British Columbia Hansard — Wednesday, May 28, 2003

H0528pm-05

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Wednesday, May 28, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 16, Number 5 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations ..................................................................................................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education............................................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................................................................ Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries..................................................................................................................... Hon.

John van Dongen Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations..................................................................................... Hon. Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development ..................................................................................................................... Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development...................................................................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services ..............................................................................................Hon. George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter ..............................................................................................................................Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality..................................................................................................................................Hon.

Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ..................................................................................................................... Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ..............................................................................................................................................Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines...............................................................................................................................................Hon.

Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance.........................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Gary Collins Minister of Forests................................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .....................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health................................................................................................................................... Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................... Hon.

Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Management Services ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue..................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General...................................................................................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour......................................................................................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management ..........................................................................................................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..............................................................................................................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection ............................................................................................................................ Hon.

Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition .......................................................................................................................................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole..............................................................................................................................................

Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ........................................................................................................................................... E. George MacMinn Clerk Assistant.........................................................................................................................................................................................Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk ...............................................................................................................................................................Ian D.

Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees ....................................................................................................................................... Craig H. James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk.................................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................................................................Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian ............................................................................................................................................................................ Joan A.

Barton Legislative Comptroller...............................................................................................................................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hans ard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria. Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636.

Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ..........................................................................Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L)............................................................... Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon.

Bill (L)...............................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L) ...........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L)....................................................................................North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ..............................................................................East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ...................................................................

Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).....................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).......................................... Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L) ........................................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Brenzinger, Elayne (L)..................................................................Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L)............................................................................... Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L) .................................................

Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L) .............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L)............................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L) .................................................................. Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) ............................................................... Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ..............................................................................Yale-Lillooet Clark, Hon.

Christy (L) ....................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ................................................................................Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ..........................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)................................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon. Gary (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L) ........................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon.

Kevin (L) ............................................................ Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ......................................................................Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L)....................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)..............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) .......................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Harris, Roger (L) .........................................................................................Skeena Hawes, Randy (L)............................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Hon. Sindi (L) ........................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ..................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon. Gordon (L)..........................................................

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ..................................................................................... Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)........................................................North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L).............................................................. Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L) ................................................................ Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L)................................................... Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)................................

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).........................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................... Peace River South Les, John (L)............................................................................. Chilliwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ............................................................. Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) .................................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L).........................................................

Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................. Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ............................................................ Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) ..............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ..................................................................................... Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L)............................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L).............................................................

New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) ............................................ West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L) ...................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) .......................................................

Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L).....................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L)..................................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Orr, Sheila (L) .............................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)......................................................................... Chilliwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ........................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L).............................................................. Nanaimo-Parksville Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ..................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L)...................................................................Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)............................................................................ Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).......................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L) .............................................. West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................... Langley Stewart, Ken (L)........................................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L)........................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L)..................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L) .........................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L)............................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)..................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, Hon. John (L)..................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L)...................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).......................................................... Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon. Katherine (L)....................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)..............................................................................Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)..............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn ........................................................ Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman................................................Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum ........................................................................

Gillian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ................................................................ Dennis MacKay Burnaby North................................................................................ Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds.............................................................................. Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon ........................................................................John Nuraney Burquitlam............................................................................................

Harry Bloy Cariboo North..................................................................................... John Wilson Cariboo South........................................................................................Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ................................................................................

Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas ....................................................................................John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke .....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .............................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville............................................................... Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .........................................................Hon. Graham P.

Bruce Delta North.............................................................................................Reni Masi Delta South...................................................................................Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .....................................................................................Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin .................................................................... Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove....................................................... Hon.

Rich Coleman Kamloops ......................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson.......................................................... Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country .................................................................John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ...................................................................Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley.................................................................................. Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca.......................................................................

Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ......................................................................Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows............................................................... Ken Stewart Nanaimo .............................................................................................Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville.....................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston......................................................................... Blair F.

Suffredine New Westminster .................................................................... Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast .......................................................................................... Bill Belsey North Island.......................................................................................... Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................... Hon. Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour ..............................................................

Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head......................................................................... Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .......................................................................Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside................................................................... Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North ...............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South ..........................................................................Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley...................................................... Hon.

Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain......................................................Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood ...........................................................Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast............................................................Harold Long Prince George North ................................................................................. Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................. Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca .................................................................

Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre ..........................................................Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East ............................................................................ Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ...................................................................Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands..................................................Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................... Susan Brice Shuswap ................................................................................

Hon. George Abbott Skeena ............................................................................................... Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................................Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers.....................................................................Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ..................................................................................Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................... Hon. Gulzar S.

Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .............................................................................Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ........................................................................ Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock................................................................. Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard .................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview..................................................................Hon. Gary Collins Vancouver-Fraserview .....................................................................

Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings......................................................................... Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................... Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway............................................................................ Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara...................................................................... Val J. Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey..................................................... Hon.

Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena ............................................................. Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill ...............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.....................................................................................Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary ......................................................Hon. Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................... Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi................................................... Hon.

Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .....................................................................................Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Wednesday, May 28, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... .............................................. 7037 Introduction and First Reading of Bills........................................................................................ ......................................... 7037 British Columbia Railway Asset Protection Act, 2003 (Bill M203) J. MacPhail Administrative Tribunals Appointment and Administration Act (Bill 68) Hon. G.

Plant Commercial Appeals Commission Repeal Act (Bill 70) Hon. R. Coleman Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ............. 7039 Korean Heritage Day L. Mayencourt Fraser Valley air quality R. Hawes Small business in Burquitlam H. Bloy Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 7040 Management of Coquihalla Highway J. MacPhail Hon. J. Reid Hon. G.

Collins Promotion of tourism in B.C. W. McMahon Hon. R. Thorpe Government action on mad cow disease P. Nettleton Hon. J. van Dongen Sale of Crown land in Comox Valley J. Kwan Hon. S. Hagen J. MacPhail Motions on Notice.............................................................................................................. ...................................................... 7043 Amendment to motion on government business

schedule (Motion 101) Hon. G. Collins J. MacPhail Motions without Notice ......................................................................................................... ................................................. 7043 Appointment of Tony Bhullar to select standing committees Hon. G.

Collins Tabling Documents.............................................................................................................. .................................................... 7043 Forest Appeals Commission, annual report, 2002 Forest Practices Board, annual report, 2002 Petitions...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 7043 J. MacPhail

Committee of the Whole House................................................................................................... .......................................... 7043 Community Services Labour Relations Act (Bill 61) Hon. G.

Collins Reporting of Bills ............................................................................................................. ........................................................ 7044 Community Services Labour Relations Act (Bill 61) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 7044 Community Services Labour Relations Act (Bill 61) Committee of the Whole House................................................................................................... .......................................... 7044 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 66) D.

MacKay Hon. G. Plant B. Penner V.

Anderson Reporting of Bills ............................................................................................................. ........................................................ 7049 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 66) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 7049 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003 (Bill 66) Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................... 7049 Estimates: Office of the Premier Hon.

G. Campbell Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt J. MacPhail J. Kwan Introduction and First Reading of Bills........................................................................................ ......................................... 7093 Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Bill 47) Hon. G. Collins Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ................................................... 7094 Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Bill 47) Hon. G.

Collins Committee of the Whole House................................................................................................... .......................................... 7094 Supply Act 2003-2004 (Bill 47) Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 7094 Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Bill 47)

7037 WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 The House met at 2:04 p.m. Prayers. [1405] Introductions by Members D. Jarvis: I'd like to introduce to the members of the House Adam Petersen, a young man who has moved into my riding in North Vancouver. He has just fin- ished being a student at Capilano College. He has been studying for his CAB licence for an insurance broker. H e ' s a g o o d s u p p o r t e r o f t h i s g o v e r n m e n t , s o p l e a s e make him welcome. J. MacPhail: Today I rise to introduce Glen Naylor to the House. Mr.

Naylor made the trip down the Is- land today from Parksville to visit one of our interns who is his grandson. I asked the intern working with us — and I was hoping the answer would be yes — whether his grandfather was older than me, but he couldn't guarantee that he was. That was extremely unfortunate on the part of the intern for not saying the right answer. Anyway, Mr. Naylor should be ex- tremely proud of his grandson, Hayden, who is doing a wonderful job. Would the House please make Mr. Naylor welcome. Hon. S.

Bond: I would like to welcome to the House today someone who is providing leadership in the area of private post-secondary education in the province, and that's Daren Hancott. He's the Vancouver campus director of the University of Phoenix, and he has been meeting with ministry staff today. I would very much like to ask the House to please make him welcome. Hon. G. Plant: Today we are joined in the gallery and the precincts by two groups of enthusiastic stu- dents from Diefenbaker Elementary School in Rich- mond-Steveston. They are a ccompanied by their prin- cipal, Susan Johnsen; by teachers Mrs. Csontala, Mrs.

Hindson and Mrs. Waterfall; and by a group of par- ents. Working among the stud ents is a specially fortu- nate young man who gets to have his twelfth birthday announced on the floor of the Legislature, Michael Yap. I hope all members of the House will please welcome all these fine students and their parents and teachers. D. Hayer: It gives me great pleasure to introduce 11 students who are touring our Legislature today.

Saira Kanwal, Laureen Naidu, Jason Chan, Michael Goitard, Al-Rahim Habib, Patricia Trinidad, Jana Ingelsman, Shalini Arya, Stacey Neves, Kylie Van Eaton and Ray- mond Soo, of grades 10 and 11, are visiting from Sur- rey. Joining them is thei r teacher, Mr. Jonathan Nielson. These 11 students were participants in the Rotary Club of Surrey "Adventure in Surrey" speech meet, an event that focuses on developing a greater awareness among young people of both the responsibility and the importance of Canadian citi zenship. These grades 10 and 11 students were asked to speak on what there is to celebrate in Canada.

