2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 8, Number 7

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Ten Thousand Villages festivals in northwestern B.C.

D. Donaldson

Child and Youth Day and rights of children

J. McIntyre

Wind turbine manufacturer in Port McNeill

C. Trevena

Richmond Peace Labyrinth

L. Reid

Caregivers association in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows

M. Sather

Fundraising activities for Surrey Memorial Hospital

S. Cadieux

Oral Questions

B.C. Hydro purchase agreement for portion of Waneta dam

J. Horgan

Hon. B. Lekstrom

K. Conroy

Access to B.C. Ferries information

D. Routley

Hon. S. Bond

G. Coons

Review of B.C. Rail

H. Bains

Hon. S. Bond

Government handling of Tourism B.C.

S. Herbert

Hon. K. Krueger

S. Simpson

Petitions

K. Conroy

D. Routley

R. Austin

G. Gentner

A. Dix

Orders of the Day

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Health Services (continued)

A. Dix

Hon. K. Falcon

S. Hammell

S. Fraser

R. Fleming

D. Routley

C. Trevena

H. Lali

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (continued)

D. Donaldson

Hon. B. Lekstrom

J. Horgan

L. Popham

G. Gentner

[ Page 2575 ]

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2009

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

L. Popham: I have friends and family in the gallery today. I have Jennie Popham; Sandra Jaques; Denise Jaques; Lorna Mckintuck, my mom; and Laurie Anne Meyersco. I would also like to welcome Chris Malinosky from the Oak Bay fire department; his son Joe; and his father-in-law, Sam Holden. Please make them welcome.

Hon. J. Yap: In the gallery today are two good friends and constituents, Andy Hobbs and Lynn Hobbs. Would the House please make them very welcome.

J. Brar: Visiting us today are two very special guests from India. We have with us Joginder Pal Jain, hon. Member of the Legislative Assembly of Punjab, and he is also a very successful business person from Moga.

[1335]

He is also accompanied by his wife, Mrs. Swaran Lata Jain, who has served first as a councillor and then as the mayor of the city of Moga. There seems to be some sort of competition going on in the Jain family in that way.

They're accompanied by two good friends of mine, Dr. Bhupinder Singh Dhaliwal and Dr. Pavittar Singh Bassi. I would ask members from both sides of the House to please make them feel welcome.

Hon. M. Stilwell: I'd like to introduce two special guests and good friends who are here today from Vancouver: Mr. Larry Garfinkel, previously a social worker and now a publisher of first nations art, and his son Daniel. I ask the House to make them welcome.

N. Simons: Joining us in the House today is Matthew Louie, member of the Cowichan Tribes and currently community development office coordinator for the Institute for Child Rights and Development. Would the House please make him welcome.

Hon. R. Hawes: Today on the floor visiting us is no stranger to any of us, a man whose career here in the Legislature spanned some three decades. He has served in almost every ministry there is and served a term as a very, very distinguished and admirable Speaker. No reflection, Mr. Speaker, on your great abilities. Mr. Claude Richmond joins us on the floor of the House. Could we all make Claude feel most welcome.

M. Farnworth: I want to join with my colleague from Mission-Abbotsford to welcome the former member from Kamloops. We can only assume that he's here to pitch in for cabinet during question period.

Hon. K. Krueger: We have some guests from Kamloops that I'd like to introduce on behalf of the member for Kamloops–North Thompson and myself and all our constituents. They are so important that we reserved the entire west gallery for them. They are from Domtar, a pulp mill that has not only survived but is thriving in the tough economic times, a pulp mill that serves two dozen sawmills in our region and has diversified its markets in incredible ways. We're very proud of them.

With us we have Eric Ashby, who is the mill manager; Bill Adams, who is the manager of engineering services; and Bonnie Skene, who is the public affairs manager and hails from the frozen part of Canada in the east. I ask the House to join us in bidding them a really warm welcome.

J. Kwan: I have some very special guests visiting us today in the gallery. They are instructors and students from the SFU

interpretation and translation program. The five instructors are Heather Charest, Winnie Cheng, Sandy Shea, Grace Lee and Wendy Steinberg.

I should just pause for a moment and say that Grace Lee was a former student of this program who later on came to my office and worked as my constituency assistant and is now the instructor of that program.

They are here to learn about the Legislature and to see the legislators in action. I hope that members will use language that they could easily interpret and translate. Would the House please make them very welcome.

D. Hayer: I would like to introduce two very special guests and friends, Morry Hubburmin and his son Ethan. Ethan Huberman was instrumental in helping us advocate for hundreds of millions of dollars of additional federal funding we received from the federal government for the South Fraser perimeter road. This was a result of his hard work with many MPs, MLAs, several chambers of commerce and many boards of trade, including the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. Would the House please make them very welcome.

G. Gentner: It's with a great deal of pleasure that I introduce to the House today a constituent of mine and also a teacher for the North Delta high school. He's also now the president of the Delta Teachers Association. Could the House please welcome and give a cordial welcome to Mr. Paul Steer.

L. Reid: On behalf of Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome two representatives from the British Columbia

[ Page 2576 ]

Automobile Association who are in the gallery this afternoon. Craig Edmondson, Advocacy and Government Relations, and Trace Akers, Communications and Government Relations, are visiting Victoria from their base in Burnaby. I ask the House to extend a warm welcome.

[1340]

H. Lali: Hon. Speaker, I too would like to join the Minister of State for Mining and the NDP House Leader in welcoming back to this hallowed hall of fame the former member — a long-time member — for Kamloops, the silver fox from Kamloops, Mr. Claude Richmond.

Also, I would like to join my fellow member for Surrey-Fleetwood in welcoming the guests from India, MLA Joginder Pal Jain and his wife, Mrs. Swarn Lata Jain, as well as Bhupinder Singh Dhaliwal and Pavittar Singh Bassi. I would like to join my colleague in welcoming them — both sets of introductions that were made earlier. Would the House please make them welcome.

D. McRae: I'd like to make two introductions today. First of all, I'd like to introduce Nicole Murillo from the Comox Valley. She's here visiting today. I'd like the House to make her welcome, please.

Second of all, from my wife Deanne and my daughter Gracie, we would like to announce the birth of our baby daughter born on November 6 this year, 7 pound 2 ounces, healthy. And for goodness' sake, she looks like her mother.

Hon. M. Coell: There are a number of members of the Association of Canadian Mountain Guides in the gallery today. Mountain guides are often involved in saving lives in the back country of British Columbia. With the winter avalanche season fast approaching, I think it's appropriate that we thank them for their hard work and dedication in making our mountain activities safe.

Here today are president Keith Reid, executive director Peter Tucker, board members Craig McGee, John Furneaux and Kimanda Jarzebiak. Would the House please make them welcome.

Mr. Speaker: I think the member for Comox Valley forgot something.

D. McRae: I was so excited, and it probably won't happen again, but my daughter's name is Chloe Stella McRae.

G. Hogg: There's clearly a degree of excitement and anticipation when one is elected to have their first session in this august chamber, and when that is sometimes tempered a little bit by the daily proceedings here, it's nice to know that that can be bolstered by the joy of actually having your birthday here as well.

We have, I believe, two members having their birthdays here today, and I would ask that we give great congratulations and joy, because I'm sure we're now their very best friends. It is the Solicitor General who's having his birthday today, as well as the member for Surrey-Panorama.

Mr. Speaker: Well, we certainly wish the two a happy birthday.

Hon. P. Bell: Speaking of birthdays, I can never resist the opportunity to make sure that I honour my colleague from Prince George–Valemount. Although her birthday is not today, it would fall on Saturday. I would ask that the House please congratulate the member on the fourth anniversary of her 49th birthday.

Mr. Speaker: Would the Minister of Transportation wish that I'd get the Minister of Forests to withdraw those remarks? [Laughter.]

K. Conroy: I wonder what was happening nine months ago, but there's a birthday on our side of the House too. That would be my legislative assistant Amber Nash, who's celebrating her 30th birthday.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

TEN THOUSAND VILLAGES FESTIVALS

IN NORTHWESTERN B.C.

D. Donaldson: Hon. Speaker, we have become a culture that defines itself in terms of retail consumption. That was epitomized after the 9/11 bombings when the U.S. President said that the best thing people could do was to go out to the shopping malls. Likewise the strategy advocated by many advisers to address our current economic crisis is to go out and buy more stuff, despite the fact that overspending and greed was what led to the crisis in the first place.

Yet we remain a consumer culture, so reflecting on how we spend our retail dollars deserves attention. That is why I'm very happy to talk about the Ten Thousand Villages festivals taking place this week in the Hazeltons and next weekend in Smithers.

[1345]

Started by a Mennonite Central Committee worker more than 60 years ago, Ten Thousand Villages defined the fair trade concept long before it became a familiar term.

The festivals provide consumers access to products that have been fairly purchased from sustainable sources. The subsequent retail exchange is designed to benefit artisans, not maximize profits.

Ten Thousand Villages typifies fair trade, which is part of a bigger movement — community economic

[ Page 2577 ]

development. CED supports initiatives based on the triple bottom line — environment, social and economic — but also uses a lens about who benefits most from the transaction. After all, wouldn't it be better if the primary benefit of a retail transaction, whether it is artisan wares or natural resources, is to the local worker and producer of the goods rather than faraway shareholders?

That brings us back to the Smithers and Hazelton festivals. The volunteer coordinator in Smithers is Ann Marie Findlay, and in the Hazeltons it's Marian Penner, who says that spending money at Ten Thousand Villages provides income for poor folks in other parts of the world who have spent most of their lives on the street, mainly women.

As many of us make additional purchases leading up to the Christmas season, reflecting on who benefits the most from that retail exchange is vital. That is what the fair trade movement and Ten Thousand Villages are all about.

CHILD AND YOUTH DAY

AND RIGHTS OF CHILDREN

J. McIntyre: I rise today to speak in recognition of child and youth day in British Columbia and National Child Day in Canada on Friday, November 20. The national day has been celebrated across Canada since 1993 to commemorate the UN adoption of the United Nations convention on the rights of the child on November 20, 1989.

The UN convention has been ratified by Canada and endorsed by the province of British Columbia. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the convention, and in recognition, B.C. has also proclaimed tomorrow Child and Youth Day in British Columbia.

The adoption of the convention and the establishment of Child and Youth Day here in our province reflect the important recognition of the basic human rights that all children and youth are entitled to — that children are important and valued members of our society.

By endorsing the convention, British Columbia made a commitment to do our best to ensure that all children are treated with dignity and respect. This includes commitments to ensure that our children and youth are provided with their basic needs, are protected from harm and are given the opportunity to have a voice.

Celebrating Child and Youth Day is about celebrating children as active participants in their own lives and communities, as active citizens who can and should have opportunities to meaningfully contribute to the decisions being made that affect their lives. Above all else, this proclamation reminds us that children need love and respect to grow to their full potential and that we must always act with their best interests in mind.

The convention acknowledges that while parents have the primary responsibility for the development of their children, governments and communities have an important role to play in supporting and protecting our children.

I urge you all to take time on November 20 to celebrate the children and youth of British Columbia within your homes and your communities and to acknowledge the efforts of all those in our society who care for and serve our children lovingly each and every day.

WIND TURBINE MANUFACTURER

IN PORT M c NEILL

C. Trevena: I travelled through northwestern Spain a few years ago and was exhilarated by the sight of the wind turbines slowly and silently turning along the ridges facing the Atlantic. They're like giant sentinels marching through the countryside. You see them in Denmark and Germany and Texas. They're wind farms.

