British Columbia Hansard — Monday, May 13, 2002

H0513pm-12

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

3rd Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, May 13, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Volume 7, Number 12 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 Monday, May 13, 2002 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 3377 Introduction and First Reading of Bills ........................................................................................ ......................................... 3377 Labour Relations Code Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 42) Hon. G. Bruce Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 48) Hon. G. Bruce Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 49) Hon. G.

Bruce Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 3378 Recognition of work of police officers D. Hayer Volunteer marine rescue organizations R. Sultan Education system advocates R. Stewart Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3380 Mental health services for persons with schizophrenia J. MacPhail Hon. G.

Cheema Mental health services for Sunshine Coast J. Kwan Hon. G. Cheema Citizens' assembly on electoral reform J. Bray Hon. G. Plant Death of Frank Joseph Paul T. Bhullar Hon. R. Coleman Grizzly bear protection J. Kwan Hon. J. Murray Tabling Documents .............................................................................................................. .................................................... 3382 Draft letter pertaining to the Vancouver coastal health authority Map regarding bear habitation Judicial Compensation Committee report, 2002 B.C.

Assessment Authority financial statements report, 2000 First Peoples Heritage, Language and Culture Council, annual report, 2000-01 Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3382 Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act (Bill 39) Hon.

M. de Jong Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3383 Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act (Bill 39) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 3383 Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act (Bill 39)

Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3383 Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 40) Report and Third Reading of Bills .............................................................................................. ........................................... 3383 Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 40) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3383 Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 41) Hon.

M. de Jong Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3384 Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 41) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 3384 Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 41) Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 3384 Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 50) Hon.

S. Bond J. Kwan B. Locke Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 51) Hon. R. Coleman J. Kwan Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3389 School Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 34) (continued) J. Kwan Hon. C.

Clark Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 3407 School Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 34) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 3407 School Amendment Act, 2002 (Bill 34) Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 3407 Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act (Bill 27) (continued) J.

MacPhail Hon. M. Coell J. Kwan L. Mayencourt

3377 MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 The House met at 2:03 p.m. Introductions by Members Hon. L. Reid: I have the enormous pleasure and privilege today to introduce individuals representing the Salvation Army. We have commissioners Luttrell, Bill and Gwen, CEOs for both Canada and Bermuda, and the Copples, who are based in Vancouver. They're the CEOs for British Columbia South. They do amazing work in our province and across this country, and it's a privilege to have the opportunity to introduce them to this Legislature today. I would ask the House to please make them extremely welcome. R.

Harris: Since I've been elected, in Victoria I've had the pleasure, as a lot of members have, of meeting and working with a number of young people who work down here in the Legislature. Today we're joined in the House by Lisa Oldham from the east annex. Would the House make her feel welcome, please. P. Nettleton: I'd like members to join me in wel- coming, all the way from the lovely community of Fort St. James, Mayor Jim Togyi and his wife Ellen Togyi, as well as residents Walter and Del Dagenais. J. Bray: I have a couple of introductions.

First, it's my pleasure to introduce to the House Andrew Clark and Christine Harvey. Andrew and Christine maintain a residence here in Victoria. They also pursue some business interests in Sacramento, but they feel and know that Victoria is their true home. I ask that the House please make them very welcome. [1405] I a l s o n o t i c e u p i n t h e g a l l e r y s o m e b o d y f r o m m y riding who worked extremely hard on my campaign and has become a wonderful friend. She also works here in the Legislature. I would ask the House to please give an enthusiastic welcome to Rosie Debretzy. Hon. G.

Halsey-Brandt: It's indeed a pleasure this afternoon to introduce Nick Loenen, who was an MLA serving in the Legislature in the 1980s and early 1990s. I know he's active as a writer and a teacher, a contribu- tor in terms of voting structure across Canada and in British Columbia. May the House make him welcome this afternoon. Hon. S. Bond: I am very pleased today to welcome a special guest to the precinct, Mr. Speaker. On your be- half, I want to welcome Dr. Martha Salcudean. Dr.

Sal- cudean is the professor emeritus and Weyerhaeuser chair at the University of British Columbia, where she served as head of the department of mechanical engi- neering and associate vice-president of research. She's an amazing person. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, Canadian Academy of Engineering, a recipi- ent of the Isaac Walton Killam Memorial Prize in engi- neering and a member of the Order of British Columbia. In addition, she has been awarded honorary doctorates by the University of Ottawa and the University of Brit- ish Columbia. I'm very pleased to introduce Dr.

Sal- cudean today because she has also agreed to serve as the chair of the new Leading Edge Endowment Fund society. I know she's going to do a fabulous job. Please help make her welcome to the precinct today. W. McMahon: It's a pleasure today to introduce Jeevan Atwal, an assistant legislative assistant working with us in the east annex. I ask the House to please make her welcome. R. Stewart: I'm very pleased today to be able to recognize my very special daughter, Vanessa, who is here today. She is writing a report for school. Would the House please make Vanessa very welcome. Hon. G.

Bruce: I, too, have an introduction today, although she actually isn't one that needs to be intro- duced to the House, because she spends as much time down here as I do. In the gallery today is my wife, An- neke. With her is one of my daughters, Tanya, and one of my sons, Ryan. I would ask the House that you en- courage them with a robust round of applause. I. Chong: Today I am pleased to welcome a grade 5 class from Glenlyon-Norfolk School who are here hav- ing a tour of the Legislature. I will be meeting with them shortly after question period, and I know they'll pose a number of questions.

They're here today with their teacher, Ms. Davidson, and I ask the House to please make them very welcome. Introduction and First Reading of Bills LABOUR RELATIONS CODE AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. G. Bruce presented a message from Her Hon- our the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Labour Relations Code Amendment Act, 2002. Hon. G. Bruce: I move that Bill 42 be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. G. Bruce: Today I'm pleased to introduce Bill 42, the Labour Relations Code Amendment Act, 2002. [1410] Bill 42 strengthens the existing purposes

section of the code to ensure that the Labour Relations Board will base its decisions on the actual purposes of the legisla- tion. Fundamental to these purposes is the development of economically viable businesses from which employ- ment and the right to trade union representation arises.

3378 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 It also adds a clear recognition of the substantive rights and obligations of employers, trade unions and employees. The bill clarifies the existing right to com- municate and balances that right with specific protec- tion from intimidation or coercion. These changes provide a framework in British Co- lumbia for workers who can choose union representa- tion and employers to build healthy enterprises that can compete on a world scale in the twenty-first century.

In addition to this bill, we will also be undertaking further consultation to find ways to modernize labour relations in B.C., as many of the different and various labour unions have asked me to do. We're encouraging employees and employers to develop healthy work- place relationships that lead to good, sustainable jobs. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 42 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.

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. G. Bruce presented a message from Her Hon- our the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Employ- ment Standards Amendment Act, 2002. Hon. G. Bruce: I move that Bill 48 be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. G. Bruce: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 48, the Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2002. Modernizing employment standards is an important part of our government's overall goal of encouraging em- ployees and employers to develop healthy workplace relationships that lead to good, sustainable jobs.

I am very pleased that this bill will help us accomplish just that. The changes in this bill follow through on commit- ments made before the 2001 election in the New Era document, in which we promised to give workers and employers greater flexibility in employment standards to negotiate mutually beneficial relationships that help them compete and prosper. This bill gives employees and employers the flexi- bility to create hours-of-work agreements that suit their needs, guided by the model of the 40-hour work week.

It increases protection for vulnerable workers through focused enforcement of employment stan- dards rules and stiffer penalties for employers who would break the law. It makes employment standards easier to under- stand, so employees know their rights, and employers properly apply the rules. This bill balances safeguards for working people while giving flexibility for employees and employers to succeed in a competitive economy. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 48 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. WORKERS COMPENSATION AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. G. Bruce presented a message from Her Hon- our the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2002. Hon. G. Bruce: I move that Bill 49 be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. G. Bruce: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 49, the Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2002.

This bill amends the Workers Compensation Act to introduce a number of changes to workers compensa- tion benefits and establish a new board-of-directors structure for the WCB. [1415] It introduces a new method for calculating workers compensation benefits using 90 percent of average net earnings as the basis of these calculations. The bill provides for wage replacement benefits to be provided to age 65, at which point a lump sum re- tirement benefit is paid to permanently injured work- ers.

It alters the method of calculating inflation adjust- ments to wage replacement benefits and adjusts bene- fits in cases where an injured worker is also receiving a Canada Pension Plan disability pension. This bill clarifies coverage for mental stress, explic- itly stating that coverage will only be provided for mental stress when it is an acute reaction to a sudden and unexpected traumatic event or the result of an in- jury or disease for which the worker is entitled to com- pensation. This bill establishes a new governance struc- ture for the Workers Compensation Board.

