British Columbia Hansard — Tuesday, April 29, 2003

H0429am-10

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Tuesday, April 29, 2003 Morning Sitting Volume 14, Number 10 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon. Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

George MacMinn Clerk Assistant ................................................................................................................ ................................................................... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .................................................................................................. ........................................................ Ian D. Izard Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees........................................................................................ ............................................Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca/hansard In addition to printed transcripts, Hansard Services publishes transcripts on the Internet and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

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

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

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

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

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

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

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

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

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

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

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

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Tuesday, April 29, 2003 Morning Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 6295 Hon. R. Thorpe Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 6295 Community Charter (Bill 14) Hon. T. Nebbeling B. Lekstrom B. Bennett Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt Hon. S. Santori B. Suffredine S. Orr J. Les W.

McMahon H. Bloy L. Mayencourt Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply ............................................................................................................ ................................................... 6310 Estimates: Ministry of Advanced Education (continued) Hon. S. Bond P. Nettleton J. MacPhail

6295 TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 The House met at 10:03 a.m. Prayers. Petitions Hon. R. Thorpe: Today I am tabling a petition on behalf of 40 of my constituents in the Pine Hills mobile home park regarding the Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act. [1005] Orders of the Day Hon. S. Santori: I call second reading of Bill 14, and in the Douglas Fir Committee Room I call estimates debate for the Ministry of Advanced Education. Mr. Speaker:

Section A will be Committee of Sup- ply. Second Reading of Bills COMMUNITY CHARTER Hon. T. Nebbeling: I move that Bill 14, entitled Community Charter, now be read for the second time. Mr. Speaker: Please proceed. Hon. T. Nebbeling: It's an honour and privilege to be here today as we move forward with the most em- powering local government legislation in the country. The charter goes further than any other legislation of its kind in Canada in treating local government as an order of government based on principles of municipal- provincial relations.

The charter is based on principles of mutual respect between the province and munici- palities and of public accountability, principles that are enshrined in the Community Charter itself. The Community Charter is a result of more than a d e c ad e o f wo rk and e f f o rt b e g i nni ng i n 1 99 1 wi t h t he Union of British Columbia Municipalities. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the hard work and determination of everyone involved in bringing the charter forward.

Following this vision, we have worked to build a new relationship between the prov- ince and local governments based on respect and in- creased autonomy of local governments. We recognize that local governments are the level of government closest to the citizens, and the Commu- nity Charter reflects that. Municipalities are in the best position to make local decisions for their citizens and for their community. The Community Charter reflects t hat as we l l .

H o we v e r, t o m ak e e f f e c t i v e d e c i s i o ns f o r citizens, for businesses and for the community, mu- nicipal government must have the appropriate tools. Local government must have the tools to pursue op- portunities for innovation and flexibility and to benefit local governments, communities and taxpayers by cut- ting red tape and out-of-date regulations. Innovative local governments are key to a solid economic base for our entire province. Strong local governments are key to the revitalization of British Columbia, both economi- cally and in spirit.

I'll be discussing the charter shortly, but first I would like to take a few moments to discuss how this legislative framework for local government came about. To say the least, this is a historical mo- ment. Municipal governments have long been a part of the economic and social fabric of British Colum- bia. In fact, the municipalities of New Westminster and Victoria predate British Columbia's joining Can- ada in 1871. Just after this, in 1873, the first munici- pal legislation was enacted, to be followed by two further generations of significant legislation in 1914 and 1957.

In approximately 100 years, the province and the local governments have had only three significant gen- erations in municipal legislation. This was in the face of the province's growth and changing national and in- ternational dynamics. In 1991, keeping in mind it was over 125 years since B.C.'s first municipality was estab- lished, local government presented a bill of rights for local governments. This was led by the then Vancouver mayor and president of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, Premier Campbell.

In the UBCM bill of rights, local governments sought the legal recognition as an order of government, but the work was to continue for another decade throughout which the UBCM continued to lobby for such things as title to municipal roads and mandatory consultation. They wanted to replace restrictive pro- vincial approvals and red tape that incurred with pro- vincial advice. The UBCM sought ability to expand financial resources and enhance municipal powers.

They wanted a hand in their own destiny and a chance to help shape the community's future. [1010] In 1995 Premier Campbell, as Leader of the Official Opposition, presented the first community charter as a private member's bill. The charter was to establish a new relationship between the provincial government and municipalities. It called for the prohibition of pro- vincial government downloading. It called for eliminat- ing unnecessary provincial interference in strictly local matters. For example, why do municipalities have to go to Victoria for permission to close a municipal road?

With Bill M222, local governments would be more ac- cessible, more accountable and more affordable. There would be less bureaucracy and less red tape, assisting and benefiting both citizens and businesses. A year later the UBCM and the provincial govern- ment of the time signed the protocol of recognition. This resulted in the Local Government Act. While there were some improvements over the previous Municipal Act, we know the act did not go far enough in address- ing the needs and the requests of local government. It

6296 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 did not address all it could with regard to local gov- ernments. We as a government made the new-era commit- ment to give local governments more control over their affairs and their operations, enabling them to select the ways to meet the needs of their communities and their citizens. Last May I had the honour to present a draft community charter to the House. It is important — and please keep in mind — that this draft was not prepared in isolation. We worked extensively with the Union of British Columbia Municipalities and other stake- holders.

Their input was actively sought and was in- valuable. At this time I would also like to acknowledge the Community Charter Council. This joint provincial- municipal government body oversaw the development of the draft charter. Their work and efforts were re- markable and appreciated. Following presentation of the draft legislation, we were clear in seeking feedback. Since last May we've received a tremendous amount of feedback on the charter. For example, there were over 43,000 downloads from our website. Over 1,500 printed documents were distributed around British Columbia.

Extensive meetings and seminars with local govern- ments and other groups were held throughout the province. We also received submissions from business groups, associations, trade unions and individuals. These submissions, almost without exception, were thoughtful and thorough. We wanted to take them into account before moving forward with the new legisla- tion. I am well aware that some people questioned the extra time spent on the Community Charter. It's quite simple. The extra time spent working on the charter was for the best possible reason imaginable.

While we were committed to implementing the Community Charter in a timely fashion and remain steadfast to that commitment, we would have been remiss if we didn't take the constructive consultations and submissions of those months following the draft legislation into ac- count. We are building the best possible legislative framework for the future of local government, the fu- ture of our economy, the future of British Columbia and the future of the communities. As I discuss the Community Charter further, there is one important thing to keep in mind.

The Commu- nity Charter is the only local legislation in Canada — the only legislation across ten provinces and three terri- tories — that legislates the principle of municipal gov- ernance and municipal-provincial relations. Local gov- ernments have long spoken about their common desire to have a real say about the present and the future of their communities. With the Community Charter, mu- nicipalities will have the tools and that flexibility to better answer the needs of their citizens, taxpayers and businesses alike.

Municipalities will have the tools and flexibility to work with each other effectively to shape the future of their communities. As we enter this new relationship between the province and municipalities, barriers and restrictions, including some exceedingly petty barriers, are being removed. This is part of a new era, a new rapport be- tween governments and the recognition that innovative and solid local governments are key to revitalizing British Columbia. They are essential to the building of a strong local and provincial economy now and for the future.

To achieve these goals, the concise legislation of the Community Charter embodies three key elements of change: a new municipal and provincial relationship, enhanced autonomy and powers, and public account- ability. The first element of the Community Charter is a new era in provincial and local relations. The relation- ship is based on principles that are enshrined in the charter. Municipalities and their councils are recog- nized as an order of government within their jurisdic- tion.

In other words, the province commits to treating them as such. [1015] We know that British Columbia, its citizens, its businesses and its economy are best served when there is a mutual respect between the governments and autonomy of local governments. As part of this rela- tionship, the provincial government will not assign responsibilities to municipalities unless there is provi- sion for the resources required to fulfil that new re- sponsibility. For example, with this principle you will not see the downloading of responsibility for social service and social housing to municipalities, as hap- pened in Ontario.

As well, the Community Charter provides that the province will work to consult with local governments and the Union of British Columbia Municipalities on matters of mutual interest. This means that we will work with municipalities in the development of the economy of this province in areas like tourism, agricul- ture and forestry. Under the charter, we will consult with the UBCM before acts and regulations directly relevant to local governments are changed. We will not be arbitrary, and we will not be capricious. We understand the im- portance of local government as an order of govern- ment.

