1989 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 34th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, MAY 24, 1989

Afternoon Sitting

[ Page

6937 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Oral Questions

Stumpage payment loophole. Mr. Miller –– 6937

Mr. Williams

Sale of mapping branch. Mr. Lovick –– 6938

Social insurance numbers on enumeration forms. Mr. R. Fraser –– 6938

Hiring of persons over 65 years of age. Ms. Pullinger 6938

Sale of lakeshore lots. Mr. Kempf –– 6938

Sash sawmill at Armstrong. Mr. Williams –– 6938

Fish-testing policy. Mr. G. Hanson –– 6939

Health risk to natives from contaminated fish. Mr. G. Hanson –– 6939

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Labour and Consumer Services estimates.

(Hon. L. Hanson)

On vote 41: minister's office –– 6939

Mr. Lovick

Mrs. Boone

Hon. Mr. Vander Zalm

Mr. R. Fraser

Hon. Mr. Reid

Mr. Sihota

Hon. Mr. Dirks

Ms. A. Hagen

Ms. Smallwood

The House met at 2:05 p.m.

Prayers.

HON. MR. PARKER :

It's a pleasure for me today to rise and introduce to the House some

very distinguished visitors. They're very important in the riding of

Skeena. They are representatives of Alcan. I'd like to introduce three

directors: Lord John Peyton, the Hon. Jean-Marie Poitras, Mr. George

Russell; and executives of Alcan: Franois Senecal-Tremblay, Claude

Chamberland, Stephen Brown and Bill Rich. Would the House please make

them welcome.

MR. SERWA : Today we are privileged to welcome distinguished visitors from afar —

Morioka. The historical and beautiful capital of Iwate Prefecture has

been twinned with our capital city, Victoria, since 1985. Since then

the citizens of Vancouver Island have enjoyed and benefited from the

rich and fascinating culture of Japan, particularly the Tohoku region.

From the ancient city, which will be the site of the 1993 World Alpine

Ski Championships, I would like to welcome a softball delegation led by

municipal assemblymen Shimoda and Suzuki. They are accompanied by Jay

Rangel, who is the Victoria representative and chairman of the sister

city committee. The members of the Social Credit caucus softball team

will be meeting these gentlemen tonight at 6:30 at Central Park. Would

the House please bid all of these fine guests welcome.

Oral Questions

STUMPAGE PAYMENT LOOPHOLE

MR. MILLER :

I have a question to the Minister of Forests. The minister said

yesterday that some theft may be taking place, but he doesn't know to

what extent, or what it is costing the government. Has the minister had

the opportunity to consult with his officials in his ministry to

provide him with this information so that he will know what's going on

within his ministry?

HON. MR. PARKER : The matter

which the member is discussing is one of evasion of paying stumpage,

and the exact numbers of what's taking place are not known until an

offence is uncovered. The fact that it does take place from time to

time is encountered and it's dealt with and the money is recovered as

best possible. Sometimes we find that the individuals have gone into

bankruptcy or have indeed left the country, in which case recovery is

very difficult. But as to the precise number at this point, I'll have

to take that as notice, and I'd be happy to share it with the House at

a later date.

MR. MILLER : A supplementary on the same topic. As I met with the auditor-general,

his advice to me was that that was quite a legitimate question which the ministry

should be able to answer. Has the minister met with the auditor-general or his

staff to seek their advice in trying to ascertain what the problem is within

his ministry?

HON. MR- PARKER :

It's not a matter for the auditor-general to deal with. It's a matter

for the auditor-general to determine whether or not there are any

shortcomings in the management of any one of the ministries or Crown

corporations, and he has flagged some items that we have dealt with

now. As to the exact numbers, it's the sort of thing we would deal with

in a ministry. As I said before, I take the question as notice and will

reply to the House at a later date.

MR. MILLER : The

minister also said yesterday that he will try to introduce legislation

to tighten regulations, but he went on to say that we can legislate

until hell freezes over, but if it is the intent of someone to commit a

criminal act, they'll do it. Is it the minister's position, or has the

minister decided, that legislation allowing prosecutions as suggested

by the RCMP would not be effective?

HON. MR PARKER :

We'll try to introduce legislation this session to deal with the issue

raised by the RCMP and the auditor-general. Whether or not we can get

it into this session depends on the scheduling of the House. As I said

yesterday, we'll try. There are no guarantees.

MR. MILLER :

Again to the minister. The minister said yesterday in the House: "The

very first premise that we have, unlike the members opposite, in

dealing with British Columbians, for whom every one of us works, is

that they're honest. We follow that as the first rule.... Could the

minister advise if he checks his own groceries out of the supermarket?

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the Minister of Forests, the auditor-general had three staff

reviewing your scaling and royalty problems for one month. They found

an unacceptable high risk of losses in their studies. In view of these

findings of two or three people in one month, have you reviewed your

own management inadequacies in your own ministry?

HON. MR. PARKER :

As I have said before, we take the auditor-general's report very

seriously, and we have taken steps to close the loopholes he has

identified.

MR. WILLIAMS : The Minister of Forests

has some 135 employees involved in scaling questions in this province.

Yet three members of the auditor-general's staff found these gaping

holes, high risks and inadequacies throughout the whole system. Have

you not reviewed your management capabilities in your ministry in view

of the fact that three people found gaping holes in one month?

[ Page 6938 ]

HON. MR. PARKER :

The management routine of the Forest Service and the matter of scaling

and revenue collection has been reviewed. It is under control. It has

been reviewed with the executive and the senior management. The

necessary steps that we have discussed with the auditor-general have

been taken.

MR. WILLIAMS : The auditor-general

indicated that in some regions your ministry relies almost entirely on

the industry to monitor and report the volumes and species of timber

harvested. Are you saying, Mr. Minister, that that policy has ended?

HON. MR. PARKER : No.

MR. WILLIAMS : The minister is saying that there are still districts and regions where the monitoring is done by the industry.

HON. MR. PARKER :

The scaling is done by the private sector and the checks are done in

the Forest Service by scaling staff and other operational staff,

depending on what the check is about.

MR. WILLIAMS :

There has been a system in place where the scale coordinator for the

regions was not, in fact, able to coordinate and did not have a

reporting system that he could control throughout the region. So you

would get one district within a region doing one thing — leaving it entirely to industry — and another doing something else. Has that changed? That's my question, Mr. Minister.

HON. MR. PARKER : Yes.

SALE OF MAPPING BRANCH

MR. LOVICK :

My question is to the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands. Can the

minister confirm that there is now a process underway to sell off parts

or all of the surveys and resource mapping branch within his ministry?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I'll take that question on notice, please.

[2:15]

SOCIAL INSURANCE NUMBERS

ON ENUMERATION FORMS

MR. R. FRASER :

To the Provincial Secretary. All of us are aware that the social

insurance number is used to collect unemployment insurance and welfare,

it is used when you submit your income taxes, but it is voluntary on

the enumeration forms that are now being sent around the province. Has

the government considered making it mandatory on enumeration forms for

the purposes of identification during a vote?

HON. MR. REID : I'll take that as notice, Mr. Speaker. I wasn't aware that it wasn't required on the enumeration forms.

HIRING OF PERSONS

OVER 65 YEARS OF AGE

MS. PULLINGER :

My question is to the Provincial Secretary as well. Recently a person

approved by a government agent as a supervisor of enumerators was

refused by Victoria on the grounds that under the Public Service Act,

someone over 65 years of age is ineligible to be a supervisor. Is it

this government's policy not to hire people over 65?

HON. MR. REID :

It must be my day, Mr. Speaker. I wasn't aware of that either. I will

take that as notice and get an answer back to the member.

SALE OF LAKESHORE LOTS

MR. KEMPF : A question to the Minister Responsible for Crown Lands —

and whatever else ministers of state are responsible for. Citizens in

my area wishing to purchase Crown lakeshore lots have been given an

ultimatum: pay what the government is asking or perhaps pay more in the

future. Has the minister decided to charge a price for these lots which

is in line with B.C. Assessment Authority assessments?

HON. MR. DIRKS : No, we do not sell for the assessed value. It is appraised value, market value.

MR. KEMPF :

Given that the assessments done by the B.C. Assessment Authority are

used to determine rates on tax rolls around the province, does the

minister not think their use in this case would be fair?

HON. MR. DIRKS :

Mr. Speaker, I would doubt that there are very many people in this

province who would sell their property for the assessed value.

MR. KEMPF :

Mr. Speaker, supplementary. Does the minister then believe the

philosophy of his ministry, which in short says that the Assessment

Authority of B.C. values are at best only a guide to current market

value and are generally not suited for establishing market value?

HON. MR. DIRKS : I guess I'd turn that question around. I wonder if the member would sell his property for the assessed value.

SASH SAWMILL AT ARMSTRONG

MR. WILLIAMS :

To the Minister of Agriculture. The B.C. Land Commission has turned

down an application for exclusion from the ALR in the town of Armstrong

for a sash sawmill plant. Could the minister assure the House that his

ministry and

[ Page

6939 ]

ELUC will seriously review the commission's report prior to considering the exclusion?

HON. MR. SAVAGE : Yes, Mr. Speaker.

FISH-TESTING POLICY

MR. G. HANSON :

A question to the Minister of Fisheries regarding the dioxin and furan

levels in B.C. interior fisheries in the release put out by the

government last week. In the press release it was stated that popular

sport fish, including Dolly Varden trout and salmon, showed no need for

consumption restrictions where tested. Can the minister confirm that

the data shows no trout were sampled downstream from pulp mills, and

that only one type of trout was tested and that was upstream?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

I can neither at this time confirm or deny which species were tested at

which particular area in the river, but I will certainly raise that

with the Minister of Environment (Hon. Mr. Strachan) and the Minister

of Health (Hon. Mr. Dueck), because those ministries are responsible

for the samples.

MR G. HANSON : The federal report

seems to validate my point. Can the minister inform the House whether

testing will be carried out to test trout downstream from pulp mills?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

I cannot confirm that either at this stage. Certainly if there's any

jeopardy in any way to health, I'm quite certain tests will be taken

and all species monitored to see what effect dioxins have had.

MR. G. HANSON :

Mr. Speaker, it appears that the testing for Dolly Varden is done on an

average basis, which means that some Dolly Varden could be testing

quite highly. Can you assure us that all Dolly Varden caught in the

province are safe for human consumption?

HON. MR. SAVAGE :

I would certainly like to say that automatically, but it would have to

be as the result of those tests. I will make certain that the Ministry

of Health and Ministry of the Environment take ample samples to ensure

that the food is clean and healthy.

HEALTH RISK TO NATIVES

FROM CONTAMINATED FISH

MR. G. HANSON : A question to the minister in charge of Native Affairs.

As the minister knows, the average consumption of fish is much higher in the

native community than in the white community, and the federal figures are based

on non-native consumption. The highest dioxin levels were found in fish species

that are staples in the diet of B.C. native people. What steps has the minister

taken to inform native communities throughout British Columbia of the health

risk posed by eating fish caught downstream from pulp mills?

HON. MR. WEISGERBER :

I believe that the Minister of Health and the Minister of Environment

have issued cautions to all people consuming fish in those water

systems, if bottom feeders are part of their staple diet. I'm confident

that the ministries have given sufficient notice to Indian people to

allow them to make a proper decision.