I move that the Workers Compensation Amend- ment Act be read a first time now. Bill 49 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) RECOGNITION OF WORK OF POLICE OFFICERS D. Hayer: I t i s w i t h b o t h p r i d e a n d h o n o u r t h a t I rise to address this House — honour that I can recog- nize and congratulate police officers who have served above and beyond the call of duty and pride, because

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3379 many years ago, before I was elected MLA to represent Surrey-Tynehead, as the president of the Surrey Chamber of Commerce, I initiated the program that is the subject of this statement. Wednesday night, my Surrey MLA colleagues from Surrey-Cloverdale, Surrey–Green Timbers, Surrey- Whalley and I, along with the Solicitor General, who was the featured guest speaker, had the pleasure of attending the sixth annual Surrey Chamber of Com- merce Police Officer of the Year Awards.

For six years Surrey Chamber, the city of Surrey and certainly the many constituents of my riding of Surrey-Tynehead have recognized these police officers who have served and have given far beyond what is required. The Surrey RCMP officer who was nominated by the community at large as the police officer of the year for 2002 is Constable Mike Wilson. I ask this House to congratulate Constable Wilson's achievement by giving an extra-long round of applause at the end of this statement.

Also, I want to recognize Constable Mike Petrilli, who was named officer of the year by his fellow offi- cers, volunteers and the staff of Surrey RCMP detach- ment. There is no form of praise greater than that of one's peers. In closing, Mr. Speaker, others recognized at the awards ceremony in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead were Staff Sgt. Richard Deets, who received the com- munity policing initiative award; Langley Chrysler for the business partnership award; Margaret Pattyson for the volunteer of the year award; and Janice Spraggs for the employee of the year award.

I would ask all mem- bers to join me in congratulating these fine officers and citizens. Thank you. VOLUNTEER MARINE RESCUE ORGANIZATIONS R. Sultan: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell you today about two organizations that maintain British Columbia's proud tradition of volunteer life-saving on the water. The first is the Canadian Lifeboat Insti- tution, which operates two 44-foot lifeboats, Steveston and Deltaport. These heavy-duty twin diesel, self- righting vessels can make 18 knots and survive heavy weather. About 100 volunteers purchase, operate and main- tain these rescue vessels at no cost to the government.

They are good insurance against a 747 landing short at the Vancouver runway or a possible cruise ship fire. The Lifeboat Institution also deals with other confu- sions of marine life. For example, member John Horton contributes his former admiral's barge, Artist's Life . Last year he was asked by the Coast Guard to check out a vessel showing up on their radar doing 360- degree turns in Active Pass. He found an inexperienced boater, using a Petro-Canada highway map, trying to find the exit in the fog. [1420] The second, much larger organization locally is the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary.

The auxiliary is, again, self-supporting unpaid volunteers operating with non-government funding, although the Coast Guard does pay for their fuel. The auxiliary provides a maximum 30-minute dispatch time, something like a volunteer fire brigade in smaller communities. They purchase, with their own money and local contribu- tion, rigid-hull inflatables which can be driven up to 50 knots by twin outboards.

These small, fast, shallow- draft vessels are based in Point Roberts, Crescent Beach, Steveston, the north arm of the Fraser, Deep Cove, Gibsons and Fishermans Cove in Port Moody, merely to cite those on the lower mainland. Our marine environment is hostile. Fall overboard, and you have about 20 minutes before hypothermia gets you. Each year the several hundred volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary and of Canadian Lifeboat rescue many mariners in distress. Those of us who en- joy the water are deeply indebted to these unsung, un- paid, largely unrecognized volunteers, and they de- serve our thanks.

EDUCATION SYSTEM ADVOCATES R. Stewart: I stand today to recognize those peo- ple who support and advocate for our school system. O f c o u r s e , t h a t d o e s n ' t n a r r o w i t d o w n m u c h , s i n c e there are many groups that support and advocate for education. There are parents, who in a very real way have a stake in what happens in our schools. There are students, who more and more are hoping to have a voice in the type of education they receive. There are school trustees entrusted by taxpayers in each community with the responsibility to run our school system.

There is society in general, for whom the edu- cation system holds the economic and social future of its citizens. There certainly are the professional teachers. The teaching profession is the cornerstone of the school system, and professional teachers should be valued and respected for the enormous responsibility they hold and for the professionalism with which they tackle their responsibilities.

Each of us, I suspect, has fond memories of a special teacher — a teacher who went out of his or her way to reach a child, to instil both knowledge and wisdom, to develop the natural thirst for knowledge in his or her students.

I know of teachers who arrive at 7:30 a.m. or who are still at the school in the evenings, teachers who h a v e s p e n t w e e k e n d s a w a y f r o m h o m e a t s p o r t s tournaments or band concerts or other field trips, teachers who stay up until midnight marking exams or writing reports or planning the next day's lessons, teachers who recognize that parental involvement has an enormous influence on a student's success, teachers who welcome parents into the classroom and into school life. In fact, I'm married to one such teacher. Teachers are important, but teachers tell me how important parents are too.

I believe it's entirely appro- priate that we have given parents a stronger voice in our school system, and I believe that professional

3380 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 teachers would concur. The role of parents is to raise their children and to advocate for their children. It is very important that we listen to these voices and pay heed to the wisdom behind them. Therefore, I salute the professional teachers and the parents of our school system, with the hope that they will continue to work together for our students. Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements. Oral Questions MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR PERSONS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA J.

MacPhail: T h e w e e k b e f o r e l a s t w e a s k e d t h e Minister of State for Mental Health about the funding cut to the North Shore schizophrenia society. The min- ister was very clear. He told the House that the Van- couver coastal health authority had been put on notice and that cuts like this will not be tolerated. He said it would not be tolerated. It's been almost two weeks. The North Shore schizophrenia society still doesn't have its funding.

To the Minister of State for Mental Health: when is he going to keep his promise to mental health patients on the North Shore and order the health authority to reinstate funding to the North Shore schizophrenia society? Hon. G. Cheema: During last week's question pe- r i o d I m a d e i t v e r y c l e a r t h a t w e h a v e g i v e n c l e a r guidelines and that those guidelines must be met. Those expectations are very important for mental health patients, and we expect that they will be met. In the meantime, I have been in touch with the health authorities, and I'm waiting for a positive reply.

Our main focus is patients and their families. Men- tal health, which has been ignored in the past, will not be ignored. This member knows better than that. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition with a supplementary question. [1425] J. MacPhail: Gosh, I wonder what kind of advocate that is when a phone call still isn't delivering, and in fact, the cuts are getting worse. Patients are actually wondering why they're still seeing their services dis- appear. It's not only the North Shore schizophrenia society that has been cut.

The schizophrenia society in Sechelt has lost funding for its eight-hour-a-week staff position as well as funding for its respite worker. How does the Minister of State for Mental Health feel about these cuts? Does he need to make another phone call? Does he think that they should be toler- ated? If not, when is he going to stop just begging the coastal health authority to change its mind? Why does- n't he order the health authority to backtrack, reverse the cuts and fund the schizophrenia societies? Hon. G. Cheema: During the campaign we made a commitment to fully fund and implement the mental health plan.

Not only are we funding a $125 million mental health plan, but we are also funding an addi- tional $138 million. We don't need to have a lecture from the NDP. Let me just read from one article. This is from a Vancouver Sun

article of April 1, 2000. The headline was "Mental Health Policy: Another Bogus NDP Policy." "The an- nouncement in the provincial capital two years ago was a classic example of the NDP party's style of pol- icy-making: big, brassy and ultimately bogus." The member opposite was Minister of Health. She admitted that they were not doing enough. We made a commitment, and we are fulfilling that promise. In one year we have done more than the NDP government did in the last ten years. Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a fur- ther supplementary. J. MacPhail: Gosh, let's see how that works.

The programs for the mentally ill and their families that have been in place for years are being cut, and this Minister of State for Mental Health stands up and somehow thinks he's an advocate? Not only has his government cut funding to the schizophrenia society in Sechelt, but they've also chopped the number of mental health outreach work- ers in the community in half. Those outreach workers are a critical part of providing care to patients and families that are suffering from mental illness.

They provide support, education and advice to families and patients who are in crisis, helping them navigate through a very difficult health time. Let's see. These programs have been in place and fully funded for years; now they're being cut. Again, the minister said he wouldn't tolerate cuts to mental health programs. Was that just more spin from the minister, or could he actually stand up and say: "I meant what I said"? Hon. G. Cheema: If this member thinks that spend- ing $125 million is a cut for Mental Health, then she's wrong.