And in Port McNeill you can visit B.C.'s only wind turbine maker. CLN Machining and Fabricating is a small operation tucked in a back street of town distinguishable by the wind turbine on its roof.

When we talk about alternative energies, the green economy and transition, CLN is the reality of that. It used to be a machine shop catering to the forest industry. Working out of Port McNeill, it was always busy.

When one of the machinists was sick, he started to play around with designs for wind turbines and, on his return to work, started to fabricate them. With the downturn in the forest sector and the increasing interest in alternative energy production, CLN started to make the switch from working for the forest sector to building wind turbines.

Their turbines are at the airfield outside McNeill, at lodges, and soon the Alert Bay School, perched on a hill in the middle of Cormorant Island, will also have a wind turbine powering its energy needs.

Unlike the wind farms in Europe or across our continent, CLN's turbines allow individual consumers to plug into the natural energy of the winds and, if there's excess energy produced, flip the switch so it can go back into the grid.

They aren't cheap, and the returns of putting excess back into the grid aren't huge — particularly compared with other provinces — but the interest is there, and the work for the company is steady.

[1350]

I would hope that most of us in this House believe that climate change is a reality and that we all need to find new ways of doing business, living our lives and sustaining our communities to reflect that. The vision and energy provided by CLN is a small

part in a shift to a green economy. But we all have to do so much more in our communities, here in our province, our country and across our continent.

[ Page 2578 ]

RICHMOND PEACE LABYRINTH

L. Reid: The Richmond Peace Labyrinth is located on the north side of St. Alban's Anglican Church Hall and is built from bricks in a single winding, purposeful path from the edge of the circle to the centre. It is 42 feet in diameter with a 16-inch-wide path. It is a replica of the 11-circuit labyrinth of Chartres Cathedral in France, which was constructed sometime between the year 1194 and 1220.

Labyrinths are known to help promote meditation, a quiet mind, health, balance and insight. They are used in celebrations, in uniting community, supporting mental health and as a path of prayer. The health benefits of walking labyrinths have been proven by their use in hospitals, schools, and respite and palliative care facilities. They've also been found in parks, churches, memorial parks and retreat centres around the world.

Research conducted by Dr. Herbert Benson from Harvard Medical School's Mind-Body Medical Institute has found that labyrinth walking is among the simplest forms of meditation. He found issues around reducing anxiety and reducing other issues around health and the heart.

The Richmond Peace Labyrinth provides a calm, peaceful and beautiful environment in the heart of Richmond. Many walkers also attend the St. Alban's community meal, served every Tuesday in the church hall. The meals started 12 to 15 years ago and serve between 20 and 40 people. It's also an opportunity for people to socialize. They come together. St. Alban's meal is set up and served by volunteers. Sunrise Rotary and Steveston Rotary both do one Tuesday a month. The other Tuesdays are covered by members of the congregation and members of the community.

Rev. Margaret Cornish leads an amazing church congregation. I would ask the House to join me in thanking this lovely woman for her dedication to community.

CAREGIVERS ASSOCIATION IN

MAPLE RIDGE AND PITT MEADOWS

M. Sather: I stand in the House today to acknowledge a special group of citizens from my community. The caregivers of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows are a support group comprised of individuals, often but not always senior citizens, who have taken it upon themselves to care for their loved ones regardless of the personal cost. These loved ones have chronic or terminal health conditions that require a substantial commitment of time and resources.

The caregivers supervise, monitor medical conditions, take those in their care to and from appointments, and administer any necessary medications. They do this without any expectation of recognition or compensation, only to ensure their loved ones have the best quality of life possible. As one can imagine, such demanding and selfless action takes a toll on one's physical and mental well-being. Twelve years ago a group of caregivers got together to share their experiences with one another and to provide mutual support.

I did say that they do what they do without the expectation of recognition, but I believe they should be recognized. Not only is what they do a sterling example of compassion and commitment, but their efforts in keeping individuals from being institutionalized is a valuable service to our communities. They keep seniors out of hospital beds and care facilities, thus substantially reducing the load on our health care system.

Even when it has gotten to the point where their loved ones have to be institutionalized, the caregivers stay close by, typically supplementing the institutionalized care with their own time and limited resources.

It wasn't long ago that the system recognized their contribution and, through the home care services, provided some respite. Sadly, this service was cut. But the caregivers still soldier on, taking personal responsibility for their wives, husbands, mothers and fathers because they care.

FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES FOR

SURREY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

S. Cadieux: On November 2 the South Asian community in Surrey came together in an enormous show of support for Surrey Memorial Hospital Foundation. Surrey-based radio station Red 93.1 FM, spearheaded by station owner and Surrey Memorial Hospital Foundation board member Kulwinder Sanghera, established an annual radiothon in 2007 with a pledge to the foundation of $2 million. The third annual 16-hour broadcast this year resulted in pledges totalling $900,000.

The South Asian community has shown great generosity towards Surrey Memorial Hospital and has now well surpassed that $2 million goal. Donations this year included a $50,000 matching pledge by Tony Singh, owner of Fruiticana, who challenged the community of radio listeners to match his contribution. Red FM stepped up and donated $25,000.

[1355]

Whether it was the children who donated their piggy banks or the Atwal family or Rai Plumbing, who have donated every single year, approximately 2,200 people personally visited Red FM to contribute and show their support.

The new emergency centre at Surrey Memorial will be named the Guru Nanak Emergency Services Front Entrance in recognition of the South Asian community's contribution to the foundation over the years.

The Surrey Memorial ER is the busiest in B.C. at 77,000 visits a year. Red FM's leadership and the South Asian community's support in Surrey are truly demon-

[ Page 2579 ]

strating their appreciation for Surrey Memorial and its continued expansion.

I'd like the House to help me recognize and congratulate Red FM and all of the donors for their immensely successful and very appreciated support of Surrey Memorial.

Oral Questions

B.C. HYDRO PURCHASE AGREEMENT

FOR PORTION OF WANETA DAM

J. Horgan: This past summer B.C. Hydro negotiated a deal with Teck Resources to buy a one-third stake in the Waneta dam for $825 million — $825 million of ratepayers' money to buy an aging facility that analysts predict was worth somewhere in the neighbourhood of $500 million. A review of the National Energy Board export permits reveals that before Teck Cominco could move any of their surplus power to the United States, they had to first offer it to B.C. Hydro.

My question to the Minister of Energy is this. Why did he allow B.C. Hydro to put $825 million of ratepayer money at risk when he can already buy the power?

Hon. B. Lekstrom: I can tell the member that this is a tremendous deal for British Columbians. We talk about B.C. Hydro and their heritage assets, the ability to expand upon what they own today on behalf of British Columbians, which is you and I in this Legislature — everybody right across.

The deal for the one-third share of the Waneta dam…. When you refer to the price, the price per megawatt hour comes in substantially lower than any power that's on the ability to be developed today. We're extremely excited about this.

We are looking forward. We have an opportunity in British Columbia to have B.C. Hydro not only grow its assets on behalf of British Columbians but to provide cost-effective electricity for British Columbians, and that's my first priority.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Minister.

J. Horgan: The minister has just said that putting at risk $825 million of ratepayers' money is a good deal when the power produced by the dam, if it is surplus to the smelting needs of Teck Cominco…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: …is available to B.C. Hydro at market rates. Last year when Teck Cominco exported power to the United States, they got $37 a megawatt hour — a $37 a megawatt hour on the spot market.

Again, my question is to the minister. Why did he allow a transfer of $825 million of ratepayer money to a private company when he could already buy the power? Where's the economic sense in that?

Hon. B. Lekstrom: It's surprising. I know the opposition is opposed to the independent power producers in this province. Now it appears they're opposed to B.C. Hydro. That just doesn't hold water.

The actual issue that we're looking at here is an acquisition by B.C. Hydro for a one-third interest in the Waneta. That is not going to put the smelter at risk. If the member has done his homework, he would see that that power wasn't utilized by the smelter.

This is cost-effective electricity — something I have heard numerous times called for by the opposition. We fully support ensuring that we have the ability to be electricity self-sufficient by 2016 as we've committed to. We are committing to do it through the use of B.C. Hydro expanded facilities — B.C. Hydro's ability to actually look at new acquisitions, such as the Waneta one-third purchase, as well as cooperation and enhancement with our independent power producers of this province.

We have a lot to be proud of. I can tell you, British Columbians are exceptionally fortunate to be served by between the second- and fourth-lowest electricity rates in North America. We're going to maintain that.

Interjections.

[1400]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member has a further supplemental.

J. Horgan: The Columbia Power Corporation is a public utility. The shareholder for that utility is the Minister of Finance. Columbia Power owns the expansion rights to the Waneta facility. The cost-effective thing for a prudent government to do was to look at the two utilities they control, B.C. Hydro and Columbia Power, and say: "Which of these two is better suited to own a one-third interest in Waneta dam?" The easy answer — Columbia Power. They weren't allowed to bid.

Is it true that the $664,000 in political contributions from Tech to the B.C. Liberals directly related to an $825 million boondoggle on the back of the ratepayers of B.C. Hydro?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just wait, Minister.

[ Page 2580 ]

Hon. B. Lekstrom: This is an incredible deal for British Columbians. I know he may differ. We have made a commitment, and it's somewhat….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat.

It's going to be a long question period.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. B. Lekstrom: I'm somewhat surprised by the question, referring that a contribution could lead to a deal like this when, in fact, I think the member knows very well that as the minister responsible, I take my job extremely seriously. I can tell you that I act on behalf of British Columbians each and every day in a way that I'm proud of.

What this is about is the ability to maintain one of the greatest Crown corporations, I believe, in North America, if not the world. It's the ability for B.C. Hydro not only to maintain and enhance its existing infrastructure but to acquire new infrastructure on behalf of the residents of British Columbia, the people that they actually provide electricity for, at a cost-effective rate.

I've heard this numerous times from the opposition. I think they'll be extremely happy with the price of the power that comes in, the ability for B.C. Hydro to move forward. I can tell you that not only on this side…. I have to believe that you have to be supporters of B.C. Hydro, but with questions like that, I have to question that.

K. Conroy: It's obvious that the minister is concerned about certain taxpayers, but it's taxpayers in B.C. in and about the region that I come from that are very concerned about this sale. The mayor of Trail, Dieter Bogs, in his brief to the B.C. Utilities Commission hearing, said that this transaction will jeopardize the future of Trail and the future of Trail operations.

The hearings to allow this sale to proceed are still ongoing. Will the minister do the right thing and stop this transaction that will benefit so few?

Hon. B. Lekstrom: I'll start by clarifying. The member indicated that this would benefit so few. We have over four million people in British Columbia, and this transaction will benefit each and every one of them.

As the member rightfully said, there is a process ongoing at the present time. I want to assure the member and to assure all British Columbians that this is not going to put Trail in jeopardy, as the member has said. If she had looked and done her homework, based on the excess electricity that had been generated, she would see that that wasn't utilized at the smelter.

In closing, I do want to say this. We're committed to building an energy- and electricity-self-sufficient province. We will be there by 2016 to meet our commitment. That includes new generating activity produced by B.C. Hydro as well as through our independent power producers of British Columbia.