MR. G. HANSON :

I know that all members of this House are aware that native people are

very concerned about the level of toxins that may be in finfish and

shellfish being ingested. I want to ask the question: because pulp

mills are provincially regulated and the provincial Minister of

Environment is involved, is the Minister of Native Affairs prepared to

accept responsibility should it be necessary for native communities to

terminate or cut back traditional fisheries? In other words, would you

pay compensation?

HON. MR. WEISGERBER : That issue

would have to be dealt with should it ever occur. At this time there is

no indication that it's the situation, and I don't see it being

particularly useful to speculate on it.

HON. MR. RICHMOND : I would ask leave for the Select Standing Committee on Labour, Justice and Intergovernmental Relations to meet this afternoon.

Leave granted.

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. RICHMOND : Mr. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

LABOUR AND CONSUMER SERVICES

On vote 41: minister's office, $273,577 (continued).

MR. LOVICK :

It's been some time since I've had occasion to pose questions to the

Minister of Consumer Services, and I'm rather looking forward to the

event, hopeful that we're going to get some clearer answers than I had

the last go around.

The issue I want to raise with the

minister has to do with consumer protection legislation. The last set

of questions that I asked the minister — this is now a couple of years ago —

was answered for me by having recourse on his part to changes to the

Consumer Protection Act and modifications to that particular bit of

legislation which it was suggested at the time....

I'm sorry, I can't call for order, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps you could tell the members opposite.

[ Page 6940 ]

Interjections.

MR. LOVICK :

May I proceed, Mr. Chairman? All right. Thank you. This would have been

the first time that the minister opposite would have had an excuse for

not understanding what I was saying; but I'll let that pass.

I say, I was referring to the fact that a couple of years ago when I

raised questions about consumer protection legislation, the answers

tended to be embraced under one answer: namely, that we were making

modifications to legislation which would solve the problem.

want to canvass a particular issue of special concern to consumers

everywhere, but an issue that arose specifically in my own

constituency. I'm talking about a sales technique used by the providers

of the cable service in my community, whereby a letter was sent to all

of the subscribers in the system. I might just add in passing and

parenthetically that if this happened in my community of Nanaimo, I

suspect it may well have happened in another 50-odd communities in the

province that are also serviced by the same cable company. I think the

question is serious.

In any event, this particular company

sent letters to its subscribers informing them that it would shortly be

introducing six new channels. Suddenly the package was to be much more

attractive, and everybody would leap at the opportunity. The problem is

that the way this particular measure was couched was to say that if you

want the service, "simply do nothing." It's reminiscent of Nancy Reagan

telling us: "Just say no." In other words, the onus was very clearly on

the consumer. The consumer is told: "If you don't want the service,

then you must tell us you do not want it." Otherwise, for the princely

sum of $2.95 a month you would receive the service.

The minister is familiar with that kind of contract; it's called negative option sales, as I recall — negative option scheme. I know what happened in the last amendments to legislation: we — that is, the government —

took this giant step forward in terms of solving the problem and said:

"What we will do to protect consumers against this kind of activity is

give them 15 days in which to refuse." I hope the minister is going to

tell me that his ministry is going much beyond that and looking very

seriously and carefully at the prospect of simply outlawing that sales

technique.

I'm wondering if I might pose that direct

question first to the minister. Are you and the officials in your

ministry actively considering changing the legislation so that this

technique will not be allowed in this province?

HON. L. HANSON :

I'm very aware of the situation the member is referring to. The

negative option sales operation is not illegal in today's regulations

or act, but it's also not enforceable. My staff recently had a meeting

with a cable company involved, and the charges as a result of the

operation, which they may issue on a monthly basis, are not enforceable.

Secondly,

if they, through that system, provide a negative entry on their credit

rating, it would have to be removed immediately, because it is not an

allowable thing to do. The company involved has agreed that if there is

any problem like that, they will reverse the charges.

are continuing to monitor the situation, and while it is a legal

procedure, it is not enforceable under the Trade Practice Act. If they

provide these extra services, provide the negative letter or card and a

postpaid envelope and so on, and it is not sent in, the subscriber

continues to get the service, they bill them, and that bill is not

enforceable and the non-collection of that bill cannot be used as a

detrimental entry on their credit rating.

[2:30]

MR. LOVICK :

I appreciate the answer as far as it goes, but surely it begs the

question concerning the desirability of this sales practice being

legal. My question, a very direct one, is whether the government is

going to take steps to simply make that sales technique illegal.

Because pretty obviously, Mr. Minister, companies do that because they

know it works very well. It's a very easy way to bump up your market,

and I'm sure the companies have all kinds of evidence to show that it

does work. It's well worth the cost to them of marketing that

particular service.

The point is, though, that the consumers are the unwilling victims, and some of those people are going to get — let me put it bluntly —

suckered into buying a particular system that they otherwise would not

want to be part of. Through their own apathy, indifference or the kind

of consumerist mentality that most of us tend to function by, which is

to not pay much attention to those monthly bills as they come in but

simply to go through the process of paying them, the result will be

that the company's market will expand and increase significantly. I

can't think of any solid arguments to support the proposition or

contention that any company in this province should be allowed to

continue that sort of sales practice. We're talking about a very

slippery marketing device.

Surely what we ought to do, if

we believe in consumer protection legislation at all, is simply say

that we won't tolerate the practice in this province. Can the minister

respond to that or give me some arguments with which, I am quite

prepared to say, I am unfamiliar?

HON. L. HANSON :

Yes, I can assure the member opposite that we are continuing to monitor

and will look at it. Future decisions as to legislative changes will be

announced as they are made.

We are also aware of some other

initiatives that are happening in the marketplace. In one instance that

we know of, a service industry is using that negative selling

technique. If it becomes a serious marketing strategy on the part

of.... Even though it is not enforceable, we may consider that.

MR. LOVICK : It seems to me that the minister's answer clearly indicates that you are prepared to

[ Page 6941 ]

tolerate

extra work. Surely the easiest and cheapest way to solve the problem

would be to simply say that we are not prepared to tolerate that

advertising technique. It's just that simple.

I can't

understand what it is about the marketplace or about the role this

government perceives itself as having that stands in the way of

interfering and saying this kind of practice should not be allowed.

there some dimension of the marketplace that is sacrosanct, and that I

don't understand? I think I know my basic free market economic stuff

fairly well. I sure can't understand this one. Would you tell me who

you are protecting? Why are we doing this? Why aren't we — the government —

saying that we will protect the consumer against this kind of practice?

This kind of practice doesn't serve anybody. All it serves are the

interests of a private company which has a relatively easy way to

increase its share of the market.

HON. L. HANSON : I think that most governments — certainly this government —

do not want to intrude into the marketplace unless there is a real need

for that. I am sure the member is aware that magazine companies tried

this sales approach for a period of time not too long ago. It lasted a

short time, because the companies that delivered were effectively

giving away free magazines, because people didn't pay.

will reiterate that when we, as the government, see the need to put

regulations in place, we will act. At this point, we don't see that as

an absolute necessity in a world that is probably overregulated as it

is.

MR. LOVICK : I am not going to go on at great

length about this. I certainly do not want to belabour the point. The

minister has pretty clearly stated his position. But to suggest any

kind of analogous situation between magazine sales and television is

ludicrous in the extreme. There are very few people who gleefully pick

up the magazines that land on their doorstep. It doesn't have the same

position or importance in our culture. I'm sure that's obvious to

anybody who pauses to reflect on it.

I have just one other

quick question to the minister. He certainly was aware of the measure.

I am wondering if there was any lobbying done either by the consumers'

association or by the interest itself — namely, the cable company in this instance. Was there any representation made to government about this practice?

HON. L. HANSON : Not to my knowledge. I was never made aware of any lobbying that was done. I did receive — I can't really be accurate —

maybe half a dozen letters from people with the brochure and the card.

That was my first knowledge of that. To the best of my knowledge, there

has been no lobbying.

MRS. BOONE : Mr. Minister, I would like to focus a little on alcohol

and drug programs, the TRY program, the CAP funding and basically the programs

offered through your ministry.

have some concerns which I expressed last year when alcohol and drugs

were removed from the Ministry of Health and moved into the Ministry of

Labour. Some of those concerns had to do with the fact that I see

alcoholism as a disease, and I think it ought to be treated as such. My

concern was that we would be focusing mainly on the employee assistance

programs — which are very important programs — but that this may be one of the movements of this ministry.

What

we have seen over the past year, though, is rather strange: constant

announcements of funding and of grants to organizations and a

never-ending further privatization of the alcohol and drug programs.

Some of these things have, I think, been very detrimental to the people

in this province who have been serving. We've seen the erosion and

dismantling of the special resources division, which was the provision

to provide the education and prevention programs. That started in June

of 1988 with the elimination of the women and youth consultants. Then

the senior consultants were transferred to the Ministry of Health, the

employee assistance program counsellor was transferred to WCB, and it

appears that they're now contracting out native consultants. All of

this is taking place on ground that is totally devoid of any standards.

Something that has concerned me over the years regards the lack of standards

in the Ministry of Health when they contracted out, and the same thing appears

here. To my knowledge, there are no standards regarding the qualifications of

the employees who are receiving grants or being contracted out. There are no

provincewide standards by the ministry saying: "This is the level of service

that ought to be available in every community, and therefore we are going to

provide those services." And there are definitely no standards involving

salaries for people.

This

may be a laughing matter, Mr. Minister. Perhaps the Premier would like

to question the minister about this. Obviously you seem to think it's

more important that you get the minister's ear rather than myself.

Mr.

Minister, a very important point, and one that can't be overlooked, is

the fact that we don't have these standards out there. Some areas of

the province are well served by organizations that have applied for and

received grants to provide a service. Others may not have the same

level of service because they either don't have the organizations or

the person to draw together a group of people to make those services

available. It seems to me that the ministry has really derogated its

responsibility and left it up to the communities to pick up the ball if

they want to. Your program, which says "The responsibility is yours, "

clearly indicates that it is no longer the responsibility of the

government to ensure that programs are offered and available, or to

ensure that everybody receives the same level of service throughout the

province. "The responsibility is yours" tells me —

[ Page 6942 ]

tells everybody — that we must pick up the ball and carry it from here on in.

The

contracting-out that has been taking place, as I stated, is done

without any standards. There's no continuity. There's no guarantee that

any of these organizations or societies are going to receive funding

next year or that the programs they're offering this year are going to

be available down the road. There's no long-term planning in any area.

The fact that the government has delegated this responsibility to

societies means there is no overall plan to deal with issues such as

alcohol and drug abuse in our province. We are operating from fiscal

year to fiscal year. You have a $137 million three-year program, yet

once again the grants are being offered on a yearly basis. We saw

grants made last year with a commitment in some cases to '89-90, but no

commitment for funding in the next year. The government's commitment to

solve these problems has got to be a long-term one. The people who get

involved must know that they're going to have the resources to make

sure their communities have these programs for a long time.

would like to ask the minister several questions on some of these

areas. The ministry talks about prevention and education and makes the

point to the public that these are the areas we must work in in order

to deal with alcohol and drug abuse, and I totally agree that those are

the areas we must focus on. At that point, why did the ministry

dismantle the special resources division, which was the division that

provided education and prevention? Why did you eliminate the positions

of women and youth consultants? And who are doing the jobs that those

people once did?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM : The member

for Prince George North suggested I should also speak and ask some of

the questions, and I would be pleased to participate.

