2003 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 37th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

MONDAY, MAY 5, 2003

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 15, Number 2

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Page

Tributes

Rick Casey

Hon. G. Cheema

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 35)

Hon. S. Bond

Skills Development and Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 37)

Hon. G. Bruce

Judicial Compensation Act (Bill 41)

Hon. G. Plant

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

Hawkair services in northern B.C.

R. Harris

Partnership network for community fundraising

P. Wong

Anniversary of question period

D. Hayer

Oral Questions

Snuneymuxw agreement-in-principle

M. Hunter

Hon. G. Plant

B.C. Rail and P3 partnerships

P. Bell

Hon. J. Reid

Safety of Tasers

T. Bhullar

Hon. R. Coleman

Child care subsidy applications

B. Bennett

Hon. M. Coell

Regulations for storage tanks

R. Lee

Hon. J. Murray

Relocation of RCMP E Division

B. Locke

Hon. R. Coleman

Abbotsford hospital project

J. Les

Hon. G. Collins

Ministerial Statements

2010 Olympic Winter Games bid

Hon. T. Nebbeling

Second Reading of Bills

Cam Glass Inc. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr403)

Committee of the Whole House

Cam Glass Inc. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr403)

T. Christensen

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Cam Glass Inc. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr403)

Second Reading of Bills

M&M Insulation Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill

Pr404)

T. Christensen

Committee of the Whole House

M&M Insulation Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill

Pr404)

Report and Third Reading of Bills

M&M Insulation Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill

Pr404)

Second Reading of Bills

Score Resources Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr405)

Committee of the Whole House

Score Resources Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr405)

R. Nijjar

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Score Resources Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 (Bill Pr405)

Committee of the Whole House

Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (Bill 31)

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (Bill 31)

Committee of the Whole House

Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act (Bill 32)

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act (Bill 32)

Second Reading of Bills

Business Number Act (Bill 36)

Hon. K. Falcon

Industry Training Authority Act (Bill 34)

Hon. S. Bond

B. Lekstrom

J. Bray

G. Trumper

J. Nuraney

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Forests

Hon. M. de Jong

P. Nettleton

D. MacKay

R. Sultan

M. Hunter

P. Bell

Committee of the Whole House

Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 27)

J. MacPhail

Hon. M. de Jong

[ Page 6465 ]

MONDAY, MAY 5, 2003

The House

met at 2:04 p.m.

Tributes

RICK CASEY

Hon. G.

Cheema: Yesterday in Victoria Mr. Rick Casey began an 8,000-kilometre

bicycle journey across Canada to raise awareness for mental health issues. My

colleagues the members for Victoria-Hillside and for Oak Bay–Gordon Head were

present at the launch.

His goal is

to raise awareness, to reduce the stigma of mental illness and to promote

community support for people with mental illness. This trip is his way of

honouring the memory of his daughter Kyla who, at the age of 19, died of a

pulmonary embolism while she was a patient in a mental health unit in Ontario.

Kyla had been diagnosed with a bipolar schizoaffective disorder shortly after

her sixteenth birthday.

recognition of Mental Health Week, would the House please join me in showing

support for Mr. Casey's journey.

[1405]

Introductions by Members

Hon. S.

Santori: This afternoon it gives me great pleasure to introduce a

constituent of mine from the beautiful city of Grand Forks. With us today we

have Ian Moslin. Ian attends Grand Forks Secondary School. Actually, he's here

shadowing me all week as part of his CAPP program workweek — a future lawyer,

as Ian has said he's interested in pursuing a career in law. At this time I

would ask that the House make Ian welcome.

Belsey: Many of us have had the pleasure of working with Tara Marsden in

communications. She's a Prince Rupert girl. Today her parents are down here, I

guess checking up on her. Susan Marsden is a curator with the Museum of Northern

B.C., and Jim Bird is a welder at Broadwater in Prince Rupert. I'll have you all

join me in making them both very welcome.

Hon. G.

Hogg: I have had the privilege to stand up twice in this House and tell all

of the members and the people of this province that the Earl Marriott's senior

girls basketball team was the provincial champion, and the White Rock Christian

boys were the triple-A boys champion, both from the riding of Surrey–White

Rock — provincial champions.

I'm proud

now to say — because I've heard many of my colleagues stand up and talk about

the great feats of teams from their ridings, and I'm sure they are wonderful

feats — that last week Basketball B.C. named the Earl Marriott's senior girls

triple-A team as the team of the year in British Columbia. I hope the House will

join me in sending our congratulations to those fine women.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

ADVANCED EDUCATION STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon. S.

Bond presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2003.

Hon. S.

Bond: I move that Bill 35 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. S.

Bond: This bill amends a number of statutes administered by the Ministry of

Advanced Education in order to reduce red tape and regulatory burden for public

post-secondary institutions. In addition, the bill includes miscellaneous and

housekeeping amendments to streamline administrative processes. These amendments

will update the legislation governing public post-secondary institutions to more

accurately reflect current practice. The amendments will also streamline

approval processes in a number of areas, including designation of degree

programs.

Finally,

the amendments will implement the recommendation of the core review and

deregulation task force to remove the requirement that government appoint

members to university senates and university foundations. These amendments will

enable the ministry to contribute to government's commitment to reduce red tape

and regulatory burden in British Columbia.

I move that

the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Bill 35

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.

SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND

LABOUR STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon. G.

Bruce presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Skills Development and Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2003.

[1410]

Hon. G.

Bruce: I move that Bill 37 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. G.

Bruce: I'm pleased to introduce this bill today. This bill amends the

Workers Compensation Act and the Employment Standards Act. In meeting our

new-era commitment to a more responsive workers compensation system, we are

making changes to ensure that surviving dependents are provided with fair

[ Page 6466 ]

compensation. The changes include providing a lifetime monthly benefit to

surviving partners under 40 years of age who have no children, increasing the

amount of Canada Pension Plan survivor benefits a surviving dependent can keep

and increasing the age limit for dependent children eligible to receive

benefits. We're also ensuring that employees and employers will have the

opportunity to use the services of lay advocates if they wish.

In the

Employment Standards Act more steps are being taken to ensure that employment

standards are fair, effective and enforceable for all B.C. employees and

employers. This bill strengthens protection for employees, adds flexibility, and

repeals outdated and unused parts of the Employment Standards Act.

addition, government is making changes to the rules on employing children under

15. The changes to child employment rules were developed and refined in

consultation with parents and employers.

I move that

the bill be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting

of the House after today.

Bill 37

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.

JUDICIAL COMPENSATION ACT

Hon.

G. Plant presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Judicial Compensation Act.

Hon. G.

Plant: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. G.

Plant: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 41. Bill 41 moves the compensation

provisions for Provincial Court judges and judicial justices of the peace from

the Provincial Court Act to the new Judicial Compensation Act. The new act also

changes the time lines and makes modifications to two judicial compensation

processes: the judicial compensation process and the judicial justice

compensation commission process. The time lines of these processes will be

brought into line with government's budget and legislative cycles, leading to a

less complicated implementation of the commission report recommendations.

Additional

legislative amendments will improve these processes by adjusting time frames and

having two commissions running simultaneously. Government staff time will be

better utilized, and allowing the commissions more time to conduct their reviews

will result in better products. I will elaborate further on the details of these

amendments at second reading of the bill.

I move that

the bill be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting

of the House after today.

Bill

41 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 25b)

HAWKAIR SERVICES IN NORTHERN B.C.

Harris: Recently in the media there have been many stories around the

aviation industry, and most of them have been pretty negative. Certainly, the

experiences of Air Canada have left a lot of northern and rural communities

wondering what is going to happen to them when it comes to air service.

Today I

want to talk about a small regional carrier that has carved out a niche market

that seems to be working well for everyone. Hawkair in Terrace started out in

1994 flying a Bristol Freighter. This marked the start of seven years of

servicing remote mining camps through northern B.C. They grew from a staff of

four to 22. But as we all know, as mining disappeared from this province, so did

businesses like Hawkair. By 1999 they were back down to four staff.

This group

of business people had a decision to make: change or disappear. They had a

concept for delivering passenger service, a concept that would have a regional

carrier situated in the north and a

schedule that would be designed to reflect

the best interests of passengers originating from the north. They had a concept

that had planes, jobs, maintenance and head offices situated in the communities

they serviced.

[1415]

I'm glad to

say that they took this gamble. In September of 2000, after achieving Transport

Canada certification, they launched the first flight of their passenger service

in a modern turboprop. In less than three years since they carried their first

passenger, Hawkair has added two additional passenger planes and is now

providing services to five cities in northern B.C. I know the member for Peace

River South certainly enjoys the service he now receives in Dawson Creek. They

employ more than 90 people company-wide, and about 60 of those are located in

Terrace. Their payroll alone in Terrace is $1.7 million, and on top of that,

they've purchased $800,000 worth of local goods and services. That's growing

each year.

More

importantly, they've opened up the north for professional employment in

maintenance, operations, safety, management, administration, technical records

and other disciplines. Prior to Hawkair establishing its passenger service, the

opportunities for people to work in these fields of aviation were largely

limited to southern B.C.

The Hawkair

experience is still challenging. The history of regional carriers is one that

certainly has no guarantees, but if we are going to reverse the trend of

depopulation in the north, Hawkair is one example of some of the things that can

be done to achieve this.

[ Page 6467 ]

PARTNERSHIP NETWORK

FOR COMMUNITY FUNDRAISING

P. Wong:

I'm pleased to report to the House that last week my colleagues from

Burnaby-Willingdon and Vancouver-Fraserview joined me at an event held by the

Vancouver Oakridge Lions Club and the Better Community Partnership Outreach

Network Also in attendance were Mr. Justice Wally Oppal; Mr. Dirk Ryneveld, the

police complaint commissioner; Vancouver police Chief Constable Jamie Graham;

and Dr. Tony Gill, president of South Vancouver community policing centre.

The dinner

was the first event of a series of unique and innovative collaborations that

will be occurring with organizations throughout Vancouver-Kensington as well as

many others. Over the last two years, many groups that provide valuable services

in my riding have approached me about their need for more financial resources.

During discussion with my colleagues and other concerned citizens in the riding,

several caring and passionate individuals came to me with the idea of creating a

network to match groups with financial resources with charities and non-profit

agencies in need of those resources.

My office

has taken a great number of calls from interested residents and the media. Many

groups in the riding have expressed interest in a Better Community Partnership

Outreach Network, and we have discovered a great amount of community support for

the network and its goals. I am very proud of the Vancouver Oakridge Lions Club

for coming to the table and taking the initiative to organize this first event,

which has thus far raised $5,000 for the South Vancouver policing centre.

