British Columbia Hansard — Tuesday, May 7, 2002 (37th Parliament, 3rd Session) (H0507pm-07) (H0507pm 07)

H0507pm-07

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

3rd Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Tuesday, May 7, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Volume 7, Number 7 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 3RD 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. Internet: www.legis.gov.bc.ca/hansard

Party Standings: Liberal 76; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 1. 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 (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, May 7, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 3243 Introduction and First Reading of Bills ........................................................................................ ......................................... 3244 Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act (Bill 39) Hon. M. de Jong Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 41) Hon.

M. de Jong Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 3244 International Youth Week J. Bray Lions Gate Bridge L. Mayencourt Adult literacy V.

Anderson Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 3245 Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3246 Lobbying by Liberal MLA J. MacPhail Hon. G. Campbell Irene Chanin's position with BCBC J. Kwan Hon. G. Campbell Negotiations with physicians and dispute resolution process K. Johnston Hon. C. Hansen Child care funding V. Anderson Hon. L.

Stephens Lobbyists' meetings with cabinet members J. MacPhail Hon. G. Campbell Electronic delivery of government services B. Suffredine Hon. G. Abbott Point of Order (Speaker's Ruling) .............................................................................................. ............................................ 3248 Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 3249 P.

Nettleton Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3249 School Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 34) (continued) J. MacPhail Hon. C. Clark R. Hawes J. Kwan

Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 3255 J. Kwan Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3255 School Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 34) (continued) Hon. R. Neufeld Energy and Mines Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 36) J. MacPhail Hon. R.

Neufeld Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3273 Energy and Mines Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 36) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 3273 Energy and Mines Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 36)

3243 TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members J. Bray: This afternoon it's my pleasure to introduce Colin Plant and Carol Whitehouse from Leadership Victoria, as well as Janet Barkley, an Esquimalt recrea- tion programmer, and Sadit Karem, a Saanich recrea- tion programmer, to the House. These four individuals are all involved in the first annual Victoria Youth Week taking place May 6 to 10. Please join me in giving them a very warm welcome to the House today. Hon. S.

Santori: Over the years the city of Trail has built a great reputation for its ability to host major and significant events in the community. Today it's my pleasure to introduce someone who has played a key role in making these events a success in our commu- nity. He's a gentleman who has chaired or co-chaired many events like the B.C. Winter Games in our com- munity, the B.C. Summer Games, the B.C. Seniors Games, and was chairman of the 1995 Babe Ruth World Series provincial as well as Canadian Little League championships.

This gentleman is currently the chief executive offi- cer of Kootenay Savings Credit Union in Trail, and he's joined today by his lovely wife Kathy, a nurse at the Trail Regional Hospital. Please give these people, Doug Stanley and Kathy Stanley from Trail, a warm wel- come. [1405] I. Chong: In the gallery today are two very special people: Dr. Sam Macey and his daughter Elizabeth. Dr. Macey can be seen in Oak Bay village at various times. He's spotted by his very ebullient smile as he walks through the village and enjoys the opportunities there to greet and meet with people. Dr.

Macey was a found- ing member of the Open Learning Institute and is a former dean of graduate studies at the University of Victoria. I hope the House will make them very wel- come. R. Lee: It's a pleasure for me to introduce four spe- cial guests to the House today. They are from the Peo- ple's Republic of China on a six-month work experi- ence in Victoria. Ms. Zheng Yong is a principal staff member from the comprehensive division budget de- partment in the Ministry of Finance of the People's Republic of China. Ms.

Li Xiaoqian is a principal staff member from the budget division in the financial de- partment of the Heilongjiang province. Mr. Cheng Danfeng is a staff member in the finance division of the treasury department in the Ministry of Finance, the People's Republic of China, and Mr. Zhang Rui is the vice-director of the Chinese government bond issuance and payment division, treasury pay- ment bureau, Ministry of Finance. Zheng Yong and Li Xiaoqian are attached to the office of the comptroller general here, and Cheng Dan- feng and Zhang Rui will be attached to the provincial treasury.

I'm sure they will enjoy working in the Legis- lature and will take back many valuable experiences to China. Would the House please make them very wel- come. J. Kwan: Visiting the House today is the presi- dent of the Action Committee of People with Dis- abilities, Joanne Neubauer. The ACPD believes that all people deserve to live a decent life with dignity, and they believe we all have the duty to ensure that business does not go on as usual while people are being left to die on the streets.

They are calling on the government to abandon Bill 26 and Bill 27 to ensure that British Columbians are afforded the right to dig- nity in life. Will the House please make Joanne wel- come. R. Visser: Today is a great day. One of this House's great defenders of his constituency, of all things Welsh and fish, has reached Freedom 55. Would the House please wish the member for Nanaimo a happy birthday today. Hon. J. Murray: I'm happy to introduce Connie Fenyo, who is in the gallery today.

Connie is an execu- tive in the New Westminster Chamber of Commerce and a businesswoman and business leader who has confidence in the emerging economic opportunities in New West and in B.C. Would the House please make Connie welcome. M. Hunter: Freedom 55. I would like to thank the member for North Island for that kind remark. I stand to introduce three people today who are some of my most important supporters: my wife, Joy, who has been here many times before, and her parents, Bryn and Iris Stephens, both of whom are avid watch- ers of the parliamentary TV channel. Will the House please make them very welcome.

S. Orr: We have two very special people visiting us today. Nouri Najjar is a grade 9 student at Reynolds School, and he is also one of the Pages that take such good care of us down here on the Legislature floor. With him is his father, Ibrahim Najjar, who is visiting us from the United Arab Emirates. I must say to Mr. Najjar: you have a son to be very proud of. Would this House please make them welcome. [1410] Hon. M. Coell: I would like the House to make welcome 25 grades 4 and 5 students from Keating Ele- mentary School and their teacher, Ms. Cautrais. Would the House please make them welcome.

3244 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 Introduction and First Reading of Bills PROTECTED AREAS FORESTS COMPENSATION ACT Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Pro- tected Areas Forests Compensation Act. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 39 be read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 39 today.

This bill confirms the process by which the Crown would compensate forest companies for har- vesting rights or improvements that were lost due to government-sanctioned land use decisions, largely during the 1990s. Bill 39 will apply the existing Forest Act compensa- tion provisions to those land use decisions and ensure that companies are fairly compensated and that there is certainty and consistency for companies and the public in respect of compensation decisions.

I am also bound to say that had the previous ad- ministration taken the appropriate steps in a timely way to confirm the methodology by which compensa- tion would be calculated, Bill 39 would not have been necessary. This bill also reflects a recent court ruling which confirmed that the Forest Act compensation provisions were the appropriate vehicle to address compensation issues arising out of these land use decisions, even though the Forest Act provisions were not invoked at the time. I move that the bill be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

Bill 39 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. FOREST (FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT) AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 41 be read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. M. de Jong: Bill 41 amends the Forest Act to provide first nations with greater opportunities to par- ticipate in the forest sector.

The bill enables the Minis- ter of Forests to invite a first nation to apply directly for forest tenures in furtherance of treaty-related or eco- nomic measures agreements between the government and that first nation. Bill 41 also allows the minister or designate to sus- pend or cancel that forest tenure if the first nation does not comply with the treaty-related or economic meas- ures agreement that led to the award of tenure in the first place. Mr.

Speaker, Bill 41 builds on announcements made earlier this month by the Premier and the Attorney General and supports this government's new-era commitment to move ahead with interim measures to ensure greater certainty during treaty negotiations and also to promote and facilitate the legitimate interests that first nations have in participating more directly in forestry-related economic development. I move that Bill 41 be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 41 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) INTERNATIONAL YOUTH WEEK J. Bray: Today I have the pleasure to present to this House information regarding activities celebrating International Youth Week. Youth Week started in 1995 with a handful of events in different cities in Canada. It has grown to international status and now includes events in coun- tries such as the United States, Australia, the U.K., Peru, Ghana and other countries. Spearheaded here by Leadership Victoria, Youth Week includes a variety of events which showcase the interests, talents and diver- sity of our youth.

A listing of events has been posted on a website at www.youth.city.victoria.bc.ca. [1415] Even though we've all been youth ourselves, per- haps no age group is so misunderstood. Each genera- tion of parents struggles to provide their teens with opportunities that challenge them while keeping them safe, and this is not always an easy thing to do. Youth Week reminds us all of the energy, vitality and promise that our youth bring to us. Our youth experiment, cre- ate and develop their own language and subculture and present a refreshing perspective on the world.

Our challenge is to embrace this enthusiasm and continue to provide them with an environment of support and challenge. Youth are an important asset to our community. Not only do they often have the most disposable in- come in a family, adding greatly to our local econo- mies, but a study published by the Community Social Planning Council of Greater Victoria reports that 32 percent of our youth volunteer their time in our com- munities.