We will not change local government grants or the Community Charter without consulting with the UBCM. That is not to say that there won't ever be dis- agreements. As we all know, there are differences of opinions and viewpoints, and we recognize that dis- agreements or disputes may occur from time to time. This can happen between municipalities and other lo- cal governments or the provincial government. Traditionally disputes had the potential to escalate into adversarial situations, which were not the best use of time and were certainly detrimental to the taxpayer.

The Community Charter promotes alternative dispute resolutions, negotiation, mediation and arbitration — but only where necessary. The charter seeks the resolu- tion of difficulties without municipalities becoming adversaries. We believe that the local governments would willingly resolve disputes without waiting for a provincial decision or going to court, both of which are time-consuming and very expensive. We believe that

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6297 municipalities look forward to resolving matters over such things as intermunicipal highways and bridges without excessive, expensive wastes of time. The second key area of the Community Charter is the broader powers the municipalities will have to carry out their responsibilities and achieve their goals. It is hard to believe that traditionally municipalities were restricted in making decisions on such things as buying, holding and selling lands. They were limited in the contracts and settlements they could enter into.

They were restricted in how and what they could nego- tiate. They simply could not operate in the best inter- ests of the communities. In other words, they were restricted in carrying out functions that any other group or government could. Often municipalities had to go through a long and arduous process to get per- mission from the provincial government on matters of local concern. An obvious example is closing a munici- pal road. Now municipalities will have the power to regu- late, prohibit or impose requirements on local issues such as municipal services, trees and public nuisance issues.

Municipalities will be able to respond to new issues quickly, knowing they have the tools to take action, for example, to respond to graffiti, disturbances in public places or unsightly nuisances. With the Community Charter, municipalities have natural person powers. This legal term simply means that municipalities will have the power accorded to any citizen in British Columbia. Municipalities will have the power to enter into contracts, to make agree- ments, to delegate powers and to establish commis- sions.

For example, they can assign responsibility for day-to-day management of an animal regulation and control service to a commission, giving citizens more involvement and clearing the council agenda to deal with the big picture. [1020] I say, Mr. Speaker: why shouldn't municipalities have the choice to sell land to a particular buyer if that is in the interest of their community? Why shouldn't t h e y b e a b l e t o p u r s u e a f f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g o r r e c r e a - tional opportunities for their community? Why shouldn't they have the power to revitalize neighbour- hoods?

Municipalities can do these things today but only if they have the appropriate powers like the power to enter into agreements, be it with individuals, companies or organizations. Municipalities can provide municipal services for their communities if they have the freedom to do so. Municipal councils will decide which services they want to provide and how to provide those services. They can help ensure services are sustainable and help reduce pressure, thereby, on property taxes. Munici- palities will now have more ability to work together.

They can negotiate and enter into agreements with one another, seek opportunities where they can save tax- payers' money and cut red tape for businesses and or- ganizations. This will facilitate municipalities to work together — for example, to develop and implement a tourism strategy for an area. Municipalities can work together to establish ser- vices amongst themselves. For example, it will be eas- ier for one or more municipalities to jointly operate a fire department. With the Community Charter, local governments can create opportunities for their citizens, businesses and the community as a whole.

They will have the power to work with businesses in providing services. Streamlined procedures in the Community Charter allow for innovative public-private partner- ships. For example, municipalities can seek electors' approval early in the P3 process before lengthy and expensive negotiations take place. This will save time and taxpayers' dollars. These opportunities are about improving our economic climate and municipal infra- structure for the long term.

Victoria is a perfect exam- ple with the demolition of the Memorial Arena and development of a new multiplex — public land and financing through the Municipal Finance Authority combined with the private sector expertise in project management, operation and marketing. These factors combine to increase recreational opportunities for citi- zens in Victoria, enhance the city's cultural life and strengthen the regional economy. These opportunities are about the future. It is also important to keep in mind that the Community Charter is a balance — a balance of interests, a balance of pre- sent and future.

With the broad powers of the charter, we must remember there must be equilibrium in those areas that are both local and provincial in scope. The Community Charter spells out these areas of concur- rent authority — areas where local and provincial in- terests intersect. With concurrent authority, municipali- ties will have the powers they need to deal with local interests, while provincial interests or the public good is uncompromised — for example, public health and the protection of the environment and wildlife across jurisdictional lines.

They affect all of us and must be dealt with as appropriate, be it at the local or provincial level. Municipalities will have enhanced general powers. For example, they will be able to provide services out- side their municipality. Of course, these will go with the consent of the host jurisdiction. This allows mu- nicipalities to use their expertise in delivering services, like fire protection or water for neighbouring munici- palities or rural areas. They can also establish intermu- nicipal systems pertaining to licences or permits.

For example, municipalities in the greater Victoria area are already leading the way with a common business li- censing system that can be a model for other regions that wish to make regulations less onerous for busi- ness. There are also further specific powers in the Com- munity Charter. For example, municipalities can give the fire chief powers to evacuate public buildings and even close them if they are a fire hazard. Currently, only the fire commissioner has that authority. Munici- palities can deal with declared nuisances.

For example, municipalities will have a streamlined and effective process for dealing with dangerous structures. It is important to note that these broad powers answer the

6298 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 longstanding requests made by local government, while maintaining a respectful balance with the overall good of the province of British Columbia. [1025] The theme of balance continues in the Community Charter with public accountability. Municipalities now have enhanced autonomy, broad powers and a new relationship with the provincial government. But it is important to note that these new elements are com- plemented by the third element of the Community Charter — accountability. The Community Charter contains quite a number of provisions in this area that call on the public to take

part in local government. How do we do a move be- yond the outdated traditions in this area? How can a local government be more accountable to the public and community it serves? It begins with the principles in the Community Charter. Under those principles, municipalities are recognized as an order of govern- ment that is democratically elected, autonomous, re- sponsible and accountable. Under the charter, municipal governments must prepare and present an annual report. This annual re- port is one-stop shopping, as it were, for citizens and those interested in the finances and operation of the municipality.

The annual report requirements and the requisite public forum to present the report are at the heart of the charter's third element of accountability. In the annual report, items like audited financial state- ments are public information, along with reports on services and operations and the progress made on pre- viously set goals. The annual report also looks to the future, setting out objectives, the strategies for achieving those objec- tives and how progress will be determined. Just as im- portant as producing an annual report is public access to the report.

A public meeting is required at which the municipality presents its annual report. The public has the opportunity to ask questions of the council, and the public will also be able to provide submissions and feedback to council. The provision for an annual report, along with the objectives and measures and public involvement, is augmented by other provisions in the charter. The charter also outlines the alternative approval process, meaning that electors may require that certain pro- posed municipal decisions, such as a new multiplex or art gallery, be put to a vote prior to action by council.

A public vote is required if 10 percent or more of the elec- tors ask that one be held. Rounding out the accountability provisions are new ethical standards for elected municipal officials. Tradi- tionally, there have been restrictions on participating in council's decisions if the councillor is in conflict. The Community Charter goes further in defining ethical standards. There are restrictions on using elected office to influence decisions of a municipal officer, employee or delegate when the council member has a financial interest in the matter being decided upon.

It would not bar councillors from engaging in business but would restrict councillors from using their office to further their private business interests — for example, in a real estate development. Outside influence is also restricted to ensure that council members who have a financial interest in decision- making by another body or person do not use their office to influence that decision. For instance, the mayor of a municipality cannot influence the regional district board or administration to take actions that may favour the mayor's business.

There are restrictions on accepting gifts, fees or personal benefits connected with council members performing their duties in office. Benefits such as gifts received as part of protocol are to be disclosed. We are working to meet our new-era commitment of a community charter, but as mentioned earlier, this is not a process that happened overnight. Just as we wanted to ensure that this was a constructive process in cooperating and balancing the needs and requests of many different stakeholders, we must also acknowledge that implementation will not occur quickly, as it will take time for municipalities to adjust.

This type of innovative legislation simply does not happen in a vacuum, and it cannot be enacted as such either. There are many people involved — many com- munities and many factors — thus there will be an im- plementation period before the charter takes effect. This is to ensure that municipalities and others inter- ested in the charter and its new way of doing business are brought up to speed on the new provisions. Mu- nicipalities, in particular, must have this time to pre- pare for and institute these changes effectively and efficiently both for themselves and also for their con- stituents and their citizens.

During this time, ministry staff will be distributing detailed information on the many aspects of the Com- munity Charter. The ministry will be preparing com- prehensive information material, which will be mounted on the website. We know that small commu- nities will need special attention, and we will be re- sponding by placing special emphasis on small com- munities and the Community Charter.