This week

I'm going to present a total of seven scholarships to two high schools, John

Oliver and Sir Charles Tupper. Six of them are $500, and one of them is $200.

Over the weekend there were inquiries from individuals and organizations also

expressing interest in providing financial incentives to the elementary schools

in the Vancouver-Kensington riding. Through the network, not only will we be

working together for the betterment of our community, but we will also be taking

a real leadership role in helping each other to strengthen our civil society.

It's my hope that other networks similar to the Better Community Partnership

Outreach Network will emerge in other communities across the province.

ANNIVERSARY OF QUESTION PERIOD

Hayer: Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention that this House

recently passed a historical date in the past 100-plus years in this Legislative

Assembly. That date was March 5, the thirtieth anniversary of the first-ever

question period.

The first

question was asked by one of the most memorable B.C public figures to ever sit

in this House. After 20 years as Premier, W.A.C. Bennett, in his unaccustomed

role as opposition leader, got to his feet and asked the Premier of the day to

withdraw several bills related to the new expenditures. Making the day even more

historic was that the first question ever asked was ruled out of order.

Nonetheless,

the first question period was a momentous occasion in opening up the government

to the people of British Columbia. I am extremely pleased that we, too, are

making our mark with a new era of open, accessible and accountable government,

whether it is with the formation of the citizens assembly, fixed election dates,

fixed budget dates, open cabinet meetings, active legislative committees or

public written questions.

[1420]

We are

committed to ensuring that British Columbians have open access to the

government. I, too, am committed to ensuring that I am easily accessible. Each

year I meet with thousands of constituents, many community groups, businesses

and social organizations in my constituency of Surrey-Tynehead office, in

Victoria and at any number of events, festivals and functions that I attend each

week. I meet with people from all walks of life, whether we share the same view

or not. I am committed to bringing their voices to the government and to the

Legislature. People can also share their views with me by dropping by without an

appointment at one of my regular monthly coffee meetings, which take place at

the same time and same location at the ABC Country Restaurant until April of

Mr.

Speaker: That concludes members' statements.

Oral Questions

SNUNEYMUXW AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE

Hunter: About a year ago in the referendum on treaty negotiations, British

Columbians voted overwhelmingly that hunting, fishing and recreational

opportunities on Crown land should be assured for all British Columbians. Today

critics of the Snuneymuxw agreement-in-principle have argued that the government

is not being consistent and has, in fact, allowed for a race-based fishery to be

created in that AIP.

Will the

Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations clarify what the government is

doing with regard to fisheries in the negotiation of treaties with B.C.'s first

nations and whether the Snuneymuxw agreement-in-principle is a model for other

negotiations?

Hon. G.

Plant: I think the Snuneymuxw AIP is fully consistent with the third

question in the referendum — that is, that hunting and fishing and

recreational opportunities on Crown land should be ensured for all British

Columbians.

There's one

important respect in which Snuneymuxw is unique, or nearly unique, and that is

that the Snuneymuxw first nation comes to treaty negotiations with existing

treaty rights under a Douglas treaty. What the AIP does, assuming it leads to a

final agreement, is move us away from the uncertainty that exists

[ Page 6468 ]

with respect to those treaty rights into a world where there is certainty

about how those rights can be exercised.

I share the

concern, and government shares the concern that many user groups have expressed

with respect to Canada's need to develop an overall long-term vision for the

fishery and the fish resources in British Columbia. That's why my colleague the

Minister of Fisheries and I, under the Premier's leadership, have been working

with the commercial and recreational industry since late last year to develop

the strategy for engaging the federal government in a process that will help

ensure that fish resources are managed in a way that is sustainable and which

provides fair and equal opportunity for all user groups. The Premier has written

to the Prime Minister to seek his participation in that initiative, and I will

certainly keep the House informed as matters proceed.

B.C. RAIL AND P3 PARTNERSHIPS

P. Bell:

My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Over the weekend my

colleague from Prince George–Mount Robson and I had the opportunity to attend

the North Central Municipal Association conference in Prince George. It was a

great opportunity to discuss some of the common concerns and initiatives that

are going on in the north. One of the more prominent issues that was discussed

was that of B.C. Rail.

The mayor

of Mackenzie, Tom Briggs, was specifically concerned with the role a P3 partner

might play in the economic development of the north and what vision a P3 partner

would have in that economic development. Can the minister tell us and the people

of Mackenzie what the expected benefits of a P3 partner would be to B.C. Rail

and how that might play in the economic development of the north?

Hon. J.

Reid: Thank you for the question. It's very important to bring clarity

around the process of what we're doing with B.C. Rail. We want to see investment

in the north. We want to see advantages to the users of the rail and to the

communities along the rail line, which, of course, are the employees of the

industries.

[1425]

What we are

doing is looking at what the public good is — the questions around the public

good. We're using the mayors' council and the shippers' council to provide input

into that. We're then going to do a request for expressions of interest and then

a request for proposals. In that request for proposals we are going to take

those concerns we've identified and put them out there to interested proponents

to tell us how they would answer the questions of how they would ensure

long-term sustainability of the rail system, how they would ensure there's going

to be access and competitive rates, how they would ensure there are going to be

benefits to the industries and the communities.

At that

point, then, government gets to evaluate those different proposals. We do

believe there are exciting opportunities for growth, for economic development.

As we work through this process, we'll get to see what vision is out there, and

then government gets to choose.

SAFETY OF TASERS

Bhullar: My question is to the Solicitor General. Approximately one week ago

the RCMP had to use a Taser to subdue a suspect who subsequently died of a heart

attack. Last year the Vancouver city police used one of the same devices on

Daniel Matheson, who subsequently died of a heart attack. The device I speak of

is a Taser. These devices are prohibited under the Criminal Code of Canada,

Governor General's order No. 3. Can the Solicitor General please tell the House

what legal authority the police have for carrying such devices?

Hon. R.

Coleman: First of all, I can't comment on an individual case, but I can tell

the member that there may be other health concerns related to the use of a Taser

in the two instances the member refers to.

There are

two areas. Probably, the common law of a constable in the use of force would be

one, but more so is that the Police Act regulations allow us to deal with use of

force for the regulations under the Police Act in the province.

The

director of police services can approve use-of-force equipment, and that's how

the Taser was approved, but not just in a vacuum. In 1998, in December, the

Ministry of Attorney General allowed a six-month test with the Victoria police

department, which was conducted. The Taser was used 14 times during that test

— 13 of them successfully and one where the Taser failed to operate. Prior to

approving the Taser, we also had our police services division review Taser use

and its use elsewhere in North America and worldwide with regard to statistics.

The Taser

is a non-lethal alternative to deadly force. In actual fact, the use of a Taser

is the last choice before actually using a firearm, in most cases, with regard

to the use of force. Police agencies and correctional facilities do use the

Taser effectively, and our understanding is that it has had very good and

positive use within law enforcement to date.

The

authority is with the Police Act and the regulations under the Police Act —

and other issues relative to the member. I am comfortable, having spoken to

police services and having discussions with regard to the Taser, that it is

being properly used in our environment.

CHILD CARE SUBSIDYAPPLICATIONS

Bennett: My question is to the Minister of Human Resources, and it's in

regard to the child care subsidy. The Kootenay region is a very large and

diverse region, and it's made up of many, many small communities and a few

larger regional centres. Some Kootenay parents have expressed concern that in

going to apply for and extend their child care subsidies, they may

[ Page 6469 ]

have to physically travel to those larger communities to do that. I'm

wondering if the minister today can just assure the House that there will be no

interruptions in child care subsidy for those Kootenay parents.

Hon. M.

Coell: I can assure the member that there won't be, and I'm pleased to take

the opportunity to clear it up if there is a confusion. What we've done is move

to a centralized service in the Kootenays — Golden, Sparwood, Cranbrook — so

parents will now be able to phone a toll-free number to apply for child care

subsidy or to renew it. That starts today, so any parents in that area or

providers can have access to that number. They won't have to go to our offices.

They won't have to make appointments. They can do it from their own homes. That,

hopefully, will help with looking after children and also give better service to

those areas.

REGULATIONS FOR STORAGE TANKS

R. Lee:

My question is to the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection. Last year I

asked the minister about what the government was doing to prevent spills such as

the one that happened at the Chevron refinery in Burnaby North. Protecting our

groundwater from contamination is very important for the health of my

constituents and their environment. Can the Minister of Water, Land and Air

Protection explain what standards are in place and what government is planning

to do to ensure that oil storage tanks are safe?

[1430]

Hon. J.

Murray: I would like to acknowledge the interest that the residents of

Burnaby North have in this issue since an MTBE spill at the Chevron refinery a

few years ago. The member for Burnaby North has provided a leadership role in

bringing together the residents, the business, the regional representatives and

ministry staff and satisfying some of the concerns of the residents.

In terms of

the standards in British Columbia, we have the Waste Management Act. That act

identifies the required result, which is no discharge of substances to the

environment that pose a risk to human health or the environment. The act also

describes the kind of enforcement that needs to happen should there be an

accident and the kind of cleanup standards. We don't have a prescriptive

standard for how to design a tank, but companies do have codes of practice and

guidelines made available by the ministry that they can follow. The Canadian

Council of Ministers of the Environment published an environmental code of

practice for aboveground storage tanks in the mid-nineties, and that code is

available to companies as they design and build their storage tanks.

I believe

that we have an environmental management approach that is appropriate in British

Columbia and that the system is effective in preventing spills and damage to the

environment or threats to human safety.

RELOCATION OF RCMP E DIVISION

Locke: My question is to the Solicitor General. I understand that the RCMP

is looking to relocate E Division. The relocated headquarters could bring as

many as a thousand jobs to the community they decide to call home. I'm sure that

any community would appreciate having the RCMP headquarters in their boundaries.

Can the Solicitor General tell us what the RCMP is looking for when they're

considering the options for relocating E Division?

Hon. R.

Coleman: It is a fact that E Division headquarters is due to move in the

next couple of years and that somewhere between 900 and a thousand-plus jobs

will be relocated out of E Division in Vancouver into a new world-class campus

for policing somewhere in the province, more than likely on the lower mainland.

The biggest

issue with regard to the relocation, members should know, is that the RCMP have

said that part of the criteria is that they will move E Division to a community

that has a long-term contractual commitment to the RCMP as their police force.

The intent is to actually move it to a contract community where the RCMP are

policing within that community. That is part of the selection process, which is

the thing that really determines where this organization will go.

As we move

forward with this, though, we're looking at opportunities to build on top of

this campus world-class facilities with regard to policing and things like

issuance of the Organized Crime Agency and what have you as we build the campus

together sometime in the next couple of years.

