2011 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 39th Parliament

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES

MINUTES AND HANSARD

MINUTES SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

9 a.m.

Rosedale Room, Coast Chilliwack Hotel

45920 First Avenue, Chilliwack, B.C.

Present: Rob Howard, MLA (Chair); Doug Donaldson, MLA (Deputy Chair); Bill Bennett, MLA; Mable Elmore, MLA; Dave S. Hayer, MLA; Pat Pimm, MLA; Bruce Ralston, MLA; Bill Routley, MLA; Dr. Moira Stilwell, MLA;
Jane Thornthwaite, MLA

1. The Chair called the Committee to order at 8:59 a.m.

2. Opening statements by Rob Howard, MLA, Chair.

3. The following witnesses appeared before the Committee and answered questions:

4. The Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair at 11:50 a.m.

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

select standing committee on
Finance and Government Services

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Issue No. 54

ISSN 1499-4178

[ Page 1585 ]

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2011

The committee met at 8:59 a.m.

[R. Howard in the chair.]

R. Howard (Chair): Good morning, everybody. My name is Rob Howard. I'm the MLA for Richmond Centre and the Chair of this parliamentary committee. I'd like to welcome everyone out this morning and say thank you for participating in this important process.

Each year, in preparation for next year's budget, the Minister of Finance releases a budget consultation paper, which guides the committee's annual consultation process. The budget consultation paper presents a current fiscal and economic forecast. It also identifies key issues that need to be addressed in the next budget.

There are well-published global economic challenges in Europe and the States, and what we are seeing is that governments who have not been fiscally responsible are being punished. In B.C. we've maintained our triple-A credit rating and are committed to balancing our budget in fiscal 2013-14. This will serve as well to protect and grow our job base.

[0900]

These challenging circumstances mean there are difficult questions ahead, and we look forward to hearing about your priorities in these challenging times. We are faced with questions such as: how can we maintain B.C. as a preferred destination for investment? With current fiscal challenges, what measures can government take to help families? What programs and spending are your priorities?

Copies of the budget consultation paper are available at the back of the room on the registration desk.

The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services is the parliamentary committee which is responsible for conducting public consultations on the forthcoming provincial budget. Our all-party committee is required to report back to the Legislative Assembly no later than November 15 of this year.

This year we will hold 13 public hearings, in each region of the province. We have also scheduled two video conference sessions to hear from residents from rural communities living in more remote areas of B.C. This is the third time we have tried this consultation method.

We opened our hearings in Vancouver on September 15 and then travelled to Fort Nelson, Smithers, Prince George, Williams Lake, Kamloops and Courtenay before returning to Victoria. This week we've been in Surrey, today Chilliwack, and then travelling to Cranbrook, Kelowna and ending our hearings in Richmond.

In addition to the public hearings, there are a variety of other ways that British Columbians can share their ideas with us. We accept written submissions by letter or e-mail and also video or audio files. Further information on how you may participate using one of these methods is available at our website: www.leg.bc.ca/budgetconsultations.

Committee members carefully consider all the public input we receive, whether it's an oral presentation made here today, an on-line survey form, a submission in writing or an audio or video clip. Our deadline to receive submissions is Friday, October 14.

At today's meeting each presenter may speak for ten minutes, with up to five additional minutes allotted for members' questions. Time permitting, we may also have an open-mike session near the end of the hearing, with five minutes allocated for each presentation.

Today's meeting is a public meeting, which will be recorded and transcribed by Hansard Services. A copy of this transcript, along with the minutes of the meeting, will be printed and will be made available on the committee's website. In addition to the transcript, a live audio webcast of this meeting is also produced and available on the committee's website to enable interested listeners to hear the proceedings as they occur. An archived copy of the audio broadcast will also be retained, also on the committee's website.

I will now ask the other members of the Finance Committee to introduce themselves.

B. Bennett: Good morning. My name is Bill Bennett. I'm the MLA for Kootenay East. I live in Cranbrook, and it's nice to be in Chilliwack this morning.

J. Thornthwaite: Jane Thornthwaite, North Vancouver–Seymour. Good morning, and I also bring greetings from Barry Penner, who is one of your MLAs, who says: "Thank you very much for participating."

P. Pimm: I'm Pat Pimm. I'm the MLA for Peace River North. I live in Fort St. John.

M. Stilwell: Good morning. Moira Stilwell, Vancouver-Langara.

D. Hayer: Good morning. I'm Dave Hayer, MLA for Surrey-Tynehead, where the Port Mann Bridge is and Highway 1 is, in Surrey.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Morning. Doug Donaldson, MLA Stikine, Deputy Chair of the committee. I live in Hazelton in the northwest part of the province.

B. Ralston: Bruce Ralston, the MLA for Surrey-Whalley.

M. Elmore: Good morning. Mable Elmore, MLA for Vancouver-Kensington.
[ Page 1586 ]

B. Routley: Good morning. Bill Routley, MLA for Cowichan Valley.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you, Members.

Also joining us today…. I'm pleased to introduce our Clerk, Susan Sourial, and we have Hansard Services staff, Michael Baer and Monique Goffinet Miller, who will record and prepare the written transcript of this meeting.

With that, I'd like to call our first witnesses — Nadine Power and Rod Santiago from Abbotsford Community Services.

Welcome to you both. As you just heard, you'll have 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark, I'll try and give you a little heads-up, and you can stop for questions or keep going. Your choice. The microphone is yours.

Presentations

R. Santiago: "I'm alone. I'm scared. I'm hungry. I'm unprepared. I'm homeless." The voices and words of the more than 37,000 individuals and families who came through Abbotsford Community Services doors last year.

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to present to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. This is Nadine Power, operations manager for Abbotsford Community Services, and I'm Rod Santiago, executive director.

For the past 42 years Abbotsford Community Services has been serving our community. We operate a diverse range of over 70 programs that help people at every stage of life, through any circumstance of life. From women escaping violence to youth overcoming addictions, we help people in crisis.

[0905]

From new immigrants to individuals with developmental disabilities, we help people to belong. From newborns to seniors, we help people of all ages.

Like the province of British Columbia, only in a small, community-specific way and in close partnership with local schools, public health units, social workers, municipal government, businesses, numerous other community players, ACS supports and strengthens the capacity of individuals and families to be full, participating members of society. Our common goal is to build a strong British Columbia where all our citizens are healthy, productive and contributing members.

We couldn't achieve a strong B.C. if we weren't investing properly in our health and education system, and we won't create a strong B.C. without reinforcing our investment in community social services. No one will dispute that there are limited funds to be spent on government programming, and with limited funding there is a greater need to allocate resources towards initiatives that are effective, efficient and outcomes-based.

How can finite resources make a fundamental difference in the lives of today's children and families?

N. Power: Last year our New Beginnings program celebrated its 20th anniversary. New Beginnings is a partnership between school district 34, the Ministry of Children and Family Development, various service clubs, other funding bodies and Abbotsford Community Services. It assists young moms and moms-to-be to successfully graduate from high school.

At this 20th celebration we were able to gather together a gymnasium full of moms and children, some of them now adults, who have broken the cycle of not graduating and the cycle of raising up children who don't graduate. Instead of high school dropouts, the gym was full of strong parents, business professionals, community leaders, contributing members to society.

The greatest challenges facing us — school dropouts, involvement in crime, rising health care costs, being competitive in the global marketplace — can only be met by focusing on the development of our parents and our children, beginning at birth. At-risk children are 25 percent more likely to drop out of school, 40 percent more likely to become a teen parent, 50 percent more likely to be placed in special education, 60 percent more likely never to attend college and 70 percent more likely to be arrested for a violent crime.

Early childhood programs like New Beginnings are the most cost-effective way to ensure the healthy development of children and offer the greatest return to society. The cost of providing preventative and early intervention services to people now results in fewer dollars being spent in the future towards much more expensive alternatives such as jails, rehab treatment centres or hospitals.

According to a recent report from the National Council on Welfare, the annual cost can be up to $42,000 for a person in an emergency shelter, up to $120,000 a year for a person in a prison or psychiatric hospital, as compared to $18,000 per year for supportive housing. Let's invest in prevention and early intervention.

R. Santiago: ACS's basic life skills training program joined up with our youth and MCFD to create an on-site soundproof music room with donations of good-quality musical instruments and sound equipment. With the expertise of a therapeutic music and arts instructor, youth dealing with mental illness and trauma have a space where they can freely express the things going on inside.

Music is a way of fast-forwarding the process of getting to know someone. It's an effective doorway for the most shut-down youth to learn about themselves and to move forward in their lives.

When funding is allocated to community organizations, something amazing happens. Innovative services
[ Page 1587 ]
come into being. Consider the free dental clinic operating out of our local food bank. Local dentists donate their equipment, supplies, expertise and time to provide dental services to food bank clients. Individuals are given the confidence to smile, to apply for jobs and to become fully contributing members of our community.

Consider the CEAS program, where teen moms volunteer to go into the schools and tell it like it really is, deglamorizing the teenage pregnancy story. In an age filled with television shows, movies, games and Hollywood role models who make it seem cool to get pregnant at a young age, our moms present the accurate message that: "Yes, we love our children, but it's not easy being a youth with adult responsibilities."

[0910]

Because community social service agencies have their ears to the ground, are quick to recognize and respond to opportunities for improvement and can perform wonders with small budgets and an army of volunteers, we are well positioned for innovations leading to substantial impacts. Let's invest in innovation.

N. Power: Just last week Abbotsford held our fourth annual Abbotsford Connect day. ACS teamed up with dozens upon dozens of community businesses, churches, service agencies, elected officials and health care professionals to create a space to develop connections with many of Abbotsford's homeless population.

One church offered the building. A dozen doctors and nurses gave free checkups. Optometrists provided eye care and glasses. There was legal advocacy, tax-filling forms, addictions support and smoking cessation. There were foot massages, haircuts and facials. One photographer captured people at their best. Food shops supplied breakfast and lunch for several hundred adults and children. Our mayor and his wife served coffee to people at their tables. It was a day of interacting, of being caring neighbours, of connecting.

Community social service agencies play a significant role in being the safety net for individuals who are marginalized or vulnerable. Funds we receive through government contracts, gaming grants or fundraising leverage so much more than their face value.

Community social services strengthen the province with our large influx of eager and capable volunteers. Last year alone ACS's volunteers logged 40,000 hours of service. That amounts to over 22 full-time-equivalent positions — one year, one agency. Imagine that each community agency in Abbotsford and across the province can tap into those kinds of resources. Together we're a very strong force, and there are not many sectors that can harness those resources. Non-profits can, and they do.