[1405]

Together, this balance is going to lead us to be a clean energy powerhouse, to lead North America in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, to do it in a way that creates electricity. I'm somewhat surprised that when cost-effective electricity is there, you're opposed to it.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

K. Conroy: That diatribe isn't going to do the minister any good, because it's not only the city of Trail that is concerned. It's the regional district of Kootenay Boundary, it's United Steelworkers, and it's people from throughout the region who are also quite worried. Doug Jones, the president of Local 480, said at the same hearings that the transaction will jeopardize the continuation of existing operations.

What is it, Minister? You have to do the right thing. Save taxpayers' dollars, and tell B.C. Hydro to call off this deal to your friends.

Hon. B. Lekstrom: Going back, the issue is before the BCUC. They're reviewing it. There is opportunity and has been, as the member has rightfully said, for people to make that. But the ability for B.C. Hydro to enter into this purchase agreement for one-third of Waneta….

Interjections.

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

Continue, Minister.

Hon. B. Lekstrom: I do want to go back to the point that we talked about — the ability to develop an electricity-self-sufficient province in British Columbia by 2016. We're doing that through the purchase of independent power producers' electricity, if it is cost-effective electricity — something I've heard the opposition speak loud and clear about.

Here we have an incredible opportunity for B.C. Hydro to acquire an asset that will bring in extremely cost-effective electricity and will benefit all British Columbians, including Trail and the residents of your riding. We're in favour of it. If you want to oppose all electricity, go ahead. But we're going to keep our lights on in British Columbia, and we're going to do it on behalf of….

ACCESS TO B.C. FERRIES INFORMATION

D. Routley: This government has a habit of making big statements and commitments without any follow-through. In a joint press release on Monday from

[ Page 2581 ]

three organizations, including the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association, Executive Director Darrell Evans said: "I doubt B.C. Ferries officials would have been paid these outrageous salaries and bonuses if they knew citizens or the media could ask for them through freedom of information."

Will the minister commit today to making B.C. Ferries subject to the Freedom of Information Act?

Hon. S. Bond: As I've said repeatedly in this House and outside of it, the comptroller general was asked for advice. She provided it to us. We will consider every single recommendation, including that one.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Routley: The interesting

part is, though, that in 1998 the Premier, then in opposition, wrote a letter to Mr. Evans. He said: "Freedom of information is not just a tool of opposition. The fundamental principle must be this: government information belongs to the people, not the government."

Taxpayers have a right to know what's going on behind those closed doors of B.C. Ferries. Will the minister quit stalling and commit today to submitting B.C. Ferries, bringing B.C. Ferries under the Freedom of Information Act and bringing back accountability to the people of B.C.?

Hon. S. Bond: And 1998 certainly brings back memories to members on this side of the House. In fact, that was the year….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. S. Bond: I'm glad the member opposite brought up 1998 because, in fact, that was one of the years where B.C. Ferries was actually teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, thanks to the members on the other side of the House.

[1410]

G. Coons: The comptroller general is only the latest of many voices calling for B.C. Ferries to be accountable to the public. In 2003 after this government privatized B.C. Ferries and removed them from public oversight, the Information and Privacy Commissioner of B.C. wrote a letter to the Transportation Minister at the time calling on B.C. Ferries to make safety reports and "other pertinent information available to the public on a website."

Will the Minister of Transportation finally make B.C. Ferries subject to the Freedom of Information Act?

Hon. S. Bond: One thing we do know that the comptroller general actually said…. Perhaps the member opposite would like to read the rest of the report. The comptroller general actually said that B.C. Ferries was run in an effective and efficient manner. In fact, the only thing the members opposite should be concerned about is that under their leadership, the debt for B.C. Ferries actually increased by 1,800 percent — 1,800 percent.

We've made a commitment to consider every single one of the recommendations seriously. We asked the comptroller general for advice, and we intend to review every recommendation.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: It was this Premier, this government that gave B.C. Ferries a green light to excessively spend and to operate in secret by exempting them from FOI. This Premier created this B.C. Ferries gone wild with no accountability and no scrutiny. This government is stalling, hoping the issue will go away. It was a mistake. It was a mistake to hide B.C. Ferries from the public.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

G. Coons: It was a mistake to hide B.C. Ferries from the public. Even the Minister of Transportation was surprised when she found out that the CEO made over a million bucks. Again, will the minister stop dithering? Will she act on the comptroller general's recommendations to make B.C. Ferries subject to the Freedom of Information Act?

Hon. S. Bond: What I'd like to do is refer the member opposite to page 29 of the comptroller general's report, which actually points out and makes this statement: "B.C. Ferries has successfully acquired independent financing and has dealt with one of the major challenges it inherited." That would imply the 1990s when it was established — a seriously aging fleet. In fact, the vessels that the member opposite is talking about were on average over 30 years old. They bankrupt B.C. Ferries. We're not going to take one minute's worth of advice from the member opposite.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: We're not starting.

[ Page 2582 ]

REVIEW OF B.C. RAIL

H. Bains: Mr. Speaker, you notice and observe the members opposite — how good they are at defending the minister who was defending secrecy in her Transportation Ministry. Let's see how she defends the waste. Let's see how she'll defend the waste under her ministry.

Everyone except the minister knows that millions of dollars are wasted at B.C. Rail every year. Four executives have been paid over $6 million since B.C. Rail was sold. Now, only after the pressure from the opposition, the minister is calling for the review.

[1415]

What review? A review to find out that they are managing less than 30 employees at a cost of $1.2 million a year? A review that there are no trains except the gravy train that existed in there? My question to the minister is this. Why doesn't she show some leadership? Why doesn't she cut them loose? Why doesn't she manage that asset through her ministry office?

Hon. S. Bond: August 25, 2009. I'm sure the member opposite…. I'm positive he could probably pick up his copy of the throne speech, dust it off and read this paragraph: "Health authorities, boards of education and Crown corporations will be subject to reviews in the coming year."

Sorry, Member opposite. We started the review of B.C. Rail Properties after the throne speech. That work is underway. We will continue to look at the mandate of B.C. Rail Properties.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Bains: It's obvious that the minister doesn't get it, like all other ministers on the other side. She is continuing to defend the indefensible B.C. Rail waste. When pressured, she hides behind the review. The fact of the matter is that we do not need another review to find out that there is $1.2 million per year needed to sell off real estate.

My question to the minister is this. Why doesn't she do the right thing and tell these executives that the gravy train is no more and save the taxpayers $1.2 million a year?

Hon. S. Bond: I guess, first of all, the member should sort out…. First he wasn't sure we'd called for a review, which in fact we did in August of 2009. So he didn't get that right, and he didn't get the rest of his statement right either.

In fact, let's take a look at one transaction that B.C. Rail Properties has managed. Let's look at the quarter-billion-dollar lease arrangement that B.C. Rail Properties has actually managed. The member opposite might want to….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

It's your time, Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. S. Bond: Let's talk about the quarter-billion-dollar transaction that actually saw not only that investment for British Columbia's taxpayers but drew additional private sector investment of over $200 million.

The member opposite might want to trivialize private sector investment in British Columbia. We're going to take advantage of every single opportunity to deal with private sector investment and advance our Asia-Pacific strategy every opportunity we get.

GOVERNMENT HANDLING OF TOURISM B.C.

S. Herbert: The opposition filed an FOI seeking records related to the B.C. Liberal decision to axe Tourism B.C. The request included all records, reports or assessments that had been carried out on Tourism B.C. that in any way informed the decision to close it.

Today we learned that there are no records, no reports and no reason to justify eliminating B.C.'s industry-led award-winning marketing agency just six months before the Olympics — a decision that the head of Canada's national tourism association has called a real setback.

So to the minister: how could the minister make a decision that puts our tourism industry at risk with no records, reports or assessments to back him up?

Hon. K. Krueger: We are on the brink now, just over 80 days from the greatest marketing opportunity that British Columbia will ever have — three billion pairs of eyes focused on British Columbia.

[1420]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Hon. K. Krueger: Three billion pairs of eyes focused on British Columbia….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, please take your seat.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: Three billion pairs of eyes focused on British Columbia — 15,000 foreign journalists covering our jurisdiction for months. Faced with the biggest marketing opportunity we'll have in our lifetimes for British Columbia, in the toughest world economic climate of our lifetimes, we brought together the 146

[ Page 2583 ]

people of Tourism B.C. with a similar number in the ministry. They're working flat out. There are 35 teams of people who are ready to maximize the post-Olympic opportunities. It's nothing but good news, and we can't understand why they don't like good news.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Herbert: The minister talks about a great opportunity to market B.C., but then he takes the industry-led marketing group which is supposed to do that marketing and takes the axe to it, shuts it down, kicks it to the ground — the award-winning industry-led marketing department.

The minister has said the decision to do so was about cost savings and efficiencies, but according to his ministry's response to the FOI, there are no records, reports or any assessments which show that there are any savings at all.

Again to the minister. So we've got B.C.'s Council of Tourism Associations, the Tourism Association of Canada, Tourism Victoria, Tourism Vancouver, the Wilderness Tourism Association — all unanimous that this was a stupid and devastating decision, on one side. And then on the other side, we have the Minister of Tourism caught naked with no study or analysis supporting his axing of Tourism B.C.

Who should we believe, Minister? I know it's a disturbing image, but who should we believe, Minister? You? Or should we believe the tourism industry?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Are you finished, Member?

Interjections.

Hon. K. Krueger: My colleagues are urging me to resist the temptation. Oh, the burns that spring to mind. But faced with….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: But it only makes sense when you've got a huge opportunity and limited resources to make sure you combine those resources, to make sure you focus them on achieving the goals that are set out before us — the fantastic opportunity we have.

We don't want to waste a dollar. We don't want to waste any human effort. We're ready. The ministry, with Tourism B.C. melded into it, is ready for this huge opportunity, and I hope the members opposite will join us in really taking advantage of that opportunity. It's going to be wonderful.

S. Simpson: The minister says that they're ready, yet what we know now is that this decision to scrap Tourism B.C. was done with no analysis, no assessment, no reports to support this.

[1425]

The minister might think he's ready, but the president of the tourism association of Canada says: "I was absolutely floored when I heard the news…. I'm just not sure the post-Games opportunities will be as accessible to government as they would have been before."

The reality is this. This minister, this government, scrapped an effective, award-winning agency that would make this successful, and he did it with no support. How does the minister justify making that decision with no intelligence at all?

Hon. K. Krueger: This government has been building for the Olympic opportunity for years. There is brand-spanking-new infrastructure throughout British Columbia getting ready for this. Whether we look at the Kicking Horse Canyon bridge or the expanded airports around the province, the Sea to Sky Highway, the Canada Line, we're ready. Tourism B.C. people and Tourism, Culture and….

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member. Member for Fraser-Nicola. Member, do you want to apologize to the House.

H. Lali: I apologize to the House, hon. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: All of that infrastructure is ready. The team is united. Jurisdictions everywhere in the world that have hosted Olympics say to our teams that nobody has ever exploited the post-Olympic opportunity the way that we could have. Salt Lake City and Sydney, Australia, are considered some of the leaders, but they say that they did not prepare for the opportunity the way that they could have.

We got the teams together. We're ready. The members opposite are going to really enjoy it.

[End of question period.]

K. Conroy: I'd like to present a petition.

[ Page 2584 ]

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

K. Conroy: I have over a thousand signatures from people from West Kootenay asking the government to stop the implementation of the HST.