We will be meeting and working with local gov- ernments to ensure this is as smooth a transition as absolutely possible. [1030] With these education and implementation processes in place, the Community Charter will come into effect on January 1, 2004. As well, there will be legislation to make all the necessary consequential amendments that arise from the Community Charter and to ensure that there is a smooth transition between the current rules for municipalities and the new authorities under the char- ter. We're also looking forward to the next phase of the charter.

The first phase presented today will, in time, expand to include regional district and land use issues. The municipal legislation presented today balances our commitment to the charter while working towards balancing and resolving complex issues such as re- gional district and land use in the latter phase. I would like to reiterate some points discussed today. We are

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6299 committed to the Community Charter, as it answers local government's longstanding priorities to have a principled basis for the treatment as an order of gov- ernment. This municipal legislation is unique in Can- ada in that regard. Today we are successful in meeting the challenges issued over a decade ago by Premier Campbell and his UBCM colleagues and their subsequent work to build relations between the province and local government based on respect and increased empowerment of local government.

The Community Charter builds upon the draft legislation and input we have received over the last number of months from local governments, from business sectors, from labour groups, communities and individuals. From the beginning we have worked with the UBCM and other stakeholders. Their input has been invaluable, as has the work of the Community Charter Council. The Community Charter is concise legislation bal- ancing broad municipal abilities and increased public accountability while protecting provincewide stan- dards in key areas like the environment and public health.

Local governments will have more autonomy to make decisions, and to make those decisions they will have the appropriate tools to efficiently and effectively deliver municipal services for their communities, bene- fiting local government, communities and taxpayers. Strong, innovative local governments are key to Brit- ish Columbia's growth and well-being, both economi- cally and socially. With the charter, local governments can promote economic development, pursue opportuni- ties for infrastructure and answer the need of the com- munities and citizens to better prepare for the future.

No longer are municipalities hamstrung by narrow legisla- tion that does not take their individual local situations into account. No longer do local city halls have to go to Victoria for decisions on simple local matters. Munici- palities will handle local matters without involving an- other level of government, saving time and money. With the charter, procedures will be simplified, allowing councils, business, industry and citizens to work to- gether in a timely fashion.

Opportunities to harmonize regulations — for example, common licensing proce- dures — and the ability to work together amongst mu- nicipalities will again save time and money. There will be opportunities to improve municipal infrastructure and to improve the economic climate. Red tape will be reduced, public accountability and responsible man- agement of tax dollars will be enhanced, and innovation will be rewarded. In short, municipalities can be respon- sible and proactive. They are now active participants in shaping the destiny of our province.

Enshrined in the legislation discussed today are principles of local decision-making and accountability. The Community Charter balances broad municipal abilities with increased public accountability. Indi- viduals and organizations will have a chance to voice their concerns. They can step up to the plate and be an active partner with local government. The public will have more opportunities to hear presentations from municipal councils, check the books and consult on the matters that are important to them. But as already said, the work continues.

The charter will expand to work with regional districts in the next phase. Consultations and discussions will be integral to the next phase of the charter. [1035] British Columbia is a large and diverse province. Our communities reflect the diversity from large urban to small rural and everything in between. Municipali- ties and the provincial government have long recog- nized that one-size-fits-all solutions do not work, eco- nomically or socially. Strong, innovative local govern- ments are key to a solid economic base for all our communities and the province as a whole.

The Community Charter is the means to those goals. The Community Charter is an integral part of our new-era commitment. The Community Charter is a key to strong and innovative governments, both locally and provincially. I ask all members to lend their sup- port to this important piece of legislation. B. Lekstrom: It's certainly a pleasure today to stand in this Legislature and pass my support for Bill 14, the new Community Charter. This Community Charter has been a long time in the making. It has evolved for many years.

I have a history in local municipal government, at which time — o n c e y o u ' r e e l e c t e d — you go in and start to learn the ins and inner workings of your job as an elected politician at the local level. One of those jobs is to take the Municipal Act, as it was in the day when I was first elected, and learn what your abilities are and what your responsibilities are. That progressed through the years to a Local Government Act, and through that work — an initiative of our Premier and the minister for the Community Charter — we have evolved today to a document that I think is an excellent document.

It is going to allow our municipal governments across this province to deliver on the services and commit- ments they make to the people that have elected them. Simply, what this is about is allowing local gov- ernment to do the job they were elected to do without having the provincial government in their way. People put their trust in the people that they elect at the local level. Many people put their names forward to run for office because they believe they have something to of- fer their communities. They have the ability and the time, and certainly they have the heart to make their community a better place.

Many times, with all the best intentions, they were stifled due to a regulatory regime through the old Municipal Act, which was a permissive piece of legislation that really made it very difficult in some cases to initiate new initiatives for the municipali- ties and new services that would deliver and increase the quality of lifestyle. So it's certainly a privilege, as I indicated earlier, and I think this is a very important day for British Co- lumbians — for the people.

I've had many discussions w i t h m a n y o f m y c o l l e a g u e s o v e r t h e y e a r s a n d c e r - tainly now that I hold this position on this document, and many are very excited about the opportunity to be

6300 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 able to deliver and drive the services in their communi- ties without having to go through the red tape and the problems we've seen in the past. The accountability issue. This is truly a banner day. Many people talk about the importance of accountabil- ity — whether it's local government, provincial gov- ernment or federal government — and what those gov- ernment regimes should be doing for the people and, when they do something, how they should report out.

The minister spoke on the issue of our reports that will be put forward by municipal councils each year on w h a t t h e y ' v e d o n e a n d w h a t t h e y p l a n o n d o i n g . I t ' s taken place to a degree, but this really broadens that. I think anytime you can improve on a piece of legisla- tion, that's the job of every government, and that should be their mandate. The local government consultation process was extensive. The Union of British Columbia Municipali- ties, which represents all local governments in the province of British Columbia, was extensively involved in this consultation.

I would like to thank them and my former colleagues for the work they've put into it. This isn't a new concept, putting a piece of legislation to- gether and enhancing the old legislation to really allow people to do the job. It's quite simply that simple. It's about allowing our local elected officials at the munici- pal level to do the job unencumbered, to allow them to deliver on what they have committed to delivering and do it within the bounds of this piece of legislation, which makes it much easier. It doesn't make a local council less accountable to the people. I want that to be very clear.

That's a very important part. M a n y p e o p l e , w h e n t h e y l o o k a t s t r e a m l i n i n g o r elimination of red tape, think it's going to jeopardize another portion. What this does is tell the people of British Columbia, from our government, that you put your trust in the people you elected as local govern- ment representatives. You've cast your ballot. They've won a democratic election, and now we're going to let them govern your municipality as they wish under the guise of this piece of legislation within the laws of Brit- ish Columbia.

We're going to step back and quit telling them, on every single thing, what they have to do and how they have to do it. They are the people who were elected. They are the people that the people have put their trust in, in their local governments, to deal with this issue. [1040] A very important part of what we do in British Co- lumbia is the recognition of local government as a level of government. It's vitally important, and far too often I think that was overlooked. We used to elect councils.

We used to elect regional districts, and never did it seem that they were a recognized level of government at the provincial or federal levels. That was always, always a problem. Not to be recognized as — what I consider and as the minister pointed out earlier — the closest form of government to the people in British Columbia was certainly a challenge. That was changed. We have built on that, and we continue to build on it through the Community Charter. I want to go back to the issue of autonomy.

When we elect — whether it's provincial governments or fed- eral governments, and in this case we're talking about municipal governments…. They need the autonomy to do the job they think will best suit the services needed in their municipalities. One-size-fits-all doesn't work. It's been shown time and time again in our province that what one municipality needs to deliver for services may not be what the next one needs.

The document before us today, Bill 14, allows the flexibility for coun- cils to work cooperatively with each other and, in cases, deliver individual services that they feel are needed within their municipal boundaries. We talk about roads; we talk about water; we talk about sewer. It's quite interesting. We have had some discussion over the last number of months and some concerns expressed as to what this charter really means. I've had a couple of people talk about…. They have raised a concern, saying it gives a lot of power to the local councils. Certainly it does, and I'm proud of that.

These are people that were elected by the people of their munici- palities to deliver. People run on a platform — all councils, whether it be for the position of mayor or councillor. They run, and they deliver a program that they think will improve quality of life. That's really what government is all about at any level. The issue here, when we talk — and I'll go back to the account- ability framework — is very clear.