As well as the vast unpaid workforce, we are able to leverage additional grants through the business community, foundations and individuals. We work with other non-profits and government agencies to provide quality services.

The Abbotsford Youth Health Centre is a service model that demonstrates just how powerful partnerships can be. It's a collaboration between MCFD, the division of family practice, Fraser Health Authority, IMPACT, ACS and many volunteers. The AYHC is the first centre of its kind in Abbotsford to provide health services in a youth-friendly, safe, confidential and non-judgmental environment for 12- to 24-year-olds.

In the first six months some alarming results came to light. Seventy-one percent reported depression; 29 percent reported self-harm; 39 percent reported having traded sex for money or valuables; 56 have reported high- or moderate-risk substance abuse patterns.

With the results so far, reaching youth who have never seen a doctor in their lives or fast-tracking youth to urgent, life-saving treatment for conditions that were caught during our in-depth intake process, we know that the service being provided is not only meeting a need in the community, but it's also resulting in significant cost savings to the medical system by identifying developing conditions before they become crises. Let's invest in partnerships.

R. Santiago: The social determinants of health — people's living conditions, food security, quality of education, employment options and the services available — impact the well-being of British Columbians and strongly influence the quality and health of our communities. When we invest in these social determinants, we create a longer-term payoff.

Premier Christy Clark was quoted on January 20, 2011, at an Abbotsford town hall meeting as saying: "We want these groups — whether it's…sports, arts groups or organizations working with the most vulnerable — to be able to focus on the good work they do and not be in a constant state of flux over their funding." We couldn't agree more.

We sincerely urge the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services to be a resounding voice for those who stand alone, scared, hungry, unprepared or homeless. By taking actions such as increasing support to children, youth and families, restoring funding for legal aid, endorsing a poverty reduction plan and restoring gaming funds to the charitable sector's pre-2009 levels, the province of British Columbia would increase prevention and early intervention funding for the community social service sector; the province would support innovation in services delivery; and the province would work in partnership with local communities to co-create long-term solutions.

Our essential work — helping people at every stage of their life — is critical in building strong communities. We never take it for granted that this work is only made possible through the continued support of funders,
[ Page 1588 ]
proceeds from gaming, volunteers and businesses in the community.

Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today.

[0915]

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you. We have some questions.

J. Thornthwaite: Thanks very much for your presentation. I've got two questions. One is: did you present to the Skip Triplett review on community gaming grants?

N. Power: Yes, we did.

J. Thornthwaite: Okay, good.

The next one is: how many young moms do you see in a year in this partnership, New Beginnings?

R. Santiago: We have 69 this year. It's about that many in any given year, and it's grown over the 20-year period.

J. Thornthwaite: So it's consistently the same numbers.

R. Santiago: It is, yes.

D. Hayer: Thank you very much for a very good presentation. I'm impressed with the 40,000 hours that your volunteers have contributed.

Have many volunteers do you have? Also, have you added up how much money you are asking for government to invest in the program you're looking at? Did you sort of roughly calculate how much extra funding government should be putting in all the programs you suggested at the end?

R. Santiago: Last year alone we had over 1,400 volunteers who were involved, and that's anything from people who mentored newcomers into the country to volunteer dentists and lawyers and doctors, a whole range of board members — so a whole range.

In terms of dollars, there are specific dollar values for specific initiatives that we're wanting to do or programs that we're wanting to do. We haven't boiled it down to a specific dollar value. I think it's a case where, given an amount, we can make it go a long ways.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Good morning. Thanks for the presentation. It's nice to have some of those real-life examples mixed in with all the facts and figures, so it makes it very human.

The Premier alluded to a constant state of flux in funding. Have you experienced that, and can you give some examples — for instance, the gaming grants? How has that been over the last couple of years and other funding sources that you used to do your good services?

N. Power: Well, I'll speak to the gaming grants. We were in a position to be receiving just over $200,000 over the last number of years, and with the new rules, we were told we would be going down to $100,000 per year as a result of the cap.

More recently there is a regional level that has been set, and so we're hoping to be able to fit into the regional level, which would put us back. But that could have been up to $110,000 per year, which would affect our seniors programs, our food bank, some of our volunteer services — that type of thing.

A number of our other programs, also, are up and down in funding. Do I speak to any of those?

R. Santiago: There were cutbacks last year with MCFD funding and then with some of our health programs and also some of our programs which have been running, let's say, for 20 years. The number of people receiving the services increases, for example: Meals on Wheels, which ensures that there's food available to the most homebound individuals. The numbers have increased significantly, but the dollars have stayed the same of what we receive from that fund. That is….

N. Power: Probably ten or 15 years. There's been no increase.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Well, thank you very much, both for your good work and for the presentation this morning. We got you two inside your allotted time, so that was great.

Next up we have the B.C. Road Builders and Heavy Construction Association — Jack Davidson.

Good morning, Jack. As you probably know, you've got 15 minutes. At about ten I'll give you a heads-up, if I can. You can stop and take questions or go straight through. Your choice.

J. Davidson: Okay. Thank you very much. Good morning. I apologize. I'm over 60. I left the handouts on my desk that I was working on last night, so it's difficult.

The B.C. Road Builders and Heavy Construction Association was established in 1966 and represents the private highway maintenance contractors, construction contractors, underground utility contractors, paving contractors and the various companies that service and supply our industry. The B.C. Road Builders are champions for the development of efficient, safe transportation systems that help sustain and promote economic growth in British Columbia. In British Columbia, and indeed in all of Canada, the strength of our economy has always been tied to a strong transportation infrastructure.

[0920]

In order to provide the excellent health care, education and other important benefits that British Columbia and all of Canada are envied for, we must continue to
[ Page 1589 ]
have a strong economy. Transportation has a significant impact on jobs, trade and our quality of life.

Provincial fiscal and tax policy have considerable influence over British Columbia's global competitiveness. It is no coincidence that B.C. has weathered the economic downturn better than most other provinces. This is because the provincial and federal governments made unprecedented contributions toward stimulating our economy by investing in core infrastructure projects.

Strict adherence to fiscal prudence must be balanced against the need to continue investment in both national and provincial public infrastructure. That will result in more productivity and more competitive B.C. corporations. Without a balanced approach, government risked undermining future economic growth in order to achieve a lower debt-to-GDP ratio.

As part of this year's budget consultation, the B.C. Road Builders are pleased to submit the following recommendations for the committee members' consideration. First, we support the provincial government's job plan, which includes strengthening infrastructure to get B.C. goods and services to market. Efficient transportation systems will make B.C. corporations more competitive, attracting investment, which will create new jobs.

We support the provincial government, in cooperation with the Council of the Federation, to further research the links between infrastructure funding and productivity and to deliver a long-term infrastructure investment plan and cost-share its implementation among all three governments.

We support the provincial government's program to supply incentives to develop air quality improvements via greenhouse gas — GHG — emissions reduction strategies and other environmental programs.

We support the government's continued efforts to build a stronger and more cooperative working relationship with their federal counterparts, particularly in regards to federal-provincial cooperation on construction permits and approvals. Currently, requiring both provincial and federal environmental studies creates unnecessary, long delays and is a waste of time and taxpayers' money. Governments need to develop a joint ombudsman or environmental permits office to work together for heavy construction companies to help expedite project permitting.

We support the provincial government's request for an increase from $2 billion to $5 billion annually in the amount transferred to municipalities under the gas tax program.

We support the government's appointment of a municipal auditor general for B.C. Governments can attain more value for every dollar they spend by requiring fair, open and transparent tendering wherever taxpayers' dollars are being spent. All projects with provincial and federal funding should be required to be fairly and openly tendered, with the results published and available on municipal websites.

We support the provincial government's advocacy for a change in current tax policy.

We support making the apprenticeship job creation tax credit a true incentive. It's not enough to make it even considered by business right now.

We support increasing the capital cost allowance rate for equipment purchases covered by classes 10, 16 and 36 to 50 percent and to make these classes of equipment depreciable on a straight-line basis.

We support the provincial government, as soon as practical, shielding the business sector from the incremental sales tax burden that's coming from switching back to the PST.

[0925]

We support the provincial government's stated objective to balance the operating budget by 2013, but not if it means decreasing infrastructure investment, which is key to B.C.'s long-term prosperity. British Columbia's productivity rate is strongly linked to its investment in core public assets, such as roads, highways, ports, airports and border facilities.

Previous, 1990s, funding declines for infrastructure maintenance have led to accelerated deterioration of local public assets, resulting in a reduction in B.C.'s manufacturing productivity. While higher tax rates will be required to support sustaining infrastructure investments, the resulting economic gains will more than offset any project loss in income.

For every real dollar spent on public infrastructure, a $1.11 increase in the GDP will be generated. Every infrastructure job creates five more jobs in support services, building material supply and equipment supply. B.C. road builders members appreciate the need for fiscal prudence in the coming years, but if British Columbia is to overcome low productivity levels, become the gateway to Asia-Pacific trade for North America and remain a globally competitive place in which to invest and do business, it must sustain and even increase overall spending on infrastructure.

Thank you very much for this opportunity to present our views on what needs to be done to move B.C.'s economy forward and create prosperity for British Columbia's workers and their families. Thank you again. I appreciate your listening.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Thank you, Jack. We have a number of questions, but just before we start with the questions, the hard copy that is on your desk….

J. Davidson: I'll get it to you.

R. Howard (Chair): Okay. If you contact Arlene at the back of the room, she can make the arrangements.

So a number of questions. I'll start. You piqued my interest when you talked about infrastructure funding and
[ Page 1590 ]
productivity. Could you expand on that a little bit, or is that included in your hard copy presentation?

J. Davidson: No, that's all short form. I know you don't want to be reading a lot of stuff.

If you're in a business — a service business, plumber, electrician — and you're sending your guy across town to do a job, if he's stuck in traffic for two hours, the productivity for that job is gone. You're losing money. If you're a manufacturer, and you're trying to get raw materials into your plant or to ship — especially across the border, which is certainly what we're trying to do in B.C. — and that truck is stuck in traffic or can't get through the border or has to wait along the way, the productivity is way down.

In B.C. our transportation system is costing us millions, probably billions, daily for people that can't move their goods and services and people while they're working.

R. Howard (Chair): So you basically would be suggesting a weighting of infrastructure projects that look at that kind of hidden cost.

J. Davidson: Yes.

R. Howard (Chair): All right. Thank you.

B. Ralston: Thanks very much, Jack. Manley McLachlan from the B.C. Construction Association also spoke about the need for fairer and more open tendering. He put a cost of the present process, as opposed to using some of the more standard documents that have been developed, at 20 or 30 percent higher than it need be. Can you give us some specific examples of increased capital cost of construction due to less-than-transparent tendering processes?