Before

I do ask the questions, I would like to commend the minister and the

ministry on the TRY program. It certainly is exemplary. I don't think

there is anything anywhere in Canada like it. Certainly for many years

we've had people in government talk about similar programs. We've had

NDP governments, Social Credit governments and governments before that

talk about these particular programs, but this government was the first

ever to do it. Mr. Minister, you and your ministry are all to be

commended for a program which is the best in the country.

[2:45]

I really didn't get up to speak only about the TRY program, and I

will mention some other things as well. I heard some criticism from the

member for Prince George North (Mrs. Boone) and, Mr. Minister, I would

like to give you another view. The member seemed to indicate that too

much was left up to the community if they wanted to; those were about

the words. I frankly don't see anything wrong with the community being

involved.

I guess perhaps this is where we differ with

the NDP. I would suggest that we continue to see the local community

involved as much as possible because we in the free enterprise sector,

I believe, have time and time again experienced that where you have the

community involved — be it local government, school boards, local chambers of commerce, Rotary clubs, Kinsmen, Lions or community associations — chances

are the programs will be far more effective than if they are simply

left to government, particularly a government in Victoria or Ottawa. It

is a tremendous benefit, I will always believe, to see local people

involved in the process.

I also, Mr. Minister, commend you

for having contracted out many of these services. I believe that

contractors will be made to perform, and we can establish for them — and perhaps you will comment on this —

a set of guidelines, ground rules, standards which they are required to

meet. If they don't meet them, we can cancel the contract, I would

presume;

whereas if it's always all government, there is no way of

cancelling the contract. We are stuck with whatever it is we are set

upon.

So the idea of bringing in local contractors....

Interjection.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM :

No. I've seen it again and again, hon. member for Prince George North,

that where the government becomes involved, particularly a socialist

government — and we've seen a couple of those in this nation, unfortunately, and we continue to pay the price —

they get hooked into government always doing all things. It remains

thus, things don't change and they are afraid to make the necessary

corrections for fear it will show the populace how lousy a job it is

they are doing.

I am referring particularly to socialist

governments because they have a habit of always taking things upon

themselves and cutting out the private sector or contractors, and we're

talking about contractors. I commend you for having contractors

involved and for setting high standards for them. If they don't meet

the standards, cancel the contract and we can look to somebody else who

will do a better job. I still prefer to see the private sector and the

local community involved in providing that particular service.

also heard the member for Prince George North say that she doesn't

appreciate, like or understand the program because there are no

guarantees of funding for next year or down the road. Again, Mr.

Minister, I know that if we keep a sound economy and if we have a free

enterprise government in this province, which continues to see new

investment and growth of industry, we will carry on these programs

because they are necessary and serve a tremendous purpose. But there

are no guarantees. As a matter of fact, if ever — Heaven forbid! — the

people of this province chose a socialist government, that would

probably be the end of that program. They'd have to chop it because the

economy would, I suggest, suffer considerably. I don't see, Mr.

Minister, how you could provide guarantees. There are no guarantees.

Only

[ Page 6943 ]

the socialists believe they can somehow provide guarantees. It's not possible.

Mr.

Minister, I was speaking on this particular subject as well because I

was hoping that the Leader of the Opposition might be around someplace

and might be listening somewhere so that he could be in the House for

some of this debate. It offends me a little bit that when we are

discussing a very important portfolio, the Ministry of Labour, we

always end up with only three members of the opposition in the House.

The Leader of the Opposition, to my knowledge, has not participated

once.

So if he is listening, I would hope perhaps that he

will come into the House, because I would like him to stand up and

provide some alternative suggestions to you, Mr. Minister, as to what

it is an NDP government might do with respect to labour in this

province. Mr. Minister, the NDP has for some time now — and I know we spoke of this yesterday, but I'm going to say it again and again until we get some answers —

told British Columbians that if they became the government, they would

replace Bill 19 with a new piece of labour legislation. We've not seen

any sign of that.

I want to talk about Bill 19, but I also

would like to see the opposition get up and say how they propose to do

things differently. Instead of continuing to be negative all of the

time, let's hear some positive comment. Let's hear some good, alternate

suggestions. Tell us what it is you would do. And go back and remember

that the Leader of the Opposition, your leader — I think — was going

about the province saying: "If we became government, we would do away

with Bill 19; we would bring in something else." As a matter of fact,

in many of his speeches not so long ago, he was saying that the NDP

would abolish Bill 19. "We would replace it with a fair labour law." He

went on to say....

MRS. BOONE : On a point of order,

Mr. Chairman, I fail to see the relevancy of all of this to the

minister's estimates. Bill 19, as you know, was two terms ago. This

minister's estimates have to do with this year's budget, and certainly

have nothing to do with the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. CHAIRMAN :

Thank you, hon. member. The restriction in Sir Erskine May would

certainly apply to some bills that might be discussed, but in this

case, Bill 19 would not be one of them, because it's past legislation

that's been dealt with.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM : Isn't

that interesting! Suddenly, the NDP doesn't want to hear a mention of

Bill 19. They don't want to talk about Bill 19. I would challenge you

to speak about Bill 19 during the hours or days ahead. Talk about Bill

19. Suddenly they don't want to talk about Bill 19, because it's been

such a success. That's why you don't want to talk about Bill 19.

They,

and particularly the Leader of the Opposition, said that they would be

proposing an alternative to Bill 19. They've had lots of time. One

thing about members of the opposition, they get lots of time off. They

travel around the province. They've got lots of time off throughout the

year. They can use any excuse, not having the time to provide an

alternative to Bill 19.

The Leader of the Opposition has

said during that early debate that Bill 19 is not going to bring

stability. He said that instead it will bring instability. In fact, the

exact opposite has happened. As a result of the cooperative attitude of

both labour and management, the number of worker-days lost in British

Columbia last year was the second lowest in more than 30 years. That's

hardly instability.

[Mr. Rogers in the chair.]

Maybe

that's why the opposition now doesn't want to talk about Bill 19. I

think this is why, perhaps, they don't want to get into Bill 19.

AN HON. MEMBER : Too positive.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM :

Too positive is right. They don't want to get involved in that. The

Leader of the Opposition has also stated that Bill 19 is going to hurt

the economy and hamper investment. I can recall that he was saying that

in the House, outside the House and all around the province. Once

again, the facts prove otherwise. The provincial economy has never been

stronger and investment is at record levels. Statistics Canada says

that B.C. leads all other regions in the country and is expected to

increase its capital investment still more, ahead of any other place in

Canada. We're leading the country. It's not so long ago that the doom

and gloom of the NDP was saying: "Bill 19 is going to hurt the economy

and hamper investment." I can remember it so well. It was said again

and again.

When the media vainly tried to get the Leader of

the Opposition's views on the day of the general strike in 1987, the

Leader of the Opposition once again painfully sat on that picket fence,

the same one he's been perched on since he became leader, and he

wouldn't really comment or say anything one way or the other. As a

matter of fact, it prompted one columnist to write that the public

deserves more from the opposition.

Mr. Chairman, why has

the opposition not told British Columbians their plans for labour

legislation? We have a whole raft of private members' bills dealing

with environmental questions — and that's fine and wonderful — but why

have they not presented one private member's bill on labour issues?

Why, if you said Bill 19 was so bad, why, if you said it couldn't work,

why, if you said it would cause unemployment, why, if you said it would

cause unions to lose their memberships — which hasn't happened — why,

if you said there would be a tremendous downturn in economic activity,

have you not presented an alternative to Bill 19? Where is your

alternative?

Does it maybe indicate that the NDP has a devious, hidden political agenda? Come clean! Where are

[ Page 6944 ]

you?

Where is your alternative? Let's have a look. Let's have a glimpse at

this hidden political agenda of yours. Let's find out. It's two years

ago now that a former NDP member of this Legislature, Bill King, said

that a new NDP government would bring in anti-business legislation if

business supported Bill Vander Zalm's version of industrial-relations

bliss in Bill 19. Now where is your alternative? I would encourage, I

would urge, I beg the members of the opposition, particularly your

long-lost leader who's never in the House, to stand up and tell us

what's your alternative, what's your option, what's the alternative to

Bill 19. Let's hear from you. Let's hear from all of you on this.

MR. CHAIRMAN : The member for Richmond wishes to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. LOENEN :

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Premier and myself, I'd just like to

welcome a visiting group of students. They've just entered the public

gallery. These are exchange students from Montreal, and they are

accompanied by their hosting group, a number of students from the

Richmond school, Burnett Junior Secondary School, together with their

teachers. I would like to ask the House to please make them welcome.

MRS. BOONE :

Mr. Minister, my questions to you were so long ago that I'll tell them

to you again. My questions were regarding alcohol and drug programs:

why did you dismantle the special resources division, which was the

education and prevention division of alcohol and drug? Why did you

eliminate the positions of the women and youth consultants? And who are

doing the jobs that are done by these particular people?

HON. L. HANSON : The member will be pleased to know that she has hit something that I do have the responsibility for in my ministries.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN :

Could we have a quiet time for a second, Mr. Minister. Perhaps we could

have this debate take place when members are recognized. The member for

Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota) and the Premier have had their

little time now; perhaps we could have the minister with his estimates

for a minute.

[3:00]

HON. L. HANSON :

Well, the member asked a number of questions in her remarks. We as

government made a long-term commitment a while ago. We do have a

three-year plan. I think the total amount of money is some $134

million, to be spread over — at least partially — last year, this year

and the following year. The programs we have in place are quite

innovative. In many cases we do have the services that the member was

referring to being provided in communities. We have gone to a

regionalization, if you will, for delivery of the programs, and we do

have all of the resources that we had before in place.

far as the privatization remarks that were being made, we have in some

cases societized some of the treatment facilities, and we found that

the TRY program has encouraged the volunteer aspect of each community

to a degree where they find the socialization process very attractive

to them. We have a manual, and every agency we have contracted with has

to abide by that manual, which governs the standards for delivery of

service. At this point we do not have any long-term contracts, but I

think it's important that the member understand that by the

societization and the various programs we have put in place, we are in

an assessment period. We are looking very carefully at all the services

to make sure those being provided best suit the individual community's

needs. That's why the societization and regionalization is happening.

We're

not intending to commission an independent study of the terms of

employment among the funded agencies, but we certainly ensure that the

agencies are up to a certain standard. We are going to do a study of

the qualities of those people, but we're not going to do it

independently outside of the ministry. We do not have a licensing

process in place for people who work for the various agencies. But a

number of community colleges are developing and delivering training

programs for counsellors involved in drug and alcohol programs.

The member was talking about a number of grants, which are the grants we are providing under the community action program —

CAP. An advisory committee has been put in place in every region of the

province, which is made up of representatives of the services provided

in that community and others who are interested in sitting on that

committee. The applications made for community action program funding

are submitted to this committee in each region, and it deals with the

grants as they see appropriate. There has been some funding for some

quite innovative programs. There has been some funding for some dry

grad programs in some communities. There is quite a variety around

British Columbia, even though it is on a one-year basis.

