2007 Legislative Session: Third Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2007

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 20, Number 7

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First

Reading of Bills

Private Post-Secondary

Accountability and Student Protection Act, 2007 (Bill M217)

Fleming

Statements (Standing Order

25 B )

Great Salmon Send-Off at Stoney

Creek

H. Bloy

Tzu Chi

Ralston

New health care services in

Surrey

D. Hayer

Protection of drinking water

supply

Simpson

Flood preparedness

R. Hawes

Benefits of exercise

Cubberley

Oral Questions

Farmworker vehicle inspections

Puchmayr

Hon. K.

Falcon

Chudnovsky

Chouhan

Farmworker vehicle licensing

Chouhan

Hon. K.

Falcon

Employment practices at Nanaimo

Seniors Village

A. Dix

Hon. G.

Abbott

B.C. Rail bidding process

Fleming

Hon. W.

Oppal

Disclosure of documents on sale

of B.C. Rail

J. Kwan

Hon. W.

Oppal

KPMG access to e-mails

Ralston

Hon. C.

Taylor

Gas prices in B.C.

Horgan

Hon. R.

Thorpe

Farnworth

Homeowner grants for low-income

seniors

Karagianis

Hon. C.

Taylor

Tabling Documents

Forest Appeals Commission, report,

Hon. R.

Coleman

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Health

(continued)

Hon. G.

Abbott

C. Wyse

Trevena

A. Dix

J. Brar

Routley

Simpson

Fleming

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Tourism,

Sport and the Arts (continued)

Fraser

Hon. S.

Hagen

Gentner

Macdonald

H. Bains

[ Page 7833 ]

THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2007

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. S. Bond: Today I am very pleased to welcome to the

Legislature two classes from Mount Benson Elementary School in Nanaimo, and I

certainly hope that my colleagues on both sides of the House will understand why

I'm introducing them today.

There are 41 grades 4 and 5 students, and they left Nanaimo very

early this morning on a bus. They came and saw the Titanic , and that was

an excellent opportunity for them. They're now here in the Legislature learning

more about how government operates.

Today the students are accompanied by their principal Gary Dodd,

teacher Karen Murchie and educational assistant Cheryl O'Donnell, and we have

fabulous parent chaperones who come along to make sure that everything goes

well. We have Lisa Burns, Jackie Stark Mackay and Cathy Lutner. I think Deb

Cochrane may have had to leave.

Finally, their teacher is Mrs. Melissa Robertson. I am

particularly thrilled to have her in the gallery, because her maiden name

happens to be Bond. I'm delighted to welcome my daughter and her classes to the

Legislature.

[1335]

D. Chudnovsky: I wonder if the House could help me welcome

two very good, dear and — not old — mature friends of mine who are here in the

gallery with us, people who have fought for social justice for all of their

lives. Please welcome Harold and Seemah Berson.

Hon. T. Christensen: As many members will know, on Monday

the province proclaimed Child and Youth Mental Health Day here in the province.

This is also Mental Health Week both in British Columbia and across Canada.

Today we're joined by a special group of people, a dedicated group

of professionals who specialize in helping B.C. children and youth who are

dealing with mental health issues. Joining us today are Jane Mauchan, a skilled

mental health clinician based in North Vancouver, and Jason Farquharson, who I'm

told is not only an aboriginal support worker assisting children and families

throughout the Peace region of our province but has also recently earned a place

on the Karate B.C. team and a trip to the nationals, which are going to be held

in Vancouver.

A new employee also joins us, Joseph Greene. Joe is a child and

youth mental health team leader in the Vancouver Island region, and we have

stolen Joe from Alberta. He joined us just a couple of months ago and says that

he was drawn to this field in British Columbia specifically because of the work

being done with aboriginal communities and the B.C. child and youth mental

health plan, so it's good to have him here.

As well, we have Francine Douglas, an aboriginal outreach worker

or, as Francine says, a liaison worker who works with members of the aboriginal

community throughout the Fraser region. Barry Fulton joins us from the interior,

where he is a highly experienced regional manager of child and youth mental

health. Yvonne Reid joins us from Terrace, where she's doing great work as the

regional child and youth mental health manager for the north.

Last but certainly not least, the ministry's senior mental health

consultant, Gayle Read, joins us from here in Victoria. Gayle has worked

tirelessly on the coordination and implementation of the child and youth mental

health plan, which is now going into its fifth year of implementation.

I know that all members of the House respect and are very happy

with the work that is being done by these professionals across the province and

the assistance that they're providing to children and families dealing with

mental health issues. I would ask that all of us please make them very, very

welcome.

D. Routley: On behalf of the member for Nanaimo, I would

like to add to the Minister of Education's welcome to the 45 students, teachers

and parents of Mount Benson Elementary. The member for Nanaimo would like us all

to help make them welcome.

J. Nuraney: It's once again my pride and a privilege to

introduce to the House 30 grade 5 students from my favourite school, Maywood

Community School in Burnaby. They are accompanied today by Miss Bradley, Mrs.

Smith, Mrs. McCartney and Miss Naklicki. May the House please join me in

welcoming these very bright students.

A. Dix: I want to introduce to the House Mr. Dalip Sandhu,

who's the president of the Fraserview Rotary Club. Mr. Sandhu is here with

friends and family from Vancouver, from the United States and from India. I'd

ask everyone here to bid them welcome.

I have one more introduction to make — a dear friend from Burnaby,

British Columbia, vice-president of the Hospital Employees Union. He works as a

care aide and is a fighter for social justice in his own right — Mr. Boni

Barcia.

R. Cantelon: Visiting us today in the precinct is my

constituency assistant Karen Grey, her daughter Emily and her son Sam, and also

her mother and father Jan Creighton and Doc Creighton, who, Mr. Speaker, are

from your constituency. Let's all make them feel very welcome.

G. Gentner: It's a great deal of pleasure to introduce to

the House today members of my CUPE Local 454 and dear friends of mine, president

Darryl Robison, Lori Whitlum, Lisa Randazzo, Samuel Holmes, Todd Selig and James

Hubert. Could the House please give them a warm welcome.

[1340]

Hon. L. Reid: I have the very great pleasure today of

welcoming to this place children from the Richmond

[ Page 7834 ]

Jewish Day School in my riding. They're accompanied by their teacher Ms.

Sachar, and I would ask the House to please make them very welcome.

D. Routley: I would like to welcome two members of CUPE

Local 606 to the precinct. Ayn Cargill from Duncan is an associate of mine who I

worked with in the school district, and Marlene Crozier, the president at Local

606, is retiring this year. She's been a mentor to many people in the school

system and myself in particular. I've benefited greatly from her experience, and

I want to thank her for her years of dedicated service to public education in

British Columbia. Can the House help me thank her for that.

Hon. J. van Dongen: Visiting the Legislature today are 23

fourth-year political science students from Western Washington University. With

them is their professor, Dr. Butch Kamena, who teaches a Canadian government

class at the university.

Western Washington U is located in Bellingham and is considered

one of the best regional public universities in the northwest. They just

recently completed Canada Week, where they gave the students a chance to learn

all about Canada and their Canadian friends. I ask the House to please make all

of the students and their professor very welcome.

R. Fleming: In the gallery with us I would like to

introduce a friend of mine and a special guest here today, Ms. Sandra Giesbrecht,

who is a tireless advocate for public health care in our community and works in

that sector. Will the House please join me in making her feel welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

PRIVATE POST-SECONDARY

ACCOUNTABILITY AND

STUDENT PROTECTION ACT, 2007

R. Fleming presented a bill intituled Private Post-Secondary

Accountability and Student Protection Act, 2007.

R. Fleming: I move introduction of the act for first

reading.

Motion approved.

R. Fleming: It's my honour to present the Private

Post-Secondary Accountability and Student Protection Act today. This bill will

provide for greater protection for students who attend or plan to attend private

career training colleges in British Columbia. The bill amends the Private Career

Training Institutions Act to strengthen the authority's governing body, making

it more responsive to the needs of students and providing balanced and

strengthened oversight of the industry.

It mandates the PCTIA to investigate when students have complaints

about private career-training institutions, and it restores financial protection

for students who receive career training from institutions that falsely

represent themselves and their services.

This bill also makes amendments to the Degree Authorization Act.

It requires the Degree Quality Assessment Board to review each application for

degree-granting status by a private college and to make a recommendation to the

minister. Under this bill, the minister cannot grant such status before

receiving this recommendation from the board.

The bill also mandates the board to review all cases where

institutions wish to use the word "university" in referring to their educational

programs. Our province has received growing international scrutiny from

countries such as India, China and South Korea for putting at risk the financial

protections of international students who pay to live and study here.

It is time to provide protection — real protection — for students

enrolled in private post-secondary education in British Columbia. It is time to

restore public confidence in B.C.'s private college system. We cannot allow

incidents like Kingston College to leave students penniless and with no recourse

in our province.

I move that the bill be placed on the order paper for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M217, Private Post-Secondary Accountability and Student

Protection Act, 2007, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on

orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) GREAT SALMON SEND-OFF AT

STONEY CREEK

H. Bloy: Hon. Speaker, I rise today in the House to tell

you about the Great Salmon Send-Off taking place this Saturday at Stoney Creek

community school in Burnaby, in my riding of Burquitlam. The Great Salmon

Send-Off has been a tremendous success since 1990. Now thousands of participants

come to see the displays, enjoy refreshments and experience the thrill of

releasing thousands of salmon back into a natural stream.

[1345]

This is a great educational event for children, who learn about

the journey a salmon takes. After release the fish lives in Stoney Creek for a

short while before swimming down the Fraser River and eventually thousands of

miles into the Pacific Ocean, where they'll grow to adulthood and return to

Stoney Creek to spawn.

Streams in urban areas are susceptible to human impacts, such as

destruction of streamside vegetation and water pollution from such items as

household cleaners and fertilizers.

I would like to thank some individuals for making this event

happen every year: Jennifer Atchison; Christine Leston; Principal Joanne Shutek;

Jocelyn Sing,

[ Page 7835 ]

the community school coordinator; and many other organizations and groups,

including BCIT, Burnaby Mountain Secondary School, Burnaby Now , the

Burnaby school board, urban salmon habitat, the city of Burnaby, Sapperton Fish

and Game Club, and Terasen Gas.

This event will help keep Stoney Creek the most productive

salmon-bearing tributary of the Brunette River. This Saturday I would like to

invite you and all of Burnaby and the lower mainland to join the Minister of

Environment and myself at the Great Salmon Send-Off at Stoney Creek.

TZU CHI

B. Ralston: I rise today to recognize the Harmony Festival

scheduled for Sunday, May 13, at Swangard Stadium, Central Park, in the city of

Burnaby, hosted by Tzu Chi Foundation Canada.

Harmony Festival is a three-part festival celebrating Buddha's

birthday, Mother's Day and Tzu Chi Day. Five lower mainland mayors will

simultaneously proclaim the day Tzu Chi Day.

The recognition and celebration of Buddha's birthday will be the

first such large-scale birthday ceremony in Canada. A simple but solemn flower

presentation will take place outdoors at the stadium.

Tzu Chi celebrates Mother's Day, as do all of us, as an important

occasion for us to express our profound gratitude for the unconditional love of

our mothers. Tzu Chi Day celebrates the commitments of its members to achieve

harmony in the heart, harmony with communities and harmony with the Earth by

serving our communities with gratitude, respect and love.

Tzu Chi in the Chinese language means compassion and relief, and

implies an action orientation. Tzu Chi was founded in Hualien, Taiwan, in 1966

by Master Cheng Yen, a Buddhist nun.

There are at present ten million Tzu Chi members around the world.