Their responses were lively and represented a refreshing image of youthful pride in being Canadian. As an acknowledgment of their fine work, I invited these students on a trip to the B.C. Legislature to gain a greater understanding of ho w our provincial govern- ment functions. Would the House please make them very welcome. R. Hawes: Today in the precincts we have 40 grade 7 students from Hatzic Elem entary School with their teacher, Ms. Heron, and five adults as chaperons. Could the House please make them welcome. Hon. S. Hawkins: Our Kelowna Rockets hockey team returned from Quebec City, from the Memorial Cup.

They had a fabulous season, and I want to offi- cially congratulate them he re. They had what has been described as a Cinderella season. They were a very young team, and they won the WHL finals. I think I've already made that point to the members from…. Interjections. Hon. S. Hawkins: Yes, okay. From Kamloops and from Cranbrook. I want to congratulate Marc Habscheid, who won the honour of Coach of the Year for the Canadian Hockey League, and Bruce Hamilton, who is the Ex- ecutive of the Year — both from the Kelowna Rockets organization.

Next year Kelowna is hosting the Memorial Cup, and I can tell you our Rockets will be back there to de- fend it. Congratulations to them, and I hope the House also congratulates them. [1410] Hon. R. Thorpe: Today I had the privilege of listen- ing to 42 students from Glen rosa Middle School play. Their band was here, and they played in front of the Legislature. It's been a lifelong dream of the band di- rector, Eddie Atherton, to br ing the group here to Vic- toria and play in front of the Legislature. I just wanted to say what a great event it was.

Would the House please make them feel very welcome here in Victoria. Introduction and First Reading of Bills BRITISH COLUMBIA RAILWAY ASSET PROTECTION ACT, 2003 J. MacPhail presented a bill intituled British Colum- bia Railway Asset Protection Act, 2003. J. MacPhail: I move the bill standing in my name on the order paper, entitled British Columbia Railway

7038 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 Asset Protection Act, 2003, be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. J. MacPhail: This bill amends the British Columbia Railway Act to ensure that neither the government nor the company may lease or sell any part of the lines and property of the company. B.C. Rail is turning a profit for British Columbians, and therefore there is no need to sell B.C. Rail, particularly since the sale of B.C. Rail will have severe impacts on B.C.'s communities and economy and could be devastating for northern com- munities.

According to recently released internal B.C. Rail documents, over 70 percent of B.C. Rail's workforce — that's over a thousand people — will lose their jobs if CN takes over operations. B.C. Rail offices will be moved out of the province, resulting in the loss of fam- ily-supporting management and union jobs in commu- nities like Prince George. The cost of transporting goods will increase by 500 percent, which will cripple the forest industry, an indust ry that's already reeling. Some of the rail lines may be abandoned, leaving the resource-dependent communities with no service. The sale of B.C.

Rail does not make economic sense. Massive job losses coupled with increased costs of pro- duction for an industry will hurt this province. British Columbians are telling the opposition that profitable public assets like B.C. Rail should not be sold off to pay for this government's failed economic plans or its re- cord-breaking deficits. I move that the bill be put on the order paper for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill M203 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.

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS APPOINTMENT AND ADMINISTRATION ACT Hon. G. Plant presented a message from Her Hon- our the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Adminis- trative Tribunals Appointm ent and Administration 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 the Admin- istrative Tribunals Appointment and Administration Act. This bill flows from th e administrative justice pro- ject, the first system-wide review of administrative tribunals in the history of British Columbia.

The bill is the first in a series of legislative reforms that will en- sure British Columbia has an administrative justice system that is accountable, relevant, affordable, citizen- focused, accessible and fair. The two principles that un derlie this bill are inde- pendence and accountability, and in this bill we give effect to those principles by focusing on the appoint- ment and the tenure of tribunal members and on the role of tribunal chairs in overseeing effective tribunal operations.

This bill establishes the principle of merit as the basis for tribunal appoin tments and recognizes the role of tribunal chairs not only in the appointment of members but also in the overall management and op- eration of the tribunal itself. These measures will strengthen the independence of administrative tribu- nals, foster greater public confidence in their impartial- ity and enhance the public accountability to and through government. While the bill is intended to apply to all administra- tive tribunals, we recognize that one size does not fit all.

Accordingly and where appropriate, the provisions of the act have been modified to meet the unique circum- stances of individual tribunal s. Under the bill, tribunal chairs and members will be given fixed-term appoint- ments, replacing the current practice of at-pleasure ap- pointments which create uncertainty of tenure. This change will strengthen tribunal independence. The bill recognizes the need to have highly experi- enced and capable tribunal members.

To encourage the development and retention of expertise, the bill will remove the current impediments to reappointments in the same tribunal or cross-appointments to others. This will enhance the effectiveness of administrative tribu- nals and provide lasting benefits to all those who use their services. [1415] The bill fosters public accountability by clearly ar- ticulating the leadership responsibilities of tribunal chairs, and this concept of accountability to and through government will help us realize our new-era commitments for responsible, accountable manage- ment of public resources and tax dollars.

I move the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 68 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. COMMERCIAL APPEALS COMMISSION REPEAL ACT Hon. R. Coleman presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Commercial Appeals Commission Repeal Act. Hon. R. Coleman: I move that Bill 70 be read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. R. Coleman: I am pleased to introduce Bill 70. This bill repeals the Commercial Appeals Commission

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7039 Act, dissolves the commission and makes necessary consequential amendments to all statutes with refer- ence to the Commercial Appeals Commission Act. This legislation follows recommendations made through the core services review process. That process concluded that the number of appeals made annually to the Commercial Appeals Commission was not suffi- cient to warrant its continued operation.

The commis- sion was mandated to hear appeals of administrative decisions made under the authority of the provincial statute that adopted the commission as a main avenue of appeal. The commission pr imarily heard appeals of licensing decisions associated with consumer protec- tion or finance-related statutes. These are appeals of decisions related to the ability of an individual or com- pany to do business within regulated sectors. These are not appeals related to disputes between consumers and suppliers.

A number of the statutes amended by this bill re- place the current appeal to the commission with the appeal to the courts. Other statutes are being amended to provide appeal to a new tribunal, the financial ser- vices tribunal, which will be the responsibility of my colleague the Minister of Finance. I m o v e t h a t t h e b i l l b e p l a c e d o n t h e o r d e r s o f t h e day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 70 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements (Standing Order 25

B) KOREAN HERITAGE DAY L. Mayencourt: A s m a n y m e m b e r s o f t h i s H o u s e have noted, May is Asian Heritage Month here in Brit- ish Columbia, and it's my pleasure to speak today on the issue of Korean heritage in our province. Immigration from Korea has grown significantly since the 1970s, but it's really the economic might of the Republic of Korea that has caused more and more Ko- reans to come to British Columbia to set down roots and engage in business here.

In my riding, we have numerous Korean restaurants, Internet cafes and bars that are all around my comm unity, serving the Korean community as well as the other people in the larger community. Additionally, we have an astonishing record on in- ternational students. We have around 30,000 Korean students that come to British Columbia every year to study English. They come here because it's a safe and vibrant and beautiful place, and because it's economi- cal for them.

I understand, from the 2001 census, that over 28,000 individuals named the Korean language as their mother tongue, and that's a very significant group of people. This increased population continues to put down roots, and they continue to share their rich cul- ture and traditions with the rest of British Columbia. On Saturday we're all getting together to celebrate Korean Heritage Day at the Plaza of Nations in Van- couver. We're going to honour the fortieth anniversary of diplomatic relations between Korea and Canada. It will be a great day, full of festivities and dance and arts and culture.

We'll also take a few moments to honour the many Korean Canadian veterans that have served in Canada's armed forces. It's always a favourite part of the day for me, when I go to Korean Heritage Day, to take a moment to honour those men and women who have contributed so much to Canada. Another special guest that will join us there is Ji- Won Park, a young lady who came to Canada last year. The Korean community has been so generous, as has the rest of British Columbia, in supporting her in all of her trials and tribulations.

I just want to ask all members to join me in celebrat- ing Korean Heritage Day on Sunday. [1420] FRASER VALLEY AIR QUALITY R. Hawes: This B.C. Liberal government is commit- ted to ensuring that the people of British Columbia live in the healthiest environment possible. That means strenuous environmental pr otection, a strong water protection regime and clean air standards. To that end, we have introduced a number of bills that ensure our environment is protected in a sensible, sustainable and sensitive way.

We've passed water protection legisla- tion that ensures clean, safe water and have demon- strated our commitment to clean air through our ac- tions. The Fraser Valley has one of the most challenged airsheds in British Columbia. It's a huge trap for pollu- tion and airborne particulat es, and only through strin- gent control by local, provincial and federal govern- ments can this be mitigated. For years the citizens of the Fraser Valley have done their utmost to ensure that the quality of the air in the valley does not deteriorate further.

In fact, their efforts and the expenditure of considerable amounts of ca pital have begun to evi- dence measurable improvement. Yet, in the Fraser Valley we continue to be chal- lenged from the south by th e SE2 plant in Sumas that has refused to take "no" for an answer. As I speak here today, the National Energy Board is hearing an appli- cation to allow SE2 to connect into the grid to enable their power production to fl ow through to the United States. Hundreds of dedicated and concerned citizens are lining up to speak against this proposal.

