1972 Legislative Session: ist Session, 30th 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)

FRIDAY, JANUARY 26, 1973

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page 5 ]

The House met at 3 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister of Lands, Forests and Water

Resources.

HON. R.A. WILLIAMS (Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources):

Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to make a statement regarding an important

matter.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, namely the oil

spill at Alert Bay. I'd like to report, Mr. Speaker, that the

Premier spoke to the Minister of the Environment, Mr. Davis,

asking him for a report on action taken by his department

regarding the spill. Mr. Davis informed him that the Ministry

of Environment has the responsibility of identifying the areas

of spill, setting the priorities of the clean-up of the spill

and co-ordination of the overall strategy of clean-up.

Mr. Davis stated that the Ministry of Transport will provide

the equipment and personnel necessary as requested by the

Department of the Environment and as of this moment booms,

three slick-lickers, and three transport vessels are either on

site, or on way to Alert Bay. The three transport vessels left

the Victoria area yesterday afternoon for the spill site.

At the moment of this spill a fisheries patrol vessel

happened to be on site and immediately requested experts on

tides, currents and wind to set up the programme of action with

respect to the spill.

Mr. Davis went on to say that over-flight information by

Ministry of Transport planes is being coordinated by his

department. He advised us that Mr. Bob McClaren of the

Department of the Environment is the co-ordinator for action on

the spill. As Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources, I

ordered my staff to charter a plane so that provincial

departmental people would be on site as well. The plane left

this morning — Mr. Roland Rocchini of the Pollution Control

Board, and Mr. Don Gough of the Commercial Fisheries Branch.

The MLA for the area, Ms. Karen Sanford, is also on site with

our staff. Mr. Rocchini will be staying over the weekend and

will be giving a direct report to myself later today. Ms.

Sanford will be back today and will provide me with a verbal

report this evening.

We have also asked the environmental consulting firm of

Howard Paish and Associates to have their staff independently

evaluate the situation and the actions taken today. Mr. Ross

Peterson and Mr. Bob Sherwood of that firm are also in the area

right now and will be reporting back to us shortly as well as

preparing a full written report on the matter.

It may be recalled by Members of the House that a full

report was prepared by that firm in April of 1972 for

Environment Canada entitled "The West Coast Oil Threat In

Perspective" which included numerous recommendations.

Members may also recall that it was announced in Washington

State that a special House committee will be formed to review

these matters during the session. It is the intent of the

Government to refer the reports received from our staff and our

consultants to the House committee along with the earlier

recommendations that were made to the federal government in

order to assess the adequacy of existing arrangements. The

committee will of course be asked to call witnesses so a

thorough review can be made and that we can be assured that the

best course of action possible will be taken in the future.

I'd like to also report, Mr. Speaker, that Mr. McClaren of

Environment Canada has just called us in the last few minutes

and advised us that they have everything they need. If they

need anything further they will contact us later today.

I might indicate also that Governor Evans has been contacted

and we're expecting some information from the governor shortly

with respect to the possibility of help should that be

necessary, and Environment Canada indicates that that is

necessary.

I understand from the Hon. Attorney General that charges

have also been laid under the Canada Shipping Act . Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr. Member. The Hon. Premier.

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): I would ask that the House extend

a courtesy of statements by leave to the Leaders.

Leave granted.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. House Leader for the official

Opposition.

MR. F.X. RICHTER (Boundary-Similkameen): Mr. Speaker, in as

far as the official Opposition is concerned we are most pleased

and support the action that is being taken by the Government.

On this the position of the official Opposition is well known — we're opposed to the transportation of large tankers down the

west coast of British Columbia. We will maintain this until it

can be proven that it is safe to move oil — we would prefer to

see it move by pipeline, We are concerned definitely for the

little village of Alert Bay, which was one of the first ones to

make any effort to clean up their foreshore, their beach area,

and develop it. We would urge the

[ Page 6 ]

provincial government and Treasury Board to give immediate

consideration to assistance to restore the land area, the

foreshore area — to the assistance going to the village of

Alert Bay.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Liberal leader.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I

welcome the departure from procedure which has permitted the

statement by the Minister and comments by Opposition

leaders.

The question, Mr. Speaker, that comes to mind first is that

we essentially have here a report delivered by the provincial

Minister from the federal Minister of the Environment. And we

welcome that report; we are glad that it has taken place. We

are glad apparently that difficulties which previously

surrounded discussions between the Premier and the Minister of

the Environment are now apparently at an end and communication

lines are once more open. I trust that the Hon. Minister of

Lands, Forests, Water and tourism and various other things

(Hon. Mr. Williams) that escape my mind at the moment — has

that been changed? Oh, very good. Anyway the general grab-bag

Minister that he is, is in close cooperation with Ottawa on

this matter.

The statement he has made, however, raises some questions in

our minds.

First, he did refer to the fact that the federal department

would be co-ordinating — and I understand from his general

statement that the provincial government's intention is to

leave the federal Department of Environment in control — not

only under the areas that are by legal definition under federal

jurisdiction but also the on-shore areas which are, again by

legal definition, under provincial jurisdiction. It's a point

which I feel could be elaborated on and if departures from our

previous practices in this House are permitted, I will be

putting forward a motion for question periods by unanimous

consent so that I can question him on this issue, in a few more

minutes.