If this member thinks that spending $1.1 billion more on health care this year is a cut, then this member is wrong. We are spending… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G. Cheema: …close to $10.3 billion for health care in this province, and Mental Health is getting a fair share of the funding. We are investing in health care which will have a long-term impact on mental health in this province. We wish they had done that. She's fearful because we'll be successful. She's not fearful because patients will suffer.

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3381 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR SUNSHINE COAST J. Kwan: All the minister has to do is ensure that the funding is in place for these programs. It seems this government is intentionally trying to make life miser- able for mental health patients on the Sunshine Coast. The Minister of State for Mental Health has also eliminated funding for the Arrowhead drop-in centre for mental health patients in Sechelt. It's going to have to close its doors at the end of June. The Arrowhead mental health drop-in centre provides an invaluable service to the community.

It provides meals and activi- ties, it coordinates a larger volunteer program, it oper- ates a greenhouse, and it employs an advocate. Mental health patients in Sechelt are devastated by the closure of their drop-in centre. They don't know where to turn now that their $51,000 grant has been eliminated by this government. [1430] Again, to the Minister of State for Mental Health: would the minister like to explain to the patients why they have to tolerate the closure of their centre when the minister promised them that he wouldn't? Hon. G. Cheema: Mr. Speaker, during that cam- paign a promise was made.

A promise was made to fully fund and implement the mental health plan. We have done that. We are not only spending $125 million extra; we will be spending $138 million extra. What has t o b e d o n e … . T h i s m e m b e r m u s t u n d e r s t a n d t h a t w e have given them clear guidelines, and those guidelines must be met. We should not be micromanaging the health care system. This is important for patients and their families, and all the advocacy groups in this prov- ince are working with us, unlike the NDP. They were not working with them. Mr.

Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J. Kwan: Let's just recap. The Minister of State for Mental Health told mental health patients and their families that he won't tolerate cuts to mental health services, but in the community of Sechelt mental health services are being wiped out. They've lost their out- reach workers. They've lost their respite worker. They've lost their part-time outreach coordinator. Now they've lost their mental health drop-in centre. That's just in Sechelt. These are the cuts that are being repli- cated throughout the province.

Either the minister wasn't being truthful when he said that cuts won't be tolerated, or someone is dis- obeying his orders. To the minister: will he today get out his pen and paper and write a letter to the Vancou- ver health authority ordering them to follow up his directive and reinstate funding for all of these mental health services in Sechelt? If it would help, I have al- ready drafted a letter for the minister. All he has to do is sign it. J. MacPhail: Hear, hear. Just sign the letter. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. G.

Cheema: Any development for the mental health policy in this province must be done in consulta- tion with the health care providers, advocacy groups, the families and the patients. For the last ten months I have met with many groups, and the policies are being developed in consultation with all of them. The main objective is to serve the patients and their families. The health authorities are working with us, and we are en- suring that they will meet those standards. For the first time in any part of this country we have certain goals, and those objectives must be met.

They will only im- prove the patients and their health in this province. CITIZENS' ASSEMBLY ON ELECTORAL REFORM J. Bray: My question is to the Attorney General. Today the three-year vote campaign has been launched to push for the implementation of a proportional repre- sentation system to elect MLAs. This is an issue of great interest in my constituency. In the New Era document the government committed to appointing a citizens' assembly on electoral reform to assess all pos- sible models for electing MLAs. Could the Attorney General tell us when this commitment will be fulfilled? Hon. G. Plant: Well, yes.

Prior to the last election we recognized that there was growing public interest in the subject of electoral reform, and we said that if elected, we would create a citizens' assembly that would consider proposals for electoral reform. We in- tend to keep that commitment. It was a commitment made in the New Era document, and we are certainly beginning the work to implement that citizen's assem- bly. I look forward to completing that work in the months ahead. Mr. Speaker: The member for Victoria–Beacon Hill has a supplementary question. J.

Bray: Well, a number of forums have been held throughout the province advocating the need for a move towards proportional representation, and I at- tended a large one here in Victoria. Could the Attorney General tell us whether the government supports pro- portional representation? [1435] Hon. G. Plant: There are many ideas for electoral reform. Proportional representation is one of them. Of course, there is also the possibility that a group of citi- zens examining all the alternatives might determine that our system, the current system, for all of its fea- tures and sometimes its flaws, is the best.

We as a government believe that the best way to advance the discussion of electoral reform is to ask a group of citizens to consider it, and we will not have a

3382 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 position on proportional representation or any other model. That is exactly why we have decided that we should have a citizens' assembly: to ask a group of citi- zens those very important questions. We intend to keep that promise. DEATH OF FRANK JOSEPH PAUL T. Bhullar: My question is to the Solicitor General. Over the past weeks I've had numerous correspon- dence with internal affairs of the Vancouver police department and the police complaint commissioner concerning the death of Frank Joseph Paul, a homeless person.

This correspondence indicates that the Solici- tor's office was satisfied that there was no serious wrongdoing in this matter, and the file was closed. Would the Solicitor General please tell the House the precise nature of the review by his office in this matter? Hon. R. Coleman: First of all, I don't comment on an independent office of the Legislature in any investi- gation it may be conducting, but I will clarify for the member that we did have a request from the commis- sioner with regards to a coroner's inquest. We advised that a coroner's inquest was not warranted in this case.

In the Paul case a coroner's inquiry was held, and the coroner's file was closed. A report with recommenda- tions was published. After a file has been closed, a formal coroner's in- quest can be ordered only if (

a) the coroner neglects to hold an inquest or (

b) an inquest has been held, and it's in the interests of justice to hold another inquest. In my opinion, neither of these conditions applies. A coroner's inquest is not the forum to assign blame for deaths or to conduct cross-examination of witnesses. In fact, the Coroners Act prohibits findings of fault or blame. The coroner is there to determine whether a death is natural and, if not, give recommen- dations to help prevent future deaths. The coroner per- formed his duty by identifying Mr. Paul, the approxi- mate time, date and place of his death and the cause of death.

Four recommendations were made to the Van- couver city police. It is our expectation that they be acted upon. I understand that they have been, to help prevent any future or similar deaths in the future. GRIZZLY BEAR PROTECTION J. Kwan: The Minister of Water, Land and Air Pro- tection constantly defends her scientifically based ap- proach to environmental management, but when it comes to grizzly bears, it's shoot first because the sci- ence doesn't matter. Just today her ministry has issued a press release extending the grizzly bear hunt on Van- couver Island throughout this fall. Mr.

Speaker, there are no grizzly bears on Vancou- ver Island, nor have there ever been any. This has been confirmed by the minister's own website. Just how much faith can British Columbians have in the judgment of a minister tasked with protecting grizzlies and their habitats when she doesn't even know where they are? Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: The NDP imposed a blanket mora- torium on grizzly bear hunting contrary to the advice of the wildlife biologists and scientists in the ministry.

When we were elected, we listened to the scientists in the ministry, and we lifted the blanket moratorium, because we are committed to make these decisions based on science, not based on politics. [End of question period.] J. Kwan: I seek leave to table documents. Leave granted. Tabling Documents J. Kwan: I rise to table two documents. The first one is a draft letter that I've prepared for the signature of the Minister of State for Mental Health to direct the Vancouver coastal health authority to not make any cuts in the area of mental health.

The second document is a map arising out of the Minister for Water, Land and Air Protection's website, and it highlights where the bears inhabit British Co- lumbia. It shows that, in fact, there have never been bears inhabiting Vancouver Island. [1440] Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, just for the benefit of members, you can ask leave to table a document, but you cannot read from the document. Hon. G. Plant: Pursuant to

section 32.1(11) of the Provincial Court Act, I wish to table before the Legisla- tive Assembly the 2002 Judicial Justice Compensation Committee report and commend to all members the provisions of

section 32.1 and the procedure estab- lished therein. Hon. S. Hagen: I wish to table a report from the B.C. Assessment Authority on the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2000. Hon. G. Abbott: I have the honour to table the 2000-01 annual report of the First Peoples Heritage, Language and Culture Council. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins : I call committee stage of Bill 39. Committee of the Whole House PROTECTED AREAS FORESTS COMPENSATION ACT The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 39; J. Weisbeck in the chair.

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3383 The committee met at 2:43 p.m. Sections 1 to 10 inclusive approved.

Schedule approved. Title approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I wonder if we might go to sec- tion 7 of the bill, Mr. Chairman. On

section 7. Hon. M. de Jong: I have an amendment that I'll table with the Chair. [SECTION 7(1), by deleting the proposed paragraph (

b) and substituting the following: (

b) an annual cut reduction affecting the licence, to the extent that it was or is attributable to the establishment of a protected area.] The Chair: I'll just call for this again. Sections 1 to 6 inclusive approved. Amendment approved.