We, too, as a provincial government — a Liberal provincial govern- ment — are standing alongside the local residents, with both our legal counsel and our MLAs, who will be making submissions to the hearing. As a resident of the Fraser Valley, I'm proud of our commitment to ensur- ing that our work to improve air quality in the valley airshed is not compromised by the SE2 project, which

7040 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 has no benefit at all to residents of the Fraser Valley, just as I am proud of our in itiatives to protect the envi- ronment without strangling economic growth. SMALL BUSINESS IN BURQUITLAM H. Bloy: I rise today to acknowledge small business, the backbone of the economy of British Columbia. The riding of Burquitlam is ve ry fortunate to have hun- dreds of small entrepreneurial businesses. My riding of Burquitlam, like others in British Columbia, has a vari- ety of cultural groups that excel in the business com- munity.

Though 99 percent of these individuals and businesses are never recognized formally for their con- tributions to British Columbia, their work does not go unnoticed. British Columbia thrives because we have such a rich, diverse population that all bring new thoughts and innovations into the very lifeblood of our province. I would like to particularly congratulate four excep- tional entrepreneurs that ha ppen to do business in the riding of Burquitlam. The first three names are winners of the B.C. New-Canadian Entrepreneur Awards. Bayne Vardy is the president and owner of B.C. Fur- nace Service Ltd. Mr.

Vard y emigrated from London, England, and has built one of the largest companies within his industry. John Shen, another recipient that I'm proud to repre- sent, is the founder of Palcan Fuel Cells. I've toured his facility. His technology and fuel cell development is on the cutting edge in British Columbia. Johnny Fong is a person I'd like to congratulate, as I've had the pleasure to meet him on several occasions. Mr.

Fong was the recipi ent of the outstanding achievement award for his tire less work in establishing a number of successful businesses in British Columbia and for his selfless dedication to a multitude of chari- ties in and around his community. The fourth person from my community, Kazuko Komatsu, is president and CEO of Pacific Western Breweries. Miss Komatsu ha s just been nominated for the International Business Person of the Year Award by the International Management Development Associa- tion. They will be holding their twelfth congress here in Vancouver this June.

I look forward to having the Min- ister of Competition, Science and Enterprise visit my riding again to meet these four individuals and many other businesses in British Columbia. [1425] Oral Questions MANAGEMENT OF COQUIHALLA HIGHWAY J. MacPhail: With each passing day, outrage is growing at the Liberals' plan for selling off the Coqui- halla Highway, and that outrage is being fed by a min- ister who refuses to give simple details about what the government expects in return for the sale. The Minister of Transportation told this House on Monday that she has a bottom line, but she won't say what it is.

Would she like to take this opportunity to come clean and tell interior residents just how low she plans to go in this Coquihalla fire sale? Hon. J. Reid: There is great benefit to the people of the region and the province with the operating part- nership of the Coquihalla. It's very important, as we go through this process and we work with the mayors and have a mayors' council, that there is a business case that will be made. If the province won't benefit in a proper way from this, in an adequate way from this, we wouldn't be doing the partnership, so there are benefits.

If the benefits are going to accrue to the users of the highway and the taxpayer s of B.C., then this will be a good and positive partnership to engage in. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question. J. MacPhail: What the residents of the interior are asking for are some guarantees that they will benefit. Over and over again, despite repeated questions to this minister, she refuses to give any details to the interior residents whatsoever. "Trust me," she says. Well, interior residents don't want to pay with their highway to bail out the government with a short-term cash infusion.

They paid fo r the highway through their tolls, and they have a right to know how much it's go- ing to be sold for. The conv entional wisdom that's out there circulating — if the minister doesn't deny — is that this government is willing to sell off the Coqui- halla for as little as $500 million. In order to add $500 million to the bottom line, the government is going to lose approximately $55 million in revenue for the next 55 years. That's over $3 billion in today's dollars that they're going to lose. If that were a loan, the payback would be 500 percent.

Given what an obvious ripoff this deal is to the taxpayers, will the minister listen to the people of the interior and kill this desperate cash grab of the Coquihalla? Hon. J. Reid: Thank you for the opportunity to be able to clarify the misinformation that the member of the opposition is clouding the issue with. The highway has not been paid for. On top of that, being able to give the benefit to the people…. Let me give an example of the benefits people can receive.

For example, if there's a worker who lives in Merritt and travels just three times a month to Vancouver for wo rk, over a year's period right now they'd be paying $720 a year in tolls. If we are able to do a partnership agreement, that person would see a reduction of $520 a year. I believe that is a significant benefit to the people of the area. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplementary. J.

MacPhail: I guess it's just the residents of the inte- rior that just don't understand how valuable this repre- sentation is, just like when the member for Kamloops– North Thompson attended a public meeting and ac-

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7041 cused the people in the room of being stupid. I guess that's the same thing this minister is doing. This minister reminds me of the person who quit their job so that they could get vacation pay to pay off their credit cards. That's exactly what she's doing. It just does not make any sense to sell a perfectly good highway to get out of a fisca l hole. It's no wonder the Minister of Forests doesn't understand, no wonder he doesn't understand it.

Even if the private operator spends half of the reve- nue stream on maintenance and operating costs, it's still over a billion and a half of lost revenue in today's dollars to the people of B.C. that's going into someone else's pocket.

British Columbians — not the Minister of Forests and not the Minister of Transportation, clearly, but British Columbians — know a ripoff when they see one, and this one can be seen coming from miles away. [1430] Again to the minister: if she won't listen to the peo- ple of the interior and tell them what she expects to get for the highway, will she promise that if Liberal MLAs from the southern interior te ll her that this is a dumb deal…? Will she then kill it? Hon. G.

Collins: It's a little hard to sit here in this House after ten years of NDP and that member and h a v e h e r g i v e m a t h l e s s o n s t o t h i s s i d e o f t h e H o u s e . First of all… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G. Collins: …the revenue stream from a part- nership on the Coquihalla Highway is not required to balance the budget in 2004-05, despite the assertions of the members opposite. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Let us hear the answer. Hon. G. Collins: No revenue stream, no revenue source from a partnership on the Coquihalla is booked into the fiscal plan.

I've said that repeatedly. The member either knows that and is misleading the public or doesn't pay attention, so I'll just clarify that for her here today. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G. Collins: Thirdly, if there is going to be the windfall, as the member prescribes, using her math, then it would seem to me that there would be a vast number of people willing to bid for that revenue stream. The reality is that we'll put out the partnership. We'll describe what the benefits need to be. We'll de- scribe what the benefits need to be to the people who live there.

We'll describe what the parameters are and the safety parameters are on the Coquihalla Highway. The bidder will have to respond to that and comply with that. Then there'll be a competition over what the value of that is. The thing is that the proceeds from that go to the people of British Columbia to be reinvested in infrastructure. Lastly, at the end of 55 years the people of British Columbia still own the Coquihalla Highway, and they get it in prime condition back into British Columbia. In the meantime they've been able to build additional infrastructure. It's a good deal for the people of the province.

PROMOTION OF TOURISM IN B.C. W. McMahon: My question is to the Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise. The summer tour- ist season is approaching, and the Kootenays are in a great position to benefit. I understand the minister met with tourism ministers from across the country in Van- couver this past weekend to discuss tourism initiatives. Can the Minister of Competition, Science and Enter- prise let people throughout the Kootenays and the rest of the province know what steps are being taken to promote this vital sector of British Columbia's economy? Hon. R.

Thorpe: First of all, our government has made extra funding commitments to tourism in British Columbia — $500,000 to regional tourism, which in- cludes $75,000 for Tourism Rockies, and $750,000 in incremental funding to Tourism British Columbia to be used in nearby markets so that rubber traffic can come into British Columbia and help offset some of the losses from long-haul air traffic. On May 9 we met in Toronto, and the Canadian Tour- ism Commission committed a further $5.4 million to advertise into key cities in the United States.

Two of those, which are going to benefit the Kootenays in bring- ing people into British Co lumbia, are Seattle and San Francisco. Then, this past weekend the tourism ministers from across Canada met in Vancouver. We have com- mitted to developing a ministerial task force to have a national tourism strategy in place by September 15. On Monday I attended Rendez-vous Canada in Vancouver. It was the second-largest Rendez-vous Canada in the history of this country. Tourism Rockies and all of the tourism operators in British Columbia were front and centre, workin g hard to attract visitors to British Columbia.

Our government is committed to working with tour- ism operators throughout British Columbia to grow that industry, to create empl oyment and to create jobs throughout British Columbia. [1435] GOVERNMENT ACTION ON MAD COW DISEASE P. Nettleton: To the Minister of Agriculture — again, regarding the effects of BSE, or mad cow disease, on British Columbia — I would like to reiterate my suggestion that the minister seriously consider that no

7042 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 animal feed enter or be produced in British Columbia that contains animal product — that is, protein slaugh- tered from cattle. I say let's not wait for the federal government to do this out of necessity, but rather let the B.C. government protect its own cattle industry now, through a complete ban on animal content in any and all animal feed.

Could the minister then please tell the House what steps are being taken to assure and inform the public that British Columbia beef products are safe, if indeed that's the case, and can the minister also indicate how many other farms, ranchers or beef producers may be feeding cattle ruminant-based poultry feed in contravention of the law? Is the British Columbia government investigat- ing this at the present time, or is the ministry leaving this issue entirely in the hands of federal inspectors? Hon.

