. Not only are we concerned about these young men

who are in the penitentiary crying out for treatment and knowing that

when they come out.… What about the young children? What about the

young children in British Columbia?

Because these sexual offenders once they've served their sentence

are put out into society again, with no treatment, no rehabilitation

and I have heard these men say "I cannot control myself. I don't know

when this will happen again; that I may be involving myself in another

assault." What is going to happen to the children of the province

unless this government at least attempts to come to some solution for

this? It's not an easy solution but at least show the people of the

province that you're concerned about the children of the province.

Five years ago we were promised a forensic clinic. One of the P.T.A.

briefs outlines this very well. We're getting tired — very, very tired

— of these needed vital services of this government completely ignores.

You know, Mr. Speaker, I've only highlighted today some of the areas

of neglected services to children by this government. In the estimates

that are coming up in the next few weeks, I hope I will have the

opportunity to expand on many other areas which I feel have been

neglected.

But in conclusion I want to say that our children are our future. We

have no choice, Mr. Speaker, but to ensure that no needed services are

denied them. For let us remember that all society suffers each time

some significant contribution is not made because the person's

potential was squashed early in life.

Mr. Speaker, this is not a budget prepared by a government that

cares. It's not a budget prepared by a government that cares about

children. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I will not support this budget.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS (West Vancouver–Howe Sound): Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. In response to the question from the Hon. first Member for

Vancouver-East (Mr. Macdonald), if there ever was any doubt in his mind

I am not supporting this budget.

AN HON. MEMBER: No applause on that other side.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: That's right. No applause.

AN HON. MEMBER: No Members. No Members.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: I suppose, Mr. Speaker, that I might agree

with the Hon. Member for Esquimalt (Mr. Bruch) who spoke last night, in

his categorisation of this budget. He said it is what we have become

accustomed to expect for the past 19 years. That's what's wrong with

the budget.

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Bennett) sits upon his

ever-growing piggy bank of surplusses and he manages the money and

manages them and manages them, regardless of the needs which may exist

in this province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you think you can do it?

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: We each year are told about balanced

budgets and all it is is a little bit more added here and a little bit

added there with no real positive steps made towards advance in this

province, in the needs of the people, in the needs of this decade and

the needs that we will approach in the coming decade.

I think it is significant that we are debating here today, in part,

the remarks of the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Brothers) because

his is a department which is really concerned and vitally concerned

with the people in this province who will be citizens in 1980. I have

made reference to this before.

But it is clear, Mr. Speaker, from what the Hon. the Minister of

Education said today that he is completely unaware of the steps that

must be taken if this province is to continue its advance and if those

young people who are in our schools today are to perform the role that

this society is entitled to expect of them in the 1980's.

He talks about the increase in the budget for education of some $44

million and how great that is. Yet this Minister neither in the throne

speech debate nor in the debate today could in any way convince the

Members of this House from

[ Page 543 ]

what he said that the programme upon which he has

embarked, a programme commenced by the former Minister of Education,

will have any other result than the dismantling of the educational

system in this province.

A continuation of the direction which we have taken in years gone by

and which is being intensified this year in the actions of this

government will only serve to widen the gulf that exists already — a

gulf created by this government. A gulf between the teachers, the

school trustees, and the general community.

Who will be the benefactors of this programme? The benefactors will

be the factor in education which is so essential — the students. They

will suffer, Mr. Speaker. They will suffer because of the policies of

this government. Its failure to take into account the growing needs of

education, the improvements which we must have, will reflect upon the

kind of citizen we will have in this province 10 years hence.

The Hon. Member for North Burnaby (Mrs. Dailly) who just took her

place pointed out many areas in which this government has failed to

respond to the challenge that faces it in education.

I want to deal with one which is really a problem of education but

is too often confused with other responsibilities of government. It too

is a matter to which the Hon. Minister referred in his remarks. He

spoke about the fund that was established for education in matters of

drug, alcohol and tobacco use.

You know, Mr. Speaker, the incompetence of this government is

perhaps most clearly shown by the name that has been given to this fund

— drug, alcohol, tobacco. You'd think there was some distinction

between those three. Alcohol is just as much a drug as anything else — all the long lists of mind-depressant, intoxicant substances which are

available to our citizens today.

But none-the-less, we have this fund and we have a committee

established under it. What has that committee done? Well, it's spent a

lot of money in advertising. Both in the newspaper and on the radio and

on the television. Advertising, you know, that gives you that nice warm

feeling but doesn't really get noticed. Because the people, Mr.

Speaker, who need to be reached by this kind of programme are not those

who sit home comfortably in their recreation rooms or living rooms and

watch the television at 11.00 at night, to see those cute ads that come

on at great expense.

Those same people are not the ones who read the advertisements in

the Press, who send in for the material that is published by this

committee. They are the least likely to be affected by that programme.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Now, if I may pause in this particular

matter to return to the matter of advertising on another aspect. We

were treated this morning, Mr. Speaker, to a headline story in the

Victoria Colonist : "Peterson

Threatens to Pull Out B.C. Ads." I always thought that we were a

province which understood the rule of law. And yet it seems from the

statements in this

article to confirm what we and the Opposition have

so many times said in this House. That the government is using the

people's money for its own political purposes.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, shame!

