1985 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 33rd 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)

TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

5123 ]

CONTENTS

Tabling Documents –– 5123

Oral Questions

Federal-provincial agreements. Mr. Skelly –– 5123

Women's economic rights branch. Ms. Brown –– 5124

Capital punishment. Mr. Lauk –– 5124

Federal-provincial forestry agreement. Mr. Howard –– 5124

Federal EPF funding. Mr. Stupich –– 5125

Throne speech debate

Mrs. Johnston –– 5126

Mr. Strachan –– 5129

TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985

The House met at 2:06 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. GABELMANN: Mr. Speaker, I have two or three introductions

this afternoon, if I may. Firstly, here from the village of Gold River

in the constituency of North Island is an active supporter of mine,

Mrs. Kay Ferrero. I ask the House to make her welcome.

Also visiting are some friends from Port Moody, Chuck and Susan

Zuckerman. Susan was a teacher once upon a time in a one-room school in

Port Eliza, which the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Heinrich) should

visit one day. I'd like the House to make them welcome.

In the gallery as well this afternoon is a gentleman from Vancouver.

He has a lot to do with events in North Island. I'd like the House to

welcome Mr. Bert Gayle.

MR. MOWAT: Mr. Speaker, in your gallery today we have Prof.

and Mrs. De Santis of Victoria. Dr. De Santis is a professor emeritus

in the history department of the University of Notre Dame, Indiana.

Mrs. De Santis is a graduate of Magee Secondary School and a very

active member of the Multiple Sclerosis Society. They are the parents

of Dr. Owen Lippert, of our Social Credit caucus research department. I

ask the House to make them welcome.

MR. SKELLY: Mr. Speaker, I too would like to welcome Kay

Ferrero from Gold River, which was represented by the member for

Alberni before the riding boundaries were rationalized in 1978.

1 would also like the House to join me in welcoming Eve Howden and

Mrs. Lundgren, who are active in politics here in Victoria and

throughout the province. They are also active in the campaign to save

Meares Island.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Speaker, in the gallery today is Mr.

Jack Ford, a businessman from Vancouver–Little Mountain and the city of

Vancouver. I would like the House to welcome him and to express

appreciation for the very fine work that Mr. Ford does in creating

employment for handicapped citizens.

HON. MR. ROGERS: I have a friend in the gallery today, Randy

Sandhu, who is visiting us from Vancouver South. Would the members

please make him feel welcome.

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, may I join the member for

North Island in welcoming Bert Gayle, who is here today representing

the Canadian Forestry Association. I would also ask members to extend a

welcome to John Murray, who is also with the CFA, and remind members

that the CFA is very prominent in promoting the proper use of our

forest resource.

HON. MR. PELTON: Mr. Speaker, I have in the galleries today three guests

that I would like to introduce and have the House welcome. First are Al and

Jill Jamieson. Jill is the secretary in the riding office in Dewdney and her

husband Al is the president of the constituency association. The third person

I would ask you all to welcome is Mr. Roman Evancic, a certified general accountant

who is also an alderman in Maple Ridge.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I would like to take the opportunity to

introduce to the House two residents of the city of Vernon in the

constituency of North Okanagan, and two very important people in my

life: my better half, my wife Arlene, and my son Matthew, who, I might

add, is taking down notes on the business of the House and will be

making a full report back to his grade 3 class come Monday.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I have several introductions to

make this afternoon. In your gallery I have two very special guests,

Peg Anderson and Jean Heaney, who are visiting us from Portstewart in

Northern Ireland; and Patricia Hopkins, Bill and Betty Anderson,

Marguerite Leach, Jeanne Eddington, and Mr. and Mrs. Harold Rink, all

hardworking Surrey constituents and friends. Would you please welcome

them.

HON. MR. GARDOM: I have two welcomes, Mr. Speaker. The first

is to the hon. member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly) to her new seat

in the House, and to express to her our every sympathy in having to

more closely endure the first member for Vancouver East (Mr. Macdonald).

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I would be very grateful if all members would

join me in welcoming to our assembly this afternoon Dr. Donald Balmer

and his students from the political science department of Lewis and

Clark College in Portland, Oregon. Welcome.

Mr. Mowat tabled the 1984 annual report of the Labour Relations Board.

Oral Questions

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL AGREEMENTS

MR. SKELLY: Has the Premier concluded an agreement with the

federal government which would allow the placement of provincial trade

representatives in Canadian embassies and consulates overseas?

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the Premier is not negotiating

contracts on behalf of the government. Appropriate ministries are

holding discussions. The question should be directed to the appropriate

minister.

[2:15]

MR. SKELLY: Supplementary to the Premier, Mr. Speaker. Has the government concluded such an agreement with the federal government?

HON. MR. BENNETT: At such a time, Mr. Speaker, the government will make an announcement.

MR. SKELLY: I assume the answer is no, Mr. Speaker.

A supplementary to the Premier. Has the Premier or the government

received an acknowledgement from the federal government recognizing

their obligation or their commitment, as it was stated in the throne

speech, to finance the Vancouver Island natural gas pipeline?

[ Page 5124 ]

HON. MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the record of commitment from

the federal government is well known from the election campaign, when

there was a significant change made in the constituency of Nanaimo.

Secondly, on the pipeline, the federal government has in its

possession the information that was made public, before the commitments

contained in the election, from the PUC regarding the amount of funding

the federal government would have to supply to meet the same standards

and the same commitment as was made to the Atlantic provinces and to

the province of Quebec from the same public commitment under which

these pipelines were to be financed, both by the last government and

now the present government.

MR. SKELLY: In the absence of simultaneous translation, Mr. Speaker, I assume the answer is no.