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3245 T h i s i s a n e x c i t i n g t i m e t o b e a y o u t h i n V i c t o r i a and British Columbia. As confidence in our economy continues to build, there are more opportunities for youth created every day by small business owners and community leaders. We must continue to harness the energy, hopes and dreams of our youth. We must en- sure we engage all of our youth, as their contributions will only strengthen our communities and our lives. Today's youth are tomorrow's leaders.

Again, I would like to thank Leadership Victoria, greater Victoria recreation departments and area youth for organizing such an exciting week of events. I would encourage all Victorians and British Columbians to join me in acknowledging the value of youth and the value that they bring to our community by participating in various events of International Youth Week here in Victoria. LIONS GATE BRIDGE L. Mayencourt: I've admired the Lions Gate Bridge for decades, and thanks to a recent refit, this beautiful bridge will be here for many more decades.

Many peo- ple helped to make this restoration possible, and they all deserve a great thank-you, but most of all, my hat goes off to the men and women that rebuilt her. This bridge is an economic and social link, but did any city ever have a finer gateway into the great out- doors? Well, I think not. The Lions Gate Bridge is much, much more. It's an international icon without equal. Walkers challenge it, cyclists revel in it, and residents enjoy its graceful symmetry against a moun- tainous backdrop.

Have you ever wondered how many photographs of the Lions Gate Bridge might be floating around — photos of tourists with our bridge looming in the back- ground? It must run in the millions and perhaps be- yond, and its value to tourism is not to be underesti- mated. Throughout history, bridges have always stood for progress, for bringing people and communities to- gether. Bridges take us to places previously inaccessi- ble, and quite literally, bridges move mankind forward river by river and bay by bay. There's no need for us to wonder where we'd be without them. We'd be stranded on the other side.

Lions Gate Bridge will be enjoyed and marvelled over for many generations. Those that are keenly inter- ested in the engineering aspects will have access to reams of information about this refit in as much detail as they can handle. They will think about the men and women that rebuilt her. Even those without an engi- neering background, those who take an hour or two some quiet evening to research the history of this bridge a week from today or a hundred years from now, will all come face to face with the skill and de- termination of those workers.

In future years marvel- lous photographs and news stories of this project will also serve as a bridge helping to narrow the gap be- tween today and tomorrow. I share a dream with many other Lions Gate lovers to honour these men and women by having our bridge recognized as a national historic site. ADULT LITERACY V. Anderson: Today I would like to express my adoration and appreciation for two groups of people. First, I would like to express my admiration for those adults in our communities who tackle and overcome the literacy gap in their lives.

These are the people who, for whatever reason, did become functional adults despite not having mastered the knack of being able to read or write. They are, for the most part, very adaptive people who function very well in their com- munities, thank you, in spite of the difficulty and handicaps they have in not being able to either read or write on their own and often without other people be- ing aware of their difficulty. [1420] Thus it is a big challenge to tackle, as an adult, the slow process, the patience and the frustration which one must go through in order to learn to read and write.

But what an achievement as stage by stage they learn and make their lives even richer by patience, per- sistence and perseverance. Also, I would like to express my appreciation to those women and men of all ages who take the time and effort, often as volunteers, to encourage and coach these new learners in reading, writing and often arith- metic. Many of these coaches take their time to share with others their thrill in reading and writing. Among these are those who are part of Literacy B.C., Literacy Canada and other similar groups around the world.

These are persons who believe that it is never too late for persons to learn to read and write and to get the thrill and satisfaction of doing those things for themselves at home, in the family, in pleasure and at work. These, too, are patient and persistent persons who dedicate themselves. In Literacy B.C. we have a channel for those who would learn to read and write no matter what their age. P. Bell: I seek leave to do an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members P. Bell: Mr.

Speaker, I note that two gentlemen f r o m P r i n c e G e o r g e N o r t h h a v e j u s t j o i n e d u s i n t h e gallery today. These two gentlemen are very successful in their own right and certainly have continued to in- vest in the province of British Columbia. I would ask that the House please make both Terry Kuzma and Bill Kordyban Jr. very welcome. K. Manhas: I also see k le ave to make an intro duc- tion. Leave granted.

3246 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 K. Manhas: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to introduce a group of students from B.C. Christian Academy visit- ing Victoria from Port Coquitlam. Oral Questions LOBBYING BY LIBERAL MLA J. MacPhail: There are a couple of questions that have gone unanswered in the Premier's absence, so I welcome him back. Last week a B.C. Liberal backbench MLA was caught mixing private and public business. As the Premier saw it last week, the member was only doing his job. Of course, this is the same Premier that promised time and again that Liberal friends would not get special treatment.

Everybody except the Premier agrees that the member for East Kootenay crossed the line, including the member in question. Will the Premier finally stand up and add his voice to condemning the behaviour that was demonstrated, and will he please tell his restless and bored back bench that pressuring public servants to hire friends is unacceptable? Hon. G. Campbell: I can tell the member opposite that I am proud of the work that our back bench has done on behalf of all of their constituents across the province. I am proud of this Legislature.

Unlike previ- ous Legislatures that I was involved in, which the member opposite was at least partially responsible for, we've had a Health Committee of this Legislature go across the province and work with people in British Columbia to make a health care system that works for patients. I am proud we have a Legislature that says we want to make sure that we include British Columbians in improving our education system. I am proud we have a legislative committee that's working with Brit- ish Columbians across this province to improve the quality of life of aboriginal British Columbians.

I am proud that we have a back bench that's willing to stand up for their constituents and always look for the best value for the tax dollar in British Columbia. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question. J. MacPhail: Well, that's a bit of a surprise state- ment by the Premier. Even the member for East Kootenay understood he had stepped over the line and apologized for lobbying for a friend at the expense of other local business people.

I can't understand why the Premier insists on continuing to defend behaviour that everybody else understands is wrong. [1425] The Premier said, actually, and has continued to say that he's encouraging that kind of behaviour. In this case, then, can the Premier table today the guide- lines and instructions that he's provided to his MLAs to ensure that they're not doing business on behalf of friends or clients? Hon. G. Campbell: I t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e p r o v i n c e o f British Columbia and the people of British Columbia wanted to change the kinds of attitudes that were prevalent in the last government.

We have done that. We are open. We have open communication. We have open tendering in this province. We have detailed pub- lic regulations that make sure that whenever the public invest dollars, they are getting the best value possible for their tax dollars. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplementary. J. MacPhail: Mr. Speaker, we have a Premier that thinks the kind of behaviour of lobbying on behalf of a friend at the expense of the rest of the local business community is just fine. That's exactly what the Premier has said. And not only do they do the lobbying, but… Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. J. MacPhail: …backbench MLAs are responsible for approving funds — funds from ministry expenses that go to exactly the kind of businesses on behalf of which this member was lobbying. The Premier has a document this thick for guide- lines for cabinet members. It's clear that MLAs are run- ning rampant, lobbying on behalf of their friends and who the heck knows else-wise. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. MacPhail: What guidelines are in place for the kind of behaviour that this Premier thinks is just fine? Hon. G.

Campbell: As the member opposite will know, this government undid a lot of the damage that they did with their closed tendering processes. We've opened up tendering. We have included the people of British Columbia in knowing what our goals and objec- tives are. We would say to every British Columbian, regardless of their political background: "You are wel- come to bid… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G.

Campbell: …on contracts that this gov- ernment will let." The public service, the professional, non-partisan public service, will let them on the basis of the best value possible to British Columbians. IRENE CHANIN'S POSITION WITH BCBC J. Kwan: Mr. Speaker, today the government is targeting programs for children in Vancouver. The

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3247 school immunization program team, the Small Talk program for preschoolers with speech and language disorders and vision screening programs for children in day care and preschool — all of these programs have been cut back or eliminated. At the same time, the Premier has created a soft landing at the B.C. Buildings Corporation for Irene Chanin, the former deputy minister of his public affairs bureau. Can the Premier please inform this House just what his priorities are? Are they protecting necessary health programs for children?

Or are they secretly cre- ating six-figure salary jobs for failed deputies at a quiet Crown corporation? Hon. G. Campbell: I can report to this member the priorities of this government. This government is committed to creating a health care system that focuses on patients, and that's why we've increased the budget by $1.1 billion. This government is committed to creat- ing a top-notch education system that focuses on stu- dents, which is why we've increased the Education budget in the province of British Columbia.

And this government is dedicated to ensuring that we have the kind of public services that create value for citizens across this province. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J. Kwan: Hospitals are closing. Long-term bed fa- cilities are closing. Educational programs are being cut. BCBC already has a fully staffed communications de- partment, and there are no postings — no postings — for senior positions there. It's on the website — no post- ings.

But the Premier had to find Irene Chanin a new job, maybe because she refused to implement the political agenda the Premier is demanding for his communica- tions shop. At any rate, the Premier's office ordered BCBC to make room for her big salary. To the Premier: how much severance would Ms. Chanin be entitled to if the Premier hadn't found a cosy position for her, and can he advise us what process was there to find Ms. Chanin her new taxpayer-funded job? Hon. G. Campbell: M s . C h a n i n w a s h i r e d b y t h e government under a three-year contract.