Interjections by Hon. Members.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Here we have a threat, a threat from the

Attorney General, that he is going to take specific action in respect

of newspapers which do not comply with the law. What action is he going

to take? Now, it's very significant. He said and this is the reporter

speaking:

He would recommend that no further government advertising should be placed in the Times

or any other paper which broke the advertising ban. Mr. Peterson said

the embargo should extend to all forms including legal advertising.

That's the reporter speaking. But, Mr. Speaker, what did the Hon. the Attorney General say?

I will recommend that this kind of irresponsibility of a daily newspaper should not be rewarded by the government.

AN HON. MEMBER: Rewarded!

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Rewarded. That's the significant word.

"Rewarded." That's exactly what this government has done year after

year after year. They have used the funds of the people to reward

papers that publish their advertisements. And we've had enough of it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Point of order.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Attorney General has risen on a point of order.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: What's the point of order?

HON. L.R. PETERSON (Attorney General): I'll speak my point of order as soon as you take your seat.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: When I'm finished with my speech you may make your

point of order. If I have misquoted….

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister has a point of order, will the Member

please be seated while he states his point of order?

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: At the end of my speech he's entitled to

make his point of order. If I've misstated something, then he's

entitled to do so then.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Will the Member please be seated while the Attorney General states his point of order?

HON. MR. PETERSON: The Honourable Member, Mr. Speaker, has

quoted me as using the word "rewarded". I made no such statement using

the word "rewarded".

MR. D. BARRETT (Leader of the Opposition): Point of order, point of order.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: What is your point of order?

MR. BARRETT: The rule of this House is that the point of

order cannot be used to correct any impression made in a speech. The

rule of this House is that any corrections or statements are to be

alluded to after the speech is finished. This is a typical abuse of

this House and I ask you to stick to the rules of this House.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Member for West Vancouver–

[ Page 544 ]

Howe Sound.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Attorney

General has made his point of order and I trust that the reporter who

is responsible for this particular news story will have the opportunity

of referring to his notes and indicating either in his newspaper or

otherwise to Members of this House whether he is guilty of misquote.

Interjections by Hon. Members.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: At the end of the speech if you have anything else to say you may stand in your place.

The point of the matter is this, that the kind of programme that we

have in this province to even approach the problem of drugs — pure and

simple, drugs — is incompetent of any organised government. The

Honourable Minister stood in his place and said that they were spending

$250,000 on this programme — $250,000. Based upon the figures of the

illicit use of heroin in this province, we are told by a committee of

the medical profession that the market alone is $150 million a year.

Now that's for the guy who is already hooked. He's on it. He's done — and that's just heroin. How he got there is another problem. That's the

kind of money that's being spent in the illicit market in this province.

Now, what does that mean? It means that this committee, spending

$250,000 in this one programme, is spending what 13 drug addicts spend

in one year at current prices — 13 drug addicts and we've got 7,500 of

them. Thirteen of them are spending as much on heroin as this

government is spending on educational programmes to make sure that

there aren't any more addicts. That's the illicit market.

Let's talk about the legal market. We're spending $250,000 to

educate our citizens, young and old, as to the dangers of the use or

abuse of these intoxicant, mind depressant substances.

The people in this province, up to March 31, 1971, spent $224

million to the government to buy booze. This is fair? This is the way

this government reacts to this problem. In the legal market, the market

that is run by the government of this province, the people spend $224

million and this government, to educate the citizens about the problems

of such use or abuse spends $250,000.

It's typical of this government and it's typical of this budget,

that if we understand the problem we don't know how to go about

attacking it. This is what's wrong and this is why we oppose this kind

of budgetting. We aren't using the fiscal resources which are available

to us in order to meet the problems, to do any kind of a job.

This brings me back to the matter of education. There is in the

Province of Alberta a committee not dissimilar to the one that the

Minister has established here in the Province of British Columbia. Last

year, the budget available to the Alberta co-ordinating committee on

drugs, was $1.2 million. They have a population of about 800,000 people.

That co-ordinating committee in the Province of Alberta for the next

year is budgetting for $2.3 million — just for that committee — to

carry on its programmes which will encourage community involvement in

very specific ways, which will carry out research into the drug culture

and will make some attempt to encourage treatment of those who are

already in the grip of drugs.

Aside from that, and if the Minister is really interested in having

something done about this, I suggest that he communicate with the

Department of Education in the Province of Alberta and through them

with the Calgary school board. Because there is functioning there a

positive programme to do something about drug use and abuse through

Grades 1 to 12.

That school board on its own, supported by a committee of citizens

from the City of Calgary which involved all of the local community

organisations, plus the law enforcement body, decided to do something

about it. They hired a co-ordinator who's on the full-time payroll of

the school board and that co-ordinator has been given the job of

putting into the school programme the kind of programme that will reach

the students, Grade 1 to 12.

They have done it with the full support — oh, there was a lot of

opposition at first — but they are now doing it with the full support

of the community and of the teachers. Teachers are voluntarily taking

courses to understand what the drug culture is all about. To understand

how to communicate what the drug culture is all about to the students

who are their charge.

At the same time, the teachers are going out into the community and

making sure that the parents of the children in the schools also know

what the drug culture is all about — how to understand the problem, how

to recognise the problem and how to meet the problem in their own home

and in the community.