Nevertheless it did indicate to me that, despite the spill,

the bilge-cleanings which wound up on Chesterman Beach I

believe — a fact reported to this House by the former Social

Credit Member, Dr. McDiarmid, from that area. Despite the Long

Beach spill, the Van Lene spill not far from that area — despite the Cherry Point spill where the Hon. Provincial

Secretary spoke at lengths about provincial government failure

to establish depots of equipment which could be used, we appear

to have had very little done since that time.

We are once more simply in the position of leaving it

entirely for the federal government to do from the Minister's

statement. No objection to this procedure, Mr. Speaker,

provided that it is clearly understood — and if the people of

British Columbia are not given this "after you, Alphonse" routine, whereby one government

defers to the other or blames the other in cases of this

nature.

I trust that the Minister, if we are permitted to have

questioning in a few minutes, will make clear to this House and

to the people of British Columbia what are the institutional

arrangements that have been set up by this new Government — which was so critical of the previous Government — to deal with

problems of this nature. Because from what he has said so far

we are apparently still acting on an adhoc basis. And

apparently nothing has been done in the last few months

provincially to put on site equipment that could be used for

cleanup and equipment that could be used for restoring the area

to its previous state.

As I mentioned, Mr. Speaker, I will be proposing in short

order a motion which will require unanimous consent which would

allow us to question the Minister on this point.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. House leader for the Conservative

Party.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay) : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of our party I would

welcome the prompt action taken by the Government. In passing I certainly would

like to say how much I appreciate the fact that matters of important business

from day to day can be dealt with in the fashion we are now dealing with it.

In previous times, when I have been here, there usually was a procedural wrangle

before we even got to the subject. Therefore I think that today's example of

being able to talk about something about which we are all concerned right at

this moment is most welcome.

I think it points out one other very important fact that we

really don't need to wait and see what will happen when tankers

many times the size of the one which struck a rock on this

occasion start to come down our shores. So this incident is

very timely in refuting the argument I've heard that "of course

by the time we get the bigger tankers they are more

sophisticated and they are this and they're that and the next

thing."

I don't think any of us should be in any doubt any longer

about the inevitability of spills when tankers are passing down

our coast. So it's happening now. We don't have to argue about

for or against bigger tankers. It's proven that it is happening

now.

Therefore on that basis my personal feeling and the party

feeling always has been that we're rather looking at this issue

with sort of blinkers on in a sense — that we're either for or

against Alaska oil. As far as the Conservative Party is

concerned, we are for safer international navigation. And if

this is happening with relatively small tankers, it will just

be 10 times worse with bigger tankers.

[ Page 7 ]

Therefore the key, and certainly the point of view I would

like to express today, is that the evidence of

provincial-federal cooperation, which this Government I am

happy to see has demonstrated, should immediately push for

national and international stringency in regard to shipping

regulations, communications with shore and between ship and

shore, and several other of the vital safeguards that are much

more likely to prevent spills.

But I do feel, Mr. Speaker, that this party is grateful for

the prompt action of this Government and for the welcome

evidence of provincial-federal cooperation. I would regret if

this House at this time now degenerated into a debate of trying

to spell out in minute detail, which I don't think is

available, as to who does what when. I think that if the spirit

of cooperation exists as it does, we are obviously in a

formative period where the provincial and federal governments

have an understanding and can communicate. And I think we

should exhibit a reasonable measure of patience to see what can

be forthcoming from this cooperation.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Premier.

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): Mr. Speaker, on the same basis of

leave, I have just received notice that Governor Dan Evans has

sent a radio-telephone message to my office. As a result of our

initiation of contact with the governor, the governor has

stated that he will place all equipment that is at the hands of

the State of Washington at the disposal of either the

he will wait for the call for that equipment for the people

the Province of British Columbia delegates to make that

request.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Second Member for Victoria.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Hon,

Members' leave of the House to move the following motion,

seconded by the Hon. First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey (Mr.

McGeer): that the House respectfully request the Hon. Speaker

to permit, before the orders of the day, a period not exceeding

25 minutes duration for oral questions by Members, commencing

today and continuing until the Speaker shall report pursuant to

the provisions of the Legislative Procedures and Practices

Inquiries Act .

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Attorney General.

HON. A.B. MACDONALD (Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, the

Legislature, I think with the Hon. Member's concurrence, passed

the Legislative Procedures and Practices Inquiry Act . Under the Act, Mr.

Speaker, you shall report to the assembly within 15 days of the

commencement of each session on the matter raised by the Hon.

Member, including the matter of oral questions — which are the

best kind.

I think that we should follow the procedure the Legislature

has laid out, and I think the Hon. Member should. I hope that

report will come in very speedily and we will very shortly have

the rules formulated whereby we can have an oral question

period in this House.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I was

asking for unanimous consent of the House; not arguing the Act….

Interjection by an Hon. Member. (Laughter).

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Right. But the Attorney General's remarks

seem to indicate that we should wait, Mr. Speaker. I would

like, with deference, to point out to him that already today we

have departed from the rules of the House, as suggested by the

Hon. Mr. Williams, a matter….

Interjection by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order. We departed, Mr. Member, from the rules

of the House by unanimous consent, and when I asked if there

was any objection to your proposal, it was obvious you were not

getting the unanimous consent — at least from the Attorney

General.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: May I ask, Mr. Speaker, for a vote?

MR. SPEAKER: You want me to? All right. I will ask, will the

House give unanimous consent to the proposal of the Liberal

leader? I hear some no's. And therefore, the next order of

business.