Section 7 as amended approved. Sections 8 to 10 inclusive approved.

Schedule approved. Title approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:44 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. [1445] Reporting of Bills Bill 39, Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be considered as reported? Hon. M. de Jong: With leave, now, Mr. Speaker. Leave granted. Bill 39, Protected Areas Forests Compensation Act, read a third time and passed. Hon. M. de Jong: I call committee to consider Bill 40.

Committee of the Whole House FORESTS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 40; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:46 p.m. Sections 1 to 17 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:47 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Report and Third Reading of Bills Bill 40, Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, re- ported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed. Hon. M. de Jong: I call the committee to consider Bill 41. Committee of the Whole House FOREST (FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT) AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 41; J. Weisbeck in the chair. The committee met at 2:48 p.m. Sections 1 to 5 inclusive approved. On

section 6. Hon. M. de Jong: I move the amendment on

section 6 presented to the Table. [SECTION 6, by renumbering the proposed subsection (2) as subsection (1.2).] Amendment approved.

Section 6 as amended approved. Sections 7 to 11 inclusive approved.

3384 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 Title approved. Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:49 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills Bill 41, Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002, reported complete with amendment. Third Reading of Bills Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be considered as reported? Hon. M. de Jong: With leave, now, Mr. Speaker. Leave granted. Bill 41, Forest (First Nations Development) Amendment Act, 2002, read a third time and passed. Hon.

G. Collins: I call second reading of Bill 50. [1450] Second Reading of Bills ADVANCED EDUCATION STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. S. Bond: I move that Bill 50, Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, be now read a second time. This bill amends the Engineers and Geoscientists Act and the Technical University of British Columbia Act. I would like to speak to the amendments. First, the Engineers and Geoscientists Act.

These amendments will authorize the Association of Professional Engi- neers and Geoscientists of B.C. to make bylaws requir- ing that members of the association carry primary and secondary liability insurance. In addition, the amendments will authorize the association to establish insurance fees and other fees either by bylaw or under the authority of a bylaw. These amendments will allow the association to par- ticipate in a national secondary-liability insurance pro- gram established by the Canadian Council of Profes- sional Engineers.

The amendments will also enable the association to make bylaws establishing the circum- stances under which its members are required to hold primary liability insurance. Additionally, the amendments will authorize the association to establish insurance fees either by bylaw or under the authority of a bylaw. This will provide the association with the flexibility to adjust fees in re- sponse to changes in the insurance market. For consis- tency, the amendments will also authorize council to establish other fees either by bylaw or under the au- thority of a bylaw.

By authorizing the association to require members to maintain insurance, this legislation will help to im- prove liability coverage for engineers and geoscientists in the province and increase consumer protection. I would also like to comment on the amendments to the Technical University of British Columbia Act. This bill will amend the Technical University of British Co- lumbia Act so that the government can appoint a tran- sition administrator to wind up the Technical Univer- sity of British Columbia.

The amendments will also provide for transfer of the university's assets and li- abilities and for repeal of the Technical University of British Columbia Act. Continued operation of the Technical University of British Columbia in its current form is simply not fea- sible. Since it was established in 1997, the Technical University of British Columbia has consistently failed to meet its original mandate in terms of enrolment, operating costs, funding and industry partnerships.

Government has increased funding for the Technical University of British Columbia several times and has repeatedly adjusted enrolment targets downward. Government has worked with the Technical Uni- versity of British Columbia to try to find a solution to keep the university going in its present form. However, we have not been able to find a solution that assures certainty for students and is fiscally responsible. We want to ensure a smooth transition for all stakeholders, and this legislation will help to ensure that happens.

In particular, student needs have been this government's top priority in making decisions around the future of the Technical University of British Columbia. In winding up the Technical University, this commitment will continue. The amendments to the Technical University of British Columbia Act will allow for a transition administrator to oversee the winding up of the university and to transfer the rights, property and assets of the university.

I'm very pleased to say that the Technical Univer- sity of British Columbia's assets will be transferred to Simon Fraser University, which has agreed to accom- modate existing Technical University of British Co- lumbia students and to continue the same range of program offerings as the Technical University of British Columbia. Simon Fraser University will also be ac- commodating as many Technical University of British Columbia faculty and staff as possible. Simon Fraser University has agreed to maintain a presence in Surrey and has also committed to expand- ing enrolment in Surrey.

This will benefit students, faculty and staff of the Technical University of British Columbia. The city of Surrey and Surrey residents will also benefit from having a satellite campus of a major university located in the city. Government has also taken steps to ensure that current Technical University of British Columbia stu- dents do not face any disruption to their education

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3385 during the transition period. Current students will be able to complete their year at the university and will be offered the possibility of earning a degree from Simon Fraser University. Not only is the Simon Fraser University proposal good for students, it is also fiscally responsible.

In fact, the Simon Fraser University proposal will cost $22.4 million less over three years than the continued opera- tion of the Technical University of British Columbia under its most recent business plan. [1455] This legislation demonstrates the government's on- going commitment to ensuring that British Columbia has a top-notch advanced education system with sound financial management. It will ensure that the needs of students are met and that public post-secondary educa- tion in this province is delivered in a fiscally responsible manner that benefits all British Columbians. J.

Kwan: Bill 50 marks a substantive setback to edu- cation in this province, as the majority of the provisions in this bill have the purpose of eliminating the Techni- cal University of British Columbia. Tech B.C. is an innovative and dynamic organiza- tion that delivers high-quality high-tech training to the people of British Columbia. Tech B.C. is the only uni- versity-industry hybrid in Canada. At Tech B.C. learn- ing takes place in the classroom, the real world and the virtual world, giving students the right mix of theory, hands-on practice and workplace skills in a high-tech environment.

Research happens in interdisciplinary teams, addressing such areas as design management, on-line learning systems, human-computer interfaces and computer games systems. Tech B.C. is an initiative that should be supported and encouraged, yet this government has chosen to hinder this innovative organization by eliminating the governing board of the university and making Tech B.C. a satellite campus of Simon Fraser University. The New Era document outlines the goals this gov- ernment has for advanced education in British Colum- bia.

Among the many goals listed in the document are: "Double the number of graduates in computer science and electrical and computer engineering within five years," and "Strengthen our network of colleges, insti- tutes and on-line learning throughout the province." That's a direct quote from the New Era document. While the government expresses these sentiments in the New Era document, the government's policies to- wards Tech B.C. hinder the realization of these two goals. Tech B .C. provide d an innovative model fo r as- sisting and furthering these two goals.

Eliminating Tech B.C. is a serious setback to these goals. In a press release issued by the government on Feb- ruary 7, 2002, the minister stated the plan to make Tech B.C. a satellite of SFU: "It's a solution that meets the needs of students and provides certainty." In my esti- mation, a great deal of uncertainty remains for students interested in studying technology in this province. One issue of concern is the lack of support that this government has provided to the institutions that pro- vide on-line and other alternative learning methods. Tech B.C. is a leader in this field.

Tom Calvert, the vice- president of research and external affairs for Tech B.C., is the co-creator of Virtual U software, a well-respected telelearning program. According to Mr. Calvert: "Our goal at Tech B.C. is to use telelearning to the greatest extent that's sensible, and this is partly because we think you can do good teaching but also to increase access." That was from the Vancouver Sun , November 12, 1998. Tech B.C. is a centre that attracts faculty and stu- dents who are leaders in the field of on-line learning because it is the only university of its kind in the coun- try.

Amalgamating Tech B.C. with SFU, I believe, will diminish the capacity of this program to attract the best and the brightest in on-line learning innovation, be- cause Tech B.C.'s unique university model will be lost when Tech B.C. integrates into the existing SFU struc- ture. [1500] The uncertainty regarding this government's com- mitment to distance learning is also evident in the gov- ernment's approach to the Open Learning Agency. The Open Learning Agency has also played a significant role in advanced education in this province; 22,000 people take Open Learning Agency courses each year.

The Open Learning Agency has provided the people of this province with a way to access advanced educa- tional training through distance education. The minis- ter fired the board in February of 2002 and has still not yet announced what will become of the agency and its students. Clearly, innovation in non-traditional learn- ing methods is not a priority for this government. Another source of uncertainty regarding the situa- tion of Tech B.C. relates to the location. Tech B.C. is currently located in Surrey, the fastest-growing com- munity in our province.

This government has repeat- edly criticized the building where Tech B.C. is cur- rently located for being too expensive and being too impractical. I think Surrey is a good location for Tech B.C., and this government's criticism of the physical structure of the building should not interfere with the vision of the project. I am concerned about the location of Tech B.C. and its change and potential change, which may be jeopardized as a result of its amalgamation with SFU. Tech B.C. has had an annual budget of $23 million, and it is estimated that the university pumps $150 million into the local economy each year.