ABBOTSFORD HOSPITAL PROJECT

J. Les:

With respect to the last question, just on the record, I want to assure the

Solicitor General that Chilliwack is ready, willing and able to assist.

My real

question is to the Minister of Finance. Partnerships B.C. has been engaged in a

process now for a number of months to identify a private sector partner to build

and operate the new hospital in Abbotsford, together with the new cancer clinic

that is to be built with that facility. The people of the Fraser Valley are

excited that this new project will be built to provide health care long into the

future to the residents of the growing Fraser Valley.

However,

they have some questions and possibly some concerns about the new and innovative

approach we're taking to producing this facility. The Fraser Valley regional

hospital district is providing $71 million as part of the financing of this

project. The residents of the valley would like the Finance minister to tell us

today what measures are being taken to ensure we get the very best possible….

Interjections.

[1435]

J. Les:

What measures are being taken by Partnerships B.C. and the Ministry of Finance,

along with the

[ Page 6470 ]

Minister of Health, to assure that we get the very best possible facility for

the taxpayer's dollar?

Hon. G.

Collins: There are a number of things. First of all, the regional hospital

district is contributing almost a third of the cost of the construction of this

facility. It's important that they be involved in the process to make sure that

we do get best value for the citizens that both we represent but, as well, that

they represent.

The

Minister of Health has been talking to the local communities, as have I. There

will be a committee that will involve the local leaders — MLAs, etc., — but

also the two members of the regional hospital district. Abe Neufeld as well as

George Peary will be part of that process and sit on that committee to make sure

that we get the best value and the best health care services for the people in

the Fraser Valley who have been waiting a long, long time for this project.

I think

that's great news for the local community, and I think the local community and

the local taxpayers can rest assured that there will be great local involvement

in making sure we get the best value for the health dollars we spend in that

community.

[End

of question period.]

Ministerial Statements

2010 OLYMPIC WINTER GAMES BID

Hon. T.

Nebbeling: I would like to make a ministerial statement.

In just 58

days the International Olympic Committee will gather in Prague. They will make

the decision on the winning bid to host the 2010 Winter Games and Paralympic

Games. It is a day and an announcement that we have worked towards for several

years.

Last

Friday, May 2, our bid reached an important milestone. This is on the road to

the decision with the release of the IOC evaluation report. This report is the

final detailed response before the July 2 vote. It gives us a final opportunity

to further strengthen our bid based on their recommendations and suggestions.

In March

British Columbia welcomed the IOC evaluation committee to Vancouver and

Whistler. Our 2010 bid team gave an impressive presentation during their stay.

The Premier led the provincial representation during the visit and played a

critical role in assuring the IOC that British Columbia recognizes the proposal

and has the full backing of the province. Our guests were very pleased with what

they saw. They felt excellent venues in a spectacular setting and enthusiastic

residents who very much would want to host the 2010 Games.

I think it

is fair to say that we had a strong bid, but after the release of the report, we

can truly say that our bid is even stronger. The IOC commented on the strengths

of many components of the bid. It is an inclusive bid, and the IOC noted one

thing in particular, and that was the involvement and participation of our first

nations.

The report

said our financial plan is sound and our guarantees are strong and noted that

the independent office of the auditor general had said the same. The report also

puts to rest the concerns about our bid transportation plan, saying it is

logical, well thought out, and should provide for a high level of service.

The report

noted that our plan to hold opening and closing ceremonies indoors would be a

historic first for the IOC. As well as the MLA for West Vancouver–Garibaldi, I

must say I was personally very pleased and impressed that the bid staff seized

upon the opportunity to hold medal ceremonies in Whistler after the evaluation

commission asked about that possibility. That means the Olympic spirit and pride

will be shared among communities.

All in all,

we can all be very pleased with the report of the IOC evaluation committee and

very proud of our 2010 Olympic bid team. It provides great information as a

report and will influence the IOC final decision on the host city for 2010. When

in Prague, it will vote on July 2.

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

Collins: I call second reading on Bill Pr403.

Second Reading of Bills

CAM GLASS INC.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

Christensen: I move that the bill be now read a second time.

This bill

will restore Cam Glass Inc. to the registry of companies so that the company can

be joined in litigation arising with respect to a period before the company was

struck from the registry.

[1440]

Motion

approved.

Christensen: By leave, I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of

the Whole House to be considered forthwith.

Leave

granted.

Bill Pr403,

Cam Glass Inc. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003, read a second time and

referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

CAM GLASS INC.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

The

House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill Pr403; J. Weisbeck in the

chair.

[ Page 6471 ]

The

committee met at 2:41 p.m.

Sections 1

to 4 inclusive approved.

Preamble

approved.

Title

approved.

Christensen: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 2:42 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Mr.

Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time?

Christensen: By leave, now, Mr. Speaker.

Leave

granted.

Bill

Pr403, Cam Glass Inc. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call second reading of Bill Pr404.

Second Reading of Bills

M&M INSULATION LTD.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

Christensen: I move that the bill be now read a second time.

This bill

will restore M&M Insulation Ltd. to the registry of companies, which will

in turn enable the company to be added as a party to ongoing litigation with

respect to events arising before the company had been struck from the registry.

Motion

approved.

Christensen: By leave, I move the bill be referred to a Committee of the

Whole House to be considered forthwith.

Leave

granted.

Bill

Pr404 , M&M Insulation Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003 , read

a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration

forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

M&M INSULATION LTD.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

The

House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill Pr404; J. Weisbeck in the

chair.

The

committee met at 2:43 p.m.

Sections 1

to 4 inclusive approved.

Preamble

approved.

Title

approved.

Christensen: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 2:44 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Mr.

Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time?

Christensen: By leave, now, Mr. Speaker.

Leave

granted.

[1445]

Bill

Pr404, M&M Insulation Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003, reported complete

without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Collins: I call second reading of Bill Pr405.

Second Reading of Bills

SCORE RESOURCES LTD.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

Nijjar: I move that the bill be now read a second time.

Motion

approved.

Nijjar: By leave, I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the

Whole House to be considered forthwith.

Leave

granted.

Bill Pr405,

Score Resources Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003, read a second time and

referred to a

[ Page 6472 ]

Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

SCORE RESOURCES LTD.

(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2003

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill Pr405; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

The

committee met at 2:46 p.m.

Sections 1

to 4 inclusive approved.

Preamble

approved.

Title

approved.

Nijjar: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 2:47 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Mr.

Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time?

Nijjar: By leave, now, Mr. Speaker.

Leave

granted.

Bill

Pr405, Score Resources Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2003, reported complete

without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 31.

Committee of the Whole House

COURT JURISDICTION AND

PROCEEDINGS TRANSFER ACT

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 31; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

The

committee met at 2:48 p.m.

Sections 1

to 24 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. G.

Plant: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 2:49 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill

31, Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 32.

Committee of the Whole House

ENFORCEMENT OF CANADIAN

JUDGMENTS AND DECREES ACT

The House

in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 32; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

The

committee met at 2:50 p.m.

Sections 1

to 19 inclusive approved.

Title

approved.

Hon. G.

Plant: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without

amendment.

Motion

approved.

The

committee rose at 2:51 p.m.

The House

resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill

32, Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G.

Plant: I call second reading of Bill 36.

Second Reading of Bills

BUSINESS NUMBER ACT

Hon. K.

Falcon: I move that the bill now be read a second time.

As the

Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise explained during the last

reading, Bill 36, the Business Number Act, will provide businesses with a single

identifying number to use in their interactions with multiple levels of

government. Passage of the

[ Page 6473 ]

Business Number Act will simplify the relationship between business and

government by removing red tape and reducing the time it takes businesses to

comply with government requirements.

The single

business number initiative directly reflects a number of the British Columbia

government's new-era commitments — such as, it restores British Columbia as a

world leader in electronic government; it will cut the cost of paper flow, forms

and information as much as possible, making the cost of doing business in

British Columbia much more cost-effective; it will work to create a competitive

climate for business and investment in British Columbia; and it will help

contribute significantly towards our goal of reducing the red tape and

regulatory burden in British Columbia by one-third in our first three years.

Specifically, passage of the Business Number Act will reduce government red tape

for businesses both large and small and make British Columbia a better place to

do business. That's the bottom line.

This act

will incorporate stringent security provisions to protect confidential

information and will continue to respect the privacy of British Columbia's

business community to ensure that it is not in any way compromised. Partners of

the single business number initiative adhere to strict privacy legislation here

in British Columbia.

Finally,

Bill 36 demonstrates this government's commitment to an efficient and

financially sound way of doing business. The Business Number Act establishes the

adoption of the business number as the common business identifier for British

Columbia businesses, based on a number that is issued by the Canada Customs and

Revenue Agency, otherwise known as CCRA.

The act

also establishes the information system known as the B.C. Hub, which is to be

developed by the single business number initiative to support the business

number processes. This initiative provides businesses with a single identifying

number instead of multiple numbers and a single window through which information

can simultaneously be registered with multiple levels of government. The single

business number is used as a common business identifier in selected programs in

New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Ontario. Manitoba is currently developing a

common business number identifier project using the federal business number.

[1455]

Without

this legislation, businesses will continue to have various numbers they are

forced to use when accessing different levels of government and services, and

business registration will continue to be complicated and time-consuming. Our

Ministry of Competition, Science and Enterprise has worked cooperatively with

the corporate privacy and information access branch of the Ministry of

Management Services on this legislation with respect to the all-important

privacy issues.

I would

like to read into the record a quote from Chris Norman, executive director of

the corporate privacy and information access branch, in a letter to our ministry

dated April 15, 2003.

"We

have completed our review of your privacy impact assessment and agree with

your assessment that there are no personal information concerns with the

proposed Business Number Act, as no personal information is collected as part

of the B.C. Hub project. The business name, business address, owner and

contact information collected in the context of engaging in a business

enterprise and to the associated registration with government programs are

treated as non-personal information for the purposes of this project."

The

single business number initiative is a key e-government initiative and has

been developed in partnership with the province's chief information office and

also with the CCRA, Ministry of Provincial Revenue, Ministry of Finance and

the Workers Compensation Board. Other ministries and program areas have

indicated their interest in future participation in this initiative. Local

government has also been supportive of this initiative.

British

Columbia businesses are strongly in favour of this legislation and look forward

to a streamlined method of complying with government regulatory requirements.

Bill 36 provides evidence that this government is committed to assisting British

Columbia business to succeed. Passage of the Business Number Act will simplify

the relationship between business and government. The initiative will create a

competitive climate for business and investment in the province and is one more

building block to restoring British Columbia as a world leader in e-government.

On that

note, I am pleased to move second reading of the bill.

Motion

approved.

Hon. K.