J. Davidson: The only examples that I know would include my members, and I'm not going to talk about that.

B. Ralston: Well then, maybe just….

J. Davidson: The whole basis is competition. If there's no competition, and there are deals being made, then you don't get the cheapest price, the lowest price. If there is good competition and fair tendering, you will always get the good price, the best price.

B. Ralston: What's the instance of direct awards in your business?

J. Davidson: More at the municipal level, but some at the provincial level as well. It's probably 20 percent of the budget. But I think even the direct awards, where there's no competition there, affect where there is competition, because it sets the bar. Then people say, "Oh well, this is where we need to be," and so the bids are higher.

[0930]

D. Hayer: Thank you very much, Jack, for a very good presentation.

Your members worked on Pacific Highway; 176th Street in my riding, widening it; the new Port Mann bridge; Highway 1; and the South Fraser perimeter road. How many of those projects were directly awarded, or how many were actually negotiated — that different people had the chance to bid on it?

The second part: are you still able to find enough workers to work on these projects and also the projects the government is tendering on? Are the prices higher or lower than what it was a few years ago on these projects that are coming on line now?

J. Davidson: None of those projects that you mentioned were directly awarded. The provincial government and the Ministry of Transportation are very thorough at making sure their tendering process works.

Right now our labour situation is good. During the last slowdown, transportation was able to maintain their productivity and keep going, but we stole people from mining and forestry. This time around we see another shortage coming in two years. Mining is ramping up, and so is forestry, so they'll be trying to steal those people back.

We think that in two years, maybe three, there will be a critical skills shortage.

D. Hayer: Is the pricing going up or down or stable during the construction projects?

J. Davidson: I don't really get into that. As an association, we stay away from pricing as far as we can.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation.

You mentioned training and that it was a concern that the job plan didn't address training in a significant way. The Business Council of B.C. was the latest, last week, to talk about potential regional skills shortages.

Could you elaborate a bit more on the training credit and it not being a true incentive and, perhaps, how that could be rectified?

J. Davidson: Yeah. The amount of it is not worth the paperwork for employers to apply to get it.

Our industry is at fault, as much as anything else, on training. We are a just-in-time employer. There's no vision. I tell the guys: "In two years you're going to be short." They say: "Okay. Yeah, that's true." They won't do anything about that today.

What the government needs to do is make sure that the training and supply of skilled workers is nimble
[ Page 1591 ]
and can adjust. I got into the program thinking that we would change the world, guys would plan, and we'd set up apprenticeship programs today because they're going to need them in three years. They just don't operate that way.

So you have to change your thinking a bit and say: "Okay, we can't force them to plan and look after that, but we have to make it so that when the time comes, we can respond to their need." No matter what you do, we still have a responsibility to supply the people and skilled workers when they're asked for.

Unfortunately, the system has to meet the needs of the employers, so we have to make it more nimble, I think.

P. Pimm: Thanks, Jack, for the presentation.

I want to follow up on MLA Ralston's comments. I didn't really take that out of the presentation — that it's not transparent. He mentioned risk that the contractors association had to take on. Can you expound a little bit on risks that are involved in the contracts? Is that something we could manage better?

J. Davidson: Certainly, risk is what all the contracts are about — who gets it and why. Our position is that the person who can control the risk should get it. We went through ten years of working with the Ministry of Transportation on reallocating risk. They are a huge owner and really can do whatever they want, but they've understood that the risk involved — who accepts the risk — has to go with who can control it.

[0935]

Today we're working with B.C. Hydro. B.C. Hydro has had a lot of problems with not getting a lot of bids because they've evolved to where they just given off all the risk. Now they've come to us and said: "We understand we're in a bad position. How do we work around this?" And we said: "Well, the Ministry of Transportation's contracts are great. We should model them and work that for you."

Municipalities also are really, really risk-averse. They need to accept risk where the contractor can't control it. Once you're underground, once you've dug the hole and found something new, it can't go all to the contractor to fix the problem with this risk.

I'm sorry. I rambled on.

P. Pimm: No, that's good. Thank you.

R. Howard (Chair): That's great, Jack. Thank you very much. We've run you out of time. Appreciate you coming out this morning.

Next up we have Lynn Perrin.

Welcome, Lynn. As you know, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up if I can, and you can stop and take questions or go straight through — your choice. The microphone is yours.

L. Perrin: Welcome to the Fraser Valley. The issue I'm going to talk about is actually a thousand miles away in MLA Pimm's constituency. This is the fourth time since 2005 that I'm making a submission to this committee on this matter. You've got the links from 2007 and 2010 to Hansard for my presentation then.

At every committee hearing I've brought forward information with regard to the injustice experienced by Omineca Enterprises Ltd., a Fort Nelson small family-owned and -operated forest company, by the huge B.C. Ministry of Forests. This injustice has continued in spite of the Ministry of Forests not being able to substantiate their claims regarding a debt owed to them by Omineca that stems from 1980 to 1984, when the forest sector economy was in economic peril just as it is today.

You should be concerned that each year, Omineca's purported $4.4-million-plus debt in 2009 is on the books of the Ministry of Forests as an accounts receivable. Yet the lawyer for the Ministry of Forests has admitted there has never been an adjudication of the debt in spite of a 1998 ruling by a handpicked Forest Appeal Board that debt caused the cancellation of two timber sale harvesting licences.

In 1999 the lien placed on all of the assets of Omineca and its affiliate had to be rescinded, because there were no documents to be put to the test of an audit. The reason there were no account records is that all of the account records for 1980 to 1984 for the Fort Nelson timber supply area were shredded in 1989 while there were appeals and legal action.

Omineca has exhausted its appeals of the 1998 Ministry of Forests appeal board ruling up to and including the refusal to hear the appeal by the Supreme Court of Canada and the province's refusal to join in its rule 50 appeal to argue the alleged debt. So far this has cost them over $2 million, and it is likely that it has cost the taxpayers of B.C. twice as much.

In the meantime, all of the timber allocation belongs to a single large forest company that has not had either of its two mills in Fort Nelson TSA operating for almost three years. The mills employed 500 people who lived and paid taxes in Fort Nelson and in B.C.

According to the submissions at Fort Nelson of this committee a couple of weeks ago, the mills are still closed. While the oil and gas sector has been able to keep income flowing to the provincial coffers, it is of little use to the community when the taxes from wages go out of the province and the community loses a property tax base for required public services. The income taxes lost due to those 500 mill jobs would be significant as well.

[0940]

However, it is time for this committee to make recommendations supporting small local enterprises such as Omineca as a way to provide economic security for isolated communities such as Fort Nelson. At this committee's hearing in Smithers a local tree-planting business
[ Page 1592 ]
said they cannot even submit a bid for work as it is beyond their capacity. Therefore, the work goes to a large company from outside the community, and no benefits derive from local resources. How can a northeast B.C. community thrive and add to the economy of B.C. if this transfer of value from their resources does not stop? How can B.C. thrive if value from our resources leaves our province?

Omineca has always stayed in the Fort Nelson area and provided products and employment to local residents to the best of its ability. Omineca is committed to do that in the future if given the chance. Here are some details of the dispute they have been working hard to resolve in order to return to full participation of the forest sector in Fort Nelson. This committee has within its mandate to ensure that this dispute is resolved for justice not only for Omineca and Fort Nelson but for the rest of the taxpayers in B.C.

I would like to read into the record excerpts of two letters which I've added to my oral presentation notes. The first is from local executives of five NDP constituency associations, including Peace River North. The second sets out a possible solution to this dispute and includes facts that Omineca believes will enable this committee to now make its settlement recommendations for the 2012-2013 budget. I'm quoting from the five constituency associations here.

"This is the first time we've made a request to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services to recommend a third party to resolve the 25-plus-year impasse between Omineca and the Ministry of Forests as the best place to spend tax dollars.

"On April 8, 2011, a number of B.C. NDP constituency presidents sent a letter to the Attorney General of B.C. and the Justice Minister of Canada urging them to settle the injustice to Mr. Peterson. The April 8 letter with binder of documents pertaining to the Omineca dispute is relevant to the deliberations of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. It is imperative that this dispute be resolved for the sake of Fort Nelson and B.C., as well as that justice is seen to be done for the Peterson family, who have spent 30 years dealing with this travesty.

"For more than 15 years NDP constituency associations throughout B.C. have supported Omineca's 30-year effort through letters asking government to have an independent third party to mediate or arbitrate a binding solution to what we now reiterate is a growing, manifest injustice. It has become very apparent to us, after reviewing documents of some 25 forest appeal and court hearings over 30 years, which have cost millions of dollars paid for by both Omineca and B.C. taxpayers. This is evidence that the courts have all failed to resolve this grave injustice to Omineca and the community."

It asks you to see the chronology of the legal proceedings.

"It has also become clear now that this Finance Committee…. And we assert that this demands a political solution settlement or an immediate agreement to engage with an independent third party who can resolve the matter."

This is from Abbotsford West, Abbotsford South, Abbotsford federal, Chilliwack and Peace River North NDP constituency association executives.

This is from Omineca:

"Therefore, making Omineca's idea count, we ask this committee to understand and fully grasp the true ramifications, especially the true basic facts. With strong belief, convince this province it has no moral or legal defence against paying Omineca its settlement by applying these nine basic facts" — which I've given in a big binder to the Clerk. So when I talk about exhibits, they're in the big binder for the committee.

[0945]

"(1) In 2006 the Ministry of Forests admitted that they made an administrative oversight in 1980 by failing to comply with the terms of the timber sale harvesting licence.

(2) Failing to credit rental due from the $40,000 paid on account to prevent suspensions.

(3) It breached section 62 of the Forest Act that stops alleged stumpage and rental and interest from accruing, which means that the 1980 rental of $28,320 has now gone up to $4.6 million, mostly interest.

(4) A recent Auditor General report confirms to Omineca that it is the victim of ongoing internal fraud on the part of the Ministry of Forests since these 1980 breaches.

(5) The final true result of this ongoing fraud and deceit has led appeal boards and judges that simply make all damaging decisions against Omineca since July 7, 1980, void.

(6) Omineca cannot be defaulted, as it did everything possible to meet the province's demand from July 8, 1980, to this date.

(7) The province ignores Judges Ruttan and MacFarlane's decisions ruling Omineca has been damaged and should reverse the TSHL cancellations, and the judges urged mediation.

(8) This leaves the TSHLs not cancelled and the province with no real defence to not pay for Omineca's fair proposed order of settlement.

(9) With its Fort Nelson licence reinstated and the mill infrastructure rebuilt, Omineca can aid in more economically diverse and thriving community in the cash cow region of northeast B.C."

May I just finish, or should I stop now?