This was derived from the Tech B.C. general information. In my estima- tion, Tech B.C. is based upon a sound vision, and the issues surrounding the building it's located in do not discredit the importance of this vision. I recall that when I was on the Education Commit- tee, there were individuals who came forward and spoke on the Tech B.C. issue. They tried to advocate that the government keep Tech B.C., keep its location, understand its uniqueness and the innovation within it, understand that it's not only a learning environment but also the leading edge of the wedge of technologies in British Columbia.

3386 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 I remember this committee, actually, because when the matter was brought up, the Chair of the committee tried to tell the individuals who came to make those submissions to take their concerns else- where, not to this committee. In spite of that, people came forward and made their submissions in any event, and we listened to those submissions.

Although Vancouver–Mount Pleasant is not where the Tech B.C. site is located — it is located in Surrey — I as an MLA have received correspondence from British Columbians urging the government and urging me as the opposition to raise the issue with government around the importance of Tech B.C. and its innovation, urging the government to keep Tech B.C. intact. So far we have seen a half-earnest, half-hearted a p p r o a c h t o T e c h B . C . f r o m t h e g o v e r n m e n t i n t h e amalgamation of Tech B.C. with SFU. Much of its fu- ture is still uncertain, particularly in relation to its location.

There is also the other issue. It's been surfacing particularly in the newspapers over the last couple of weeks, although we've known about this challenge for some time now. In the years to come there will be a lack of people who are trained in various different fields to come forward into the skilled labour envi- ronment. There are grave concerns in this area.

So far we have not seen any plans whatsoever from this Minister of Advanced Education in terms of preparing British Columbia for the future, in terms of making sure there are people who are trained in the various different trades to make sure the employment needs are going to be met in the future, to make sure the technical needs will be met in the future, to make sure the trades needs will be met in the future. We have yet to see a plan from this government, from this minister, on this issue.

What we have seen so far, though, is elimination of the tuition fee freeze that allowed individuals throughout British Columbia to get access to post- secondary education, particularly those who are faced with socioeconomic barriers and challenges.

What we've seen, quite frankly, is this government attack- ing student s on t hat f ro nt, m aki ng it more and mo re difficult for students to access post-secondary educa- tion. [1505] I wonder where the Surrey MLAs are and whether or not they'll actually rise up in this House to speak on behalf of their own constituents, to speak on behalf of Tech B.C. and to advocate for the protection of Tech B.C. from the chopping block of this govern- ment. So far we haven't heard any Liberal MLAs come up and raise this issue. They have been particu- larly silent, like on so many issues.

Tech B.C. is an- other one of those that the Liberal MLAs are being silent on, and there is no exception to that. If you look at the bill, there is one area of grave concern, and that is the issue in relation to the demise of Tech B.C. and its ultimate future. As we know, not only does it provide an educational opportunity for students and innovation for the people who teach at the university, it is also an economic generator for Surrey. The community would have spinoff in terms of economic activities that Tech B.C. would bring to it.

The certainty of that location is now being questioned and is unanswered, as of yet, by this government. The ramification for Surrey, one of the fastest-growing communities in the lower mainland, is that it's going to have to grapple with the fallout of the govern- ment's decision. This bill deals with the attack on Tech B.C. Interjection. J. Kwan: One of the members raises the issue about the past government's decision around Tech B . C . T h e p a s t g o v e r n m e n t a c t u a l l y r e c o g n i z e d t h e i n n o v a t i o n a r o u n d T e c h B .

C . a n d t h e v a l u e o f T e c h B.C. to British Columbians and understood that it provided tremendous opportunities in the area of technology in this field, both for students and for the p e o p l e w h o w o r k i n t h a t s p a c e . T e c h B . C . b e c a m e a vision from that perspective. Now all of that is being undermined, and there is a potential that this gov- e r n m e n t w i l l s i m p l y d o a w a y w i t h T e c h B . C . i n i t s current location. That would, I think, undermine the progress Tech B.C. was intended to do.

It would un- dermine the future for British Columbia in terms of training people in the various different trades and technologies in preparation for the shortages of these skilled individuals in the future. This is the major

section of the bill that I wish to speak to. I just want to recognize the role of Tech B.C. and its importance and urge the government to keep its current location in Surrey so that it would benefit not only the students and those who are involved with the institution but also Surrey as a whole. B. Locke: I want to thank the Minister of Ad- vanced Education for her vision and this government for making the SFU campus in Surrey a reality. I want to tell you that the people of Surrey are excited. They support the concept of SFU in Surrey in place of Tech B . C .

W e h a v e s u p p o r t f r o m t h e m a y o r a n d c o u n c i l , from the chamber of commerce and, most impor- tantly, from the students. It was only that vision which saved that school and saved those students. I want to tell you, the fallout that the member for Van- couver–Mount Pleasant…. It was a fallout indeed. It was a fallout from an unsustainable, ill-conceived plan — no business plan, in fact — that put students, teachers, faculty and workers in jeopardy. It was just an appalling display of management. I am just thrilled to support this bill.

I am pleased with the direction the minister has gone in recogniz- ing Surrey and the needs of the South Fraser. I want to applaud the bill, and I look forward to supporting it. Mr. Speaker: Second reading of Bill 50. The Minis- ter of Advanced Education closes debate.

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3387 Hon. S. Bond: I want to suggest that the reason we require this piece of legislation is because the pre- vious government decided that in order to protect the needs of students, they needed to attach it to a piece of real estate that was too expensive and unsustain- able.

We simply decided we wanted to keep what was best and most important about Tech B.C. [1510] I want to suggest that when we involved Simon Fraser University, they said to us that they wanted to look at trying to maintain an innovative program, trying to keep as many staff members as possible and, most importantly, ensuring that the students who b e g a n a t T e c h B . C . , w h o s e f u t u r e w a s i n j e o p a r d y because of the fiscal mismanagement around this pro- j e c t … .

T h e y s a i d : " W e w a n t t o m a k e s u r e t h o s e s t u - dents don't lose their opportunities, and we're going to even try to provide them with a degree." We think that makes great sense and is really good news for the city of Surrey and the people who live there. The fabulous news, the great news, is that…. Interjection. Hon. S. Bond: Y e s . I n f a c t , y o u k n o w w h a t ? T h e member opposite asked the question: where were the Surrey MLAs? I want to tell you where the Surrey MLAs were.

The Surrey MLAs were working hard to make sure this government paid attention to the students who attended Tech B.C. and make sure that we were held accountable for ensuring a presence in Surrey. They worked very hard. They did an excellent job, and I'm pleased to see that two of them are in the House today as we bring this bill forward. Let's talk about our commitment to double the number of graduates. The fantastic news is that we will double the number of graduates. In fact, some of the students at the campus at Surrey will contribute to doubling the number of graduates as we said we will.

In addition, we're working on an on-line strategy for the first time in this province, where we're going to look at expanding access to students who live in every corner of this province. We're looking at not only a comprehensive strategy but one that's innova- tive and exciting. We want to reiterate the fact that Simon Fraser University has agreed to look at a presence in Surrey. They have said they're going to keep what's best about Tech B.C. We're excited about that. We believe we want to maintain as many of the staff as possible there.

Simon Fraser University has said we're going to look not only at those programs but at the possibility of expanding the kinds of opportunities and access for students. We think that's a great news story, and this piece of legislation is the technical piece that we need to take care of. But you know what? The vision is expressed by Simon Fraser University working with the city of Surrey, working with the MLAs in that area, to provide even more opportunities for stu- dents in that region of the province.

On a final note, I do want to just make a comment on the reference: "We haven't seen a plan for skills and trades training in this province." I'm interested to be able to point out that the reason we haven't seen a plan is because we don't believe the way to create g re at p l ans i s t o s i t i n a n o f f i c e i n V i c t o ri a a nd c o o k them up. As a matter of fact, we're working right now with industry across this province. I met and spoke to the B.C.

Business Council on Friday and issued a chal- lenge to industry to say: together we need to figure out how best to deliver the trades and training that are necessary in this province. They're going to step up to the plate and work with us, and we think that's a far better solution than government one-size-fits-all solutions. With that I would move second reading. Mr. Speaker: The question is second reading. Motion approved. Hon. S. Bond: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 50, Advanced Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, read a second time and referred to a Com- mittee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. R. Coleman: I call second reading of Bill 51. PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2002 Hon. R. Coleman: I move that the bill be now read a second time. The Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, amends sections of the Crime Victim Assistance Act, the Criminal Records Review Act and the Motion Picture Act.