Falcon: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House

to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 36,

Business Number Act, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole

House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. L.

Stephens: I call second reading of Bill 34.

INDUSTRY TRAINING AUTHORITY ACT

Hon. S.

Bond: Hon. Speaker, I move that Bill 34 now be read a second time.

Mr.

Speaker: Please proceed.

Hon. S.

Bond: Over the past year and certainly longer than that, a great deal of

attention — both media and otherwise — has been devoted to the subject of

Canada's and British Columbia's impending skills shortages. It seems we are

faced with a critical shortage

[ Page 6474 ]

of skilled workers brought on in large part by an aging employee population.

It becomes increasingly clear that in order to continue to prosper as a

province, we need to explore new ways of producing the skilled workers that B.C.

needs and wants.

At this

point of the system we certainly have almost 16,000 apprentices in British

Columbia, and thousands more students are enrolled in entry-level trades

training at public post-secondary institutions. When we look at the creation of

a new system, it is both complex and time-consuming. I can assure the members of

this House that this has generated much debate both within our caucus as we've

discussed the options and also within the province.

As a

government, we need to ensure that any model — any new system — is flexible

and responsive and that it meets, first and foremost, the needs of students and

learners in British Columbia and that it responds in a timely and flexible way

to the needs of industry. We know that in order to have our economy prosper, as

we know it will, this system must be done in a thoughtful and progressive way.

[1500]

The

proposed system this bill represents will better align and match opportunities

because it will be able to respond much better to the shifts in the job market,

creating more opportunities for workers and students.

We have

looked at a number of options around modular training and competency-based

credentials. In fact, in the province as we are creating and looking at the

legislation today, we have 16 pilot projects that will test practical

applications for new approaches to industry training. In essence, we want to

look at how we can do things differently to enhance the current system, and we

want to try those out as we work through this process. Again, these pilot

projects will help us develop a system that will not only meet industry needs

but encourage people — young people in this province — to consider the

trades as a viable and important career option.

It's been

unfortunate that as we've gone through this process, there has been much

information and some misinformation. Many who are not fully informed question

any change at all to the system. I want to make it perfectly clear that the

system we develop will not see the quality of training in this province

compromised. Enforcement of safety standards and consumer protection in

compulsory certification trades, which we currently have, will be maintained. We

are not going to dilute the trades. In fact, current standards will be

maintained, including the national Red Seal standards.

We are also

proposing, where it makes sense, to work through industry and with industry to

determine and expand the number of opportunities and credentials that are

available to workers in this system. Before I speak specifically to the contents

of the bill, I want to assure apprentices who are currently in the system that

their training will not be interrupted. We are working on options to ensure that

college-based training and examination services are maintained and, in fact,

that expanded opportunities are available generally throughout the regions of

this province.

The bill

today will repeal and replace the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Act,

which established ITAC, the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission, in

1997. At that time the need was identified for an industry-driven training and

apprenticeship system. Unfortunately, and despite its best efforts, ITAC was

unable to implement the changes necessary to fulfil its mandate. Government's

subsequent review of the industry training and apprenticeship system revealed a

number of problems. I want to articulate some of them for you today. Some of

them are very specific, because as we look at legislation to create a new model,

it's important to recognize the problems that the system was encountering.

We have

training in the province called entry-level trades training. One of the things

we discovered was that there was incredible variability of entry-level trades

training duration. Two programs may offer the same training credit and yet

differ in currency, quality and length of time. A significant concern was the

lack of credit that entry-level trades training courses provided toward

apprenticeship training. A learner may take a program of up to 12 months in

length without any assurance that industry will give consistent recognition to

the skills and knowledge gained. Credit may be as little as six to eight weeks

of technical training, and it varied by employer and by trade.

We also

discovered that there was an inability to meet employer needs for tradesworkers

and to address skill shortages. Employer needs identified included

multi-skilling, specific skill sets to meet current employment openings and

increased opportunity to identify emergent needs and have training developed to

meet those needs. We found there were often inflexible training methods —

based on time rather than competencies — that have been a barrier to

innovation in training, design and delivery.

Of concern

to us was the fact that many people drop out of their training program and fail

to qualify to work in their trade or occupation. This represents a significant

investment of time and money simply wasted. Many learners have to start over

again when they begin a new program or trade that overlaps with the knowledge

and skills they already have. These learners are far less likely to be flexible

in gaining new skills and are also less likely to complete training to the level

of their personal goals.

[1505]

Industry,

in fact, is also not attracting young people. The average age of apprenticeship

in British Columbia is 28; many are in their thirties or forties before they

complete their training.

Lack of

qualified workers is a continuing concern. Half the current apprentices do not

complete their training to become qualified in a trade. As you can imagine,

those are specific and fundamental problems that create challenges when we're

trying to meet the

[ Page 6475 ]

needs of learners in this province. Even more significantly, how will we

actually provide the significant numbers of skilled workers that we need in the

future of this province?

As a result

of our review, it was determined that a new model was needed to govern the

industry training and apprenticeship system in British Columbia. So what did we

do about that? We put together an industry training transition advisory

committee, and there were members appointed to that committee from business,

from labour and education representatives to advise us on how the changes should

be made and what changes were necessary to bring about a new and enhanced

training system in the province.

The

committee had significant input into the proposed framework for the new model

and, in fact, set out some thinking in a discussion paper, A New Model for

Industry Training in British Columbia. A series of eight regional forums

were held in January and February of 2003 to solicit input from employers,

apprentices, trainers and labour representatives on the proposed training model

contained in the discussion paper. In order to solicit wider input, the

discussion paper was also posted on the ministry website.

I have to

tell you that the consultation process was one that generated a great deal of

interest in the province. As the process moved around the province, we worked

very hard to accommodate the fact that there were large numbers of people who

wanted to be involved in the process and who had not originally been included in

the process. I'm pleased to say that my ministry staff worked very hard to

incorporate all those people into a series of meetings around the province.

The

discussion was passionate, as well it should be. We're talking about significant

change, about a system that has been in place for literally dozens and dozens of

years in this province. But I think it's important for me to say clearly and to

reassure the people of British Columbia that, in fact, what we want to do with

the new industry training model is enhance the system that currently exists. In

fact, where appropriate, the traditional apprenticeship model will continue to

exist in the province.

We're

simply saying that the way people learn and the credits and opportunities that

individual learners have had over the last number of years, at least on the

academic side of my portfolio, have changed. We've allowed and encouraged people

to look at different opportunities. We've allowed them to look at how to learn

on line, how to look at going back to school and using the credits they've

achieved at another point in their lives. We're simply saying that on this side

of my agenda, in the skills training agenda, it's time for us to look at how to

encourage learners to utilize their competency, to be able to find a way to

measure their skill set. It's not enough to base that simply on time. We have to

look at competency.

I certainly

appreciated the interesting and very vibrant debate that took place around the

province as we talked about this model. I think that's healthy; I think it's

important. I think the changes you see will reflect many of the opinions we

heard in that consultation process. We tried very hard to look at the

suggestions and concerns of participants at the forums and of those responding

to the discussion paper through the website, and they have been helpful in

developing the new model.

You know,

the transition advisory committee proposed a mandate and a mission statement for

the industry training system, and they couldn't have said it better, from my

perspective. They suggested our mission statement should be: "To provide

effective and efficient industry-focused training that meets the skill

requirements of employers and the career aspirations of learners in British

Columbia." They said it well, and I think it should absolutely be the

mandate that drives the new system.

The new

system and the evolution to a new system will begin immediately, but it will

take place over time. The option for employers and for their apprentices to use

traditional apprenticeship training models, as I've already mentioned, will be

retained as appropriate, but new mechanisms for skills development, for

assessment of skills and knowledge and for more flexible ways to build other

credentials will be added.

[1510]

Young

people and their parents will be encouraged to recognize the real opportunities

that are presented by the trades and technical occupations. Employers and/or

sector associations will actively engage with parents and the secondary school

system to promote and market trades training and career opportunities.

There are a

series of key principles which have guided the development of the legislation

and will guide the delivery of a new model for industry training in British

Columbia. We believe that a closer relationship between trainers and industry

will result in better training that is relevant to the needs of the industry,

workers and our learners. Trainers will have more responsibility for program and

curriculum development and design, working directly with industry clients. We

also believe that the achievement of standardized competencies — standardized

competencies with appropriate assessment recognition and crediting of those

competencies — will be a key element of the new model.

efficient and effective training system recognizes both formal and informal

learning and practical experience. It is coordinated with K-to-12 education and

the post-secondary education system. That helps us facilitate the transition

from school to work, and it helps us attract youth into the areas of skill

shortages which have very well-paid employment waiting at the end of that

process.

The

industry training act that we're looking at the second reading of today

establishes the Industry Training Authority. The purpose of the authority will

be to ensure the provision of effective and efficient industry training that

meets, most importantly, the needs of trainees and learners in the province and

also of employers. The authority will be composed of a nine-member board

appointed by the minister, a chief ex-

[ Page 6476 ]

ecutive officer appointed by the board and a small team of employees

appointed by the chief executive officer.

The

appointment of this small group will result in a much more streamlined

decision-making process. The board members will be appointed on the basis of

their personal experience and, most importantly, their expertise relative to the

mandate of the authority. We're going to look for the best nine people that we

can find in the province to be a part of the Industry Training Authority, based

on their expertise, their excellence and their leadership in the area of skills

and trades training. Their job will be to oversee training in the province,

formerly administered through ITAC, including the development of standards for

industry training programs.

The chief

executive officer will be accountable to the board and be responsible for the

administration of the authority. The board of the authority will appoint

advisory committees on an ad hoc basis. These committees will have a specific

mandate and time frame to address particular issues. They will be few in number

and small in size, with members appointed, again, for their relevant personal

experience and expertise. This process for appointing advisory committees will

result in a streamlined and flexible advisory structure.

[H.

Long in the chair.]

The act

also contains general enabling powers of the authority relating to industry

training and apprenticeship programs, program standards, examinations and

assessments, and industry training credentials. These provisions will enable the

development of a flexible and innovative industry training and apprenticeship

system that is responsible to both employers and trainees' needs and, most

importantly, addresses skill shortages.

The

authority will designate recognized industry training programs and program

standards for them. Recognized programs will include programs that are regional

in scope as well as just-in-time and customized training to meet sectoral or

cross-industry needs. Initially, they will consist of all training programs for

the trades and occupations that were designated by ITAC, except those that are

interprovincially recognized trades — the Red Seal trades.

The

authority will recommend to the minister that a training program be designated

as an accredited industry training program. The authority will develop programs

and standards for accredited programs with program standards being subject to

the approval of the minister. Accredited programs are ones that meet provincial,

interprovincial or national standards. They will consist of the 45 Red Seal

trades.