I'm proud that we have a document before us today that is going to allow our local governments to deliver on their commitments and to deliver in a timely fashion — one that isn't going to be held up through red tape. The commitment by the minister — and his dedica- tion to this and the Premier's dedication to the devel- opment of the Community Charter — i s o n e t h a t I commend, and I thank them for the effort that they've put in. I thank all British Columbians who took the time to evaluate the discussion paper on the Commu- nity Charter.

Particularly, again, I will point out my thanks to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities who, I think, do a tremendous job in representing all of the communities and regional districts across this prov- ince. With that, simply put, this is about allowing local governments to do the job they were elected to do and to do it in a fashion that will meet the needs of their residents. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to what I think is a landmark day in British Columbia with Bill 14. B. Bennett: Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of Bill 14.

I personally intend to vote in fa- vour of the bill and am pleased to be part of a govern- ment that keeps its commitments. This was one of our commitments that we made in our New Era document going into the last election. [1045] Bill 14, the Community Charter, is a positive re- sponse to a number of requests over the years from municipal governments across the province. They needed more flexibility to operate and to service the

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6301 people to whom they are accountable. In that sense, this is a very positive statute. I've been lucky to be part of a government that, in addition to keeping its commitments, allows its mem- bers to express themselves freely. Today I'm going to take advantage of this opportunity and express one concern that I do have about this statute — despite the fact that I do intend to support it and vote for it, and think that generally it is long overdue and an excellent piece of legislation.

I do think that the business community in this prov- ince has expressed some legitimate concerns about the legislation — particularly, I think, with respect to what they would refer to as the commensurate accountability that is required to balance the additional powers and dis- cretion given to municipal governments. It remains to be seen, and I guess only time will tell as to what real impact that flaw — if it is a flaw, in fact — will have. In any case, I think that as an MLA, having spent a lot of time in small business myself and having been involved with the B.C.

Chamber of Commerce for a number of years, I have to express this point of view. Many small business owners in British Columbia don't have the resources to go to court if a municipal government decides to do something that hurts their business. They really won't have much by way of prac- tical recourse if this wider discretion that municipal governments have is abused. That is the concern that I think small business has, and that's the concern I'm trying to echo here in the House this morning.

I should also balance my comments by saying I'm aware that there are many, many municipal leaders, mayors and civic officials who are quite pleased about the provincial government's introduction of the new Community Charter. I think that the implementation of the charter will tell the tale. It has tremendous potential to be positive in the province. I understand that there will be a second stage. Per- haps in the second stage the concern I've just expressed that small business in the province has about the legis- lation can be addressed. Certainly, I want to offer my support.

I want to offer my time and my own personal resources to the minister and to the government on that second stage to try and close the circle that we perhaps left a little bit open with this first stage. Having said that and having discharged what I think is my obligation as an MLA in this government and representing my constituents, I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity. Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt: I rise in support of what I believe is revolutionary and groundbreaking legis- lation this morning.

I congratulate the Minister of State for Community Charter for his work and the ministry staff and local governments around British Columbia for their contribution to this landmark legislation. Why would I call this legislation revolutionary and groundbreaking? It's because, for the first time, it estab- lishes communities around British Columbia as an or- der of government with clear, independent powers. They are no longer the children of the province. As members know, under the Canadian constitution there are only two orders of government in Canada — the federal and the provincial.

This bill does all we can under our legislative powers to establish municipalities as an autonomous order of government. Cities date back to

an act of 1849 in Canada when they were limited to looking after pigs on streets — and, more importantly, trying to keep them off the streets — and controlling drunkenness and the keeping of bawdy houses. Under the British North America Act of 1867, which united four colonies into Canada, the responsibility of cities was left the same as in 1849, but they were transferred to fall under the dominion of the provinces. They were called creatures of the provinces and could only exercise those powers that provincial governments gave to them.

One hundred and fifty years ago only a small per- centage of Canadians lived in cities. Today it is the reverse. Today over half of Canada's population lives in cities of over 100,000 residents, and when you con- sider all Canadians living in organized municipalities, the percentage is over 90. Cities today look after child care.

They look after housing, sewage and water treat- ment, community centres, the environment and a host of other functions that were not even contemplated in 1867, but the constitutional status remains the same. [1050] Incrementally, provinces across Canada have added new responsibilities to cities and towns through continuous amendments to local government legisla- tion. When I was first elected to local government in 1981, we operated under the Municipal Act, which had hundreds of sections and hundreds of — and I do say over 1,000 — pages.

It was overly prescriptive on what municipalities could do and could not do. The lan- guage was equally obtuse and out of date. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of the Premier in starting the process of greater independence and responsibility for local government. When the Premier was mayor of Vancouver in the early nineties, he was instrumental in creating a document called the local government bill of rights. I remember it well, as I was mayor of Richmond at the time and supported its concept and content.

When the Premier became Leader of the Opposition, he introduced a private member's bill entitled Community Charter, which again endeav- oured to empower municipalities to carry out their responsibilities as an order of government. Bill 14, the Community Charter, establishes cities, towns and villages across our province as an order of government and gives them natural person powers. Previously, they had corporate powers that were spelled out in detail in the Municipal Act and, more recently, the Local Government Act.

Natural person powers mean that municipalities have the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person rather than a list of corporate powers. The effect of this change means that local governments will have a wider range of powers more reflective of the responsibilities of democratically elected bodies.

6302 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 In addition, the legislation sets out for the first time the principles that will govern municipal-provincial relations. These principles address the relationship between both levels of government; acknowledge and respect the jurisdiction of each; work towards har- monization of laws, policies and programs; and foster cooperative approaches to matters of national interest. In particular, the provincial government will not assign responsibilities to municipalities unless there is provi- sion for resources to fulfil those responsibilities.

In other words, there will be no more downloading. I want to give a couple of examples. Formerly, all roads in a municipality belonged to the province. Of course, the construction and maintenance of those roads was the responsibility of the municipality, but the underlying property was owned by the province in lieu of the Crown. Now these roads are to be owned by municipalities. Road closures will not have to be ap- proved by Victoria. Unused road allowances can be used by municipalities for housing, parks or other ap- propriate uses. No permission is needed from the prov- ince, and no compensation is paid.

An example I would like to reflect on is one in an area of Richmond we call Steveston, which had a num- ber of unopened road allowances. At the time, the city wanted to put in a non-market housing project on those particular properties. There was considerable difficulty in pursuing the closure of those roads, but the province and the city and B.C. Housing came to- gether to eventually put in a non-profit housing project that today under this legislation would be much quicker and much more simplified. A second example.

Formerly, as we know, all parks dedicated as part of a subdivision required provincial approval to be used for something else. Now, if such land is not suitable for park use and the municipality has identified a better community use for it, the elec- tors of that municipality are the only ones that need to consent to the change. A final example. Fine ticket amounts for fines will n o l o n g e r h a v e t o b e a p p r o v e d b y a P r o v i n c i a l C o u r t judge. Formerly, before any bylaw could come into effect that contained fine amounts for non-compliance, a provincial judge had to approve them.

The munici- pality did all the administration, the ticketing, the en- forcement and the prosecution, and the fines often bore no relation to the seriousness of the offence. Now, at least, the municipality can establish the amounts and defend them in court if necessary. [1055] Part of the trade-off in giving municipalities more autonomy is that in return, they are more accountable to their citizens. I believe the Community Charter fairly sets out a balanced reporting mechanism to work to- ward that accountability. Today municipalities must have an annual budget and a five-year capital plan. This is a start.

This new legislation requires an annual report that not only includes the audited financial statement but also must include which properties were previously tax-exempt and what the cost of a munici- pality is as a result of that, a report respecting city ser- vices and operations for the past year and a progress report on those services and operations, and a state- ment of municipal objectives and the measures that will be used to determine progress respecting those objectives for the current and the next year. Today measuring council's progress on what they said they were going to do is very difficult.

With a mix- ture of political parties and individuals at the local level, with many different viewpoints, measurement is most difficult. Now, in an annual report that must be approved by a majority of council at least, the public will have a clear idea of what the objectives are of vari- ous municipal departments and the municipality as a whole. The public can ask questions of the council and hold them accountable as to progress. Usually when you get a new job or an assignment, there is a job description or terms of reference to go with it. That has not been the case for elected councillors and mayors.