She has been s e c o nd e d t o B C B C f o r t he nex t t wo y e ars as p art o f a transition. There will be major changes in government communication, and those will be announced in June, as I said during my estimates. [1430] NEGOTIATIONS WITH PHYSICIANS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS K. Johnston: My question is to the Minister of Health Services. The B.C. Medical Association is claim- ing that it is the lack of an adequate dispute resolution mechanism that is forcing doctors to begin the with- drawal of health care services.

To the Minister of Health Services: why won't the government agree to the BCMA's proposal for a dispute resolution system? Hon. C. Hansen: I think, first of all, the thing that motivates us in all of our deliberations and actions around this area is how to put patients first in British Columbia and meet their needs wherever they are in British Columbia. That was certainly the motivation of the Premier six weeks ago today when he signed a memorandum of understanding with the B.C.

Medical Association that actually provided for a framework to resolve the allocation of $392 million of new money for physician compensation and to resolve it in a way that would provide for those solutions without compromis- ing patient care in the province. One of the issues that was agreed to that would be resolved as a result of that memorandum of under- standing was a dispute settlement mechanism. We put a proposal on the table early on in those discussions, and the BCMA did not respond to it.

They did not sig- nal that they wanted substantive discussion at the bar- gaining table throughout these various weeks of dis- cussion. Then for them to withdraw from negotiations and say that the lack of success on that particular issue was the reason, I find very hard to fathom. When I see doctors in this province threatening to put patient care in jeopardy because of their inability to move forward in a meaningful way on negotiations around dispute settlement mechanisms, I have a real problem with that. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver- Fraserview has a supplementary question. K.

Johnston: Recently the provincial and federal governments agreed on a dispute resolution mecha- nism for solving issues between the two levels of gov- ernment. Can the Minister of Health Services tell us if the government would accept a similar dispute resolu- tion mechanism between the province and the BCMA? Hon. C. Hansen: I certainly saw the telecast of the president of the BCMA commenting favourably about the dispute settlement mechanism that is in place be- tween the federal government and the provincial gov- ernments with regard to

interpretation of the Canada Health Act. We would certainly be willing to explore that as a model. That could very well be the basis if that is something they're interested in as a dispute settle- ment mechanism. The point is that we can't resolve these issues if there are not negotiations. The BCMA, I believe, has an obligation to patients in British Columbia to get back to the negotiating table today to resolve these outstanding issues. CHILD CARE FUNDING V. Anderson: My question is to the Minister of State for Women's Equality. As the end of the school year approaches, many parents are planning for the

3248 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 children's after-school care next fall. This week the minister announced the $10.1 million of transition funding for out-of-school care programs. To the Minis- ter of State for Women's Equality: what does this an- nouncement mean for the parents of children who are planning to be enrolled in these programs next fall? Hon. L. Stephens: This is very good news indeed, because our government is committed to ensuring that school-age child care services are available to parents who need them.

I'm very pleased that this transitional grant of $10.1 million will be available to 495 currently enrolled child care providers and approximately 17,000 children, beginning in July for the summer care and then in September for the next school year. This fund- ing will provide the stability and predictability of qual- ity child care for parents and their children across the province. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Langara has a supplementary question. V.

Anderson: The Minister of State for Women's Equality has committed to increasing child care options for British Columbians and to direct funding to those who need it most. Can the Minister of State for Women's Equality tell our constituents how this announcement is going to facilitate a long-term child care plan? [1435] Hon. L. Stephens: This is a transitional grant, and it gives us the flexibility that we need to develop a long- term child care plan that will be partnership-driven, community-focused, fiscally sustainable and targeted to families who need it the most.

This new targeted system will reduce the adminis- trative costs for providers. It will make more efficient use of our limited provincial resources, and it will pro- vide more choices for parents and their children. In addition, it will deliver on our new-era commitment and our promise to target families who need it the most and to encourage the expansion of child care services in British Columbia. LOBBYISTS' MEETINGS WITH CABINET MEMBERS J. MacPhail: So far we've had that it's okay to lobby on behalf of friends, it's okay to…. No jobs available at BCBC, but put a deputy minister in there.

Let's try an- other one for the Premier today. Last week we asked twice of the Attorney General if organizations represented by Bruce Clark had been meeting with cabinet members. Two times the Attor- ney General ducked the question. This time to the Premier: has Bruce Clark, a well- known and well-connected Liberal insider, been ar- ranging meetings for clients with ministers in this gov- ernment? Just a simple question. Couldn't get it last week. Yes or no? Hon. G. Campbell: I have no idea. Mr. Speaker: The member for Nelson-Creston. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Order.

The member for Nelson-Creston has the floor. ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES B. Suffredine: M y q u e s t i o n i s f o r t h e M i n i s t e r o f Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. One of the government's new-era commitments was to make B.C. a world leader in e-government. In my riding there are many rural communities and businesses that could benefit from being able to access services from government on line. Can the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services tell us what progress he's made in fulfilling this commitment? Hon. G.

Abbott: This government did, in the last campaign, make some very ambitious commitments around leading in e-government and bridging the digi- tal divide. I am delighted to advise the member and the House today that we've taken a big step in that direc- tion with the installation of community access termi- nals in all 58 of the government agent's offices around British Columbia.

What this will allow us to do in both a cost-effective and, I think, a very effective way for all British Colum- bians — whether they're from a rural community or an urban community — is to, in a very immediate way, access all of the government services and programs that are available to them. I think this is an important step on the way to effective leadership in e-government across British Columbia and around the world. [End of question period.] Point of Order (Speaker's Ruling) Mr.

Speaker: Hon. members, on May 2 the Leader of the Opposition rose on a point of order relating to privileges of members and reports of committees funded out of the Legislative Assembly budget. She later specifically stated that she was raising a point of order, not a point of privilege. The gist of the member's question was whether the stipend paid pursuant to

section 8 of the Legislative Al- lowances and Pension Act to the chairman of the gov- ernment caucus offshore oil and gas committee made the committee subject to parliamentary privileges insofar as that funding comes out of the vote 1 general budget rather than the Liberal caucus global budget. Select standing and special committees are a sub- sidiary component of the Legislative Assembly. They are formed of members from all parties chosen by the Special Committee of Selection, instructed by order of

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3249 the House, and report to the House in accordance with those instructions. Both parliamentary law and the Legislative Assembly Privilege Act apply to legislative committees. On the other hand, caucus committees are formed by a party caucus from its members and are subject o n l y t o i t s c o n t r o l . T h e y h a v e n o o f f i c i a l s t a t u s i n t h e House, do not report to the House and play a role only within the party caucus. The payment of a stipend to the chairman of a cau- cus committee, pursuant to

section 8 of the Legislative Allowances and Pension Act, does not transform that committee into a House committee comparable to a select standing or special committee. Therefore, the short answer to the question raised by the Leader of the Opposition is in the negative. [1440] Petitions P. Nettleton: I wish to present a petition, if I may, from 148 students and parents from the Gladstone School in Prince George. They're opposed to the pro- posed closure of their school there. Orders of the Day Hon. M. de Jong: I call Committee of the Whole.

For the information of all members, we are debating at committee stage Bill 34. Committee of the Whole House SCHOOL AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 34; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:44 p.m. On

section 32 (continued). J. MacPhail: We're on

section 32, which is the in- corporation of parts of the Company Act into the School Act. [1445] My colleague from Vancouver–Mount Pleasant was pursuing issues around the engagement of parts of the executive of a school board — with one hat — on pur- suing matters under this section, the Company Act, which may fail, and how one can guarantee the separa- tion of the risk and potential failure of a matter pur- sued under the Company Act so that it doesn't impede or harm program delivery or assets of the school board.

My colleague and I were looking for examples of situations that perhaps required this kind of legislation in order for us to assess exactly what the intent of this legislation is. Here's why. There is a range of fundraising and commercial activities in which school boards engage now — a full range — both within the province and out- side of the province. None have been, as far as I know, threatened with any legal action or, in any way, where there's been a mixture of perhaps liability of a failed commercial action imposing on school programs. We're trying to understand the necessity of this. That's all. Hon. C.

Clark: As I said before, school districts have asked us for this legislation. In fact, they asked previous governments and previous, previous, previ- ous governments for legislation like this that would achieve this purpose. Clearly, they are concerned about whether or not the activities they're engaging in would open themselves up to any kind of liability. They asked for this change in legislation. We agreed with them that we wanted to ensure that taxpayers' assets are pro- tected and that schools and those assets we've invested so much in are protected.