These changes will clarify new benefits for victims of crime, protect B.C.'s criminal-record check program and streamline how films are classified. The Crime Victim Assistance Act will replace the Criminal Injury Compensation Act this summer, transferring this program from the Workers Compen- sation Board to the Ministry of Public Safety and So- licitor General. The new crime victim assistance pro- gram will have a faster, less onerous application process and give crime victims benefits like medical and dental care, rehabilitation, income support, coun- selling, home security and relocation expenses.

Today's amendments will clarify the benefits for victims, families and witnesses and how those bene- fits will be provided. Changes will also ensure that victims receive benefits under this act as long as they are not eligible for the same benefits from another source, such as an employee health benefit plan. We want to eliminate the potential for double benefits

3388 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 without preventing victims from receiving benefits to which they are rightfully entitled. Changes will also give the crime victim assistance program authority to obtain documents, evidence and sworn testimony in order to adjudicate a claim. They will also clarify how claims and appeals in process under the Criminal Injury Compensation Act will be handled when the new program comes into force. [1515] The Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2002 also changes the Criminal Re- cords Review Act.

This statute helps protect children from physical and sexual abuse by requiring everyone who works with children or who has unsupervised access to children through their work and is em- ployed, licensed or funded by the government to un- dergo a criminal-record check. The program conducts about 60,000 checks per year for positions such as teachers, doctors, nurses, physical massage therapists, licensed child care pro- viders and school and hospital staff. If no relevant offence is found, the employer is notified in writing that the employee is cleared to work with children.

The act lists 56 offences that are considered relevant for potential to harm children. Confirmation of a current charge or provision or a previous conviction for a relevant offence triggers an adjudication to determine if a person poses a risk to children. Currently, if an adjudicator determines someone poses a risk, the individual has 14 days to provide the registrar with written notice of their in- tent to appeal. An appeal panel considers the adjudi- cator's decision and can either confirm or overturn it. Since 1996 there have been about 2,800 adjudica- tions, 25 of which resulted in findings of risk.

The Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General has appointed three adjudicators to make these determi- nations. Today's amendments will eliminate the adju- dicator position and refer people with a relevant criminal record to the deputy registrar, who will de- termine whether they present a risk to children. The deputy registrar will apply the same criteria and guidelines used by the current adjudicators. As the vast majority of cases are straightforward, this change will allow decisions to be made in an in- formal, timely, fair and impartial way.

Complex files may require external specialization consultation. Cur- rently, the adjudicator's decision can be appealed through an appeal panel. Since 1996 there have been only nine appeals. The most recent was in 1998. Today's amendments will change the appeals process. Reviews of the determination of risk made by the deputy registrar will be referred to the registrar. People will have 30 days to request a review. The number of appeals is expected to continue to be minimal, and judicial review will still be available to anyone wishing to dispute a determination of risk.

A final amendment to the Criminal Records Re- view Act will introduce cost recoveries to the pro- gram. This is consistent with other cost recovery prac- tices in government and cost recovery fees charged for criminal-record checks done through police for private sector employees and community volunteers. I believe employers, parents and the community want the reassurance of a criminal-record check for those who work with children. Checks are a comple- ment to other employment screening and supervisory methods so that children can live and grow without fear of harm from those who are entrusted with their care.

The changes to the act will help to make sure the program is sustainable for the future. The final set of amendments made by this bill is to the Motion Picture Act. The Motion Picture Act au- thorizes the activities of the B.C. film classification office, which classifies films, videos and new media and oversees licensing and compliance of retailers and distributors. The amendments will allow the of- fice to adopt a rating for a motion picture already given by another provincial or industry classification organization.

This will enable us to eliminate duplica- tion and lessen repetitive submissions by film dis- tributors. The director of the film classification office will be given the authority to delegate duties, functions and decisions about licensing, classification and enforce- ment. The film classification office makes thousands of classifications, licensing and enforcement decisions each year, but fewer than ten are appealed. The amendments will eliminate the Motion Picture Ap- peal Board, which reviews film classification deci- sions.

The amendments include a new decision- making process that gives the director of the film classification office the power to reconsider decisions regarding licensing, classification and enforcement. If there is still a dispute about the decision, a judicial review will continue to be available. [1520] J. Kwan: This bill incorporates a number of differ- ent areas, one of which is the Crime Victim Assistance Act. I know in the act that it would no longer require the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to consult with the privacy commissioner before enacting regulations related to information-sharing agreements.

The oppo- sition will be canvassi ng t his area during thi rd re ad- ing with respect to privacy issues and whether or not the privacy commissioner has commented on this bill and what his thoughts are around that in terms of privacy protection. The other area which this bill canvasses is around t h e C r i m i n a l R e c o r d s R e v i e w A c t . T h i s i s a c h a n g e particularly in relation to criminal-record checks, which will no longer be paid for by the ministry. The person requesting the criminal-record check will now pay for it.

The government currently pays, as I under- stand, $1.2 million on the criminal-record check pro- gram. Record checks are required for anyone who will be working in the child care support program area. This, of course, includes child care providers. The press release announcing this bill states: "The fee will be set by regulation and will be in line with the fees currently charged by police departments." In

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3389 Victoria a criminal-record check will cost that child care provider $50. It is not uncommon for a child care provider to apply for a criminal-record check numer- ous times, as the criminal-record check is not child care provider–specific but rather facility-specific. This means that if a child care provider is working part- time at one facility and applies to another facility to work a couple of extra days a week, he or she would need to apply again for a criminal-record check, meaning that another $50 will be taken out of their pocket.

Requiring the person applying for a criminal- record check to shoulder the costs will create, I be- lieve, added financial responsibilities for the person who provides a very necessary profession. Child care providers are not highly paid. They're generally paid approximately $10 to $15 an hour. The child care sector has been hard-hit by many of the cuts being implemented by this government. Par- ticularly, the previous government had brought for- ward a universal child care program, and this gov- ernment, under the Liberal government's leadership, will no longer be proceeding with a universal child care program.

The cost recovery fee, I believe, will further hurt those engaged in one of the most valuable profes- sions, and that is, of course, caring for children. Given that the cost is not just a one-time cost on a check on the profession — that is, child care provider–specific — but rather that it is facility-specific, every time you went to work with a different facility, a criminal- record check would be done, and you would have to pay for the cost of that. That, it seems to me, goes contrary to the govern- ment's notion of cutting red tape.

One would have thought the government would have brought forward a criminal-record check on a profession-specific basis — that is to say, if you're a child care worker, you've been cleared by that criminal-record check to be a child care worker. You would be able to utilize that for different facilities. That is not the case here. This is a facility-specific piece of legislation that asks for the person to pay for a record check every time they go to work at a differ- ent facility.

That, in my mind, is not only a burden for the individual, but it is also a burden on red tape in terms of the amount of record checks that the person needs to go through, and it goes contrary to the gov- ernment's purported agenda of cutting red tape. During committee stage the opposition will par- ticularly be canvassing this area and our concerns around this area, and we'll have more to say by way of questions to the government on this matter. Hon. R.

Coleman: I look forward to those discus- sions in committee, and I think we can actually deal with most of the member's concerns relative to this particular piece of legislation. I've heard the Victoria argument already, but we, in regulation, can set the f e e s f r o m a g o v e r n m e n t s t a n d p o i n t r e l a t i v e t o o u r criminal-record checks. There are some concerns in and around that, which the member mentioned just briefly. I'm sure we can deal with it, again, in commit- tee.

Relative to whether it be site-specific or not, one of the concerns as we went through this debate was identifying the concern we had with people that were actually changing their names in the province and running from criminal-record checks, in a loophole that we closed there — that we would actually not have somebody transitioning from one facility to an- other in the midst of criminal activity and not having to be actually reidentified, whether they had at some point during the period of time from one facility to another, been involved in some activity involving children that was illegal.

That we will discuss in committee. [1525] I believe that it's important that employers and employees in the public sector, where they are funded by government, recognize that they have the same responsibility as people in the private sector relative to criminal-record checks for their employees. I think that's the reason we want to go to cost recovery so that we can make this a sustainable system. I look forward to committee stage, and I'm sure we can deal with the member's issues. Motion approved. Hon. R.

Coleman: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 51, Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2002, read a second time and re- ferred to a Committee of the Whole House for consid- eration at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. R. Coleman: I call committee stage of 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 3:27 p.m. On

section 36 (continued.) J. Kwan: Reflecting on our debate from the previ- ous days on this matter,

section 36 is of course relat- ing to the funding formula that school boards receive. The minister had suggested that the funding for- mula does not change. She insists the funding formula and what the minister is doing in the area of education is that she is protecting education, but more and more we're learning that this is in fact not the case. People, school trustees, individual parents are sending in in- formation challenging the minister at every step with respect to her comment on this.