Interjection by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: How can you have a division on that? Unless

your hearing aid isn't working. (Laughter.) The Hon. House

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. F.X. RICHTER (Boundary-Similkameen): I would like to have

the House join with me today in welcoming the first group of

students, which I am very proud of, from the Sunshine Valley

over at Grand Forks in my constituency, the best constituency

in B.C. They are here today in full number and with their

chaperons, Mr. Gumley, Mrs. Glanville, Mrs. Flanagan, and I

would like very much

[ Page 8 ]

to have the House join with me in welcoming these students

on their first trip to Victoria.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. R.M. STRACHAN (Minister of Highways): Mr. Speaker, I'd

like the House to join me in welcoming to the gallery a man who

preceded me as the leader of the CCF and as the Leader of the

Opposition in this House, the husband of the Member for

Vancouver South, Mr. Arnold Webster.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Langley.

MR. R.H. McCLELLAND (Langley): Mr. Speaker, I'd like the

House to make welcome to the gallery, the Mayor of Langley

City, His Worship Mayor Bob Duckworth.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Minister of Public Works.

HON. W.L. HARTLEY (Minister of Public Works): Mr. Speaker, I

would like the House to welcome an old timer up in the gallery

this afternoon, Pasquale Misiano from Merritt. He has

campaigned consistently over the past 40 years for the

philosophies of democratic socialism in this province…

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

HON. MR. HARTLEY: …he lost his job in Powell River in

1933 when he was elected the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: Mr. Minister, please. May I say this to Hon.

Members. It may become more important, if we ever come to a

question period in this House — but it is important that your

statements be confined to the guest that you are wishing to be

introduced and that you confine it to non-political statements,

or I'll have to do something to curtail them.

Orders of the day.

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Nelson-Creston.

MR. L. NICOLSON (Nelson-Creston): Mr. Speaker, I move,

seconded by the Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Burrard (Ms.

Brown), that the following address be presented to His Honour

the Lieutenant-Governor: We, her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, 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

the present session.

It is a pleasure and an honour to be the first Member to

speak at the second session of the 30th Parliament of this and

to move the address thanking His Honour for his gracious speech

of yesterday.

It is particularly worthy to comment that His Honour has

graciously agreed to stay on in office, in spite of the

personal reasons which would argue in favour of his

retirement.

I am sure that all Members of this House join me in

recognition of the personal sacrifice being made by His Honour

in the service of Her Majesty the Queen, and the people of the

Province of British Columbia.

I would like, at this time, to draw attention to the honour

which has been bestowed on the Hon. Second Member for

Vancouver-Burrard (Ms. Brown) by the United Nations. The Hon.

Member has been presented with a fellowship in recognition of

her pioneering work in the field of women's rights.

The high level of expectation referred to by His Honour

yesterday is felt not only by the people of this province, but

by many people in Canada, and even throughout the world.

The mandate given by the people to the New Democratic Party

was unique in North America. For the first time, a democratic

socialist government was given the right to govern an

economically sound province. The results of the first session

of this thirtieth Legislative Assembly show that the levels of expectation were well

founded, and that the new levels of social dignity were, in

fact, within our grasp.

The Guaranteed Minimum Income Assistance Act

reaffirmed the trust that the pensioners of this province had

placed in the New Democratic Party, but the effects of that Act

went on to form one of the major issues in the recent federal

election. The recent Speech from the Throne by His Excellency,

the Governor-General in Ottawa, indicated that the spin-off of

last fall's legislation will lead to increases in the basic

pension, as well as in war veterans' pensions for all Canada.

It is hoped that minimum income assistance for pensioners is

but one step toward a guaranteed minimum income for all

Canadians, and that the present federal-provincial ministerial

talks on social assistance will pave the way toward the day

when economic security is guaranteed, and individual initiative

is rewarded by a comprehensive plan for social assistance.

His Honour's call for a government automobile insurance plan

will be hailed by most as a worthy plan long overdue. For some,

the plan will mean a considerable saving, but while most of us

anticipate a plateau in the ever-rising cost of auto insurance,

the

[ Page 9 ]

real benefit will be found in the quality of service and

delivery of benefits. The present no-fault plan in British

Columbia restricts the $50 per week disability benefits to

those who have worked for six or more months of the 12 months

preceding their accident. There is no such restriction in

Saskatchewan or Manitoba. There is no appreciable difference in

the premiums for no-fault, only in the benefits.

My riding, and this entire province, are full of automobile

insurance victims. It is unfortunate that these people have

been the victims in an automobile insurance accident, but the

foreign controlled insurance industry has often done more to

compound the misery, than to comfort and aid the victim. The

multiplicity of insurance companies has led to inconsistency in

settling claims.

For a poor pensioner who has his pick-up truck flattened by

a roof in a windstorm, there is no benefit for

an act of God,

but for a prosperous businessman, the same accident with the

same roof is covered through comprehensive insurance by a

different company. I would hope that the Hon. Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr.

Strachan) will consider very carefully the extension of the

no-fault principle, so that it will no longer be possible for a

carpenter to lose two-thirds of a court award to medical costs

and legal expense, when he loses the use of his working

arm.

Mr. Speaker, the victims of automobile insurance have high

expectations. They hope that never again will someone be

subjected to the delays, the threats, the uncertainty, and the

inadequate compensation for permanent injuries, that they

themselves have suffered.