You went to seminars for newly elected people, and I would certainly like to acknowledge the hard work of the Union of B.C. Municipalities for put- ting on these seminars every three years for newly elected people in local government, both in municipali- ties and in regional districts. You learn from that, or you learn from council members who have perhaps served longer and look to them for guidance. This new charter actually sets down what the roles and responsibilities of elected officials are. When I was mayor, I was the chief executive officer of the city.

I could appoint committees, chair council meetings and declare an emergency, and that was about it. Other duties you carved out for yourself as you met the needs of your community and established a working relation- ship with staff and the rest of council. Now the mayor, as spelled out in the legislation, must provide leader- ship to council, recommend resolutions and bylaws, communicate information to council, give general di- rection on behalf of council to municipal officers and reflect the will of council. The last two points particu- larly are going to prove interesting for many mayors in British Columbia.

Giving direction to staff and direc- tion for the community generally must reflect the will of council. This may create a healthy dynamic tension — on the one hand, to constrain the individualistic tendencies of many mayors and, at the same time, to have the power of council support behind their actions. Clarity in the charter around gifts, insider informa- tion and disclosure is helpful, as local elected officials previously had to rely on shifting legal opinions.

The ability to hold special meetings electronically, audio- visually or just audio, or to bring an absent council member in through electronic means is a great step forward. Definite guidelines for closed council meet- ings, the ability to have staff or a person other than staff attend a closed meeting and the ability to have a closed workshop or a shirtsleeve session for the pur- poses of council planning are all valuable clarifications to allow municipalities to work better. T h e l a s t a r e a t h a t I w o u l d l i k e t o c o m m e n t o n i s

part 9, intituled "Governmental Relations." This whole

part is new legislation and is the first of its kind, I un-

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6303 derstand, in Canada. I know our local government col- leagues will welcome for the first time a legislative commitment that there must be — and I underline that there must be — consultation with the UBCM before the amount of revenue transfers are reduced or an amendment is made to this legislation that affects mu- nicipalities. This charter spells out how extensive the consultation must be and that all reasonable efforts will be made to reach agreement if differences arise.

The legislation outlines a dispute resolution process to be followed if a difference arises between a munici- pality and another municipality, the province or a pro- vincial government corporation. This is the first time that a province has been bound to a process to settle a difference with local government — truly ground- breaking in Canada. [1100] [J. Weisbeck in the chair.] In conclusion, I had the opportunity to explore a dispute resolution process when I was chair of the greater Vancouver regional district and mayor of Richmond.

There was a difference of opinion between Richmond and the GVRD on the growth management plan — a disagreement between two different govern- ments. Although we only went a little way along the process before it was settled, I felt that the process cho- sen was indeed fair. Nothing as daunting as binding arbitration works as quickly and as efficiently to prod two parties to agree. Now a dispute resolution process is extended to municipalities, the provincial govern- ment and provincial corporations.

I would like to again congratulate the Minister of State for Community Charter for bringing this legisla- tion forward and to thank all locally elected officials and their staff for their ideas and help. I know all local governments across the province welcome the changes it holds. We eagerly await

part 2, dealing with elec- tions, land use and regional districts. Hon. S. Santori: I want to take this opportunity, f i r s t o f a l l , t o c o m m e n d t h e m i n i s t e r o n b r i n g i n g f o r - ward something historical with respect to municipal governments in British Columbia and something that has been long overdue. As a former mayor of a com- munity and having spent 13 years in local government, I welcome this change. I welcome the opportunities this is going to provide to municipalities. I want to comment, first of all, on the process.

I be- lieve this was a process that was very inclusive, and it gave municipalities and stakeholders throughout the province a good opportunity to look at what the char- ter was attempting to achieve. I believe that the minis- ter and his staff were very receptive and inviting in terms of suggestions on how we could improve this revolutionary change in how municipal governments work. I want to commend the minister for the inclusion of all stakeholders in developing what I believe will be a charter that will serve municipalities.

I think that for the first time, municipal governments will be recog- nized in terms of the value that they bring forth to their communities. For the first time, it is an appreciation that local governments and the people that live in those local communities know what is best for their commu- nities and do not need a prescriptive act similar to the Municipal Act that was there before. I think that on many occasions the Municipal Act stifled creativity. It did not allow communities and those elected officials who were trying to make deci- sions and changes in the best interests of their commu- nities….

It would not be conducive to allowing them to exercise their creativity. The new charter recognizes, as was said by my other colleagues, that one-size-fits-all, especially in

an act so onerous as the Municipal Act, can work for each and every community. Each community within this province is distinct and does have different challenges, and most have different approaches on how they want to deal with the challenges. The charters will open up the doors to creativity and the opportunity to think outside the box and to make decisions that will truly reflect the wishes of the community and to do what is in the best interest of the community.

The member for East Kootenay made reference to some concerns regarding the businesses in the province and some of the issues or concerns they may have with respect to the charter. Let me say that I have the utmost confidence in the elected officials of this province in the municipal levels of government. They, too, like this government, are dedicated to creating a friendly busi- ness environment in this province, and they will not prove to be a hindrance to the business community.

As a matter of fact, I believe that municipalities will go out of their way to work with government to achieve the goals we have set in terms of involving the private sec- tor and strengthening the private sector in this prov- ince to meet head-on the economic challenges we have and to achieve economic prosperity in the future.

I remain extremely confident that this new charter will, in fact, enable citizens to have more input, to re- quest and demand more accountability of elected offi- cials who have taken on a tremendous responsibility in governing their local communities and in taking steps and processes that will ensure the prosperity of these communities. [1105] In conclusion, I'm looking forward to the minister coming forward with the charter as it relates to re- gional districts, as I do believe that in the past we have seen some separation or some lack of clarity between the roles of the two governments, sometimes with con- flicting mandates — something that has not always been in the best interests of governing our municipal communities.

I'm hoping the charter that will come forward with respect to the regional districts will add clarity to the mandates of those bodies so that we can best serve the people of the communities of this prov- ince. My final note, once again, is that I want to express congratulations to the minister and commend him for

6304 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 the consultation process that was undertaken with all municipalities in the province through the UBCM and all of the stakeholders. I remain extremely confident that we have put in place now a charter that will allow communities to move forward and do what's in the best interests of those people who elected them in their positions. B. Suffredine: I'm surprised that the Minister of M a n a g e m e n t S e r v i c e s c o u l d b e s o b r i e f o n t h i s o c c a - sion.

He had difficulty being that brief on the weekend when he was at the Association of Kootenay and Boundary Municipalities. There he waxed on elo- quently for quite a while over municipal issues, and I was surprised he could contain his excitement on the Community Charter. As you're aware, Mr. Speaker, for many, many years what is now going to be called the Community Charter was titled the Municipal Act. It's a massive piece of legislation that even people who have dealt with it for years have difficulty finding their place in. I think it's over 800, close to 900 sections.

I was the city solicitor for the city of Nelson for most of a decade, and there were things within the Municipal Act that were absolutely confounding both to the municipalities and to others. Things had crept into it like the two-month notice

section that made it so that if you wanted to sue a mu- nicipality for negligence you had to know, as an aver- age citizen, to give a written notice within two months or potentially lose the right to be compensated for damage caused to you by something as simple as an auto accident. It created some very great inequities. For example, if you were in a car accident with anyone else on the street, you had two years to bring your suit against them, but if you were in a car accident with a municipal employee driving a municipal vehicle, you had two months and then six months to commence your proceedings.

There were some great inequities that existed in the former municipal legislation. As well, of course, the municipal councils were relegated to simply a power of taxation on land. They had great difficulties in trying to find ways to bring initiatives like tourism development — trying to pro- mote their cities for tourism projects — and no ability, for example, to put a simple thing like a room tax on a hotel at 25 cents a night or something like that. The idea of expanding the ways in which munici- palities can find sources of revenues….

The promise, at some stage, to do traffic-fine sharing rather than a grant in lieu of traffic fines is a positive thing that will, I think, enable those councils to feel empowered. One o f t h e t h i n g s t h a t I f i n d , a s I g o a r o u n d m y r i d i n g , i s that in almost every area people feel that they have no choice in how things are done. They've simply been told how they're going to be done for years and years. [1110] The example given previously in debate of the abil- ity to close streets and roads. Now, that's a remarkable example of a place where what existed before made no sense.

The streets and roads within a municipality are of no interest to the province of British Columbia, but title was vested in the province under the way the leg- islation worked, and the procedure required was ex- tremely restrictive and complex. It requires an order- in-council to close a street. In my community of Nelson some of those streets are so steep that they're hard to walk down, never mind drive down. They're not buildable, and they never were, but on the survey plan they show up as a street.