This is the way it's being attacked. It may even be that those

students who are in our high schools today, are beyond the grasp of

such a programme. Perhaps some of them who might be encouraged to abuse

drugs, might be stopped. Perhaps some who are already using them can be

drawn away from that way of life.

The ones to be reached, Mr. Speaker, are the ones who are going into

Grade 1 this year and through our elementary schools. They are the ones

who are yet pure, who have not been reached but who are likely to be

the most susceptible to the encouragement that is offered in the kind

of life that we lead to fall into the ways of drug users.

What does that require? It requires positive programmes from the

government, it requires people in the communities, it requires response

from school boards and it requires the responsible, intelligent,

understanding, cooperation of the teaching profession. The teaching

profession — the one which this government has gone out of its way to

isolate and to hold up to ridicule. Mr. Speaker, if a government

pursues the kind of policies which it has indicated in this budget,

towards education, it is going to destroy the kind of attitude that

will be required from those responsible people who are most likely able

to help us in finding a solution to the drug culture problem. The

government must take this carefully into its consideration for it

ignores this problem at its peril.

I would like to turn my consideration to another area where I

believe the government this year has, in its budget, failed to take

into consideration some real problems which we have in various areas of

this province.

Last July and August, the people of this province were treated to an

abuse of executive power by the government of this province and by one

of its members in particular, such as we have never seen before.

Mind you, we are becoming accustomed to abuses of executive power by

this government but this was certainly a high point, if that is the way

you could describe that kind of action. I speak specifically of the

action that was taken by the Honourable, the Minister of Health, (Hon.

Mr. Loffmark), the dictatorial position that he was taking in

[ Page 545 ]

presentation of an order in council, in having it

passed by the cabinet of this government giving him extreme powers over

the medical profession and the delivery of health care in this province.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Some people failed to understand what the

Honourable Member from Cowichan-Malahat, (Mr. Strachan), was saying the

other day. That we have responsible groups within our community — teachers are one, the medical profession is another — groups who over

the years have been looked up to by the community for the contribution

that they have made and can make in the future. A remark such as that

which has just come from the Honourable lady Minister without

Portfolio, (Hon. Mrs. Jordan) indicates that she alone cannot

understand this and she of all people should.

The problem is this, the honourable Minister of Health, this man who

made himself Tsar of health in British Columbia, having gone through

all this explosive exercise, ended up by coming to an agreement with

the medical profession.

What change it has made in the delivery of health services in our

communities, not one is quite certain. It has only shaken the respect

that has been accorded to the doctors and shaken the confidence of the

people in our communities in the ability of our entire health system to

deliver to the people this service to which they are entitled, for

which they are paying and paying very dearly.

I would have thought in the budget this year, that we would have

seen some pronouncement from the government indicating that through the

Minister of Health there would be some positive steps taken to improve

the situation in this province. One situation which clearly needs

improvement is that of the delivery of health care in our outlying

rural districts. Outlying, Mr. Speaker, in this province, needn't be

that far from any place. The Honourable Member from Alberni, (Mr.

McDiarmid), alluded to this in his remarks last night and he spoke of

this in an earlier debate several years ago. And the Hon. Member knows

what the problem is and it is shocking that we should be here some four

or five years later, still talking about the same problem. What does it

mean?

Well, my constituency has its most exciting area in Pemberton

Valley. The Pemberton Valley is a delightful place, about 2,000 souls

live in that valley. It's a valley which has existed as a community for

more than 100 years. It's a valley which finally got its own doctor

about two years ago. That doctor is not one of the fortunate ones who

makes the kind of income that is so often referred to in discussing the

benefits that doctors enjoy under medicare. He's not the one. But he

plays a very significant role in the life of that community and he's

concerned to see that it grows.

He knows that for the first time there is going to be a significant

industrial development take place in his community. They are going to

build a mill. It's being built. It should open some time this next

summer. When it opens they're going to bring another 150 families to

that valley and you know, Mr. Speaker, there aren't any facilities,

except the doctor, his four-wheel-drive vehicle and his little black

bag.

He's got some X-ray equipment which he bought but he hasn't got any

place to put it. There's a medical centre, so-called, which was built

back in 1958 when the only access to the valley was by the P.G.E. and

the purpose of the health centre was to provide just a place for a

couple of beds so that people who were brought in from the local farms

and had to wait for the train to come in would have some place to be

accommodated, whether they had a leg off or whatever the case may be.

That's all it is.

There were a couple of beds. That building is now falling apart and

this community just doesn't have the money to provide the facilities.

This doctor is making an effort but the delivery of health care to this

community is impossible under the rules that presently exist in this

province.

Let me give you an example of what is faced by this doctor. He had a

patient approaching 70 years of age. The patient had cancer, terminal.

No question the patient was going to die. The question was, where could

that patient best spend the last few weeks or months of his life?

The doctor came to the conclusion, and the family agreed, that the

best place would be at home. This man required 24-hour-a-day care.

After a couple of weeks the doctor became concerned that the man's wife

wasn't going to be able to stand up to the kind of pressure that was

being placed upon her in providing the care that her husband needed.

The doctor was going twice a day to visit this man and he was

putting in for his house-call, as he is entitled to do under medicare.