But

we do have contracts. We have just recently reached an agreement with

some of the agencies that are providing a service. There are so many

agencies interested in providing service in various communities, and

the response to the TRY program has been quite tremendous actually.

We're now trying to establish a standard of treatment in each community

by those programs.

I should add that we also have an

advisory committee in place to help us look at these programs before we

initiate them. They're made up of a number of very prominent people

interested in drug and alcohol abuse and education. There are police

chiefs involved, people from religious communities and from native

communities, representation from the British Columbia Medical

Association. I think there

[ Page 6945 ]

are

about 25 in total, and I'd certainly be pleased to give the member a

copy of the list of people who have consented to sit on the committee.

do have a manual that is required. One of the things we're working on

at the moment is trying to get an assessment standard throughout

British Columbia so that the assessment procedures are done on a

similar basis, and so that the most appropriate treatment determined as

a result of that assessment would be relatively stable throughout the

province. In other words, if a certain situation existed in the

Okanagan, and that same situation existed in Prince George, we would

like to see a method of determining that the treatment would be

assessed to be similar in both communities.

There are so

many avenues of treatment available today. There is, of course,

Alcoholics Anonymous. There are a number of live-in situations where we

provide full treatment right at the.... There are a number of

consulting terms where people come in for a session and are helped in

that manner. To attain that standard, we are still working on that. We

haven't got it in place. My assistant deputy minister in charge of that

is working to attain that standard. The assessment process is

relatively similar wherever it may be in the province. I think that

everyone would agree that it is a positive approach.

I know

that the member asked a number of questions during her speech. Maybe I

have missed some and she might remind me of which ones I haven't

answered.

MRS. BOONE : You missed most of them, Mr.

Minister. I wanted to know why you dismantled the special resources

division, which is the education and prevention end of the ministry;

why you eliminated positions of women and youth consultants; and who

are doing the jobs that were done by those previous positions?

think we all acknowledge that education and prevention is the keystone

to dealing with alcohol and drugs, that it is very difficult to deal

with the problem once it's there. We have got to attack this problem at

the front end. We have always advocated that from this side of the

House, and I have heard the Minister of Health talking about it as well.

seems a little strange that at the time we are advocating prevention

and putting $137 million over three years into a program.... I am

surprised that you forgot it was $137 million, not $134 million,

because every single one of your press releases that comes out states

$137 million, and I have been inundated with that figure. If you have

$137 million, why did you choose at this particular time to eliminate

that division? Who are doing those jobs that were done by those people?

HON. L. HANSON :

Sometimes when we are talking about these things, we add things

together and come up with answers that aren't exactly the same: $134

million is correct, but when we add our CounterAttack, it is $137

million.

To speak to the other situation, there hasn't been

anyone released. We have decentralized a number of services to the

regional offices. The special resources programs are available in the

regional offices. The services of the women and youth consultants that

you mentioned specifically are available in the regional offices.

think the member would agree that a regionalized approach, where each

community has access to these resources as opposed to having them

centralized here in Victoria, is probably a wise move, because it is

much more accessible to the people who really need the service. She

mentioned education too. We are going to be introducing this fall — with the cooperation of the Ministry of Education —

an alcohol and drug educational component into the mandatory school

curriculum. I believe the goal is September at the moment, although I

understand there are some drafting difficulties with the program. It's

our hope to introduce it into the curriculum this fall.

MRS. BOONE :

It has been my understanding, Mr. Minister, that in January of this

year the staff of the special resources division were told that their

program area would no longer exist. You are telling me that it has been

regionalized. Are you telling me then that rather than having people

here in Victoria, those positions are now out in each of the regions

and the staff in each of those regions has been increased to take up

those positions?

[3:15]

HON. L. HANSON :

We have regionalized many of those functions. Some people who were

involved in one particular area have a slightly different

responsibility, but we haven't taken them out of the system as such. I

suppose that if you looked at the system in Victoria, you would have a

concentration of people, but when you regionalize it, some people may

be doing more than one function because of volumes and whatever.

All

the services that we were providing previously we're now providing in

the regions. I have heard very little complaint about that. Just about

all the communication I have had on the TRY program and our other

initiatives has been very positive.

MRS. BOONE : This is going to be a long process. I didn't think we were going to be very long on this area.

the minister saying that the regional offices have increased their

staffing to supplement the jobs that were previously done by the

special resources division? Or is the minister saying that now the same

level of staffing has remained at the regional offices and that, in

addition to the functions that they were doing before, they are now

also doing the education and prevention? Are those functions now being

done by the same people at the regional end in addition to the

functions they had before, or have you increased the staff at that

level?

[ Page 6946 ]

HON. L. HANSON :

The Victoria group was always a resource group. There have been some

increases in staffing in the various communities. One of the

initiatives going on right now, because our program started a new year

at the end of April, is that we are looking at staff complements in

some of the regions. There have been some staff increases in the

various regions, but we haven't increased them all.

MR. R. FRASER :

It's a great pleasure for me to get into this debate. I want all those

children up there to hear what great things this government has done

for so many years. This minister has the wonderful opportunity of

looking after things like WCB and ICBC and all those great programs.

There are so many things we could talk about, but let's start with some

of the great things that you'll want to hear about and that some of the

school kids talked to me about.

Last Friday — a week ago Friday —

my colleague from Vancouver South and I, along with the Minister of

Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mrs. Johnston), were at one of the high schools

in our riding talking about GradPass. It doesn't actually relate to

that minister, but that's the kind of thing we've done with the

drinking and driving CounterAttack; one of the great programs that this

province has come down with. You will see how much safer it is on our

streets because of that kind of program and because of the thinking

that comes out of this side of the House. Maybe that's why the Social

Credit Party has led this province for so long.

AN HON. MEMBER : And will continue.

MR. R. FRASER : And will continue.

Now

with the TRY program, a most serious concern in our community,

naturally, is the drug abuse problem. Young children being hooked on

drugs like marijuana and cocaine and things of that nature was unheard

of when those of us on the floor were going to school, probably — with

the exception of the young member from Esquimalt, who.... I guess the

two of you are going to be looking after this minister.

MRS. BOONE : We'll look after him.

MR. R. FRASER : The two of you; that's right. Well, it's nice to see so many of you here.

Interjection.

MR. R. FRASER : Yes, where are they? Where are those guys anyway?

The

TRY program is a very positive approach. What are we doing in our

schools and our communities to attack the drug abuse problem? We're

going into the schools saying: "This can happen to you if you should

run into those people who peddle drugs." Can you think of anybody doing

that? Can you think of anybody picking on a human being in that way,

making them totally dependent? You hear the experiences of young

children who are addicted, who will do anything — steal from their

families, let alone the things we don't mention in this House. No

wonder we're making such a great effort to tell the students of the

hazards of these things.

What we'd like also to do, if we

could, would be to instruct some of the judges about the terms and the

conditions of sentences given to people who are trafficking.

MR. CHAIRMAN :

Mr. Member, I'm going to try and remind you whose estimates we're doing

and ask you to relate just to the administrative responsibilities of

the Minister of Labour and Consumer Services. Trafficking, perhaps; but

sentencing is.... Even I'm having trouble relating to that.

MR. R. FRASER :

Mr. Chairman, thank you for guiding me. I do appreciate the counsel I

get from you and those who have the honour of sitting at the front in

the Chairman's chair, and occasionally in the Speaker's chair. You have

a history of experience here that is uncommonly strong, and we should

all take advice from a man of such character — such a character.

wanted to point out how serious the problem is and how important it is

for the minister to go on with the TRY program. At least it's a

positive way to demonstrate to the school children that it is not fun

to get hooked on drugs, and that's why the ministry's doing that.

move to a subject that has become quite close to me, the WCB. The

minister's also responsible for that. We find that there's some

suggestion that the board should become independent from government.

Many people in my riding think it already is. According to the act,

which I've read and I believe I understand, you can appeal decisions

from the Workers' Compensation Board. But my experience is that the

board hasn't been all that interested in doing that sort of thing. Once

a decision is made, it seems final. I'm not at all sure that that's

reasonable.

Another thing I understand, told to me by

members of the board, is that once a company changes its title, they

lose their experience rating. That's a recent decision. You're called

the ABC Co....

MRS. BOONE : You've lost your audience.

MR. R. FRASER :

I've not lost the audience. Those students will never forget me. I bet

if they could, they would move into the riding of Vancouver South to

support the Chairman and myself.

I hope that you're listening, because I would like you to learn something today. This is a fresh new experience.

MRS. BOONE : I always listen.

MR. R. FRASER : I know. I know.

This is important. Why is it that a company that changes its title and keeps the same staff loses the

[ Page 6947 ]

experience

rating? It doesn't seem reasonable to me. It certainly doesn't seem

reasonable to the employers who have experienced this wonderful event

and suddenly find their rates going up. If you have the same staff and

if you have the same company and if you're doing the same job with the

same people, why would you lose your experience rating? It doesn't make

any sense. It's arbitrary, in my opinion, to have that happen.

you're separating a piece of property from the business, and the

property has nothing to do with the business, why do it? I would like

the minister to ask the WCB why they do that, to see if they can come

up with a logical reason. I think those two members over there would

probably want to hear the reason so they could relate it to some of

their colleagues.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM : Their so-called leader. What's his name again?

AN HON. MEMBER : Who's the leader?

MR. R. FRASER :

I know who the leader is. The leader is the first member for Vancouver

East (Mr. Williams). The front man is the man for Vancouver Centre.

Perhaps the leader is the member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr.

Sihota), or maybe the leader is the second member for Vancouver East

(Mr. Clark). But I know it isn't the lady for Prince George North (Mrs.

Boone). That much I know; we're confident about that.

Back

to WCB. If the minister could tell me why a company would lose an

experience rating when it's only a matter of separating a piece of

property off and the employees, job and the management are the same — then why does that happen?

HON. L. HANSON :

The issue that the member speaks of has come to my attention a number

of times. When we have the new board of governors in place, I assure

the member that will be one of the policies we will refer to the board

to assess.

MRS. BOONE : I'm going back to the

questions again here, because you really haven't answered them at all

with regard to the dismantling of the special resources division. You

say that those people are still here in Victoria doing other jobs or

what have you. That is a central core of people doing the education and

establishing education and prevention for alcohol and drugs. That

resource program has been eliminated. You say they've been sent out

into the regions. You can't tell me if any extra people have been added

there. You can't tell me who's doing that job. Are they doing the

education and prevention program on a regional basis? Are they all done

regionally, with no standards established for the province as a whole

saying that this is what the education should be or this is the

prevention program? Are they all done strictly at the regional level?

Who is doing the jobs that were done by these people before?

HON. L. HANSON : I think the member misunderstands what those people were doing —

I think there were four people involved. They were a resource group.

They weren't doing prevention as such. They were doing education,

distribution of materials and that sort of thing. A number of them had

a library established. A number of them have gone to other jobs — there

are four in total. I think, if I remember correctly, that one went to

the Ministry of Health in another capacity. The service that was being

provided by that group is now being provided by the regions and the

people in those regions.

MRS. BOONE : Are you saying,

then, that there is no central resource establishing education

priorities for the ministry, that now this is on a regional basis, that

all of the library resources and other things have been distributed out

to the regions, that there is now one person in each region responsible

for the education programs? Is that what you're telling me?