J. van Dongen: I want to start out by advising the House and the public that there continues to be no evidence of any compromise in the safety of our food supply. On the three farms th at were identified in the feed investigation, none of the animals entered the food supply. I also was advised this morning that all of those ruminant animals will be removed by the CFIA, and they will be destroyed and tested for BSE — 62 cattle and 35 goats. The CFIA is continuing to interview customers of certain feed mills.

I think it's important for farmers to recognize that they have to comply with the law in terms of the use of poultry feed. All of this is a federal matter. I was advised this morning by the federal minister that they are continu- ing their full investigation. There are no new farms under quarantine, but they co ntinue to do so in a sys- tematic manner. It's very important from the point of view of international trade that we do so in a scientific manner, and we support the CFIA on their efforts. SALE OF CROWN LAND IN COMOX VALLEY J.

Kwan: The Minister of Sustainable Resource Man- agement is embroiled in an issue involving Crown land in his own riding, and it smells even worse than fish farms. Recently the Courtenay city council narrowly voted to annex a 40-acre piece of Crown land known as the Lannan forest. This was a required step towards the completion of one of the worst backroom deals that the Comox Valley has ever seen. For years the regional district of Comox-Strathcona has expressed its strongest interest in obtaining the Lannan forest for a park.

This past November, the pub- lic learned for the first time that Land and Water Brit- ish Columbia had secretly negotiated a deal to sell the land to Crown Isle Resort for a golf course and what many believe may turn into a subdivision. Can the minister explain why no one else was al- lowed to bid on the land and why the public can't even find out what the price is? Hon. S.

Hagen: I don't want to pre-empt a press c o n f e r e n c e t h a t ' s g o i n g t o b e h e l d a t 3 o ' c l o c k t h i s a f - ternoon by the city of Courtenay, telling the public of the Comox Valley that this is probably the best land deal that's ever happened in the Comox Valley. But I want to tell you that Land and Water British Columbia has done a very, very good job in making sure that the land that's coming in is going to be well used. They look at economic factors — how many jobs are going to be created — and this government is interested in new jobs.

As you know, we had almost 80,000 new jobs in the province last year, and we've had 17,000 new jobs so far this year. We want some of those jobs in the Co- mox Valley. I'm very pleased to say and to advise the member opposite that she should pay attention to the press con- ference that's going to take place at 3 o'clock this after- noon, where the mayor and the city council unani- mously will say that this is a good deal for the people of the Comox Valley. Mr. Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J.

Kwan: This deal was brokered by real estate agent Art Meyers, who contributed $9,000 to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Management's nomination cam- paign. [1440] A condition of the Lannan forest deal was that the property had to be annexed by the city of Courtenay. City councillors said they were being blackmailed into the annex of Lannan in order to preserve other pieces of Crown land, which is to be announced later today. Well, will the minister intervene and say that this mess stinks and allow the public to be involved in making decisions about the Crown land we own? J.

MacPhail: Were they blackmailed into having the press conferences too? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The term "blackmail" is unparliamentary, and I'd ask the member to withdraw it immediately. J. MacPhail: I withdraw. Mr. Speaker: Thank you. Hon. S. Hagen: As usual, the members opposite have false information and are giving out false infor- mation. The realtor in question was retained when Land and Water B.C. was called the B.C. Assets and Land Corpo- ration in about the year 1994, when I believe those people were in power.

The re altor in question received no commission on this sale. The realtor in question was

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7043 being paid an hourly rate for advice. There is no com- mission paid on this sale to anyone. [End of question period.] Motions on Notice AMENDMENT TO MOTION ON GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

SCHEDULE Hon. G. Collins: I move Motion 101 standing in my name on the order paper. [That the motion passed by the House on May 26, 2003, be amended to read as follows: D a y T i m e B i l l S t a g e Monday: 2:45-4:45 Health Services Com. of Supply 4:45-9:00 Bills 40, 45 2nd Reading

Section A: 5:00-9:00 MOS Mental Com. of Supply H e a l t h M O S I n t . , L o n g T e r m H o m e C a r e Tuesday: 10:00-12:00 Bills 50, 51 2nd Reading 2:45-3:45 Bills 64, 66, 58 2nd Reading 3:45-4:30 Bill 61 2nd Reading 4:30-6:00 Bills 40, 45 Committee and 3 r d R e a d i n g

Section A: 10:00-6:00 Health Services Com. of Supply Wednesday: 2:45-4:30 Bills 61, 66 Committee and 3 r d R e a d i n g 4:30-9:00 Office of the Com. of Supply P r e m i e r V o t e s 1 - 7 a n d F i n a l S u p p l y Thursday: 10:00-11:00 Bills 50, 51 Committee and 3 r d R e a d i n g 11:00-12:00 Bills 58, 64 Committee and 3 r d R e a d i n g 2:45-6:00 Bills 29, 39 Committee and 3 r d R e a d i n g ] J. MacPhail: I would ask the minister if he could please explain the necessity for this motion. Hon. G.

Collins: It is an amendment of the earlier mo- tion for time allocation, and it merely adds the words "3rd Reading" after the word "Committee" in various places on the motion to clarify that the bill needs to go through all stages in order to complete government business. Motion approved. Motions without Notice Hon. G. Collins: By leave I move that Mr. Bhullar be added to the list of members composing the Select Stand- ing Committee on Education and the Select Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs for the present session. Leave granted. APPOINTMENT OF TONY BHULLAR TO SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES Motion approved.

Tabling Documents Hon. M. de Jong: Tabling reports, Mr. Speaker. I've got the 2002 annual report for the Forest Appeals Commission and the 2002 annual report for the Forest Practices Board. Petitions J. MacPhail: I rise to table a petition signed by over 1,000 British Columbians who say they are opposed to extended care patients being treated as second-class citizens and ask the government to keep the Gorge Hospital open. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call committee stage debate on Bill 61. Committee of the Whole House COMMUNITY SERVICES LABOUR RELATIONS ACT The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 61; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:43 p.m. Sections 1 to 3 inclusive approved. [1445] On

section 4. Hon. G. Collins: I move the amendment standing in my name on the order paper to

section 4. [SECTION 4, by deleting the proposed

section 4 (1) and (2) and substituting the following: Association of unions 4

(1) A trade union certified to represent the employees of an agency included in a bargaining unit established under

section 3 must belong to a single association of unions composed of all trade unions representing employees in all bargaining units established under

section 3.

(2) The trade unions affected by subsection (1) must agree, within 30 days of the date on which this

section comes into force, to articles of association that (

a) are consistent with this Act and the Code, (

b) provide the association of unions with exclusive jurisdiction to bargain on behalf of the bargaining units for which the association of unions will be certified and to conclude a single collective agreement for each bargaining unit established under

section 3, (

c) provide the association of unions with the right and obligation to resolve differences among its members with respect to the administration of the

7044 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 collective agreements referred to in paragraph (

b) of this subsection, including differences with respect to the right or obligation to a particular trade union within the association of unions, (

d) include provisions with respect to ratification and other collective bargaining processes that reflect the relative membership size of trade union representation in the bargaining units within the association of unions, while ensuring that a member or group of members of a constituent trade union is not treated by the association of unions in bad faith or in a manner that is arbitrary or discriminatory, (

e) provide for the future addition to the association of unions of any other trade unions that the Labour Relations Board may certify to represent employees of an agency that are within a bargaining unit, and (

f) include any other provision that the Labour Relations Board determines may be necessary in order to ensure that the association of unions can function as a bargaining agent and administer a collective agreement on behalf of the employees within its jurisdiction.] Amendment approved.

Section 4 as amended approved. Sections 5 to 10 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Collins: I move the committee rise and re- port the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:46 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 61, Community Services Labour Relations Act, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the order passed today in this House, the question is now third reading of Bill 61. Bill 61, Community Services Labour Relations Act, read a third time and passed. Hon. G.

Plant: I call committee stage debate on Bill 66. Committee of the Whole House MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2003 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 66; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:50 p.m. Sections 1 to 10 inclusive approved. On

section 11. D. MacKay: I rise today to speak to

section 11 of Bill 66, which is before the House today, to express my opposition to the amendment being passed through this House. First of all, I'd like to make the House aware of the Election Act as it presently stands today.

Section 30(

b) is the

section under the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act that we're looking at repealing com- pletely. Basically,

section 11 under the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act states that we're going to remove the disqualification of prisoners serving sen- tences of two or more years from voting in provincial elections. This issue of allowing prisoners who are serving time the right to vote in pr ovincial elections has been with us for some time. Back in 1988 there was an amendment to the provincial Election Act wherein it was decided that a person is disqualified from voting at any election and shall not make an application to have his name inserted in a list of voters who, under subsection (

b) says: "…has been convicted of treason or an indictable offence, unless he has secured a free and conditional pardon for these offences or has undergone the sentence imposed for the offence, but it does not apply if that person who had been convicted of the indictable offence has been released or is on proba- tion…." The issue of allowing prisoners the right to vote was an issue in 1988, and the is sue came up again in 1995, when the last amendment to the provincial Election Act stated, and qualifies, individuals who are disquali- fied from voting. It states today that, "Without limiting

section 29 (f), the following individuals are not entitled to vote in an election," and subsection (

b) states: "…an individual who was imprisoned in a penal institution serving a sentence of 2 years or more." That's the legis- lation we are proposing to amend today. Mr. Chair, I served for 28 years in the RCMP, and I know from experience that fo r an individual to be sen- tenced to a period of two years or more, they would have had to have committed a significant criminal of- fence with extenuating circumstances. So you might wonder what sort of crime and punishment would see a person sentenced for such long periods of time, and I'd like to give you just a couple of examples.