Tzu Chi focuses its work on international disaster relief and has included

donations of food, clothing and other aid, assisting more than three million

victims. Tzu Chi has also helped in post-disaster relief by building 102 schools

in six countries.

Here in Canada, under the leadership of Chief Executive Officer

Gary Ho of Tzu Chi Canada, the organization has grown, with over 9,000 members

across the country. The organization's objectives focus on charity, medicine,

education, humanitarian relief, bone marrow donation, environmental protection

and community volunteer services. Tzu Chi volunteers are active in the lower

mainland communities of British Columbia.

Everyone is invited to participate in the Harmony Festival this

Sunday in Burnaby.

NEW HEALTH CARE SERVICES IN SURREY

D. Hayer: Health care in Surrey will soon be dramatically

improved as the new 148,000-square-foot out-patient hospital in Green Timbers

takes another step closer to reality.

Construction on this great new facility is to begin soon, with its

first patient admitted in 2010. This is a direct result of a $151 million

investment by our government into health care in Surrey.

This state-of-the-art out-patient hospital will drastically reduce

congestion at Surrey Memorial Hospital. That hospital now handles 134,000

out-patient visits and performs close to 95,000 out-patient diagnostic

procedures each year. Those numbers are expected to grow by almost 60 percent by

2020, so construction of this new out-patient hospital is both timely and

significant in the delivery of health care in Surrey.

Some of the other good news on the health care front in the Surrey

community includes a new $4.8 million minor treatment centre at Surrey Memorial

Hospital to relieve ER congestion, the opening up of 20 sub-acute beds to care

for patients prepared to return home or move into residential care, ten new

hospice beds, 18 additional acute care geriatric beds, a planned

state-of-the-art emergency centre and urgent care facility, tripling of Surrey

Memorial Hospital's emergency floor area, a new perinatal care facility at

Surrey Memorial Hospital, the completion of 67 new acute care and critical care

beds by the end of 2007, 12 new renal units added to Surrey Memorial's services

by 2009 and 250 new residential care beds by the end of 2008.

[1350]

These investments in health care options are incredible, and they

are the direct result of our government's efforts since 2001 to improve the

quality of life and care in Surrey.

PROTECTION OF

DRINKING WATER SUPPLY

S. Simpson: I'm happy today to rise to acknowledge Drinking

Water Week, a time when we recognize one of the most critical and essential

resources that we have. Without water to drink and air to breathe, whatever else

we may possess is pretty much moot.

In British Columbia we have a relative abundance of clean, quality

drinking water when compared to many places in the world. However, it would be a

grave error for us to become complacent about our situation or smug about the

future of water in our province.

Scientists are telling us today that one of the negative impacts

of climate change we can expect is the availability and quality of our water.

These warnings come from scientists in our own province and from around the

world. The international Panel on Climate Change states in their report:

"Warming in western mountains is projected to cause decreased snowpack, more

winter flooding and reduced summer flows, exacerbating competition for

overallocated water resources."

One of the concerns that we need to pay particular attention to is

the state of our glacier system. We are seeing our glaciers across the province

at their lowest points in thousands of years. The potential for droughts is

growing, and the risk of toxicity is greater than ever before.

[ Page 7836 ]

As University of Victoria chair of geography Prof. Dan Smith said

recently in the media: "At some point in time, we are going to reach a critical

threshold where there isn't enough water in our rivers. It may not happen for a

long time, but it will happen."

Those of us who live in Greater Vancouver have had a longstanding

smugness that when we turn on the tap, the water will flow. That was shattered

during last year's storms when over a quarter million people faced a boil-water

advisory. While this situation may not be that uncommon for many in our

province, for Vancouverites it was a wake-up call.

These impacts are not one-off events. The science tells us that

the effects of climate change will make this a more common occurrence. We face a

growing challenge as legislators to ensure necessary regulations and resources

are in place to protect the future of water in our province as a public

resource.

As the stewards of British Columbia's water, we need to put that

responsibility at the forefront of our agenda and priorities.

FLOOD PREPAREDNESS

R. Hawes: With the looming threat of flooding throughout

regions of the province, governments, companies and individual British

Columbians have stepped up to meet the challenges that might come. They've moved

quickly to identify and complete 87 projects costing $33 million that could be

done immediately to mitigate flood risk.

Yet with the snowpack levels at near-record highs, people are

concerned about what to do in the event the worst happens. They're aware that

transportation links could be cut, power and water supply disrupted and that

evacuation could be necessary.

Just think of the logistical challenges. Where would people be

housed? How would they be fed? What about animals? Where would they go? How

would dairy cows be milked, and where?

All of the possible scenarios are being covered by an army of

dedicated volunteers in every community. Very few people will ever truly know

how many hours of meticulous planning have gone into ensuring that every

conceivable contingency has been covered. Behind the scenes, emergency

preparedness teams made up of local government staff, police, fire and emergency

social service personnel, service club volunteers, church groups and thousands

of concerned citizens are working tirelessly to ensure that people, pets and

livestock are safe in the event of flood.

They will be deployed at the first sign that flooding is imminent.

It's their efforts that will ensure our safety, and they are unsung heroes.

Please join me in saluting these outstanding people, for they truly represent

the spirit of British Columbia.

BENEFITS OF EXERCISE

D. Cubberley: This morning I woke up depressingly early to

the incessant chirping of birds. But instead of firing up the computer as I

often do, I crossed another threshold, stepped outside and went for a walk with

no other purpose than to get myself moving — a step in the right direction as

this is Move for Health Day, and because much of this session I haven't moved

anything except paper and my mouth.

[1355]

After my walk, I felt a residual buzz from the energy expended,

which reminded me how easy it is to transport ourselves to a better frame of

mind. As it happens, the reason for this sense of well-being is that exercise

sends a flood of endorphins to the brain. Endorphins are opium-like substances

that impart a sort of natural high, if you will, to anyone willing to put one

foot in front of another. That's why exercise is mildly addictive and why we

should let ourselves get hooked. It's fun, it's legal, and the authorities will

never visit your home.

Seriously, Mr. Speaker, beyond the endorphin rush lie other

benefits. If we move regularly and raise our heart rate for a sustained period,

we get fit, which not only imparts a high but actually proofs us against

disease.

Fitness has prevalence over all causes of mortality. Exercise

regularly, and the likelihood of getting any of the most common diseases

decreases. Even modest investments in movement — say, 30 to 60 minutes a day of

brisk walking five days a week — will put us on the road to better health. Stay

with it, and on average we're going to add six to nine years to our life span.

It's said that the human body was made for movement and that it's

the only machine that wears out through lack of use. We have largely engineered

use out of our daily lives. It's high time we took the machine out of storage,

and Move for Health Day is a great reminder. [Applause.]

Mr. Speaker: Just think, Member. This isn't even question

period.

Oral Questions

FARMWORKER VEHICLE INSPECTIONS

C. Puchmayr: Yesterday a roadside vehicle inspection team

pulled over a van carrying farmworkers. The van didn't have enough seatbelts,

the floor was rusted, and the seats were welded to the sheet metal. This van was

owned by the same contractor as the van that had the horrific accident on

Highway 1 in March.

I'd like to ask the Minister of Transportation if he can explain

how this vehicle passed inspection.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: I have to tell the member that I can't

actually explain that at this point, because I haven't got the information. I

will tell the member that we are in the midst of auditing the inspection

facility that undertook that inspection. We've suspended their

[ Page 7837 ]

ability to issue decals until such time as we complete the audit, to ensure

that if there is anything untoward going on, it doesn't continue. When I have

that information, I would be happy to share it with the member opposite.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. Puchmayr: The opposition has now learned that this

government has moved school bus inspectors and moved them on to the highways to

do farm vehicle inspections. These are duties that are normally done by school

bus inspectors who are no longer inspecting school buses that move our children.

Can the Minister of Transportation explain how putting children at

risk is any kind of way to deal with this crisis?

Hon. K. Falcon: I think that question highlights just

perfectly how it's so important to have the facts before you make those kinds of

outrageous allegations. The fact of the matter is that we have about 2,500

licensed school buses in the province. Over the past year we've inspected almost

1,800 of those buses, and those inspections continue.

The member should know this. The way inspections work is that you

actually focus on compliance. When you have a sector like the school buses,

which actually has a very high rate of compliance, you don't focus your

attention on the people that are doing a real good job. You focus on the bad

operators. That's exactly what we're doing with the people transporting

farmworkers.

[1400]

D. Chudnovsky: What was it that Macbeth said? Filled with

sound and fury, signifying nothing. Is this government not capable of doing

inspections on school buses and farm vehicles at the same time?

Hon. K. Falcon: Apparently, that member didn't listen to my

last answer. We have inspected almost 1,800 school buses over the last year. We

continue to regularly inspect, but they have a very good compliance rate. We are

focusing attention…. That's how the commercial vehicle inspectors operate. The

member should know this, learn a thing or two. They actually focus their

attention on sectors that are problematic. That's the best use of resources and

the men and women that we have doing these inspections, and we'll continue to

operate in that manner.

D. Chudnovsky: Once again this minister figures that if he

just raises his voice, he can get away with not answering the questions.

The question is clear that yesterday inspectors were taken off the

task of school bus inspection and put on farmworker vehicle inspection. The

question is absolutely clear. Is the government not capable of doing both, and

how often are inspectors taken off school bus inspection and put on farmworker

inspection?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm going to try to explain again to the

member how the commercial vehicle inspection process works. What happens is we

have continual investigations, as we do with school buses. As I say, of the

2,500 licensed school buses in the province of British Columbia, over the past

year we've inspected almost 1,800. That's a pretty aggressive and successful

rate of inspections.

The fact of the matter is that they actually have a very good

compliance record. The whole point of vehicle inspections is that you want to

have the inspectors focusing their attention on areas and sectors that have

compliance problems. That's why we're focusing attention on the transportation

of farmworkers. There are compliance problems. It's not an either/or, Mr.

Speaker, and the member needs to know that before making those kind of crazy

questions.

R. Chouhan: Let's talk about farmworkers. The vehicle

carrying farmworkers that was pulled over yesterday for a roadside spot check

had the floor rusting through and seats welded to sheet metal, and many of the

seatbelts were not functioning. This very van was inspected only two weeks ago

and apparently passed with flying colours. Meanwhile, who knows how many other

vans transporting farmworkers are unsafe, even though they passed inspection.

How can people have faith that the vehicles carrying farmworkers

are safe if vans with the floor rusting through are passing inspections? Can the

minister tell us how many of these vans were inspected in the last two months?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is right to be outraged at the

fact that a vehicle in that kind of condition was transporting workers. I share

the outrage, quite frankly. That's why we're doing the inspections — to catch

bad operators like this and make sure we yank their vehicles off the highway.

I do want the member to know this, and I want the member to pay

attention to this, because I think it's actually pretty important. That

particular operator — we suspended that operator's ability to operate any

commercial vehicles in British Columbia until such time as they improve their

record.

[1405]

In addition to that, we have suspended the designated inspection

facility which approved that particular vehicle until such time as we complete

the audit and find out what actually happened there. Then I'll have more

information, and I'll release that publicly once we gather that information.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

FARMWORKER VEHICLE LICENSING

R. Chouhan: That suspension only happened after this

incident. One of the 29 recommendations made by farmworkers on March 15 was to

launch an immediate

[ Page 7838 ]

review of the vehicles inspection system, but the minister has so far ignored

that recommendation.

Given what we learned yesterday, will the minister review the

licensing of all vehicles used to transport farmworkers?

Hon. K. Falcon: The short answer is that we will do

anything or whatever it takes to ensure that people who transport farmworkers

are going to do so in a safe manner. That's exactly what we're going to do.