R. Howard (Chair): No, you can go through.

L. Perrin: Okay.

"Omineca proposed a solution to this dispute in the June 2, 2011, cover letter of exhibit D, which urged the Premier and Attorney General and the Forests Minister, with the agreement of the official opposition, to approve Omineca's prompt settlement. After 25 years in the courts we believe this should happen under section 4(e) of the Ministry of Forests Act and other political means. It could apply at the next sitting of the Legislature" — this sitting of the Legislature — "for cabinet to approve or, similar to what happened in 2002 with the twin Carrier Lumber case" — the lawyer for Carrier was a lawyer for Omineca, and he said they are twin cases — "for a political judgment as a matter of law and justice. This statement simply sets out documents where the defendant, the province, has no real defence...."

I would like to say that I have helped Omineca for 19 years now, and I have researched over 12,000 government documents. I have read every single one of them. I concur with Omineca. The province simply has no real defence against Omineca's renewable forest licence — and their payment requested for settlement in order to meet the mandate set out for this committee to continue to request for resolutions to the injustice suffered by Omineca at the expense of three generations of the Peterson family, the community and the taxpayers of
[ Page 1593 ]
B.C. A process for prompt settlement must be one of the recommendations in this committee's report.

I'm submitting the letters and the supporting documents.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you, Lynn. We've run you out of your allotted time. We've got your presentation, and thank you for that.

Next up we have Science World British Columbia — Bryan Tisdall; and school district 33 — Ruth Wiebe. Welcome to you both. As you have heard, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up. You can take questions or go straight through — your choice. Over to you.

B. Tisdall: I'm sure you all have an impression of Science World. I hope you do. I was going to bring a little interactive experience for us all to start off today. I didn't do that, thinking that it might appear somewhat disrespectful to the committee. But seeing your schedule, how you started — you have four hours of deliberations this morning — I really should have done it. Come visit us in your communities or down at our facility in False Creek, and we'll try to get you involved at that point.

Why I am here today — three things. First of all, to extend our appreciation to the committee, who I have met with one or two times in the past, for their support and the support of the government for the investments that have been made in Science World. I'd like to tell you a little bit about the results of those.

Secondly, hopefully to expand a little bit your understanding of our organization — who we are and what we do.

[0950]

Thirdly, to request from you your ongoing support for the future for some major activities we would like to continue, particularly here in Chilliwack. We chose to talk with the committee at this location, and I thank Ruth for joining me from the Chilliwack school district, because we are all around the province. As you can see from page 2…. And by the way, I don't plan on reading this word for word, but it does keep me on track. Those of you who I have met with before know that if I don't have this in front of me, I may go off in this direction — or that one, even.

We do have activities around the province, as you can see on the first page there. While we're well known for the dome on False Creek and the activities we have there, we have a very extensive program around British Columbia. That's because of the vision we have and the mission of our organization that's set out on page 2, which is not about growing our organization but rather about pursuing a belief that science and technology are crucially important to the future prosperity of British Columbia. Exciting young minds and getting support of families around the province are essential for that future prosperity.

Science World is well known for the experience-based services that we provide around the province. But in fact, behind those good times, especially those good times on rainy days like this, there is a desire to expand what we have done, as illustrated in what we like to call our "ages in stages" approach on page 3, beyond families and young children to focus more upon younger children, early childhood learning, a teen audience, an adult audience, and do more than just excite but go from a level of interest and curiosity into a much deeper appreciation of science and its contribution, right through into action and a leadership role.

We do that through a number of vehicles — through the activities we run out of the dome in False Creek, which I hope you're all aware of…. Interestingly, we're just finishing a $35 million renovation on that facility to make sure it will be…. We opened in 1989, and we want to make sure we are around for another 20 or 30 years. With this renovation, we'll do it — and also through the outreach program around the province.

This is based strongly on the belief, the need, that science is crucial to so many aspects of our life today — not only high-tech and biotech that we may think of, but all of the health services and resource development sciences behind all of that. Yet currently there are not enough young people pursuing courses, careers in science and technology to fill the need that we have today and going forward.

We believe that Science World is distinctly positioned to address that need. We have a stable and sustainable organization. It's a self-supporting, non-profit organization that enjoys wonderful support throughout the communities — individuals, foundations, industry. We have used that support efficiently and effectively in delivery of services over the last decade plus, as in some of those results that are illustrated on page 7 — some of the responses that we received when we asked people: "How are we doing?"

Page 8 outlines four activities, which I just want to speak to for a moment, that illustrate the range of activities in which we're involved beyond what you might imagine that Science World is involved in.

Just this fall we've introduced a program called Future Science Leaders, which builds on the more populist nature of all our activities. We have identified, initially, 20 of the best and the brightest grade 10 and grade 11 students and are providing them with a year-long experience to deepen their understanding and appreciation for science, their love of science, and to provide them with peer groups with whom they can interact and some role models to provide them with direction. It's a departure from what we have done traditionally, which we've just launched this year.

On the other end, though, Big Science, Little Hands is a program for early childhood learning that has been developed to provide resources for families and early childhood educators And increasingly this year, we're
[ Page 1594 ]
working with kindergarten teachers faced with the challenge of having all those wonderful five-year-olds for the whole day rather than half the day, and we're working quite extensively with them.

[0955]

Super Science Club is a program we developed for underserved communities and children from those communities, originally in downtown Vancouver. Having developed that content, we were very anxious to see if it could be used more broadly around the province, which brought us to Chilliwack.

Ruth, maybe you could tell them a little bit about what we're doing here.

R. Wiebe: Science World came to town several years ago to help us out with building an awareness and an understanding of some of the knowledge that's available to urban children quite readily but is not so available here in a community such as Chilliwack. You may think: "Well, you're an hour and a half, two hours out of the city. What are you talking about?" Here we have pockets of isolation in our community. We actually have lower measures on school readiness than the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver. So there is a lot of knowledge that our children are struggling to achieve, a lot of knowledge they're struggling to have access to.

Science World offered that opportunity to us. They came here. They visited our schools. They invaded Chilliwack…

B. Tisdall: In a nice way.

R. Wiebe: …in a nice way for about two months. We ended all of that with a science celebration that involved hundreds of people from around our community.

Now, that was about two years ago, and you think: "Okay, so you had this big event. Now what's left?" We have had sustainable impact here for the last two years. We have a study group of middle school science teachers that continue to work with a few people from Science World and with our aboriginal communities to develop indigenization of the science curriculum that we have.

We've got the Super Science Club here at Central Elementary, one of the lowest economic areas of British Columbia, and they continue to offer exciting science experience for our kids there. We've developed a wonderful partnership with our university and with agriculture in the classroom and with some of the other people within our community that we weren't really in touch with until Science World helped us to connect. So it has had a tremendous impact on our community, on our teachers, on our students.

B. Tisdall: Let me jump right over to page 10 and remind you or tell you all how you helped this happen.

In 2005, as a result of some discussions with a number of folks across the government, the government made a five-year commitment to Science World at a level of $1 million a year to help us provide free experiences for elementary school students. Those students could either…. All those yellow school buses that come up to our building, kids got in for free, or one of our outreach programs would visit your community in Fort St. John, Nanaimo, Castlegar, Cranbrook, Duncan — wonderfully successful through the working with local communities.

In 2008, about midway through that program, that was topped up in two ways. We were approached and asked if we could do more for young learners — we developed some activities for early childhood learning — and, similarly, if we could do something with secondary school students in the levels of sustainability and climate action.

That program ended in 2010, at which point we were very fortunate to receive interim funding through the Year of Science — the province's Year of Science, our Year of Science — that has allowed us to continue these activities to the past school year and the current school year.

That funding expires at the end of June next year, and the range of activities that you see outlined on page 11, with the results that are in the chart on page 12, will come to an end unless we can get renewed funding for those activities.

That will mean not only the dismantling of the infrastructure by which we can directly provide them but the end of the stimulation and interaction we can have with local community folks, whether they be colleges, school districts such as Ruth outlined for us, regional innovation councils, First Nations organizations, municipalities, library boards. When we work around the province, the approach is to do that in conjunction with local authorities.

To continue that, there's a requirement that we need long-term, sustainable, predictable funding — funding that we believe is extremely significant in magnitude and in impact on our organization, and through that around the province, but what we would like to suggest is a relatively minor investment for the province with a great return on that investment.

[1000]

How did we do? Are we anywhere near ten minutes?

R. Howard (Chair): You're perfect timing. You're ten minutes, right on the mark.

B. Tisdall: That's unusual.

R. Howard (Chair): We have a question.

B. Bennett: Good morning. It's really nice to see you two — not just individually, personally, but the two institutions working so closely together.
[ Page 1595 ]

It's going to be difficult for me to ask a question, but I want to get you talking about this. In my experience in public life over the last 10½ years, I've become so frustrated with the lack of scientific literacy in a lot of the big, controversial issues. You mentioned resource extraction.

I even encounter a lack of confidence in, and understanding of, the scientific method — for example, when scientists have examined something and said that it's safe to do, safe to eat, safe to be around. There are many people in society that don't understand what the scientific method is and don't actually trust the scientific community. Does that bring up any thoughts?

B. Tisdall: That resonates entirely. We're not in the business of teaching people everything there is to know about science. We're not out, in any way, to replace the school system. It's all about thinking. It's all about a way of thinking. It's all about questioning, creativity, ingenuity, curiosity, the scientific method — bringing that approach of questioning and of understanding, rather than specific knowledge, in the experiences that we have.

We have no intent that everyone that passes through our doors or is involved in one of our programs is going to become a scientist. A scary thought, actually. Some of them will. A good number of them will.

But science is involved in so many…. You mentioned the resource-based industries. We talk to folks in mining, fishing, forestry. They tell us about how they need folks who are more attuned to science and the importance of science, who may stay involved through the elementary and secondary levels in science courses to prepare them for future careers — careers in their own communities — and the way of thinking.

R. Wiebe: Well, one of the conversations that happened while Science World was here was about water and the impact of agriculture on water. The scientists came in with their methodology and talked about the safety measures that have been put in place with regard to our local water. So it did help develop that trust in the scientific method. It did bring that evidence to our people about that.

B. Bennett: Is it possible to do a quick follow-up?

R. Howard (Chair): I'll come back to you if I can.

M. Elmore: Thanks for your presentation. In terms of your requests for the major contribution for Science World, can you talk about that? Is there a dollar amount to that or what that would be to continue?

B. Tisdall: To continue the level of activity we're currently doing, it requires in the vicinity of $1½ million a year.

M. Elmore: Right.

B. Tisdall: And as I mentioned, the desire would be to…. Sorry, but I say this appreciating the situation that you all face — the economic situation before the government. But year-to-year funding makes it very difficult to plan and use funds as effectively and efficiently as we would like to. The commitment that we received in 2005 was ideal because we knew we were in business for five years, and we could build that and build the community contacts.