D. Routley: Permission to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

D. Routley: I have a petition with hundreds of signatures by constituents of the province of British Columbia demanding that the province halt the implementation of the HST.

R. Austin: I rise to present a petition with hundreds of signatures from the riding of Skeena opposing the implementation of the HST.

G. Gentner: I rise to present a petition from constituents of mine and others throughout the province, those who are opposed to the implementation of the government's HST.

A. Dix: I am pleased to present a petition from hundreds of parents and community members in support of the early psychosis intervention program — that it stay at the University of British Columbia.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call, in Committee A, Committee of Supply — for the information of members, the ongoing estimates of the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources; and in this chamber, the Committee of Supply, the estimates of the Ministry of Health.

[1430]

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF HEALTH SERVICES

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); L. Reid in the chair.

The committee met at 2:33 p.m.

On Vote 34: ministry operations, $14,008,318,000 (continued) .

A. Dix: Before the break we were talking about the impact of surgery cuts in the Fraser Health Authority by hospital. What we had ascertained was that those surgery cuts will happen across hospitals and that each hospital would have its own plan to reduce surgeries in that particular hospital.

For example, some hospitals obviously do neurosurgery, only three in Fraser Health — Burnaby Hospital, a little bit; Royal Columbian Hospital; and Eagle Ridge Hospital. Most hospitals, of course, don't do that.

I guess I wanted to ask the minister whether he would be able to provide for us the elective surgery reduction plans for each hospital — the plans that are now in effect, and the plans that obviously are in the possession of people, the Fraser Health Authority, for whom he's responsible in the House.

[1435]

Hon. K. Falcon: As I said to the member earlier, we haven't got all of that information here with us, but we will endeavour to acquire that from the health authority and share that with the member.

A. Dix: Sorry. I don't think…. The minister in his last answer gave a rhetorical answer. I don't think I quite got that answer, so I'm delighted to hear that he'd be prepared to share it. Would it be possible to learn from the minister whether he'd be able to share it before the end of estimates so we'd have a chance to discuss it?

Hon. K. Falcon: Certainly, if the information is gathered and assembled in the manner that the member was discussing and we have that available, we'll be happy to do that.

A. Dix: I think that was yes. The question I have overall.… The minister talked about 4.6 percent of elective surgeries. Does that include the reductions taking place between September 15 and March 31 and what are called the Olympic reductions, which are a further 2,200 surgeries, or do they just…? Is that a total number, in fact — the reduction of 4.6 percent of the annualized total, which obviously is much more in the next little while? Just a clarification from the minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: The answer is yes. It does.

A. Dix: I understood from a Fraser Health document that the number of surgeries that'll be cancelled or reduced during the Olympic period — how it's proportioned out — was originally said to be 2,200. Is that the right number?

Hon. K. Falcon: That is correct.

A. Dix: If the number is 4.6 percent — so that I understand correctly the numbers involved…. So 2,200…. Obviously, what we're talking about is, as I understand it,

[ Page 2585 ]

a 35 percent reduction during that period and a further reduction, I think, in the extension of a Christmas break period, if I'm correct on that.

That would mean that the remaining surgeries…. Well, I'll just ask the minister. How many more surgeries will be cancelled in addition to that Olympic period?

[1440]

Hon. K. Falcon: For the member's benefit, those would be the cases we talked about publicly before, where during the Olympic period…. This has been the experience in other jurisdictions, too, where you have a reduction in cases that typically will take place during an Olympic period, when people generally aren't scheduling their elective surgeries — both on the medical side, the professionals, but also by the people that are wishing to have surgeries.

There tends to be…. At least, the historical experience for Olympics has been that there is a reduction. That we talked about, I think, a couple of months ago. We mentioned publicly that there would be surgical slowdowns during the Olympic period leading into the spring break period.

A. Dix: The question is…. If 2,200 surgeries are being cancelled during that period because, of course, people in Chilliwack won't want to go and get their elective surgery done because the Olympic Games are on…. If that's the number in that period, how much is in the period other than that period between September 18 and March 31?

Hon. K. Falcon: Just to correct the member, they're not being cancelled. It's more a case of their not being scheduled. They're not being scheduled because, again, the historical experience is that when you have a major international event like the Olympics that takes place in your jurisdiction, typically what you have is a desire by people — both people within the system, frankly, and without the system — to attend or participate or what have you.

It's typically not a time…. At least, based on the historical experience that other jurisdictions have informed us on, there's a reduction in demand. People aren't wishing to be scheduled to have their elective surgeries undertaken during that period. So they've done a planned, scheduled reduction in the amount of contemplated surgeries. It is not cancellations of anyone's surgeries.

A. Dix: The instruction from VIHA is to reduce OR hours by 14 percent in all hospitals in all periods between….

Hon. K. Falcon: Fraser.

A. Dix: In Fraser Health, yes; sorry. It's in Fraser Health between September 18, which is the period the cuts happen, and March 31. This is both in internal documents and on the public record. That's the instruction. So presumably, these 2,200 cancelled surgeries during the Olympic period are part of that 14 percent.

What I'm asking the minister…. If you look at the period between September 18 and March 31 — and the minister, I'm sure, will have this detailed information in front of him — you will see that the base OR hours for that period were 47,880. That's going to be reduced to the new OR hours, which is 41,177, according to the Fraser Health Authority.

I'm asking a very simple question. When you're seeking that 14 percent reduction or what the minister tries to characterize, annualized, as less than that…. That's what it is in this period — right? To get to those numbers, how many surgeries are you cancelling? So 2,200 in the Olympic period. How many in the rest of the time?

I guess on top of that I'll give him a second question. I'll give him something to think about. How many operating rooms are being mothballed?

If the suggestion is that a majority of the surgery cancellations are taking place in the Olympic period, which I think is what he was suggesting before, why are they mothballing operating rooms in Chilliwack, Coquitlam and Surrey?

Hon. K. Falcon: Look, I recognize that I'd probably be doing the same thing if I was in the member's position. You try to take something, build it up and try and make it something it's not. The fact of the matter is that I tried, in previous answers prior to the break, to explain to the member that there has to be a perspective around the very modest surgical reductions that are taking place — on two notes.

The first is: how are the health authorities doing, generally, with respect to reductions and wait times? In fact, we've seen, on average, an almost 50 percent reduction in median wait times for hips, knees and cardiac procedures in the province of British Columbia — including, in Fraser Health, dramatic reductions in wait times.

In the context of that, we have…. Fraser Health Authority, in an attempt to manage a 3½ percent pressure on their budget, has said that they will do 4.6 percent fewer elective procedures for the year.

[1445]

The member is right to point out that earlier we had publicly a discussion about the fact that there will be a surgical reduction that will take place on the order of, I think it was, 2,200 cases. Not cancellations. Nobody that was scheduled has now been cancelled. Planned reductions to reflect the fact that during the largest event that has ever been hosted in the history of the province of British Columbia…. It's far bigger than Expo 86, for example. The historical experience of other jurisdictions is that you see a decline in the requirements for elective surgical procedures.

[ Page 2586 ]

Obviously, urgent and emergent are dealt with. They always will be. But the people who have some flexibility as to when to have their procedure done generally don't choose to

schedule it during events of major international significance. Based on that, that's why we discussed some months ago publicly that the health authorities, Coastal and Fraser in particular, were going to have planned reductions in the numbers that they were planning on doing — as a result of that reality.

In terms of the reductions in the elective surgeries that are being proposed, it's 4.6 percent in the number of procedures. He is correct in pointing out that the reduction in the OR budgets is about 14 percent, but there is not a direct correlation between the OR budget and how many procedures get done.

They have found and continue to find ways of delivering services that sometimes can actually increase the number of procedures with the existing amount of dollars. That's obviously not infinite, but that has been the experience as we've been working and particularly learning from some of the investments we've been making on the health innovation side.

A. Dix: The minister has offered to give us hospital-by-hospital information on that, but what I'm asking is: if it's a 4.6 percent reduction you see…. This is where it becomes easy, because the minister has the information before him.

I think he thinks I'm asking something diabolical here. I'm not. I'm asking for the actual information — like, the actual information.

Given the reduction he's proposing…. How many elective surgeries have they decided to do this year, based on it? It's because 4.6 percent has to be 4.6 percent of something. The minister has the numbers. I'm just asking him to share those numbers with the House.

Hon. K. Falcon: As I indicated earlier, just before the lunch break, in '08-09 Fraser Health did a total of 83,600 surgical procedures performed in all of Fraser Health. Of this, 65,716 were elective.

As I say, the proposal that the experts within the system — the surgeons, the OR managers, the administrators — came up with was a 4.6 percent reduction in the elective component. I think that's about 3,000 or just under 3,000 procedures out of a grand total of surgical procedures of 83,600 that were performed in '08-09.

A. Dix: This is a Fraser Health document here. Fraser Health doesn't estimate. It stated its number of procedures were 70,469 in '08-09. That's from Fraser Health documents here.

[1450]

I guess that 4.6 percent on that…. You don't need too much of the detail, but that's less than 3,000. What would be suggested…. If you're counting the 2,200 in that, there'd just be a few hundred surgeries on top of that. But when you take account of the fact that they're closing….

The number of surgeries, therefore…. I guess what I'm asking for is: what's the number? What is the number of elective surgeries this year? You have to have that number, or you wouldn't know 4.6 percent. So what is the number of elective surgeries being budgeted this year?

You know, we've been raising these issues for months, so the ministry obviously has this information. I would just like to know that number, and we can move on.

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm trying to provide the member with that information. As I mentioned, the total surgical procedures performed, at least I'm informed…. I have to go…. I don't know what the member is referring to. I can only tell you what I'm being provided. In '08-09 they completed 83,600 surgical procedures, and some portion of those are elective procedures. A 4.6 percent reduction means, on average, about 3,000 less surgical procedures out of the total procedures of 83,600. That's what I'm informed of.

A. Dix: Perhaps we're just not understanding each other properly. I just want the number now of elective procedures that they're going to do this year, and the minister can provide that number to me elsewhere. I don't want to get stuck on it. I think he just said, "4.6 percent of the 84,000" and not "4.6 percent of the 65,000." I think he meant "of the 65,000." I think that's what he meant. If he could just provide us with the number they're expecting to do after these cuts — or changes, as the minister likes to call them — this year, then we can move on to that.

Perhaps the minister can tell us, then — just because it's the same broad subject; then we'll come back to Fraser Health — how many fewer surgical procedures are going to take place in Vancouver Coastal Health this year?

As the minister will know, we released some information about one plan out of Vancouver Coastal Health, which saw a dramatic cut in surgery. It's a plan, I'm happy to say, that I believe the health authority abandoned. Far be it from me to take credit for that. It was good news, anyway, for people waiting for surgery in Vancouver Coastal Health. They seem to have abandoned the worst parts of that plan.

Presumably, the same thing is going on in Vancouver Coastal Health with respect to the Olympics. There are, if I remember correctly, between 1,000 and 2,000 elective surgeries not going ahead because of the Olympics. What is happening at Vancouver Coastal Health with respect to elective surgeries? How many fewer are they doing this year than last? How many are they cutting in the last five months of the fiscal year to meet the new targets of the health authority?

[1455]

[ Page 2587 ]

Hon. K. Falcon: Very optimistic news on this front. First of all, Vancouver Coastal Health has provided record levels of surgeries, as of course we've seen across the province. But over 67,000 surgeries last year, which was about 6,500 more procedures than they had done in the previous year — and worth noting.