At the same time, we certainly want to encourage school districts to go out and engage in entrepreneurial activity where it's appropriate. Particularly, we've talked a lot about school districts going and exporting our intellectual capital in the Far East. There are cer- tainly some opportunities there to bring some money home for B.C. kids, and this legislation, I think, not only offers them the ability to protect themselves but also sends them a very clear message that we want to encourage them to undertake some of these activities. J.

MacPhail: How does one distinguish when the secretary-treasurer of a school board is wearing a hat as a director under the Company Act or as secretary- treasurer of the school board? Hon. C. Clark: Certainly, it depends on where the member is sitting. J. MacPhail: What's the legal protection against pursuit of duties with wearing one hat or the other? Hon. C. Clark: Perhaps the member would clarify her question. J. MacPhail: As I recall the debate from this morn- ing, the minister pointed out that the secretary- treasurer would be sitting as a director under the Company Act. Is that correct? Hon. C.

Clark: Yeah, if the member takes a moment to have a look at the amendments we've proposed, in the act it very clearly says that it can be the secretary- treasurer or it can be a trustee of the board. [1450] J. MacPhail: Yes. What I was saying was that a sec- retary-treasurer is an employee of the school board with specific fiduciary responsibilities for the delivery o f p r o g r a m s . A t t h e s a m e t i m e , h e o r s h e c a n , b y t h e legislation, be a director pursuant to the Company Act if the school board incorporates itself. The minister has said that this

section is needed to prevent the school board from assuming liability for any actions — I as-

3250 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 sume fundraising actions — that will now be taken o v e r b y a n i n c o r p o r a t i o n , p u r s u a n t t o t h e C o m p a n y Act, where the secretary-treasurer or a trustee can have a foot in both places. Where's the firewall to prevent…? Is there some sort of limited liability that's being placed upon the individual who sits both as a trustee or secretary- treasurer and as a director of the company? The whole pursuit of this, I assume, is to not allow public assets to be used for risk in the pursuit of a commercial venture. Hon. C.

Clark: The reason I made my last point is because the member, in her question, indicated that she thought the legislation required a secretary-treasurer to be a member of the board. I wanted to just draw her attention to the fact that the legislation doesn't actually say that. It says that the secretary-treasurer may be a member of the board. I suspect the member is getting to a point here, and it will help me understand her question if she just gets to the point and we can have a discussion about the subject she's obviously trying to pursue here. J. MacPhail: I did.

What part of the question didn't the minister understand? We're trying to figure out the necessity of incorporating the Company Act into a school act that deals with public education. The minis- ter has said it's to pursue commercial and entrepreneu- rial activity that is separate and apart from putting at risk or imposing any liability — those were her words — on the school board.

We're talking about limiting liability, and yet we have a situation by the legislation that permits a secretary-treasurer — in fact, names a secretary-treasurer and names a school trustee — to be a director of the company that I gather will be pursuing commercial or entrepreneurial activity for which the minister doesn't want to have their risk imposed on the school board. I'm asking what hat it is that…. Let's say it's either a school trustee or the secretary-treasurer. One is an employee; the other is an elected official.

How does one distinguish what hat that person is wearing in order to impose limited liability? Hon. C. Clark: They have different powers. When the individual is acting for the board, they're acting for the board, and when they're acting for the company, they're acting for the company. It's as simple as that. [1455] R. Hawes: I've been listening to this for quite a while. Just for my own clarification, if I could ask the minister, perhaps just with an example…. The district of Mission owns a development corporation. The sole shareholder is the district of Mission.

The board of di- rectors are the mayor and the council and the adminis- trator. The administrator is the secretary-treasurer. That company does business in anything from land development work…. It also does some mortgage lend- ing. It may go into joint venture partnerships. It can do all kinds of things that are kind of off the balance sheet, if you will, of the municipality, although it is later in- corporated into the balance sheet of the municipality. Yet it does limit risk to the general taxpayer from the ventures that the development corporation may be engaged in.

Are we talking about a similar type of thing here? Hon. C. Clark: Indeed, we are. It's a very similar thing. I think, as the member has illustrated, it's a fairly common thing at the level of local government. The purpose, of course, is to do what his municipality has done, which is to protect the public assets from any liability. It's a fairly commonly understood and com- monly engaged-in activity. I would add this, of course, as well. This is some- thing that school districts have been asking for, for a long time. They recognize the need for it.

I think they're delighted that they finally have a government in Victo- ria that agrees with them and recognizes that they're right. R. Hawes: Over the years the development corpo- ration in Mission has been tremendously successful, has generated a great deal of profit that has come back into the municipality as its sole shareholder. I'm assuming, then, that the minister is hopeful and all of the school boards that asked for this are hopeful that the same thing is going to happen here. Would that be wrong? Hon. C.

Clark: The purpose of this is to allow school boards, in a way that protects them and the pub- lic assets from liability, to go out and engage in entre- preneurial activities that will earn money for our kids in our schools. That means if they go and start a school in China and they're able to earn some money from tuition for those students, they can bring that home to their local school district and put it in classrooms here. Or they can recruit students from overseas to be a part of our classrooms here where they would pay tuition in our classrooms.

It's something that is being done now but certainly something that school districts want more encouragement for and more protection for when they're doing it. There's nothing wrong with us exporting our intel- lectual capital. We have invested a huge amount in our curriculum in British Columbia. We should be maxi- m i z i n g t h a t v a l u e . W e s h o u l d b e b r i n g i n g t h a t v a l u e home for students in British Columbia's schools. J.

Kwan: In municipalities and having been a city councillor, I have some sense of what the minister is talking about in terms of the municipality setting up a company or a corporation. In those instances, the mu- nicipalities utilize municipal staff, the staff that's avail- able to them within the municipality. In this instance, is it anticipated that the school board will utilize school board staff to create these en- trepreneurial ventures? Hon. C. Clark: If they do, it would be outside the terms of their employment with the school board.

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3251 J. Kwan: Is the minister saying they're not allowed to do that? If they do, what happens? Hon. C. Clark: They would certainly be allowed, but again, it would be outside of their responsibilities to the school board. J. Kwan: If the school boards are allowed to utilize resources that ought to be dedicated to providing edu- cational support to the school system here, if these school trustees end up utilizing staff to do work in cre- ating revenue for the school board, does that not take away the resources in the school system? Hon. C.

Clark: Again, they may use those staff. Again, it would be outside the terms of their employ- m e n t w i t h t h e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t . W e f u l l y e x p e c t t h a t school districts will continue to stick to their knitting. They'll focus on the core business that they have, and that's educating B.C.'s children. To the extent that they're able to maximize other opportunities and bring those opportunities home for B.C. kids, we'd like to encourage them to do so. [1500] J. Kwan: If the school board then utilizes staff to do this work, would they have to engage in a separate contract with those staff?

That is to say, if staff are be- ing asked to develop business ventures to make money as opposed to putting their time and effort into the educational programs necessary for the students in B.C., and when that time is diverted away, then one would assume that the individual is not doing his or her job. The only way for the school board to utilize staff to engage in developing business ventures to make money for the school board would be that they would have to contract them out under a separate contract. It would not be within the terms of the employment they'd been hired to do.

That's the only way they could actually engage in those kinds of business venture ac- tivities. Hon. C. Clark: As I said, they may engage to work for the company. That would be outside the terms of their agreement with the school board. They may de- cide to work for the company, but again, it would be separate. J. Kwan: The existing situation is such that schools are already engaging in fundraising activities. They already sell the B.C. curriculum to other countries.

They already do a lot of the things the minister sug- gests in the government's press release in trying to cre- ate additional dollars for the school system, without the incorporation. With the incorporation, the minister is saying staff within the school boards must not be diverted from their jobs in developing and working on the educa- tional issues for the students in B.C., and when staff are asked to do that work, they must do it outside of the time and the terms of employment they now have with the school boards.

That means if an existing staff mem- ber is to engage in that work, he or she must engage in some sort of different contract with the school board in order to do the work. Who does the minister think, then, the school board will have working on developing these entrepreneurial activities if they're not to rely on their staff? Who will be doing that work, and where will they get the money to hire the staff to do that work? Hon. C. Clark: It could be whole range of people.

T h e y c o u l d d e c i d e o n e x i s t i n g s t a f f , o r e x i s t i n g s t a f f could decide they would like to devote part of their time to doing that. There could be new employees. We've heard from a number of former superintendents across the province who just have a huge appetite to get involved in this, so they would certainly be a source of potential support for the companies the dis- tricts would form. Sort of in answer to the comments the member prefaced her question with, she said, "Why are we do- ing this again?" and has asked that question again.

The answer to that, as I'll reiterate, is because school dis- tricts have told us that yes, they are engaging in some of these activities, but they're nervous about it. Frankly, so is the ministry — and with good reason. We are an increasingly litigious society, and none of us at the provincial level or at the district level wants to put taxpayers' assets at risk. That's why school districts have asked us for this change, and that's why we ful- filled the request. J. Kwan: Where would the funding come from for the new employees? Hon. C.