So if a neighbouring owner decided that they'd like to buy that piece of property and use it for some- thing for which it would be practical — make a garden out of it or something — the city council had to go through an extremely expensive process resulting in an order-in-council made by the Lieutenant-Governor in Victoria that usually took six months to a year, in my experience as a solicitor, and cost the applicant and the city a lot of money.

What that alone will do is enable cities to use what is useless to them as roads, to turn it into a cash flow so that they can actually create some revenues for the city taxpayers and use the land in a productive way. It's a win-win for them, and it's some- thing that just didn't need to be done in the way it was being done. Now, there are still some concerns from municipal councillors about what's coming, and that's a natural part of change, a natural consequence. I don't want to be critical; I'm not being critical.

I'm sure there will be some adjustments to the act in the fullness of time as we see how things work and how we can improve them to make them even better than what's proposed. For those who have some concerns about what they see…. You know, change is always uncertain. I think I heard quoted the other day that Mark Twain said that everyone wants progress, but no one likes change, and you just have to have both. Perhaps there are even more sources of revenue that can be found and shared with municipalities.

I know that it's not in the charter, but there may even be some consideration of royalty revenues for things like district municipalities that would at least be worth looking at. It's all about empowering those municipali- ties. It's all about making them feel that they manage the affairs that are relevant to citizens within those communities. This is the most dramatic change that has been done in municipal law for, from my experience, proba- bly four or five decades. I congratulate the minister for bringing this forward. It's a brave step.

I know he'll have lots of work to do as it rolls out and as people start to see how everything is working and where it can be improved. S. Orr: I wanted to stand up and give my support for this for two reasons. I spent many years, as a lot of us in this chamber did, sitting at a council table. I was an elected municipal councillor for two terms. When I was in that position, I remember thinking many times: "Now, hang on a minute. I am the grassroots politician. I'm the person that's making the decisions on the ground. I'm the person that on a day-to-day basis

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6305 meets with the constituents of…." At that point it was Saanich. I often used to feel that I had this huge responsibil- ity on my shoulders, and yet I didn't have the auton- omy that I felt I should have had. It seemed a continual grapple back and forth between the municipalities and the legislation coming down from government.

I can't tell you how important this is not only for the citizens of the municipalities but for the councils and the mayors and various other governing bodies around a municipality, let alone staff, who I know would spend so much time making sure that every- thing was working back and forth with government. The Community Charter is the best tool that has been designed and brought forward to municipalities — ever. I thank the minister for taking the incredible amount of time that he and his staff did not only in putting the Community Charter together….

I know that it took a long time, and I know they kept going back and forth and making sure that they had a ton of input. Again, as a municipal councillor at the grassroots level, input from the community was what we dealt with every week — two, three times a week. What the minister did with the Community Charter…. He did the same thing at the provincial level. He took this piece of legislation, and he worked with the people who work at the grassroots level and made sure that it fit what the municipalities were looking for. [1115] Now I'm wearing this other hat.

I still spend a great chunk of my life with the other hat on at the council level. I just think that finally you can sit there and you can make decisions right there in your own municipal- ity. The fact that we have been given the autonomy and accountability, and that local governments have wel- comed this, is so very important. A lot has been said and a lot more will be said this morning, and I wasn't actually going to stand up and speak, but I felt this was so important.

Again, relating it back to my former life, it would almost make you be interested in running for a municipal seat again, be- cause finally you could do something at a much more local level and feel you have the power you should have. So I want to say that I'm in huge support of this. I want to thank the minister and his staff for all the work they have done in putting this forward. I support this 100 percent, and I think the municipal councillors will find their lives one heck of a lot easier with this piece of legislation. J.

Les: I, too, want to take my place this morning and make a few comments with respect to the pro- posed Community Charter. It has been quite some time in the making, but I think appropriately so. This is very fundamentally important legislation that not only talks about the relationship between the provincial govern- ment and municipal governments in British Columbia but also gives municipal governments the tools to be more appropriately accountable to their electorates.

Like many members in this House, I spent a con- siderable number of years on municipal councils — 16 in total, 13 of those as mayor of the community of Chilliwack. Those were very good years, I must say. I enjoyed every minute of my municipal political career. But, as in many things we do in life, there were some aspects of it I found frustrating from time to time. Those frustrations usually had to do with the fact that there were an awful lot of times you had to go back to Victoria to get approval for, sometimes, the most basic of municipal matters.

Many of these things will now be streamlined and put into the context of regular mu- nicipal approvals within a municipal administration. That is as it should be. Municipal councils are elected throughout British Columbia, and in the ensuing three years they expect to be accountable to the people who elected them. We have hundreds and hundreds of councillors, mayors and regional district directors who are elected every three years across British Columbia. These people run in the first place, because they are interested in their communities.

They want to contribute to their commu- nities only to find, in years gone by, that they were often handcuffed when they wanted to think outside the box or become creative, or when they found that what worked in Vancouver didn't necessarily work in Chilliwack or that what worked in Chilliwack didn't necessarily work in Vanderhoof. I can draw all kinds of analogies like that. This is going to bring creativity to the forefront in municipal government in British Columbia. It's going to highlight best practices.

It is going to more readily en- able municipalities to develop best practices, to think outside the box, to be more accountable and more pro- ductive on behalf of the ratepayers in their communities. One thing that is particularly important in this pro- posed legislation is the granting of the powers of the natural person to municipalities. This might seem like dry legal minutiae, but it is in fact a very important step forward in terms of municipal powers, and where that really comes to the forefront is in the development of public-private partnerships.

As a provincial government, we encourage the in- volvement of the private sector in the delivery of public services. More often than not — I would say almost 100 percent of the time — that results in savings to taxpay- ers and, at the same time, the provision of better levels of service.

We have many examples all over this prov- ince and certainly in the community of which I was formerly a mayor, where that in fact has been the case. [1120] The archaic rules, though, that were set out in the Municipal Act made it sometimes virtually impossible for communities to intelligently structure a public- private partnership. Frankly, that still is the case today, and I have a current example. The city of Chilliwack is currently in the final stages of putting a package together whereby, through a public-private partnership, a new hockey arena is going to be built for the community.

At a very late stage, after the counterpetition process which is

6306 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 currently required, a positive development occurred, and that is this. A gentleman by the name of Pat Quinn, who some might recognize as the coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs, has decided to become an investor in this project. That has resulted in this project becoming a better bet in terms of financing. When they go to the financial markets, the involvement of Pat Quinn means that they've been able to achieve a better interest rate.

One would think, normally, that that would simply involve an amendment to the agreement and that — because the electors of the city of Chilliwack had al- ready had an opportunity through the counterpetition process to express their opinion, and given that only two people had registered any contrary opinion — no further process would be required. What is the case, in fact, is that the entire project has to go back through the counterpetition process in order for this very positive development to be put together with the addition of one additional investor.

That is the ridiculous extent to which the current act puts municipalities through some very convoluted procedures and acts as a disincentive to often a better way of doing business. I am and always have been a real proponent of public-private partnerships. I think we can deliver far greater value to the taxpaying public for the taxes that they send to Victoria, which they send to their respec- tive city halls. This municipal charter will be a huge step forward in enabling communities around British Columbia to take advantage of those business ar- rangements that deliver services to their electorates.

There's been a lot of work that has gone into devel- oping this Community Charter, and I want to com- mend the minister and his staff and the various advis- ers that have worked with the minister. I know that some of the people that have worked with the minister, who I've known in years gone by, I guess now sit in the municipal senate. He has very appropriately tapped into those resources to garner their expertise and their insight. I know that collectively we've worked very closely with the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

That's been a lengthy and laborious process but a necessary process, because we are dealing with roughly 180 mu- nicipal governments across British Columbia. Again, what works for some doesn't necessarily work for the rest, and vice versa. I want to comment for a minute, as well, about this notion of expanding sources of revenue. I think, in the first instance, what is important here is that municipali- ties have an opportunity to do a better job with the revenue they have — hence my emphasis on public- private partnerships.

The expanded sources of revenue debate sounds, to members of the public who listen to these debates, like another excuse for a level of gov- ernment to invent ways to extract more taxes from them. I don't think, in the first instance, that that is what this is about. This is about doing more, doing better, being more accountable with the tax revenues that are already collected. I think that is an important distinction.