We're very reluctant to go into communities to develop these partnerships. The desire, always, is to reach a level of self-sufficiency in the communities, but that can take a while to develop. To parachute in, do something and then not be able to support that — we're very hesitant to do.

So it's not only the amount of funding but the predictability of that over some period of time that we're seeking.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you both. Now we've run you out of time. So with apologies to MLAs Bennett and Donaldson, they'll have to catch up with you outside of this.

B. Tisdall: Or come visit any time, please.

R. Howard (Chair): We appreciate you taking the time.

Next up we have the B.C. Agriculture Council — Garnet Etsell and Reg Ens.

Welcome, gentlemen. As I'm sure you've heard, you've got 15 minutes. I'll give you a little heads-up around ten. You can go straight through if you like or stop and take some questions. Over to you.

G. Etsell: Thank you for the opportunity. I'm going to do the presentation, and Reg is going to answer all the hard questions.

[1005]

You've got the presentation in front of you. I am just going to hit some of the highlights. We're not going to go through it verbatim. But just for those of you that don't know the B.C. Ag Council, we are the umbrella farm organization for British Columbia agriculture. We are a council of commodity groups. Through our members, we represent 14,000 of the 20,000 farm families in this province. They, in turn, generate about 96 percent of the farm-gate receipts, so we represent commercial agriculture.

Agriculture is, and we're proud to be, the third-largest resource sector in this province. We generate a significant amount of GDP to the province. However, the sector has been under stress the last number of years. The Stats Canada numbers for agriculture showed that B.C.
[ Page 1596 ]
was the lowest-producing agriculture sector in Canada. We were the only province that had a net cumulative loss, to the tune of $80 million last year.

What I want to talk about is the need for us to create a competitive environment. The policies that have been in place the last number of years and the funding policies have really resulted in us being uncompetitive vis-à-vis our neighbours. I want to hit four areas that are covered in this document. There are others, but these are the four main ones.

First of all, the provincial sales tax. We thought we had finished this lobby. The Ag Council had worked hard for ten years to effect change in the PST system, particularly as it applied to agriculture. The HST gave us everything that we were looking for and benefited the industry to the tune of about $20 million per year. Going back to the status quo will cost us $20 million.

There's an opportunity, I believe, for us to…. Before we just say, "Well, we'll go back to the status quo," let's take a look at what wasn't working with the old PST system and see if we can make those corrections. A lot of it revolved around that antiquated list of capital exemptions, and there's got to be a way that we can improve that.

The basic concept of those that developed the PST system, particularly the exemptions around agriculture…. The principle was that food should not be taxed and neither should the input costs to produce that food. It works on the operating expenditure side with the exemptions that were in place. It does not work on the capital side. And as agriculture continues to become more capital intensive and mechanized, that old exemption list is cumbersome to work with. The retailers did not like working with it. So I believe there is an opportunity for us to change that.

The second area is carbon tax. B.C. is the only jurisdiction in North America that imposes the carbon tax. We are competing. None of our competitors have a carbon tax. This has cost us, to date, with the last increase, $45 million a year. With the increase that's anticipated in 2012, that'll be $65 million. Keep in mind that the ag industry, as I said, last year had a cumulative net loss of $80 million. We are quickly moving to a situation where we could say that it is government policy that is putting us in this negative net operating income area.

Two opportunities that I want to take a look at in terms of investment. I would point out that B.C. is the second-lowest funder or user of public dollars toward agriculture of any province in Canada. But there are two opportunities, I believe, that we should prioritize, and they are both in the area of market development.

One is that we need to implement the program that was recommended in the 2005 ag plan, and that is a Buy B.C. program. I firmly believe that an import displaced and a dollar retained is just as effective at generating GDP as an export dollar.

[1010]

We need to make our citizens aware that we produce a good, healthy food product in B.C., and they should be encouraged to purchase it. So we need to increase our market share in the domestic market.

The other area that we need to work at is expanding our export base. We are at the gateway of Asia. China, India, Southeast Asia are all potential markets, and government can play a great role in opening up those markets for us in two ways. One is to work at removing the barriers to export, and the second area is helping to facilitate the sale of the B.C. brand — not just the Canada brand but the B.C. brand. We've got a great story, and we've got some great products that are in demand, but we need to break those barriers down.

With that, folks, there's a lot more in this document, but I really would like to open it up and have a discussion with you.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Thank you.

M. Elmore: Thanks for your presentation. In terms of your recommendations for the PST changes, are you basically asking for more items to be included under your exemption list?

G. Etsell: I want to get rid of that blasted list. That list was cumbersome. One of the ways that you could do it is flip it. Rather than it being a tax-exempt list, have a very short, concise list of taxable items.

M. Elmore: And in terms of your promoting the B.C. brand and building those markets, do you have a position on local procurement for local products?

G. Etsell: Well, we would certainly encourage local procurement. Of course, when you start talking to the feds about that, then they bring in all these trade negotiations and a list of why those local procurement policies don't work. But absolutely, we would encourage that. It's really frustrating when you hear about hospital districts buying their prepackaged, processed foods from Iowa. I much prefer to see fresh B.C. product in there.

P. Pimm: Well, sorry I missed most of your presentation, but I certainly know the gist of it. The HST. Obviously, I think we're all going to regret the decision made on HST, but that's not a discussion for this table.

The carbon tax is the one that I really want to touch on with you here. I come from the largest grain-growing area of the province, so I'm certainly aware of what it's doing. What is your stand on carbon tax? Do you want to see it completely removed? Do you want to see it maintained at its level? Do you want to see it increased? What would you like to see?
[ Page 1597 ]

G. Etsell: We are pretty clear in the document. The BCAC is calling for an immediate elimination of the provincial carbon tax.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Thanks very much for the presentation. Good to see you again. I fully agree and support that there's a need for an expanded sector in agriculture in our province. We made some recommendations last year, this committee, along those lines as well as on the Buy B.C. program.

I wanted to expand a little bit on the question that MLA Elmore gave around — I wouldn't call it local procurement — procurement policies, purchasing policies, and especially in regards to the development that we're going to see in the province — potential development and community benefit agreements between, for instance, mining companies or the building of the northern transmission line. Have you been advocating? What kind of response have you got — that for those camps and those companies it should be not just guidelines but required to purchase B.C. food products for those operations?

G. Etsell: I've got to be honest with you. This is the first time I've heard of that.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Well, you're missing a big opportunity then.

G. Etsell: No, I agree. I think that that sort of opportunity would be very good. Thanks for bringing it up. Reg has made notes.

D. Hayer: Thank you very much for your presentation — a very good presentation.

I have visited the Burnaby Lake greenhouses in my constituency, and they were talking about the carbon tax, how it's hurting their business when nobody else around the world has it, and we were the only one.

Now, in case we don't eliminate the carbon tax, has the government talked to you? Can they find some other solutions for specific sectors so they don't get so negatively affected, basically where you end up forcing them to shut down and eliminating all those jobs? Has the government been in touch with you to try to discuss, find some solutions, or no?

G. Etsell: No, the message that we have been hearing…. Well, we're getting a mixed message, to be quite honest with you. The one message is that there are no other options, that the dollars…. It was created to be revenue-neutral, and those dollars are committed. So that's the one message.

[1015]

The other message that we hear is that there is an appetite to take a look at the competitiveness of B.C. and the potential elimination. So it's a mixed message.

I want to be very clear. The greenhouse is the largest sector that's impacted — absolutely — because that tax hits the bottom line. They're big users of natural gas. But it is all of agriculture that is getting hit.

It's very frustrating. Food is made up of carbon. Where does carbon come from? The plants get carbon dioxide out of the air. That's where it comes from, and yet we're being taxed on the carbon dioxide that we use through the energy, and it takes energy to produce food.

Again, I'd almost revert to the same principle as the PST. The principle should be that food should not be taxed, and neither should the inputs.

R. Howard (Chair): I have no more questions but a few minutes — if you want to make a closing statement.

G. Etsell: Well, I would. In fact, I'll go to the last paragraphs of our presentation.

You know, if we look at the underlying work that the national food strategy, which BCAC has worked on with the CFA…. The world's agricultural production will have to increase by 70 percent by 2050. By 2020 — that's only nine years from now — 196 countries in the world…. It's been estimated by the UN that only six countries will be in the position of generating surplus levels of food over and above their own requirements. Canada is one of those.

B.C. has a great opportunity. As I said, we're the gateway to Asia, one of the big importers of food in the future. It is not a stretch, I believe, that if we create a competitive environment in this province, we will be able to double the output of agriculture.

That, folks, means that our rural communities will be more sustainable. It means that we will be a vibrant, contributing sector to this province. I would encourage you to help us create a competitive environment so that agriculture can thrive.

R. Howard (Chair): There's a great note to wrap it up on. Appreciate you both coming out this morning.

A Voice: Well, thanks for the opportunity.

R. Howard (Chair): Committee members, we're going to jump forward here. We're going to wait until our presenter comes back into the room.

We have the Canadian Home Builders Association of British Columbia — M.J. Whitemarsh.

Welcome. As you probably know, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up. You can take some questions or go straight through — your choice. The microphone is yours.

M. Whitemarsh: My partner in crime is not here yet, because I told him 10:50. But we're a little early, so that's fine.
[ Page 1598 ]

This is probably my sixth or seventh visit with you to deliver a prebudget submission. But I'm here today to talk to you about an industry that's in crisis.

The Canadian Home Builders Association of British Columbia is the second-largest economic driver to the gross domestic product of this province. We employ about 133,000 to 150,000 direct and indirect jobs we create every year. We employ thousands of people. Our association alone represents over 1,800 companies that employ directly thousands and thousands of persons. So the number of dollars that we create in wages in a year is not something to be sneezed about.

I'm sure you've heard about the HST until you're blue in the face. I know, for us, it's been a three-year nightmare. We as an industry believed that the HST was a good tax for the economy of the province. We believed that as a consumption tax, the HST was a good thing for British Columbia.

We also believe very strongly that housing and renovations are not consumable products and shouldn't have been taxed at all. We didn't have the provincial sales tax portion of the tax charged to housing or renovations prior to the HST, and now we do. But we worked with government. We had the threshold raised. We were in conversation with government shortly before the referendum to look at a renovation tax rebate for the renovation sector.

[1020]

That all went to hell in a handbasket with the vote that came out. Prior to that the industry itself in the province as a whole — not one segment, but the province as a whole, and I represent all of British Columbia — was put into a wait-and-see attitude. Wait and see. Wait and see what happens with the referendum. Wait and see how long it will be before the tax is gone. Wait and see.