[1515]

Red Seal

trades have been designated by the Canadian Council of Directors of

Apprenticeship for inclusion in the interprovincial standards, or the Red Seal

program as it's known. The Red Seal credential, received on passing the Red Seal

examination for that trade following an apprenticeship or after years of

practice in the trade, facilitates interprovincial labour mobility.

The

authority will develop examinations and assessment standards and procedures for

recognized and accredited programs, including the Red Seal trades, and for

recognition of training in another program or jurisdiction. The authority will

also establish processes for program review to ensure that standards for

training programs, examinations and assessments are met.

The

authority will develop criteria to award credentials, including the Red Seal,

and will award or authorize the following to award credentials: public colleges,

university colleges and institutes, as well as private trainers. These

credentials will include recognition to individuals for completing equivalent

training in another program or jurisdiction. The criteria for credentials will

promote laddering, transferability, portability and mobility.

Think about

that for a minute. There are people who come to the province of British Columbia

who have a particular skill set. Or they live in British Columbia already, and

they have a particular skill set. What we're saying is that this particular

model of industry training will allow recognition of those individuals'

competency — the skill set they already have. That, to me, is responsible,

it's appropriate, and it's absolutely one of the ways we are going to begin to

address the skills shortage in this province as we recognize people's

competency, not simply the time spent in a particular program.

A key

element of our new training system will be a competency-based modularized

delivery system. You should try saying that quickly.

Manhas: Easy for you to say.

Hon. S.

Bond: It isn't easy for me to say, actually.

Modularization

of current trades curriculum into specific skill sets will allow for

competency-based assessment at that level and receipt of progressive credentials

with the option of working towards a full credential. For example, a trainee

could earn a certificate as a framing carpenter or a level 1 carpenter and

eventually work to gain a Red Seal credential as a carpenter, if they wanted to

progress to that level.

There will

also be articulation so that skills and knowledge learned in one trade can be

applied to another trade. That is a concern we heard expressed repeatedly by

employers in the province — that there needs to be portability of those skills

from one trade to another. This is absolutely critical to increasing the number

of trained workers in British Columbia.

I want to

say it one more time. I've said it frequently over the past number of months.

The traditional apprenticeship model will still be available. But a

competency-based system, where trainees have the options of earning incremental

or specialized credentials tied to a specific skill set, is expected to result

in more young people being attracted to the trades.

[ Page 6477 ]

We've found

over time…. One of the things I'm most concerned about as a minister is that

very often students don't consider a skill or a trade in this province as a

viable or a significant option for them. We have to look at a way to open up the

system to allow students to think about how they can not only participate but be

successful in gaining the skills, qualities and credentials necessary to work as

a skilled and trained worker in the province. You and I depend on them every

single day in British Columbia, and I think it's completely unacceptable that in

many cases students and parents look at skills and training as a third or fourth

— or somewhere down the list — option. It should rank right up there as one

of the number one choices that parents and their students consider, as they look

to their future in this province. In fact, I think it's important for us to

point out that we all have to do a better job of doing that.

[1520]

I'm a

parent, and when we start to speak to our own children about what their future

aspirations or goals are, do we as a parent sit down and explore the trades as

one of those options? As the Minister of Advanced Education I can tell you this:

having had this portfolio for almost two years, I realize that it's not only

important but absolutely essential that we start at home. We start by looking at

those options and, as parents, recognizing that it's just as important that we

have plumbers and electricians and people who look after the aircraft we fly on

everyday or who look after the cars we drive as it is to have physicians who

look after us physically and all of those things. It's an attitude shift that we

need. We need to work together with industry, labour and educators to ensure

we're making those changes that help students make those decisions.

Another

important part of the process is a challenge process, based on competencies,

that will recognize prior learning and credentialing through equivalency and

assessment. It will include practical and/or written examinations which will be

available regionally. Those who are not successful at challenging examinations

will be linked to training to address the skills and knowledge deficiencies, to

allow them to progress toward a credential.

We're going

to allow someone in this province to say: "I think I have the competencies

necessary to achieve that credential." Should they be successful, that's

fantastic. Let's move them on either to a job or to the next step of training.

If they are not successful, what will we do? We'll say: "There are some

areas here that you need to work on and that we need to give you some help

in." We're going to match them up to a training program that will help them

bring their skill set to the level necessary to achieve the credential. It

sounds like it makes a lot of sense, from my perspective.

I want to

give you an example. I was recently visiting an institution in the province —

I've visited just about all of the ones I'm responsible for — and there was a

young man who was taking an automotive repair course. His instructor — who, by

the way, under the current system was able to challenge the fourth-year

apprenticeship program…. That instructor was successful and is now an

incredible instructor in the system. He can't do that now. You can't do that in

British Columbia now.

He pointed

out a young man to me who was probably in his late twenties or early thirties,

and he said: "I want you to know something. That young man has the

competency level and the skill set to actually begin his training at the third

year of an apprenticeship. He has all the skills necessary to do that." Do

you know what he said to me? "The unfortunate part of it is that he can't

do that under this system. He has to start at year one."

How

frustrating is that for an employer and for a young man with incredible

potential to be able to move forward to a particular process and to move ahead

in that process? He has the skill set to do it. The process simply will not

allow him to do it. This legislation will help us to address that.

Competency-based

assessment will also allow us to look at dual credit, something that my

colleague the Minister of Education has supported and is looking at expanding in

the K-to-12 system. We want to look at dual credit towards apprenticeship and

other certificates, diplomas and applied degrees. New credentials will be

developed to reflect current workplace standards and skill sets.

In the new

industry training system governed by the authority, training will include

on-the-job training, upfront training, short- and long-term institutional-based

training, co-op training combining classroom and work experience, on-line

training, entry level and advanced training and training that leads to diplomas

and applied degrees. That sounds like a lot of choice, a lot of flexibility and

a lot more opportunity for the learners of British Columbia.

In carrying

out its powers and duties under the act, the authority may delegate its powers

respecting training programs with the prior approval of the minister, with one

exception. The authority's power to designate a training program as a recognized

program cannot be delegated, to ensure that consistent criteria for designated

recognized programs are applied.

The

authority will have the power to delegate curriculum development, assessment and

issuance of credentials in recognized programs to public and private trainers

and industry groups. This will allow for direct involvement by them in

delivering training programs and credentials relevant to the needs of industry,

workers and, most importantly, our trainees. It is important for the development

of a highly skilled, employable workforce that industry work together with

trainers and trainees to develop the priorities for training so that it is

relevant and, most importantly, responsive to changes in industry and

technology.

[1525]

Delegation

of the power to give recognition for training to provincial standards to the new

Safety Authority will allow for their involvement in developing training

programs and standards where public safety is an issue. Funding sources for the

authority are ex-

[ Page 6478 ]

pected to be multiple, including the $78.5 million training budget of our

ministry. We expect to raise additional revenue from industry.

To ensure

accountability for public funding, the authority will be required to submit to

government a multi-year business plan and an annual report. The business plan

will include proposed revenues and expenditures as well as assets and

liabilities. The business plan will also include a statement of how the

authority proposes to meet the goals of increasing the quality and quantity of

training received by learners in British Columbia. The annual report will

include the authority's progress in meeting these goals, which are targeted at

addressing current and projected skills shortages.

Accountability

requirements will apply to all of those who receive public funds to provide

training. The new act will allow for a flexible system in which workers can

demonstrate or achieve competency at different levels or in related trades. This

is important for increasing the number of trained workers in British Columbia.

Public

safety concerns will be addressed by the authority, ensuring that training meets

the safety standards set by the appropriate ministry, agency or federal

government department. The act requires the authority to maintain a register of

trainees and industry training agreements.

Something

that will be exciting…. Again, this morning we heard from one of the members

about the importance of high-tech. We're going to look at an on-line

self-registration system. This new system will allow for updating of a trainee's

experience and education by the trainee, the employer or public and private

trainers, as appropriate. We'll actually be able to track progress and look at

the additional credentials so that an employee, an employer and the trainee can

all have a complete record of a particular learner's skill set and

accomplishments on one system.

The new

system will reduce red tape as well as improve data accuracy and time lines. The

collection of more accurate and timely data will result in improved reporting of

information and also monitoring of funding.

In terms of

appeals, the act provides for a two-tier process of administrative review by the

chief executive officer and an independent appeal to the Industry Training

Appeal Board. This will allow for a far more streamlined process where matters

can be dealt with by the authority unless they require an independent review.

Transitional

provisions are contained in the act to ensure continuity once the new act comes

into force. These transitional provisions apply to the following: trades and

occupations designated by ITAC, trainees and industry-training and

apprenticeship programs established by ITAC, apprenticeship agreements

registered by ITAC, credentials and exemptions granted by ITAC and appeals under

the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Act. All of these will continue under

the new act.

Before I

close, I want to thank the members of the Transition Advisory Committee for all

the hard work they have done and to say that their contribution has been

valuable and has helped to shape a new industry-training model for British

Columbia. I also want to thank all of those, as I mentioned before, who

participated in the exciting and exuberant regional forums held around the

province, as well as the many who responded to the discussion paper posted on

the ministry website.

All of

these comments have been helpful, and while there is certainly not a consensus

or full agreement on many of the issues, there is one thing that is important to

note. It became even more apparent as we moved through the process that the

status quo simply will not suffice any longer. While it's important to maintain

and enhance those aspects of the model which we are committed to doing, which

are excellent and work well, it's time for us to open up new opportunities and

to look at new ways of training in this province while maintaining those things

that are important — Red Seal certification, the ability to be mobile, high

standards, safety standards in place.

We're

simply saying it's time for change. We want to do that thoughtfully, we want to

do that carefully, and we want to look at a new path of industry training in

this province. I want to reaffirm our government's support and commitment to an

industry-led training and apprenticeship program that is designed to improve the

skills and productivity of the workforce and therefore — and so important to

all of us — to better position British Columbia for economic growth and

increased prosperity.

[1530]

Lekstrom: It's certainly my privilege today to stand in this House and

support Bill 34, the Industry Training Authority Act, as presented by the

minister. I'd like to thank the minister for her work on this initiative, one

that I think a lot of people have had a lot of questions on. I commend the

minister for putting the time and effort into answering those questions, not

just for your colleagues but for all British Columbians, and giving them the

opportunity to go out and express their concerns.

Certainly,

there was unknown out there. There was a lot of discussion that took place, but

it's very clear to me. People ask one simple question: why did we have to do

this? The minister touched on that, and I think it became very clear for most

people — 45 percent of the people that entered our previous system didn't

complete it. That has to be reason for concern and reason for any government to

reconsider the delivery model they were using to try and better accommodate the

needs of British Columbians in our province here today.