Clark: I think I know where the member is going here, so perhaps I could just cut to the chase and answer the question. The company that's formed by a school district may not use money from the grant that is granted to them by the province to support their activities. Just to make sure she knows, these employ- ees we're talking about will be employees of that com- pany, and the money the company would pay them with cannot be a grant from the provincial government. [1505] J.

Kwan: Existing staff, the minister says, who've been hired by money from the provincial government cannot be putting their time towards any of the work in relation to the incorporation of the company or the work that has arisen from the incorporation of the company? Hon. C. Clark: Not time that they're paid for by the school board. It would be either on their own time, or they would be remunerated for that portion of their time by the company. J. Kwan: The revenues that are generated from these companies — would the minister have any direc-

3252 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 tion with respect to how those moneys would be spent? Or is it entirely up to the board? Hon. C. Clark: It's up to the board. J. Kwan: Earlier, before we broke for lunch, I asked a question about risk — wherein if these business ven- tures should fail, who would be responsible or liable for the failed ventures? The minister said that it would be the company. What about a case where the company has repre- sentatives as directors who are trustees or the secre- tary-treasurer on the board, as is allowed in the act?

What if the venture fails and the company has no abil- ity to absorb the costs of the failed venture? Who will then be responsible? Hon. C. Clark: This is consistent with the laws of British Columbia and with the Company Act. Any li- ability would be limited to the company. J. Kwan: Could the incorporation of such compa- nies or the work of the school boards decide to privat- ize schools in British Columbia? Would they be able to do that? Hon. C. Clark: Schools are a public asset, and the answer is no.

Section 32 approved. On

section 33. J. Kwan:

Section 33 speaks to the acquisition and disposal of land. The original act allows the school boards to dispose of land with the approval of the minister. The amendment means that now the board can dispose of land without seeking the approval of the minister. School boards are facing unprecedented financial hardship, and the disposal of land and school buildings may be looked at as a quick way of generating much- needed funding dollars.

What will the minister do to en- sure that the disposal of school assets considers the long- term needs of schools and that boards will not be forced to dispose of valuable and much-needed assets simply to deal with the short-term need to balance budgets? [1510] Hon. C. Clark: S c h o o l d i s t r i c t s a r e n ' t a b l e t o t a k e money from their capital account, from the sale of their capital assets, and use it for operating. That's a long- standing rule that the government imposed on school districts, and we aren't anticipating changing that. J. Kwan: Well, then, the disposal of assets.

What kind of assets is the minister anticipating that school boards are entitled to dispose of? Hon. C. Clark: It could be a whole host of things. It could be a maintenance yard; it could be the school board office, if they decide to move. It could be a whole host of different kinds of assets, but again, the school district is required to put that back in their capital ac- c o u n t . I t m u s t b e s p e n t o n c a p i t a l ; i t c a n n o t b e s p e n t supporting the operating costs of the school district. J.

Kwan: On the issue of capital, the minister is not providing much-needed funding to upgrade schools for any number of things. I know that in my own commu- nity, there are times when there are issues around win- dow leaks. When it rains, it pours not only outside but inside. When the capital funding dollars are not forth- coming from the minister to fix the school buildings, would disposal of these assets and the dollars be util- ized for fixing up repairs and maintenance for schools? Hon. C. Clark: As has long been the case, school districts can…. You know, repairs are considered part of capital spending.

Certainly, though, we do provide money to school districts for maintenance. We hear from school districts fairly frequently that they think that money is reasonably adequate. J. Kwan: Even the minister herself had formerly complained about how the funding is insufficient, es- pecially for upgrading schools for earthquake prepar- edness purposes, as an example. The former govern- ment initiated the process in terms of putting moneys into capital upgrades in that area. Children, teachers and parents continue to lobby for additional dollars in these areas.

Would a school board be able to divert or sell assets to fix their schools to upgrade for the pur- poses of, let's say, earthquake preparedness? Hon. C. Clark: As I said, the rules around this haven't changed. J. Kwan: It was a first when the minister earlier said that she would answer the question directly. Unfortu- nately, that was the first and only time so far in the debate on Bill 34. Nonetheless, I assume that the an- swer is yes. Actually, I get that from the staff sitting behind the minister, who is nodding his head. I seem to be able to get more information that way rather than from the minister.

I assume, then, that the answer is yes, they're able to do that. Would the school boards be able to dispose of their assets in such a way that they would take that money and invest it in these corporations that we earlier discussed? Hon. C. Clark: As I said, it has to go to the capital account. [1515] J. Kwan: So the disposal of the assets cannot be utilized for the purposes of business ventures of any shape or form. Why is the minister deciding now that the approval for the disposal of the assets should not come to the minister for approval? Hon. C.

Clark: We've said all along that school dis- tricts should have autonomy to make decisions that

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3253 reflect their local communities' needs and local priori- ties. This is a demonstration of that. We trust that school boards will make the right decisions about dis- posing of capital assets. They aren't little kids that re- quire approval from mom and dad every time they turn around. School districts are locally elected. They are responsible. They are empowered by law to make decisions. We believe that they are entirely capable of making these decisions. J. Kwan: How much asset does the minister think the school boards have in British Columbia? Hon. C.

Clark: Well, it's a ballpark, but there's about $8.5 billion of buildings and land in school dis- tricts' asset base. J. Kwan: Would the minister have this information broken down on a school-board-by-school-board basis? Hon. C. Clark: Yeah, I could get that for her. I'm not going to go through the list of 1,750 schools here today, but I could certainly get that for her. J. Kwan: Yes, I would appreciate that information: the assets that school boards own, broken down school board by school board, district by district; what those assets are and the anticipated value of those assets. Sections 33 and 34 approved. On

section 35. J. MacPhail: Could the minister explain the reason for the change here, please? Hon. C. Clark: W e w a n t t o m a k e s u r e t h a t s c h o o l districts share in the proceeds of the sale of an asset proportionate to their original investment. We think that's only fair. J. MacPhail: Yes. I'm asking for what the change is. Can the minister explain the way it was before and what the change is now, please, for the record? Hon. C. Clark: The current School Act, I'm advised, is unclear about the requirement to share in the pro- ceeds of a sale from capital assets.

The amendment to the legislation clarifies that. J. MacPhail: I'm curious to know what change there will be in practice as a result of this legislation. I'm just trying to figure out what the intent is here. Is the new amendment merely reflecting current practice, or will t h e r e b e a c h a n g e i n p r a c t i c e a s a r e s u l t o f t h i s n e w legislation? [1520] Hon. C. Clark: Yeah, this is a change in practice for school districts.

Previously, if the province had any share in contributing to or supporting the purchase of an asset, if that asset was disposed of, all of the money — no matter what the province's share — would go into the capital reserve. Now the portion of the pro- ceeds that's proportionate to the district's contribution can go into their local capital reserve, over which they have control. J. MacPhail: I assume this matter has been dis- cussed with the school trustees. Has there been any ballpark value placed on what this would mean for school boards? Hon. C.

Clark: No, I can't give the member a ball- park on it, but we have talked to school districts who have told us they are pleased with this change. J. MacPhail: W e l l , I ' m c u r i o u s a s t o w h e n t h o s e discussions took place. Perhaps they took place after the annual general meeting of the School Trustees As- sociation. There are two resolutions on record from the an- nual general meeting of the School Trustees Associa- tion — resolutions 39 and 40 — that were passed. One is that the B.C.

School Trustees Association "request the Minister of Education to allow school districts to retain for local capital purposes the proceeds from the sale of district school buildings and/or sites." Perhaps she could address that one in the context of this legislation. Hon. C. Clark: Yeah, that is essentially what we're doing, except that rather than 100 percent of the money going into the local capital reserve, the amount that is proportionate to the contribution of the district origi- nally in purchasing the asset will go to a local capital reserve. J.

MacPhail: That's why I was asking what the ball- park figure would be for school boards. I had assumed that the annual general meeting would have been aware of the legislative implications when they passed this resolution. I'm trying to figure out why there's still a pursuit of this resolution by the School Trustees As- sociation. If indeed in the past there was a shared purchase of an asset and then that asset was sold and 100 percent went into the provincial coffers, have the school trus- tees calculated what, in terms of lost opportunity cost and lost revenue, that's meant for them?

Let me ask that question first. Hon. C. Clark: Let me correct the member. The portion that is proportionate to the provincial invest- ment in the purchase of the property doesn't go into provincial coffers. It goes into the capital reserve. It stays in the district in their capital account, but that's controlled by the province. The difference between the capital reserve and the local capital reserve is that the local capital reserve is something over which the local school district has control. Did school districts calculate how much this would mean in lost opportunity for them? I don't have an an-

3254 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 swer to that. What were they thinking when they put forward the resolution? I'll quote my husband and tell the member that I am not psychic, so I don't know what they were thinking when they did it. J. MacPhail: Sorry. I thought the minister, the last time we discussed this legislation, was on the verge of meeting again with the School Trustees Association. I had asked that question on several other matters about issues that arose out of their annual general meeting. I just assumed that that meeting had taken place and that those matters had been explored.