Now that the referendum is over, we are now in another 18 to 24 — maybe longer; we don't know — wait-and-see period again, and our industry is dying. I can tell you right now that in the Okanagan region, 267 jobs have been lost — 60 in one company alone, a cabinet supplier — because builders are not building. They can't build. People are not buying.

One thing, through no fault of the provincial government whatsoever…. It's a federal government rule. The federal government's ruling on principal residence says that you can only claim back any kind of tax or rebate on your principal residence. So of course the second-home market in British Columbia, which is absolutely huge, especially in places like the Kootenays, the Okanagan, the Comox Valley, even here in Chilliwack…. Persons that buy those second homes are not entitled to any kind of a rebate that comes back to them from the HST.

Even though we as an industry in partner with government had done a great job of having that threshold raised so that it would cover more homes in the province of British Columbia, those building a second-home market were totally obliterated from getting that back. That is creating a huge problem. I have a member that has 46 inventory homes totalling over $18 million in Fernie. That has just decimated his business.

The other thing is that as a province, we've done a wonderful thing over the past few years in training our young people. We've put money, we've put resources, and we've put all kinds of things behind the education and training that we give them. We've trained our builders to build the house as a system. We don't want any more debacles like we had back in the '90s with the leaky-condo crisis. So we have done a really good job of training our members.

We've done a really good job of training the youth. We've worked with the education system, with the ITA, with others that have really, really strengthened what the education is for builders and renovators in this province, and we're going to lose that now.

The human capital is going to go. That is going to dissipate. It's going to go to Alberta. It's going to go back to Ontario. We are going to lose our youth. We are going to lose our trained individuals. We are losing jobs. If this province is really convinced about the jobs…. I see that every one of you here is from a different part of the province that I represent. If you're really concerned about the families in British Columbia and the jobs, then support our industry and make sure that we don't lose any more.

Sir Isaac Newton had it right with the law of motion. It's far easier to keep something going that has already started than it is to start something from a full stop. So let's create something for this industry. Let's get rid of the provincial sales tax portion of the HST immediately, and let's stimulate the renovation industry, because that's a $7.1-billion industry in this province.

Across this country, British Columbians are the ones that renovate to a higher dollar level than any other part of Canada. Part of that is because our land base is so rare, and it's expensive. People tend to live where they are, stay where they are and renovate the homes that they're in.

We also have a huge need — because of the real estate we live in, which is the most expensive in Canada — for secondary suites and other multiple-living situations within a home. Therefore, these homes need to be renovated to do it. So we also need to do that.

If you look at my submission that I brought in, I talk about the harmonized sales tax. It, again, reiterates some of the things that I've just told you. We create 133,000-plus jobs, $6.1 billion in wages, $15.8 billion in building in a year, and we do a lot of really great things for the province of British Columbia.

The other thing that you need to remember is for every home that is built and sold in the province of British Columbia, there is a minimum of $32,000 of spinoff spending. That's when people go out and buy drapes
[ Page 1599 ]
and TVs and all the other the things that they put into their homes when they buy them.

Let's look at removing the PST portion of the HST immediately. I know that there are parameters. We are not devoid of any information on that. We know that the HST is a federal tax. We know that we are at the mercy of the federal government and what they will, and allow us to, do.

But we also know that this government has never been afraid to take bold action and to do things that will make a difference. I think that stands on its own merit and proves that we here in British Columbia are a little bit further ahead than a lot of our counterparts across the country.

[1025]

The other thing you've heard me say over the last six or seven years as I've come here is that the property transfer tax — which was given to us by Mr. Bill Vander Zalm, once again — is not a fair tax. We happen to tax land three times before the consumer purchases it.

If you look at a farmer's field and that farmer sells his property to a developer, there's property transfer tax paid on that land. When the developer apportions that into building lots and sells them to a builder, the builder pays property transfer tax on that same piece of land. When the consumer purchases the house that's been built on that piece of land, the purchaser pays property transfer tax again on that same piece of land.

Triple taxation, one piece of land — it's got to stop. We cannot support, even though I know we need money…. We have a great education system and a fabulous health system, and we need to keep that. We in the building industry are not devoid of the knowledge that we need tax base to cover those costs, but it cannot be done on the backs of the purchasers of new homes.

There has to be a fairness. The government deemed that $525,000 was a fair threshold for the HST. We believe that if government still believes that's a fair threshold, that threshold should be raised from $200,000 to $525,000 for the calculation of property transfer tax — also with the triple taxation.

Market housing in British Columbia is the housing that creates the gross domestic product that helps our province grow. It's the entity that puts the tax money into education and into health care. Yet our Housing Ministry is at least 95 percent social housing–focused.

We believe that in order to give the focus to the market housing industry that it so greatly deserves, we should have our own housing secretariat, a think tank of sorts where those in the housing industry could actually go, without being overly supervised in the information that they give back, to benefit with cost-benefit analyses on things that come in — like rain screen, seismic upgrading, building envelope, all those things.

Those things do not need to be done in silos. They need to be done in concert with industry. Industry are the ones that are on the site every day, putting on their tool belts and getting out there and doing the job.

Include us. We know what we're talking about.

Limitations of land are also impacted by the agricultural land reserve. You all sitting around this table just heard a friend of mine, Garnet Etsell, give you a talk on the agricultural process. He and I have had many spirited discussions about the agricultural land reserve.

We all know that there is land in this province that is a sacrament under the agricultural land reserve that will never ever be used for agriculture. We need to have a look at that. We need to have a close look at it and make a determination on whether or not we really do want to increase our land base and help the housing affordability in this province.

The industrial land reserve is another one. We talk about putting in the Evergreen line and increasing better transportation, but the industrial land reserve doesn't allow for the building of residential in and around those lines. If we really want people to use that kind of transportation, if we really want to decrease our carbon footprint, then we need to start looking at all these things. I'm sure the people that are in the know, when they do find out these things, will make a difference.

Take some of that industrial land reserve…. Take those rulings, and look at them in the big picture. Let's look at them to start putting residential there.

There's a section there, also, on inclusionary zoning. I do that more for an education piece for yourselves, so that when you go back into your municipalities, you will be in tune with what's going on there.

We as an industry are being beleaguered all the time with: "Yeah, we'll subdivide that land for you. We'll give you 20 lots, but you've got to give us two back for a park. Oh yeah, by the way, we want to put a green space in behind all the lots for a bicycle path, and you need to give us that too. And oh yeah, by the way, while you're at it, we want an extra $100,000 to put the park in at the same time."

Inclusionary zoning, in its place, can be good, but it's starting to be a rape-and-pillage thing, and it really needs to be looked at.

R. Howard (Chair): M.J., you're at about ten minutes, just so you know.

M. Whitemarsh: I am finished. My conclusion is there. You're all incredibly bright people, and I know you can read it. It makes great bedtime reading.

I'll take your questions now, if you have any.

[1030]

B. Bennett: Thank you, M.J. Your employers are getting good value for whatever they're giving to you. It was a good presentation. You know that I'm well aware of the second-home problems in places like the Okanagan and the Kootenays.
[ Page 1600 ]

M. Whitemarsh: I'm glad you read my stuff.

B. Bennett: Yeah. And certainly, the Finance Minister is also aware, as you know. Individual MLAs have made representations to him, and I know you folks have as well.

If we were to find a way to get rid of the PST and take the purchase and sale situation back to the way it was prior to HST, you'd still have the 5 percent GST on the purchase of new homes. You'd like to get rid of that, I'm sure, too, but that's not really on this table.

I've been told that actually it works out to 5 percent provincially as well — that there's 2 percent buried…. Before HST there was 2 percent PST buried in the price?

M. Whitemarsh: That is so.

B. Bennett: So have you asked for a 5 percent reduction, or a 7 percent reduction?

M. Whitemarsh: No. Anything that we have done has always been in the 2 to 4 percent range; 5 percent, if they're going to do it…. But we've never added on the two, because we know that the 2 percent was imbedded. We actually did the analysis back before the HST came in.

Just a couple of things. The GST, 5 percent…. When that first came out in 1991 the federal government did tell us as industry nationally that they would look at it in two years and index it. That's never happened. So our national association has, since 1991, and will again this year make that presentation to have that changed.

The 5 percent needs to come off right away, Bill, and it needs to come off retroactively, because a lot of the inventory homes that are in inventory have been there since June 2010. It's like the tap turned off.

B. Bennett: So would it help…? How much would it help if you were to take the inventory that was there prior to July 1, 2010 and say 5 percent off — doesn't apply?

M. Whitemarsh: It would kick-start the industry back again.

B. Bennett: Would that be big? Would that make a significant difference?

M. Whitemarsh: It would be a huge, significant difference. Absolutely — it would. Because what's happening is…. You may know this already, but I'll tell you for the rest of the committee. I referred to a builder that has 42 inventory homes and has had them since June 2010 in Fernie. He has 11 customers from the province of Alberta, nine of whom are my age. I'm not telling you what that is. But they are getting ready for retirement within the next three to five years. They are ready to purchase, but they won't purchase until the HST is gone.

That 5 percent would kick-start a lot of business. It's being penny-wise and pound-foolish. You are losing property transfer tax. You're losing the wage income tax. You're losing the sales tax on products and services. You're losing the $32,000 in spinoff spending. You start putting all that together and make an aggregate, and you will come up with far more benefit to the province of British Columbia than what you're gaining from that 5 percent.

R. Howard (Chair): Thanks, M.J. I'm going to move on. I've got a long speakers list and probably only time for one more.

B. Ralston: I think you've effectively communicated that sense of crisis that you spoke of at the beginning. The Leader of the Opposition and I both raised this issue with the Premier in question period a week ago. Really, the answer was basically: "Wait and see."

What further steps do you think this committee could take to communicate that sense of crisis to the cabinet and to the government? Because it doesn't seem to be getting through right now.

M. Whitemarsh: I would suggest that the government's hands are virtually tied at this point in time, until they find out what the parameters are. And we have had discussion with the Finance Minister. We've had discussion with staff in the Finance Ministry. We know that there are parameters that they have to follow.

But I think if this committee could do anything to help save this industry, it would be to relate the urgency of taking bold action now. Going outside what the transition rules may be. Going outside what the parameters may be and just taking a bold action on behalf of British Columbians. It will make a huge difference.

And it's not just the industry that's suffering. The touchstone of residential construction is huge across the province, and it will impact lots of jobs.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Thank you, M.J. We've run you out of time. I've got MLAs Hayer, Pimm and myself on the list. We'll have to catch up with you after this, or outside of this at least.