I want to take a moment to recognize the leadership of the administration, the board, the executive and the front-line teams that have actually seen that Vancouver Coastal wait times already are 25 percent lower than the provincial average. So certainly some great success.

The only change that will be taking place in Vancouver Coastal, I am informed, is that which was discussed earlier in line with Fraser Health, which is that they will be doing some planned reduction during the Olympic period and the spring break. I am led to understand, relatively modest savings, certainly in the scheme of their budgets, about $400,000. That's not even a rounding error in Vancouver Coastal Health.

So they are forecasting about 450 surgery cases that are planned not to take place during the Olympic period and the spring break, which is the typical period spring break where they also plan for some surgical elective reductions.

A. Dix: I think it makes sense, and I think the minister would agree with that, that the 70,000 surgeries that a health authority does, given that would come from a range of the surgeries, would be cheaper than the first surgery it does. My colleague from Surrey–Green Timbers is going to ask some of the other questions just for a few minutes after this one.

I guess it raises the question: why is the Fraser Health Authority cutting thousands of surgeries to save $5 million, when it would appear, I think, to most people in increased wait times and all the consequences that will come from that?

Really, it's not savings, as the Minister of Health well knows. What the Fraser Health Authority is doing is, in fact, fewer surgeries this year, saving $5 million in this fiscal year. But all of those people that don't get it done this year will have to get it done in the future. So the wait times are increasing by however many surgeries the minister doesn't do.

I'm just curious to know, because the incremental savings…. To get a lot of money in savings and surgery cancellations, you have to close a lot of operating rooms. I guess the question is, in terms of both health authorities…. We're talking about thousands of surgeries cut and the significant impact that will have across the board that doctors have talked about.

I think the minister will agree that they're very concerned. They will have written him and the Fraser Health Authority. Why would you do that for what appears to be relatively little in the way of savings?

As I say, to the minister, my colleague from Surrey–Green Timbers will have a couple of questions for him. I'll be delighted to read his answer in Hansard .

Hon. K. Falcon: Every health authority and their capable executive team and front-line workers — because they're not monolithic, they are in fact separate health authorities — will deal with the challenge of managing their pressures differently. I acknowledge that. As I say, in the case of Vancouver Coastal, you can see that they are having virtually no impact on the number of surgeries they have done over last year, which was a record level.

I think what I would say to the member, just generally speaking, is that the perspective is important. You know, when I talked about average wait times reducing by almost 50 percent in the key areas of cardiac, knee surgeries and hip surgeries in the province of British Columbia, it is within that context that Fraser Health is making a very modest — albeit, they're real — reduction of 4.6 percent in elective surgeries.

The important thing to note, too, is that the Wait Time Alliance, which is an alliance made up of physicians represented by the Canadian Medical Association, which is physicians from one end of the country to the other, have actually put together a scorecard where they are measuring the wait times in every province right across Canada.

I think it is worth noting that the Wait Time Alliance has recognized British Columbia as among the very best in the country in terms of the wait-time reductions we've seen in the areas of cataract, cardiac and, of course, hips and knees.

[1500]

So while I recognize that, in the case of Fraser Health…. They are having a very modest reduction this year in the midst of very challenging economic circumstances externally. The fact that they are trying to manage their budget with a 3½ percent pressure on their budget, even with a 20 percent budget increase over the next three years…. I think that all of the health authorities are trying hard to look at the decisions they're making in recognizing that they are trying to minimize the clinical impact as much as humanly possible.

That varies between each of the health authorities. I acknowledge that. But I do think it is worth noting that whether it's Fraser Health, Vancouver Coastal, Interior, Northern or PHSA, they are all working very hard and doing a good job in trying to do that, recognizing that these are difficult circumstances even with 20 percent budget increases.

S. Hammell: I'll just carry on this line of questioning around the Northern Health Authority. We'll move to Northern Health and to VIHA, but I would just like to put this into context.

[ Page 2588 ]

It is interesting that the minister acknowledges there are individual differences within each health authority based on their activity. They make different decisions in terms of cutting or reducing their activity based on the challenges they're faced with, which seems to me to lead to the reflection of a conversation earlier today.

We talked about how the standardization of service plans was making things uniform across the board when, in fact, there is quite a significant difference in activity and action going on within each health authority. That would seem to indicate that there possibly should be some variations in terms of service plans because there are different activities.

My question, though, to the minister is around…. We'll start with the Northern Health Authority. Could you tell us in the House what the total number of surgeries is? What elective surgeries are being planned, and what is the reduction?

[1505]

Hon. K. Falcon: We're now talking about the Northern Health Authority. Again, this is a health authority that is seeing an operating budget increase of 20 percent over the next three years. In their case, they are managing a pressure that is somewhat less than the Lower Mainland — nonetheless, still a pressure of 2.1 percent.

I'm advised by staff that the number of acute care in-patient surgical procedures performed in NHA is 8,481. I'm advised that there are no plans for reductions to the elective surgeries in this year.

A. Dix: Because we're trying to get a sense of the nature of the reductions, if we can, in Fraser Health…. I think we've talked about Northern Health a little bit, and we know that on Vancouver Island the reduction is in the neighbourhood of a thousand, I think — maybe a little less, maybe 760 in terms of surgical reductions. I think that's right.

In Interior Health it's a little more opaque. It's seemingly done by regions. There are some surgeries cut, but it's in the same area, I think — 800. In Northern Health the minister is saying that it's flat. In Fraser Health we're saying that it's 4.6 percent, and we'll find out of what. That's the nature of the surgical or elective surgery cuts. Cumulatively, we're talking about probably a very small number of savings, although obviously a very significant impact for people.

In terms of MRI procedures just in this period, we know that we're going from 22,500 in VIHA to…. They initially said 18,100, and I think they've restated that as 19,100. Going back to Fraser Health, my understanding is that they are planning to stick to the same number they did last year. Is that a correct understanding?

[1510]

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm advised on two things. First of all, the number of MRI machines from 2001 to 2008 in the Fraser Health region…. There have been 12 new MRI scanners added, which increased the total from nine MRIs in 2001 to 21 today.

I'm further advised that the CEO, Dr. Nigel Murray, earlier this year in a progress report suggested that the Fraser Health Authority was going to hold the health authority's MRI volumes at last year's volumes, which are 10 percent higher than the previous year and — again, to put it in perspective — about three times as many as were performed in 2001.

A. Dix: So just to understand…. The public fundraised in Burnaby and at Peace Arch for two new MRI machines this year. There were large public fundraising campaigns at both of those facilities. If the number of MRIs is the same, and you add two machines, by definition you are reducing the number of MRIs done at each individual facility. Is that an accurate description of what's going on?

[1515]

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is right to note that there are indeed even more now — two additional MRI scanners, which allow those folks in that area to be able to have local access to MRI scanners. But as the member would know, even in a perfect world there is…. In our publicly funded systems, often it's the case that we don't have an unlimited amount of dollars to run an unlimited amount of MRIs.

What we try to do is maximize as many as we can. As I pointed out, in the Fraser Health region we've seen since 2001 — the year that I first got elected — a 333 percent increase in scans. That is a pretty dramatic increase. Of course, the number of MRI scanners, as I mentioned, has gone from nine to 21.

The Fraser Health Authority, again, I am advised, is going to be attempting to meet the same number of MRI volumes as they did last year, which are at a record level and indeed are 10 percent higher than the previous year and, as I mentioned, are three times the volume that was being undertaken in 2001.

A. Dix: The minister will know that it's true in every jurisdiction, because MRIs are used more than they were ten years ago — that that would be the case.

He also knows, because of the Canadian student health information and the Canadian Medical Association, that MRI wait times in Canada are roughly five times longer in British Columbia as they are in Ontario.

All of that is very interesting, I suppose, but what the minister didn't answer was the question. I mean, I might have asked about MRI machines since 2001, but I happened not to. What I asked was…. Burnaby and Peace Arch went on a large fundraising campaign, and those machines are going to be used not even not at capacity but nowhere near capacity, after a huge public effort.

[ Page 2589 ]

In fact, the bringing on of those machines will mean a reduction at all the other hospitals in the region — every other MRI in the region.

It just follows that if you're freezing the number of MRIs, and you're adding machines, the number of MRIs per machine drops. That's the point I'm making to the minister — that, in fact, we have dramatically longer wait times for MRIs than, say, in Ontario. This is a fact that is established by those reputable bodies.

We have this new capacity, and it has no effect on wait times. It will have no effect on wait times, because they're not doing any more MRIs this year, even after the two machines come on. That's the point I was making to the minister. I think it will be evident to everyone.

I want to ask the minister briefly about what his plans are for the Mission Memorial emergency department.

Hon. K. Falcon: Just to finish off on our last discussion, it is important to point out that, again, record levels of MRIs are taking place in Fraser Health. I think the member would know, because I know he certainly reads up a lot on health issues.

[1520]

But you always have to be careful to even equate the number of procedures with outcomes. I would gladly put our health outcomes up against Ontario's health outcomes here in British Columbia anytime. I'd be very, very pleased to do that.

With respect to Mission Memorial Hospital, as the member knows — it's certainly been publicly discussed — Fraser Health is in a conversation with the community to look at the operation of the emergency department. I have personally met with Mayor Atebe from Mission to speak about this issue. They are developing options on what to do with the emergency department.

One of the issues that I assured Mayor Atebe of when I met with him and some of his staff is that my responsibility as Minister of Health is to make sure that the decisions they make are going to be based on facts that will be shared to everyone so there is no surprise on which the foundation of a decision is being made.

As I have since pointed out, one of the challenges with the emergency department at Mission Memorial is that it sees very little activity, particularly in the overnight hours, where, on average, it will receive nine patient visits after 11 p.m. In fact, only one of those visits would actually present by ambulance.

I say that not to denigrate those nine visits, because they are still important visits, even if they are not of a high-acuity nature, generally speaking. But we have to understand, again, in the context of the fact that Mission Memorial Hospital doesn't operate in isolation.

Our health system is a network of health systems. One of the things that we do know is that 20 minutes away across the river, over the bridge, is a brand-new $355 million Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer Centre, the first new regional hospital built in the province of British Columbia in 35 years, which has opened up.

In addition to that, in the other direction, almost an equivalent amount of time, is the Ridge Meadows Hospital, which has seen a tripling of the emergency department during the last number of months.

It is within that context that the health authority, on looking at how it is going to deliver services, recognizing that typically, high-acuity patients are being diverted already to those other emergency departments, has suggested as one of their options on Mission Memorial Hospital that having the emergency department closed during the overnight hours of between 11 p.m. and, I believe it is, 7 a.m — it might be 8; I'll double-check that — is one of the options that they are in consultation on.

Now, this is a very difficult issue for the community. I recognize that, because we all become very attached to our respective hospital facilities. But I do think, within the context of the massive investments that have been made and recognizing that the health system is a network, that those options do need to be considered and are being discussed.

A. Dix: Yeah, and I think the minister will agree with me. I mean, the Abbotsford hospital is a bigger hospital, as was MSA. They get, according to the same report, four ambulance visits a night, which in absolute terms doesn't seem like a lot, although if you're in one of the ambulances, I think it would be pretty important.

In the case of Mission Memorial Hospital, I understand that between the hours of 11 and seven, like every other hospital in the province, they get less patients. They get about 3,500 a year, I understand. The minister is talking about nine a night, which roughly will bring you there.