An exciting

format we've talked about is the ability for our children coming up through our

K-to-12 system. We're going to focus now on not only having them focus on the

need to go to university. In many cases, if that's their wish, it's very worthy

to do that, but I think for far too long we focused on that. We made our

children feel that unless they went to univer-

[ Page 6479 ]

sity, they were taking a second seat to somebody that did when in fact, as

the minister pointed out, we couldn't be more wrong in that concept.

Whether you

want to be a millwright, a welder, an electrician, a plumber or a meat-cutter,

all of those are very good ideas and good opportunities to make a living for

yourself, to raise your family, and are opportunities and jobs you should be

proud of. In British Columbia, like around the world, not everybody and every

need comes from a university education.

I'm not

here to say that university educations aren't worthy. We all set our goals in

life, like our children do. But when we have children going through school and

they hit grades 10, 11 and 12 and feel that maybe their desire isn't to go on to

university, why should they even finish grades 11 and 12? We see a dropout rate,

and that is an effective way to discourage a child from carrying on in school.

They may want to go right into the trades, and now we're going to have a program

that's going to allow our students in grades 10, 11 and 12 to focus in on what

they may like to do with their future and to start getting credits towards a

trade in British Columbia that they can work towards and be ahead of the game

when they graduate from grade 12.

My key

reason for looking at this and supporting it, among the many that the minister

has pointed out, is what I've said earlier — 45 percent of our entrants into

the previous system didn't complete. There was work that needed to be done, and

I believe the minister, along with all of the people, has done a wonderful job

in trying to come up with what I think is going to be a great alternative.

As the

minister pointed out, the people who were in the existing system are looked

after. This isn't about completely getting rid of one and only allowing the need

for a new one. This is about combining both.

The issue

of compulsory trades that are moving to be accredited. Many people had concerns

about that and felt it was some move to deskill the workforce and try to take

away compulsory trades, of which I believe 11 were recognized under the previous

legislation. This is about allowing flexibility, as the minister pointed out.

Somebody

that's worked many years in a trade and wants to shift their career and move

into another trade may very well have the ability to challenge that at the third

year or the second year — probably very rarely at the fourth-year level —

but the previous system didn't allow that. They had to go back and begin at year

one.

This new

system we're putting in is going to allow flexibility. Rather than being based

just on time, it's going to be based on how you're able to do the job, how

capable you are, with the experience you've gained in the field along with your

cohorts and the workers you've worked with. I think that's a very good move, and

certainly again I commend the minister for looking at that and bringing

something in that will implement something that is going to benefit British

Columbians, not deskill our workforce.

I've had

discussions with many people over this, and I certainly have a history of this.

My father was an instructor at a college, and my brother is an instructor at a

college in the trades training. I've had many people express concerns about new

modularized training initiatives that we're going to see in different areas of

the province — whether it be, as the minister pointed out, for a framer rather

than being a fully qualified journeyman carpenter. You may just want to be a

framer. There's a great need for those, particularly in the lower mainland where

we're seeing a boom take place.

People have

said that's going to deskill the workforce. I think they're wrong. I think

they're off track when they say that. All you have to do is look at what takes

place in welding today. If you go in, it's a modularized system already. You

have your C ticket, your B ticket, your A, your pressure. You go through a

modularized system that allows you to carry on as far as you want to go.

[1535]

There's no

mandate that says you have to go up here. If you receive your C ticket and that

allows you to do the work you want to do, and you're making a living for

yourself and your family, and that's what you enjoy doing in life, there's

nothing that says you have to go back and upgrade. You can continue with that.

We're going to allow the same flexibility for many other areas with our

apprentices and our trades training in British Columbia.

The

transferability from one trade to the other, as I pointed out, made very little

sense — that a qualified person would have to go back to year one. If they

spent 15 or 20 years in a trade of their choice and decided to upgrade and take

on another one, they may well be able to transfer over immediately. Instead,

what they're willing to do is challenge the test. Again, I want to reiterate how

important that is.

There were

a lot of people concerned about the Red Seal certification. The Red Seal

certification is an interprovincial ticket that we get. This does absolutely

nothing to change what's going to take place with our Red Seal certification.

Red Seal certification is a national standard we have to utilize to make sure

that if we take an electrician from British Columbia, for example, and they want

to go to Alberta or Saskatchewan or farther east, they have that certification.

We will not put in a system in British Columbia that will see an electrician in

British Columbia not credentialed to work in Alberta or anywhere else if they

have their Red Seal certification. I think that's vitally important for people

to understand.

I think

that when we get into issues like this, many, many people talk about "what

if" and "what might" rather than actually dealing with the

factual information. I'm proud to be part of this change today, and I think that

in the years to come we're going to see more of our workers that enter the

system of trades training and apprenticeship in British Columbia carry on to

completion, which will correct the 45 percent dropout rate that presently takes

place.

There are

so many things and so many examples the minister touched on. She certainly

covered a good portion of what I wanted to say today, and I know that

[ Page 6480 ]

people listening at home and following our debate don't need to hear things

two and three times.

In closing,

I just want to say that this has been an issue with my family and my friends.

We've talked about it. We've had much discussion right around the province.

There's been a lot of concern. Again, I think that concern was legitimate,

because that's how we find better modes to deliver services in British Columbia.

Those concerns were listened to by the minister. A lot of work has gone into

Bill 34, and I'm proud to stand today and show my support for it.

J. Bray:

I, too, rise in support of Bill 34, the Industry Training Authority Act. I

concur greatly with the previous speaker, the member for Peace River South.

The

development of this bill. Perhaps that's where I'll start this afternoon. You

know, sometimes the people watching wonder where legislation comes from. How

does it arrive on the floor of the Legislature that we'll debate things like

industry training and apprenticeship or any of the other things we debate here

in the House? Where it comes from is when government, this government,

identifies a problem, consults with the public and consults with stakeholders to

arrive at a solution to a problem.

The problem

facing our economy was one of a lack of skilled tradespeople coming up through

the system. It was hearing from industries right across all sectors that the

number one concern they had — other than taxes, of course — was a lack of

skilled tradespeople. The average age of skilled tradespeople was rising every

single year, and they did not see the flow of new people coming into the trades.

The ability for our economy to grow, for communities to grow and for families to

support themselves was going to be directly impacted by that.

I think

many people in the public have had situations where they've looked for help on a

project, be it a general contractor doing some work or even just trying to find

a plumber to come and fix your sink, and found it difficult to find somebody who

was skilled to come and do that work. Well, that's not just an inconvenience;

that actually is a real threat to good, strong economic growth.

[1540]

There has

been a bias, I think, for many years to suggest that one must graduate high

school and go to university or college — not either-or, but that was where you

should go. We as parents have done a lot of that ourselves. We have actually

created that ourselves by our own biases perhaps. The reality is that there is

such a shortage of skilled tradespeople — and these are individuals who make

excellent wages, family-supporting wages, community-supporting wages — that

perhaps now is the time for us to recognize that the problem of a lack of

skilled tradespeople starts here. With the emphasis that we place on apprentices

— those learning the trades, those entering into the trades — how do we

address that shortage in a way that complements the individual, complements the

various industries, our economy, high school and our post-secondary

institutions, and provides solutions for all? I commend the minister, because

Bill 34 addresses all of those in a very comprehensive way to the betterment of

everybody.

It's

interesting to note — and I congratulate the member for Peace River South for

raising this issue — that the trades are just as honourable as somebody with a

college degree or certificate or with a university degree. Somebody who is an

apprenticed journeyman plumber is in an honourable trade. Somebody who is a

journeyman painter is in an honourable trade. Somebody who is a fully ticketed

meat cutter is in an honourable trade, on par with every single person in this

Legislature, on par with anybody in society. Our communities were built by

people who worked in the trades, and our economy will thrive only when we have

enough people with those skills working forward.

The problem

with apprenticeships was that we weren't getting enough people through the

system. We weren't getting enough people who were feeling they were benefiting

by the system. Part of the reason was that the system wasn't designed and didn't

evolve over time to the benefit of that individual apprentice. It morphed into a

system that benefited various other parties for a whole host of reasons, but the

structures at the end of the day actually meant, as the member pointed out, that

almost half the people didn't complete the program. To me, a 45 percent dropout

rate is not acceptable. We would never accept that in high schools. We would

never accept that in universities. I'm glad that the Minister of Advanced

Education has said we're not going to accept that for our apprenticeship

program.

What does

the new model that the bill brings in do? It actually recognizes the system is

there for the apprentice and an apprentice who feels valued, who has access to

the opportunities, to the training and to a system that meets their needs and

will benefit the sector they're training towards. When they are benefiting the

sector they're training towards, that benefits the whole economy. I think a new

model that comes forward that respects the individual apprentice and the choices

— not that employers necessarily want to make, not that government wants to

make or that post-secondary institutions want to make or that unions want to

make — that the individual apprentice wants to make is key to the success of

this program, respecting that those individuals who choose the trades can make

decisions for themselves, can choose how far they want to go, can choose to make

career changes and can choose to move to different parts of the province to

work. Now they have a system that will respect those choices, will support those

choices and will enhance their opportunities in this province.

Recognizing

that there are multiple players in the apprenticeship program is key. The union

system is vital for apprentices, but it is not the only partner that's involved

here. You also have employers who have emerging needs, changing needs —

sometimes quite quickly — and they need some ability to respond. You have

post-secondary institutions, some of the finest in

[ Page 6481 ]

the world, who are moving forward and using technologies such as the Internet

to provide opportunities to people. You have two-income families now, so the

apprentice who maybe 25 years ago was going to be the sole income earner….

That's not the case now. Families can't just get up and move around simply to

meet the demands of one wage earner. You now need to have the flexibility to

recognize perhaps that portability, at any given point in time, isn't there.

[1545]

We need to

have a system that responds to apprentices and gives them the opportunity to get

some of their credits through the Internet and some of their classroom time

using the new technology. It gives them credit for the skills they inherently

have — not just the piece of paper that government or an institution gave

them, but actually gives them credit for the skill they inherently have. It

gives them skills for work they've done, perhaps, in other jurisdictions. It

gives them skills that are cross-trainable. You know, somebody who works with

wood could probably do more than one particular thing in carpentry. So this

system recognizes those competencies, gives them the ability.

It does

something else that I think is very exciting. It melds the two systems we have

created here. You're either an apprentice, or you go to a college or university.