I have a supplementary to the Premier. Has the Premier or the

government concluded any agreement with the federal government which

will bring any additional money to the province of British Columbia

over and above the $1.4 billion we receive annually in unemployment

insurance and the $600 million we receive annually for welfare under

the Canada Assistance Plan, both of which compensate for the province's

failure to establish an adequate economic policy?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Before calling on the Premier, I

would recommend that all members take an opportunity to review the new

rules for question period, which are contained in the blue books in

your desks, and which clearly place upon me the necessity to rule that

question out of order.

HON. MR. BENNETT: Well, Mr. Speaker, both the member for

Prince Rupert (Mr. Lea) and I are aware of the conclusions the member

for Alberni draws from discussions that may or may not have taken

place, and of his need for simultaneous translation on a consistent

basis.

WOMEN'S ECONOMIC RIGHTS BRANCH

MS. BROWN: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the new

Minister of Industry and Small Business Development (Hon. Mr.

McClelland), but since he's not here, I'm wondering if the old Minister

of Industry and Small Business would be willing to respond to it. This

is because it's International Women's Week, and I specifically wanted

to find out whether there were any plans on the government's part to

reestablish the women's economics rights branch in the ministry, since

its mandate was specifically to work for economic opportunities for

women.

HON. MR. PHILLIPS: Mr. Speaker, the old minister would be

quite happy to take that question on notice for the new, young Minister

of Industry (Hon. Mr. McClelland), but at the same time remind that

member that when I took over the portfolio, this much touted

section of

the ministry had never had a budget. It was set up in name only, and

was more huff and puff on behalf of those people when they were

government.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

MR. LAUK: Mr. Speaker, I couldn't resist a shot at the Attorney-General,

who, it is reported, suggested the use of firing squads as a form of execution

when he was in Barbados doing Her Majesty's business. There was a report

that he said, "If it's good enough for Fidel Castro it's good enough

for me," but I discount that. In light of the fact that in the Victoria

area alone several retired brigadiers have offered to supervise executions if

they're held in public, has the Attorney-General decided to recommend that

executions be carried out in public?

HON. MR. SMITH: No.

MR. LAUK: Pursuant to the same secret memo that I received,

has the Attorney-General decided to recommend that we have public

floggings? If so, will offenders include cabinet ministers who still

use the word "restraint"?

HON. MR. SMITH: Again, Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. If the

member is interested in my remarks on capital punishment, they were

made at a Canadian bar meeting in Barbados which that body decided to

hold with the Caribbean bar. There was a panel on capital punishment,

which consisted of Edward Greenspan, who is the distinguished defence

counsel from Toronto, me on the other side and the director of public

prosecutions from Barbados. It was a very long and excellent debate,

with many submissions from the floor as well. In the course of that

debate I naively made the observation that I didn't think capital

punishment should be argued on the basis of the method of execution, as

many people do. Trying to absolve themselves of the responsibility to

decide whether they are for it or not, they advance more humane

methods. I commended the policy of the state of Utah, which allows the

condemned person to select his own method.

MR. HOWARD: Is old age an option? [Laughter]

HON. MR. SMITH: To be required to spend two hours' penal servitude in your caucus would probably be adequate punishment, hon. member.

MR. LAUK: In light of the Attorney-General's recommendation

being regarded with widespread derision by civilized people, has he

decided to stop watching late-night movies such as Beau Geste?

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL FORESTRY AGREEMENT

MR. HOWARD: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could ask the Minister

of Forests if he will explain to the House the reason for his

continuing failure or inability to secure a federal-provincial

agreement on forestry which would dramatically increase expenditure on

forest renewal in B.C.

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, we have not failed to

negotiate an agreement. We have not yet concluded the agreement, but

we've certainly not failed in our efforts to negotiate an agreement.

MR. HOWARD: It's a good thing the minister knows the thesaurus is around, anyway.

Inasmuch as the federal government has insisted that projects

financed by that proposed federal-provincial agreement be identified in

the agreement, and sanctified and protected, but administered by the

province, can the minister explain why he and his government have

rejected that principal proposition put forward by the feds?

[ Page

5125 ]

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, the question posed by that member is

based upon incorrect information.

MR. HOWARD: Why are you always at war with the federal government? Can't you get along with anybody?

MR. SPEAKER: Question please, hon. member.

MR. HOWARD: That's a question.

I want to ask the minister if he can confirm that the federal

government has proposed that there be a longer term to the proposed

agreement than the five years discussed publicly and referred to often

by the minister and others, and that that longer-term agreement would

have no reduction in the proposed average $60 million a year toward

reforestation,

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, in response to the first

question by the member, I get along very well with my colleagues in

Ottawa. It is very nice to have the good representation of the western

part of Canada in the House of Commons in the governing party. We have

been very inadequately represented by members from British Columbia in

the past few parliaments.

Mr. Speaker, in response to the second question from the member, I

have not suggested, nor has my counterpart in Ottawa, that there be

anything other than a five-year term with the total funding of $300

million for a forestry agreement.

MR. HOWARD: I take it the minister was misquoted earlier when

he himself referred to ten years as having been an item discussed with

the federal government,

I'd like to ask the minister whether he has agreed to accept, in the

proposed agreement and under ERDA, the proposition that either party to

the agreement can unilaterally declare that it terminate at the end of

two fiscal years.

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, in all agreements there is a

clause which would say that if circumstances arise which at that time

cannot be anticipated, the parties can mutually agree to terminate the

agreement. I think that's probably fairly standard practice. But there

is no intent on the part of the provincial government — or, as far as I

understand, on the part of the federal government — to enter into an

agreement for anything less than five years. It is entered into in good

faith with every intention that such agreement shall carry on for that

period of time and accomplish those goals which have been agreed to.