Perhaps it was with a mind to these people that Mr. Sylvan

Liepzic a prominent Winnipeg auto insurance agent and manager,

was prompted to make three very incisive observations

concerning Manitoba's auto pact. He first said that the worst

feature of the plan was that it was a government monopoly. He

then said that it was the best plan in North America. He

finally concluded that it was doubtful if such a plan could

ever come into existence, except under a government

monopoly.

It is to be hoped that the government in its wisdom may soon

embark on a voluntary portable group life insurance plan. At

present there is a large group of people covered under the

terms of their employment by a reasonably-priced group life

plan. But many people can only ensure the security of their

families with expensive individual plans in which the first few

years' premiums are largely swallowed by commissions. The

savings of these people are invested to a large extent in

non-productive but high-profit endeavours, such as the property

industry. Through interlocking directorships with the property

developers, the building equipment companies, finance

companies, and other property related interests, such companies as North American Life Assurance

Company are able in effect to make their client a multiple

consumer of mortgages, housing, property and property

insurance. It is also in the best interests of the property

industry to control the supply, the demand of land, hence their

strong representations to influence the zoning and building

regulations and maintain the cost of property at a high

level.

I too have high expectations. I am asking this government

which has done so much in just five months of office to

seriously consider auto insurance as the first step into the

insurance field. I would hope for a life insurance plan which

would be voluntary, portable and available to all persons in

their employable years. Not only would many people be able to

realize the saving in providing for their security but the

premiums could be invested in land banks and housing in order

to attack the insurance property industry complex on two

fronts, by providing competitive low-cost property and housing,

and by reducing the capital and power of this parasitic

enterprise.

The property industry is vulnerable on another front. Its

avoidance of tax through depreciations depends upon continued

growth. By arresting the growth of the property industry the

people may well again regain much of what was lost to

collection of long overdue taxes and property.

The time has come when the control over the fundamental

needs of security and shelter were returned to the people of

the province. One might wonder that I could start talking about

life insurance and digress upon the property industry. I must

talk of them in the same breath because they are the same

business, the same directors with the same interests — and those

interests are not the security of their policyholders. It is

then in the spirit of both fulfilment and a herald of things

to come that I anticipate the announcement of an automobile

insurance plan.

I greet with special enthusiasm the message that the

government-administered pension plans will be improved. While

the existing plans for those still working and looking forward

to retirement could always stand improvement I would urge that

the needs of those presently retired on fixed pensions are

worthy of urgent attention. The sacrifice of these people

during their years in providing for retirement becomes ravaged

day by day by the effects of inflation.

I would urge that some consideration be given to these

people and that provision be made in the future for regular

pension adjustments to offset inflation.

Of special interest to the rural people of this province

will be the Ambulance Services Act . The granting by

referendum to a regional district the power to provide

ambulance services by no means

[ Page 10 ]

ensures that the district can with the best of intentions

provide a reasonable standard of service. It is hoped that

paramedical competence be a prerequisite for the operation of

an ambulance.

The need for air ambulance service in the North is another

important issue. One can only estimate the lives that are

annually lost for lack of adequate ambulance service and

intensive care facilities in our intermediate-size hospitals,

but the expectation of the people is for higher quality in

medical service.

The expectations of the people of the New Democratic Party

in government are perhaps great because of their long record in

Opposition. In my riding of Nelson-Creston there has been a

tradition of personal contact built up by the NDP federal

members for Kootenay West, Herbert W. Herridge and Randolph

Harding, who were also former Members of this House. It is said

that Mr. Herridge used to take two days to travel the 1 ½ hour

drive from Creston to Kootenay Bay.

Mr. Herridge, who didn't drive, would travel by a

combination of hitchhiking, buses and walking and stopped at

many homes along the way. His reputation for advocacy stretched

far beyond his riding, and he was often called upon to help

people from other provinces.

Mr. Harding increased his support to 55 per cent in the last

federal election, largely as a result of his availability to

the people and his genuine concern for and his ability to help

people. Mr. Harding travels by Land Rover and makes himself

available to the people of the most remote areas in Kootenay

West.

Openness has been the style of the NDP and the volume of

letters, phone calls received by its elected representatives

since August 30 is a measure of the public expectation. Another

trademark of the New Democratic Party and the socialist

tradition has been its ability to champion unpopular causes and

to create public consciousness such that the once unpopular

causes become universally acceptable.

Such things as child labour laws, women's suffrage and old

age pensions first proposed by the pre-CCF socialist pioneers.

In more recent times our Premier, as an Opposition Member, was

a voice crying in the wilderness against the mis-management of

land at Cypress Bowl. But he revealed fact after fact, and then

even the most reactionary elements were forced to admit in time

that he was right, and were moved to ask why wasn't the

Government doing something about it?

The New Democratic Party in general, and notably Tommy

Douglas, spoke against and marched against the war in Vietnam,

when the public as a whole felt that it was better dead than

Red, and no price in the death and suffering of Vietnamese men,

women and children was too great to spend to stop the spread of

communism in southeast Asia. I shared then the fears of

spreading communism and owe a personal debt to those who opposed the war from the beginning on the greater

truth that there is no justification for the Vietnam war.

His Honour has commended the across-the-border talks

regarding environmental concerns. There can be no higher

governmental priority than the environmental crisis. We are

told that the present growth of demand for energy resources

cannot continue at an exponential rate. There are many

definitions of the exponential function, but the most simple

one is that an exponential function is something that doubles

at a predictable rate.

If the demand for electricity doubles every 10 years, that

means we will have to duplicate the output of all the existing

generators in order to meet the demand 10 years hence. It also

means that, if we are to rely on hydroelectric power until

half of our rivers are dammed, we will have just 10 years until

all our rivers are dammed and we are forced to look for other

sources.