I guess the question is…. The minister will understand that Abbotsford hospital — which was running at 260 and, now that they've created 24 PATH or long-term care beds within the hospital, is operating at 236 — has a relatively poor record right now in the key standard in emergency room care, which is admittance within ten hours.

I guess that, and a number of other reasons — significant risks — underlined in the report that the minister himself commissioned, would indicate to me that it'd be a good idea to keep Mission Memorial Hospital open.

I guess what I want to ask the minister, and we can have the debate about that…. I've expressed my view, and he's expressed his view. What I would like to know is where we are now.

[1525]

Clearly, this is being done to seek savings. I wouldn't be suggesting that the minister would be closing this just because he wants to close it. He's seeking financial savings, and they've asked for financial savings. They say

[ Page 2590 ]

specifically in the report, and I highlight this to the minister, that if you don't like closing the ER, you have to find other savings in the hospital.

I guess what I want to ask the minister is where the process is at and when he expects to have a decision in this case. Will he, for example, visit Mission for a public meeting to discuss that with the citizens of Mission?

Hon. K. Falcon: I know that those discussions are ongoing. I didn't put a timeline on those discussions to the health authority. They're going to have those discussions with the community and with the surgeons. I acknowledge that these are not easy decisions. I also acknowledge, and I think it's right to acknowledge to the member, that yes, there are savings that are realized by doing this. They're certainly not doing it because it's a fun thing to do.

But I do think we have to recognize that this is being made in the context of us saying to the health authorities: "Look, with a 20 percent funding increase, you still have a 3.5 percent challenge, a pressure. In managing that pressure, we want to make sure that you are utilizing the facilities that you have in a manner that makes the most sense; that doesn't take away from patient care; that, in fact, can be informed by best practices or practices that we've seen elsewhere."

As I pointed out to the member — it may have been during a previous question period; I'm not sure exactly the form, likely a question period — near the member's own riding is the Mount Saint Joseph community hospital. It's another hospital facility that has two other facilities nearby — VGH and St. Paul's Hospital — that have 24-hour emergency departments. Now, Mount Saint Joseph's does not have an emergency department open in the overnight hours.

What Fraser Health is proposing is very similar to what is taking place in Vancouver. The one thing I can assure the member of…. I know the change itself is difficult, and I know that many in the community will view that change in a negative sense.

I think that if we look at the experience of other health authorities and, indeed, other jurisdictions maximizing the use of their facilities, recognizing also when significant investments have been made, as have been made in this case on both sides of Mission Memorial Hospital — on the tripling of the emergency department at Ridge Meadows Hospital on one side and, of course, the $355 million construction of a brand-new, state-of-the-art hospital, Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer Centre, on the other side….

Given that context, and given the fact that the Fraser Health Authority is looking at its budget and saying, "Even with the 20 percent budget increase, we need to manage the dollars we are currently spending more efficiently and effectively," they have looked at that emergency department at Mission Memorial and said: "You know, this is an emergency department that, on average, will see overnight visits of about nine per night. Only one of those, on average, will arrive by ambulance."

Now, given that reality, Member, and even though the politics of it may be difficult, I do not think that as a Minister of Health, when I have a health authority suggesting that they can manage their facilities more efficiently with some pretty significant savings to the health authority, that that is not something that I should not be supportive of.

So they are having a continued discussion with the community, through the mayor and council. I understand that there are a number of proposals going back and forth. But very clearly, what the health authority position is, is if there are other alternatives that are being presented, they certainly want to make sure that they demonstrate equivalent savings for the health authority on a go-forward basis.

A. Dix: The minister talked about what's clearly his preferred proposal, which is to reduce the hours at the ER at Mission Memorial Hospital. I just note to him that all of this has been in the period, as he likes to say, since he was elected a member of this House. The Mission Memorial Hospital has lost the maternity ward, lost more than half its acute care beds, lost ICU.

Now he's proposing to downgrade the emergency room, and none of these things have come back. In fact, this is capacity that has been lost by that community. So the community is legitimately questioning the plans that the minister has for the hospital.

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

Those are 3,500 nighttime visits — 19,000 visits overall, which is not a dissimilar number to the Ridge Meadows number. It's the hospital that people in Mission go to when they need care. That's the reality of it, and you see that reflected in the report.

[1530]

So if it was just a question…. I guess the minister has confirmed that it's basically a budget question, that if they don't like that, then they're going to have to take some other service out of the hospital.

That's what the report says. That's what the authority says. That doesn't seem to me to be an evidence-based approach, but there it is. Then maybe the minister could address or has addressed or would address the idea of the risks, because when you lose an ER, of course, it creates other risks in the hospital, and the other risks to patients at Mission Memorial Hospital are underlined in the report.

He seems to be advocating for an option that would see, really, yet another major downgrade. Sometimes I think it's five major downgrades, and sometimes I think it's six. But it depends. One, I think, can be counted in

[ Page 2591 ]

two phases. But it would be the sixth major downgrade of an important hospital in that region, and it sure matters to the people of Mission.

I agree with the minister to this extent. This is not an easy decision, but it sure matters to the people of Mission. We have seen time after time after time the Fraser Health Authority come looking for savings only from the people of Mission.

Hon. K. Falcon: Look, I think every government has to occasionally make difficult decisions. I know that the member would know that when the NDP took office, there were 84 acute care beds at that hospital. When they left office, there were only 42 beds. I don't doubt for a second that those probably were not easy decisions for that member while he was in the government of the day, nor for the Minister of Health of the day.

One thing I do know and am learning rapidly and am informed on as I meet with more and more medical professionals — and, I think, something that we have to keep in mind — is that the practice of surgical and surgery for physicians is a very, very important practice. Actually, best practices, particularly in areas of maternity, because the member mentioned that…. Volume is very, very important for the best outcomes for the women that are receiving birthing from a medical professional, from an obstetrician or a physician.

There's no question, Member, that these decisions are a challenge and can be a challenge, but I do think that we have to listen to some of our medical experts and the things that we have learned, not just here but around the world, in terms of operation of our medical facilities.

You know, one of the things that I said at the beginning of my remarks is that this is a health system. In my community of Surrey, for example, when the Abbotsford hospital and cancer care centre opened, that actually provides a benefit to the system, including in Surrey. None of these hospitals operate in isolation, whether it's Peace Arch or Surrey Memorial or Abbotsford Regional Hospital and cancer care centre or Mission Memorial or Ridge Meadows, they are all part of a system. We have to look at what's happening across the entire system.

As I mentioned, we have a situation in this case where we've got significant investment made in the tripling of the emergency department at Ridge Meadows on one side of the Mission Memorial Hospital, and on the other side, we've got a situation where we've got a brand-new hospital, the $355 million Abbotsford Regional Hospital and cancer care centre.

Why is that important? That is important because when we think about patients and the kind of care that we want to have those patients receive, I can tell you that one thing we do know from the numbers that are presented by Fraser Health is that the overwhelming number of visits to the Mission Memorial emergency department are taking place during the daylight hours. There's just no question about that. The number of visits that take place in the overnight hours is very, very modest — as I mentioned, nine on average and one presenting, on average, by ambulance.

When we are asking our health authorities to manage their dollars responsibly, I do think they do have an obligation to say: "Well, you know what? We just made a massive investment over here. We made another massive investment over here."

[1535]

This is a system that we are providing, and the best practices suggest, particularly on high-acuity patients that have been involved in serious incidents, that you certainly want them to be presented at the high-volume tertiary facilities that can provide the best possible services to those particular individuals. Is it difficult politics? I absolutely acknowledge it is. No question about that.

But I have to point to the experiences, as I mentioned, in Vancouver, where we've got very similar situations. If you look at the service that's being provided in Vancouver today, whether at Mount St. Joseph's or VGH or St. Paul's, it is an exceptional level of service. We are recognized by the Conference Board of Canada as having the best health system in the country. I do not believe that the options they are discussing with Mission Memorial are taking away from that one bit.

A. Dix: Well, the continued cuts to Mission Memorial Hospital have taken away from it quite a bit. I just note to the minister that according to his own chair of the board, he gave the fastest-growing health authority, maybe, in the country — certainly in the province — a 2.9 percent lift this year. That's what he gave them. That's what the chair of his health authority says he gave.

Naturally, since they barely balanced the budget last year — they, essentially, were right on the number — this meant that there were going to be cuts. This government signed many contracts between 4 percent and 5 percent for workers — there were reasons for that three years ago, and they took lots of credit for that — which they haven't funded.

Other inflation in health care is very high. You've got a very fast-growing health authority, and there's a shortfall, and that's why. Surely the minister isn't suggesting that there was a $160 million shortfall because people were incompetent. That's the issue we're facing.

I would say, in the case of the Mission hospital…. I was very interested to hear the minister talk about maternity beds. This will allow us, perhaps, to transition to another question.

The minister will know that the Fraser Health Authority produced a plan that suggested that they were going to consolidate pediatric units and maternity units. He just referred to what he called best practice. I'll just read what that plan says. It says: "The research

[ Page 2592 ]

in pediatrics supports maintaining critical mass at specialized sites as a good threshold for safety for our child patients."

Since the minister is mentioning that, perhaps the minister can tell us the progress or the results of the review of the pediatric unit at Langley Memorial Hospital.

Hon. K. Falcon: I know that the member and I will disagree about this continually, but I do want to put on the record that the increase, again, to the health authority budget this year is 5.9 percent.

It's worth noting that since 2001 the Fraser Health Authority has seen a budget increase of over 62 percent. So this is not really a discussion about whether more money has been added. That is very, very clear. It is really a question of…. In spite of the massive increases in funding that have been provided, there are still challenges in the system.

With respect to the member's reference to reviews that are underway, my understanding is that they are still working on those reviews. We expect that we will see those in the coming weeks, and then we will have a discussion about them.

A. Dix: The minister and I had a brief exchange in the Legislature this week about the closing of the adolescent psychiatric unit at Abbotsford Regional Hospital and the six beds involved in that. Obviously, that has real implications.

[1540]

Just a year ago, a previous Minister of Health and the health authority were talking about this as an important innovation, as a crucial innovation to health care. What we're seeing, therefore, is a shift. They went up to 16 beds. There's clearly demand. I think the minister would agree there is acute care demand for psychiatric beds for adolescents in the Fraser Health Authority. In fact, in some respects, the Fraser Health Authority is, if you take the same comparative view, under other health authorities in terms of its access to mental health services.

I want to ask the minister — the minister talks about transferring patients to Surrey — if he is aware of what kind of wait times there are for the beds in Surrey, whether he is aware there are no acute beds that teens can be admitted to on the weekend in all of Fraser Health, and whether he is aware that, in the case of the ten-bed Surrey unit, two psychiatrists recently resigned, which has put that unit under stress as well.

I guess what I'm asking the minister is — because there is a strong evidence-based argument to open the unit not 15 years ago but last year — why the decision has been taken not to continue to recruit and find people for that unit, why the decision has been taken to close that unit given the critical shortage of those services and the wait time to get into that facility in Surrey.

Hon. K. Falcon: As I mentioned in the previous exchange we had with respect to this, since the adolescent psychiatric unit opened last year at Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer Centre, they've faced real difficulties in staffing that unit. It's one of the reasons why just two of the six beds have been occupied. So it's been operating at 30 percent of its capacity.