M. Whitemarsh: That's fine. You know where to find me. Thank you for your time.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you for coming, and thank you for moving yourself up on the list here.

Next up we have the Chilliwack Chamber of Commerce — Jason Lum.

Welcome, Jason. As you have undoubtedly heard, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up. You can take some questions or go straight through — your choice. Over to you.

[1035]
[ Page 1601 ]

J. Lum: All right. Well, I'm going to take about five minutes of your time. As the chamber of commerce, as you know, we represent…. I'm a volunteer representative of the Chilliwack chamber. We represent almost 600 members, small- and medium-size businesses, here in Chilliwack.

First of all, on behalf of the chamber of commerce, I'd like to welcome the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services to Chilliwack today. We applaud your time you've put into this consultative process, and we wish you luck in moving forward developing Budget 2012.

As I said, I will be keeping my comments from the chamber brief. We have provided input to the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce, who you'll no doubt be getting buried in paper from. One of the things I wanted to do was just highlight one of the areas in Chilliwack that we've been particularly interested in from a chamber perspective. That area is education and skills development to ensure economic sustainability. I will be taking a local spin on this.

In 1995 the closure of the Canadian Forces Base in Chilliwack was a blow to the local economy, felt by many chamber members. We applaud and encourage government in their continued commitment to the Canada Education Park, which, for those of you who don't know, is an innovative partnership between the city of Chilliwack, the University of the Fraser Valley, the RCMP and JIBC.

The chamber sees the Canada Education Park, anchored by the university, as a key priority area for investment here in Chilliwack and, indeed, the region. The chamber believes the education park has huge potential in providing the business community with local access to a highly skilled workforce, trained and educated in our own back yard.

The chamber believes there are excellent investment opportunities available in a burgeoning agricultural program, food processing as well as health sciences and trades and technology.

The chamber has been impressed with the university's proactive approach to maintaining a solid working relationship with the private sector, and we are proud to support them in their endeavours.

We applaud, again, government in their job program that's recently been announced. Being a chamber that is almost 90 percent made up of small businesses, we indeed encourage continued investment in small business as we move through economic uncertainty.

Now, there is a whole bunch of other recommendations that we have made and have provided input to the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce, but again, I just mostly wanted to highlight the education park. Indeed, if you haven't had a chance to have a look, tour the facility, it's one of the nicest places here in Chilliwack.

If there are any questions, I can take those. Otherwise, I'll be happy to give my time to the next speaker.

R. Howard (Chair): All right. We have one question.

B. Routley: Thanks for your presentation. Could you give us a little bit more information about this education park and what kinds of students are attending it? You mentioned two programs — agriculture and food processing. What other kinds of programs are there, and do you know the number of students? Are there four-year programs available? Exactly how does it work?

J. Lum: Right now the education park is anchored, like I said, by the university. It's the main teaching institution there. The majority is a trades and technology centre. What we understand is that the university is just starting their agricultural program now. For a place like Chilliwack, where agriculture is obviously a key sector, we believe that it's a huge opportunity, not only just kind of status quo agriculture but looking at opportunities around new, innovative technology, agricultural technology.

[1040]

There is a bit of a disconnect between…. When you talk to people on the street or younger people, students, about agriculture in particular, they think about mucking out a stall or something. Indeed, when I tour some of the facilities that we have in Chilliwack, you see the kind of technology that's involved there.

A lot of times they're hiring companies from across the line to fix complex robotics and stuff that they use in some of their operations. I don't see why we can't be supporting something in our own back yard and something where we can have students being able to provide that kind of service to our local agricultural sector.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Well, thank you, Jason.

J. Lum: You're welcome. Thanks for having me.

R. Howard (Chair): We appreciate you taking the time to come out this morning and present to us.

Next up we have the British Columbia Association of Child Development and Intervention — Bruce Sandy.

Welcome, Bruce. As I'm sure you've heard, you've got 15 minutes. At about ten I'll give you a heads-up.

B. Sandy: Excellent. I was hoping I could steal some of his time.

I'm the provincial advocate for the B.C. Association of Child Development and Intervention. The association represents approximately 30 member agencies that provide services for children and youth with special needs around the province. Our member agencies include child development centres, the pediatric hospitals, such
[ Page 1602 ]
as Sunny Hill and Queen Alexandra. And our members provide critical health and developmental services to children and youth with special needs and their families.

Likely you've heard from a number of our member agencies already, around the province, from different communities. You've heard from the Bulkley Valley Child Development Centre Society. You've heard from the Prince George Child Development Centre Association, the Comox Valley Child Development Association, the Kitimat Child Development Centre Association, the Quesnel and District Child Development Centre and the Terrace Child Development Centre Society.

You'll also be receiving submissions from a number of other member agencies.

I have been coming here since 2006, and I've had the honour to present to a number of select standing committees. They have been very good in actually listening to our presentations, listening to our recommendations and even included a number of those recommendations in the reports. The frustration of the association is that none of those recommendations have actually been implemented by the province.

With respect to contracted services for children and youth with special needs, there has been erosion over the last ten years. The province has implemented a number of changes that have negatively impacted the sustainability of these services. Some of these include….

The Ministry of Children and Family Development failed to compensate contractors for increased accountability measures, including provincially mandated accreditation and the implementation of new and costly reporting requirements. The province has also failed to cover overhead costs — such as gas, utilities, insurance, audits, etc. — and some administrative costs for over the last ten to 15 years.

As we're also aware, the province has reduced gaming grant eligibility for many agencies over the last years as well.

While the overall hours of contracted services for children and youth with special needs have declined, the greatest reductions have come on a per-child basis. Funding has failed to keep pace with the dramatic increase in the number of children being diagnosed with special needs.

For example, on average, a child receiving early intervention therapy today could expect to receive less than half of the services available in 2000. There are also ever-increasing numbers of children being wait-listed for services. All children receiving and being wait-listed for contracted early intervention services are children at risk. Only through timely and sufficient levels of these services will they have the opportunity to develop to their full potential. Current service levels are dramatically failing these children.

The social and financial consequences of under- resourcing contracted services for children and youth with special needs will be substantial. The province is allowing one of its most vulnerable populations to go through life with numerous unnecessary challenges. The financial consequences will be dramatic, requiring the province to allocate far more funding in the future to support related costs with respect to health, education, social services and criminal justice systems.

Recently Minister Falcon announced that the province would be implementing cost-saving measures but that health and education funding would be protected from cuts.

[1045]

As the services BCACDI member agencies provide represent one of the best possible investments toward the future education and health of children they serve, these services deserve the same protection.

These services originally were under the Ministry of Health in 1996, prior to the development of the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

Our recommendation is that the B.C. government double resources available to the Ministry of Children and Family Development contracted early intervention therapy providers, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology and family services, from $30.7 million to $61.4 million, to address the critical underfunding.

The B.C. government should increase funding to current Ministry of Children and Family Development children and youth with special needs contractors by 5 percent to provide for unfunded cost increases over the past ten or more years. The B.C. government should also protect contracted services for children and youth with special needs from current and future cost-cutting measures.

With respect to school-age therapy services, the availability of physiotherapy services changes abruptly for children once they enter the school system. Children with cerebral palsy, developmental delays, autism, Down syndrome and many other conditions receive physiotherapy through a number of our member agencies until they enter kindergarten.

However, unless their disability is severe or they are multiply disabled, they become ineligible for these services when they enter the school system. For children that remain eligible, services are greatly diminished, including consultative physiotherapy but no direct services. Lacking appropriate services, these children are at far greater risk for conditions such as obesity, poor physical fitness, cardio-respiratory dysfunction, diabetes, mental health disorders and many other chronic conditions.

In order to reach increasingly tight budgetary constraints, a number of provincial school districts have made reductions to their occupational therapy and speech-language pathology services over the last five years. These services should be protected from budget-
[ Page 1603 ]
ary reductions, and school districts should be directed to reverse the reductions they have made to these services over the last five years.

Our next recommendation is that the B.C. government should allocate an additional $4 million towards school-age physiotherapy services to address critical gaps in these services. The B.C. government should reverse all service reductions to school-age occupational therapy and speech-language pathology services undertaken over the last five years and protect these services from future service cuts.

The next area of our submission is with respect to mental health services. Recent studies estimate the prevalence of mental health conditions in children and youth at approximately 15 percent.

Young children with these conditions and their families currently have minimal access to support services. This is predictably having a tremendously negative effect on these children as they advance into their teenage years and beyond.

Due to restricted funding, most current resources for children and youth with mental health issues are focused on treating critical issues such as when previously untreated mental health issues evolve into being a danger to the affected individuals and others around them. Increased funding is required to address these issues early in the lives of affected children, providing for earlier diagnosis and the provision of timely support.

Our next recommendation is that the B.C. government should allocate $15 million towards the hiring of psychiatrists, developmental psychologists and other mental health professionals to address the diagnostic and behavioural needs of children and youth with mental health issues, with a focus on children from birth to six years of age.

Those are our major recommendations. In our submission there is supporting data. There is also the reference to recent studies and reports such as the report done by Dr. Paul Kershaw, 15 by 15: A Comprehensive Policy Framework for Early Human Capital Investment in B.C.

You will also see in our submission that we have listed all of the recommendations that have been adopted by the select standing committee and been included in the reports in the past. Then we've also got some costing information with respect to children and youth with special needs.

With that, I'll take any questions.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you, Bruce. We have a question.

J. Thornthwaite: Thank you very much for your presentation. One of the questions that we additionally asked presenters to do this year was to also suggest areas of efficiencies.

[1050]

I'm wondering if you could comment on perhaps a possibility of actually, given the fact that there seems to be a lot of auditing going on, that the contracted agencies…. You've mentioned increased accountability measures, but a way for the government to look at how those moneys are getting distributed to the kids that need it, as opposed to looking at how they're doing it and their prioritizing, etc. Would you support something like that — that we would be going more on the accountability for the actual contracted services?

B. Sandy: So your question is with respect to the administrative costs and efficiencies around that?

J. Thornthwaite: Not just administrative — and it could be administrative. We give them a lot of autonomy. We give them a budget, and they do what they need to do within that budget. I'm just speaking personally, because I've heard it in my own riding. I don't know whether or not it occurs in other areas of the province, but there seems to be a disconnect between where the government — MCFD or whatever — gives the money to these contracting agencies, and we don't actually have any control or accountability coming back as to what that money is spent on.

B. Sandy: That's included in the contracts and the service agreements they have with contracted agencies. As you saw from our presentation here, there hasn't been funding to keep up with cost-of-living increases, gas prices, other administrative and overhead costs.