MR. HOWARD: A final supplementary. Is the minister aware that

the ERDA agreement does not contain a provision about mutual agreement

to discontinue it in less than the ten year period for ERDA but

contains a specific clause in there that says the agreement may be

terminated at the end of any fiscal year by either party giving notice

— in other words, unilateral termination of the agreement? Is the

minister aware that that's in ERDA?

HON. MR. WATERLAND: Mr. Speaker, firstly, the member is referring to

the forestry agreement, which is an agreement under the umbrella of ERDA, and

now he's referring to ERDA. I have not read the ERDA master agreement, but

if such a clause is indeed in it, it would not surprise me at all. It would

also be fairly standard practice.

FEDERAL EPF FUNDING

MR. STUPICH: I have a question to the Minister of Finance.

Federal spending estimates tabled recently in the House of Commons show

that B.C. will get some $98 million extra in health funding. Has the

minister decided that these funds will be passed on to the health care

system and not be diverted, as has previously been the case?

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Speaker, I think there might be a

difference of opinion with respect to the last portion of his

statement, which he attempted to make part of the question. Mr.

Speaker, you and the member will know that we are very close now to the

presentation of the 1985-86 budget for the province of British

Columbia. Therefore I would take the question as notice.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Speaker, I have another question. The

minister may want to take this as notice too, but in that it affects

other bodies, I am wondering.... The federal spending estimates tabled

recently show that B.C. will receive an extra some $40 million for

post-secondary education funding.

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: Yes, extra.

Certainly in that case the minister can't say that it has been

passed on in the past, because the amount available has been reducing

year by year. That being the case, has the minister decided, since

these institutions have to know, whether these funds will be passed on

to the post-secondary education system and not diverted, as has

previously been the case?

[2:30]

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Speaker, I would attempt to help the

member to this extent: he has mentioned federal money for health and

federal money for post-secondary education, and I can make a couple of

comments, I think, that do not in any way infringe upon what may or may

not be contained in the budget.

The fact is that again we see another example of individuals across

this country falling prey to the myth that the money is divided. It is

transfer money — dollars and tax points — under a heading called "EPF."

It was the unilateral decision of the former federal government, and

the former federal Minister of Finance, in particular — notwithstanding

the fact that the former Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau, some time earlier

indicated that it was block funding — to say: "Surprise! The money is

going to be split into two different sections, some for health and some

for post-secondary education."

British Columbia is not alone in rejecting that unilateral move.

Indeed, most provinces, if not all — and I'm subject to correction —

have rejected that decision taken by a former Minister of Finance, for

whatever reason, to say: "So much money and tax points for

post-secondary education; so much money and tax points for health care

and health services across the country." It is a myth, and one which I

think most provinces reject, and I hope that in the course of this

session we can discuss that further.

I think it is up to all of us who believe in the provincial system within this nation to remind Ottawa — those who

[ Page 5126 ]

served then and those who serve now — that it's

still block money. I notice the federal Leader of the Opposition, the

leader of the Liberal Party, recently fell into the same trap when

making a statement in, I believe, the lower mainland area, by saying

that money for post-secondary education had been diverted into other

programs.

Mr. Speaker, the record is very clear in British Columbia: we move money for

those two activities within the block. The member for Nanaimo nods his head

in agreement. We move money within the block for those two purposes, not to

other purposes. Indeed, I think it's time that all of us at the provincial

level made it very clear that just because some minister now gone from Ottawa

decided to change is no reason why an agreement should be broken.

MR. KEMPF: Mr. Speaker, I would ask leave to make a special introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. KEMPF: Today is the turning point in the life of one of

our faithful Sergeant-at-Arms staff, Mr. Cliff Ludtke. Yesterday Cliff

reached that marvellous age of 65 years and is retiring from this place

as of today. But before he goes, there are just a few things that I

wish to read into the record of this House.

Cliff Ludtke, born March 4, 1920, in a small wooden frame homestead

house in southeast Saskatchewan, the ninth child of a family of 13, has

a distinguished record on behalf of this country. He joined the

Canadian Armed Forces early in 1940, serving with the army until his

retirement on March 26, 1974. During that time Cliff served in Canada,

the United Kingdom, northwest Europe, the U.S.A., which included a tour

of duty in Korea with the famous Princess's Patricia Canadian Light

Infantry regiment and a tour with the United Nations in the Sinai

Desert, serving in the Gaza Strip as the regimental sergeant-major of

Camp Rafha. Cliff completed his last three years of service in

Newcastle, New Brunswick, after which he and Ina — my faithful

secretary of nine years — moved to Victoria. On April 3, 1974, he

joined the staff of the Sergeant-at-Arms here in this building, where

he has served well until this day. Cliff Ludtke is presently the

president of branch No. 172, Royal Canadian Legion, Esquimalt, and

belongs to several service branches involved in assisting senior

citizens throughout the Legion movement.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all of us here in this chamber I would

take this opportunity to wish Cliff the utmost of happiness in his

retirement, and on behalf of all British Columbians — in fact, all the

people of Canada — for the distinguished service that he has given us

in this country, thank you, Cliff, and good luck.

Mr. Speaker, in the gallery this afternoon are Mr. and Mrs. Edgar

Young, friends of Cliff and Ina from Alameda, Saskatchewan, and with

them is my secretary Ina. I wish the House to also bid them welcome.

MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Speaker, I would join with my colleague

from the government side of the House in wishing Cliff the very best.