3390 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 In fact, there is yet another letter that was sent in by an individual regarding school district 20. Let me just put the letter on the record, Mr. Chair. The letter is dated May 12, 2002, and it reads as follows: "Municipalities funding schools in their own communities will invariably lead to an increased need for alternate funding. This funding will either come from parent fundraising, service groups, private donations or corporate donations.

Once this occurs, the gap between the quality of the educational experience in the poorer communities and the wealthier communities will continue to grow. There's also the added concern that the donations come with strings attached — only selling a certain brand of pop at school, for example, or only using a certain curriculum. Service groups will be squeezed more heavily, leaving less money for other projects. "Are you ready as parents to fundraise for textbooks, library resources, lab equipment, teacher training, musical instruments, etc?

"In Ontario, and I quote: 'The average amount raised per school by parents' fundraising has gone up 30 percent over the past three years from $7,280 in 1998-99 to $9,440 in 2000-01.' This came from the CCPA Monitor, April, 2002. [1530] "School funding is a provincial responsibility that we pay on our property taxes every year. This year the new government devised a new formula to distribute money to the school districts. The Ministry of Education insists that there have been no cuts.

It has been explained to the parents in our district that in actuality there have been cuts, because things normally not covered by the funding are now included. These include such things as the maintenance costs of the building. The secretary- treasurer of the district could be more specific as to the details. He could be reached at school district 20 board office. "In actual fact, we end up with significantly less money than before — teachers' salaries and increased MSP payments adding to the funding shortfall. "This formula was not even finalized until sometime in the early part of this year.

I wonder how this formula came to be. Where was it tried out? Did they use our neighbouring district as a test case and found it was just fine there? I can only assume, since the government continually defends that they are committed to quality public education, that they have made some mistakes in regards to this formula. It is illogical to assume that in three years we need to abandon eight to ten schools, restructure many others, abandon our educational philosophy regarding middle schools and still not meet the government's targeted budget.

Is that what the ministry and the provincial government call being committed to quality public education? "We're asking the board to submit a needs budget. If the ministry cannot understand why this funding formula does not work in this district, and we're not alone, then let them come and try to provide quality education with too few funds. Let them fulfil their commitments, obligations and promises to quality education to all children in all communities. Irreversible changes in the delivery of education in our district are unacceptable.

Cuts to high school programs, limited services to special needs students, reduced librarians and learning assistants, teachers' continued use of antiquated materials and equipment is unacceptable. Send the 'flexibility' back to the government. This type of flexibility we don't need or want." This is from an individual from Fruitvale. I wonder what the minister has to say to this individual with respect to her notion of flexibility, given that the reality of this flexibility yields funding cuts, and the funding formula yields cuts to educational programs. Hon. C.

Clark: The member is confusing the issue of funding with the funding formula. This

section of the act deals with the funding formula. If she'd like to raise any questions with respect to that, I'd be happy to answer them. J. Kwan: The minister says everybody else is wrong except her. This letter was written by an individual from Fruitvale. If the minister was listening, she would have noted that the letter mentions the notion of the funding formula, which the minister purports provides for the same amount of funding and that it protects education for British Columbians. The individual is saying otherwise. That is, in fact, not the case.

To the minister again: "This formula was not even finalized until sometime in the early part of this year. I wonder how this formula came to be. Where was it tried out? Did they use our neighbouring district as a test case and found it was just fine? I can only assume, since the government continually defends that they are committed to quality public education, that they have made some mistakes in regards to this formula.

It is illogical to assume that in three years we need to abandon eight to ten schools, restructure many others, abandon our educational philosophy regarding middle schools and still not meet the government's targeted budget. Is that what the minister and the provincial government call being committed to public education?" Hon. C. Clark: We had a technical advisory group that worked on building the formula. That was how we brought it together. We certainly believe it's a simpler, fairer way to allocate funds. [1535] J.

Kwan: The reality is such that it yields educa- tional program cuts for many districts throughout Brit- ish Columbia. This individual from Fruitvale is raising the same issues. In spite of that, the minister says: "Well, it's not the funding formula. Yes, it is the fund- ing, but we're protecting education." What people are seeing all throughout B.C. are cuts in education pro- grams. Let me just review for the House some of the schools that are going to be shut and that are threat- ened with school closures as a result of the govern- m e n t ' s a p p r o a c h t o e d u c a t i o n .

I t d o e s d e a l w i t h t h e funding issue — make no mistake about it — and be- hind the funding issue, of course, it's tied into the fund- ing formula concept. The southeast Kootenay area is faced with a budget shortfall of $2.8 million, and there are four schools faced with potential closure: C.L. Salvador Elementary

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3391 School, Muriel Baxter Elementary School, Elkford Elementary School and Rocky Mountain Elementary School. These are in the area of Kimberley, Windermere and Golden. They are faced with a host of potential closures — two, four, six, eight schools in total in terms of the threats — Blarchmont Elementary, Meadowbrook Elementary School, Wasa Elementary, Canal Flats Junior Secondary, Radium Elementary, Field Elementary, Edelweiss Elementary and Colum- bia Valley Elementary. In Revelstoke they are faced with the potential closure of Big Eddy Elementary School.

The Kootenay-Columbia district is faced with the potential closures of two, four, six schools: Montrose Elementary, Sunningdale Elementary, Tarrys Elemen- tary, Valley Vista Elementary, Blueberry Creek Com- munity School and Cook Avenue Elementary. In the Central Okanagan there are three potential school closures: Bellevue Creek Elementary, George Pringle Secondary and Peachland Elementary School. The Cariboo-Chilcotin area is faced with two school closures: Forest Grove Elementary and Chim- ney Creek Elementary.

Quesnel is potentially faced with the closure of Rich Bar Elementary School and the Wells Barkerville Elementary School. In Vancouver the Shannon Park Annex is poten- tially faced with closure. In Burnaby the Canada Way Education Centre is potentially faced with closure. In Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, Thornhill Primary is faced with potential closure.

Prince George has two, four, six, eight, ten, 12 po- tential closures: Bear Lake Elementary, Haldi Road Elementary, Hart Highlands Elementary, Hixon Ele- mentary, Gladstone Elementary, King George V Ele- mentary, Mcleod Lake Elementary, Mountain View Elementary, Nechako North Elementary, Seymour Elementary, Springwood Elementary and Blackburn Junior Secondary. The Peace River South area is faced with potential closure of the Kelly Lake Elementary–Junior Secon- dary School. Peace River North potential closure is Upper Half- way Elementary–Junior Secondary.

Campbell River potential closures are Maple Ele- mentary, Central Elementary and Surge Narrows Ele- mentary. In Gold Trail, there's Riverview Elementary. The Fraser-Cascade region is faced with McAffrey Alternate School closure. Cowichan Valley is faced with three potential school closures: Honeymoon Bay Elementary, Mount Brenton Elementary and Sahtlam elementary. In the Coast Mountains, which is the Kitimat- Terrace area, there are two unspecified schools and three others in the Terrace area, respectively.

Finally, in the Nechako Lakes area — that's Burns Lake and Nechako school districts 55 and 56, respec- tively — they are faced with potential closures of Babine Elementary-Secondary and Mapes Elemen- tary. These are the schools, 57 in total, as a result of the funding — or the lack of funding, if you will — and the new funding formula that the minister insists is protecting education. What we see are 57 schools be- ing threatened with potential closures.

W e s e e o n t h e F T E s i d e t h a t 1 , 9 5 7 t e a c h i n g p o s i - tions are being threatened with a budget pressure, a budget shortfall, of $204.8 million. [1540] Maybe the minister can explain, because I fail to understand — and s o, too, d o many p arents and the public, educators and the public, school trustees and the public fail to understand — how it is that the min- ister can claim that she is in fact protecting education when all of this is going, and this is only year one. The worst years are yet to come, the next two years.

Because this is a three-year frozen budget of educa- tional cuts, the worst is yet to come. Hon. C. Clark: For the last time, I will repeat my comments. The member is confused. She is mixing the issue of the funding formula, which is what we're supposed to be discussing, with the issue of funding. If she wants to have a debate about funding, the appropriate place to do that is in the budget esti- mates. I believe we had an extensive debate about that. If she has any further questions, I'd refer her to the Hansard from those debates. In the meantime, unless she is prepared to ask questions about the relevant

section of the bill that we are discussing here today, I suggest we move on. J. Kwan: The minister wants to move on. Of course she wants to move on because, in my view, she doesn't want people to know how she is hurting edu- cation. The minister keeps on saying: "Well, it's the funding formula." The funding formula yields the funds that end up in school districts, so those two things are interrelated. For the minister to suggest that they're completely separate is, in my view, a false representation of the impacts on education and the funding needs of British Columbians.