The fact of the matter, as the member knows, is that these

particular vehicles are captured under the National Safety Code. They are

required to be inspected semi-annually. A problem was identified in that sector,

and we've now focused commercial vehicle inspectors on that sector. We will

continue to focus attention on that sector until such time as we see the

compliance level get to the level that gives British Columbians and farmworkers

confidence that they're being transported safely.

EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AT

NANAIMO SENIORS VILLAGE

A. Dix: My question is to the Minister of Health. Yesterday

168 workers at Nanaimo Seniors Village were laid off, were fired, with no

notice. This same group of workers, since this government passed Bill 29, has

been fired and hired, fired and hired, and yesterday fired again, causing

disruption in the lives of seniors and hardship to those hard-working workers.

Will the minister finally acknowledge the chaos his government has

caused in this sector by Bill 29?

Hon. G. Abbott: The facility the member references is a

privately owned and privately operated facility. He should know that if there

are labour relations issues related to this matter, the Labour Relations Board

is the appropriate forum in which to raise those labour relations issues. I'm

sure that the aggrieved members involved are taking all of the opportunities

they have to air these matters at the Labour Relations Board.

Our concern as the Ministry of Health is to ensure that all of

those who are resident there, whether supported by government or not, receive

the care they need.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: Well, the minister rigs the game and then talks

about playing by the rules. Hired and fired five times — a group of workers at

the same facility. It is outrageous. The owners of that facility — $11,000 to

the B.C. Liberal Party. No one who works at that facility could possibly imagine

making that kind of political contribution or currying that much favour with

this government.

My question to the minister is this. These layoffs are a direct

result of his government's policies. Will he stand up today and intervene to

protect these workers' jobs?

Hon. G. Abbott: This facility is a privately owned and

privately operated facility. It is not owned by the Vancouver Island Health

Authority. It is not operated by the Vancouver Island Health Authority. Its

employees are not employees of the Vancouver Island Health Authority.

The member wants to conduct labour relations in this chamber. The

member knows full well that the Labour Relations Board is the appropriate venue…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1410]

Hon. G. Abbott: …for labour relations issues to be raised

and adjudicated. It is not a matter for this assembly to conclude whether the

workers have a legitimate grievance or not. It is to the Labour Relations Board,

and I expect fully that the members involved will avail themselves of that

opportunity to air those grievances with the Labour Relations Board.

B.C. RAIL BIDDING PROCESS

R. Fleming: In 2003 Minister of Transportation Judith Reid

conducted a fairness evaluation to take away heat from the privatization deal at

B.C. Rail. The ministry's press release, shortly after, concluded: "All

proponents had access to the same information at the same time, ensuring no

proponent gained an unfair advantage."

We know that this is not true. Some bidders acquired information

on their competitors. Police found confidential bid documents at the office of

Pilothouse lobbyists; other bid documents were found in the homes of senior B.C.

Liberal political aides.

Do the government and its Attorney General still stand by this

report's conclusion?

Hon. W. Oppal: I don't know how many times I have to say

this. These are all matters that are arising out of the Supreme Court trial.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: These are matters that are arising out of a

Supreme Court trial that's….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: These are matters that arise out of the

Supreme Court trial. These allegations may or may not be accurate. It will be

totally irresponsible for me or for any other member of this House to comment on

those allegations.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

[ Page 7839 ]

R. Fleming: Well, it's same old, same old. The 2003 report

says the sale of B.C. Rail was fine, but the fairness adviser had no idea at the

time that bid documents were housed in lobbyists' offices or being passed about.

Will the Attorney General admit the fairness report is now

worthless, and will he take seriously information that B.C. Rail bidding was

tainted and hopelessly compromised? Will he finally do right by the public

interest by ordering a full public inquiry?

Hon. W. Oppal: I would have thought the member would know

that we don't hold inquiries while there are trials going on.

Let's assume for a minute that we hold an inquiry. Fundamental

rule number one: who will testify at the inquiry? The same witnesses who are

testifying at trial? It is such a ridiculous question. The answer is obvious. We

don't hold inquiries while there are trials going on relating to the same

issues.

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS ON

SALE OF B.C. RAIL

J. Kwan: "We need answers, and we need them right away."

Those were the words of Judge Bennett, who is presiding over the Basi-Virk

hearings. Madam Justice Bennett is referring to all documents, including notes,

regarding the involvement of the then Solicitor General in this investigation.

Will the Attorney General fully cooperate and commit to releasing

those documents to the courts today?

Hon. W. Oppal: I don't even know where to begin to answer

that question.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: I have news for the hon. member. The

Attorney General doesn't have the documents. You see, in this case….

Interjection.

Hon. W. Oppal: What a clever question that was.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: What has happened here is that there is a

special prosecutor appointed. If a special prosecutor is appointed — listen

carefully — the Attorney General doesn't get involved. That's pretty

fundamental.

The Attorney General doesn't get involved, so as to remove any

suggestion of any political interference. In this case there's a special

prosecutor. His name is Bill Berardino, QC. He's got conduct of the trial for

the prosecution. If the judge has ordered Mr. Berardino to produce documents, I

expect he will produce them. I don't have the documents.

[1415]

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: In court today, the Crown advised the judge that

they would request the government to provide all documents, including notes,

regarding the involvement of the then Solicitor General in this investigation.

The Premier personally pledged that the government would fully

cooperate in this investigation. Will the Attorney General comply with the

Crown's request and release all the documents regarding the then Attorney

General's involvement in this investigation?

Hon. W. Oppal: I repeat: the Crown, who has conduct of the

trial, is a special prosecutor. I assume that he'll cooperate.

Last night I had dinner with a couple of friends of mine — a judge

and a couple of defence lawyers. They said….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: They said: "Doesn't anybody on that other

side understand the system?" They've got a couple of….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Take your seat, Attorney.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: We do not politically interfere with the

conduct of the trial.

KPMG ACCESS TO E-MAILS

B. Ralston: On April 19 the Minister of Finance advised the

Legislature, when speaking of the investigation into the leaked Brian Kieran

e-mail conducted by KPMG: "This firm has been asked to look at all of the broad

implications of this e-mail."

My question to the minister is this. Does KPMG have access to the

entire e-mail exchange in order that the broad implications the minister speaks

of can be thoroughly considered?

Hon. C. Taylor: The situation being referred to, of course,

was handled by the Premier and the Deputy Minister to the Premier. The

instructions given to KPMG were to look at all the implications of the e-mail.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Will the minister confirm, then, that KPMG has

access not only to that e-mail thread but to

[ Page 7840 ]

all similar ones which discuss the same topic that are in the control of

Pilothouse?

Hon. C. Taylor: Once again, the review was initiated by the

Deputy Minister to the Premier. It is being done by an independent company —

KPMG. They've been asked to look at all of the implications of the e-mail. When

that report comes back, all of that information will be available to everyone.

GAS PRICES IN B.C.

J. Horgan: Two weeks ago I wrote the Attorney General — the

minister responsible for the B.C. Utilities Commission — asking if he would

follow Washington State's lead and do an investigation into gas prices in

British Columbia.

Since that time, prices in Toronto have flattened out at $1.04 a

litre, prices in the lower mainland at $1.27 a litre. My question: in light of

the Premier of Ontario's suggestion today that they will launch a review in

Ontario, will the Attorney General do the right thing, stand up for consumers in

this province and launch a review into gas prices in British Columbia?

Hon. R. Thorpe: Members on both sides of the House are very

concerned about rising fuel prices in British Columbia, but only the NDP believe

that regulation and red tape are the answers for consumers. It was NDP red tape

that strangled small business and business in British Columbia in the '90s.

Those in the world….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat, Minister.

Continue.

[1420]

Hon. R. Thorpe: All of us in this House know that gasoline

prices are the result of world crude costs, refinery capacity, gasoline supplies

and local competition. There is absolutely no evidence that regulating prices is

going to lower prices for consumers.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Well, the minister's recitation of the Canadian

petroleum producers' briefing note is outstanding. But he forgot to include gas

distribution problems in Nigeria and unrest in the Middle East. He can add those

to his litany of rationales.

The public in British Columbia has had enough. The Attorney

General…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: …has responsibility for the B.C. Utilities

Commission. Will he go to the chair of the Utilities Commission and direct him

to investigate price gouging in British Columbia, and will he do it today?

Hon. R. Thorpe: You know, back in 1996 there actually was a

report prepared…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Thorpe: …called the British Columbia Inquiry

into Gasoline Prices . What was the conclusion of the government of that

time? "We opt for market forces."

But then in 1999 there was another report done, and that was a

report on gasoline prices in British Columbia. What did it conclude, Mr.

Speaker? It concluded that they opted for market forces with pricing.

Now, who were the senior aides to Premiers at that time? Yes, the

member for Vancouver-Kingsway and the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin. What has

changed today?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

M. Farnworth: What's changed is the price. What's changed

is the gouging of consumers. That's what's changed since the '90s, hon. Speaker.

That's what's changed.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat for a second.

Continue.

M. Farnworth: What's also changed is that even their

Liberal cousins in Ontario recognize there's a problem and want to know why

consumers are being gouged and paying higher prices.

This government hides behind "it's before the courts" on too many

issues. Well, they don't hide behind the court of public opinion on this one.

When will this government do the right thing, do what the public of this

province wants and hold an inquiry into why the public is being gouged on gas

prices?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Thorpe: Just in case the member over there gets

carried away, I do have some nitroglycerin here for him. He's getting himself

wound up over there.

We all know that it's a global industry. But you know, refinery

capacity is very, very important. What happened in British Columbia in the '90s?

Four refineries closed in British Columbia.

Interjections.

[ Page 7841 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. R. Thorpe: Now I think I hear the NDP arguing and

supporting refinery capacity increases in British Columbia. I think now I hear

the NDP calling for more oil and gas exploration in British Columbia.

Why doesn't the NDP stand up there and tell British Columbians

what they think of more exploration in British Columbia for oil and gas? Are you

for it, or are you against it?

[1425]

HOMEOWNER GRANTS FOR

LOW-INCOME SENIORS

M. Karagianis: I thought I heard the minister evoke my

name, so I thought I better get up and ask a question.

Back in February the Minister of Finance agreed to extend the

homeowner grant program to low-income homeowners whose residence appraised in at

more than $950,000 and that that would be effective in this tax year. Well, as

the….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Karagianis: Well, unfortunately, that turns out to be a

falsehood.

As the property tax deadline ticks closer and closer, after

repeated calls to the homeowner grant office, I've discovered that they have

still not determined what kind of criteria they are going to use to determine

who qualifies for these. In fact, the criteria will not be established for who

qualifies for a low income until June 15, less than two weeks before property

taxes are due.

My question is to the Minister of Finance: how can she allow this

process to drag on, leaving citizens — most of them low-income seniors — anxious

and uncertain about what they are going to pay in the way of property taxes? And

they won't know until mere days before those property taxes are due.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Taylor: Yes. In fact, it was a very important part

of this budget. We were looking at ways that we could help low-income seniors

with their housing costs. As I recall, the opposition did not support that.

However, we do. And what we said was that the supplement would be available to

low-income seniors.

We are working through the process of how we will do that. We have

to ensure that it matches. The model, frankly, that we're looking at is…. Those

who qualify for the MSP premium support is probably the same model that we can

use.

The first year through this will take some time. We are sending

information around and preparing documents that will be available not just on

the Web but to every person that we feel might be in this situation, to make

sure that they know how….