There are many in the Crim inal Code of Canada, but I'm going to give you only two examples of sentences where people can be imprisoned for a period of two years or more. One is murder — taking the life of an- other individual — or sexual assault. Those two sec- tions in the Criminal Code carry a penalty

section that can exceed two years or more. It can carry up to life imprisonment. As I mentioned in the House two days ago when I re- sponded to the member for Vancouver-Kensington, peo- ple look to government to enact legislation to protect them. As elected officials we have an obligation to do that.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7045 From this point forward, after the enactment of a piece of legislation, we look to the police and to our court system to enforce sentences for those who break the law. [1455] The Criminal Code of Canada deals with criminal issues such as murder and sexual assault, which are just two of the many offences that carry a sentencing provision of two years or more. I'd like to look for one moment at

section 718 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The highlight there is the purposes and principles of sentencing. I'm going to read to you

section 718 of the Criminal Code: "The fundamental purpose of sent encing is to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following objectives." There are several there, but subsection (

c) talk s about: "…to separate of- fenders from society, where necessary." I think, in my understanding of the law today, that means sending them to jail, because you're separating them from society. It's interesting. When one starts look- ing at the Criminal Code stats in Canada and provin- cially, crime rates in British Columbia for the year 2000 were 11,250 Criminal Code offences per 100,000 popula- tion. That's in the province. Nationally, the average was 7,665 per 100,000 population. In 2001 there were 12,794 federal prisoners serving time in federal institutions across Canada.

Today, in this province, there are 1,901 prisoners serving sentences of two years or more. The issue before us today in this House is prisoners who have been sentenced to a period of incarceration for a period of two or more years having the right to vote in a provincial election. Let me ask you: are votes important? Is a single vote important? I'm going to give you a couple of examples of just how important votes are in a democratic society, a society in which we all live in this country.

The first thing I want to bring to the House's attention is the recent presidential elections that took place in the United States of America in the year 2000. That was the closest presidential race since 1867. After 93 votes had been counted in the United States, only 26,000 votes separated the two candidates, and I needn't remind this House that the United States has a population of somewhere around 350 million people. There are a couple of othe r examples I'd like to bring to your attention. In 1649, and that's going back a few years ago, a margin of one vo te cost King Charles I of England his head.

In 1800 one vote made Thomas Jef- ferson the third President of the United States. In 1845 one vote annexed the Republic of Texas to the United States. In 1941 the Selective Service Act, otherwise known as the draft, was passed by a margin of one vote just weeks prior to the attack at Pearl Harbor. All those were determined by one vote. I'll take you back into the United States again, down to Lost Springs, Wyoming. Leda Price is the mayor of that small community, and she was duly elected back on No- vember 5, 2000. She voted for herself, drawing an X by her name on the official Converse County ballot.

With a single ballot, with a single vote, she elected herself mayor for the fifteenth two-year term — u n a n i m o u s l y . N o b o d y e l s e bothered to vote, so she elected herself. Those are critical things to recall on the importance of a vote in a democratic society, so there should be no mistake: the right to vote is a privilege enjoyed in a free and democratic society. People have fought and died for that right we enjoy today.

The Election Act of British Columbia is now before this chamber due to a proposed amendment wherein prison- ers who have previously been denied the right — and rightfully so, in my view — would have the right to vote, should this amendment go through. I am of the strong belief that prisoners who are incarcerated for two or more years forfeit the rights and privileges they had.

They leave those rights and privileges at the prison door after they've been sentenced to a period of incarceration, and after they've served their time, they pick those democratic rights up — the right to vote — when they leave that prison after they've served their debt to society. [1500] I happen to be the grandfather of three beautiful grandchildren. My eldest is a ten-year-old grand- daughter. She's ten years old, and that makes me think back to the terrible tragedy that happened recently in Toronto. I refer, of course, to the kidnapping and mur- der of ten-year-old Holly Jones.

Can anybody in this chamber imagine the emotional suffering of the parents and grandparents of this young, innocent child who was taken from us? I also want you to stop and think for a moment and consider the tragedies surrounding sick people like Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo, who preyed on young people. Think of the sick pedophiles who preyed and continue to prey on young children today. Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo are serving sentences of two years or more.

When the individual who so tragically took the life of that young girl from Toronto is caught, he or she will be facing a jail term in excess of two years. So I ask the members of this chamber: do you want these types of people voting in a provincial election? It will happen if we allow this amendment to go through. Federal prisoners are move d around the country sub- ject to risk and other criteria established by the peniten- tiary service. Can you imag ine the person who killed that young child in Toronto winding up in a prison in British Columbia?

With the passage of this amendment, we will allow that sick person the right to vote in our provincial elections, and that is a shame. That's a terrible shame to allow something like that to happen. I also want to stop for a moment and remind people about the families of victims of crimes ― serious crimes like murder, where husbands , wives, daughters and sons were murdered and taken from those families. Those people who committed those crimes will be given the right to vote if this amendment goes through.

I am offended to think that we are considering, through this amendment, giving the right to vote to those who have been removed from society because of their criminal behaviour. I find it repulsive to think

7046 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 that the likes of Clifford Olson and others who have committed terrible crimes will have a say in a free and democratic society through the right to vote. I am strongly opposed to this amendment, and I cannot support the passage of it through this House. With the greatest of respect, I understand the Su- preme Court of Canada is forcing the province of Brit- ish Columbia to conform to the law of the land.

I un- derstand that, but I also understand that the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada — w h e n t h a t d e c i s i o n was made to force provinces to allow prisoners serving two years or more the right to vote — was a split deci- sion. It was a 5-4 decision. I want to read just one of the comments during that decision back in 1993. This is coming from the judge.

This really perplexes me, because he says here: "A ma- jority of the nine judges on the Supreme Court rejected allowing prisoners the right to vote, saying it was un- constitutional." Part of th e reason for that argument was that they said the right to vote was so important it could only be abridged for very specific reasons aimed at addressing a specific problem. Well, I'm sorry.

I have to ask myself, when I look at my grandchildren and my children, and when I talk to families in my riding who have lost loved ones because of people who have committed a criminal act and taken loved ones from them: wh at more can the Supreme Court of Canada be looking for than those types of people who have taken lives? And we now want to give them the right to vote in this province. [1505] I respect the Supreme Court of Canada for the right to pass legislation, and I'm a law-abiding citizen. I re- spect what the Supreme Cour t of Canada does. That doesn't say I necessarily agre e with them.

If there's bad law passed, we have a right — we have an obligation — to stand up and speak against anything of that na- ture. That's what I'm doing in this chamber today. As I said, I'm strongly opposed to this amendment and cannot support the passage of it through this House. I would urge other members — because I am standing up speaking on behalf of other members of this House — to stand up and be counted as being op- posed to allowing this amendment to go through. Hon. G. Plant: Let me say a little bit about what

section 11 of Bill 66 is doing. I'm grateful for the com- ments of the member opposite. I think what I need to do is put it in a bit of a different context. The Supreme Court of Canada recently made a deci- sion in a case called Sauvé that arose out of a challenge to the federal Elections Act by a prisoner serving a term of imprisonment, I believe, in a federal penitentiary. The prisoner challenged the fact that the Canada Elections Act did not allow prisoners serving terms of imprisonment of two years or more the right to vote. The argument that Mr.

Sauvé made to court was that the denial of the right to vote represented to him a violation of his rights as a citi- zen of Canada as guaranteed to him by

section 3 of the Constitution Act, 1982 — that part of the Constitution Act called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Here's what

section 3 says under the heading "De- mocratic Rights," and I'm quoting: "Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein." Those words are rightly important. They lie at the heart of our conception of democracy. They represent a strong guarantee by the authors of our constitution of the right of all citizens to vote in elections. Mr. Sauvé challenged the federal statute on the basis that the federal statute violated his rights under

section 3, and that challenge, as I recall, went through three dif- ferent levels of judicial decision-making. It went to trial, it went to the Federal Court of Appeal, and it went to the Supreme Court of Canada. The question whether or not Mr. Sauvé's rights were violated by the provisions of the federal Elections Act was regarded by all who heard it as a difficult one. The case has an interesting history in that at both appeal levels, there were divided decisions. In the Supreme Court of Canada, the outcome of the case was a decision by a 5-4 majority.

One of the things that I th ink is important to put on the table, if you will, in th e discussion of the Charter is to remind members, who probably don't need remind- ing, about

section 1 of the Charter. What

section 1 says is that the Charter "…guarantees the rights and free- doms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." When you read

section 3 and

section 1 together, it's clear there is room for an argument on a case-by-case basis about whether a particular provision of a particu- lar statute which may, on its face, violate one of the rights guaranteed in the Ch arter should nonetheless be allowed to stand because it is a reasonable limit pre- scribed by law and can be, in the language of

section 1, demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. [1510] We know a couple of things about the Charter. We've learned them over the 20 or so years since the Charter came into force. One is that reasonable people will disagree on a case-by-case basis from time to time about whether or not a particular situation constitutes a violation of Charter rights. The second thing we know is that in our system, that issue is to be decided ultima tely by the courts.

In par- t i c u l a r , w h e n w e l o o k a t s e c t i o n 3 o f t h e C h a r t e r , w e know the issue of whether and in what respect the right to vote can be infringed upon is a decision fun- damentally for courts.