He gets $1.80 more for a house call than he would for a hospital call.

What did he get? He got letters back from medicare, saying "Why are you

seeing this man so often?" Finally, in disgust the doctor stopped

sending in the accounts for the house-calls.

But if the doctor has said: "No, take that man to the Squamish

General Hospital" or Lions Gate in North Vancouver, whatever the case

may be, it would have cost this government $35 a day to keep that man.

He would have been kept away from his wife and family; away from his

community and there was no question that he was going to die.

This doctor was prepared to devote himself to the needs of his

patient and the patient's family and all he got from this government's

medical services was a rough time.

This goes on and on and on in these rural areas, where under the

current medicare system, the income of a doctor is not sufficient to

enable him to provide his own equipment, his own clinic, as in the case

of more populous areas. Yet the government and the Minister of Health

said we've got to do more to put doctors out into these rural areas.

So I ask you, Mr. Speaker, how can you possibly expect to get the

doctors to go out into the rural areas when with a doctor already in

the rural area the government is not prepared to give them the support

and the facilities that are needed in order to do the job?

What we need to have, Mr. Speaker, is some positive programme from

this government — and there are many examples in North America to

choose from — to be tried in some of these isolated communities where

you can deliver health care into a community such as the one of which I

speak. But the government isn't even trying. Nothing in this budget for

this kind of a programme.

If it was, I would be certain that the Minister of Finance would

have shouted from the housetops. Mr. Speaker, they have it in the

Province of Ontario. They understand the problems, they understand the

need to put doctors in outlying communities and so they say to the

doctors: "Fine, you go out into the outlying communities. We will

subsidise your income and provide you with the minimum equipment to do

the kind of job that needs to be done in the areas that

[ Page 546 ]

you are intended to serve. If the area grows and

under the normal incomes from medicare you begin to earn what the

minimum standards are then the subsidy stops."

Why not try it here? Why not, Mr. Speaker, even try a very simple

loan programme so that a doctor who would go into the area can equip

himself with a minimum of clinical facilities that are required to

ensure that he can perform his task as a physician?

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: The regional district hospitals can't help

them because in this particular area there is a regional hospital

district and they have two hospitals — one at Lillooet and one at

Squamish — and their moneys are devoted to the improvement of

facilities in those two hospitals.

So, Mr. Speaker, I say that this is an area where this government

has failed the people of the Province of British Columbia, particularly

those rural outlying areas where we've got real pioneers, those areas

where we want people to go to perform the tasks that need to be done

and to provide the services that they are able to provide. And yet the

Minister of Health does nothing, and this budget says nothing.

A third matter, Mr. Speaker, that I wish to discuss today. Some of

the remarks made by the Honourable Minister of Lands, Forest, and Water

Resources (Hon. Mr. Williston) about responsibilities under his

ministry, lead me to raise some questions about the environment and

land use committee that we have in this province and how that committee

functions for the real benefit of the people here.

I noticed in the newspaper, in the Vancouver Province , of

February 12, some critical comments about this environment and land use

committee by the President of the B.C. Wildlife Federation. Mr. Smith,

the president, said:

So far the energies of the land use

committee established under the Act have been devoted largely to

dealing with legacy problems and user conflict rather than planning for

the future. One of the problems, Smith complained, is that the civil

servants who are already overworked are expected to serve on land use

committees without the backing of additional staff and without

additional funds. They have not been freed from their original duties

to serve on land use committees. They are expected to resolve land use

conflicts and presumably changes in long-term resource planning on a

part-time basis.

Mr. Speaker, we've had part-time action on this matter of land use

in this province for too long now. I want to draw your attention to

matters which have been discussed in this assembly before, not for the

purpose of repeating what has been said but for the purpose of drawing

together and focussing your attention upon the way in which I believe

this responsibility has been mal-administered. It behoves us now that

we have this land use committee to wonder what it's going to do.

I'm referring, Mr. Speaker, to the Powder Mountain episode. It is

now possible to go back to the beginning of the Powder Mountain

development and carry it through to its conclusion in January of this

year and wonder and call upon the Minister to explain how this

situation will be prevented in future years.

You know, Mr. Speaker, Powder Mountain began a number of years ago

when a man in this province — and I'm not going to name any names — there's no use of drawing back into the public light men who have

already been identified with this and other projects — but back in the

early '60s a man who knows the mountain areas around Vancouver was

making some examinations and he discovered what he believed to be a

wonderful winter resort area. He was right, it has since become known

as Powder Mountain.

When it came time to put this into action, they called upon the

experience that had been gained in Cypress Bowl and the whole plan was

put into operation. Now, what do you do, Mr. Speaker? It's as simple as

1, 2, 3.

First of all you find an area that you think you could develop as a

winter resort and as a recreational subdivision area. Then you find out

where the access to the area is.

The very first thing you do, you send somebody in and you stake some

mineral claims right across the access. That was done in June, 1967.

Claims numbered 14211 to 14231; 10 claims were staked by a Mr. Boyd and

they were subsequently transferred to Messrs. Williamson and

Baraclough. That was in June of 1967.

Then following the Cypress Bowl technique, if you will, the next

thing that you do is to get a group of people together and you go in

and apply for land leases from the Department of Lands.