I know there will be a future phase of this project that will embark on an examination of other sources of revenue that should be made available to municipali- ties, but I think we need to do that very, very cau- tiously. We need to allow the act as we now have it to really take its place in the public life of British Colum- bia and in the workings of municipal government to fully demonstrate the advantages that are available in this legislation before we go into other areas of invent- ing new ways to broaden the tax take that comes from British Columbians. [1125] With that, Mr.

Speaker, thank you for making time available this morning for this debate. I'm interested to see what my other colleagues have to say, and I'm looking forward, as I'm sure many city councils are across British Columbia, to seeing the bringing of this act into fruition in the months ahead. W. McMahon: It's a pleasure today to participate in second reading of Bill 14, the Community Charter. It has certainly been a long time in the process, and rightfully so. It has been a huge undertaking.

There is no doubt, as I look at the Community Charter and the possibilities, that I have to recognize the Kootenays, the area I repre- sent, and what it will do for our communities. The Kootenays are opening up to economic devel- opment. We can look at the Cranbrook Airport expan- sion or the road improvements to Kicking Horse Can- yon and the announcement last week of $1.85 million for the Boundary roads or the Brilliant Dam expansion.

Those are all economic opportunities — huge opportu- nities — for the area, and I know that local govern- ments want to be part of this process of leading in de- veloping the economic opportunities for their commu- nities. The Community Charter, I know, will allow them to do this. It is a historic document. It will give local governments the tools they've wanted to be able to do what's best for their communities.

There is discussion around the province about the B.C. resorts strategy that the Premier spoke about in his state-of-the-province address, and I believe there are huge opportunities for us and for the communities in British Columbia to take advantage of the discussion. Look at what Whistler became because the local gov- ernment there had the tools under their own charter to move forward. The Community Charter will allow other governments in other regions of British Columbia to do something similar and become their own entities and manage their own futures. There is autonomy and accountability under this charter.

This past weekend I attended the Association of Kootenay and Boundary Municipalities AGM, and as I walked around and talked to various mayors and councillors and staff, what I heard there is that Bill 14 is great. I think they're looking to the future. Of course, with change there's always uncertainty, and they're looking to see where that will take them, and I know we will be able to fine-tune the issues within the char- ter that people maybe come forward with, which aren't quite what we thought they might be. I believe that the new Community Charter is the best tool we've ever had. I want to thank the minister

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6307 and his staff for their commitment and their work on this very long process and to let him know he has my support as we move forward. H. Bloy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportu- nity to speak today to the second reading of Bill 14, the Community Charter. It's been a privilege to run and to serve the people of British Columbia in my riding of Burquitlam. Unlike a number of my colleagues, I've never served at the city level before, but I've been very involved in my city and in the community.

A majority of city councillors and mayors run for the benefit of their citizens. They're prepared to discuss matters in an open manner. They're prepared to go forward. They're prepared to offer positive suggestions on what they should do in their city and for the provincial government. Then we have the sad fact that there are some mayors and coun- cillors that run only to refight past elections. They can't let go. They don't know how to govern.

They only know how to complain, and I feel that this is a terrible situation. [1130] The minister has put so much work into this legisla- tion, and I believe that it's truly beneficial and that he should be commended for all the hard work he has done on behalf of all British Columbians. What is the Community Charter? It's about being open and accountable. The Community Charter sets out a new relationship between the provincial govern- ment and local governments. It will provide greater autonomy to municipalities, more accountability and better services to local taxpayers.

The Community Charter enacts the most empower- ing local government legislation in Canada. It goes further than any provincial legislation in recognizing municipalities as an order of government. The legisla- tion moves provincial authority in areas of local inter- est to where it belongs — to municipal councils, who are in the best position to respond to the wishes of local citizens. The Community Charter will cut red tape and re- duce regulations. It will give communities the tools they need to realize the full potential of their communi- ties and to stimulate economic growth within their areas.

The provincial government will continue to set provincewide standards in areas like the economy, the environment and public health. There are a number of questions that have been asked about the Community Charter. The charter is about allowing municipalities to have more flexibility in their decision-making. Currently, municipalities are limited in how they can address local needs. The Community Charter will allow governments to be more flexible in addressing the concerns of their local residents and of businesses within their community.

Both the provincial government and the local govern- ments are clear that overtaxing creates a poor business environment. Many of the cities had asked in the past: "We want m o r e a u t o n o m y . " W e l l , w e ' r e g i v i n g i t t o y o u . W e ' r e going to give you the ability to set taxing levels, but taxing levels that are fair to everybody in your com- munity — residents and businesses. Our government believes that a thriving and successful business leads to thriving and successful municipalities and regions. Economic development.

In fact, the purpose of the Community Charter is to stimulate economic devel- opment. Municipalities will now be able to find inno- vative means to address local needs such as necessary improvements to infrastructure that lead to economic development. They will be able to listen to the concerns and proposals of their area and then be able to make the decisions that will allow these developments and e c o n o m i c g r o w t h t o a c t u a l l y h a p p e n . T h e y w i l l h a v e control of that. The Community Charter allows for the increased usage of P3s.

They are the partnerships between gov- ernment and business, striving to develop local economies. I believe that the cities and the municipali- ties and the regions should treat every business in this province fairly, that there should be open tendering on every project and that we should be enhancing P3s — unlike some municipalities that limit it to unions only. I believe this is wrong. When every business and every working person in this province pays taxes, they should have a fair share of every government contract that's put out to tender.

We have to stop this limited in-house working or unions making rules up to support union businesses. Governments have to step back and say: "We're here for every citizen of British Columbia, and we want every citizen and every business to have the fairest opportunity in which to do business in British Colum- bia." In fact, the purpose of the Community Charter, as I've been trying to say, is to stimulate economic devel- opment. Municipalities will now be able to find inno- vative means in which to make developments and im- provements happen in infrastructure. [1135] Getting the economy moving.

The Community Charter will allow local authorities to make decisions in a timely manner. No more blaming it on: "Well, we're waiting for another level of government to make a decision for us." They will be able to set the time lines. The authority will allow communities to address challenges quickly and in the best interests of commu- nities. The decision for communities to exceed by tak- ing a timely advantage of all opportunities…. Other questions that have been asked — amalga- mation of municipalities. Well, that seems to be a touchy issue in some areas, but let's discuss it.

This government and this minister have been open in bring- ing everything forward for the people of British Colum- bia. There has been more consultation on this process than at any other time. The Community Charter explic- itly lists the approval process necessary for amalgama- tions to occur. Currently, the province has the power to force amalgamation of municipalities against a com- munity's will. This has been done recently in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. Under the Community Char- ter, each community would have to agree before amal-

6308 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 gamation could take place. This is where we're being open and accountable, and again I have to commend the minister. The question has been asked: how do citizens fit into the charter? Currently, councils are accountable through elections, mandatory open meetings, access-to- information legislation and, in some cases, direct resi- dent approval of some actions. The charter will add three new tools to this: annual reports, annual meetings and ethical conduct standards.

It is crucial to democ- racy, to the new spirit of respect and cooperation be- tween all levels of government and its citizens, that public input and public involvement be expanded. These new tools are a way to bring the people under the same roof. I believe that this is so far-reaching, versus any other province anywhere else in Canada, that we are the leading force. Again I have to thank the minister and commend him for all the hard work that he has done on the Community Charter. The next question is: how will councils be held ac- countable?

The three new tools will allow citizens, businesses and other stakeholders to hold council ac- countable for their actions and decisions. The councils will be putting out annual reports. They're going to have annual meetings, just like a board of directors for any major corporation, and they're going to be pro- vided with ethical conduct standards. This is just open- ing up the process of government and accountability more and more every day. The Community Charter requires these meetings and reports. The meetings and reports will make sure that councils are open and transparent.

Another question that's been asked: does the char- ter improve relationships between the province and local governments? The charter will recognize local governments as an order of government within their jurisdiction. That substantial move will be the founda- tion upon which a relationship with the provincial government is built. That provincial government rela- tionship is built on mutual respect, recognition of in- terest, intergovernmental dialogue and joint manage- ment. Currently, the provincial government may change local government legislation without adequate consultation. This will no longer happen.

Under the charter, the provincial government will be required to seek input on proposed changes to local government legislation or revenue transfers. Another question that's been asked is on tourism in the Community Charter. Like any industry, the tour- ism sector will benefit from the passing of the Com- munity Charter. Local government and municipalities will soon have the flexibility to address challenges faced by all industries, including tourism.