The challenge of staffing is a very real and significant one. Just so the member knows, only two of the beds were occupied. So it doesn't mean that everyone necessarily has to be transferred over to the Surrey psychiatric ward.

In fact, what they are also doing, as I mentioned in the previous response to the member, is investing $400,000 to enhance the local adolescent crisis response program and also develop an adolescent day treatment program locally for residents that are impacted with issues of mental health.

Now, the challenge that they've been having at the adolescent psychiatry side is finding the medical professionals necessary to staff. The member just talked about a couple more that have been lost in the Surrey area. The Fraser Health Authority is attempting to develop a pool of adolescent psychiatrists so that they have a pool they can draw from to more appropriately utilize, whether on a day treatment program or in the case of in-patient beds.

Is it a challenge for them? It certainly has been. It's been a real struggle in staffing that unit. As I say, only two of the six beds were actually utilized. They've made these decisions — again, though not easy — to try and respond to the reality that they're facing, particularly in having difficulty attracting the medical professionals they need.

A. Dix: The fact of the matter is that this is a cost-saving initiative. They're saving $1.1 million. Fraser Health is claiming it's going to reinvest some of that money — a smaller share of that money, less than half of that money — in other services. That's the claim, I guess. But the savings is $1.1 million from those services.

I'll just read to the minister, because I think it's important to refer to the experts. Who are the experts? Well, I hate to say it. We'll start with the Ministry of Health Services itself. What does it say? It says that a new adolescent psychiatry unit means earlier admission and quicker access to treatment for adolescents with challenging mental illnesses. That's what they say. That's what the ministry said when the unit opened only one year ago.

What does a teacher working on the unit, Bruce Dugdale, say? Over 70 adolescents went through that unit in its first year of operation. As you know, these are critical cases. They're critical cases because of what they mean. We talk about these things in terms of savings sometimes.

[1545]

I have talked in the last few days, I'll tell the minister, and had incredibly moving stories from some of the people who have actually been on the unit and received

[ Page 2593 ]

care and, in their minds, got better as a result of the care they got there and thought it was essential for them. Seventy adolescents went through the unit.

What does Mr. Dugdale say?

"For the past year I have worked on the unit as a teacher. During that time I have seen many young people arrive at the unit extremely ill and unable to function in their communities. Certainly, many were incapable of continuing successfully with their schooling.

"Many of these adolescents became healthy enough to return to their families and schools in a very short time. Families who were devastated by their child's mental illness have been able to leave the hospital with hope, something they did not have."

So a year ago they opened the unit. This is what's happened.

Derek Smith — and I quoted this to the minister the other day — said: "This is a really unacceptable situation. The unit's just opened. Teens will continue to be underserved here. Having young teens admitted to adult units simply does not work. It's often a dangerous situation for kids." The recruitment problem, in his view, anyway, is a sham — never seen evidence of a serious attempt to recruit doctors here.

I guess what I'm asking the minister is…. This seems like the wrong path. It really seems like the wrong path for the region. The right path would be to address these issues, because there's a need for the beds. We know there's a need for the beds because there's a wait time in Surrey and because this wait time can be very troubling for the people.

I guess I'm making an appeal to the minister. I mean, yes, he has decided to cut mental health care for adolescents and save $1.1 million. I understand that's what they're doing, because they've only increased the Fraser Health budget by 2.9 percent this year. But all of that said, this seems like the wrong decision and a decision that will lead to further costs in the health care system later on because adolescents, young people, children don't get the care they need.

Hon. K. Falcon: I thank the member for his comments. I have no question that the individuals he cited are probably correct in terms of the positive outcomes. When we do have the staffing, there's no question these folks do exceptional work.

I do think it is important to point out to the member that the spending in Fraser Health for mental health and addictions is not being reduced. It is actually increasing by 18 percent over the next three years. Again, I have to say to the member that when we are asking the health authority in an era of even 20 percent — or 18 percent in this case — budget increases, they are still finding themselves with pressures to manage. It is incumbent upon them to try and make sure that they look at how they deliver the services and determine and make sure they are doing so as responsibly as they can.

Now, in this case the adolescent psychiatry unit has had real difficulties in staffing the unit, in recruiting not just child and adolescent psychiatrists but also the qualified and very specialized nurses that are required to oversee the adolescent psychiatry unit. In that case there has been difficulty in identifying and finding two specialized nurses. Those positions remain vacant. As I mentioned earlier, there is a real challenge in finding the youth and adolescent psychiatrists.

So what are they doing? Looking at that challenge, they're saying: "Okay, why don't we invest some dollars in an adolescent day treatment program and also enhance the adolescent crisis response program with a $400,000 investment?" That's locally.

Well, recognizing that, again, only two of the in-patient beds were utilized…. But should there be an in-patient bed requirement, then they would transfer, at no cost to the individual of course, that individual or individuals to the ten-bed unit at Surrey Memorial Hospital. That's something they're doing.

[1550]

What's the second thing they're doing? They're not saying that they're not going to reopen the APU. They very likely will. But prior to doing that, what they are going to do is make sure that through a continuing aggressive international and national outreach program, they are going to try and build a child and youth psychiatrist pool that will be available so that we know we've got the medical personnel, including the specialized nurses that are required to operate the APU, so that they can reopen the APU and know that they've got the appropriate staffing levels to support that. So that is a challenge for them.

I wish I could say that this was the only area of the health system where we have real challenges on trying to hire particularly specialized medical professionals, but it is not. They are trying to deal with this in a manner that is both responsible and understanding of the challenges that these young folks obviously face. They are real, and I think that the investments that they're making in the adolescent day treatment program and the adolescent crisis response program are, in some ways, to address those real issues.

A. Dix: The minister will agree with me, though, that it's a net savings to the health authority of $750,000. That's presumably the reason it's taking place and announced with all these others, this array of cuts, particularly to mental health, to long-term care, to addictions, to seniors services, to other services, to hospice care across the Fraser Health Authority. Presumably, that's the purpose for them.

Maybe the minister can just help me, because he mentioned it and mentioned the increases that he talks about. Maybe the minister can just help me here by describing the recruitment efforts that did not succeed, because when the ministry and the Fraser Health Authority opened this unit, clearly, they did so believing they'd

[ Page 2594 ]

be able to staff the unit. It would have been ridiculous to open the unit if that wasn't the case. Can the minister perhaps describe, if he can, what those recruitment efforts were?

Hon. K. Falcon: That would obviously be a good question to pose to the Fraser Health Authority and the management with respect to that unit. I obviously don't have that kind of information at my fingertips. What I do know is that they had an aggressive national and international recruitment effort. In spite of that, there was only one child and adolescent psychiatrist that was available to provide 24-7 coverage, and that is a big challenge.

They also had two specialized nursing vacancies that are necessary for the operation of that APU unit — the adolescent psychiatric unit — at Abbotsford hospital, and they have been unable to fill those two positions. So, Member, yes, they could keep operating it at 30 percent capacity with the challenges associated with that, having only one adolescent psychiatrist available to provide that 24-7 coverage, but that is obviously very, very difficult to do.

What they have tried to do is to say: "What we want to do is move forward on the basis of…. First of all, let's take some of those savings." The member is right to note that there are savings. There's no question that the health authority is trying to manage their budget in a responsible manner, even recognizing that with an 18 percent increase in mental health and addictions over the next three years in Fraser Health, there are still challenges. They're trying to manage that responsibly.

They are investing a portion of that $400,000, as I mentioned, to make sure that there's an adolescent day treatment program available right there in Abbotsford to help deal with some of these cases and also enhancing the adolescent crisis response program.

I don't pretend that this is the perfect solution. But they are, at the same time, going to again continue with a very aggressive national and international campaign to hire the specialized nurses and the specialized child and adolescent psychiatrists to create a pool that will be available.

Once they have that pool available, and they can know they can rely on that expertise, they will reopen the beds at the adolescent psychiatric unit at Abbotsford Regional Hospital knowing that they've got the pool of medical professionals necessary to continue to operate it.

A. Dix: I didn't think it was an unreasonable question, given that we'd asked the question in the Legislature and he'd referred to the aggressive campaign, to ask what the campaign was, but it is a level of detail.

[1555]

I wonder if the minister could just agree to get from Fraser Health, who may well be watching as we speak, the information as to what that aggressive campaign consisted of: what they were doing, why they decided to essentially abandon and give up the unit now and perhaps a detailed explanation for that. If he could provide that, it would make things easier.

Hon. K. Falcon: I will certainly endeavour to get that information for the member prior to the ending of estimates.

The one other thing I would point out to the member that might be useful for the member to know is that I'm advised by staff that the Surrey adolescent psychiatric unit, which I mentioned earlier and which has ten beds, is operating at 80 percent occupancy with no wait-list.

I think that is important for us to know in terms of, again, the health authority trying to make sure that they manage the assets they have in a manner that provides the best possible results. That means that at the Surrey adolescent psychiatric unit, the staff are advising me that there is no wait-list and that they're running at 80 percent occupancy.

There you have, over at the Abbotsford psychiatric unit, six beds with only two that are being occupied and extreme challenges in terms of filling some specialized positions.

So the decision they are making certainly is difficult. What they are doing is that if a patient presents that requires in-patient bed requirements — in other words, is not a patient that can be dealt with through the adolescent day treatment program that they're investing dollars in to create for the benefit of youths locally and the enhancement to the adolescent crisis response program…. If they do require an in-patient bed situation, they will be transferred, at no cost, of course, to the Surrey adolescent psychiatric unit which, as I say, has no wait-list and 80 percent occupancy.

A. Dix: I don't want to be too precise with the minister, but the 80 percent occupancy right now — 80 percent on average or 80 percent median? What is that? I'll give him a second question while he's thinking of that, while he's getting that answer.

As he knows, there's a committee of both the Ministry of Children and Families and the Ministry of Health that guides child and youth mental health in the province. Was the decision to close this unit referred? Was their opinion sought before Fraser Health made a decision to shut this unit?

That is a question that I know the minister will have an answer to, because it was asked and not answered in question period just a couple of days ago.

Hon. K. Falcon: With respect to the first point the member made, the 80 percent occupancy is on average for year to date. It typically averages about 80 percent occupancy.

[ Page 2595 ]

With respect to the Ministry of Children and Family Development, I am advised that we are often in conversations and discussions with the Ministry of Children and Family Development. But they manage community-based children and youth mental health and addiction services. We handle the acute in-patient services, which are completely managed under the purview of the health system, though I understand that, in spite of that clear separation of duties, still there are usually ongoing conversations that take place.

[1600]

A. Dix: So there is no comment from that unit. I want to ask the minister about closure of another unit in Chilliwack that deals with addictions, the ten-bed withdrawal management unit at Chilliwack General Hospital. Again, this is an issue where the ministry is claiming, anyway, that it's not running at full capacity, but it's eliminating all of the capacity here.

I just wanted to ask the minister, because people in Chilliwack, anyway, including the Salvation Army and other people who deal with these issues, are extremely concerned, in fact, with this particular cut. Can the minister explain why he thinks it's a good idea to be cutting addiction services here and all over the Lower Mainland?

Hon. K. Falcon: Both the withdrawal management unit at Chilliwack General Hospital and the similar unit at Creekside in Surrey are operating at between 60 and 70 percent capacity. Fraser Health has made the decision to centralize the detoxification and withdrawal services at Creekside in Surrey.