In this first year they will have to go through the process of

showing where they qualify, and we will get the money to them. The supplement

will be available to low-income seniors this year.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. R. Coleman: I have the honour to present the 2006

report of the Forest Appeals Commission.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call Committee of Supply. For the

information of members, in this chamber we will continue with the estimates of

the Ministry of Health and in Committee A the estimates of the Ministry of

Tourism, Sport and the Arts.

[1430]

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF HEALTH

(continued)

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

chair.

The committee met at 2:35 p.m.

On Vote 36: ministry operations, $12,819,670,000 (continued).

Hon. G. Abbott: I should complete the answer which I had

launched just prior to lunch but had not completed, in respect of Ridge Meadows

Hospital and the work that is being undertaken there. The member asked about

cost escalation, and previous to the break I had discussed the substantial

increase that had occurred in construction costs since 2002 in the province.

In terms of the increased cost, a portion of the increased cost

for the facility is related to an increase in project scope. The Ridge Meadows

Hospital emergency and ambulatory care project has expanded from 33,000 square

feet to 45,000 square feet, and as one might expect, that has produced a

substantial increase in cost.

As well, the municipal requirements and engineering analysis for

electrical and mechanical systems and so on have added cost to the project. But

those, particularly the project scope increase and the escalation that all

projects in the province have faced in respect to construction costs, account

for the increase in the cost of this Fraser Health facility.

I'm sure the member will be, like us, just as concerned about

escalation of construction costs. That's something that every project faces. I

suspect the member — he can advise me if he has a different view —

[ Page 7842 ]

would be very pleased about the increased scope of the project, because it

does make for a stronger and better Ridge Meadows Hospital emergency and

ambulatory care centre.

With that, I should also note that the opposition Health critic

asked earlier in these estimates what was involved in own-source revenues. The

principal components of own-source revenue would be investment income,

co-payment and room differential, non-resident fees, general fees and licences.

Those are the principal areas in which own-source revenues are obtained by

health authorities.

C. Wyse: I appreciate the answer that the minister was

giving me this morning when, unfortunately, I had to leave before he was able to

complete it all. I will pick up with his response. For the minister: I have some

questions around the Kamloops dispatch regional centre, so that he is advised.

I'm aware that the Ministry of Health has a report called the

Fitch report that they received in 2005, in which the examination is being made

among the three dispatch centres here in British Columbia. We are aware that

Kamloops dispatch centre, which services three-quarters of the province with a

quarter of its population, did suffer an incident on April 27 that compromised

its ability to provide services to the area.

Now, the information that I have is that the ambulance service and

Ministry of Health have once more decided to ignore the problems and

consequences of not having a backup dispatch system. From what I understand, the

Kamloops dispatch centre is to be moved back to its former location without any

significant improvements in equipment or infrastructure.

[1440]

The Fitch report clearly points out difficulties with the

equipment in the Kamloops dispatch station. Again, the information I have been

provided with is that this technology is so antiquated in the Kamloops dispatch

centre that an employee had to search their basement to find replacement parts

for the primary radio system. If the employee had not found the required part,

the entire dispatch radio system would have been rendered inoperative.

My question to the minister is: why will the Minister of Health

not take advantage of the anticipated move and immediately secure modern,

reliable and up-to-date equipment?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for his question. When

the unfortunate events occurred at the B.C. Ambulance Kamloops dispatch centre

and we had a serious sewage backup into the building, the building was

appropriately evacuated and moved on a temporary basis into the provincial

emergency program building adjacent to the dispatch centre in Kamloops.

We have now moved the dispatch centre into a longer-term but

nevertheless temporary facility which is part of the B.C. Ambulance Service

building in Kamloops. We did that so that we could undertake improvements to the

permanent dispatch centre at a time when there are not personnel in the

building. Once those improvements are completed, there will be an orderly

transfer back to the permanent dispatch centre, just as there was an orderly

move from the PEP centre over to the temporary accommodations which currently

house the dispatch centre.

The member made a number of, I think, incorrect and inappropriate

claims about the technology being antiquated, about insufficient investment and

that sort of thing, as I recall the member's words. I don't know on what basis

he would form that conclusion. The staff of the B.C. Ambulance Service certainly

don't see this as an antiquated or ineffective system.

[1445]

Despite the very difficult events around the moving out of the

dispatch centre in response to the environmental emergency that occurred, there

was not, to our knowledge, a single dropped call, a single inconvenience or a

compromising of patient care. I think all of the staff did a remarkable job in

managing an extraordinarily difficult situation. To me that speaks to both the

technology being capable of doing the job and, even more powerfully, also to the

contingency plans which B.C. Ambulance Service had in place to deal with

emergency situations just like that.

I'd like the member to clarify this for me, Madam Chair, because I

keep getting this impression from the comments he makes on radio news programs

and that sort of thing. I want him to correct me if I'm wrong here. I get the

sense from him that he wants the B.C. Ambulance Service to create a second full

dispatch centre with technology and everything in another building, precisely

duplicating what is in our original building. But he wants us to duplicate that

in another location so if something happens to the first building, we simply get

up and move over to the second one.

If that's what the member is saying around having a full backup,

then I want to hear it. I also want to hear from him, at the same time, what he

thinks it would cost to do that.

C. Wyse: Once more back to you, with all due respect. Maybe

in two years I may be sitting over there and be in a position to answer the

questions. My understanding is that this is my turn to get the information.

With all due respect, I want to return to the question that I do

not have an answer to yet, and that deals with information contained also in the

Fitch report that deals with the backup systems for the dispatch stations. It is

a report that had been tabled in November 2005. It points out that there are

serious questions about the equipment, particularly with Kamloops dispatch

station. I gave a story here that I've been given with regards to the

replacement.

The question once more that I have back to the minister: will his

ministry, along with the B.C. Ambulance Service, be taking an opportunity at

this time, as they relocate back into the situation in the Kamloops dispatch

station, to upgrade the dispatch centre, including the radio system and other

related matters? A very simple question.

[ Page 7843 ]

Hon. G. Abbott: I've already said we are upgrading the

dispatch station. We're doing that as a part of the work that is being

undertaken while we are in temporary quarters for BCAS in Kamloops. Further work

— the report the member references — is being undertaken on both the technology

side and the human resource side of that report. It's moving ahead

appropriately.

I continue to get the eerie feeling that the scenario outlined is

actually the one the member believes: that we should create a duplicate dispatch

centre in Kamloops that will sit empty but await some moment in the future when

it might be required. Again, if I'm wrong, I want the member to disabuse me of

that.

C. Wyse: The Fitch report provides a series of possible

options for addressing the total call-out for the three dispatch stations that

exist, which cover all of British Columbia. I am simply asking of the minister

what his ministry's plans are for dealing with the identified difficulties that

exist in the dispatch for all of British Columbia.

Once more: will the minister fund whatever emergency backup system

is determined in the Fitch report by his ministry for Vancouver, Kamloops and

Victoria?

[1450]

Hon. G. Abbott: The member again asks the question, "What

are you doing with the report? What are you doing about technology," and so on.

Again, entirely appropriately, the B.C. Ambulance Service is following through

on the report that was prepared in relation to both human resources and

technology.

I'll just note here that the major strategy is in progress. It's

called the NetCAD project, with a projected go-live date of January 2008 and a

targeted budget of $2.1 million for '07-08. There are additional key

technologies required to support effective dispatch decision-making. These

include items such as global positioning systems, automatic vehicle locating and

wireless mobile data terminals for the ambulances in high-volume urban centres.

An external consultant was retained to measure workload and

related staffing levels in each dispatch centre. Upon receiving that report,

BCAS management implemented an accelerated hiring and training cycle in an

effort to recover from the historical effects of attrition and begin moving

towards an industry standard staffing model. Net increases have occurred in the

Kamloops and Victoria centres that partially addressed their needs.

We are moving forward with the changes, which I gather that the

member was asking for, but it's unfortunate that he does appear to continue to

have the notion that we should duplicate a facility which doesn't need to be

duplicated. It would be rather like us saying: "There's a possibility that the

power will go out in Vancouver General Hospital. Hence we should have, sitting

empty in some other corner of Vancouver, another hospital just like Vancouver

General Hospital ready to go."

I mean, that's just not the way it works, and I wish sometimes the

members opposite — notwithstanding the fact that they have some delusions about

forming government in two years — would give the professionals in these

organizations some credit for having some idea of what they were doing. To

advance the notion that somehow we have to duplicate these fundamental resources

seems to me to be a preposterous one and quite an inappropriate use of public

funds.

Introductions by Members

A. Dix: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

A. Dix: I would like to introduce in the gallery today

several representatives of CUPE Local 873: John Strohmaier, president; Bronwyn

Barter, vice-president; David Deines, vice-president; and William "B.J." Chute,

director of public education. I ask everyone in the House to wish them a hearty

welcome.

Debate Continued

C. Trevena: I've got a couple of questions about ambulance

coverage. When I was last asking the minister questions, he wondered if I had

any solutions. I might have some solutions here.

The ambulance coverage in the north Island, where it's been

volunteer ambulance coverage…. They're going down to having no full-time

ambulance staff in the north Island — I'm talking north of Campbell River — from

this summer onwards. I would like to know from the minister what he would

suggest can be done to make sure that there is adequate coverage for the whole

communities of the north Island this summer.

[1455]

Hon. G. Abbott: The member can follow up on questions. I'm

not sure exactly what she means when she says that we don't have full-time

paramedics in the north end of the Island.

Both Port Hardy and Port McNeill are designated as rural ambulance

stations. As a consequence, they have paramedics on staff 24-7. They are on call

at $10 per hour except at those times when they are on call, at which they go to

the other rate. There's full 24-7 coverage in both of those stations.

We're not aware of any times at which the coverage is not full

and, in short, when it's been out of service. We're not aware of any

circumstances like that. The member can explain what she means by that. We just

don't understand what she means by that.

Further, the member should know that in fact in the case of Port

Hardy, we have had over a 19-percent improvement in response time from '04-05 to

'05-06 and for Port McNeill, an almost 18-percent improvement in response time

from '04-05 to '05-06.

The member may want to explain what exactly she's talking about,

because it sounds to me like the service is very good.

C. Trevena: I would be very happy to explain what I mean to

the minister. What I mean is that the

[ Page 7844 ]

ambulance service in the north Island, in the various locations — be it Alert

Bay, Port McNeill, Port Hardy, Port Alice or Zeballos — is running on

volunteers. They're running on people who are not doing this as a full-time job.

That is the situation. The one full-time paid staff who is still

operating out of Port Hardy has submitted a resignation, which leaves the whole

of the north Island relying on volunteers who are juggling what they're doing

for the ambulance service, to which they are committed, with other parts of

life. Whether they are working as loggers or in the aquaculture industry or

wherever else, it's a matter of trying to make sure that their other life

balances with the ambulance service.

The minister may be able to quote statistics on good response

times, and that's very heartening for the people of the north Island. But there

have been many times when one ambulance station is covering for another, where

McNeill is covering for Hardy or Hardy is covering for Zeballos, or Alert Bay is

trying to deal because there's nobody on Sointula.

[1500]

So it's trying to make sure that we do actually have coverage

across the north Island. This is where I would hope that the minister can

possibly give some creative solutions for the people of the north Island, so

that they know there will be continued good coverage for them.

Hon. G. Abbott: I'll look forward to hearing the creative

solution that the member apparently has but I don't think has offered up yet.

I'll look forward to that in her response.

Just perhaps a bit of background for the member, so that she

understands how these matters are constructed. The member says that the B.C.

Ambulance Service is staffed by volunteers at the north end of the Island. That

would be news, I think, to all of the paramedics up on the north end of the

Island. They are not volunteers.