Cliff has a distinguished war record, and also a very deep

part in the

heart of Esquimalt as the honorary marshal of every parade that we

have; it's his duty as Legion president and other duties. We in

Esquimalt really wish Cliff the very best, and a long life. As a member

of his Legion, I know he will be watching what I do and reporting

regularly.

MR. SKELLY: I understand this is the time on the order paper,

Mr. Speaker, to present petitions. Pursuant to standing order 73, for

the information of the Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Nielsen), I have a

petition to present on behalf of 5,391 citizens and voters in the

province of British Columbia. Would you like me to read the petition,

Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: No, hon. member. It is the opinion of the Chair

that under the new rules we simply submit our petitions without

comment; at that time we await the decision as to whether it will be

disposed of favourably or otherwise. It does not call for any remarks,

hon. member, other than a simple tabling of the document.

MR. SKELLY: Can I ask for a clarification? You do not want me to tell you that this is a petition to stop the logging of Meares Island?

MR. SPEAKER: That's right, hon. member. Otherwise, we violate the spirit, I believe, of the new act.

MR. SKELLY: Mr. Speaker will be happy to know that it's similar to one that was presented last year on behalf of 12,000 other petitioners.

MR. SPEAKER: That's most interesting, hon. member, but not really valid at this point.

MR. LAUK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, am I to

understand that under standing order 73, this petition containing

thousands of signatures of British Columbians who want to stop the

logging practices of Meares Island is out of order?

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, that's correct, hon. member.

Hon. members, it is equally in violation of our standing orders to

do by one means what we cannot do with another. I would hope that

members bear that in mind and not place the Chair in a position of

having to take any other actions against members who wilfully disregard

the rules.

Orders of the Day

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

MRS. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to move,

seconded by the hon. member for Prince George South (Mr. Strachan):

"That we, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects of the

Legislative Assembly of British Columbia in session assembled, beg

leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech which Your Honour

has addressed to us at the opening of our present session."

I am extremely pleased to be the mover of the 1985 throne speech,

because I believe it is a message of optimism that all people can

respond to in British Columbia. After three long years of sacrifice,

they are looking forward to better economic times, and that is exactly

the message His Honour has brought before us.

Partnership, cooperation and initiative are the ingredients of

success, and these are the ideals that I'm sure we shall all pursue

together in this year of new optimism for our province. As well, we're

looking forward to the new spirit of cooperation in this House. We're

looking forward to hearing the specific ideas opposition members have

developed over

[ Page 5127 ]

the past nine months to deal with the economic

challenges we face. We're looking forward to an opposition which

renounces the personal attack in favour of the practical proposal.

Before referring to some of the specific items mentioned in the

throne speech, Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with you some

examples of real-life success stories which are helping to give many of

my constituents in Surrey some of that sense of optimism to which His

Honour referred.

On a personal level, we are all very much aware of the courage and

achievements of Steve Fonyo, and I want to say that all our thoughts

and prayers are with him. Steve is a former resident of Surrey, and

perhaps that gives his mission a special meaning for us. I had an

opportunity to talk with Steve's mother yesterday, and this young man,

who will be 20 on June 29, covered 32 kilometres on Sunday. I was

pleased, as I know we all are, to learn that the leg which was giving

him some trouble earlier is much better. This remarkable young man, who

lived on 40th Avenue in Surrey from 1978 to 1983, has always been a

fine example of our British Columbia youth. While attending Immaculate

Conception School in Delta he still found time to work during the

summer months and part-time at a small repair shop in White Rock on

152nd Street near 16th Avenue. It is a testimony to the individual

human spirit, a reminder that a great vision can raise, inspire and

free all of us from the doubts, fears and suspicions that are the

greatest impediments to our success.

[2:45]

I believe that the ALRT was a great vision, and the $270 million

phase 2 project which is bringing ALRT to Surrey will be as proud a

part of our skyline and as eloquent a statement of our faith and vision

as was the Lions Gate Bridge in its day. It is a funny thing that

whenever anyone has a vision in our province, it seems that it has to

be criticized and nitpicked, without mercy, until it is completed. Then

it becomes part of our heritage and everyone wants to claim credit for

it,

A new beginning that I would dearly like to see in our province is a

new partnership in hope, faith and vision. Surrey people understand

this very well. The B.C. Transit information centre in Whalley has been

overwhelmed by people coming in to look at maps, models and charts of

the phase 2 program. Our mayor, Don Ross, was quoted as saying: "In my

ten years of involvement in municipal politics out here I've never

encountered anything that has been so unanimously endorsed by the

general public." Mr. Speaker, the concept is exciting: automated light

rapid transit, designed and built in Canada by Canadians, a partnership

between British Columbia and Ontario — a partnership, I might add,

which has future export potential for our province as we work hard to

sell our best to the world.

It will be in operation by the winter of 1988. We're looking at

eight new ALRT cars, six kilometres of line in Surrey and a 33-minute

trip to downtown Vancouver. Can you imagine: Surrey to Vancouver in 33

minutes? There will be rush-hour rides for 4,000 to 5,000, with more to

come: a transit-only bridge, two Surrey stations, 2,000 person-years of

primary employment and great economic spinoff effects for our

community. We expect a total of at least 3,000 person-years of work for

Surrey.

The Scott Road station will be as modem a transit facility as there

is anywhere in the world. We're excited and we're proud. We had 800

Surrey residents attend two recent public meetings, and that's just a

small reflection of the interest and enthusiasm. Bridge construction is

scheduled to begin this fall, and we're all looking forward to that

very much.