One of the reasons we know that is because some of the provisions of the Char ter of Rights and Freedoms are made expressly subject to something that is usually called the notwithstanding clause, and that is a provi- sion of the charter that allows Parliament or the Legis- lature of a province to expressly declare that a particu- lar provision of a federal or provincial statute shall operate notwithstanding a provision of the Charter. The problem for the argument here before us is that the notwithstanding clause doesn't apply to

section 3 of the Charter. We don't have the ability that we might

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7047 have in this House to decide if, as legislators, we believe so strongly in a particular provision of our statutes that we wish to make them operate notwithstanding the provisions of the Charter as interpreted by the courts. In this case, in the case of

section 3, it is the courts that make the law. They do so through judicial deci- sions — judicial decisions that are sometimes unani- mous and judicial decisions that are sometimes di- vided. In this particular case, the Supreme Court of Canada that heard the appeal in this decision was di- vided, but it nonetheless made a decision. It made a decision by a majority of 5-to-4 that the provisions of the federal Elections Act, wh ich restricted the right of prisoners serving long terms of imprisonment to vote, were unconstitutional.

In this chamber sometimes votes are close — less so now than it was, perhaps, in the parliament or two before this one. Whether a vote is close or not close, it doesn't really matter at the end of the day. If the gov- ernment can muster a majority in support of an initia- tive, that initiative will become law. It's also the case, at least on the law as it is today in Canada, that so long as there is a majority in the last court that hears a matter — in this case, the Supreme Court of Canada — the majority decides the outcome of the matter.

The Supreme Court of Canada conclu- sively determined that the provisions of the Elections Act of Canada that restricted the right to vote for pris- oners serving long terms of imprisonment were uncon- stitutional. The constitution actually makes it pretty clear that that's how this all operates. I believe the government of Canada has responded to that by making changes to the federal Elections Act. It's now up to us to decide what to do about the pro- vincial Election Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada case did not concern the prov incial Election Act, but I think there is no basis for an argument that would dis- tinguish the reasoning in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in its application to the federal act from its potential application to the provincial act. That is, all of the arguments and reasons that the majority at the Su- preme Court of Canada used to strike down a provi- sion of the federal Elections Act would apply with the same force and vigour to the provisions of the Election Act of British Columbia which are currently before us in

section 11 of Bill 66. [1515] That being the case, the government is of the view that

section 30(

b) of the Election Act is unconstitu- tional. We as legislators need to respond to that reality. I think there is really only one way to respond to that reality as government. It certainly is the only way to respond to this reality in this case, which is the one before us. Rather than wait for some citizen, presuma- bly a prisoner serving a term of imprisonment of two years or longer, to come forward and challenge the provision of the Election Act that is before us now, we think the right course of action is to repeal this uncon- stitutional provision.

We could argue at some length about whether or not this provision ought to be constitutional. We could argue at some length about whether prisoners serving short or long terms of imprisonment have or should have the right to vote. That is a reasonable debate. Some evidence o f th e r ea s o nab l e n e s s o f t he d e b a t e i s th a t it t o ok p l a c e even in the Supreme Court of Canada and resulted in a division on a pretty narrow majority on that very issue.

But at the end of the day, we in this chamber really don't get to decide that question, because that question — according to the constitution of Canada, under which we are governed and are free — is decided by the courts, not in this chamber. The constitution — which exists to protect all of us, and which keeps us free — is here in- voked and here relied upon to insist upon the repeal of this provision in the Election Act.

I am certain that the debate will continue here — or if not here, elsewhere — about what the right thing to do is to deal with some of the important arguments that my colleague opposite has made about the chal- lenge of wrapping our heads around the idea that peo- ple serving terms of imprisonment of two years or longer should be allowed to vote. I will follow that debate with interest and concern, because I think there are some really good questions being asked.

But they're not questions that admit much debate in their applica- tion and outcome in this ch amber this afternoon in my respectful view, because I think what we must do is that which the constitution re quires of us. In this case, the constitution requires of u s t h a t w e r e p e a l t h i s r e - striction in the Election Act. B. Penner: I've been following this debate with considerable interest and was impressed by the com- ments of both the Attorney General and the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine. I'd like to seek a bit of cl arification around this issue, so I have a question for the Attorney General.

Can the Attorney General confirm whether currently, under the provincial Election Act as written, persons serving jail terms in provincial prisons — that is, serving sentences of less than two years in our provincial jails — are permitted to vote? Hon. G. Plant: They are permitted to vote. B. Penner: Can the Attorney General give us any estimate of what it might cost taxpayers if the province were forced to defend a court action seeking a declara- tion that the current provis ion in the Election Act pro- hibiting those prisoners se rving prison sentences in excess of two years from voting…?

If such a court chal- lenge were to be brought on the province, what would it cost taxpayers, assuming that such a case would be challenged not just at the initial trial level, but also ap- pealed to the Court of Appeal of B.C. and perhaps the Supreme Court of Canada? [1520] Hon. G. Plant: It's hard to predict the exact cost of a particular case, particularly when it's hypothetical. Constitutional challenges of this sort frequently cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and occasionally

7048 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 they go into the millions of dollars. In this particular case, it might even be the case that all parties would end up being funded by the public purse for one rea- son or another. That would increase the cost to taxpay- ers if there were to be a court challenge. B. Penner: I thank the Attorney General for that clarification. I must confess to feeling somewhat conflicted on this matter. It's a difficult issue.

I think the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine argued quite succinctly and effectively that society traditionally wishes to impose certain social sanctions on people who offend society's rules — our laws. I think that's only proper. I consider myself to be something of a fan of Thomas Hobbes and his argument in favour of a social contract.

That is, at nature, we are a ll free individuals to conduct ourselves as we see fit, but we have decided collec- tively as a society to surrender certain individual rights to act the way we may feel like towards our neighbours in order to build a better society — something in it for all of us. But a fundamental component of that social contract is that if you violate that social contract — i.e., you act out against a neighbou r in a way that violates the social code or the social norms — there are conse- quences.

That is why, in my view, it makes sense not only to incarcerate people for certai n offences against our mu- tually agreed-upon rules but also to limit their partici- pation in society for a period of time through other means. I think that was the original rationale behind provisions across Canada restricting prisoners' rights to v o t e i n d e m o c r a t i c e l e c t i o n s . I t w a s j u s t p a r t o f t h a t social sanction applied to people who have willingly gone out and violated our mutually agreed-upon stan- dards of social conduct.

I certainly sympathize with the comments and the sentiment by the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine. I'm sure all members of this House feel very strongly about the types of individuals he referred to — the types of people serving very lengthy sentences for very serious crimes. None of us, I think, wish to counte- nance any of those types of ac tivities that led to those people serving lengthy prison sentences.

But I have also listened carefully to what the Attor- ney General had to say, and I'm concerned about the potential cost to taxpayers in fighting what will almost certainly, based upon a Supreme Court of Canada judgment, be a losing cause. I consider myself a fighter as much as anybody. I don't often shy away from a big battle, especially when I th ink it's important.

But I think in this case, taking a look at the evidence — and I am a lawyer and have had some experience arguing Charter of Rights cases at the trial level — it looks like a pretty safe bet that if this matter were to go to court, the province of British Columbia would lose given the precedent that's already been established by the Su- preme Court of Canada. In the interest of saving taxpayers the cost for what will ultimately be a losing battle, I think I will bring myself — albeit reluctantly and somewhat grudgingly — to vote in favour of this

section as proposed by the Attorney General in the bill before us. I know it's a big- ger issue than we'll be debating here today. From time to time, we hear concerns and criticism about what's known as judge-made law. It's important to realize that judges are called upon to make those decisions by legislators who have drafted the law in the first place. But from time to time, it's certainly been my impression that especially our senior courts have at times interpreted our constitution, and particularly the Charter of Rights, in ways that perhaps the legislators never anticipated.

Perhaps that's the risk those legislators made dec- ades ago when they decided to effectively hand the courts what amounts to very hot potatoes on difficult issues that legislators themselves during negotiations in the early 1980s couldn't bring themselves to agree upon. So we collectively, as a society, handed some very difficult decisions over to the judges. From time to time, we're not very happy with those decisions.

I must confess, although I'm a lawyer and I respect the role of the courts, that there are certainly times when I dis- agree very strongly with the decisions that some courts have made — not all the time and, in fact, not most of the time. I think most of the time the decisions, even from our Supreme Court of Canada, are bang on.

But I'd have to confess that in this particular in- stance, I would have cast my vote with those four members of the Supreme Court of Canada — those in the minority — and I would have argued strenuously that people who have committed the most serious types of offences in Canada, in addition to losing the right to move freely in our society for a period of time, have also lost the right to participate democratically in our society for a period of time. Thank you for the op- portunity. [1525] V.

Anderson: As I listen to all sides of this discus- sion, I find it fascinating and challenging for all of us to think clearly. One of the items that comes to my mind, though, is the recognition that there are those, of course, who have been sentenced for two years and longer who have performed horrendous crimes. There have also been those who have sentences of two years or longer who have not committed any criminal act, for they have been found to have been innocent at a later date.

There is one other aspect of this that I think is impor- tant — that, regardless, those people who are incarcer- ated for two years or longer are still fathers or mothers. They still have influence upon their children. They are still the guides of their own families. They are hus- bands or wives. I don't think we should lose sight of the significance of them as persons, which this judg- ment does recognize — that they are persons within the society regardless of the horrendous mistakes that some of them have made.