HON. L. HANSON :

The library will be maintained here in Victoria. There is a head office

staff we've always had that are still here. The people you are talking

about were not involved in treatment. They were involved in education

and distribution of materials. The distribution of materials is being

done regionally. The library will continue to be here in Victoria,

because there is a requirement for a head office staff to continue to

plan and run the programs as we have them.

I don't know

what other answer the member is looking for. The services that were

provided by that resource group are now being provided regionally.

MRS. BOONE :

Have you hired new and additional staff at the regional level? Or is

this now a lower priority at the regional level, to be done in

conjunction with all the other tasks that the regional people have to

do? Is this a low priority that's just shifted into gear with

everything else, or is there somebody at the regional level

specifically responsible for this function?

HON. L. HANSON :

Special Resources didn't carry out any prevention programs. The regions

that are providing information and so on are doing part of the job that

the resource team here in Victoria was doing. We still have a head

office staff. The amounts of money being spent in the various

communities are much higher. Look at the CAP programs, many of them

educational, that weren't there before and are now being put in place.

They were not directed or provided by the resource team that was here

in Victoria.

I don't understand exactly what the member is

getting at. The service that was provided by the resource team from

Victoria may have been varied a little bit, but we are still providing

an educational informational service through the regions.

[3:30]

[ Page 6948 ]

HON. MR. REID :

I want to compliment the current minister during his estimates on the

job he's doing in relation to the TRY program, but I'm saddened that

the Leader of the Opposition is not here during the discussion in these

most important estimates of this minister.

AN HON. MEMBER : How many are there?

HON. MR. REID :

There are only two members of the opposition here to discuss this most

critical issue, the estimates of the most elaborate ministry, having

all the responsibilities. It's the issue that the opposition wanted to

own and become quite conversant with. When we got into Bill 19 last

year, I recall, as the Premier said earlier, they wanted to bring

forward a new and innovative saviour kind of legislation. The fact is,

we had a more incredible year in 1988 than we even expected as a result

of Bill 19, and I want to compliment the minister for that.

want to speak to the growth of the workforce in the province as it

relates to the Labour minister and the success of Bill 19. It really

created harmony and agreement among labour and management in B.C., and

allowed the positive attitude of the province to be reflected, rather

than the completely and continually negative attitude of the

opposition. I know that the Leader of the Opposition is in the House

today, but the real front man is not here; I wish he were. He's out, I

understand, doing a sales job of some kind, but his job really is in

here discussing serious issues of the Ministry of Labour and Consumer

Services — issues to do with ICBC, alcohol and drug programs and the TRY program, which is the most successful in North America.

want to compliment the minister for his program, and would encourage

all members on this side of the House to talk about Bill 19 and its

successes, the size of the labour force and what is happening in the

labour force out there. The NDP has brought forward 20 programs, and

not one of them mentions labour. I guess that's a justifiable reason

for the Leader of the Opposition not to want to be in on this debate:

they have no position at all on labour in this province; they have no

care for labour in of this province. They care about things which are

not of major concern in this House during the debate on estimates of

ministers of the House. I am disturbed that the Leader of the

Opposition is not here.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Perhaps the

Chair will take the opportunity to circulate copies of Sir Erskine

May's rules about admissible and not admissible items during this

section of debate.

MR. SIHOTA : I just want to let

members opposite know that we will get to Bill 19 and the alternatives

and so on that are under these estimates, but I'm not going to do it

when 38 of the 44 members of the Social Credit caucus are missing. I

think they would all want to hear. There's only a six-pack of Socreds

in here right now; when the other 38 show up we'll deal with Bill 19.

I want to go to the Minister of Labour and Consumer Services and pursue this matter of....

Interjection.

MR. SIHOTA : We'll get to Bill 19 later. Right now we're on the program that my colleague from Prince George North has been referring to.

Let's

just put aside the matter of prevention. Let's put aside the matter of

the headquarters being here in Victoria. There are four people here in

Victoria who used to do some work in terms of education, distribution

of information, processing of advice in terms of the effect of various

drugs, the effect of mixing certain drugs with certain forms of

alcohol. Those were some of the functions of these four, as I

understand it. The minister has conceded that those four people have

now been eliminated in Victoria and that those responsibilities have

been picked up in the regions.

My question to the minister

is this: are existing staff now performing those responsibilities, or

have we hired new staff in the regions to perform those

responsibilities?

HON. L. HANSON : Well, the simple

answer to that is some of both; we do have some more staff in the

regions and we have had some reallocation of those duties.

MR. SIHOTA :

Maybe the minister can tell us in which portions of the province

additional staff have been hired to perform these functions and in

which portions of the province those have been picked up as additional

responsibilities.

HON. L. HANSON : I'll ask my staff

to get that specific information. I don't know whether the member is

referring to.... We've been assessing every program we've been doing,

including what the resource team was doing here in Victoria, and we

have reassigned them in different areas of responsibility. Some

informational material, I suppose, is being distributed by these

societies.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM : Mr. Chairman, I've

been listening here for the last hour and a half or so, and basically I

guess the tack by the opposition, or those two members present, has

been to try and determine what increase in staff has been provided for

the TRY program, and I've heard it mentioned with respect to other

programs. I've listened carefully. They want to know how much

additional staff, and in what regions we have the additional staff. Mr.

Minister, you can clarify this for me. Frankly, before I get you to

answer this, I believe that we should really look to contracting many

of these services that can well be performed by the private sector. The

answer is not, Mr. Minister, as the NDP continues to suggest, that we

must somehow have the biggest government in the country and that we

must continually expand on people in government; and that unless we

have that magic number of maybe 100,000 people working

[ Page 6949 ]

for

government, there's somehow something lacking. They want government to

increase, increase, increase. They're always asking for more people,

more programs, bigger government. You're not talking to a bunch of

socialists on this side; you're talking to free-enterprisers. Why don't

you change your tack. You're not going to sell us on that message. We

will not look to increasing the size of government again and again.

We're

here to try and reduce the size of government, to reduce the impact on

the taxpayers, to make it easier for British Columbians to be

productive, to build, to seek a strong economy. You don't do this by

continually increasing the size of government and by imposing more and

more taxes on people. In one day alone — yesterday — you mentioned

three new taxes, some of which we've really heard little about yet.

Hopefully during the course of these debates, you'll tell us about some

of these taxes and what they mean and how they'll impact on our

citizens. But, I'm very grateful, Mr. Minister....

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Order, please. The member for Esquimalt....

MR. SIHOTA :

On a point of order, I think the Premier is out of order when he starts

to talk about taxes. It's got nothing to do with this ministry. Perhaps

he can be brought into line with respect to those kinds of comments

that are totally out of order.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Well,

the Chair listens very carefully to try and determine whether debate is

in order. And if the rules were adhered to strictly, I can assure you

the House would have adjourned some months ago, if I were in the Chair

and allowed to interpret the rules as they are laid down in the book.

So the Chair has to use some latitude. I'm sure that if the members

stray, they will be admonished on either side of the House.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM :

I would encourage the minister and the ministry to involve private

contractors. I believe, as I've said before and I repeat again — hopefully the socialists across the way will listen to this and give it some serious thought —

that if we allow contractors to be involved in this process, as we've

done it with many services for government, and privatize, we will have

a degree of flexibility which will provide our people a greater degree

of security. If we contract to people and we establish for them, Mr.

Minister, as I said before, some strict standards which they're

required to meet.... After all, they're serving people. They're

providing assists to people desperately in need. We need to have high

standards. If we set these high standards and those standards are not

met by the contractor, cut them off. Put something in your agreement

that we can cut them instantly. That's what I believe will give us the

best control and the most effective program in the country.

Mr.

Minister, I'm not here to criticize. I believe that you're doing a

marvellous job. And this ministry is doing the best job that's ever

been done in this province. But I would ask you to answer that

question: are we not in fact relying to a greater extent on contractors

to provide many of those services?

MR. SIHOTA : Let's

go back to the Minister of Labour, after hearing that rant from the

Premier about increases in the size of the public sector. It's

interesting to note, of course, that since the Premier has come into

office the size of his office has been tripled, perhaps even

quadrupled, and he talks about reducing the size of government. There

you have it. If there's anything that should be contracted out, in my

view it's the Premier. We should get a new Premier in.

want to get back to the Minister of Labour and ask him a basic question

here. Someone used to provide these services. We're seeking an

assurance that those services are still provided. Those services are

essential, in the sense that those societies which are now being

required to deliver the services that you and the Premier speak of have

to fall back on someone for information and advice with respect to

various forms of alcohol or drugs. That being the case, we are seeking

assurance that those services are continuing to be provided, by whom,

to what extent and in what portions of the province.

It's

not a difficult question if the database is there. If the database is

not there, then the minister should agree to bring us back that

information, and we can take it from there to get those assurances that

those services are being provided. With that explanation, I hope the

minister is now able to provide us a clear answer.

HON. L. HANSON :

I get the gist of the argument at this point: the members opposite feel

that unless the service is delivered by a government employee, it's not

delivered properly. The fact is that the service is being delivered,

and it's being delivered on a regional basis. If the members would do

an analysis of the service that is being delivered in each region, you

would find that it is much better than it has ever been before. You'd

also find that we have hundreds of people working on drug and alcohol

rehabilitation, education and so on. Many of them are with a contracted

agency; many are with a society that has been approved for a particular

region; many are just plain volunteers, having a sincere interest in

people with this difficulty.

[3:45]

HON. MR. DIRKS :

On that last point by the minister, I'd just like to get up and

compliment him on two programs basically. One certainly deals with

regionalization, and that's his CAP program, where people in the area

are looking at the various projects put forth by their peers and

colleagues in the communities. They're assessing those programs and

looking very closely at them. I would compliment you on this program,

because I think it's very effective and

[ Page 6950 ]

certainly spoken very highly of in the Kootenay and Thompson-Okanagan regions.

The

other is the work that is done by your workers' adviser. Over the last

couple of years he has made several trips into my constituency to deal

with members of the constituency who have had some problems with the

Workers' Compensation Board. In both instances he has spent long days

in the constituency office talking to constituents, and in a number of

cases he was able to solve their problem simply by knowing which

buttons to press at the right time and talking with the people on a

one-to-one basis.

You've got two programs there that I certainly would like to compliment you on, Mr. Minister.

MRS. BOONE :

I think we've ground to a halt on this thing here. The minister

misinterpreted what we're saying. We are concerned that the job is

being done. You have not been able to tell us who is doing the jobs

that were done by the people that were let go. You say it's being done

on a regional basis. You can't tell us who's doing it.

The

fact is that there are no standards. No matter what the Premier says,

when he goes on a rant regarding the private sector being able to do it

better and all of these things, without any standards out there, we are

unable to determine whether the same standards exist throughout this

province. There are no standards regarding the qualifications of

personnel, there are no standards regarding the quality of service that

should be available throughout this province, and there are no

standards regarding wages or salaries for people. That's a very basic

thing. There are no standards in this province, and you are eliminating

some of the central things. We have some grave concerns when it comes

down to the establishment of standards, and that is what I think the

ministry should be doing. You should not be giving up your

responsibility of establishing those standards.