I think that the member is perhaps confusing volunteers with the

period pre-2001 when in fact many of the paramedics did work on a volunteer

basis not only on the north Island but right across the province. Many volunteer

paramedics were not compensated for their time.

What we have now, for the member's edification, is an agreement

whereby we have 24-7 coverage. Stations — such as Port McNeill and Port Hardy —

that have a certain call volume over the course of the year are deemed rural

stations. As a consequence, paramedics are on call at the station at $10 per

hour. They are not volunteers. They are at the station on call on 12-hour

shifts, at $10 an hour, awaiting those occasions when they are called into

action, at which point there is a different full-time rate that kicks in.

The member, also, is probably not understanding the remote rate,

which is $2 per hour. That has been in place since 2001. Members may say: "Well,

that's not very much — $2 an hour." But it's $2 an hour to be on standby in

community; they don't need to be in the station. They can be on standby while

they are at their regular employment. While they're doing other things, they can

be on standby at $2 an hour.

I know the member may want to disparage that; I'm sure she will.

The fact of the matter is that $2 an hour compares really, really well to the

zero dollars and zero cents an hour that was offered up during the ten years

that the NDP was in power.

I'll look forward to hearing the member's comments and am still

looking forward to hearing her creative and constructive solution to these

matters.

C. Trevena: I think it's an issue of semantics. I describe

the paramedics who are working very hard on behalf of our communities as

volunteers, because they do have other jobs. The minister acknowledged that by

saying that when they're not at the station, not on duty and are wearing their

pagers, that they are maybe doing their regular employment.

I was also asking the minister for creative solutions, and

clearly, he has none. Maybe he's too tired after six years in government and

looking for an out.

I'd like to perhaps suggest to the minister that one of the issues

that he can be looking at — and this is a very serious suggestion — is working

with B.C. Ambulance Service to ensure that every effort is made to retain those

people who are recruited. People want to join the Ambulance Service. They want

to become paramedics. They really are enthusiastic about learning the skills,

participating in their communities and making sure that people are looked after

and are safe. I can't underestimate what people give up to do this.

Unfortunately, for many people, particularly in remote communities, that is made

much more difficult under the present structure whereby people who want to

become paramedics have to pay high fees for their own training.

[1505]

The call-out costs and other moneys that they receive when they

are then working is not enough to recompense the fees. On top of this, there is

the added hardship that many of the training courses are run at great distances

away from their homes. So they have to stay away, and they have to commit to

these courses for many weekends in sequence. People are having to, first, pay

for their training courses knowing that they'll never recoup the cost by the pay

they are getting as paramedics in the community. Secondly, they are then having

to pay the extra costs of living away from home while they're doing their

courses.

My creative solution that I would like the minister to consider is

that the costs of the courses are either reduced or provided for free and that

they are most certainly provided close to the paramedics' homes. I'd like to ask

the minister to see whether he has any solutions on how we can work on this

issue of recruitment and retention of paramedics.

Hon. G. Abbott: The issue of training, particularly

training for those who are in rural and remote areas, is a very important one.

The member may not have been a part of the discussion this morning that I had

with the member for Cariboo South. We had a considerable

[ Page 7845 ]

discussion about some of the regional initiatives which B.C. Ambulance

Service has in Queen Charlotte Islands, in northern B.C. and elsewhere — Nakusp,

another example, and the West Kootenays — to try to build some recruitment and

retention capacity in areas of the province that have historically been

challenging areas to find and retain paramedics.

Again, as we discussed this morning, this is not a new issue. This

was an issue five years ago; it was an issue ten years ago; it was an issue 20

years ago. In fact, we have very much strengthened the opportunity to improve in

this area with the implementation of rural and remote standby pay.

I know that the members may disagree with it, but I think what's

happened since 2001 in that regard has been a big step forward. We see it in

response times. We see it in stronger staffing in most stations. All of that's

very good. We also recognize, though, that we continue to have challenges in

respect of training. We'll continue to have challenges, because in a buoyant

economy there are going to be a lot of competitors for labour, and we need to

recognize that we need to support in different ways the opportunity for young or

other paramedics to get their training. We recognize particularly the challenges

of rural and remote areas in securing that training.

Among the initiatives we're aiming to undertake is to bring the

training closer to the paramedic recruits. We're doing that in different corners

of the province, trying to build that training capacity closer to home, because

it is an important part of this.

[1510]

We have also been working with CUPE around a bursary funding

program of $3 million, which we will be utilizing to try to improve the number

of young recruits, particularly young paramedic recruits, that we can support

through a bursary fund and help them get through the training. I think this is

generous, but it's also appropriate, because we do need to recruit young

paramedics into the system and, hopefully, equip ourselves for the continuing

growth in demand for these services.

Hon. L. Reid: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. L. Reid: I have the absolute pleasure of welcoming to

the gallery today students from the Jewish Day School, in my riding. Mr. Sachar

is their teacher, and they are joined by a group of very dedicated parents. We

in this place appreciate the parents who give their time and effort to bring

students to Victoria. This is your parliament. Thank you very much for coming.

Debate Continued

C. Trevena: Just one last question. In light of what the

minister has said and the efforts by B.C. Ambulance Service to ensure that

paramedics are recruited and trained closer to home, I would like to have the

assurance that when B.C. Ambulance Service is doing its training and its bursary

allocation, but particularly its training, the minister will work with B.C.

Ambulance to make sure it is happening in the north Island, not south of

Campbell River as has been the case in the past.

Hon. G. Abbott: We'll take the member's constructive

suggestion under advisement.

A. Dix: The minister clarified that the 43 additional

ambulances he talked about in the media this morning were a combination of

ambulance and support cars. Would he agree to provide for the opposition details

of where those incremental ambulances are deployed in British Columbia,

community by community, so that we can see where those ambulances are? Would

that be a reasonable suggestion or request?

Hon. G. Abbott: The actual total number is 46, and I do

have that detail here with me now. I can read this into the record if the member

would like.

Victoria, Campbell River, Victoria, Victoria, Parksville,

Victoria, Victoria, Vancouver, Vancouver, Vancouver, Vancouver, Sechelt, Surrey,

UBC, Squamish, Chilliwack, Lions Bay, Vancouver, Vancouver, Vancouver,

Vancouver, Whistler, Burnaby, Burnaby, Burnaby, Burnaby, three more Vancouvers,

Salmon Arm, Kamloops, Revelstoke, Williams Lake, Kamloops, Cranbrook, Trail,

Cranbrook, Prince George, Kamloops, Kamloops, Prince George, Prince George,

Terrace, Fort St. John, northern B.C., northern B.C.

A. Dix: I think that's one of the best declarations we've

heard today.

I want to ask the minister and his staff about their plans, in

this fiscal year that we're debating, for the B.C. Ambulance Service.

[1515]

In October the new executive officer, Mr. Doney, met with

representatives of Ambulance Paramedics. He suggested the potential for layoffs,

at least according to the Ambulance Paramedics, the potential transfer of some

ambulance services to B.C. NurseLine, and the offloading of some ambulance

services to the health authorities.

Can the minister enlighten the House as to what the plans are,

what the vision is for cuts or — I won't frame it in such a political way —

changes to the ambulance service of this type to deal with what everyone

acknowledges is a significant increase in call-outs and call volume that the

whole service is dealing with?

Did Mr. Doney in fact, in that meeting, suggest that thousands or

tens of thousands of calls could be transferred to B.C. NurseLine? How would he

imagine that could possibly happen, say, taking one example of someone picking

up the phone and calling and seeking assistance…? How would a dispatch worker

make the decision, when someone calls and asks for an ambulance, to have a

discussion with them as to the role of B.C. NurseLine? How would all that

happen, especially

[ Page 7846 ]

if you're talking about saving tens of thousands of calls?

Hon. G. Abbott: First of all, I want to begin by thanking

the opposition Health critic for acknowledging that there have been no cuts

here. I think it's entirely appropriate, as he framed it, that these are

changes, not cuts, and I thank him for acknowledging that there have been no

cuts.

That certainly is manifestly the case, given, as we talked about

earlier today, the very, very substantial increase we had seen over time — from

$176 million for the B.C. Ambulance Service to $283 million, I believe the

figure was, for '07-08. So he's absolutely right. There have not been cuts,

there have been changes, and I do appreciate him so frankly and boldly

acknowledging that fact. I thank him for that.

In terms of the vision here, I think the member got some sense

this morning, as we discussed the Emergency Health Services Commission bill, of

what we're attempting to do in terms of the consolidation of those services. By

having the services of B.C. Bedline, B.C. NurseLine and dispatch all drawn

together, in fact, we can ensure that patients receive the appropriate kind of

service that they need.

For example, we would reckon with calls to 911 that involve

patients with very low acuity, very low care needs, that they are calling in

those 10 percent or 11 percent of cases with issues that are really far more

appropriately dealt with by advice from a registered nurse at B.C. NurseLine

than they would be by having an ambulance dispatched to meet their needs.

[1520]

The opposition Health critic is being remarkably pragmatic here

today, so I'm even going to test his pragmatism a little bit more here. I'm sure

he would want, just as I want and as B.C. Ambulance Service wants, to ensure

that we devote all of the available resources of B.C. Ambulance Service and the

hundreds of paramedics that serve the B.C. Ambulance Service, that we focus our

energies on the patients that need that level of care.

If we can take 10 percent or 11 percent of that stream that would

be better served in their care needs by a registered nurse at B.C. NurseLine, it

frees up resources to ensure that those who need those resources get them most

appropriately.

A. Dix: Well, let's explore this proposal — because of

course it was suggested that there would be tens of thousands of calls moved off

the manned B.C. Ambulance Service to the NurseLine.

The minister may want to explain how this happens, how this debate

will happen between someone calling 911…. Hon. Minister, this debate will happen

among someone making that call, the dispatcher and the various services. It

seems to me that one of the things about the Ambulance Service is that you need

it when you need it, and that the ambulance paramedics provide an extraordinary

service to British Columbians.

Now I want to just put this in context, because the minister says:

"We're not talking about cuts." Well, I'll list off the cuts, just so he knows.

Full-time paramedics cut in 17 communities — Sooke, Port McNeill, Qualicum,

Chemainus, Castlegar, Grand Forks, Invermere, Fernie, Ashcroft, Chase,

Revelstoke, Winfield, Oliver, Osoyoos, Princeton, Merritt and Armstrong. Those

are cuts. We could talk about other cuts.

The minister this morning, when I raised the issues raised by

ambulance paramedics themselves, was dismissive. He implied that the only reason

that ambulance paramedics are raising issues in this province is because of

their collective bargaining. So the ambulance paramedics are subjected to the

same dismissive attitude as every other group of workers in the health care

system.

In fact, here's what Ambulance Paramedics of B.C. say. Here's what

they say to the minister. And this isn't collective bargaining. I think that

when the ambulance paramedics go out on a call, they're the ones dealing with

injured people. When they're late for a call, they're the people that deal with

the situation. Here's what their representatives, and they, say.

They say that British Columbia is going in the wrong direction.

They say that the response-time target is getting worse. They say that ambulance

paramedics are being asked to respond to more emergency calls with fewer

resources. That's what they say, hon. Minister.

I think it's fair to say — and you know, the minister does this

some of the time — that if I had to choose between the experience of ambulance

paramedics themselves and the experience of the hon. Minister of Health, I would

choose the ambulance paramedics every time, hon. Chair. When they talk about

cuts, when they talk about having to do more with less, I think we should take

what they say seriously because they're the ones who have to deal with people in

need.

I want to ask the minister about these various proposals and, for

example, in terms of the transfer work done by ambulance paramedics, whether

there are plans at this time to privatize any of the work currently done by

ambulance paramedics.