Ontario already has harnessed most of its hydroelectric

potential. Its combined production of fossil fueled and

nuclear-powered thermal plants already out produces hydro

power. For those still dedicated to the unlimited growth ethic,

the challenge is to re-discover fossil fuel reserves at an

exponential rate. But the predicted life expectancy of the

fossil fuels is being constantly revised downwards. The

proportions of the problem are now having visible effect in the

United States where an oil crisis is right now.

One cannot expect too much from nuclear power. While it is

true that 20-inch fuel bundle of uranium dioxide pellets inside

zirconium rods can produce as much electricity as 25 coal cars,

the reserves of nuclear fuels are subject to the same limits as

fossil fuels. In spite of these limitations, I feel that

nuclear power should be given serious consideration as an

alternative to damming more rivers, or building more fossil

fuel plants.

If nuclear power is being attacked, it's being attacked for

the wrong reasons. One of the chief fears is that the nuclear

reactors will greatly increase the normal background radiation

which naturally exists and pre-dates man and man's technology.

The medical use of radioactive materials will have doubled the

background radiation sometime in the 1980s. No one has called

for a halt to medical use of radio-active isotopes, x-rays and

cobalt treatments. All projected installations of nuclear

plants into the next century would not increase the background

level by 10 per cent.

The interior of this province is being scarred by unsightly

power line rights of way, which cut through farms and valleys

and through beautiful wilderness areas. In my riding B.C. Hydro

is paralleling the existing West Kootenay Power and Light

Company right of way and creating a 200-foot corridor, which

leaves precious little land in some, of our narrow

[ Page 11 ]

valley bottoms which must also provide for trains and

highways.

Herbicide sprays that are used to clear these blights on the

landscape are a further argument toward nuclear power, which

can be placed on site. We express great fear of oil spills from

super tankers and pipelines, and these fears have a good basis

in fact.

Fuel used in the Pickering, Ontario nuclear plant is

nonradioactive and the spent fuels, while highly radioactive,

can be safely disposed of and do not appreciably add to the

background level of radiation which I previously have

mentioned.

There has been a great deal of research done on the

pathology of radiation. Otherwise how could the medical

profession proliferate the widespread use of radioactive

materials. We are just becoming aware of the medical effects of

the by-products of petrochemicals. Nitrous-oxide levels and

trace metals present a much more uncertain menace than the

by-products of nuclear reactors.

I would urge all environmentalists to reassess their

position on nuclear power. It may well be that least damaging

alternative for the short-term power needs.

I'm not an advocate for nuclear power, but I am asking that

we search for rational data in an issue clouded by emotion and

prejudice. Most importantly, I am mindful of the predictions of

the Club of Rome and the limits to growth. It is on this issue

that the House must surely be divided between democratic

socialist philosophy and the profit-motivated, unlimited growth

syndrome.

The ethic that shows signs of uniting the three Opposition

parties is the pursuit of profits and unlimited growth. We are

charged with a dual role of producing jobs and growth in the

short run, and to limiting growth and the use of our natural

resources in the not-so-long run.

For those who await the 11th hour, the energy crisis in the

United States indicates that the time is now 11:30. We must

take a great hand in processing our own resources. While

everyone is willing to concede the electronics field to Japan,

a Canadian designed and produced electronic calculator is

leading the domestic market.

We must throw away the philosophies of the past. We can no

longer locate pollution-free industries such as universities

solely on the basis of demographic criteria. We must expand

criteria to include economic and sociological studies. We have

studied the biological and economic value of game management,

but have we ever evaluated the sociological importance of

maintaining wilderness areas.

I greet the announcement of 1,000 new jobs in the Civil

Service, and I'm surprised that the Hon. Member for

Boundary-Similkameen (Mr. Richter) has labeled this a pork

barrel. I would have thought that, with his role in supporting

the Provincial Alliance of Businessmen, he would be more familiar with pork barrels. Every one

of those 10,000 jobs will be handled through the Civil Service

Commission.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. NICOLSON: One thousand, I stand corrected. People and

all-terrain vehicles are required to police the All-Terrain

Vehicles Act , which his Government introduced. The

world-renowned game management area of the East and West

Kootenays has only one game biologist and one technical

assistant to cover a vast terrain.

The previous Government failed to provide the people as it

failed to provide the equipment. Conservation officers were

expected to police four-wheel drive trucks and Skidoos with

standard pickups and snow shoes. The same story can be related

to all too many Civil Service departments. We want to utilize

the skills and offer fulfilment to our unemployed,

well-educated young people and give them a share in fulfilling

the high expectations of the people of this province.

Yes, the New Democratic Party will use its balance of power

in Ottawa as the people expect it to. We will not let the

Liberals attack unemployment by attacking the unemployed. We,

the back bench of the New Democratic Party, will support the

programme of His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor because we

respect the efforts of our comrades who preceded us in this

House, and without whose efforts this party could not have

gained the confidence of the people. We will work hard to

fulfill the high expectations and retain that trust.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. second Member for

Vancouver-Burrard.

MS. R. BROWN (Vancouver-Burrard): It is a pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to

rise to second the motion thanking His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor for his

very erudite, informative and brief Speech from the Throne. I would also like,

Mr. Speaker, to thank the government caucus for choosing the constituency of

Vancouver-Burrard to participate in this singular honour and, for myself, to

thank the people of Vancouver-Burrard for choosing me to represent them. I welcome

this opportunity to publicly say, "thank you, Vancouver-Burrard."