T h o s e w h o h a v e b e e n j u d g e d t o h a v e m a d e t h o s e mistakes have, in many significant cases, not made them but have simply been judged wrongly. I think we

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7049 must take that into account, and so I would support the Attorney General in his presentation. [1530]

Section 11 approved on the following division: YEAS — 61 Falcon Hogg L. Reid Halsey-Brandt Hawkins Whittred Cheema Hansen J. Reid Santori van Dongen Barisoff Nettleton Roddick Masi Thorpe Hagen Murray Plant Campbell Collins Bond de Jong Nebbeling Stephens Abbott Neufeld Coleman Penner Anderson Orr Harris Brenzinger Bell MacPhail Kwan Chutter Mayencourt Johnston R. Stewart Hayer Christensen Krueger McMahon Bray Les Locke Nijjar Bhullar Wong Bloy Suffredine K. Stewart Visser Brice Sultan Hamilton Sahota Hawes Kerr Manhas NAYS — 8 Wilson Jarvis Belsey Trumper MacKay Cobb Lekstrom Hunter Sections 12 to 19 inclusive approved. [1535] The Chair: Attorney General on the amendment on

section 19.1. Hon. G. Plant: I move the amendment standing in my name to add

section 19.1 to Bill 66. [SECTION 19.1 by adding the following section: Financial Institutions Act 19.1

Section 37 (1.1) (

c) of the Financial Institutions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 141, is amended by striking out "the Minister of Finance and Corporate Relations." and substituting "the administrator."] Amendment approved. Sections 20 to 41 inclusive approved. On

section 42. Hon. G. Plant: I move an amendment standing in my name in the orders of the day to

section 42. [SECTION 42 (a), by deleting the proposed subsection (3) and substituting the following:

(3) A master is entitled to the remuneration, allowances and benefits established under

section 13 (13) to (15) and (17) of the Provincial Court Act., and] Amendment approved.

Section 42 as amended approved. On

section 43. Hon. G. Plant: I move the amendment standing in my name to

section 43. [SECTION 43, in the proposed

section 12 (

a) by deleting "sections 16 to 24 of the Judicial Compensation Act" wherever it appears and substituting "sections 19 to 19.8 of the Provincial Court Act", and (

b) in the proposed subsection (2) (

a) by deleting ' "January 1, 2003" ' and substituting ' "December 1, 2002" '.] Amendment approved.

Section 43 as amended approved. Sections 44 to 46 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. G. Plant: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendments. Motion approved. The committee rose at 3:37 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 66, Miscellaneous St atutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003, reported complete with amendments. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to order 101 passed in this House today, the question is now third reading of Bill 66. Bill 66, Miscellaneous St atutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2003, read a third time and passed. Hon. G.

Collins: I call Committee of Supply. For the information of members, we'll be debating the esti- mates of the office of the Premier. [1540] Committee of Supply The House in Committee of Supply B; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

7050 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 The committee met at 3:41 p.m. ESTIMATES: OFFICE OF THE PREMIER On vote 8: office of the Premier, $52,270,000. Hon. G. Campbell: Just so the member opposite knows, I will be joined today by my deputy minister for corporate planning and restructuring, Brenda Eaton, and my deputy minister and cabinet secretary, Ken Dobell. I'm also joined by the Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relation s, the MLA for Richmond Centre. We look forward to answering any questions that the members may have. Hon. G.

Halsey-Brandt: I'll be joined in a moment by some staff members, and I'll introduce them when they come in. It's my pleasure to give a brief overview to the committee about the work of the intergovernmental relations secretariat, which is part of the office of the Premier. Our objectives in intergovernmental relations are to advance British Columbia's priorities with other Canadian and international governments and to man- age protocol activities, of ficial honours and awards, and conferences and events.

B.C. is involved in planning Canada's annual Pre- miers' conference, the Western Premiers' Conference, the annual meeting of western Premiers and western U.S. Governors, and the annu al meeting of PNWER, or the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region. Leaders may meet for only a couple of days, but the preparation — involving exchanging docume nts, conference calls, travelling and face-to-face meetings to lay the ground- work for progress on issues of mutual concern — is considerable.

A good illustration of intergovernmental coopera- tion is the Canada–British Columbia partnership an- nounced in this year's Speech from the Throne. British Columbians want their provincial and federal govern- ments to work together on their behalf. We agree, and we are creating a new partnership with the federal government in recognition of the importance of British Columbia to the current and future health of our na- tion's economy and society.

Over the past year we've worked in partnership with the federal government on such things as the Olympic bid, with over $300 million committed subject to Vancouver winning the bid; the new Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre, where over $200 million has been committed; the new Gulf Islands na- tional park; the softwood lumber dispute; forestry worker and community adjustment, where a signifi- cant portion of the $340 million announced by the fed- eral government over the past year will be spent in British Columbia; the pine beetle infestation, where $40 million has been committed; highway and border in- frastructure initiatives, where over $225 million has been committed; and just last week a joint federal- provincial contribution of $84.5 million towards 35 green infrastructure projects , with a value of nearly $127 million, under the $800 million Canada–British Columbia infrastructure program.

We intend to continue to work in partnership with the federal government on these and other initiatives for the benefit of British Columbians and all Canadi- ans. We are taking a constructive approach to federal- provincial relations. Cooperation with the federal gov- ernment is key to meeting the broad range of provin- cial priorities from resoluti on of the softwood lumber dispute and offshore oil and gas development to urban rapid transit, high-tech cluster development, and im- proved fisheries management.

We are identifying areas where B.C. is not receiving its fair share and working with federal ministers and B.C. ministries to achieve a more equitable distribution of federal government contract expenditures. [1545] Major areas where B.C. has traditionally fared worse than other provinces incl ude procurement spending, spending on cultural industries and spending on highway infrastructure. We're concerned that federal economic development organizations give more fa- vourable treatment to northern Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

We're considering whether Western Economic Diversification, dealing with B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, is enough to help our province grow out of our have-not status. Getting people together to hear other views on the issues we all deal with is also an important part of the intergovernmental relations secretariat in British Co- lumbia. Our annual provincial congress is a unique and effective way for B.C. leaders of every political stripe to share perspectives on issues that are of common inter- est to all British Columbians so that we can work to- gether for the benefit of all.

The congress is part of our commitment to enhance B.C.'s working relationship with municipal, aboriginal, federal and other provincial representatives. Logistical support for the provincial congress is provided by the protocol and events branch of intergovernmental rela- tions. Working with other provincial and territorial governments is also critical to our success. We're ensur- ing that British Columbia is a proactive national leader, a full and equal partner in the Canadian Confederation and a pivotal player in its future development.

We worked very hard with the federal government and the other provinces to secure more health care fund- ing for patients in British Columbia at the February first ministers meeting. We must ensure that British Colum- bia has the means to provide patients with the care they need. The new first ministers' arrangement on health was certainly an important step in that direction.

On the international scene, British Columbia must play a strong role in international relations, particularly w i t h t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s o f A m e r i c a , w i t h a n a p p r o a c h that emphasizes economic, education, cultural and other links, while promoting the government's strategic priorities. While the Minister of Forests is leading Brit- ish Columbia's campaign to resolve the softwood lum- ber dispute, intergovernmental relations provides sup- port.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7051 Through British Columbia's membership in PNWER, the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region, we have been exchanging information with American leg- islators on the softwood lumber dispute as well as get- ting support for the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and Paralympic bid. British Columbia's involvement in the Canadian-American Border Trade Alliance has led to significant improvements in security and efficiency at the Canada–United States border.

Our international relations also focus on the Asia Pacific region, where we are the leader in Canadian trade, education and cultural relations. About 22 per- cent of British Columbia's total trade is with the Asia Pacific region, and we wish to take advantage of the opportunities offered through events like China's ac- cession to the World Trade Organization. We continue to pursue development of British Columbia's markets and other relationships in the region.

M y r o l e a s M i n i s t e r o f State for Intergovernmental Relations includes building relationships with the in- ternational representatives of the British Columbia Consular Corps with visiti ng representatives from other countries. The Consular Corps is vital to British Columbia's international interests. I'm hosting meet- ings between senior B.C. representatives and the 76 members of the corps to keep them up to date on our policies and show them the be st face of our province.

Apart from the Consular Co rps as a whole, I consis- tently meet with individual consular and trade officials from around the world to build relationships. In conclusion, we live in a time of a rapidly chang- ing domestic and international scene. IGR plays a vital role in providing strategic advice to the Premier and other ministers. I want to extend my thanks to the staff of the intergovernmental re lations secretariat and to the staff of other ministries who have worked with us. Success in intergovernmental relations is about rela- tionship-building and cooperation.

Our success in- volves the efforts of many dedicated people who are continuing to build relationships with their colleagues in other provincial governments, in the federal gov- ernment, in the United States and in other countries. I would like to now introduce the staff joining us here this afternoon. The first on my left is Pierrette Maranda, who is acting deputy minister and senior adviser, federal- provincial relations. On my right is Garry Curtis, the senior adviser, strategic services, and on his right is Keith Ogilvie, senior adviser, international relations. J.

MacPhail: I'd like to read into the record a letter sent to the Premier on May 21 of this year. It's from Harry Nyce, chair of the regional district of Kitimat- Stikine. [1550] "Dear Premier, "Re Skeena Cellulose Inc., a public inquiry: "The prolonged closure of the Skeena Cellulose pulp mill and sawmills is having a devastating effect on northwestern British Columbia. The provincial government sold the company to NWBC Timber and Pulp for just $6 million, plus a further $2 million offered for unsecured creditors.