Hon. G. Abbott: The member said many things there, and I'll

try to respond to a few of them. He mentioned, for example, tens of thousands of

calls that would be diverted off to B.C. NurseLine. You know, when you look at

10 percent or 11 percent of 300,000 calls, that's certainly like 30,000 calls.

Is the member saying that he would rather, where someone needs some advice on

chronic disease management, that they should utilize an ambulance and go to the

emergency room rather than benefiting from the knowledge and experience of a

registered nurse at B.C. NurseLine?

[1525]

I would think that the hon. member would be saying, "Yeah,

absolutely," because he goes on then, in the submission he made in the last

round, to say: "You need an ambulance when you need it."

Well, exactly. So would we want to have an ambulance preoccupied

with a low-acuity call? Again, we

[ Page 7847 ]

would reckon that to be around 10 or 11 percent of the stream. Would the

member want an ambulance to be tied up in a low-acuity call where it's not

needed to be tied up when someone who has had a cardiac arrest or a serious head

trauma in an automobile accident really needs that ambulance? What B.C.

Ambulance Service is intending to do is as commonsensical as that.

There is absolutely nothing nefarious about this. There is

absolutely nothing in this that threatens any paramedic in this province. I can

tell you definitively — as someone who has learned more than I probably care to

about health delivery over the last couple of years — over the next ten, 20 and

30 years there's going to be more work than we can imagine in the health care

delivery system, including on the paramedic side. No one need feel threatened by

this change.

In fact, everyone should salute this change. It is totally

appropriate. Any shift in transitioning here will only be done with careful,

clinical, medical oversight and scrutiny. This is exactly what should be done.

Further — and I can't tell you, Madam Chair, how disappointed I am

by this…. After I saluted the member for his pragmatism in recognizing that a

62-percent increase in a budget could not possibly be construed as a cut, he

turns around and then says: "Oh, but then there are all kinds of cuts."

I suppose only a New Democrat could identify a 62-percent budget

increase from $176 million to $283 million as a cut. Only a New Democrat….

Interjection.

Hon. G. Abbott: Yes. The Transportation Minister…. I agree

with him completely. Only a New Democrat could identify that as a cut, and I

think — and I know that the Minister of Transportation agrees with me on this —

only a member of the New Democratic Party would say that a positive, beneficial,

constructive change was a bad thing. Because it was change, and of course,

reflexively, they seem to oppose any kind of change in any system whether it's

beneficial or otherwise.

The fact of the matter is we are moving ahead with very

appropriate changes, including — and we'll address the latter point of the

Health critic here — by looking at a new partnership with health authorities

around the transfer of patients between facilities within health authorities.

This is an important issue, and I know that the member will ask more questions

about it. We'll look forward to hearing those and talking more about it.

Historically, we have seen a lot of transfers by B.C. Ambulance

between health facilities. The one exception to those transfers has been on

Vancouver Island, where for some years, I think — and the staff can correct me

on this — there have been some private transfers of patients between health

facilities. In the balance of the province all of those transfers have been

undertaken by the B.C. Ambulance Service.

It may well be that they continue to be undertaken by B.C.

Ambulance Service, but what we are saying to the health authorities is: "We're

going to work in partnership with you. We're going to dedicate the budget for

transfers. We're going to turn it over to you, and we're going to get you to

manage the flow of the interfacility transfers of patients in your health

authorities."

We believe that this is an excellent step forward, both in terms

of managing costs and in terms of better patient care. I think it's consistent

with both.

A. Dix: It's like when the minister imposes P3s on the

Fraser Health Authority and on the Interior Health Authority, talks about

consultation and so on.

[1530]

The reality is, from what the minister just said, that the fears

of ambulance paramedics are well-founded — that, in fact, they will be the

target just like other workers have consistently been the target of this

government's efforts to privatize. They have every reason to fear that. That's

what the minister has just confirmed. Unfortunately, it's one of those things.

The minister, though, never responded to what I said. I've met

with many ambulance paramedics — not just people who are activists and active in

the union, but just ambulance paramedics — who tell me, whether they're in rural

and remote, whether they're in urban areas, that their jobs are more and more

difficult, and more and more, there are greater and greater challenges.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

They have more and more calls they have to deal with and more

difficult circumstances than ever before. The minister consistently says: "Well,

that's just collective bargaining." They're just collective bargaining. Their

heartfelt concerns, their proposals, their suggestions are not worthy because he

thinks that they're trying to get, I guess, more money or something. That's the

suggestion — that their rejection of the suggestions that have been made to them

in many of these areas by the B.C. Ambulance Service is just about collective

bargaining.

Doesn't he agree with me that ambulance paramedics know a little

bit about their work, know a little bit about the circumstances they work in? He

must know, and he must have heard from ambulance paramedics in British Columbia

at some point, about their concerns about their present situation. Is he only

going to dismiss those concerns today?

Hon. G. Abbott: The member is dead wrong, as is frequently

the case. He is attributing statements to me that I have never made. Those

assertions he made are absolutely false. I have a world of respect for

paramedics in this province. They do a great job. They work tirelessly and

constructively to provide a public service in this province. I am delighted on

every occasion that I have the opportunity to meet with paramedics and their

leadership. I certainly, on every occasion, look forward to doing that.

The member, I'm afraid, is spouting a whole lot of nonsense in

that area. He's the one that wants to raise collective bargaining issues in

here, not me. I'm happy at any point to hear submissions from anyone on how

[ Page 7848 ]

to improve the Ambulance Service, but collective bargaining discussions would

not be undertaken in this chamber.

A. Dix: I'm delighted about that. I have just a couple of

more detailed questions to the minister. I'm glad that the minister, who said

this morning when I raised those concerns that it was about collective

bargaining, says this afternoon that he has great respect for ambulance

paramedics and their representatives. That's good news.

Hopefully, they will be full partners. I ask the minister:

will they be full partners going forward in any change he proposes to make in

the B.C. Ambulance Service?

Hon. G. Abbott: The member would have to tell me what he

means by full partners, hon. Chair.

A. Dix: That means fully consulted on any changes before

they're announced and finalized publicly.

Hon. G. Abbott: Absolutely they'll be consulted. We have a

provincial joint labour-management committee that deals with just such issues.

A. Dix: There, we talked about collective bargaining, but

it's part of the budget of the Ministry of Health, of the B.C. Ambulance

Service. How is that labour management committee functioning?

Hon. G. Abbott: I understand that the relationships have

been strained at points, but everyone, I'm sure, hopes to be working more

constructively in the future.

A. Dix: Perhaps the ministry could be more specific about

those strains. Have those strains involved staff budgeted by the Ministry of

Health and paid for out of his budget, say, going to the labour board?

[1535]

Hon. G. Abbott: Yes, I understand that part of the issue of

ensuring that the collective bargaining agreement was being respected involved a

visit to the Labour Relations Board.

A. Dix: We're making extraordinary progress here. I just

had a couple other technical questions for the minister. I'd like to ask how he

thinks, because response times are a key question….

Having a standard way of measuring response times is extremely

useful, I think, to everyone involved. It allows us to compare between periods

and to compare how the government is doing in terms of response times in urban

areas — apparently worse than the 1990s.

Let me ask the minister this. Shouldn't the time from the 911 call

to the time the paramedic arrives at the patient's side…? Shouldn't that be the

measure of response time?

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm not sure what the member is exactly

looking at here. The response time is from when the call is received from

dispatch to the time that the crew arrives on scene.

A. Dix: I guess the question is whether a more accurate

reading of response time would include the time it takes for the call to come in

and be processed and sent and dispatched. That's the question in terms of

measuring response time. How do you address extra time at the front end and

extra time at the back end? Are we measuring response time?

I'm looking for information. Mr. Platteel has worked here in the

service for a very long time. In terms of the measurement of response time, is

our measurement consistent with other jurisdictions?

[1540]

Hon. G. Abbott: Again, I'm sure the member is leading to

some point here, but there are different ways this is measured in different

parts of the world. I understand that Great Britain has a different way of

looking at it. I'm sure some provinces have different ways of looking at it.

The way we look at it in British Columbia is from the time the

call is received to the time the crew gets on scene. But what we are going to

increasingly focus on in terms of response time is response time to those most

urgent cases — i.e., cardiac arrest and that sort of thing, where minutes and

seconds can make a tremendous amount of difference.

Again, we talked about this, this morning. The average response

time for urgent calls on the lower mainland is generally pretty stable at just

under nine minutes. We get to those urgent calls 90 percent of the time in less

than those nine minutes. So that's where we need to refocus attention — on the

most urgent calls.

A. Dix: The minister just said they get to 90 percent of

the calls in less than nine minutes. How is that possible, given what he said

about the statistic?

Hon. G. Abbott: That is our goal. Let me clarify: that is

our goal.

A. Dix: The reality is that it's less than 70 percent,

which is, I guess, not as good.

I just want to say to the minister with respect to NurseLine that

I think it's frequently the case that people blame emergency room problems on

the people that come to emergency rooms. The suggestion that when people call

911 — when they're looking for a nurse or might be able to get help with

NurseLine — they are misinformed, or that people dial 911 frivolously, seems to

me to be inconsistent with the facts.

I say this with the greatest of respect. I support NurseLine. I

think it's a great idea. But the question is…. Surely people who want to call

NurseLine can find a way to call NurseLine, and the people who call 911

shouldn't have to debate — shouldn't have to debate about whether they get an

ambulance.

My question is how, when you talk about transferring 30,000 calls

away from B.C. Ambulance Service,

[ Page 7849 ]

away from ambulance paramedics to NurseLine, that process will work, because

surely the process at the intake point will increase delays as people try and

make those judgments based on a discussion they have. If we're talking about

urgent need, if we're talking about a desire to get there in nine minutes….

I'm just asking the minister how that will work, because we're not

talking about people who call NurseLine. We want people who need NurseLine to

call NurseLine. But when people call for an ambulance, how is that process going

to work? How are you going to save 30,000 calls? That's the question. I think

it's a reasonable question, and it's a proposal that has come forward.

I'm just asking the minister, because Mr. Doney has suggested that

that's a thing the service may want to do, and I think that's worthy of

interest. I just want to understand how they see that happening.

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm glad the member feels it's worthy of

interest. I think it makes all the sense in the world that if we have 10 percent

or 11 percent of the calls that are of low acuity — and based on appropriate

clinical and medical advice, clearly are low acuity — where the patient would

benefit first and foremost from having an opportunity to discuss with a

registered nurse at NurseLine the condition they have versus calling out an

ambulance, clearly that makes all the sense in the world, and I'm glad the

member thinks it's at least worthy for discussion.

[1545]

Let's be clear about this point. When we're talking about response

time, we're talking about urban response times in this case. The average

response time for urgent calls in the lower mainland was eight minutes and 54

seconds in 2005-2006. It was eight minutes, 35 seconds in 2004-2005. It was

eight minutes, 53 seconds in 2003-2004.

Do we want to improve on that? We spent an hour this morning

talking about it, and I said 15 times in 15 different ways: "Of course we do."

We are going to look at different ways of improving that response time.

Again, sometimes I get the sense from this member and his

colleagues that you can improve response times, and you can improve service, but

never actually make any changes at all to those services. To me, this

partnership with NurseLine makes all the sense in the world. I've told the

member previously that that will be undertaken in a methodical and careful way

with the best clinical and medical advice on how to proceed with it, and that is

what we're going to do.

If the member is going to just reflexively oppose every change,

then I suppose that's fair enough. That's his right to do so. But I think we

have a responsibility as a government to ensure that we maximize patient service

and we maximize the value of those now 283 million taxpayer dollars that we are

devoting to this service.