That's exactly what took place at Powder Mountain. There were nine

applications for land leases, each one 640 acres, one square mile. You

very carefully choose where those leases are so that they cover the

access route and those areas that you have wanted to include in your

development.

Having gone that far there's a bit of difficulty but it's overcome

by being able to approach a friendly government, a government that

wants to get things done. That was done also in the case of Powder

Mountain because these land leases were advertised in August, 1968.

But strangely enough on September 4, 1968, an order-in-council was

made by the executive council in Victoria. This was order-in-council

No. 2791, that means there's been 2790 orders-in-council passed that

year before this one.

Anyway, who was present at the meeting? There was Mr. Black, Mr.

Williston, Mr. Skillings, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Kiernan, and Mrs. McCarthy.

They passed an order-in-council that an area outlined by map should be

reserved from alienation. The area on the map covers all of the

Callaghan Lake area and the access from the highway, those areas which

were essential to access to Powder Mountain and in particular to embody

Callaghan Lake.

Now you say, why is Callaghan Lake so important? Well, Callaghan

Lake, as it turned out on subsequent examination, was where the first

subdivision was going to take place. That was in September 1968 and at

that stage fortunately some citizens became involved.

Letters were addressed to the district forester and to the land

commissioner by Mr. Ken Farquharson. Ken Farquharson was president of

the Save Cypress Bowl Committee. I would like to take this moment, Mr.

Speaker, to pause for an instant.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Oh well, that's fine. We'll see.

I'm glad the Minister is paying attention because if what is

reported is wrong, he'll have an opportunity to correct it. And at any

rate in November, 1968, Mr. Farquharson wrote these letters and he

asked certain questions. Also as I was saying Mr. Farquharson was head

of the Save Cypress Bowl Committee. Mr. Farquharson in respect of the

work

[ Page 547 ]

that he has done in this Powder Mountain incident

and the Cypress Bowl affair really deserves the wholehearted thanks of

all environmentalists in this province.

I'm afraid for much of the time that he worked on this, all that he

got was abuse but it would appear that some of the ideas and some

concerns that he early expressed have proven to be well founded.

Anyway, when he wrote to the district forester, he asked questions

about the inventory of forests in the area of Callaghan Lake and he

wanted to know whether or not a licence to cut had been issued for the

purposes of access roads to the proposed development.

From the land commissioner, he wanted to know the current status of

these lease applications, the type of land tenure which was envisaged

by the department, and where, when and how objections could be raised

to these applications for land.

He also in December wrote to the Honourable Minister of Lands,

Forests, and Water Resources sending a copy of the letter to the

director of lands and in that letter he said to the Honourable Minister:

We urge you to develop new systems of control which will ensure

that the full recreational potential of public land is realised when its use

is allowed by private developers. Present systems of control through logging

legislation are inadequate. Control must be through recreation experts.

And in his letter to the director of lands, Mr. Farquharson requested information

about applications over this land and he closed by saying:

We respectfully request that a public hearing on the matter of

these applications be held in Vancouver before any final adjudication is made.

Well, in January, 1969, he received a response from the director of

lands and the response dealt with answers to the questions saying as

follows:

The areas applied for are situated within a reserve from alienation

established by order-in-council. However, all the stakings were made prior to

the establishment of the reserve. Secondly, applications for Crown land can

be made either in the names of individuals or corporations.

And there's no question

that that was true at that time.

A letter of consent to construct an access road into this area

was issued after the company had spent nearly two years carrying out snow surveys

and gathering other preliminary information necessary to the construction of

liftlines, et cetera.… Leases issued by the department will be restricted

to that part of the area applied for on which the development is proposed.

In other words, although a person may apply for 640 acres the

extent of the lease issued will be dependent upon the development plan placed

before the department. That's fine.

A letter of consent to construct the access road does not give

the recipients the right to prevent other people from using the road.

That's right. He closes by saying:

The many ski developments now operating successfully throughout

the province were all handled directly by the department, and as this project

is no different from the others there does not appear to be a need for a public

hearing.

That was in January, 1969.

AN HON. MEMBER: Same as Cypress Bowl.

MR L.A. WILLIAMS: Well, the work at Powder Mountain continued

and the trees kept coming out. That's right, the trees were cut down

and they came out of the right of way, 30 million feet of them

altogether. The companies that went broke, how they went broke I'll

never know — how you can get broke taking out 30 million feet under the

control of the forest service. That's the very responsibility of that

department to see that they don't go broke in constructing an access.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Is the Minister responsible for Bulkley Valley? Are you admitting responsibility for the mess that exists at Bulkley Valley?

AN HON. MEMBER: He's waffling on it.…

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Alright then, Mr. Speaker, in July, 1969,

people became concerned about what was going to take place. A group

including the chairman of the regional district, the directors of the

regional district, members of the advisory planning group from the

area, the clerk-treasurer of the Municipality of Squamish, the

assistant chief forester, the district forester for the Vancouver

forest district, and others attended at this site.

Along with them was a Mrs. Tatlow from the Squamish Times . She wrote a story about this in July, 1969. She said:

Metal Dome, Powder Bowl, Powder Dome, Powder

Mountain will be familiar names in the skiers' vocabulary when plans

for the Powder Mountain complex now underway are completed.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, they're familiar names in the skiers'

vocabulary but there are other words in the vocabulary that this paper

wouldn't print. The story goes on.