Several of our local businesses have been awarded a number of

contracts and subcontracts to work on Expo 86: Onyx, Calwood, Maxwell

Floors, Shamahaus, Surrey Iron Works, Martina Enterprises, Dominion

Metal, Alnor, Southwest Contracting, Surrey Power, Van Ingern and

Cloverdale Glass. These are the good news stories of today, and there

are plenty more to come where Expo and ALRT are concerned. Good news

doesn't just happen. It's no accident. It happens when people have

vision; and just as important, it happens when people have the courage

to make things happen.

I'd like to at this time pay tribute to the fantastic job that our

Minister of Human Resources (Hon. Mrs. McCarthy) has done with ALRT and

to the outstanding assistance she has received from my colleague, the

second member for Surrey (Mr. Reid). They have contributed in a very

major way to the greatest project in the history of our community and

one of the greatest projects in the history of our province.

You only make history, Mr. Speaker, by looking to the future. That

is the hallmark of governments in British Columbia, and that is the

theme of His Honour's address.

The creation of real permanent jobs for British Columbians is our

number one priority today, We are far closer to that objective today

because of the sacrifices which our people have made over the past

three years. I say that with confidence, because I am referring to

permanent jobs. In today's world that means jobs that will meet the new

needs of a new world economy which has emerged very quickly, flowing

from the fantastic advances made in technology in recent years and from

the new economic power of advancing nations, particularly in the

Pacific.

In order to take full advantage of the new opportunities, we had to

break some old habits. We had to recognize the need to trim the size of

government to an affordable level, and to examine how our taxation

system could be improved in order to help our existing industries meet

their competition, survive and expand.

This is where cooperation is vital. I was involved with our

municipal government for a number of years. I know that local

governments have a real part to play, along with the province and the

federal government, in ensuring that the climate for business expansion

and new investment is attractive in terms of taxation levels, provision

of services, regulations and administrative attitudes.

The renewal of our forest and mining industries and the continuing

vitality of our hospitality and secondary industries are critical to

our economic future. I am very pleased by the priority they have

received in the Minister of Finance's (Hon. Mr. Curtis'

s) taxation

review, in the Premier's recent TV address and in the throne speech.

I'm really encouraged by the proposal for a commissioner of critical

industries, because I believe that all members will agree that the

desire is there as never before for cooperation to save jobs and to

encourage new investment. Our labour unions have done a great job over

the years of fighting for the wages and working conditions of working

men and women. I believe that today they more and more see the need to

fight for their jobs, as well as for the survival and success of their

industries in cooperation with government and responsible management. I

am delighted to see this new vehicle to give them that opportunity,

free from any of the historical problems they may have experienced with

other processes or institutions. This is a new beginning, Mr.

[ Page 5128 ]

Speaker, and perhaps the most important that we

have seen. While government can do much to make our province a more

attractive place in which to invest, nothing that government does at

any level — civic, provincial or federal — can guarantee new investment

or new jobs unless labour and management also exhibit a positive

willingness to try new approaches to a harmonious relationship, even

while great changes are taking place. Confidence is like oxygen: we

can't see it, feel it or hear it, but we can't live without it.

There is sometimes a tendency to seek one quick fix to problems. I'm

glad to see we aren't falling into that trap. High tech can be of great

importance to our province, and I want to take this opportunity to

congratulate our Science minister (Hon. Mr. McGeer) on his recent

signing of a memorandum of understanding with Mr. Siddon, his federal

counterpart, who is also a scientist and a British Columbian. That

bodes very well for the future of high-tech industry in our province,

and is another reason that my constituents are looking forward today

with renewed optimism.

We have not forgotten, however, that our existing industries can and

should be strengthened at the same time that we are pursuing

innovation. New investment from outside Canada can be beneficial, but

I'm glad we are not forgetting that British Columbians want very much

to develop this province, and we are encouraging them to do that. When

we are looking for new investment, we should never forget our fellow

British Columbians and fellow Canadians.

When we look at job creation, we must remember that one size does

not fit all. British Columbians come in every size, shape, colour and

creed, every personality, taste and ability. We are a great people

because of this diversity, and I believe that our vision, enterprise,

human and economic potential are second to none. That diversity is

nowhere more evident than in our small business sector, and I firmly

believe that in most sectors of our economy it is the small business

sector, particularly where it is developing innovation, products or

services, that will lead the way in new job creation.

The reference to our cultural heritage is a welcome one. So too is

the agreement of Canada's cultural ministers to actively pursue the job

creation potential of the cultural sector. Our government has sometimes

drawn remarks which refer to "Hollywood north." I don't know about you,

Mr. Speaker, but I wonder what is wrong with that. I'm sure there are

hundreds of young people in my own constituency who would love to work

in the film industry or in other creative fields.

Another very exciting area for job creation is the field of energy,

and I must say I was very pleased with my appointment as parliamentary

secretary to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources

(Hon. Mr. Rogers). I believe we have a great energy future in our

province, and I very much want to work closely with the minister in

promoting energy-related job-creating investment throughout British

Columbia. We have not begun, for example, to tap the true potential for

natural gas in our province; but we have the vision to do so, and we

shall, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to note the importance accorded to our mining industry,

which has had to contend with severe world market conditions, and I am

looking forward to learning a great deal more about this important

industry. I am sure we all endorse the premier's strong message of

support and the intensive efforts which are underway to preserve and

restore jobs in some of the hard-hit facets of this historic B.C.

Industry. Hopefully the tragic British experience has given us all an

object lesson in the need to replace ideology with common sense and

cooperation, not only in mining but throughout our economy.