AN HON. MEMBER: You're welcome.

MS. BROWN: Thank you. With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I

would also like to join the Hon. Member for Nelson-Creston (Mr.

Nicolson) in thanking the Lieutenant-Governor for so

unselfishly agreeing to stay on and serve this province,

despite his already extraordinary service and to say a

special

[ Page 12 ]

thank you to Mrs. Nicholson, who so graciously permitted him

to do so.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, that Mrs. Nicholson has not been

enjoying the best of health and her decision to support the

Lieutenant-Governor in carrying on this arduous task

demonstrates the strength and grace of this very remarkable

lady.

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I would also like to

welcome you, the senior Clerk, the Clerks and all my colleagues

to this, the first maxi-session of the Legislature with the

socialist hordes at the helm.

It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that at last perhaps, peace

will have come to that troubled land of Vietnam — that perhaps

now those strong and gentle people can look at their skies

without seeing bombs raining down upon them. That perhaps now

they can look at their children without seeing them disfigured

by napalm burns. And that perhaps by some miracle, grass and

trees and green leaves will grow again in that ravaged

land.

The editorial pundits, Mr. Speaker, say that this is not

necessarily so. They say that the negotiated peace is an

incomplete and uneasy one. I pray God that they are wrong

because if ever a people deserved the peace, the people of

Vietnam and indeed throughout all of southeast Asia have earned

it.

And so with your permission, Mr. Speaker, I take this

opportunity to ask all peoples and their governments everywhere

to do whatever they can to ensure that after more than

20 years of strife, the people of southeast Asia will

have peace now.

Already, Mr. Speaker, in the short five months since this

Government has been in power, we have seen our Premier,

remarkable person that he is, and his Government succeed in

thawing the very frigid relationships which previously existed

between this province and the rest of the world. We have seen

the Premier extend his hand across the border and offer to

cooperate with our neighbours to the south and to the north

and talk of ways in which together we could work to protect our

coast line from the fouling and pollution which is even at this

minute threatening to destroy the beautiful environment which

we now enjoy. In this single gesture, Mr. Speaker, this

Government has demonstrated its recognition that we are a part

of the whole, that neither our coast line nor theirs can be

protected in isolation and that indeed such protection must be

done in harmony together rather than with recrimination.

As you might have noticed, Mr. Speaker, this province is once again on speaking

terms with the federal government. (Laughter). And although disagreements still

exist and voices do get shrill from time to time, at least dialogue has been

re-introduced between these two levels of government, a situation which had

not existed over the past many years and which indeed led many of us to fear

for the cohesion of this country during the tenure of that last repressive regime

which was laid to rest on August 30 in the year of our Lord 1972.

AN HON. MEMBER: Right on! (Laughter).

MS. BROWN: And from the people of Vancouver, with its brand

new, shiny city council, a sigh of relief goes up, Mr. Speaker,

that for the time being at least all is now sweetness and

light. Their mayor visits us, we visit their mayor and always

there are smiles. And who knows, Mr. Speaker, if that council

succeeds in avoiding the pitfalls of its predecessor and if it

can learn something from its relationship with us, perhaps this

sweetness and light may so envelop the land that by the simple

process of osmosis we may end up with an NDP city council in

Vancouver after all.

I have spent some time on the subject of improved

relationships between this province and its former antagonists

because I feel that this was a priority hurdle successfully

breached from which we can draw strength in preparing for the

other hurdles ahead of us. The lessons learned and the

expertise developed during this period of learning to

re-establish contact will stand us in good stead in the years

ahead. It will also serve to demonstrate to those with high

expectations and hopes throughout the province that the

cleaning up of the mess left by 20 years of an

arrogant and uncaring regime has been draining energies which

otherwise could have been spent implementing programmes

promised to them in our campaign of 1972.

But the May session and the period after are behind.

Although some of the mess still remains, the implementing of

our promises will go on. That is why, despite the pressure of

the big guns of the automobile insurance megalopoly and their

friends, government automobile insurance will come. For the

experts among us, Mr. Speaker, who may state that there is no

such word as "megalopoly" I would like to assure them that they

are quite right. (Laughter). But private automobile insurance

is so much more than a monopoly that all dictionaries failed to

produced a word which could ably describe it, so I was forced

to coin one myself.

My personal feeling is, Mr. Speaker, that this legislation

should not be called "government car insurance" at all, but

really should be called "the people's car insurance" because

that is what it is — designed for the people, owned and operated

by them, it will truly be their insurance, not ours. The people

know this. They knew it, Mr. Speaker, when they voted on

August 30 and they know it now.

Recently, on a free-time television broadcast, I spoke

about car insurance and the fact that legislation, when

revealed to the House, would prove to be the best possible for

all the driving public. Following that broadcast, Mr. Speaker,

my mail bulged with letters — all of them stating complete

support for the

[ Page 13 ]

Government on this issue and agreeing that the private

insurance companies could even now still demonstrate their

concern for the people of this province in a tangible way — by

returning to them the millions of dollars which they collected

in excess premiums during the two years 1970-1972 and

which was at least $7 per person for all of the

hundreds of thousands of drivers insured by them.

Contrary to propaganda, Mr. Speaker, there will be no

wholesale dismissal of workers when this plan is introduced.