Already the road has been pushed almost as

far as Callaghan Lake, 14 miles from the highway, and the Alexander

subdivision just inside the Powder Mountain recreation area is being

cleared. Mr. Boyd, one of the members of Lakeland Valley Developments

Ltd., the Powder Mountain company, said this initial stage of the

development will cover 594 acres, but much of it would not be cleared

as there would be a 40-acre lake and park areas included in the

property which is expected to contain 700 lots.

No subdivision?

AN HON. MEMBER: What do you call it, if that's not a subdivision?

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: The story goes on.

Plans call for much of the timber to be

removed from the 131 acre hillside whose base is at the 2,600 foot

level and while this is not common practice in B.C., in Europe many

easy slopes are completely cleared and planted with grass. This

provides for skiing when there is very little snow on the ground as

there are no stumps or logs.

But this is only the first stage of the

projected development. A 200-acre subdivision will be built at Meadow

Lake just below Callaghan Lake, which the developers plan to leave as a

wilderness area. And the third large development, approximately 500

acres, will be the ski village at the base of the main ski area.

That was the plan, Mr. Speaker, that was the plan of the company that was going in and the Minister knew that was

[ Page 548 ]

their plan.

HON. MR. WILLISTON: It was not an approved plan.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, this is the difficulty, and

that's why I raised the question as to the way the land use committee

functions because the land use committee is under the control of the

Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources. And it's one thing for

him to say that he doesn't know what is being planned, but another

thing for him to say that he knows what is being planned but doesn't

know what has been approved. Because time and time again in this

province we find that approvals have been given in spite of what the

Minister knows.

HON. MR. WILLISTON: Name one, name it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Cypress Bowl.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Yes, I know what was approved and the

leases were granted and they were issued and they were sold to Benguet

weren't they? Don't tell me the leases weren't issued.

HON. MR. WILLISTON: The leases for the bowl were not.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Will the Members please address the Chair?

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Yes, I'm a lawyer and I understand the

documents. Wait a minute, Mr. Speaker, I hope the Minister will

respond. It will be very interesting to hear his explanation. In

December of 1969 the question again came up….

AN HON. MEMBER: You weren't into my office.

Interjections by Hon. Members.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Do I have to check in with you? Well, I'll

come to some of the answers to my correspondence that you sent me. This

matter again came to attention in December, 1969, Mr. Speaker, and the

Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources told the Squamish

Regional District the people who were on the site, and they were

concerned, that he would not agree to any judicial inquiry into the

circumstances surrounding Powder Mountain.

He requested the regional district chairman Donald Gow to advise how

a judicial inquiry could clarify details of the controversial

development, and in this instance Williston was asked if the real

estate subdivision does not more properly come under the municipal

affairs department than under the lands department even if it is to

take place on Crown land.

His answer was: "Quite frankly we haven't had too much experience at

this kind of development in the past because it's usually taken place

in association with skiing facilities for other area development." We

haven't had much experience.

My problem Mr. Speaker is that they still haven't got any

experience. They still don't have the staff in the department of lands

in which to assess this kind of a programme. That was in December, 1969

and the Minister says that I wasn't into his office.

It's quite true, I wrote him in December, 1969 and the Minister responded. December 10, 1969:

I have for attention of re ply your letter dated December 2, 1969 dealing with the ski development at Powder Mountain.

There are no uncertainties surrounding the Powder

Mountain development as you alleged. The development company has shed

those directors who were also affiliated with Alpine Outdoor Recreation

Resources Ltd. I would respectfully point out that the first stage of

the Powder Mountain development is being undertaken in a portion of an

area that was applied for as a timber sale of 1965. However, the

applicant company after carrying out a detailed study of the timber

withdrew its application because it reported the timber to be extremely

defective and contained a preponderance of pulp timber.

A timber company in a statement on file advised it had

thoroughly checked the area and found it was completely uneconomic to

log at that time because in addition to the poor quality of the stand

about 11.6 miles of road would have to be built.

The chairman of the

Squamish Lillooet Regional District visited the site with other

officials of the government and the developers and was in complete

agreement with the project.

That's not true. And the Hon. Minister closed by saying: "in the view of all the circumstances there is no basis for your suggestion of holding an enquiry into this matter."

I wrote him again in October, 1970. And the Minister responded.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: I say it's not true, the Minister's

statement is not true. He said the chairman was in complete agreement

with the project — but the regional district chairman had already asked

him to hold an judicial inquiry — a public hearing, the Minister said

it wasn't necessary.

October 27, 1970 again he responded to my letter.

Reference is made to your letter dated October 21, 1970. With

respect to questions raised as to whether I would advise are as follows:

1. A condition in the lease issued to Lakeland Valley Development

Ltd.

it was a lease now….

over certain Crown lands in the vicinity of Alexander Falls required

the lessee to complete the access road through to Callaghan Lake by the end

of this year.

And it wasn't done. That's the subdivision, sure. Why did you think there wasn't

a subdivision?

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Well, where's Alexander Falls in relation to Callaghan Lake? It just lies below Callaghan Lake.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: That's right, that's right.