Government plays many vital support roles in our economy: in

educating, training and retraining our people, in providing the

transportation systems essential to development, and in ensuring

plentiful energy at a reasonable cost. As we prepare to reach out to

the world through a new Ministry of International Trade, in trade

missions and in Expo 86, we must do more to ensure that our young

people and those who are unemployed because of automation, markets and

structural changes in our economy have available the quality of

education, training and retraining that they will need to take maximum

advantage of the economic opportunities which will become available as

a more cooperative and incentive-oriented economic climate fosters

job-creating investments in our province.

We must continue to develop that outstanding transportation system

which has built our province over the decades and is continuing to

build it — at Prince Rupert, the Annacis crossing, the ALRT and the

Coquihalla, to name but a few.

As I've said, we must recognize the full potential of our energy

resources, and I'm very pleased to be able to congratulate the

government on its innovative proposal for incentive electricity rates.

It is only because of the vision which was shown in developing

plentiful energy supplies in our province that we can consider this

creative option.

I have spoken of visions, Mr. Speaker. It took a great deal of

vision to build the outstanding health care system that we have in

British Columbia, and the education, social services, transportation

and energy supply systems. It will take equally great vision to adapt

them to the needs of this decade and decades to come.

The wide-ranging review and consultative process now underway with

respect to our School Act is timely. It will require courage and

consultation, and a consistent commitment to both quality and

cost-effectiveness. I am pleased to see that the government wishes to

strengthen emphasis on maths and sciences. Our grandchildren will, I am

sure, look on typewriters in the same way that we look at horse-drawn

carriages.

I would like to ask the young women in our school system to examine

opportunities in science and technology. They are every bit as open to

them as to young men. Science has been largely a male preserve — not by

design, but by traditional attitudes which fostered a lack of awareness

on the part of young women. I want to urge all of the young women in

our schools to take full advantage of these opportunities. Let's make

two-scientist families a part of our west coast cultural identity, Mr.

Speaker. It seems to work so well for our Minister of Universities,

Science and Communications. I believe it is an idea whose time has come.

[3:00]

Once again, Mr. Speaker, government has a role. Government can

provide the opportunities, but, as in the field of labour-management

relations, it is ultimately the people who have the power and the

responsibility to change their own lives and their community for the

better.

I am very pleased that the Throne Speech reflects the continuing

need to encourage women in their training for career advancement, while

at the same time recognizing the fundamental importance of the family.

Mr. Speaker, the proposal for rewarding outstanding teaching ability is excellent. This is the sort of approach

[ Page 5129 ]

parents in Surrey want. For too long the only

reward for a good teacher was to make him or her an administrator. From

the point of view of classroom instruction, that was often

counter-productive and, in some cases, just plain dumb.

The teaching profession is, as it should be, one of the most

honoured in our community, and the recognition of outstanding merit is

an important step in enhancing the quality of education and in

recognizing the pursuit of excellence. Every member of this House knows

that having a really good teacher is even more important to the quality

of a child's education than whether there are 22 or 24 students in a

class. It's time we recognized that.

Our children are very concerned about their future, and they're

willing to work hard in order to do well. I am very pleased with the

reference to a new scholarship program which will recognize and reward

those successes. Young people want something they can believe in, and I

believe that if we dedicate ourselves to the twin pursuits of

excellence and innovation, their achievements will surpass our greatest

hopes, just as did our magnificent British Columbia athletes in

qualifying in such large numbers for our Olympic team.

Congratulations are in order to the nearly 2,000 athletes who just

competed at our Winter Games in Osoyoos and Oliver. These games involve

many thousands in playdowns all across B.C. They encourage fitness and

health awareness throughout B.C. They exemplify the values of community

spirit, volunteer effort and, once again, the pursuit of excellence.

[Mr. Veitch in the chair.]

If we can carry those values over into our pursuit of economic

renewal, our future will be bright indeed. Taking personal

responsibility, expressing one's own creativity, volunteering to help

others, being conscious of health and environment, taking interest in

science and new technology, looking with interest to the cultures and

economies of the Pacific and other advancing countries, valuing and

participating in our own cultural diversity, working toward better

understanding between all groups in society and pursuing equal rights

for all citizens: these, I believe, are among the finest values, which

are typical of British Columbians and which I believe we are

recognizing and affirming in the Speech from the Throne.

While the concern with job-creating is paramount, we are renewing at

this time our commitment to environmental protection in addressing the

issues of acid rain, ozone and flood control — all of which, I might

add, have a direct relevance to my own constituency. We are taking

strong initiatives to promote British Columbia agricultural exports, a

very positive step for the Fraser Valley, the Okanagan and other

food-producing regions in our province.

I am sure that the international food exhibition at Expo will

provide a major boost for our farmers. Access to markets and stronger

marketing initiatives are the keys to expansion of our agricultural

industry, and the minister is to be congratulated on his outstanding

efforts on behalf of our farmers.

We are reaffirming our historic commitment to quality in education

at all levels and in job training for all ages. We are addressing the

serious problems faced by women and children in our legal system. We

are declaring war on violent pornography and the abuse and sexual

exploitation of the young. We are recognizing the invaluable service of

volunteers to the handicapped and the poor. We are proposing a working

partnership with federal and local governments and with business and

labour in an innovative way to strengthen our existing industries — the

forest industry, the mining industry — to aid in the terrific growth

potential of our tourist industry as it gears up for Expo 86 — a $3

billion boost to the B.C. economy. We are working to create job

opportunities for young people, including a venture capital program

which taps their creativity and allows them to be their own bosses.

Above all, we are offering a new optimism to all British Columbians,

who have sacrificed so patiently and who have earned the right to hope

for a much brighter future. The sooner we get to work together, Mr.

Speaker, the sooner and the brighter that future will be.