I'd like to

ask the minister some questions on the establishment of the TRY

program, which was developed and circulated. I understand that this

program was developed completely independently from existing government

programs, that the TRY phone line is contracted out, that the TRY

booklet was contracted out and produced independently, and that there

was no consultation at all with alcohol and drug program employees who

provide education and prevention services for the government.

Basically, it was organized and developed without any input from the

ministry. Can the minister please comment on why the TRY campaign was

developed using outside ad agencies and private consultants designing

and implementing a program that could have — and should have — had the input of the ministry educational people?

HON. L. HANSON : That's sure interesting. I'm not sure where the member gets her information from — obviously from some source that I don't have access to.

[Mr. Rabbitt in the chair.]

The

program was developed by the alcohol and drug programs branch of my

ministry. It was thoroughly edited and reviewed by the interministerial

committee on alcohol and drugs. It was reviewed and edited by the

minister's advisory committee on alcohol and drugs. For the benefit of

the member opposite, the members of that committee are Dr. Raymond

Baker, who represents the B.C. Medical Association; Capt. Christine

MacMillan, who represents the B.C. Health Association; Neil Menard, who

is a representative of the B.C. Federation of Labour; Robert Buckley of

the B.C. Business Council; Chief Constable Bill Snowdon from the B.C.

Police Association; Laura Acton, school trustee; Dan Cumming of UBCM — Dan

isn't chairman of UBCM anymore, but he is still involved; Charlene

Belleau from the B.C. Tribal Forum; Flora MacLeod from United Way; Don

McLean from ICBC; Bill Greer of WCB; John Smith, a medical consultant;

a representative of the B.C. and Yukon Hotels Association; a citizen at

large, Ardayth Cooper; the Distillers of B.C.; the Vintners'

Association; the Brewers' Association; the director of alcohol and drug

programs, David Gilbert; my assistant deputy, Claude Heywood; and

recently we added a representative of the Neighbourhood Pub Owners'

Association.

The TRY program went through that process,

which I think the member would have to admit is pretty involving of

ministerial staff and those people who have an interest publicly.

MRS. BOONE :

Was there any consultation at all with the alcohol and drug employees

who provide education and prevention services for the government — the resources people we were talking about earlier?

HON. L. HANSON :

Again, all the regional managers we have were involved in the process

after they had talked to their individual regional staff. I really have

difficulty in understanding how the member can suggest that it was done

in isolation, without consultation. I don't know who else we could talk

to.

MRS. BOONE : I asked the minister if he consulted

with the education and prevention people. You won't answer that. You

have not been answering any of the other questions that I put to you,

so I won't expect an answer from that either.

CAP grants

are given out, and there is a review committee established for each

region. I understand that would be eight regions, probably through the

ministries of state. Am I correct in that? Can the minister tell me how

much has been budgeted for CAP for each of those regions?

HON. L. HANSON :

I am just getting those figures. As I recall them, about $600,000 for

last year. I think special programs had just in excess of $4 million

this year.

[ Page 6951 ]

MR. LOENEN : How much for each zone?

HON. L. HANSON :

How much for each zone? I'd have to get that information; I don't think

I have it here. There are specific amounts for each zone, but I don't

know that I have that information. We have the total budget allocation:

region 1, which is Vancouver, was almost $8 million. Anyway, a total of

$27 million for all of those regions — but that isn't CAP; it's the

total budget for each of those regions. I can get the member the exact

figure for each of the five regions.

MRS. BOONE : Are you saying five regions or eight regions, Mr. Minister?

HON. L. HANSON : Five.

MRS. BOONE : So they are not on the ministries of state?

MR. CHAIRMAN : I would ask the members to address the Chair.

HON. L. HANSON :

There are eight regions, but there are five ministers of state. They

come under the five ministers of state. I can't remember all of the

names. I can remember the one from Thompson-Okanagan. There are five

ministers of state. They come under the responsibilities or territories

those ministers of state have.

MRS. BOONE : That's a

different kettle of fish, because the ministers of state.... As you

know, we have two ministers who are dealing with extremely large areas;

in particular, the Minister of State for Northeast, or whatever it is

up there. You've got him in the Nechako region as well.

there is a review committee established for that region and that

minister, is it the same one that deals with grants that go to the

Peace River as compared to grants that go to Bums Lake? Would the same

committee make decisions on those grants?

HON. L. HANSON :

I guess it's a little confusing There are eight regions. Each of those

regions has a committee representing them. Some of the ministers of

state have two committees within their territory, because they have two

regions. With five ministers of state and eight regions, some of them

obviously have more than one region. Each region has a committee that

is responsible to the minister of state, so there are effectively eight

committees.

MRS. BOONE : I would appreciate it if the

minister could get me the figures as to how much is available in the

CAP program through each of those regions. I understand that the

process involved right now is that a group may make an application. It

goes to the regional alcohol and drug programs people, who investigate

it and discover whether it's a legitimate organization, etc. They then

pass it on to the review committee.

The review committee is

the committee that makes the decisions as to whether a grant is

approved or not. The ministry alcohol and drug people have no say in

whether a program is good or not good; they merely state whether it is

a legitimate organization or not. It's entirely the review committee's

decision as to whether a grant is approved or not. Is that correct? If

I'm not correct on that — I could be a little fuzzy — perhaps the minister can just inform me as to how those decisions are made.

HON. L. HANSON :

The regional manager of alcohol and drug programs sits on each of those

committees; therefore the philosophies of alcohol and drug prevention

programs are taken into consideration when an application is approved

or turned down. They have to have a component of education or public

awareness before the program is approved. The way you explained it is

substantially correct, yes.

MRS. BOONE : I understand

that there are deadlines for submitting grants and for grants to be

approved. What are the deadlines for those grants, please?

[4:00]

HON. L. HANSON :

Yes, there are deadlines. I would be pleased to give them to the

member. There will be another program with funds attached to it for

assessment this fall which will also have a publicized date by which

applications must be in before they can be considered by the committee.

MRS. BOONE :

I can't get answers to some of the questions, because the minister

hasn't got the information regarding how much was available for each

region. One of the things I want to know is: how much was available to

each region? Did any region last year, for example, which is now

completed — I know it was a short year, the program had only come out —

spend its entire budget? If there was money left over, what happened to

that money? Is it rolled over so that they can use it this year? Is it

lost? What happens to those things?

It's my understanding

that in some regions some of the review committees are actually being

overly frugal, one might say, with the money, and that programs are

being turned down. All of the money is not being spent in those

regions. I guess the concern I have is that I want to know how much was

available for the regions. I want to know how much was spent last year.

How much is budgeted this year for each of those regions for CAP? How

much is available for those people? I've done some figures here in

terms of spending for this fiscal year and have come up with $661,859,

which I have calculated from the press releases that come through my

office. I'm assuming that you do press releases on everything, because

we get press releases on $2,000, so I assume that most of these things

are press-released, with your commitment to $137 million repeated over

and over. I just want to know how much has been spent, how much is

still available for those people in the next year, if

[ Page 6952 ]

those moneys are being accessed and what happens to the money that does not get spent or accessed through the years.

think it's an important issue, because it's very easy for the

government to announce $137 million over three years, if in fact they

are turning around and not spending that money. If the money is just

being lost, then $137 million is not really being spent.

I'd

like to ask the minister how much the advertising program that has

taken place cost, including the TRY pamphlet and other advertising

programs with regard to the program.

HON. L. HANSON : You started off on another tack there. I think I could answer some of the other questions that you had in the first place.

Last

year, as you know, was the first year of the program. It wasn't a full

year, because the announcement didn't come out immediately and the

program wasn't in place immediately. In that period some of the regions

spent all of their allocation, some spent even slightly over. Some

didn't spend all of their allocation. The funding that was not spent,

as with any government program, went back into the general fund; it

doesn't carry forward each year.

This year we have pretty well exhausted — I'll get you all of the figures, to be exact —

the first allocation of funds with the first deadline, as a

provincewide program. We anticipate that in the second phase we will

also allocate because, if anything, we're always short of funds. At

some point we may have to look at the amounts allocated to each area

and where the demand and the programs require some additional funding.

There may be some adjustment when we look at another area whose

allocation isn't being completely utilized.

But we certainly expect that this year — the year we're talking about now —

will see the expenditure of all of the funds. I will get the

information on what happened last year, what amount was allocated for

the first application period this year — by region — and what is allocated for next year.

Moving

on to the TRY program, we allocated slightly in excess of $2 million on

the program. That included the print campaign in the newspapers,

television listings, bus-boards, community relations programs, research

and other materials, such as posters and newsletters. The cost of

producing the TRY booklet in itself — in isolation of that, although it's included in that figure —

was $292,000, and the cost of the distribution to about 1.2 million

homes was $73,500. Printing and distribution cost about $365,000. The

total media expenditures on the TRY campaign as of April 7 for

television, radio, bus-boards and newspapers, including ethnic radio

and television advertising, was almost $900,000 — $882,868.

MS. A. HAGEN : I would first like to ask the minister if he could advise us about the status of a couple of facilities in the lower mainland — the Peak program and Pacifica —

where there were some concerns about the contract that the ministry was

proposing with these organizations, concerns that in both cases saw the

potential loss of those programs within the communities. Pacifica is a

short-term residential program in New Westminster which provides

services for a rank-and-file population and also has a seniors' program

associated with it. The Peak program, of course, is for youth. I wonder

if the minister could advise us about the status of contract

discussions and the ongoing stability of those programs at this time.

HON. L. HANSON :

We have reached agreement with Pacifica, and there is now a contract in

place. Hopefully we will enjoy the services of Pacifica for a number of

years. It has certainly been one of our highly esteemed treatment

centres.

MS. A. HAGEN : I'd like to turn to the

working relationships between the Minister of Labour and Consumer

Services and the Ministry of Education around drug abuse and alcohol

abuse with young people, particularly adolescents.

One of

the areas discussed by the Royal Commission on Education was the need

for a coordinated approach among ministries targeted to young people, a

whole range of programs and services and issues that affect children's

and students' education but don't necessarily fall within the purview

and the responsibility of educators, if you like, or the Education

ministry.

Is this ministry seeing itself as part of what is

proposed to be a protocol among a number of ministries, with the

Ministry of Education, around the provision of services and programs? I

would particularly see this in respect to the drug and alcohol abuse

programs that might be offered. Could the minister advise us what the

plans are in that area?

HON. L. HANSON : I would like

to assure the member that because the responsibility for drug and

alcohol has been transferred to the ministry there is no lack of

cooperation with the other ministries involved. The most involvement in

it, of course, is with the Education, Health and Social Services

ministries.

We have an interministerial committee that

works very closely in the development of those interministerial

programs. The health care part of the education curriculum is being

developed, and it includes an alcohol and drug component of the health

curriculum that will become part of the Ministry of Education's

curriculum.

We work very closely with those ministries, and

I must comment that the cooperation we have received through that

interministerial committee is highly effective and working very well.

We have very little difficulty with that situation.

MS. A. HAGEN : I wonder if the minister could advise us, in addition to the alcohol and drug component of a health curriculum, what programs — and particularly what lighthouse programs, what

[ Page 6953 ]

new programs —

his ministry may have in mind around the concern about drug abuse with

young people. It's an ongoing issue, and certainly in respect to some

of the, shall we say, newer drugs there is real concern in communities

about young people getting access to and becoming involved with drugs

that are highly addictive and really very dangerous to their health and

well-being.