A. Dix: I know that the minister's view of consultation is

talking to his senior staff. We're asking questions here. It's reasonable to ask

questions. I just asked the minister what they have in mind.

I have an issue, and I call 911 — I would like the minister,

because this proposal has been made — and I say: "I need an ambulance to help

someone here at the scene. I have come upon a scene, and we need an ambulance."

How does that process…? How does that debate happen? How does that debate

between myself and the dispatcher not, in fact, delay the situation? How do you

impart that information?

It's especially true, because…. I don't know about the minister. I

haven't called 911 that many times in my life, and I suspect that most members

of the House and most people in British Columbia haven't either. So how does

that happen? That's the question that I'm asking.

I understand that we want people to call NurseLine. It's

fantastic. We want people who need NurseLine to call NurseLine. I'm talking

about those thousands and hundreds of thousands of calls that are coming in to

the B.C. Ambulance Service through various dispatchers. That's all. I'm asking

how he sees that process going.

Hon. G. Abbott: We manage those through a set of highly

trained, highly skilled dispatchers who ask the appropriate questions according

to a protocol which is described as the advanced medical priority system. They

would deal with each case on its own circumstance and arrive at appropriate

conclusions about what would prompt dispatch or what might prompt other

responses.

A. Dix: I'd just like to ask the minister how many

paramedic vacancies there currently are in British Columbia of more than six

months.

Hon. G. Abbott: Just to close the loop on the previous

point, it should be noted that B.C. NurseLine may in some instances, where they

feel the acuity of the patient is appropriate, also move the call to dispatch

for the B.C. Ambulance Service, so it's going to work both ways through the

Emergency Health Services Commission. I think it speaks to the strength of

having that partnership involved.

The member asked how many vacancies we have. I think 24 in rural

stations at this point.

[1550]

A. Dix: At this point I just say that I think one of the

challenges, really one of the reasons — I'll just conclude with this to the

minister — it's so important that ambulance paramedics and dispatchers be

involved in this process is that inevitably, if there's an institutional

pressure to transfer calls, that is going to put pressure on individual

decisions made by individual dispatchers.

When the pressure comes and when the targets are set, that can

have a real impact on them, both on their quality of work, their ability to do

their jobs and the real pressure of these jobs. I think everybody would

acknowledge that these jobs at times have real and profound pressures.

I think what it underlines is the need for the B.C. Ambulance

Service to build and rebuild a strong and better relationship with ambulance

paramedics and

[ Page 7850 ]

those that represent them. That's all I would say to the minister.

With that, my friend from Surrey–Panorama Ridge has a few

questions on the next topic for the minister, and I'll give the floor to him,

unless the minister would like to respond.

Hon. G. Abbott: No, I'd just thank the member for his

comments. As we have done so many times during these estimates, I agree strongly

with his last statement. We look forward to B.C. Ambulance Service and CUPE

Local 873, representing the paramedics, building a better relationship. That is

certainly what I'd like to see, and I'm glad the member shares that view.

J. Brar: Let's change the topic and maybe a brief,

refreshing visit to the city of Surrey….

The Fraser Health Authority submitted a report called Building

for the Future: Surrey Health Services Capacity Initiative. That report was

made available to the minister in October '05. The report made a number of

recommendations, short-term and long-term.

One of the actions recommended on page 17 of that report, which is

very important…. I would like to quote from the report. It says:

"The renovations for our critical care, medical beds and

renal stations will be implemented in order of priority to acquire additional

acute beds and as the transfer of out-patient services occur. The goal is to

ensure that there's enough capacity in all areas of the hospital until the new

ambulatory care facility and emergency room can be built and a long-term acute

bed strategy can be implemented.

"Most of the renovation to Surrey Memorial Hospital

can begin immediately and will result in the addition of approximately 62 acute

beds and five critical care beds by the end of '07."

We are in the middle of '07, so I would like to ask the

minister to provide some update as to where we are in terms of that action at

this point in time.

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for his question. Just

so the member is clear, in terms of the acute care capacity initiative, that was

received in draft form from the Fraser Health Authority in late January of 2007.

We have been conducting a ministerial review of the draft acute care capacity

initiative report since the receipt of it in late January, and that review is

proceeding.

In terms of the content of the ACCI, I think that Fraser Health —

its leadership, its planners and its board — have all done an exceptional job in

terms of the work around the acute care capacity initiative. What they set out

to do was to look at the pressures on the acute care side that would be present

in Fraser Health Authority between the present time and 2020 — now some 13 years

out from today. I think they did a very good job.

[1555]

Of course, the acute care capacity is just one part of the

equation in terms of health care, and that's rightly recognized, I think, by

Fraser Health. The residential care capacity is a very important thing, and I'm

really, really proud that Fraser Health Authority has added some incremental

1,000 residential care and assisted-living beds in the past two or three years.

That's a huge achievement, a huge step forward in terms of meeting what would

otherwise be another pressure on acute care.

I'm very proud, as well, of the hundreds of community mental

health beds that have been added in the Fraser Health Authority. It's another

area where they have done remarkably well.

The other piece that really needs to be developed in the years

ahead as we prepare to meet that very powerful growth in population that we're

seeing in Fraser Health and the aging demographic that Fraser Health shares with

pretty much all other areas of the province towards an older population and also

the burden of chronic disease which emerges as strongly in Fraser Health, if

perhaps more strongly, than in other health authorities….

Those challenges are quite rightly identified as reasons why we

can expect an incremental growth between now and 2020 in acute care. So that's

very good work, I think, that's been done by Fraser Health. It is work that is

being reviewed by the ministry now.

I'd also say — and hopefully, the member has an opportunity to pay

attention to me…. I'd also want to advise the member that in terms of acute care

capacity, there are three major projects that have been undertaken in Fraser

Health in recent years that do have a bearing on the acute care capacity for the

Fraser.

The first project is the Abbotsford hospital and cancer care

centre. That is a $355-million project — a huge project. Anyone driving down

Highway 1 recently would see just how huge a project that is. There will be

incremental acute care beds coming with that new facility, as well, of course,

as cancer care for the east end of the Fraser Valley that hasn't existed before.

It's a remarkable project, on time and on budget. I'm very proud of the work

that's being done there as well.

I should note that Abbotsford was a project that our government

proceeded with very early in its term after a decade of the previous NDP

government promising yet never delivering on that Abbotsford hospital and cancer

care centre. I'm proud that our government grabbed that project, and we've got

it well underway, and we look forward to it being completed on time and on

budget.

Another promise we fulfilled, which again was the object of some

neglect by the former government in the 1990s, was the expansion and remediation

of Surrey Memorial Hospital. What we will be seeing with the investment of

approximately $200 million in Surrey Memorial Hospital will be the creation of a

huge out-patient hospital adjacent to Surrey Memorial Hospital. We will be

seeing the tripling of the emergency room at Surrey Memorial Hospital, again

long overdue and much warranted, particularly given the neglect that occurred

during the 1990s. But part of that project, and it ties in, I think, nicely with

the residential care piece that I described earlier…. We will be seeing some

additional acute care capacity freed up at Surrey Memorial Hospital as part of

that project as well.

[ Page 7851 ]

Just a third note in terms of the immediate future, we will also

see added acute care capacity at Peace Arch Hospital in White Rock as well. So

all of those things…. I see the member smiling and nodding his head. I clearly

have made his day here today. I can't believe how many members of the opposition

I have made happy. I'm starting to feel kind of spooked by this. I keep advising

them of all the good news that is happening here in Fraser Health Authority.

[1600]

I think that some of my colleagues are getting a bit jealous. It

seems that I'm bringing smiles to the faces of far too many opposition members

in this House, and I suppose we can't blame them. They've watched their own

government for a decade let a lot of these facilities fall into neglect. Thank

goodness that we have turned it around in British Columbia with these new health

facilities.

There will be incremental capacity from those three projects.

That's not going to be the end of it, obviously.

Surrey, I think, is the fastest-growing city in Canada. The member

may correct me if I'm wrong. It's certainly one of the fastest-growing cities in

Canada. Fraser Health is the fastest-growing of all of our health authorities.

We know we're going to have to build on that three-quarters of a billion dollars

that we — our government — have invested to date in Fraser Health. And we look

forward to more projects in the future that will strengthen even further our

capacity in acute care, residential care, assisted living, community mental

health and primary care.

J. Brar: I hope one day we will have some rules about the

time of the estimates debate as well.

I want to say that this minister can only see in the past but not

in the future. I got a big lecture here but not the answer to the question. I

asked a very specific question about his own report, which he approved.

I would like to ask once again, very simply…. The report of his

own government came out — and I have a copy of the report — on October 31, 2005,

not '07. This is about a year-and-a-half-old report. The question is — on page

17 of this report, the recommendation I mentioned before: how many new acute

beds and critical care beds have been added as of today?

Hon. G. Abbott: Neither I nor my staff is familiar with the

government document to which he refers. If the member could be more specific

about what B.C. government document he's referring to, I'd be grateful.

J. Brar: This is a report I have from the Fraser Health

Authority. This report was made available to this minister on October 31, 2005.

Subsequently the minister went to Surrey to announce this report and also

indicated, basically, acceptance of all the recommendations of this report.

I would like to repeat once again, if the minister can provide me

with the answer…. On page 17 of this report it says that most of the renovation

of Surrey Memorial Hospital can begin immediately and will result in the

addition of approximately 62 acute beds and five critical care beds by the end

of '07. We are in the middle of '07. I am asking the minister: what is the

progress made as of today?

Hon. G. Abbott: Again, we're hypothesizing here that the

report the member is referring to is an annual planning report that health

authorities, including Fraser Health, provide to the government. I don't know

whether that's correct or not. We don't have the document in front of us that,

apparently, the member does.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

Every health authority has ongoing planning every year. Obviously,

they try to make the best, most rational use of the resources that are allocated

to them — those billions of dollars every year that go to the health authorities

for both operations and capital. They attempt to make the best use of them.

[1605]

I've talked about Abbotsford. I think we anticipate that there'll

be 60 or 70 or thereabouts incremental beds from Abbotsford when it opens in

'08, comparable to 72, and 66 at Surrey Memorial. There will be some incremental

additions at Peace Arch.

Of course, planning is not something that we do one day and then

stop doing the next day. Planning is something that is evolutionary. It is

ongoing. We are constantly looking at the challenges presented. We're constantly

looking at demographic changes. We're constantly looking at population changes

and trying to appropriately adjust to meet those changes.

If the member is saying that the government hasn't made any

investments in Fraser Health, he's dead wrong. I'll give him a list as long as

my arm of projects that have been undertaken in Fraser Health, if that's his

wish. We've made fabulous investments, totalling up to about three-quarters of a

billion dollars, in Fraser Health.

I'm not sure what point exactly the member is trying to get at.

Presumably, he is trying to take some abstract quantity out of the air and say:

"Holy cow. Got ya." But it ain't working.

You can't dismiss the projects like Surrey Memorial Hospital. You

can't dismiss projects like Abbottsford. You can't dismiss the 1,000 residential

care and assisted-living units that have been added in Fraser Health. You can't

discount the three-quarters of a billion dollars in capital investment that's

been made in Fraser Health. That would be absurd, and I hope that's not what the

member is attempting to do here.

Certainly, I can pull out from my file here a very long list of

excellent projects across Fraser Health that we're remarkably proud of. The

member can try to clarify what it is he's looking for.