Heaven forbid that you ever connect the two, because one is a trade and one is

academic. This actually recognizes that you need to have all skills to be a

fully participating member in the community, and if you choose at some point in

time…. Say, as an apprentice you've got your journeyman papers, perhaps in the

construction trades, and you want to move forward and become a general

contractor or do some other things. The system now recognizes that you can get

some credits for your skills towards, say, a business administration degree. How

novel to actually say: "You've been doing this for 20 years. I bet you've

got some competency."

Now we

actually recognize all the skills inherent in being a journeyman carpenter and

vice versa. Perhaps you've gone to university for some time. You've done

mathematics, some physics and some geometry, and you decide that you really

would like to do something in the trades. Well, now you don't start at day one.

Now you have the ability to get some recognition for some of that academic work.

The flexibility provides that the individual, who should be at the centre of the

whole issue of trades training, is now recognized in this.

What are

some of the other benefits this provides to apprentices? Well, it provides them

the opportunity to choose where and when they want to take training. They're not

stuck in a regimented process that doesn't recognize that life is more

complicated now. There are other issues that go on, and you sometimes can't fit

into a rigid, autocratic system. This allows the flexibility that individuals

need in today's society to meet family and community demands as well as training

demands.

Certification

will be based on skills and abilities rather than just the arbitrary measurement

of time — to somehow suggest that if you've been there long enough, that's a

trigger to say you're successful. It actually says that skill is what we're

going to measure you on, and ability is what we're going to measure you on. In

other words, we're going to look at your merits as well just some arbitrary

measurement of time.

It also

means that for some apprentices to be fully certified, to be able to demonstrate

all the skills and abilities to be certified, your actual apprenticeship time

may be reduced. You may actually be able to achieve your full certification

quicker because we're now measuring you on skills and ability and not just time.

As I said before, you can transfer your credits around to meet your own

individual needs. It recognizes that cross-training purpose.

So I think

that this is really an important piece of legislation. It will be one of the

many pieces we're putting into place to advance the trades, to advance the

looming skills shortages, to make the system responsive to the most important

person in the entire system, and that's the apprentice.

I'm proud

to be able to support Bill 34, and I congratulate the Minister of Advanced

Education for consulting, for listening to the various stakeholders in what has

sometimes been a very emotional and complicated system to meet the needs of

everybody but to always keep the apprentice at the centre of the equation.

Trumper: In rising to speak to Bill 34, I want to say it is time that the

programs for apprenticeship are modernized so that our trades work for business

today, for employers and for the student who is taking up that road in their

career. As you know, Mr. Speaker — and you yourself live in a community which

is industrial-based — many of our tradespeople who came there many years ago

are now retiring, and we find a huge shortage in apprentices and qualified

tradespeople. Many of those people came from Europe many years ago, where

they've always had a very good apprenticeship program for trades.

[1550]

Over the

years I believe that not only British Columbia but Canada has fallen back in

making apprenticeship programs modernized and available for those that wish to

use these as a career path. I do want to acknowledge that in my region,

NorskeCanada has an excellent apprenticeship program, and I know they are doing

some pilot programs at the moment. Also, North Island College was one of the

first colleges to have the modular welding program in place some years ago.

One of the

issues that I think has come forth with the discussion on this particular bill

is that there has been a lack of understanding, or maybe it's just that change

is challenging. I was at a meeting about a month ago where I certainly was

castigated on this particular program. I won't use the word that was used to me

at this meeting, but it's fair to say that I was told I was completely

untruthful in what I was reporting on the particular program.

I hope

those who have concerns and maybe don't quite understand the direction that

we're going will

[ Page 6482 ]

read Hansard, because the minister certainly covered it incredibly

well as to the direction we are taking. The minister made it very clear what the

standards are and how they will be accepted right across Canada, and that our

tradespeople, as they reach their qualifications, will be accepted and will be

able to work in any province in this country.

Most of

what I wanted to say has been referred to recently, and I'm quite sure that most

people don't wish to have it repeated. But a month ago I, like many of my

colleagues, met with a particular group of people who were very opposed to this

program, and so I issued them a challenge. I asked them to come back to me with

some recommendations on modernizing the apprenticeship program. To date I

haven't received anything from them. I do believe that criticism and concern

about programs are always valid, but I also believe that you have to be prepared

to make some recommendations.

Over the

years we've looked at the apprenticeship programs. I can remember many years

ago, when I was on the school board, we tried to encourage apprenticeship

programs for young people. At that time the unions of the day were very set on

the fact that it was seniority that was the most important thing, so you were

getting people who, for whatever reasons, at the age of 45 were starting on

apprenticeship programs. There was absolutely no opportunity for young people to

get into the apprenticeship programs.

Times have

changed; things have moved on. There is opportunity, but I also believe there is

a great opportunity today for young people to look at the roads they're going to

take, to look at the careers they're going to take. If you look at the trades

that are out there, they are well-paying jobs. They enable many of them to move

across the country, to move to other places to get employment. It gives them an

opportunity, and it opens the world for them.

I do

believe, as many people have said previously, that too often…. I don't believe

we have encouraged our children to look at the trades, to look at the

apprenticeship programs, for their futures. I am very pleased today to commend

the minister on this new Industry Training Authority Act, to look at the way we

are moving forward so that we can modernize the way we train people. It gives

them the opportunity to do it in their own time, to recognize some of the

training they may have had in other education programs. It gives them an

opportunity to move on.

They can do

it at their own time, not necessarily at the time and in the programs that other

groups may need. They can take the opportunity to individualize their programs.

I believe we are laying a great foundation for the young people, particularly,

in this province to move forward to have careers that they will be successful in

and also that will enable them to have good, fruitful lives and be successful in

whatever they do.

[1555]

Nuraney: I also rise this afternoon to support Bill 34, which is on the

floor today. Just as my colleagues have said, it is a bill that is, again, a

reflection of what this government is all about. If the status quo continues to

be accepted, there can be no change. There can be no progress. I think that in

bringing this bill forward, the minister has proven to us that she indeed has

the conviction that the status quo has to be changed.

What she

has done, more importantly, is identify needs and have the courage to move

towards responding to those needs. We have in the past heard about the dangers

that would confront us in time as electronics and the new technology enter the

fields of trade and industry. There is that huge fear expressed some years ago

that the labour force that was in these different fields would become redundant

with the introduction of the new technology. The fear was: how are we going to

retrain that labour force to make it more productive again?

In this

bill I see that as a part of the response to that need. What we have now adopted

here is a program that we can give to people who can very quickly be put back

into the workforce with specialized training that is geared towards what the

market needs right now. The market is shifting so rapidly in terms of its needs

for resources in manpower. As my colleague also mentioned, which I think is very

appropriate, one does not really gauge a person's success or qualifications by

the length of the term of the time that one spends in institutes of high

learning, but by the skills they develop and bring forward to become more

productive members of society.

Once again,

I think this is a bill that is striking the balance of also recognizing the

traditional requirements and the traditional necessity of qualifications like

the Red Seal — which continues to be accepted and recognized, and will

continue to be offered — while at the same time offering to those people who

perhaps do not have that kind of retention level of going through a three- to

five-year training program but who want to be specialized in a particular field

and have the ability to move forward in their lives and become productive.

I think

this bill addresses all those kinds of challenges that we have identified and

have seen in the past years. Once again, I think it is courageous of the

minister to be able to respond quickly to the needs without fear and to have

that conviction in her and her department that we have to move forward to meet

the needs where they are being identified.

I once

again want to congratulate the minister for bringing this forward and want to

express my support for Bill 34.

Hon. S.

Bond: I simply want to thank the members who made comments. I look forward

to ongoing discussion, I'm sure, through committee stage.

I think

it's best been said by my colleagues, in fact, and perhaps in a more articulate

way than me. They have highlighted absolutely the principles and the thinking

that have driven the creation of this bill and ultimately a new model. I think

perhaps focusing on the individual and their ability to choose is absolutely

critical to the thinking. The ability to retrain workers —

[ Page 6483 ]

so important as people make life adjustments through the skills they have in

more than one job in a period of time — is absolutely critical to what we're

doing. I think the comments about change causing uncertainty and the fact that

when we look at changing the status quo, often we react simply because it's

change and that we haven't really thought through the necessity for that change.

I simply

want to thank my colleagues for their comments, for their obviously thoughtful

review of this bill and for their recognition of how important it is to support

a system that reflects the needs of learners in this province. With that, I

would move second reading.

Motion

approved.

Hon. S.

Bond: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to

be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 34,

Industry Training Authority Act, read a second time and referred to a Committee

of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Hon. L.

Stephens: I call Committee of Supply to debate the estimates of the Ministry

of Forests.

Committee of Supply

The House

in Committee of Supply B; H. Long in the chair.

The

committee met at 4 p.m.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF FORESTS

On vote 25:

ministry operations, $312,230,000.

Hon. M.

de Jong: While various personages are assembling, I'm going to suggest that

at a time when obviously significant changes are taking place with respect to

forest policy management, I am looking forward to the questions I know members

will have about some of those changes as they have been announced thus far and

the significance of that from the point of view of ministry operations in the

year ahead.

Nettleton: Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to ask the minister

questions with respect to the Ministry of Forests, a ministry of vital

importance to the province and certainly to the part of the province I am

fortunate enough to represent.

With

respect to these estimates, the Ministry of Forests service plans are projecting

three years ahead. So I am taking this as a jumping-off point to ask the

minister to venture further with respect to his predictions with respect to his

ministry.

Seeing that

forest sector employment levels continue to weaken — and with B.C.

experiencing increased world competition in forest product markets, along with

mounting conservation pressures — and considering huge issues such as the

softwood lumber dispute, what does the minister foresee happening with respect

not only to the B.C. forest industry but to workers in that industry from

various communities and various parts of the province over the next few years?

Hon. M.

de Jong: Maybe before I go further, I can introduce the deputy minister, who

is seated to my right; Mary Myers, on my left from the Forest Service; and

Bronwen Beedle, directly behind me, as the staff who are participating in these

discussions.

I think the

member refers to an issue that is certainly on everyone's mind. It relates in

large measure to the overall health of our number one industry in this province,

and the trend lines over the past decade have not been positive. A great deal of

what we are embarked upon with the forestry revitalization plan is designed to

reverse that trend and is a response to what I think is an inescapable

conclusion one must draw: if we do nothing, the trend the member has identified

will continue.

[1605]

In fact,

ironically, for a host of reasons, at a time when we are certainly facing some

serious challenges with respect to forest health — and the member knows about

that firsthand from his own neck of the woods — and with respect to trade

issues, notwithstanding those very significant challenges, the short-term

employment numbers are actually marginally up. But I don't think we should kid

ourselves about where the trend lines have been. I know the member hasn't, as

part of his question. At the end of the day — and the member is correct to

look out beyond three years — the objective is to allow industry and all

facets of the industry to restructure and reconfigure in a way that will allow

us to regain a competitive advantage not just vis-à-vis the United States but

on a worldwide level. That is the new reality we live in as a forest sector.