It's not just me who's saying that on these issues. The information that I've brought forward to the House is coming from the public. The public are con- cerned about education, even if the minister doesn't care, even if she says everybody else is wrong except for her — that she is the person who knows what is best for education. She and her colleagues from the Liberal bench are the only persons in this entire uni- verse who say that education and its funding are be- ing protected. Everybody else is saying something different. Maybe everybody else is wrong, with the exception of the minister.

Maybe that's the perspec- tive of the minister. Let me just look and see what the BCSTA, the B.C. S c h o o l T r u s t e e s A s s o c i a t i o n , h a s t o s a y . T h i s w a s a press release that they sent out on April 29, so it's

3392 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 recent. The quote that I'm going to put on the record is as follows: "'School boards are getting mixed messages from Victoria,' BCSTA president Gordon Comeau said. 'On one hand the province has joined trustees in our key work, improving student achievement through community engagement, and is supporting us in reaching this end with contract language and legislation that acknowledges the need for autonomous school boards.

On the other, the province is legislating unprecedented and unnecessary powers to intervene in the work of locally elected school boards, and we are facing the biggest deficits I have seen in 21 years as a school trustee due to the unfunded teachers contract.'" That's from the B.C. School Trustees Association. There's no denying that the funding formula that the minister is now putting in legislation results in less money for school boards and for educational pro- grams throughout the different districts and schools. As a result of that, some 57 schools are now going to have to close.

Close to 2,000 teaching positions are going to be eliminated in the school system. School trustees and school boards throughout B.C. are faced with a total of over $200 million in shortfall in terms of funding. That's derived from the funding formula. There is no denying that. The impacts are grave. I know the minister doesn't want to talk about it, but we need to talk about it. The minister needs to come clean with what the issues are that school boards, teachers, parents and children are faced with. The Liberal MLAs may not want to raise these issues. They've been silent, quite frankly.

They have- n't spoken to this issue, raised the matters in this House and challenged the minister on this front. They have all just thumped their desks and agreed, saying: "Hey, hey, hurray — yay for the minister. Good on you for making these cuts to education, and we'll all pretend that somehow it is protecting education." The reality is that the public knows the difference.

I'm raising some of the issues that they have brought to my attention as matters to be raised in the House. [1545] This was actually from a retired teacher-librarian, someone who is not in the system anymore but who still cares very much about the education system. The letter actually was a letter to the editor and was pub- lished in the Times Colonist. Let me just put this on the record, Mr. Chair. "School Libraries are Worth Fighting For" is the headline: "There is a school library in every school in B.C. In tiny schools they may be part of a hallway or classroom.

The school library is a distinct space in every new or renovated school. "A good school library is a self-directed learning laboratory for your child. "Almost every parent in B.C. will soon learn that the school library will be affected by the recent changes in school funding and organization. "One of the key issues that the government changed in the legislated solution to the teachers' contract was the elimination of minimum levels of 'teacher-librarian' support in the schools.

While those minimum levels were not large — one teacher-librarian for every 702 students K-to-12 — the legislation completely eliminated this standard for service across the province. It is now up to each board, and perhaps each school, to determine the levels of teacher-librarian support, if any. "What is a teacher-librarian? Why is a teacher- librarian important to my child? "The teacher-librarian is a teacher who has taken special training in developing a school library program that meets the learning objectives of the school.

That program includes teaching all children how to access and use learning resources, to develop the criteria and skills to select quality information, and to read widely and well. The teacher-librarian is a catalyst for ideas in the school, offering access to community and worldwide resources and linkages to resource people. "Do teacher-librarians make a difference to the quality of my child's education? In major studies conducted in Colorado, Alaska, Pennsylvania and Texas, the provision of qualified school librarians had a significant effect on pupil achievement.

"Teacher-librarians are responsible for making the school library part of the learning program of a school. The school library, without professional leadership, will rapidly become an impoverished, incomplete service that will not meet the learning needs of children. Despite the best of intentions for volunteer and clerical support, the school library will rapidly become irrelevant to the school's overall program. "What will my children lose if the school library is closed or diminished? If students do not have access to quality library programs they will lose that linkage between resources and learning.

In other words, the direct consultation between teacher and teacher-librarian provides enormous opportunities for personalizing learning, developing lifelong research skills and acquiring important literacies, including reading, viewing, listening, presenting and computing. "In addition, they could lose a 'cultural' base that could affect their values in this increasingly complex society. "It is important to note that the school library is often shown as a measure of quality in the publicity for independent schools, colleges and universities. "How much does a school library cost?

A quality library program in a school of 500 students would cost about $250 per student. This would include the costs for a full-time teacher-librarian, a full-time clerical assistant and a reasonable budget for current learning resources. The average cost for schooling per student in B.C. last year was over $6,000. "Why can't the public library provide this service? There is a distinct difference in function between the public library and the school library. The public library offers services directly related to the provision of a wide range of information for the entire community.

The school library teaches students to engage information and ideas. The public library is not equipped to meet instructional needs. The school uses the school library to enrich and augment the learning environment. "What can a parent do? Challenge decisions to cut school library programs. Visit the school library in your school. Ask tough questions. Ask questions of your principal and your teacher-librarian. Demand answers. Talk to your trustees and your MLA." That's what Donald Hamilton, a retired education li- brarian and a trustee for the Greater Victoria Public Library, had to say.

MONDAY, MAY 13, 2002 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 3393 [1550] The cuts come from the funding formula — make no mistake about it. The minister may not care, be- cause when I was reading this

article into the record the minister was busy talking to other members in the House. She couldn't be bothered to listen to what a trustee — a retired librarian and, I suspect, probably a parent as well — has to say. For the minister, only she knows best. Nobody else knows what is important in the school system. Only the minister knows best, and she couldn't be bothered to pay attention to the words of Donald Hamilton.

Section 36 of the bill, which also touches on sec- tion 106.2, requires the minister to establish and an- nounce the amount of funding to be paid to boards in the next fiscal year by February 1. There is no mention of what the formula will be and what will be used to make this determination. The minister consistently says that the formula works and is an equitable dis- tribution. Could the minister please break down, then, how the minister arrived at this funding for- mula — in detail? Hon. C.

Clark: On February 1 we announced the block that's available to the ministry for dispersion to school districts, and then we broke that down by the formula we used. We had an extensive debate and discussion about the formula in our estimates debate — the actual formula, which is not a part of this piece of legislation. If the member is having difficulty recollecting that discussion, I can give her a quick rundown here, al- though if she wants any further detail I'd suggest she go back and have a look at the Hansard. It's $5,308 per student.

There is an additional allocation of $1,100 for each ESL student, an additional allocation of $950 for first nations students and $30,000, $10,000 or $6,000 for special needs students. There is special recogni- tion given for districts that have unique geographical needs, transportation, salary differential, and then there is the formula buffer grant that's built in. J. Kwan: Maybe the minister can provide this in- formation to the House.

I recollect the estimates of that d e b at e v e ry we l l , and i n f ac t at t hat t i m e we re c e i v e d early information from the Vancouver school board, which outlined their $25.5 million shortfall. Then we listed the items where they were faced with that short- fall. The minister emphatically denied that there was such a thing as a shortfall and that it was all funded, and so on and so forth. Subsequent to the estimates debate, my colleague the member for Vancouver- Hastings and I had met with the Vancouver school board.

They advised us we were dead-on the money with respect to the shortfall that is caused by the fund- ing formula, by the funding the government has intro- duced. That's a $25.5 million shortfall. Subsequent to that meeting, we brought the mat- ter back to the House. When I first brought the matter to the House in estimates, asking the minister about the shortfall that the city of Vancouver was faced with, the minister said she wasn't privy to that infor- mation and that she needed to talk to the Vancouver school board around that.

Well, it's a long time since, and quite frankly, the script from the Vancouver school board has not changed. They're still faced with a $25.5 million shortfall. Irrespective of what the min- ister said in terms of how they're fully funding educa- tion, the fact of the matter is that there are huge in- cremental costs. The minister is bobbing her head as if to make light of the matter. Maybe for her this is all very funny. Maybe for her this is all irrelevant: so what if education funding is being cut? So what if education programs are being cut?

She is maintaining her mantra no matter what happens, as she's protecting education. The reality is — and school trustees know this — that they're faced with educational cuts. They're caused by this minis- ter. They're caused by this minister; make no mistake about it. It is a result of the new funding formula and the freeze on

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0513pm-12
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0513pm 12
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	fc182ef65da213433f4bbd6e5f1b7e78bb16c94e

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