J. Brar: It's very surprising for me that the minister

doesn't recognize the report which he received himself. Let me remind the

minister that during the middle of the last election the Premier went to Surrey

to make an announcement, which was fast-tracking the solution for Surrey health

care. During the middle of the

[ Page 7852 ]

election the Premier asked the Fraser Health Authority to put together a

report. That report I have a copy of here. That report was submitted to the

Minister of Health for British Columbia on October 31, 2005. Subsequent to that,

the minister went to Surrey and said to people that he accepted the report.

I also have a copy of the press release the minister issued that

day to the people of Surrey, saying that this report makes good recommendations.

One of the recommendations in this report was, which I mentioned, building 62

new acute care beds.

This is my third question. The minister has not the responded to

my question, basically. I would take it that the minister actually has added no

beds at this point in time, as far as the recommendation of this report is

concerned.

I would move on to the next question. On page 17 again — if the

minister needs a copy of page 17, I will hand over a copy to the minister; if

you can pass it on — the recommendation was made, and I would like to quote

again: "The construction of the new ambulatory care facility would start in '07,

with the projected completion date in '09."

Subsequent to this report the minister went to Surrey on December

5, 2005, and made the announcement that the minister actually accepted the

recommendation and was going to act on that. Subsequent to that, the Premier of

the province went to Surrey again, in May '06, to make a second big announcement

that they are going to continue working on the ambulatory care facility and that

the Premier will finish the project, as recommended in this report, in '09.

Subsequent to that, the Minister of Health presented a report in

this House on March 20, 2007. According to that report, the completion of the

construction of the ambulatory care facility has been moved from '09 to 2010.

[1610]

I would like to ask the minister: what are the reasons, what is

the rationale to postpone — delay — the construction of the ambulatory care

facility from '09 to 2010?

Hon. G. Abbott: Madam Chair, you will recall with great

clarity, I'm sure, that we canvassed this subject at some length yesterday with

the member for Surrey-Newton. We canvassed this subject fully. I explained to

the member at that time all of the issues around this and asked him why it was —

when at long last, after a decade's neglect by the former government — that they

were saying: "Thanks for the new Porsche in my carport, but I really don't

appreciate the fact that it was a day late."

It's exactly that kind of logic that is propelling these, I think,

quite remarkable questions — the possibility that it could be early 2010 versus

late 2009, that somehow they should now begin to disparage the $200 million

investment that we're making in the province. That's absurd. The only delay that

we know about was the ten-year delay between 1991 and 2001. The member can

follow up on that more if he wishes.

But I want to note this, and this goes to the member's earlier

question. On December 5, 2005, government endorsed the recommendations contained

in Fraser Health Authority's Surrey Health Services Capacity Initiative

final report. Key recommendations of the report were to establish a new

out-patient hospital to provide out-patient care; to establish a new primary

care clinic; to build a new state-of-the-art emergency — i.e., tripling the

emergency facility; to establish a new perinatal care facility; to establish new

residential care facilities; and to renovate reclaimed space at Surrey Memorial

Hospital.

That is what the Fraser Health Authority's Surrey health services

capacity initiative was all about, and we have done or are doing all of those

things. It is remarkable what we have done in Fraser Health, and there is so

much to be proud of.

I mentioned the Abbotsford project, but in Burnaby there's $2

million on Burnaby Hospital emergency triage and waiting room renovations; in

Chilliwack, $3½ million on hospice beds and on the hospital itself; close to $6

million in Coquitlam on Cottonwood Lodge; over $6 million on Delta Hospital

redevelopment; over $6 million, almost $6½ million, on Fraser Canyon Hospital;

Fraser Hope Lodge redevelopment; Langley, the acute tower upgrade, $1½ million;

Maple Ridge, the Ridge Meadows Hospital emergency department, ambulatory care

extension, close to $20 million — $19.41 million there; and on and on.

I do thank the member for asking his important question and

reminding me that we have fulfilled our commitments, in stark contrast to that

government that was here in British Columbia between 1991 and 2001.

J. Brar: Once again I got a big lecture on the history but

not the future. Again, why has the construction of the ambulatory facility been

delayed for one year? We did not get any answer from the minister.

I would challenge the minister to tell the people of Surrey: why

have you delayed the construction of the ambulatory care facility which you

promised? Subsequently the Premier of the province went to Surrey to promise

that, and the Fraser Health Authority promised the people of Surrey. That hasn't

been done.

I would like to say this to the Minister of Health as well. This

government has been in power…. This is the second term, and as to the promise

this government made to the people of Surrey at the beginning of the first term

— that they would provide the best health care when and where you needed it —

nothing was done in Surrey.

In the second term, this government promised a new hospital. The

promise is that they're not going to build anything until after the next

election. That is what you have done; that's what your government has done.

[1615]

Let me remind you also as to what the NDP has done. The minister

has said in newspapers in the past that the NDP has done nothing. Let me tell

you, Minister, if you know the history…. You need to know the history

completely, not selective history as you described it to the newspaper.

During the NDP time, the new south wing was built, and that wing

is 30,000 square metres. It's three

[ Page 7853 ]

levels including parking. In that wing it has hospital housing for new

children, an extended family birthing unit, an extended special care nursery,

ten new upgrading rooms, two surgical in-patient units, 42 beds and a new

intensive care unit.

The list goes on. I can read all that. Your government has not

given us even one 2-by-4 as of today. That is the record of your government. I

don't know why you stand up and keep saying that you have done more than that. I

would like to ask you another question.

The Chair: Member, through the Chair.

J. Brar: Sorry. To the minister: the minister did not give

me the answer to my previous two questions as to whether 62 beds, as per the

recommendation in this report, have been built or not. There is no answer, so I

will take it that no action has been taken on that one.

I have asked the minister why he delayed on the ambulatory care

facility for one year. I did not get the answer, so I will take it that the

minister does not want to respond to the people of Surrey.

My next question. On page 19 of the report, there were three

options given to the minister when it came to choosing a location for the new

ambulatory care facility. Option 1 was an ambulatory care facility on the Surrey

Memorial Hospital site. Option 2 was a facility adjacent to Surrey Memorial.

Option 3 was a facility away from Surrey Memorial Hospital. Can the minister

explain why the minister chose option 1?

Hon. G. Abbott: First off, the member is absolutely wrong.

He suggested that there was a one-year delay in this project. He is wrong; that

is false.

At this point there may be a delay of perhaps three or four months

from late 2009, possibly to early 2010. The fact of the matter is that the three

or four months may well get made up in the construction. The member, as is

typical of folks on that side, is fearmongering in a reckless way about this,

suggesting that somehow the project is diminished because it may be three months

later.

If the member is opposed to the project, he should just say so.

Interjection.

Hon. G. Abbott: He is saying yes. You are opposed to the

project? If you're opposed to the project, you should get up and say it. If you

want this project to be terminated because you think that three months' delay is

totally inappropriate, then you should let the people of Surrey know so that you

can be held to account for that, if you wish to do that.

The delay is a very modest one. It is not in any way a one-year

delay, and the member should know that. Further, the 62 beds that are mentioned

in the planning initiative report…. We expect those 62 are going to be in place

by the end of 2007.

Further, in terms of the location of the site, a lot of thought

went into the planning and determination of where the out-patient hospital would

be located. The out-patient hospital, as I think the member knows — others may

not — is going to be located on a 5.8-acre site on the corner of 140th Street

and the Fraser Highway.

Construction is expected to begin in '08. We've been talking about

when it's likely to be concluded. The Fraser Health Authority chose the Green

Timbers location because it's only about three-quarters of a kilometre from

Surrey Memorial Hospital. It offers easy access for patients by road and public

transportation, while also allowing for future opportunities for growth.

[1620]

The site is cost-effective, because we're going to have

above-ground parking available there. It makes a ton of sense to go there. To

add underground parking at the existing Surrey Memorial site would have been

prohibitively expensive. I shouldn't assume this, but I would hope that the

member might agree that we are far better off putting resources into patient

care facilities than we are putting them into underground parking.

J. Brar: I have one more simple question, and I hope for a

simple answer for that.

When will the request-for-qualifications process begin to

short-list the best proponent for the ambulatory care facility?

Hon. G. Abbott: Can I ask the member to repeat his

question, please.

J. Brar: My question is: when will the

request-for-qualifications process begin to short-list the best proponent for

building the ambulatory care facility?

Hon. G. Abbott: The RFQ process was launched some weeks

ago, and it has reached the shortlist stage as of today.

A. Dix: It's good to see the minister animated this

afternoon. I had a couple of questions on another issue. It's good to see him

animated when he is answering questions from someone other than myself. It's

very exciting and very heartening to all of us.

The minister will know that I'm actually asking a few questions on

behalf of my colleague from Burnaby-Edmonds, the critic for mental health

service. He had a couple of specific follow-up questions. Perhaps, if it's okay

with the minister, I'll just put a couple of them together, and if the staff is

there, that's fine. Or he can perhaps get back directly to the member for

Burnaby-Edmonds.

The first is…. The minister mentioned that Wendy Hill is the ADM

responsible for mental health. The member notes that she is also the ADM for the

health authorities division, a rather large portfolio. How can the minister

assure British Columbians that the provincial government is committed to

providing sufficient support for people with mental health issues? The thrust of

the member's questions is whether in fact there needs to be a more focused voice

in the bureaucracy.

[ Page 7854 ]

The member is also interested in the work of Ann Marr of the

Ministry of Health. What things is she responsible for?

Thirdly, the member also asked — and this is a more difficult

question than the first two: can the minister describe the format of "discharge

plans from prisons, detox centres and hospitals?"

He would like you to explain Pharmacare G, a plan you referenced

yesterday. The minister could probably do that in writing.

Finally, it's about the question of Riverview. It's an issue of

concern, and it has been, I know, a question of concern for the Premier and

others — and for all of us. The question is: are there in fact 300 clients

remaining at Riverview for life? Are they able to be integrated into community

programs? What are the circumstances? What are the circumstances that lead

clients to be left at Riverview and which clients?

So those are a set of questions, some of which the minister may

want to respond to here — the more policy-oriented ones — and some, if he would

respond directly to the member for Burnaby-Edmonds perhaps by correspondence —

or the staff can.

Hon. G. Abbott: Could I ask the member to repeat the second

of the four questions.

A. Dix: The second question was related to the

responsibilities of Ann Marr in the ministry, asking the policy areas that Ms.

Marr would be working on.

[1625]

Hon. G. Abbott: I'll leave the one issue about the details

around discharge planning and plan G to correspondence. I think we can probably

more effectively provide that there.

In terms of Wendy Hill, Wendy has been with us for a couple of

years now. She came from Alberta and has probably a quarter of a century or more

of experience in senior health planning issues in Alberta, has a remarkable

range of experience, including a master's degree in nursing and clinical and

other leadership.

She is a remarkably capable and remarkably energetic individual.

There is some suspicion that she is propelled by goji juice, but I don't think

that's ever been confirmed within the ministry structure itself. Goji juice is

apparently a miracle drink that can produce great results.

Wendy does a remarkable job for us. But of course we don't expect

any individual to deliver on whole areas of health care policy. Wendy is part of

the leadership team and a broader team that, both in the ministry and in the

health authorities, is aiming at achieving the very best results for those

afflicted by mental health and addictions issues.

Ann Marr is a key part of that team. Ann is actually here today

with us, and she is the executive director of mental health and addictions

programs for the ministry and for the province. Ann brings some 20 years of

policy and planning work to the table for us. She is a very important part of

the team and, with Wendy, certainly helps to provide us with exceptional

leadership in the areas of mental health planning and mental health services. I

thank them both for the exceptional work that they do.

In terms of the final question around Riverview, this is actually

an extremely important question from my perspective and, I think, from the

province's perspective. Riverview was, I guess, for many decades the only

tertiary centre in the province where one could access mental health services.

Of cou