MR. STRACHAN: Before I begin, I would be remiss if I didn't

join with the member for Esquimalt–Port Renfrew (Mr. Mitchell) and the

member for Omineca (Mr. Kempf) in offering my very best wishes to Cliff

Ludtke. He has served this assembly in an outstanding manner. I had a

family member who also served with the Victoria Patricia — the PPCLI —

and I can assure you that it was a proud regiment, and men such as the

calibre of Mr. Ludtke contributed to the record and honour of the

Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry,

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to second the motion of the

first member for Surrey. His Honour's address contained many positive

initiatives, and as a representative for British Columbia's

third-largest city I am pleased to acknowledge the direction taken by

His Honour in recognition of the vital potential of not only my

community of the central interior but of the whole province.

As well as being a significant time for our province, this week and

this year hold a special significance for Prince George. Although, as I

mentioned earlier, Prince George is our province's third-largest city,

we are certainly not the oldest. However, I am pleased to tell you, Mr.

Speaker, that tomorrow is a very special day for our city, as March 6,

1985, will mark our city's seventieth birthday. When I reflect on His

Honour's statement that our government believes in the power and

potential of individuals — it is their initiative, their efforts and

their creativity that have made our country and our province great — I

reflect on the individual spirit of our Prince George pioneers who

contributed so much to the dynamic community that I live in today.

Mr. Speaker, they came from all comers of the world, our pioneers —

from southern China, Greece, Italy, eastern Europe from Yugoslavia to

the Ukraine, the United States, the Maritimes, Ireland, Scotland,

England, Wales and the Scandinavian countries. Some were mighty figures

— aviation pioneers such as Grant McConachie and Sheldon Luck who

served the north. I'm sure the member for Omineca (Mr. Kempf) can share

in stories on the character of those two very significant pioneers.

Significant political figures drew the blueprints for development in

our central interior: Ray Williston, the Moffat family, the Assman

family, John McGuiness. Our city's pioneers had names like Brkich,

Berdusco, Yip, Houghtelling, Bellos, Ewert, Sintich — and on that point

I might note that Mr. Sintich's son is in the buildings today, and I'd

like to recognize him for the record — Roin, Ambrose Trick, Harold

Mann, the Williams family, Dr. Lyon, Dr. Alward, the Prudentes, Pete

Wilson, the Hoy family, Ivor Guest, Martin Caine. Native Indian

families contributed so much: the Bird family and the Quaws.

[ Page 5130 ]

They freighted on the Fraser River; they built the railroad; they

built bridges. They were Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, agnostic. They

were Liberals, Conservatives and CCF MPs and MLAs. They would work

outside at 40 below, and in the summer they had horse-races on 3rd

Avenue. They had spirit, determination and an undefeatable momentum.

Job creation in those days — 70 years ago — was not a government

program; job creation was an essential element of staying alive.

Those pioneers are being remembered tomorrow and for 1985 in Prince

George. I would like at this point to acknowledge for the record the

history committee who have done such a good job in putting our

seventieth birthday together, in particular Garvin Moles and Bob

Harkins, and some of the speakers who have come. We have had the

opportunity to have Sheldon Luck come back to Prince George and speak

about his early days in aviation — very exciting, I might add. Ken

Bernshon spoke about the IWA organization of the lumber industry. Bob

Gallagher spoke about the Northern Interior Lumbermen's Association and

how they recognized 20 years ago that they had a unique and distinct

product to sell but they had to clean it up, market it and get it known

throughout the United States and throughout the export world. We now

have the reputation in the central interior as probably being the

leading edge in terms of quality lumber and quality exports in North

America, if not the western world. To those men and women with the

strength and fortitude, we say: "Happy birthday and thank you."

At this point I'd also like to extend my best wishes to the member

for Prince Rupert (Mr. Lea) and to his community, who this weekend are

beginning their seventy-fifth anniversary celebration. The member for

Prince Rupert, in his own inimitable style, with much humour, said:

"This must be the week of the Princes." So that's his line, if you like

it.

As we reflect on past achievements and remember those who gave us

this fine province, we must also reflect on what lies ahead. That, of

course, is why we have a Speech from the Throne, which can highlight

our best wishes, our initiatives, and our 1985 style of determination.

There arc many individual and seemingly separate statements in His

Honour's speech, but they follow a significant course and combine to

form an entity larger than the simple sum. Like our Prince George

pioneers, we are challenged in the face of adversity. We've had

pitfalls, we've had setbacks, we've had the equivalent of a 40-below

chill in our economy, but we've won. We've weathered the cold and we're

better for it. We're not yet at our summer horse-race celebrations, but

we're ever so close. We have one more chill to overcome, and it's

really just a matter of our own attitude. Let's look at us all in this

assembly — all of us seemingly bogged down with one concern or another.

It's time to get out of the bog, Mr. Speaker. Let's start that

momentum. Let's do something. We can do it. All of us assembled in this

room — we know our communities, we know our strengths. We know how to

build and how to contribute. There's not one of us in this room who is

not capable of action, initiative and determination. If it were

otherwise we would not be here. Some of us have political philosophies

that differ from others, but that's democracy. The belief in a

particular policy or philosophy is what attracted those who voted for

us. But irrespective of philosophical differences, we have a common

goal, and that is to build a better British Columbia. No one here in

this room could admit they are here to tear down or destroy. We are

here to build, create, develop and take satisfaction in our own

accomplishments. Where do we begin? Right now. We begin by assessing

the reality of 1985 and examining the details, the potential, the

momentum, and the absolutely clear direction contained in the throne

speech.