I'm curious, then. Let me read the next resolution passed by the AGM and see whether that's been dis- cussed: "That BCSTA urge the Minister of Education to allow school boards to use the proceeds from assets originally purchased through local capital funds for operating or capital purposes, as they see fit." [1525] Again, can the minister suggest what discussions, if any, have taken place? Is it her view that the legislative changes meet that request? Hon. C. Clark: No, it doesn't. We, as I said, will not allow school districts to use money from their capital account for operating.

That's just not something we're contemplating. If the BCSTA would like to have a dis- cussion about that, I'm happy to have a discussion with them about it. Although, I can tell the member now what my answer will be to that request. It will be no. J. MacPhail: I'm trying to figure out where it is that the line of autonomy is drawn. School boards are try- ing to figure out ways to meet their needs, and the government seems to be claiming that this is putting more money in the hands of school boards through sharing of sale of assets.

Yet the portion of the sale of assets that was originally funded by the local school board and is being returned to them is still having re- strictions drawn around it by the Minister of Educa- tion. Is that the understanding? Hon. C. Clark: As I said, we have granted school districts an unprecedented amount of autonomy in their ability to manage their own affairs. They are, I think, grateful for that ability. But we are not, at this stage, con- templating extending that autonomy to allow them to spend money from their capital budgets on operating. J.

MacPhail: When is the minister meeting with the School Trustees Association to discuss these issues? Hon. C. Clark: We have not set a date, but of course, I'm always delighted to meet with the BCSTA. It's something I do very frequently. I'm in regular con- tact with Gordon Comeau, their president. We're here to help in the ministry, so I'm always delighted to meet with them. J. MacPhail: I'm sorry; I must have misunderstood the minister last time. She said that she was about to meet with the School Trustees Association to discuss these resolutions.

In terms of the flexibility given to boards to do as they see best for meeting the increased pressures on their budgets, where is the line drawn? Is it simply that they've got flexibility within the frozen grant to them? Is that what it is? And then beyond that, it's under the minister's control about what they can do? Hon. C. Clark: First, the grants to school districts have not been frozen. Many of them have actually seen increases in their budget this year. They are able to look in their operating budget and move money around within that budget. We've been pretty clear about that.

That's a new flexibility that they haven't had before, and I think they're delighted about it. J. MacPhail: Thank you to my colleague. Yes, we were under the impression that the minister did say last time that she had received the request to meet and was going to meet as soon as possible. So that's why I was under, I guess, the misapprehension that she was actually going to meet. Mr. Chair, these are matters that I assume the School Trustees Association will be looking for flexibil- ity around in order to meet the cost pressures that are ever mounting with a….

Well, I guess we had news today that the Minister of State for Women's Equality had redone her budget and had transition funding. It wo u l d b e ni c e t o hav e t he red o ne b u d g e t i n an e nt i re package across the board. We've got courthouses changing. We've got welfare changes. Gosh, we've got legal aid changes. We've got physician changes.

It would be nice to know exactly what the budgets are of this government. [1530] We certainly know, at least to date, that all of the new money for increased MSP premiums and cost pressures that the boards have had will not continue next year, so I would assume that next year, the second of a three-year budget that's been tabled with the school boards, will be frozen. It will be interesting to know how the school boards will have increased flexi- bility in order to meet the ever-mounting cost pres- sures.

I expect school trustees from around the prov- ince will be looking exactly toward those asset sales for increased flexibility.

Section 35 approved. On

section 36. J. Kwan: This

section deals with the provincial funding for the boards. My colleague and I have re- ceived 679 letters from Kootenay parents. The 679 let- ters are from concerned parents of children in the Kootenay region, and they have sent the letters to the Premier and to the Minister of Education outlining their concerns for the education system in B.C. The Beaver Valley Middle School PAC sent copies of these letters to us so that we, too, would be aware of

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3255 the concerns and to ensure that the minister is aware of the concerns. What I'd like to do, Mr. Chair, is read the letter into the record. The letter reads as follows: "Dear Sir or Madam: "I am deeply concerned about the devastating and unprecedented budget cuts that many of British Columbia's schools are facing over the next three years. Some school districts face drastic service cuts, and others are being forced to close schools. "Services, programs and resources for our children have already been subjected to successive cuts over the last decade.

These new budget cuts will jeopardize the very future of public education. Our children will lose schools, teachers, programs and services that are critical to their support and achievement. All students will suffer, and more will be put at grave risk. "We're asking you to honour your government's promise to protect education and make it a priority and to not cut education funding. We're asking you to fund at the full amount the teachers' salaries and benefit costs that you legislated. By requiring school boards to pay for them, you're effectively making devastating cuts.

"Restore the millions of dollars that many districts have lost because of your new funding system. Education is the best investment we can make in our province's future. If we don't invest in our children today, we'll all pay more tomorrow. Our children desperately need your help. "Thank you." These are the letters we have received — 679 of them in total. First, let me just ask if I could seek leave to table these letters in the form of a petition. Leave granted. Petitions J.

Kwan: Those are the 679 letters from concerned parents from the Kootenay region, and I've read their letter into the record with respect to where their con- cerns lie. Debate Continued J. Kwan:

Section 106.2 requires the minister to es- tablish and announce the amount of provincial funding to be paid to boards in the next fiscal year by February 1. However, there is no mention of what formula will be used to make this determination. What formula will the minister be using to determine what amounts are available for provincial funding for education? [1535] Hon. C. Clark: We announced the formula on March 1. We i nformed board s of that. We spe nt a fair amount of time with them doing that. I think we spent a fair amount of time having a discussion about this in the estimates process in the other chamber as well. That formula is a three-year formula. J. Kwan: Why doesn't

section 106.2 of the bill in- clude a description of the formula that is to be used to determine provincial funding available for education? Hon. C. Clark: The formula, according to this legis- lation, must be announced by March 15 every year. We've committed to having this current formula in place for three years, which is the most stability that districts have had in a long time. Previous governments have changed the formula every year, and school districts were working in a very chaotic and unpredictable atmosphere as a result.

This funding formula is in place for three years, and school districts know that it will be stable, and they will know what to be able to expect. J. Kwan: The minister suggests that in previous years the education system has been in chaos and op- erating under a chaotic system. Here we have a new government with a new minis- ter with her new funding formula, and school boards… An Hon. Member: More good news. J. Kwan: …across British Columbia are finding that educational programs are being cut. The member for Peace River North is suggesting that this is more good news. It is stunning.

I have never heard from an MLA who would say that educational program cuts for their constituents and for the students in their own commu- nity is good news. Closures of schools are taking place across British Columbia. Students are going to be left in a situation where classrooms are going to be more crowded with less attention from the teachers. Special needs assis- tants, many of them, are going to be eliminated from the school system. Teacher-librarians are being taken out of the school system.

Speech pathologists, who teach children so that they can break through the chal- lenge they face and have an opportunity to advance as everybody else who doesn't face those challenges…. Their funding is being cut. Multicultural outreach workers, who assist students so that they can stay in the school system for a longer period of time, are being cut. All of those things and much more are under pres- sure. Those programs are being cut. Here we have the member for Peace River North saying: "More good news." That is absolutely stunning.

Maybe he hasn't gone out to talk to the parents to find out what the par- ents have to say about the cuts in the education system. What we have over the next three years is reduc- tions in the education area because of the pressures that are there in the education system, which are not being funded by this government. As a result of that…. I just read into the record some 697 letters that had been sent from the Kootenay region from parents who are concerned about these cuts. The funding formula does not address their concern. It does not address their concern.

3256 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 It is essential that everyone knows how the amount of funding is established, how it varies from previous years, what it might be in the future and in what context it is understood. To leave this out, quite frankly, is contrary to the notion of predictability and stability and transpar- ency. So far the government has not met those objectives. In the act,

section 106.3 is there for determining the final amount given to school boards, but it is based upon the available amount that the minister deter- mines. Will the minister amend the preliminary amount allocated for provincial funding in order to ensure that non-district students are included in the funding allocation numbers for each district? Hon. C. Clark: We've announced the formula. It will be stable for the next three years. That's certainly an improvement on the way we've done education funding in the past.

The legislation sets out March 15 as the date, and school districts had more time this year than they have had in many, many previous years to do their planning. [1540] We anticipate that this change will mean that school districts have a much more stable environment in which to work. They have an ability to plan for the future. That's certainly going to improve the way that our education system operates. Hon. R. Neufeld: It's good to join the debate.