Yet the public's expectations, if not the obligations on the purchaser in the sales contract, are far from fulfilled. In the meantime, some logging proceeded on the timber tenures, supported by log export permits, but high unemployment persists, and property taxes owed to northwest communities remain unpaid. "The regional district is not suggesting some impropriety has occurred with the sale of Skeena Cellulose. However, the British Columbia public, and especially northwest residents, deserve a comprehensive evaluation of what has become a major economic and social catastrophe.

We call upon the provincial government to clear the air with a public inquiry into the sale of Skeena Cellulose and its subsidiaries. The regional board recommends appointment of a special commissioner with the powers of subpoena to investigate the sale agreement and identify the reasons why little progress has been made to restart company operations. "The provincial government has a responsibility to protect the interests of the British Columbia public, yet sale of the assets of Skeena Cellulose has returned little for British Columbia. An inquiry is needed to determine why.

"Yours truly, "Harry Nyce, chair of the regional district of Kitimat- Stikine." What is the Premier's reply? Hon. G. Campbell: Obviously, Skeena Cellulose was a grave challenge for all of us in government as we looked at how we could put that enterprise, as well as those communities, on a sound financial footing. We were chal- lenged not just by the changing jurisprudence around the sale and the acquisition.

We're also challenged by the so- cial problems that have b een created in the northwest through almost a decade of, frankly, government misap- propriation — programs that didn't work, didn't respond to the needs of communities and didn't recognize the chal- lenges that the marketplace was presenting. I have not read the letter. I'm pleased to hear the let- ter. My response would be, as I would do in a case like this, to deal with the Minister of Forests and talk with him. I see no particular benefit in a public inquiry at this time.

I think the important thing that we're trying to do is create some stability in the northwest to create an op- portunity for economic grow th in the northwest based on forestry, based on mining and based on opportunities that are created in the energy industry and the transpor- tation industry. The great port of Prince Rupert…. They're all part of the components that we will build a stronger and more vital enterprise and economy in the northwestern part of province. I appreciate the comments from the regional district. I'm always glad to hear from local representatives.

But I don't believe that we would move any further for- ward than we have and we are now — any more expe- ditiously — by having a public inquiry. J. MacPhail: Perhaps the Premier could outline how 2003 is better than 1998, let's say, for that community economically. Hon. G. Campbell: I think one of the advantages of 2003 is that at least the northwestern part of the prov-

7052 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 ince knows that we're paying attention to them. They certainly understand that we recognize the transporta- tion challenges that they faced. We have opportunities in tourism, opportunities in mining. There is clearly a major challenge that we face as a result of Skeena Cellulose. I think that challenge was mishandled by the previous government. We could obviously have a debate about that, and I would rec- ommend that the member opposite do that with the Minister of Forests. There's also a significant change in the environment with regard to first nations.

This government has said to first nations that we welcome them into the economy of British Columbia. We look at them as partners as we move forward to build an environment of prosperity, and that prosperity will be for the northwestern part of our province as well as for the rest of our province. The expansion of mineral opportunities, of mining oppor- tunities throughout the no rthwest is a huge opportu- nity for people in those communities. The potential for tourism development is an enormous opportunity for those communities.

I believe that when you look at what small busi- nesses are telling us throughout that part of the prov- ince, they see that the government is on the right track. They're encouraging us to move more quickly. We are trying to do that as we brin g together not just regional districts but the federal government, the government of Alberta, the government of British Columbia and the private sector to try to make sure we meet all the op- portunities and open all the opportunities to the people and the communities of the northwest. [1555] J. MacPhail: It's interesting.

The Premier says the change to 2003 from 1998 is that they're paying atten- tion to that corner. I just read a letter where the re- gional district chair is asking for a public inquiry. The Premier hasn't even seen the letter yet, and he's reject- ing a public inquiry. How's that paying attention to them? I'd like to know. Perhaps the Premier could say what effect the con- tinued closure of Skeena Cell ulose, after this govern- ment selling it for six million bucks, has had on unem- ployment. What are the unemployment changes from 1998 to 2003 — or let's just say from 2001 to 2003?

What effect has the Skeena Cellulose sale by this government had on the unemployment rate in the area? Hon. G. Campbell: Unemployment is clearly up in the area. I'm surprised the member has to ask that question. The challenges that we fa ced in terms of the Skeena Cellulose sale…. We know those challenges; they're clear. There was a long ga p between when the acquisi- tion was made and when the union finally came to the table and said they were going to be part of the solu- tion.

As the member opposite should know, there were court decisions made that required the government to move forward with regard to this in a different manner than had traditionally been the case. We have done that. I think the real issue here, in terms of the northwest, is that the vision for the northwest is one that will rein- force the economies and the assets of the northwest,

whereas the previous government, Mr. Chair, as you know, decided the…. The Tatshenshini decision had an enormous impact on the northwest. We know that the Skeena Cellulose decision, and the way the previous government managed it…. I had people from the northwest today saying that that cost them thousands of jobs; it cost taxpayers over $400 million. Clearly, that is a major and difficult issue f o r u s t o d e a l w i t h a s a government, when we look at the social infrastructure of those communities. But I can tell you, Mr. Chair, the northwest of this province has great potential and a bright future.

It's a future that has been generated by MLAs who have focused their attention on moving us forward in a comprehensive manner. It's a future that says we can open up that part of the province with opportunities, with improved transportation, with improved relation- ships with first nations, wi th improved mining activi- ties, with improved opportun ities in the energy field and with improved opportunities in forestry. Most of the contractors there will tell you and most of the people there will tell you that it has been very, very difficult over the last two, three, four and five years.

We're trying to turn that around. It does take time. I'm the first to admit that, but I think the positive contributions from the people in the northwest are something that we should celebrate. We should con- gratulate them on their perseverance. We know that in the long term, the northwest of this province and in- deed the entire province of British Columbia will bene- fit. J. MacPhail: Well, actually, the regional district of Kitimat-Stikine is looking for specifics, not rhetoric. The unemployment rate has almost doubled in the regional district from '01 to '03.

Can the Premier tell us what has happened to the assessed value of residential housing in the regional district of Kitimat-Stikine? Hon. G. Campbell: No. I'm really not in a position to do that. I'm sure the member can get that from the B.C. Assessment Authority. J. MacPhail: The Premier stands up and says how great things are going for the area of Kitimat-Stikine, and he's getting a thumbs-up from his own member. Well, he should know this, because he's claiming that things are going to get better.

The assessed value of housing in that regional district has plummeted so that the total assessed value is le ss than 50 percent of what it was last decade — less than 50 percent. Why is that important? It's important because peo- ple don't have jobs. The unemployment rate has sky- rocketed; they don't have jobs. The pulp mill isn't about to open, and they've got to move out of town. But they

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 7053 have to sell their houses first, and they can't sell their houses. That's why it's important. Perhaps the Premier, then , could say what specific good news this regional district has to look forward to in the next six months. What actual investment is being made in the regional district of Kitimat-Stikine? Hon. G. Campbell: First, let me just go back for the member opposite, because the member tends to sort of forget about what her government did to this part of the province.

The forestry policies of the previous government were raised time and time and time again by citizens of the northwestern part of British Columbia as being detrimental to their econom ic future, as being detri- mental to their social futu re. We, unfortunately, inher- ited a forest industry which was in decline. It was a forest industry which was driving investment out. It was a forest industry that was watching as literally dozens of mills closed under the previous govern- ment's auspices. [1600] Our goal is to restore a sense of confidence and cer- tainty in the region.

There will be literally hundreds and thousands — up to millions — of dollars of trans- portation investments, which will be taking place in the northwestern part of this province in the next six months. Those projects have been initiated. They will be moving forward. There also is work that is going on today, as the member opposite knows, with regard to improving our forest industry in this province. That's taking place every single day in British Columbia as we move our- selves forward from the decade of decline that we saw with the previous government.

I am the last to suggest that all of the problems that were built up over ten years have now been solved. They have not. But we have started, I think, the process of creating a framework of economic certainty — a framework of economic opportunity in mining, in en- ergy, in forestry, in tourism, in retailing, in technology. All of those things are applicable to the northwestern part of our province. The economic opportunity that is created by the great port of Prince Rupert is one that has been there for years.

Through the decade of the 1990s I can recall where, for some reason, the previous government did- n't seem to recognize the opportunities that Prince Rupert did present. This government has embraced that. We are looking for investments in containeriza- tion; we have put dollars into building that study and that business case. We're looking at investing millions of dollars in a new cruise ship facility for the port of Prince Rupert.

All of that builds throug hout the northwest, as you go across Highway 16 from Prince Rupert to Terrace, to Kitimat; as you carry on to Smithers and down to Burns Lake and right through to Vanderhoof and Prince George. People will then make their choices about whether they want to go down the Rocky Moun- tain Trench or Highway 97. All of these opportunities, as much as we would like there to be an instant soluti on to problems that took a decade to build….

We're going to continue to work relentlessly both with the MLAs and the communities in the northwestern part of this province to identify opportunity, to create a condition of certainty and to assure that in the northwestern part of British Colum- bia the economic future — the future in terms of jobs in the resource industries, in publi

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0528pm-05
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0528pm 05
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e9dd6f369f52c27818bbf3669831ea1ae5f60eb3

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).