Last year we had a federal election in this country that resulted in

a majority government with majority support in every part of Canada for

the first time in many years. We see that as a great opportunity for

cooperation and Canada-wide partnership.

It's interesting to consider and reflect that federal systems were

not really designed with the modem mixed economy in mind. They were

most in vogue during the era of a very limited government involvement

in economic affairs. That's unfortunate, since one of the legacies of

our very decentralized federalism had been kind of an institutional

barrier impeding fast and effective response to external economic

change. But as you know, Mr. Speaker, and my honourable friends on both

sides of the House, since we last sat for a full session we've seen

massive change in our province and in our country of Canada. We have a

new federal government — a new awareness. I can tell you that for the

first time in my political career, I hear Ottawa saying: "British

Columbia is not part of the problem; British Columbia is part of the

answer." I'm beginning to feel like it. I'm sure I speak for all of us

in this room and for everyone in this province: I'm beginning to feel

like a Canadian again, and it feels good.

As I look at Canada from Prince George, I see a limitless horizon.

It doesn't stop at the 49th parallel or the Alberta or Yukon border or

the Strait of Juan de Fuca. It doesn't stop anywhere; it just goes and

goes. It is northeast coal to Japan. It is Prince George pulp and paper

to Germany. It is Prince George helicopter avionics to Singapore. It is

dimension lumber to Italy. It is B.C. gas and hydro to the United

States. It is a Prince George consulting forester to New Brunswick. It

is the same Prince George spirit that split rails 70 years ago that is

now a world leader in high-recovery computerized sawmills.

At that point, Mr. Speaker, I would like to dwell a moment on an

item that both the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Heinrich) and I are

extremely proud of. It's a sawmill in our city of Prince George —

Lakeland Mills — which recently won a Canadian award for excellence in

labour-management relations. That's what I mean by grassroots

cooperation and changing attitudes.

[3:15]

In December 1980, Lakeland Mills made what has been described as a

quantum leap from the mechanics of a relatively inefficient scragmill

to the sophisticated microelectronics of a modem studmill, with a

computer with up to 145,000 cutting combinations, which improved lumber

recovery by some 30 percent. The mill has drawn worldwide attention for

its efficiency in production. What makes the story truly remarkable,

Mr. Speaker, is the way in which the modernization was carried out. We

all have a fear, I'm sure, when we think of new technology, of losing

jobs. There were very few, if any, jobs lost on that — total

cooperation. The Canada award went to Bob Stewart of Lakeland Mills and

to the IWA representative, Mr. Tage Mogensen. I'm proud to mention both

their names and to have them put on the record here.

As I look at the initiatives in the throne speech, particularly the

commissioner of critical industries, I would recommend to that

commissioner that he or she, when appointed — and that commission — use

Lakeland Mills as a

[ Page 5131 ]

model for modernization and good, effective labour relations.

That's British Columbia right now, Mr. Speaker. It's a world leader.

So much of it is staring us right in the face; I wonder at times if we

can see it. We can control cost, quality, reliability, and we have the

promise of better things to come. These are simple words, yet they sum

up virtually all of the interrelated factors that will spell success or

failure in our world markets, the success of which we must depend upon

for our jobs, schools, hospitals and social programs.

All the natural and human resources in the world won't earn us a

living unless we can deliver quality goods and services on time,

dependably and at a reasonable price. If in addition we can develop a

reputation as an innovator, we will have the edge over those who match

us on the other criteria, because change in itself has become an

integral element of world markets in the eighties and beyond.

If members will carefully examine His Honour's address, they will

see ample evidence that these critical elements, which must be present

to create and preserve jobs in our economy, are addressed in every

page. As a matter of fact, every initiative in the throne speech draws

the circle of British Columbia ever wider.

Mr. Speaker, we will increase trade. We will market our British

Columbia determination. We will welcome the world, not only at Expo but

at every other conceivable opportunity; and the world will welcome us.

We have spirit. We have the will. And we must and will succeed. That is

the absolutely clear promise and that is the absolutely clear direction

of the throne speech.

Mr. Speaker, there is one more item stemming from yesterday's

business that I would like to address briefly before closing, and that

is my election as your Deputy Speaker. I want to share with all members

my appreciation and thanks for the trust you have once again placed in

me as one of your presiding officers. I would imagine that to an

outsider who would recognize my particular political philosophy, to

come from a government bench and sit objectively in the middle of

heated debate requires some fondness, I guess, for masochistic

schizophrenia, but it's not that way at all. Many members who have

occupied a position in the middle, and in that setting, recognize that

Parliament is supreme. I want to assure you that the supremacy of

Parliament will continue to be my priority.

On this note, may I also offer my congratulations to the member for

North Vancouver–Capilano (Mr. Ree) on election as the deputy chairman

of committees, and sincerely thank, I'm sure on behalf of all members

of the Legislative Assembly, the contribution, assistance, good cheer,

charm and style that was so much enjoyed of my former colleague at the

chair, the current and newly appointed Minister of the Environment

(Hon. Mr. Pelton).

Mr. Speaker, hon. members, thank you for your indulgence. I look

forward to the ongoing debate and the opportunity to hear opinions

which may vary from mine. In closing, may I say that it is with sincere

pleasure that I second the motion as proposed by the first member for

Surrey (Mrs. Johnston).

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

MR. SKELLY: Mr. Speaker, I also would like to congratulate

the mover and the seconder of this motion, and to acknowledge the

appointment of the new ministers to the cabinet. In the spirit of

cooperation, I would move adjournment of this debate until the next

sitting of the House after today.

Motion approved.

Hon. Mr. Nielsen moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 3:22 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1986,2001: Hansard Services, Victoria, B.C., Canada