Westbar Timber Ltd, has a substantial amount of money owing it by

the lessee and has agreed to complete the road in accordance with the

requirements of the lease indenture subject to it obtaining a share

position at Lakeland Valley Development Ltd.

It didn't happen. The leased-developed-purchased concept for Crown

lands has not been altered. And it doesn't work, does it, Mr. Minister?

[ Page 549 ]

3. No commitments other than those originally entered

to by the crown with Lakeland have been made but in any future

commitments which may be made, providing the lessee complies with the

terms of the conditions of the earlier lease agreement, the lessee will

be required to satisfy the department in respect to financial

capabilities to ensure the project is carried through to completion.

And Mr. Minister, through you, Mr. Speaker, you were never satisfied

about the financial ability of the company to carry anything through to

completion. All of the undertakings that you took from that company

failed.

They didn't build the road, they didn't put in the uphill

facilities, they never were in the position to do so, they never had

the money to do so, and yet you allowed them to continue with this

project — you allowed a company to go broke, and you leave Powder

Mountain in the same kind of a mess as Cypress Bowl was in so far as

the development is concerned when finally it was taken over.…

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Alright, Mr. Speaker. I don't want to be

in constant debate with the Minister, but I enjoy this. The condition

of the Power Mountain development is exactly the same as it was in

Cypress Bowl. Nothing has been done.

The timber is gone, right? People have gone broke, and there still

aren't any uphill facilities, and no way that we ever are going to be

sure there will by any uphill facilities. What is wrong Mr. Minister,

and you will not understand what I've told you on many occasions as

have other Members, that if you want to carry out the development of

recreational areas in this province, you've got to have people in your

department who understand what needs to be done so that you can assess

the viability, the appropriateness of any particular plan which is

produced to you by a so-called private developer.

Then you'll know whether the things will ever be carried through to

fruition. We won't have lost all these years. This is what the land use

committee is for. And you should have the staff to assess the kind of

ideas that are put forward to you.

Now, you stepped into Cypress Bowl. I understand from statements

from Ministers, they were not going to step into Powder Mountain. Thank

goodness for that.

But the situation is, Mr. Speaker, that my concern is what happens

next? Yes, we've got a logging road most of the way into the Powder

Mountain area. Thirty million feet of timber gone. How much will be

required before we have access completed there? What we need to know in

this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, after the Cypress Bowl and the Powder

Mountain incident, is who's going to move into Powder Mountain next?

And what are the conditions to be? And who's going to lay them down?

Mr. Speaker, it doesn't do the Minister any good, or any of the

people in the department to talk about posting of bonds because how big

should the bond be for Powder Mountain? You can't buy a bond from a

bonding company to cover this kind of performance. It's cash money you

have to put out. Is this government prepared to ask for $50,000 — $100,000 — $200,000? How much will it cost to do the programme?

The Minister and his department, the land use committee, must know

what it will cost before they allow any private developer to go back in

and undertake the tasks that need to be done at Powder Mountain.

Rumours are rampant as to what's going to happen. We know that Mr.

and Mrs. Raines are interested — they've said so. It has been suggested

to me privately that the Bank of Montreal is interested in backing Mr.

and Mrs. Raines in this development.

If that is to be the case what are the conditions? How much is it

going to cost to get the job done? And what assurance is this

government going to have that it will be done this time?

If you want my concern in another area of my constituency, Mr.

Speaker, I ask the same question of the Minister with regard to the

catastrophe that occurred at Brohm Ridge. When a private company went

broke it cost a lot of people in the Squamish area a lot of money,

because they believed that what was going to take place there would be

properly carried out.

Now, it was a private development throughout. But, Mr. Speaker, I

want to know from the Minister and from his land use committee who's

going to take it over? Who's going to get the benefit of what was done?

And what assurance are we going to have from this government that the

job will be done? This is the kind of performance that we need to have

from the land use committee and from this Minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear hear.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have been longer than I

intended. This government is not doing the job in this province, Mr.

Speaker, in the areas of people's needs and the areas of looking after

the resources which are the responsibility of this government to

administer, whether it be land or otherwise.

I could not by any stretch of the imagination support this budget.

But one question has come to my attention now. Early in my remarks I

read a quote from a newspaper report this morning that appeared in the

Victoria Colonist attributing words to the Honourable the Attorney General.

The Attorney General has risen in his place and denied making those

words and as an Honourable Member — we are all Honourable Members — I

have to accept what he says.

However, I have a message sent to me at my place here — not one, not

two, but three persons present at the time of that interview confirm

that the Honourable the Attorney General used the words: "I will

recommend that this kind of irresponsibility in a daily newspaper

should in no way be rewarded by the government."

Three people.… As I take my place, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Attorney

General if he again wishes to rise in his place and deny that he made

this statement.

HON. MR. PETERSON: Mr. Speaker, if I may just respond to that

point. I don't recall having used the word "rewarded." If indeed three

people recorded it then I'd certainly be prepared to accept their word

that I did. The fact is that they taped many of the sessions and I'd be

interested if that word was used on any of the tapes. I don't recall

using it, but if three of them say I did, certainly I'd be prepared to

accept their statements.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable first Member for Vancouver-Burrard.