Now, to help offset some of the issues that that may raise in the eastern Fraser Valley, Fraser Health will be expanding home detox services that could support up to 250 clients a year as well as to, of course, support clients that may require transport to the Surrey facility.

I am advised that Fraser Health is also investing in increased access to stabilization and transitional living residences in Fraser East for homeless clients who need a safe and stable environment for detox and support to transition to other levels of support. They are also maintaining an addiction outreach worker to facilitate access to the home detox services in the Creekside withdrawal management unit.

A. Dix: So you closed one unit in Abbotsford and moved it to Surrey; closed a unit in Chilliwack and moved it to Surrey. Can the minister tell us how much money is being saved by the closure of this unit?

Hon. K. Falcon: I am advised that the savings for this year will be $250,000 on an annualized basis. That would be a net savings of $800,000 in '10-11.

I do think, Member, that, again, this is one of those areas where if you are operating similar facilities at 60 or 70 percent capacity, you are, of course, responsible for all of the overhead and staffing costs associated with those two separate, distinct facilities operating at less than their total capacity.

So the decision of Fraser Health is…. While they are closing the withdrawal management unit, some patients may end up, of course, in the Surrey facility at Creekside, but as I say, they are taking some of those savings to expand the home detox services that will potentially serve up to 250 clients a year as well as investing in, as I mentioned, the increased access to the stabilization and transitional living residences in Fraser East for homeless clients who need a safe and stable environment for detox and to support their transition to other levels of support.

[1605]

A. Dix: The decision in this case has, I think it's fair to say, been greeted with some alarm in the community.Of course, the minister is not ensuring that a service…. He's saying that it's running at two-thirds capacity and that's a bad thing, so he's going to close the whole thing.

For people in Chilliwack there are significant issues. If you look at the overall assessment and the reviews done by Fraser Health of health needs in the region, you'll see that that region has significant mental health and addiction needs, especially addiction needs. So it seems perplexing that the government would close the unit that they again just opened, really, just a few years ago — that that decision would be made.

So I'd ask the minister again to review it because, in this case, this isn't an issue, presumably, of lack of capacity based on lack of staffing. I assume that's the case. It's the decision made because the minister's arguing there's insufficient demand. But what people in Chilliwack say about it who refer and deal with people suffering and dealing with substance abuse is that it's a key part of their community services. This is an essential part of their community services in that region.

Surely it's not easy for people in Chilliwack, which…. The minister will agree with me…. He was talking about some places being close to one another recently. It's a big health region, at least for a suburban health region. Fraser Health's a big health region, and Chilliwack's a long way from Surrey. Doesn't he think that that's a real blow to addiction care in the Chilliwack community?

Hon. K. Falcon: I appreciate the member acknowledging that many of these services, the whole range of them through Fraser Health, are, of course, all new services since 2001.

We're proud of the fact that even with changes made for the system to manage the budget pressures and make sure that they utilize the facilities they have in the most responsible and financially responsible manner, there are occasionally changes that have to be made to try and

[ Page 2596 ]

deal with some of the pressures that the authorities are dealing with, in this case Fraser Health, in spite of the fact that the mental health and addictions spending is increasing over the next three years by 18 percent.

I think it is important to note, and I'm advised that it's very important to point out, that not all clients that are needing detox treatment need or want to go to a withdrawal management unit. For some clients, home detox is very much a viable and, indeed in many cases, a preferred option. That's why when the member just talks about it closing as if nothing else changed, that is actually not the case.

What is happening is they are investing in expanding the home detox services which, as I mentioned, can support as many as 250 clients a year, and this is often the preferred option for many of the clients that do not wish to spend their time in the withdrawal management unit.

They're also, as I mentioned, investing in increasing access to the stabilization in transitional living residences in Fraser East for the homeless clientele, which is a particular subgroup that requires a safe and stable environment for detox and then ultimately support to transition to other levels of support.

So I recognize it is a change, for sure. In fact, I acknowledge that the easiest decision, of course, would be to do absolutely nothing and continue to operate both facilities at under capacity, but I think what they have done is say: "Look. We recognize that we don't have unlimited funds in Fraser Health."

We recognize, as the CEO has acknowledged — and is doing an exceptional job, by the way — that the 20 percent increase they're seeing in their budget over the next three years is extraordinary, and he appreciates it. But in spite of that, there is still a challenge. There are still pressures.

So we have said, and certainly I will, as a member of this government, as the Minister of Health…. It is us that have said to the health authorities: "We expect you to manage within that 20 percent budget increase."

[1610]

That means they have to look at all the services they deliver to ensure that they are maximizing the dollars they spend to ensure that they are providing the best possible treatment with the dollars that are available. I acknowledge they are not unlimited dollars.

As I say, I think in this case that while they are indeed closing the withdrawal management unit, they are doing so recognizing that they've got excess capacity at Creekside in Surrey while, at the same time, taking some of those savings that are generated and reinvesting them in the eastern Fraser Valley to expand opportunities on home detox services, which I understand is often not only a viable but a preferred option for many of those who struggle with addictions issues.

Of course, I talked about the initiatives that are being invested in further on the transitional-living residences in Fraser East for that subgroup of the population that is homeless and requires a safe and stable environment for detox and, ultimately, transition.

A. Dix: Indeed, as the minister noted, Dr. Murray has also agreed with the chair of his board that the lift this year is 2.9 percent, just as the chair and the CEO of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority have acknowledged that their lift is 2.4 percent.

They've done it again and again. They're facing these difficult circumstances. The minister might reasonably argue that 2.9 percent is a generous increase. That's what he may want to argue. But to say, since we're talking about this year's budget, that 2.9 percent, given the collective agreements and everything else, does anything but lead to service reductions is wrong.

We said before the election that it would lead to service reductions. The government denied it, and here we are. What do we have?

Well, we have the closure of the adolescent psychiatric unit and the closure of the withdrawal management addictions in Chilliwack. We have the closure of hospice beds and of a convalescent care unit in New Westminster. We have the closure of beds at Peace Arch Hospital, the closure of what are called temporary long-term care beds all over the Fraser Health Authority, and on it goes. There's the closure of residential care beds at Bear Creek Lodge and then the cuts in surgeries that we've talked about and so on.

This is where we're at. I just want to ask the minister, in light of all those closures to really important services in Fraser Health…. He said, and I believe him, that he doesn't like cutting mental health services, cutting surgeries, cutting MRIs — or freezing them and cutting them at every hospital in the region but two. He doesn't like closing hospice beds. He doesn't like closing the convalescent care unit. He doesn't like any of these things, and I believe him. I believe he doesn't like that.

I guess the question it asks, because he referred to it…. This is an important statistic if you look at the Fraser Health budget. If you look at the Fraser Health plan, the share of corporate expenditures, which are broadly administrative expenditures — they're not all the administrative expenditures, but they're broadly the expenditures — is actually going to increase as the share of the budget.

In fact, in the Fraser Health region and in many other regions it's going to increase faster, that share of the budget, because when that thing increases its share of the budget, other things decline as a share of the budget.

There's only 100 percent, and it's going up from 7.77 percent to 9.48 percent in the next two years. That's what's happening in Fraser Health. Oddly, it's happening in Interior Health as well. Oddly, it's happening in Northern Health as well.

When the minister talks about making these tough decisions and cutting administration and so on, the

[ Page 2597 ]

reality is that the plan that he himself has presented to us shows an increase in administrative costs as a share of the budget.

I appreciate that he says they're tough decisions brought about by, as the chair of the board of Fraser Health says and as the CEO of Fraser Health says, a 2.9 percent lift that doesn't cover increasing costs in health care. I appreciate that. But I'm perplexed, I guess, as to why the corporate share of the budget is increasing so dramatically.

[1615]

Hon. K. Falcon: Again, it's one of the things that I've tried to point out as we've had this discussion, an important discussion in the debate, about how do you have a health system manage in an era where a 20 percent budget increase is still not enough. The perspective is important because we've just been, as you know, talking about mental health.

The member is criticizing changes that have been made in mental health, some driven by best practices, depending on which program you're talking about. But he cannot argue with the fact that the budget increase for mental health in Fraser Health is increasing by 18 percent over the next three years. In fact, he was chief of staff of the government that I do have to point out promised a $125 million mental health plan that did not have one dollar associated with it — not one dollar associated with it.

I will absolutely accept criticism for decisions being made by health authorities as they struggle to manage within a 20 percent budget increase, but I will have to…. I know it will annoy the member, but I will put it in a perspective.

The member talks about hospice beds. Well, I think it's interesting to note that in Fraser Health there was a grand total number of hospice beds when we were elected in 2001 — so following a decade of the NDP government — of zero hospice and tertiary palliative care beds in Fraser Health. Zero. There wasn't one.

What is there today? Today we've got 96 hospice beds and 30 palliative care beds in Fraser Health. You know, that's why perspective is important. These members like to…. It's kind of like if you're an accountant and you only focused on one side of the ledger. That's typically what the NDP do. They like to focus on one side of the ledger and try and define everything as cuts even when the evidence in the budget…. The member keeps talking about a 2.9 percent increase. We know it's 4.9 percent. It's in the blue book. That is the base budget of Health from one year to the next.

I pointed out to the member that yes, one-time dollars were provided midway through the year last year. We were fortunate that we were in an era where the government was seeing dramatic increases in revenues. The economy was the strongest in the country. Things were looking very, very good. It was great that we were able to provide those one-time dollars to the health authorities — much of it targeted to encourage innovation and to continue to try and do new and better things within the authorities.

But this year is a very different year. The whole world has changed since last year. Apparently, it hasn't changed for the members opposite, but I can tell you that in every part of the world we are going through one of the most challenging economic circumstances we have ever seen. In spite of that, it was a decision of this government that we are still going to…. While we are reducing in many other ministry budgets, we said that in health care and in education we would increase the budgets.

As I say, we are increasing them in Health, and I'm proud of it. I acknowledge — I have been very up front with the fact — that in spite of that, there are still pressures, and we are asking them to manage that 3½ percent pressure. It varies between each health authority. As I mentioned, up in the north it's 2.1 percent. It will be different depending on which

section or which health authority you're talking about, but on average, it's a 3½ percent pressure. They're doing a very good job in managing it.

The member now talks about administrative expenses. I am informed that to the period up to the end of August, the Fraser Health Authority administration, which is their admin and support expenditures as a percentage of their total expenditures, in '08-09 was 10.7 percent. In '09-10 it is 10.3 percent. We've also seen reductions in Northern Health. We've also seen reductions in VIHA. We've seen reductions in Vancouver Coastal.

Keep in mind that it's interesting the member mentioned that fact, because any time we do see administrative reductions, the first people to jump up and talk about health care cuts are the same NDP members of the opposition. It is indeed an interesting perspective that they often take on these things.

I will tell you that I do think the health authorities, under the leadership of very competent and able leaders like Dr. Nigel Murray in Fraser Health, are doing an exceptional job in challenging circumstances, because they are challenging.

[1620]

They are trying to make sure that the decisions they make are respectful of the increased taxpayer dollars they are receiving but also recognizing that there are not unlimited dollars. They are trying to manage as best they can and doing a very good job.

A. Dix: I know it's unfair to ask the minister about what's actually in his own plan for health care. I think that might be seen as unfair. Corporate line: Fraser Health Authority, $192 million, 2009-10; 2010-11, $248 million; 2011-12, $264 million. That's the Fraser Health Authority.