How do I know this, Mr. Speaker? Because I know that we are a

government concerned about increased employment. We want to

ensure that people who can work have work and that is why

legislation is being introduced in this sitting which, in the

civil service alone as the Lieutenant-Governor told us, will

create 1,000 new jobs. This Government, Mr. Speaker, does not

regard employment as a privilege to be reserved for a chosen

few. It believes that it is everyone's right and I know that

our legislation will demonstrate that we have seriously

addressed ourselves to removing the spectre of unemployment,

which is not just stalking this province, incidentally, but

throughout this entire land.

This Government, Mr. Speaker, is also aware that this planet

is in clear and imminent danger of drowning in its own filth.

It is aware, Mr. Speaker, that drastic measures will be called

for to deal with the pollution which currently exists and to

ensure the prevention of future irresponsible acts on the part

of polluters. It is wrestling, I know, with the whole question

of growth, Mr. Speaker, and with the whole question of the

exploitation of resources for the benefit of the few and with

the question of the exploitation of lumber resources at the

expense of spawning salmon or the exploitation of minerals at

the expense of the landscape and the balance of nature.

A scientist writing in the Bulletin of Atomic

Scientists in 1971 said that the only animals

necessary for human survival are the bacteria which reside in

our body, and that indeed if all other forms of animal life

disappeared from this planet, man would continue to survive as

long as these bacteria survived. Man is a predator, Mr.

Speaker, and when I use "man" I mean woman too. (Laughter). Man

is a predator, Mr. Speaker, and over the years he has proven to

be a polluter and a destroyer. But it is the opinion of this

Government that man exists on this earth not to pollute and

ravage it, but to live in harmony with the other creatures who

share the environment with us. It is the opinion of this

Government, Mr. Speaker, that the day must never come when only

man and his bacteria survive.

This Government is determined to embark on a course which

will see an end to the dumping of raw sewage and industrial

waste into our rivers and streams, an end to the belching of

foul and odorous effluent into our air, an end to the ravaging of our

countryside and the usurping of our farmlands in the name of

progress. This Government must and will work for the end of the

wanton destruction of our animals and birds for fun and

profit.

It must and will work for an end to the strangulation of our

cities by the automobile and unchecked urban sprawl. And an end

to the sacrifice of our ancient and traditional buildings which

would see the beautiful and graceful Christ Church Cathedral

torn down by the high priests of steel and glass.

And that is why, Mr. Speaker, this Government is determined

and must insist that before embarking on any major project, be

it a port in Squamish, a ferry terminal in Iona, a land

development scheme anywhere, that an environmental impact study

be done and that we be guided by the decision of the results of

these studies.

As you may know, Mr. Speaker, this is Human Rights Year, and

surely this Government has chosen a most tangible way in which

to commemorate this auspicious occasion. By introducing a bill

of rights at this time, the Government is reaffirming its

belief in the equality of all people, as well as its commitment

to ensure that all people, regardless of their race, sex, age,

political affiliation, religion, sexual orientation, marital

status, cultural inheritance or whatever — whatever their

difference to any other people may be, they will be treated

with equality and dignity by the laws and the government and

the people of this province.

I am indeed proud and happy, Mr. Speaker, to be identified

with the government which is introducing this bill, and I hope

that, unlike the last administration, it is not planning on

exempting itself from the bill's jurisdiction. I am indeed

proud and happy, Mr. Speaker, to be identified with a province

in which this bill of rights will become law.

Concern for one's fellow man is nothing new to this country

of course, Mr. Speaker. For more than 100 years people of

different cultures, different races and different religions

have always come to these shores in search of dignity and

peace, and they have always found what they were seeking here.

And it is my fervent hope, Mr. Speaker, that this will never

change, and that we will resist any temptation to close our

gates to future immigrants, remembering that with the possible

exception of the native peoples we all are, or our ancestors

were, immigrants to this land.

For myself, Mr. Speaker, I will always remember that during

those tragic days of slavery in the United States, slaves

always knew that if they could escape to Canada they would find

a haven here. I will always remember, Mr. Speaker, that all

across this country, from Halifax to Victoria, there were stops

on the underground railroad supported by women and men of

goodwill. I will always remember, Mr. Speaker,

[ Page 14 ]

that great and honourable gentleman, Governor James Douglas,

who welcomed to this city in 1858 freed black women and men

fleeing the terrible fugitive slave law of the United States. A

law which allowed freed slaves, if recaptured, to be returned

to their masters. And a law which led to the State of

California itself considering to introduce slavery.

These black people sailed into Victoria harbour — this same

Victoria harbour, Mr. Speaker — aboard the Brother Jonathan, a

ship in whose memory, Mr. Speaker, our youngest son has been

named. And they were welcomed on their arrival by the people of

this great city.

And so, Mr. Speaker, it is with joy that I grasp this

opportunity to say to you and to all Canadians, on behalf of my

ancestors and on behalf of the ancestors of many black people

who still live among you, thank you.

I thank you on behalf of the Starks and the Alexanders and

the Ramseys. I thank you on behalf of that magnificent

fisherman Deas, for whom that tunnel in Richmond was first

named, and on behalf of the Robinsons and the Gibbs and Joe

Fortas, and the many others whose names I have never known.

It was said of me, Mr. Speaker, and of the Hon. First Member

for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Barnes), that we were the first

black people ever elected to government in this province. But

did you know, Mr. Speaker, that here, in this City of Victoria,

in the year 1866, Mr. Mifflin Gibbs, a black man of

considerable stature, was elected by the people of this city to

serve on their council as alderman? And part of that time he

was the president of that council.