Councils will now have the opportunity to employ innovative ideas to meet these challenges. [1140] Tourism is going to grow with the awarding of the 2009 World Police and Fire Games to Burnaby, British Columbia, and I would just like to talk about that for a moment. The 2009 World Police and Fire Games were awarded, but it was really the hard work of two local firemen in Burnaby, Jeff Clark and Miles Ritchie, who each put $2,500 (U.S.) on their own personal credit cards to get a deposit down to host the games in Burnaby.

I want to thank and say what an honour it was to work with my colleagues from Burnaby-Edmonds, Burnaby-Willingdon and Burnaby North. We worked with the minister of aboriginal and community affairs and with the Premier to support this initiative. My col- leagues and I were the driving force behind supporting the World Police and Fire Games. We brought the province to the table. We worked with Tourism B.C. and Tourism Vancouver to assist them. We were there. We hosted a reception for the bid committee on the first night. This is something where local governments will now be able to step in sooner.

When they see opportu- nities arise, they will be able to participate. It should be at the local level, even though it's the British Columbia Police and Fire Games. We were awarded it last Satur- day afternoon, and there was a big ball by the Burnaby firemen on Saturday night to celebrate that. The Community Charter partners business and local government. The Community Charter serves to stimu- late business, not hamper it. With the Community Char- ter we want cities to take an active interest in their com- munities. We want them to go out. We want them to seize opportunities and be able to act upon them.

I guess the last question that arises is the time line on the Community Charter. It's been asked. Well, I believe we've consulted more than anybody. The min- ister has gone out, listened to consultation, come back and made changes where necessary. He's been open and accountable every step of the way. When you're about to do something different that the rest of the country hasn't done, when you're about to allow pow- ers to be in another area that you once controlled, you have to do it right, and you can only do it once.

You know, sometimes there might be a little tweaking, but basically you want to do it right the first time. You write a report with consultation. I know the minister consulted greatly with UBCM, the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, and all the other five or six municipal associations that are a member of that. They were all part of this consultation. The mayors and the councillors have been part of this process from day one. The minister went out, and his staff went out. They consulted, they came back, and it was reviewed. They put another report out again, fine-tuning it, all with consultation.

In the draft legislation we stated that our job was not complete. We asked for further feedback, and the minister received it. The ministry has received over 1,000 compre- hensive and constructive submissions pertaining to the Community Charter. That's just amazing. You know, there are some mayors out there that say we've never consulted. Well, I don't know where those mayors are, because we have consulted. When you get 1,000 submis- sions on a piece of legislation, that is amazing. The time extension will allow each and every sub- mission to get the attention it deserves. The govern-

TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 6309 ment is committed to an early implementation of the charter. I know that. They want to get it going. The minister wants to see it enacted, but he wants it done right the first time. This extension does not diminish the goal. In fact, it only serves to emphasize our com- mitment to local communities in British Columbia. We will use the extra time to properly prepare and assist small communities to develop information and educational material.

We're going to work with every municipality, every region in this province, so that they can take full advantage of this and be the best partner ever within their community — within developments, with business, with other governments in their region — and they will be absolutely number one. We as a government are prepared and committed to stand be- hind them and work with them every step of the way.

This additional time also allows us to take the construc- tive comments we've received and to build the best possible charter for the future of local governments in British Columbia. [1145] I would like to thank the minister for the consulta- tion process he has gone through, for reviewing the over 1,000 submissions that have come in and giving them each their due care and attention. That's a lot of people. Out of those 1,000 submissions, I would say there was a lot of committee structure that went into that. It's not just 1,000 people.

It's probably 10,000 peo- ple or more that have contributed to this piece of legis- lation. For the minister to be strong enough to take the time to go through and review this, to look at the con- structive comments that have been made and to be prepared to say, "This is good, and this is not, but we're prepared to look at it and implement it into the plan that's before us today," is such a breath of fresh air after a decade of despair under the NDP. I just want to thank the minister and applaud him for all the hard work he's done. L.

Mayencourt: It is indeed a great privilege and an honour to stand in this House to support the initiative of the minister responsible for the Community Charter on Bill 14. I want to spend just a few minutes talking about why we are introducing this piece of legislation. For many, many years the Community Charter has been a priority for local governments.

When I read some of the history of this act — and I just spoke with the min- ister earlier this week about the fact that this is only the third generation of local government legislation that's ever been introduced here in British Columbia — this is something that has been on the back burner for a long time. So when we came to government, we made a new-era commitment that we would put it on the front burner. I can see by the hard work that's been put into this particular piece of legislation that this minister has taken this piece of legislation to heart.

He has dedi- cated a good deal of time to consulting with communi- ties to find out about their hopes and dreams for the Community Charter. But this is something local gov- ernments have been calling for, for many, many years. Under this charter, local governments will have more autonomy, and they will have the tools they re- quire in order to do their job best. In the past, local governments have been hampered. They've been con- strained by narrow legislation — legislation that does not allow them to respond to the needs of their various communities as they see fit.

Local government is a very important part of the many levels of government that we have. It's the closest to the road…. You know, it's where the rubber hits the road. It's where people within communities have the most access to their political leaders. It is where they can go to community meetings, where they can have some input, where they can talk about the issues that tear at their hearts — the things they want to see happen.

To constrain that is simply unfair, because the people who elect those individuals to city councils expect that they're going to be able to move forward and bring about change in their local communities. Well, with this legis- lation we are giving them those tools. We are giving them the power to make effective decisions — decisions that have a direct impact on the citizens they represent. We've talked a lot about the provincial economy. That's certainly been a guiding principle with all we have done in this Legislature to date, since we were elected in May of 2001.

We believe that the basis of a good economic recovery is a strong and innovative local government. That is what this Community Charter is about. It sets up a whole new relationship, one that is based on respect and that recognizes we are equal partners in providing ser- vices to our communities, to our citizenry. It is this rela- tionship that we are striving to recognize — the autonomy of local governments.

It moves provincial authority in areas of local interest to where it belongs — to municipal councils, to that direct forum of democracy where those people are in the best position to respond to their neighbours, friends, people in their communities and business leaders — to ensure they are meeting the wishes of those local citizens. This is a dramatic piece of legislation. It's the first time any kind of legislation of this nature has been in- t r o d u c e d i n a C a n a d i a n p a r l i a m e n t . I t ' s v e r y h i s t o r i c and very, very important.

It empowers local govern- ment, and it goes further than any other provincial legislation in recognizing municipalities as an order of government, as people with the right and responsibil- ity to respond to the citizens. Our provincial govern- ment, at the same time, will continue to set province- wide standards in areas like the economy, the envi- ronment and public health. This is truly appropriate. [1150] Now, the minister took a good deal of time with this particular legislation.

In fact, when we look back on the history of this whole notion of the community charter, it really goes back to the early nineties when the Premier was the chair of the UBCM and brought forward this as an idea, as a way of bringing some bal- ance into the various levels of government. I'm grateful to the minister because last year, when he first came forward with this piece of legislation and tabled it in this House, he made it available to all of the

6310 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003 citizens of British Columbia. You could actually go to a website. You could read what the charter said. You could provide him with input. That input has been very, very valuable. I believe that we had thousands and thousands of submissions from ordinary British Columbians, from various levels of government, from business and com- munity leaders all speaking in favour of this greater autonomy — this greater level of respect for this level of government.

We were very clear about saying we want to get your feedback and we want to know what you think about this legislation. We heard from the broadest range of British Co- lumbians that you could possibly imagine. Virtually anybody who wanted to go to the website could find this piece of legislation, could look at it and could make comment on it. This consultation period was so good that we now have…. As the member for Burquit- lam said, "We got a pretty darn good piece of legisla- tion out of it," and I am very happy that we have this particular piece of legislation before us today.

The Community Charter ensures that before any new responsibility is put to a local government, there needs to be resources to fulfil those responsibilities. We don't view the Community Charter as a way to get rid of some expensive programs. We recognize that if we ask a local level of government to take on responsibili- ties, they need not only the tools to take that on, but they need the ability to fund those particular things.

That's appropriate because those local people, the citi- zens of a local community, that are calling upon their local elected officials to provide a service are the ones paying for it, and they want to know that they have the tools in order to do that. I'm just reading my notes here. Apparently over 43,000 British Columbians took the opportunity of downloading this particular piece of legislation. That i

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0429am-10
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0429am 10
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f43a4c7a308059a379232886c956bd350666e2cc

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