It's an issue that we would want to deal with

in a preventive way. It's an issue that we would not want to see

escalate to become a major problem with young people. That, I think,

requires this ministry working in cooperation with the Ministry of

Education to be ever vigilant.

One of the concerns in the

schools is having the dollars and the trained personnel to provide the

programs and services that are effective for young people. I'd like to

know the minister's views and what actions he has proposed for the

coming year in this very important area, particularly for the

adolescents of the province.

HON. L. HANSON : We

certainly see the youth and children as an area of special

responsibility. Although it doesn't stop there, certainly it is a very

important part. As I said, the Ministry of Education is cooperating

very well with the ministry. They are in the process, as a matter of

fact, of developing an in-school poster program right at the moment.

have a small pilot program working with some of the high schools in

Vancouver. In phase 2 of our TRY program we will be paying special

attention to youth and their difficulties. There are a number of

community things happening under the CAP program — so many that it's really hard to elaborate on all of them — but a number of them are directed at young people.

[4:15]

I believe one community's CAP program funded a theatre production

related to drug and alcohol difficulties that was going to be taken

through all the schools. We've printed and distributed a number of

informational brochures that deal with the effects of using various

drugs. One that has become high-profile in the media recently is

something called crack. We've had a number of brochures printed on its

effects and we're distributing those throughout the school system.

we're taking a number of initiatives. Again, we still hope this fall to

introduce into the health part of the curriculum some of the drug and

alcohol educational aspects that would, with the cooperation of

everyone, become part of the curriculum taught in all schools. I

believe K to 10 are the age limits initially proposed.

MS. A. HAGEN :

Does this ministry have a research and evaluation capacity around the

need for programs and the effectiveness of programs? In many instances

these programs are delivered through the Ministry of Education for the

student body that we're talking about. That ministry is not expert in

this particular area, and the problem is a changing one. We know

that we've always had a problem with the use of alcohol among young

people. We know that peer programs, for instance, have worked extremely

effectively where they have been introduced to limit the number of

young people who begin to smoke at an early age. And we know that by

limiting the early introduction to smoking, we lower the number of

students who eventually become smokers. The more esoteric areas that

concern us all are the dangerous drugs that are available to young

people and that we find moving in and around our communities.

I'm

really looking for some indication of who is keeping tabs on this, who

has some measure of the dimensions of the program, who knows where

those problems are surfacing. What kind of research do we have in this

ministry or, if not in this ministry, in some other ministry that

really lets us target? Once programs are in place — if indeed they are in place —

how are they evaluated? Are we really, through this ministry, able to

be on top of this situation at the point where it's most important for

us to be providing a service, education, a treatment response? Can the

minister give us some idea where his ministry fits with that need?

HON. L. HANSON :

We have allocated some $2.3 million in our budget to the evaluation and

research side of alcohol and drug programs. In the communities we are

organizing a coordinating body, if you will, trying to get.... For

example, in many communities we now have an assessment team working in

the hospitals, composed of a doctor, a nurse, an alcohol counsellor, a

clerk and probably one or two others. In a number of communities we

have a program for women where they have alcohol counselling and so on.

I've forgotten the name of it; I was trying to think of it in my own

community. In other words, in each community a number of people are

very involved: Alcoholics Anonymous, the native communities.

We're

now trying to put together advisory committees or coordinating

committees so that no one is abandoned after a period of treatment. The

assessment team in the hospital may help to educate the doctors and the

nurses to recognize symptoms of abuse: even though the patient may come

in with some other problem, to recognize that a contributing one may be

a symptom of abuse. What happens when those people leave the hospital

scene? Is there some coordination so that they get further treatment

and so on? When we've got those teams organized, we hope they will

provide some assessment of the various programs. We would look to the

regional managers and those people involved for assessment of the

programs that are going on. We would ask the teams that we have in

those hospitals to make that assessment also.

I'm not sure

you were here when I named the people on the committee. We have them

operating in a number of areas. They are very interested in the alcohol

and drug program, and most of them have almost daily contact with the

difficulty. We will be

[ Page 6954 ]

asking them to assess the various aspects of the program.

are very much in the growing stage of putting these programs in place,

so if at any time we will ever be very conscious of assessing all the

things we're doing it certainly will be now, because we are looking at

and evaluating everything that has been done in the past and all the

new programs we will be putting in place. Assessment of the performance

of these various programs is very high on the list of priorities, and

we will use every resource we have available to us to help with those

assessments.

MS. SMALLWOOD : I'd like to change the

topic slightly and ask a couple of questions of the minister to better

understand the process the ministry undertakes as far as labour market

strategies go. Could the minister indicate whether or not there are at

present any interministerial committees dealing with the overall issue

of labour market strategy?

HON. L. HANSON : I think you may be referring to the Ministry of Advanced Education and Job Training for that initiative.

MS. SMALLWOOD : I'm asking the minister whether his ministry does any work with regard to overall labour market strategies —

what's going on in the province; is any legislation needed to assist

specific groups; is anything needed in the way of government assistance

to encourage development in any particular sectors; what is the reality

among working people in this province; how can the ministry help; those

kinds of things.

HON. L. HANSON : I'm sure the member

is referring to the Ministry of Advanced Education, because that's

where that responsibility lies directly.

We do have an

interest in maintaining employment standards: hours of work and those

sorts of things. At one time the Ministry of Labour had the

responsibility for apprenticeship programs and so on, but that was

transferred to the Ministry of Advanced Education. We do keep track of

the conditions of various contracts that are negotiated within the

province. One of the responsibilities of the Industrial Relations

Council is to provide a database for those particular kinds of things.

My ministry does deal with the minimum wage, and continually assesses

it and how it is affecting the workplace.

Other than

providing some information to the Ministry of Advanced Education, we

don't do an assessment if there are more.... As an example, are more

electrical installers needed in the province? We would provide some

information if we had it within the ministry, but we wouldn't have the

direct responsibility for determining that.

MS. SMALLWOOD : Is the minister saying that you're not involved in any long-term or overall planning?

HON. L. HANSON : We certainly are involved in all sorts of long-term planning, but not in the area the member is asking about.

MS. SMALLWOOD : Perhaps the minister is having some difficulty. I'll provide some specifics.

The

area I'm particularly interested in is women and their role in the

labour force. The reason I have more or less zeroed in on that area is

twofold:

(1) I feel some attention needs to be paid because of

historical inequities; and (2) because of my critic responsibility with

social services and the information that is coming to my attention in

increasing quantities that women are disproportionately poor in our

society in general. The statistics I'd like to share with you.... I'm

hoping you can provide some information as to the attention your

ministry has paid to this specific area, and I'm looking for some

indication that your ministry is doing some work in this area and will

provide some leadership, not only in your direct responsibility for

labour but also in your cabinet responsibilities in working with other

ministries to address some of these wrongs.

I'd like to

start off by sharing with you a quote from a United Nations report.

This quote has been used over and over again. I'm sure the minister is

very familiar with it. The report is called "The State of the World's

Women." The quote says: "Women still perform two-thirds of the world's

work, receive one-tenth of its income and own less than one hundredth

of its property." In our society, the only way that income is

distributed is through wages and work; therefore, there is a direct

responsibility. I believe it falls on your ministry's shoulders.

When

first reading quotes like that, one tends to feel that those statistics

are directly affected by countries in the Third World, and somehow they

don't relate to Canada or indeed to British Columbia, given the wealth

of our province. Unfortunately, that's not the case. The reality in

British Columbia is that women are still stuck in low-paying positions.

They are not being hired or promoted at the same rate as men. According

to a particular report filed in Ottawa and done on 371 federally

regulated businesses in 1988, the average income across Canada for

women is something like 65 percent of that earned by men.

becomes increasingly obvious that in British Columbia, on the basis of

the same report.... Statistics show that men in Prince George, for

instance, earned more than twice as much as women. The median male

salary in Prince George based on income tax filed in 1986 was $27,300

or $4,500 higher than the provincial average. By contrast, women in the

city earned a median wage of $10,400 compared to $11,600 for the

province as a whole.

[4:30]

The income tax data show that the gap between women and men in the

central interior and the rest of the province has widened since 1981,

in terms of median salary. Things are getting worse instead of better.

I'm hoping that the minister can indicate that

[ Page 6955 ]

attention is being paid to this situation, and I'd like to hear what you're doing about it.

HON. L. HANSON :

We have knowledge of the issue, and we are concerned. I believe, in

today's expressions, that you're really talking about pay equity

legislation. That's probably what you're looking at.

Four

other provinces have pay equity legislation at the moment. Ontario has

had considerable experience or difficulty with its application. We are

monitoring what is happening in the other jurisdictions in Canada. We

have no intention of introducing any legislation in the immediate

future, but we're certainly aware of the situation and are watching

what is happening in other jurisdictions.

MS. SMALLWOOD :

I'm very disappointed to hear that, and I'd like to go on. While the

government continues to monitor the situation, women in this province

face a rather abysmal reality. Let me give you a few more statistics.

More than half of all low-income Canadians — and that goes for British Columbians as well —

are female. Six in ten low-income persons between the ages of 16 and 64

are women. Seven in ten of the elderly poor are women. Women constitute

82.7 percent of the unattached aged with low incomes. That's the

reality. Those are the facts of life that women face in this province.

I would like to hear from the minister why he thinks those facts exist.

HON. L. HANSON :

I don't dispute that those facts exist. I haven't been privileged to

see the research the member has done, so I am not going to even comment

on them.

We do continue to monitor the situation. I think

it's an unfair comparison, to make generalizations like you're making.

There is an acknowledgment that it is something that society will have

to look at. We in this government, as we assess the situation and

assess how successful other jurisdictions are in dealing with it, will

bring forward our position on it at that time.

MS. SMALLWOOD :

The minister has not disputed the fact that the way wealth gets

distributed in our country is through the wage. The minister also

acknowledges that he has some responsibility through legislation and

otherwise to affect that in some way.

Let me share another

startling statistic that really should bring the issue home and

hopefully move the government in some way. This is the government that

tried to make some hay on their profile of strengthening the family.

Let me tell you that families headed by women are more than four times

as likely to be poor as male-led families. The number of single-parent

families in this province, and in Canada, has been on the increase for

some years. Well over half of all female-headed families are currently

on welfare, because women cannot make enough money to feed their

families. That is impacted not only — as the minister indicated — by

wage equity legislation, but also by the minimum wage. It is also

impacted by the need for affirmative action programs in the province.

These

gross inequities in our society have been in existence for a long time.

Some provinces are grappling with the issue, some more successfully

than others. For this government, who say they care about families, not

to be putting together programs that deal with these inequities, deal

with the existence of poverty in this one group alone — a group that is poor only because of their gender — is not good enough.

The

statistics I shared with the minister indicating that seven in ten of

our seniors are women living in poverty are an indication of this

neglect that has gone on for so long — neglect not only in the area of

need for intervention because of the minimum wage or pay equity, but

also pensions. Many of those women worked most of their lives in one

type of job or another and found themselves at the age of 65 without

the support to live in dignity.