MR. H.J. MERILEES (Vancouver-Burrard): Mr. Speaker, if you

took away these young sports' snowballs and Skidoos and things they

wouldn't have much left would they? These

[ Page 550 ]

Liberals, about all they do is a snow job. First

it's Trudeau at Whistler, and then they're in one bowl and then another

bowl, and if it isn't that they're in the bog of the Skagit Valley, or

the Member for Point Grey he's got the fox in the hen-house and you

name it, they are real sports.

Mr. Speaker, it's a great budget and I'm proud to take my place in this debate.

Incidentally, I'll be voting for it. But contrary to what some of

you might think this is not election budget, it's just the usual magic

that we've come to expect from the great Canadian financial wizard,

Merlin the Magnificent, British Columbia's Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh, oh.

MR. MERILEES: Come back next year, Mr. Leader, or just come

back from the coffee shop or wherever you are, and you'll see a budget

that is an election budget.

You'll remember who Merlin was, Mr. Speaker. He was that legendary

figure in the time of King Arthur's round table. Merlin was known in

those days as a magician. But history proved later that Merlin was no

magician. He was just a very brilliant man — a man ahead of his time.

Sure, Mr. Speaker, he used to pull off a few little feats of magic, but

these were just to make sure the other boys didn't forget who was the

real brains behind King Arthur and the Round Table. So just watch out.

Merlin will wait and you watch as Trudeau gives himself a real

Western-style hanging, at least he'll hang himself west of Thunder Bay,

that's for sure. Merlin will wait as Nixon winds up his Vietnam

disaster.

During this time most of the union bosses will be disrupting the

B.C. economy and fomenting senseless strikes and they'll be enraging

the voters with some of the most exorbitant demands they've ever made.

Mr. Speaker, they too will join in the Ottawa game that "B.C. is a

goblet to be drained." Greedy, short-sighted labour bosses going for a

quick buck now — talk about the "rip-offs," Hon. Member for

Vancouver-East (Mr. R.A. Williams).

It's a matter of record, Mr. Speaker, that one union alone among

many others has already filed demands to increases of more than $5 per

hour. On top of what they are already getting, which would bring them

if successful to $13 per hour.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. MERILEES: It's on file. In the long term such tactics will discredit and destroy the power and the respect of our labour unions.

Then and not until then, Mr. Speaker, will Merlin the Wizard of

Finance reach back into his crystal cave and bring out an election

budget. A budget that will even boggle the eyeballs of that famous

liberal scientist from Point Grey (Mr. McGeer). You know the one I

mean, Mr. Speaker — that mathematical genius who couldn't even get the

If you'd like a little backing for my Merlin analogy then listen to this quote from the Vancouver Province , datelined Ottawa, February 14. "Canada Missed Chances, Says Economic Council."

The new chairman of the council says Canada

had a golden opportunity to increase domestic control of business and

industry through new tax laws.

Dr. Raynault, 44, E.C.O.C. chairman since the

first of the year said the government chose not to adopt

recommendations in the Carter Royal Commission Report on Taxation that

would have increased economic independence.

Raynauld described himself as a nationalist

who regretted the amount of foreign control in Canada but also felt

freer trade was necessary to reduce outside control.

This is the head of the economic council.

He said he is, as a result "not very far from

B.C. Premier W.A.C. Bennett's proposal for a common market with the

United States."

There are some pretty fabulous things in the 1972 budget, Mr.

Speaker. Extra home-owner grants for older people. Extra money to help

some of them own their own homes — new or older homes — it doesn't

matter. There is extra money to help tenants own their own apartments.

If they're paying $135 a month or even less they can kick this habit

and own their own suite or apartment. Then they can build themselves a

capital asset and collect the annual home-owner grant. Page after page

in the weekend newspapers offer home and apartment purchase

opportunities and they stress the assistance given by the government

grant plan.

In Vancouver-Burrard alone hundreds of our citizens have taken

advantage of the home acquisition grants and low-cost second mortgage

opportunities — older people and newlyweds alike. Thousands of

home-owners in Vancouver-Burrard between False Creek and 16th Avenue

applaud and are grateful for the extra dollars and those over 65, Mr.

Wizard of Finance, are particularly grateful.

Many developers — and we've heard developers criticised by the

Opposition and some of them ought to take a hand at trying to do a

little developing and see what kind of a mess it gets them into, it's

no simple trick — many developers have built multiple family dwellings

and apartments and condominiums all made possible by these grants. All

these projects create great new markets for building materials, home

furnishings, wages for workmen and taxes for the cities and

municipalities in which they are built.

Streets, Mr. Speaker, are made to move people. One bus will move

more people faster and cheaper than 40 automobiles. One rapid-transit

train will move more people faster and cheaper than 300 cars. One

private automobile parked on a downtown street hogs 50 feet of the most

expensive property in British Columbia.

I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, in recommending the budget, to note that

the budget recognises the urgent need for senior government help in

operating a Greater Vancouver and lower mainland transit authority.

All we need now is help to finance the capital cost.

There is no question that Ottawa has an obligation. The U.S. Federal

Government is pumping billions into redevelopment of the urban areas.

Much of this goes for mass transit all the way from San Francisco to

Boston. Practically every country in western Europe does the same.

Federal help we must get. But in the meantime still look to this

government to assist in financing the initial capital costs.

Vancouver and t