That's the challenge we face, and that's the objective we've set for ourselves.

Nettleton: Yes, and certainly that is the hope, I think, of communities and

workers within the forest sector — that, in fact, the future does bode well

for that industry, particularly in the context of the difficulties families and

communities have experienced over the last ten or 12 years or so with respect to

the forest sector.

Back again,

if I may, to the service plan. There are about ten or so references within the

service plan stating the importance of consultation with first nations when it

comes to forestry and the forest sector. Those references state the need for

consultation, not just because of recent court decisions but because it makes a

lot of sense. First nations have an important constitutional place in our

province. I'm wondering, then, why there is this gap or divide between the

government's commitment to consultation and the first nation sentiment — their

sense that such consultation is not hap-

[ Page 6484 ]

pening. I'm thinking, surely, there must be some reason for those feelings on

the part of first nations if further court action and roadblocks are on the back

of the table. There's certainly been reference made to that by various first

nations.

To the

minister, then: what is his sense in terms of this growing frustration on the

part of first nations with respect to questions in and around the whole issue of

consultation?

Hon. M.

de Jong: Thanks to the member for the question. I think it is fair to say

that because it is a fact that some first nations have articulated a concern

around the issue of consultation, as the member points out fairly, there is a

recognition of the importance of engaging in that consultative effort within the

service plan, not just because of the obligations that exist either

constitutionally or via judicial pronouncements but also because, from an

operational point of view, it makes sense to do so. I think, though, one has to,

as well, analyze the parameters of what it actually means to consult. I'll

address that in sort of two ways.

[1610]

The

obligation to consult is not, in my view, the equivalent of bestowing upon

anyone a veto. Whenever one embarks upon an exercise designed to elicit the

opinions of people, part and parcel of that is the recognition that there may be

differing opinions and there may be different views about what the proper course

of action may be. At the end of the day the government accepts the benefit of

having received a myriad of different opinions and then proceeds in a way it

believes best serves the interests of the broader citizenry. So that is an

issue.

Here's

another issue I know this member has been involved with and has turned his mind

to, as have other members in the House: how do we find a model for consultation

that is workable, that will enjoy broad-level participation amongst first

nations and that gets beyond discussions that exist purely at a bilateral level

between the Crown in the right of the province and an individual band?

Now, there

are circumstances in which that is necessary and that is the correct and proper

channel for those discussions to take place. But there are a whole host of other

issues that relate to broader forest management policy in which it makes sense,

in my view, for us to look at some vehicle or mechanism, perhaps initially on a

regional level, that could then broaden into a larger provincial mechanism,

where we are sitting down to discuss operational aspects of forestry, technical

aspects of forestry, the Forest Act and the Forest and Range Practices Act —

but that those forums take place on a larger or broader level.

We've begun

some work in that respect, and I'm hoping we can gather some momentum. It won't

be easy. Obviously, it is going to take a degree of collaboration on the part of

both government and first nations. I have to say to the member candidly that I'm

glad he asked the question. Of late I have seen good results. That doesn't mean

we haven't got a long way to go, but the indicators in that respect are positive

in my view.

Nettleton: Thank you for that update. Again, representing as I do

communities that are resource-dependent — forest-dependent — we certainly

hope that some of the mechanisms and models that are currently being explored

will, in fact, be adopted and implemented and will lead to a resolution of some

of the uncertainty in the forest sector with respect to first nations

involvement.

For a lot

of the communities — not only the non-native residents of those communities

from which I hail, but for the first nations, of course — the forest sector

really is the only opportunity in terms of being involved in a very meaningful

way and finding some way to become involved in the economy and providing

opportunities for members of the various bands. For that reason, we all want to

see us move forward and prosper together. Certainly, we hope that will be the

case.

Changing

the topic then, if I may, the service plan talks about plans for the ministry's

six seed orchards. I understand these were offered up for lease to the private

sector, but there were no offers. My question would be: why lease when

outsourcing — the term being used — is what we see occurring in other

ministries?

[1615]

Seed

orchards work towards improving seeds for reforestation. Should this

responsibility be better done by, for instance, post-secondary institutions? I

think of UNBC, with which the minister is familiar, having been there on a

number of occasions. He's familiar with their programs. They have a significant

forest research component. Perhaps this could be a joint effort with the

Minister of Advanced Education with respect to seed orchards.

Hon. M.

de Jong: I apologize to the member. I wanted to try and get as complete a

set of information for him as possible. In fact, I think the member's

information is correct. There was an opportunity for submission of expressions

of interest on the six seed orchards. Unlike the nurseries such as Skimikin

where, ironically, there is both the nursery and the seed orchard, the private

sector did opt to take advantage of the nursery component, not the seed orchard

aspect of it.

The best I

can offer the member with respect to that is that it would appear there is less

interest in the commercial opportunity those seed orchards represent, and it may

be a product of the amount of time, the investment required at the front end

before a private operator would realize a return.

I think the

second part of the member's question, however, related to whether or not these

represent an opportunity for exploration of partnerships with post-secondary

learning institutions. I think that's possible, and I'm happy to receive the

member's suggestion in that respect.

Nettleton: Thank you to the minister. I would also like to ask, if I may,

about Forest Service roads.

[ Page 6485 ]

The ministry intends to hand off, as I understand it, the maintenance of

these roads to the forest industry, to something called road user groups and to

the Ministry of Transportation. What is the rationale for this?

Hon. M.

de Jong: I think the member's question is a timely one. He will know that as

part of the core review process of more than a year ago, we have undertaken a

pretty serious examination of what the ministry's responsibilities are and

should be with respect to the maintenance of a road network that I believe

extends beyond 40,000 kilometres in the province.

A number of

those Forest Service roads are roads that have been maintained by the ministry.

In large measure, we have relied historically in British Columbia on

participation by the licensees who use the roads. In fact, well in excess of a

half of that network of 40,000 is utilized and maintained by the licensees who

are operating out on the land base.

[1620]

Our

resources are taxed, and that's what happens when revenues decrease by the

approximate $600 million per year that we've seen over the last number of years.

We have looked at other avenues. The member will know — because I think he was

involved in some of the brainstorming that gave rise to the birth of this idea

— that we have designated a new type of road, a wilderness road, where

admittedly, the maintenance standards will be somewhat less than on a

conventional Forest Service road. The best way I can describe it is that you

probably don't want to take your Cadillac Eldorado out on a wilderness road, but

I'm not sure many people who want to access our outdoors in British Columbia are

inclined to do that.

The bottom

line is this. We have an extensive forest road network within British Columbia

that British Columbians have had access to and want to continue to have access

to. We are examining, in the best way we can, how to maintain that network.

Admittedly, in some cases, we are looking at a new type of road that will be a

little bit rougher and tougher to ride on. We're obviously looking for

continued, even increased participation from licensees. But the member knows as

well as anyone in this House the level of importance his constituents and

British Columbians place on having access to British Columbia's outdoors via

that network of roads, and we're doing the best we can to ensure that access

continues.

Nettleton: Yes. Well, a Chevy pickup works for me. In any event, as the

minister pointed out, these roads do provide access to folks, particularly those

of us who live and work and play in northern British Columbia.

Will the

Ministry of Transportation be afforded additional resources for maintaining any

roads for which that ministry receives responsibility?

Hon. M.

de Jong: In fact, those discussions are taking place with the Transportation

ministry. There shouldn't be any secrets here; I hope there aren't. Some of

these roads, which began as Forest Service roads, have evolved into something

far different. They have evolved into almost arterial highways, connecting

people to town. In those cases, the use that those roads are put to more closely

resembles a highway, which would logically fall under the jurisdiction of the

Ministry of Highways. On a fairly site-specific basis, we are engaged in some

discussions with that ministry on that issue.

Nettleton: Right. Yes. Well, as the minister has pointed out, I believe

Forest Service roads do, in fact, serve more than logging vehicles or provide

access to the woods to industry. Northern residents — myself included, and

other members of this House representing the north — use them as

transportation routes. There are often campgrounds or outdoor recreational sites

along these roads. These roads are often the only access points to some

wonderful recreational opportunities for hiking for locals, tourists and others.

Of course,

we're all concerned — those of us who live in the north — with respect to

the standards established for use. If some of these roads are no longer

maintained to a proper standard, we're concerned about what happens to those

opportunities. That is something we will certainly be monitoring and will be in

touch with the minister and his ministry as the ministry moves forward with

respect to roads.

[1625]

Finally,

with respect to roads, are there any such road user groups coming forward to

assume responsibility for a Forest Service road — for instance, a first

nations band or community association? If so, would they have the resources to

assume responsibility for roads that are particularly important to their group?

Hon. M.

de Jong: I think I should state the obvious, which is that probably without

exception, the preferred position for anyone that falls into the category of

groups the member has referred to is that the Crown continue or resume or

maintain responsibility for the maintenance of the roads. I suppose that is an

obvious position for anyone in that position to take.

The kind of

situation where we have begun to have discussions is where there might be a

recreational group or tourism group, and I think I heard the member refer to

these examples. It acknowledges that the road by which access to their

particular location or activity exists is no longer a road that is related to

any forestry activity. Therefore, there are no licensees providing the kind of

maintenance associated with that, and the Forest Service has signalled that for

budgetary reasons, we are unable to provide traditional maintenance.

In those

cases, discussions are taking place, again on a pretty site-specific basis, as

to how we might work together to ensure that access continues. It varies. There

are situations, obviously, where you have some pretty isolated locations and a

lengthy road, and that's really the only activity, the only occupant, at the end

of the road. That presents a different set of challenges to

[ Page 6486 ]

the situation where a number of homes, for example, have sprouted along a

forestry road and there is traffic associated with that.

That's the

kind of situation in which those discussions are taking place. I can acknowledge

to the member that we haven't solved all of the problems, and we're trying to

work through them as best we can.

Nettleton: The minister is quite right that they're very site-specific —

some of these discussions. It has been my experience, and I'm sure it has been

the experience of other members with respect to issues in and around roads and

accessing some of these more remote communities, residences and what have you,

that in the various ministries — that is, both the Ministry of Forests and the

Ministry of Transportation — the personnel at the local and regional offices

have been very helpful in terms of attempting to work through those on a

site-specific basis. That has certainly been my experience.

I guess the

concern would be that this might change if, in fact, the resources were somehow

not there for those particular ministries at the various regional offices and

community offices and so forth. But certainly, it has been my experience, as I

say, that the personnel at those offices have worked very hard on working

through those issues with folks.

[1630]

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]