The member earlier — in a remark I made about more good news in relationship to a new government, a new era and stable funding for education — moved that into my inferring that I agreed with cuts that were happen- ing and all those kinds of things which she lives in that small world about. It is not uncommon for that mem- ber to spread those kinds of rumours. They are ru- mours; they are fearmongering; they're all kinds of garbage. That is not untypical of that member. We've seen her do it time and time again.

I would like to ask the Minister of Education: could she please confirm that school funding this year has stayed the same and, in fact, has increased? I think my school district in Peace River North received a little bit of extra money this year on top of an increase from last year. I would just like the Minister of Education to again tell us about some of that good news that's hap- pened in British Columbia since we finally got rid of those socialists. Hon. C. Clark: I would like to thank the member for his question. What a good one it was.

Indeed, as I've said a number of times in debates — perhaps I haven't said it this afternoon; I appreciate being reminded — not only have we protected the education budget in British Co- lumbia, but we've increased it by $20 million. That is in the context of the largest governmentwide restructuring in British Columbia's history. Every other government in this country has undertaken a governmentwide restruc- turing. We're the last people to get onto this, but we are amongst the first to do a governmentwide restructuring and protect education funding.

When you look across the country and you look at those restructurings that other provinces have done, you will see that they took an equal amount out of education and an equal amount out of health care to what they did in every other ministry. We chose not to do that. We chose a different way because we want to put students first, and education is at the top of our priority list. That's why we've increased education funding this year. We want to make sure that we have and continue to have a top-notch education system not just for this year but for every year to come. J.

MacPhail: You know, it is very disappointing that this government stands up, after they've had re- peated petitions that they've had to table…. Liberal MLAs stand up here at the end of question period and table petitions with thousands of signatures on them. The way they describe it is "people commenting on education funding." Maybe the fact that they can con- vince themselves that that's what the petition is, is good news for this government.

They pound their ta- bles, and we have questions about: "Did you cut fund- ing, or did you increase the budget?" Literally thou- sands of parents have put their names to petitions that have had to be tabled by backbench MLAs and perhaps even some cabinet ministers — parents signing, saying: "We are deeply concerned about the cuts resulting from education funding." Why? Maybe this is why the deficit is $4.4 billion: because this government doesn't actually understand that you have funding and you have expenditures, and when the two don't match, it works out to a deficit. You know what?

That's why we've got the largest defi- cit, under this government, ever in the history of B.C., and we have funding cuts in health and education. That's why. [1545] Here we have the largest deficit ever in the history of British Columbia after receiving two balanced budg- ets and having the largest surplus handed over to this government. Here we have school boards in every sin- gle jurisdiction save one that are having to make cuts in programs, and the government cabinet member stands up and says: "Could you tell me whether you increased funding or not?" Here's the real question.

Here's the real question that maybe the Minister of Energy simply hasn't been paying attention to. After you, Minister of Education, imposed a teachers' settlement worth $300 million, after you imposed MSP premium increases of over $20 million and after you moved to a funding formula that doesn't protect schools in rural areas, did you protect funding? That's the real question.

Of course the backbenchers never ask that, and in fact, the cabinet ministers never ask that question ei- ther, because the answer to that would be: "No, I didn't give the money." The Minister of Education would have to say: "No, in fact, I imposed a teachers' settle- ment, and I didn't fund it. You're right; my government did increase MSP premiums, and no, I'm not funding that. No, that's true. We changed the system so no

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3257 longer are rural schools protected." That's why about 60 of them are closing for the very first time — an un- precedented number of them closing in the history of British Columbia. If the trained seals pounding their desks wanted to ask that question, the Minister of Education would have to stand up and say: "No, I haven't funded those pressures.

In fact, yes, there will be program cuts in every school district save one." In fact, the Minister of Management Services probably isn't standing up ask- ing the question that the Minister of Energy and Mines does, because his school district is actually contemplat- ing — I hope they've stepped back from this — massive school closures. The members from the Kootenays probably should have been tabling this letter from Kootenay parents that the Minister of Energy and Mines gets up and mocks. It isn't my colleague suggesting on her own that somehow there were cuts.

It's 600 parents from one district worried sick about the cuts. Was that…? Interjection. J. MacPhail: The Minister of Energy and Mines accuses the parents of telling a lie. Hon. R. Neufeld: I'm telling you you're telling a lie. J. MacPhail: He says it's untrue. The Chair: Order, members. J. MacPhail: The Minister of Energy and Mines says to these parents that it's untrue. Well, then I guess all the government has to do is write back to every sin- gle one of these parents in the Kootenays and say: "You've got it wrong. There won't be funding cuts. You've got it wrong." That's all that has to happen.

Just stand up…. Instead of self-congratulatory bafflegab about, "Has funding been increased? Why, yes, it has," why doesn't this government come clean and say ex- actly what the funding levels mean for parents, stu- dents and communities in this province? Maybe the Minister of Management Services would like to stand up and contribute to what it says. Maybe the member for Yale-Lillooet would like to stand up and say what it means. I guess maybe any member who's present here could stand up. The Burnaby MLAs — let them stand up.

The member for Burquitlam could stand up and say what funding by this govern- ment for individual school boards may mean. [1550] At least this government should show respect for the very parents that they seem to want to be so incor- porated into the system, for the over 600 parents from one district who write in and say: "We are deeply con- cerned about the devastating and unprecedented budget cuts that many of British Columbia's schools are facing over the next three years." You know what?

Why don't we just have the minister stand up here and say, the way she did to the Minister Energy and Mines, "Don't worry," to these parents, to the Beaver Valley Middle School PAC? This is a parent advisory commit- tee, the new heart and soul of this government's target audience. Say exactly why they shouldn't be concerned and why they're telling something that isn't the truth, as the Minister of Energy and Mines accuses them. Hon. C. Clark: The member is intentionally, I be- lieve, mischaracterizing what the Minister of Energy and Mines said. Certainly, he did not attack the parents who wrote letters.

That is just an absolute mischarac- terization of what he said. I should say this too. I want to thank the member for her rant, for her lesson in mathematics, in budget- ing, in good fiscal management. Thanks a lot. Perhaps she should have given that rant to some of her colleagues over the last decade as they were driv- ing British Columbia into the deepest hole we've been in. Perhaps she should have given that rant to all the investors that have fled this province and taken their money and those jobs with them.

Perhaps she should have given that rant to all the families who've been forced to leave, all the grandchil- dren who can no longer spend time with their grand- parents because there aren't futures for them in their local communities anymore.

Perhaps she could have given that rant when she was standing in front of the mirror when she was Min- ister of Finance for the worst government in British Columbia's history, a government that over a decade put British Columbia at the bottom of the list in this country, the bottom of the list in private sector invest- ment, the bottom of the list in job growth, the bottom of the list by almost every measure in this country. We are dedicated to turning that around. This last budget is the beginning of that. We have been in a dark tunnel in British Columbia for a long time.

It was this member and her government that put us there. We saw with the last budget a little pinprick of light for the very first time at the end of that tunnel. We are going to keep rushing toward that light until we are out in the full light of day finally, so that we have a government in British Columbia that actually repre- sents the people and that believes in local communities, in the forest industry, in the mining industry, in the tourism industry, and is prepared to put our money where our mouth is and make sure that we put British Columbians finally back to work.

The Chair: I just want to remind members…. Interjection. The Chair: Order, please. Order, please. I just want to remind both sides of the House, please, to confine our remarks to

section 36. J. Kwan:

Section 36 relates to the funding formula and the funding formula that school boards get over the next three years.

3258 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 We hear from the minister, ranting about how great a job she's doing in making sure that school boards cut education programs as a result of the lack of funding from this government in the area of education. The minister is full of rhetoric. The rhetoric extends not just from this minister but to every single Liberal MLA, back bench or front bench. We heard from the Minister of Energy and Mines, praising the government on the cuts in education pro- grams.

We heard from the Minister of State for Women's Equality, praising the government on the cuts in education programs. We heard the same thing from the Minister of Management Services, praising the cuts. He has forgotten…. Oh, he's a full minister, but you can't tell the difference. I mean, God, there's so many of them. You don't know what they actually really do other than to cut programs for British Columbians who are in greatest need. You have the Minister of Management Services.

He must not be home very often, because close to 700 con- cerned parents from his own community have sent in a petition calling on the government to fully fund and support the teachers' salaries and benefits that were legislated by this government, calling on the govern- ment to restore the millions of dollars that many dis- tricts have lost because of the new funding formula, which we're discussing under

section 36 today. [1555] That's not all. That's only from one school district for a short period of time. They have gathered this many signatures. In my own community in Vancouver there were over 12,000 letters sent to the minister from Save Our Schools. That was a host of people, and the minister keeps on wanting to minimize and mock that group as though they're not relevant, as though some- how their voice has no role to play. It is absolutely stunning. Let me educate the minis- ter just a little bit about who Save Our Schools are.