I am hoping that the

minister will strike a committee with the Minister of Social Services

acknowledging that women are disproportionately poor and that your

ministry has the mandate to deal with the whole area of the labour

market and wages. Along with the Ministry of Social Services, you

should encourage the Minister of Advanced Education, now responsible

for the status of women, to sit down and put a program in place that

begins to deal with women's reality in this province and begins to use

as its mandate or its priority the eradication of poverty in this

group. I am hoping that the next time we deal with the estimates of

your ministry, you'll be able to let the House know that there is some

sort of positive action in this area.

HON. L. HANSON :

The issue the member has raised is certainly a very complex one in our

society. I think that we would actually be remiss in attempting to deal

with it without a really in-depth look at the various difficulties that

are faced by women in our society. There is no doubt that this

government has a commitment to that. In the throne speech, the

Lieutenant-Governor said that we will be appointing a minister of state

for women, which will be done at the Premier's timing but, I

understand, before too much time has elapsed. Certainly that is a lead

issue that the individual with that responsibility could certainly take.

have had discussions with my colleague the Minister of Advanced

Education (Hon. S. Hagen), who by now does have some responsibilities

in that area. But it's a much more complex question.

The

member mentioned that a number of our female senior citizens are in

financial difficulties or are living in poverty. We certainly want to

provide solutions that will work, as opposed to solutions that may not

work. That's why we are continuing to see what is happening in other

jurisdictions and hopefully we'll be able to gain information from

that. Certainly it would be a very appropriate issue that the new

minister of state for women would address very early in their agenda.

[ Page 6956 ]

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

MR SIHOTA :

I was going to deal with another matter, and I'll get to that in a few

minutes; but I want to just canvass this a bit further, in light of the

comments that were raised by my colleague from Surrey.

Quite

frankly, I'm a little surprised at the minister's response to this

issue. The issue of poverty and the extent to which poverty overwhelms

women is an issue that should not be just glossed over during the

course of a 15-minute discussion here. I'm a little surprised that the

minister's basic view is: "Well, we're looking to see what's going on

and we're seeing what other jurisdictions are doing."

would like to know from the minister: what studies have you taken, if

any, of the Ontario legislation, for example; and what are your

conclusions with respect to that legislation? Are you saying that that

legislation is impractical, can't work, can't be applied to British

Columbia? I would like to have some indication of the extent to which

the ministry is monitoring it. Is it a casual monitoring of it? Is it a

serious monitoring of it? And if so, to what extent and which way is

his ministry probing it? What kind of funds are committed by his

ministry in this year's budget to the analysis of pay equity?

Those are very basic questions that I think the minister should provide my colleague with an answer to.

HON. L. HANSON :

We continually monitor all things that are happening within the

responsibility of the ministry. Our experience with the Ontario

legislation has been — at least the initial response — that it isn't

working as well as had been anticipated. We have a research branch that

continually reviews the issue. We are in constant contact with the

officials in Ontario. We're certainly not glossing over the issue. We

continue to monitor those sorts of things that are happening In all

jurisdictions.

I get reports periodically on successes and

on difficulties that others are facing, those that are intending to

introduce this sort of legislation. I have, as I said earlier, no

initiative at this point to introduce legislation immediately; but we

certainly are continuing to study and monitor. We don't allocate

specific funds within the ministry to do this; it's an ongoing

responsibility of the ministry and is included in the overall budget of

the research branch, which has the responsibility to continually

monitor what happens. There are several people doing that on a regular

full-time basis, not restricted to this particular issue but for a

number of issues.

[4:45]

MR SIHOTA :

What impediments does the minister see to the implementation of a pay

equity principle in British Columbia? In light of what has obviously

been some study by the minister, perhaps he could advise us what

impediments he sees to the implementation of that kind of principle in

British Columbia.

HON. L. HANSON : The member asked

what impediments we see. We don't see any impediments other than we

haven't at this point developed a philosophy or seen a philosophy used

in another jurisdiction that works as well as originally intended. I

quote from the Globe and Mail :

"'More than half of the 1.7 million women covered by Ontario's pay

equity legislation will get no benefits from it because of a loophole

in the law,' the Pay Equity Commission reported yesterday." It goes on

with that. We haven't yet seen an attempt to deal with the situation in

its entirety the way we feel it should be. That's the impediment.

MR. SIHOTA :

If there is a loophole in the legislation, it's certainly not difficult

for British Columbia to come up with legislation that mirrors Ontario,

for example — if we were to go to the Ontario model — and plugs the

loophole now that you're aware of it. There's all sorts of other

legislation that we introduce in British Columbia, and we don't

hesitate to introduce it because in other jurisdictions where they've

implemented it, other people have found a loophole. Since when has it

been the policy of government to wait till there's absolute perfection

in legislation in other jurisdictions and only then to move with the

implementation of legislation? That's not the way it works. Different

provinces, based upon their philosophical commitment, introduce

legislation based upon their political agenda. If there are

difficulties, then you remedy them as time goes on.

I don't understand your saying: "Okay, here's this Globe and Mail

article

that points out what's wrong with Ontario." Isn't it the case, Mr.

Minister, that it's just not a philosophical priority for this

government to move for equity in the fashion that we're talking about?

MR. CHAIRMAN :

Just before we go to the next speaker, I might just remind hon.

members, as I did yesterday, of the citation from the nineteenth

edition of Sir Erskine May — I believe it was on page 741 — which says

that during the course of debate there should not be any debate on the

requirement for legislation or legislation that might be coming down

this session. I just remind members of that. We're still on vote 41.

MR SIHOTA :

I'll go back to the question I asked the minister, because I'm not

standing up here, in all respect, Mr. Chairman, to talk about

legislation. It's interesting, because we've had an enormous debate

here all day long, and the Premier has gone out of his way to speak on

legislation, and we're just on the periphery of talking about

legislation.

What I'm talking about is a philosophical

commitment from this government, and one of the ways you reflect that

philosophical commitment is legislation. Let's put that aside. The

other way you reflect that is in allocation of funds through your

ministry for those kinds of initiatives. Is it not true then — let me ask the minister again — that the reason the government isn't moving quickly on the matter of equity as we've

[ Page 6957 ]

described

it is that there's no philosophical commitment? The government just

doesn't see it as a philosophical priority. Isn't that really the case,

Mr. Minister?

HON. L. HANSON : As I said earlier, we

have monitored the situation. We've seen too many examples where

legislation is produced that hasn't been well thought out or researched

and doesn't perform what it was intended to do. The legislation in

Ontario has had some difficulty in its application. It's been difficult

to find the appropriate benchmarks, and sometimes it can be

particularly expensive to small businesses. To focus issues just like

this is why we are appointing a minister with the responsibilities to

specifically deal with issues of this sort. I find that difficult to

translate into a philosophy that we have no interest.

MR. SIHOTA :

Let's just go back to the basic point here. First of all, there is no

point in talking about the possibility of another ministry being

created. We don't know if that's going to happen. We haven't seen the

legislation. In fact, if one reads what the press is reporting, it's

questionable.

Secondly, we don't know if this matter would

fall within the purview of that committee. What we do know is that the

matter now falls — today as we stand here — within the purview of this ministry and this minister. So this move from hypothesis to fact....

Now

let me ask the minister again the pivotal question here. Will he agree

that it's simply not a priority matter for his ministry? Yes or no?

HON. L. HANSON :

I've answered the question about ten times already. I think the member

wants me to get up and say that we have no intention, and that it's not

a priority. That's just not true. We look at it as a very important

part of a social difficulty that exists not only in British Columbia

but in all of Canada.

The philosophy that was expounded in

the throne speech is that we will be appointing a minister responsible

for the interests of women. That is the philosophy of this government.

If the member doesn't accept that, he will have to ask someone else.

MR. SIHOTA :

What I don't like is the fact that the minister's view seems to be that

we are just going to continue to look at it. We have here a kind of — if I can put it this way to illustrate the example —

cancer that is spreading. It's not adequate to simply say that we are

going to look at it as the problem becomes greater and greater. The

question is: what initiatives is your ministry offering to remedy the

spread of that cancer or that social phenomenon? What steps is his

ministry taking this year to remedy that problem? That's the question.

MS. SMALLWOOD :

The minister shook his head and refused to get to his feet. We've

outlined the reality of poverty among women. The minister has

recognized that he has some responsibility, and he says he is studying

it. Perhaps we can get at it another way.

Not only the

issue of equity and closing the wage gap, but the issue of the minimum

wage, affirmative action.... Can the minister indicate what kind of

study or information you have at your disposal about women's situation

in the labour market here in British Columbia? Will you share that with

us?

HON. L. HANSON : I have statistics of wages

earned by various segments of the market. I don't have studies that

deal with the poverty aspect of what the member is asking. I deal with

those gross statistics as they are presented to me. Percentages and

various things have to be analyzed very carefully. We continue to do

that.

I repeat that we are looking at the pay equity

legislation that has been introduced in some other jurisdictions, and

we see several difficulties that are happening, or at least that they

are experiencing in those jurisdictions. We will continue to look at

that until we see a really good solution that someone has had

experience with.

We quite often generate legislation. The

member opposite would be surprised if, when we generate legislation, we

don't look at what is happening in other jurisdictions. We spend a long

time before we bring forward legislation. We will continue to do that.

Our commitment to the status of women as such, our philosophy, was

outlined in the throne speech. Regardless of what happens with that, if

we do reach the point where we introduce legislation to this effect — and the Chairman mentioned that's out of line in the discussion of the estimates —

it probably will lie within my ministry, despite what the.... The

ministry of state with that responsibility would certainly be involved

in anything we did in that area.

Again, I tell the members

that we monitor it and will continue to monitor it. I'm made aware of

many observations on things that have happened in other jurisdictions.

I haven't commissioned a study, but we continue to monitor what happens

in just about all jurisdictions and on just about all of the

responsibilities of the ministry to see if there is an idea we can

adapt to some problem we may be having here or to see how a certain

idea is working in another jurisdiction. That's part of every

minister's responsibility.

MS. SMALLWOOD : I think

what is very clear here is that this particular minister has done

absolutely nothing to deal with the inequities in the labour market.

We've asked him several times to give us information specific to

women's reality in the labour market. We've asked him to refer to

studies, and he says he continues to monitor. We've asked him for

action, and he indicates that some mythical ministry of state may

indeed do some work in this regard.

I want to remind the

minister that the statistics I have shared with you to do with women's

poverty in this province are the history of this government and of your

political party. Thirty years of rule in British Columbia has created

this poverty. Thirty years of

[ Page 6958 ]

rule and inaction has brought about a history of inequity, where women in this province....

[5:00]

HON. L. HANSON :

Mr. Chairman, we're here to discuss the estimates of the Minister of

Labour. Dealing with the social problem of poverty is for another

discussion. If we can stick to our estimates, it certainly would....

MS. SMALLWOOD :

I'd like to remind the minister of his mandate for the labour market in

this province. We're not talking about a social phenomenon; we're

talking about a labour market inequity. We are talking about a

strategic component of the labour market — over 51 percent of the population —

and an increasing number of people who are entering the market and

using the wages they earn in that market to support their families.

That is the minister's responsibility, and no matter how much the

minister dodges and dances around it, it is because of his inaction

that we continue to live with that reality.

I'd like to ask

the minister specifically whether his ministry has done any research as

to the type of employment and percentage of represen