And did you know, Mr. Speaker, that the first military force

in this province was the Victoria Pioneer Rifle Corps, a corps

of black soldiers which was formed in 1860 when it appeared

that the colony might be threatened by invasion from the United

States? So you see, Mr. Speaker, you all are part of our

history and we all are part of yours. And may we never forget

that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not so naive as to think that the

hopes and dreams embodied in any bill will be realized once

that bill is introduced. The introduction of a bill of rights,

Mr. Speaker, is not the end; indeed it is just the beginning.

To ensure the equality of all, Mr. Speaker, we must introduce,

for a while at least, special measures to ensure the catching

up of those groups in our society who have fallen behind

because of the inequalities which until now have existed in

it.

You see, Mr. Speaker, life is like a long distance race, and

like all long distance races it is run on a curved track. A

curved track, Mr. Speaker, with a straight line as a starting

line, and I am sure you will agree that this is most unfair.

And always, Mr. Speaker, the inside lanes have gone to the

white middle and upper class male in our society.

And so, Mr. Speaker, if the dream of this bill is to be

realized by the women of this province, and by the poor and by

the other minority groups who have traditionally drawn the

outside lanes of the track in this race, the starting line will

have to be staggered. And the further from the inside track

that one is running, Mr. Speaker, the greater will be the need

for the starting line to be staggered.

And if this Government is serious in its wish that all

people should enjoy equality, Mr. Speaker, then those sections

of the population which have been treated unequally in the past

must have special measures designed for them for a period, at

least until they too are equal.

A human rights Act is a beautiful thing. A bill of rights is

a magnificent thing. They are always welcome. But by

themselves, Mr. Speaker, they are never enough. No human rights

Act, no bill of rights will ever be enough. And that is what

the women — that 52 per cent of our population who have been

disadvantaged, discriminated against and oppressed — are saying,

when they say to you, Mr. Premier, through you, Mr. Speaker,

that they would like a Ministry of Women's Rights. That is what

Sylva Gelber, the Director of the Ontario Women's Bureau was

saying, Mr. Speaker, when she referred to women as the

"underemployed, underpaid third of the labour force." And that

is what the female dietary aides at Riverview Hospital and the

striking women of Sandringham Hospital are saying. They are the

experts of underemployment and they are the experts of

underpay.

And those women who have chosen to remain at home and raise

and nurture their families, that is what they are saying when

they speak of insecurity, Mr. Speaker. That is what the women

of the University of British Columbia — that bastion of higher

learning and humanitarian thought — are saying when they

publish statistics that show that, despite equal

qualifications, few of them are ever permitted to attain the

higher ranks of the academic departments. And that also is what

the women of U.B.C. are saying when they publish statistics

that show that we are educating fewer women than men and that

we are educating them less.

And this is what the working women in British Columbia are

saying when they ask why there are so few women in the upper

echelon of the civil service of this province, and why there

are so many women on welfare, and why there are so many women

between the ages of 55 and 65 existing below the poverty

line.

This, Mr. Speaker, is what the native peoples are saying

when they have their starvation sit-ins pleading for control

over their own affairs. And this is what Fred House, their

leader, was saying when he said: "We do not want to be treated

as special people, but we are people with special problems."

And this is

[ Page 15 ]

what the Association of Non-Status Indians was saying. Again

I quote, "One fact which is clear is that traditional

government agencies and services using line authority and

bureaucratic organization, although successful in promoting

certain kinds of technological progress, have been less

successful in meeting human needs; and, in particular, have

been unsuccessful in meeting the needs of the Non-Status

Indians of British Columbia and in promoting their social and

economic development. The gap between "White" society and

people of Indian ancestry has, in fact, widened, and, as a

society, we seem to be faced with a marked increase in the

numbers of people of Indian ancestry alienated from the large

social system."

This is what the youth are saying, Mr. Speaker, when they

ask for a greater voice in decisions affecting their destiny.

And this is what the poor are saying when they ask for more

opportunity to participate in the prosperity of this land.

They're not asking for handouts, Mr. Speaker, but for an end to

the attitude that poverty is a crime and that they, because

they are poor, should be punished. And for an end to

paternalistic exploitation and to the erosion of their dignity

as human beings.

What better time than now, Mr. Speaker; what better

Government than this, to right those wrongs.

And so it is with feeling of hope and anticipation that I

enter this second session of this thirtieth Parliament because

I am aware that we are about to witness the staggering of the

starting line of the long distance race for all people who have

chosen to make this beautiful and magnificent province their home. And I am

especially heartened, Mr. Speaker, to learn from the speech of

the Lieutenant-Governor that my Government is not going to try

to go it alone; that my Government, in recognizing the

magnitude of the challenges ahead of us and mindful of its role

as the peoples' Government, will call upon and tap the special

skills and talents of people from all walks of life who are

willing to and can help it with its tasks.

We are the people's government, Mr. Speaker, and I for one

look forward to getting the people of this province into the

act whenever there is need for their wisdom. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for North Peace River.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Mr. Speaker, it's been a

serene afternoon full of harmony and goodwill and it would seem

to me a little inappropriate to launch upon an attack at this

particular time. So in a spirit of harmony and goodwill, I'll

move adjournment of this debate until the next sitting of the

House.

Motion approved.

Hon. Mr. Barrett moves adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1973, 2001, 2013: Queen's Printer, Victoria, B.C., Canada