"Save Our Schools was launched in Vancouver in early April by a diverse group of parents who were concerned that proposed education cuts would hurt all children and jeopardize our province's public education system. This movement began as a grass-roots response to across-the-board education cuts proposed by the Vancouver school board, which was facing an unprecedented $25 million budget shortfall for next year. "Our ad hoc non-partisan group was founded by concerned parents Maureen Bayless and Judy Thau and is being led by PAC reps and parents from all areas of the city and all walks of life.

We have also received extensive support from our DPAC and from our schools and communities." The minister likes to claim that she'd like to listen to parents. Here we have 12,000 signatures from parents, some of them involved in PACs, involved in DPACs, calling on the government to stop their cuts in the edu- cational programs for students in British Columbia. The minister sits there and mocks the group, writing them off as though they don't count, as though some- how they're there for a partisan purpose.

They're there for one purpose and one purpose only, and that is for the educational opportunities for their students. They are saying that this government has cheated the students of educational opportunities by imposing such a huge set of pressures in the fund- ing areas for schools all across British Columbia. That relates to this

section of the bill around the funding formula we're now debating. On the education cuts, the SOS continues to say: "Our provincial government promised to make education a top priority and to protect education funding. However, the government legislated increases for teachers' pay and other benefits but did not give school boards additional funding to cover the increases for 2002-03 or for further increases legislated for 2003-04. "This means school boards must make cuts to pay for the extra costs.

The new provincial funding formula has also meant reduced funding for many school districts, which now have to choose between cutting essential services or closing schools. SOS parents represent diverse interests, and we agree that instead of fighting amongst ourselves for shares of an inadequate budget, we would stand up together to call for properly funded public schools. "We are not alone. Many schools and communities across B.C. are organizing their own campaigns against the education funding shortfall, including Richmond, Coquitlam, Kitimat and Chilliwack" — j u s t t o n a m e a few.

I know that the parents didn't have very much time to do this work. When I learned of what they were do- ing, I was absolutely astounded from the point of view that in a short period of time, they were able to gather some 12,000 signatures by way of a petition to the gov- ernment. They invited the government to come and receive this petition, and you know what, hon. Chair? The minister couldn't be bothered to show up to re- ceive the petition. In less than 12 days they have gathered over 12,000 signatures, and the minister couldn't be bothered to pick up the petition from them. You know why?

The minister says these people aren't important. She mocks them; she mocks their efforts. She discounts these indi- viduals. The Minister of Energy and Mines pounds his desk as though these cuts are somehow a good thing for the students in British Columbia, as though some 12,000 parents across the province are wrong in terms of the impacts of the cuts from this government. Just for informing the House, let us go into this matter a little bit on cuts for other school boards. For all the MLAs who are sitting silent, I wonder where they are.

They're sitting silent, not asking one question of this minister about the funding formula and the short- fall in the funding that impacts their schools and their students. [1600] Not only are they silent, they are pounding their desks and barking, saying, "This is wonderful, wonder- ful. Make more cuts," and that's somehow a good thing. Let's look at the Alberni area. What's the Alberni district faced with? Two million dollars' worth of short- fall. What are the cuts? They are 15.7 full-time teaching positions; up to 20 teacher assistants; maintenance workers; even the bus drivers are at risk; 2½ clerical

TUESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3259 positions. Non-enrolling teachers will also have their hours reduced, including librarians. Burnaby school district. I'm waiting to hear whether or not the members from Burnaby will rise up to raise these issues: a $7.5 million shortfall; 80 teaching positions, including classroom teachers, ESL teachers; librarians; counsellors; 20 janitorial positions; cuts to the supplies, to the bus routes and to career programs.

I'd like to hear the members from Burnaby rise in this House and tell parents that a $7.5 million shortfall in the Burnaby school district is a good thing for the students there, that cutting ESL teachers…. The mem- ber for Burnaby North knows — I know he knows — that in the area of Burnaby there is great need for ESL teachers and ESL training for the students. They're now f ac e d wi t h c u t s i n t hi s are a a s a re s u l t o f t hi s g o v e rn- ment's and this minister's shortsightedness and lack of priority in the area of education. Coquitlam. What happened to the silent member from Coquitlam?

There's a $6.9 shortfall. Curriculum experts, groundskeepers and resource staff are being eliminated — the groups of people that make the school system work. Those people are now going to be eliminated. There's $6.9 million worth of shortfall in Coquitlam. That's the minister's own riding, and she's not coming forward to advocate for her students. No, she's not. She's saying: "Well, you know, your concerns are irrelevant. We protected funding." The minister knows, and knows very well, that what she's done is cut educational funding.

How is the minister justifying the funding formula that results in reduced funding for schools boards and for the students in British Colum- bia? Kootenay — the Minister of Management Services. In the Kootenay-Columbia school district eight schools are going to be closing as a result of the budget short- fall, the budget pressures caused by this government. Langley schools — the Minister of State for Women's Equality. There's a $6.5 million shortfall. Maybe the Minister of State for Women's Equality should go and talk to the school trustee, Diane Pona.

Here's what she had to say: "This particular govern- ment I don't believe has a clue about what education is." And the minister says: "Been there, done that." Actually, maybe she did meet with them; I don't know. But when the women's centres coalition wanted to meet with the Minister of State for Women's Equal- ity, do you know what she said to them? "I'll meet with you provided that (

a) you don't go to the media and (

b) you don't make me angry." That's what happened, hon. Chair. The Chair: Member, on

section 36, please. J. Kwan: The Nanaimo-Ladysmith school district. There's a $7 million shortfall. Proposed cuts: 45 teach- ing positions, 11 support staff, four administrative workers, increased class sizes between grades 4 and 12. New West. Where is the member from New West? It is the Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection. I guess she's busy trying to just be a mouthpiece for the minister, because she has done nothing to protect edu- cation. Interjections. The Chair: Member. Member, would you please confine your remarks to

section 36. J. Kwan:

Section 36…. Interjections. The Chair: Order, order. Please, your remarks to

section 36. [1605] J. Kwan: Yes, absolutely, Mr. Chair. In the New West area there's a $2.3 million short- fall. Where is the funding formula that justifies a $2.3 million shortfall in the New West area? We have cuts — 24 teaching positions being eliminated; ending the community education night school program; eliminat- ing some of the crossing guards; even cancelling early French immersion programs that were meant to start during the upcoming school year. That is what New West is facing as a result of the funding formula that is being imposed by this government.

This minister says it is somehow better for the students when we see crossing guards being eliminated, night school pro- grams being eliminated, French immersion programs not being able to start as a result of the funding short- fall that this government has created in the area of edu- cation. North Van school district. Where are the members from North Van school district? There's a $6.7 million shortfall; increased class size in grades 4 to 7; increased fees for band programs, outdoor school and summer school; aging furniture and equipment that won't be replaced.

Prince George school district: $9.2 million shortfall; 160 teaching positions this year and an additional 57 next year will be cut; 12 school closures, including four rural schools — McLeod Lake, Hixon and Bear Lake Elementary Schools and Blackburn Junior Secondary School. How is that funding formula helpful for the students in Prince George? How is it helpful? Then we have Quesnel school district, with about a million dollars' worth of shortfall and two elementary school closures.

To help address a budget shortfall of more than $1 million, the Quesnel school district board of trustees decided to proceed with plans to close Wells Barkerville and Rich Bar Elementary Schools in Sep- tember. Students from the Wells Barkerville Elemen- tary School will be bused 77 kilometres one way from Wells to Barlow Creek Elementary School. Barlow Creek Elementary is 11 kilometres northeast of Quesnel on the Barkerville Highway. Twelve teaching positions will be eliminated, and there will also be a reduction in the school trustees from seven to five. Saanich. Where are the members from Saanich?

There's a $1.5 million shortfall. Three special needs

3260 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, MAY 7, 2002 education assistants, 22 full-time teaching positions, 20 support staff, four administrators…. McTavish and Sansbury Elementary Schools will have to share one principal. That is as a result of the funding formula now before the House under Bill 34. Sooke: $3 million shortfall, 26 classroom teachers…. The Chair: Member, your time has expired. J. Kwan: Okay. I am going to ask the minister this question, then. How does this funding formula assist these schools when they're faced with all these pres- sures?

As a result of the funding shortfall, they're going to lose the supports they need in the school system for the children. Hon. C. Clark: As I explained to the member a number of times in estimates, the funding formula has not penalized districts — not the actual funding for- mula itself. In fact, I think what she's doing is confus- ing two things. She's confusing the structure of the way we distribute the money, which is what we're discuss- ing in this legislation, versus how much money is dis- tributed. I want to make two points about that.

On the sec- ond, as I've said, we have increased the amount of money that is allocated to the Education budget this year by $20 million. While she stands up and sort of cavalierly says this means that districts have their budgets cut and that all

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0507pm-07
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0507pm 07
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	fbf25091a683eaca8906e83190db8aae3312f6f7

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