The funds that will have been used in the past to go directly towards services for children and youth with special needs are also going to cover these overhead costs. There are cost increases that come from collective bargaining, from cost-of-living increases, gas increases.

Our member agencies are some of the most effective and efficient agencies with respect to shared services, co-locating services, one-stop shopping. This is not an area to be looking at with these agencies with respect to further administrative efficiencies.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Thank you, Bruce. I appreciate you coming out this morning.

Next up we have University of the Fraser Valley — Dr. Mark Evered and Jackie Hogan. Welcome to you both. As I think you've heard, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up. You can take some questions or go straight through. Your choice.

M. Evered: Thank you very much for the opportunity. It's good to see our former minister at the table as well.

I thought I'd begin with a few comments to help put our presentation in context. I could probably hold up our banner here, our description. "The University of the
[ Page 1604 ]
Fraser Valley is one of Canada's best," and I'll describe that in a moment.

I'm not sure I need to say too much in context other than to thank Jason Lum, who was speaking to you earlier today and who I understand said some fine words — I caught him in the hall — in appreciation for the work the university has been doing. I think we might also take our comments today in the context of the Globe and Mail editorial yesterday on the challenges facing post-secondary education and the various ways in which universities themselves need to respond, because we believe we are.

The University of the Fraser Valley and the regional communities it serves have been working hand in hand throughout the history of the institution. Fraser Valley College was created in 1974 in response to persistent community demand, and the region has been an active participant in each stage of the university's development. I think an excellent example was the highway-jamming attendance of over 600 people supporting the university's request for university status when Geoff Plant brought the ministry's '06-07 review to the Fraser Valley.

The University of the Fraser Valley has fully recognized and embraced its responsibility to its region. As I've said on a number of occasions, I'm extremely proud to be the president of a regional university, because to me, that's not in any way synonymous with second class.

Our commitment is to serve our region at an internationally recognizable level of excellence. The regional piece in our mandate is to direct our attention to the region we serve. Most recently this commitment has been formally institutionalized at the University of the Fraser Valley as goal 2 of the two goals of our strategic plan.

[1055]

Our second goal is to be a leader of the social, cultural, economic and environmentally responsible development of the Fraser Valley. Our first goal is to provide the best undergraduate education in Canada, and I'll come back to that in a moment.

We've actually committed, within our strategic goals, to be a leader of the development of the Fraser Valley. In achieving that goal, the university is committed to community partnerships in planning, in action and to giving priority to educational programs and applied research that meet the development and planning needs of the Fraser Valley.

The university has a record of responding to regional needs with new programming, and I'll just give you a couple of recent examples. It includes planning to match regional development and needs in agriculture, in agribusiness and the aerospace industries, the launch of a new faculty of health sciences and the recent announcement of programs in graphic and digital design. The university and its regional committees have been working closely together in the planning and development of new facilities within the valley to ensure that these are consistent with the community's vision, goals and resources.

A couple of examples. The development of the Canada Education Park here in Chilliwack, supporting trades, technology and professional programs. Another example would be the joint Abbotsford–University of the Fraser Valley planning in the development of a vibrant university district and the establishment of a downtown Abbotsford campus, and the recent announcement of renovations to our Mission campus to support some signature programming there. That's where we will be putting our digital and graphic design program.

Our biggest problem — and, I would argue, a problem for the Fraser Valley — is that our university is full to overflowing. Demands remain higher than our capacity to serve. We have opened the gates as wide as we possibly can. We're offering evening classes, weekend classes.

Our full-time-equivalents are currently at least 5 percent above the ministry-set target, and they're climbing. They could be in the 6 to 7 percent range above the targets when the smoke clears. The campus in Abbotsford, which is our region of highest demand, is currently serving 20 percent more students than it was designed for — hence the evening classes, the Saturday classes, etc. Wander through the campus in the evening, and you'll find those classrooms full.

Students and their families and many others in the community are frustrated that our classes are full, and the course wait-lists this term have tallied in the thousands. The demand exceeds what we can serve.

The ministry's contribution to our operating grant now meets less than 50 percent of our expenditures, and there's no sign of an increase. We understand the financial challenges, but we do have this high demand, and we would hope that the government would also recognize our exemplary service, not just in numbers but in quality.

I want to come back to that first goal: to provide the best undergraduate education in Canada. If you flew into the Abbotsford Airport, you would have seen on display above the luggage carousel or as you leave within the departure a list of our achievements in the Globe and Mail annual survey. We've consistently achieved very high scores in that national report, where we rank among the highest in Canada of universities our size. In fact, we rank among the highest in British Columbia of universities of any size in quality of education, student-faculty interaction and student satisfaction.

We are frustrated that as a university and as a community knowing that other B.C. post-secondary institutions haven't been doing quite as well, there appears to be no differential reward or penalty. We are asking our provincial government to recognize the value of investing in post-secondary education in the Fraser Valley region, where we're working very hard to reverse the traditionally low participation rates in post-secondary
[ Page 1605 ]
education. They are lower than the provincial average. We're working very hard, and obviously, people are waking up to the need. A redistribution of resources to regions of high demand and continuing population growth certainly makes sense to us.

I'll turn it over to Jackie Hogan, our chief financial officer, with a few more details.

J. Hogan: Just a bit more on our capacity, both our physical and our financial capacity, to meet the demands of our region. The number of students on our wait-lists, as Mark has mentioned, has dramatically increased. From fall 2010 to fall 2011 it has increased by over 30 percent.

[1100]

Tuition revenue generated from adding an additional section, an additional class, covers approximately 25 percent of the costs of adding that class. So we're concerned. We're concerned that the number of students on wait-lists is too high, that students are frustrated and that they're not able to get into their classes and not able to finish their studies in a timely manner and then not able to move into the workforce and become part of the economic recovery that we need in the province.

UFV is the only public post-secondary institution in the Fraser Valley region. Fraser Valley students don't have other close options available and have to relocate if UFV is not able to accommodate. And thinking of the region, we do want to serve our region. We are the institution of choice for graduates from our local school districts and have an excellent reputation in our communities and indeed nationally.

We want to serve more students. We want to encourage post-secondary education in our region. But we are limited by our resource capacities and by our physical space capacities. So as Mark has mentioned, we recommend that the provincial government recognize the value in investing in post-secondary education in a high-demand area. Distributing resources to regions with continuing population growth such as the Fraser Valley makes good sense.

In addition, we would encourage a review of the tuition limit policy, which has been in effect since 2005. While this policy has had a positive impact on the affordability of education for students, it also restricts institutions from adjusting fees that may be historically out of line or adjusting fees for programs that are supply- or equipment-intensive. It also limits universities from being creative in developing retention and incentive programs.

A review of the policy, including consultation with both students and post-secondary institutions, could reveal a more equitable and accountable tuition policy that provides flexibility while maintaining affordability.

Turning to international students, UFV currently serves close to 1,000 international students annually. These students add significant value to our campuses, bringing international culture and experience to the classroom and exciting opportunities for cross-cultural integration.

International students pay approximately three times the tuition fees of domestic students, so they fully cover the cost of their education and the support services provided by the university. A portion of their tuition is also allocated to capital improvements. Over the years we have supported the building of a CIS league gymnasium, a 200-bed student residence and expansion and improvements to capital projects that otherwise wouldn't have been possible.

UFV fully supports the government's initiative to increase enrolment of foreign students by 50 percent over the next four years. This is an excellent way to build relationships and connections with international partners and to attract and retain skilled workers for the future.

Fraser Valley is a key area to build on already established international connections. UFV could be a strong contributor to the initiative, but we're limited by physical capacity facing our campuses. But we've got a solution to that also.

I'm wondering if I'm running out of time.

R. Howard (Chair): You're at about ten minutes, just so you know.

J. Hogan: I've just got a few more comments to make.

We're actively pursuing ways to solve our space problems, such as moving forward with a $15 million student centre building on our Abbotsford campus funded completely by non-government sources. But we're facing significant hurdles to achieve this project reality.

The restriction on borrowing funds, even though this debt would be non-taxpayer-supported, has stalled the project by more than a year. We recommend that government explore ways for public post-secondary institutions to be able to borrow funds for self-financed projects that wouldn't impact government debt-to-GDP ratio.

In addition, in order for UFV to remain flexible and responsive to the needs of the communities we serve and remain fiscally disciplined, the current issues facing us as a result of 2012 changes to accounting policy need further discussion. There's a looming problem for post-secondary institutions and indeed for the province of B.C. in the current incompatibility between the no-deficit legislation and the accounting rules under PSAB.

The concept of balancing results on an annual basis conflicts with the underlying principle of not-for-profit accounting and to even a greater degree the proposed changes to PSAB standards, as it restricts the use of financial resources on hand for their intended purposes.

In effect, we have trapped surplus cash that we are unable to access and to use for building and for moving the
[ Page 1606 ]
university forward in its goals. A resolution to this issue is a must in order to enable post-secondary institutions to contribute to the economic stability of the province.

[1105]

We are encouraged by government's recommendation to allow for creative improvements in collective bargaining. Giving flexibility and autonomy to post-secondary institutions will allow for best results by enabling the focus to be on the unique opportunities and challenges of each institution. We look forward to the consultation and discussion on this.

UFV is also prepared to significantly contribute to an innovation and applied research strategy complementary to the key economic sectors of our region. Working with business and industry partners, UFV has established unique relationships that provide opportunities for our students and value-added services for our partners.

With a focused approach and a flexible structure, UFV is able to respond quickly and productively to opportunities that present themselves. We recommend that government invest targeted funding to jump-start the potential in new partnerships and leverage the opportunity of existing partnerships.

I'll end it there. Thank you for the opportunity.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you. We have a long list of questioners and just a few minutes left.

M. Stilwell: About the increase in the international student spaces — how will you manage your relations in the community if you're selling capacity internationally when you have waiting lists for students?

M. Evered: We deal with this now with the current waiting lists, and we remind members of our community that the presence of international students has enabled us to open up more sections. They're not replacing the domestic students. Up to the limits of our capacity, they're enabling us to provide more education to domestic students.

We are hitting the ceiling now in terms of capacity. For us to take on any additional international students, we will have to find more space.

B. Ralston: In the transition from college to university there were assurances given that the role of the trades training part of the college curriculum would be maintained. Is there the same growth in the demand for trades training, and have you been able to expand capacity in a way that's consistent with the expansion in other parts of the university?

M. Evered: No question. We've embraced the trades and technology options. In fact, we've been finding innovative ways to integrate the trades and technologies with the traditional academic programs. For example, students who have completed a two-year diploma in the trades — picked up their ticket in welding or carpentry, whatever — can now take two more years and get a BBA degree.

Likewise, we've got students who are enrolled in traditional academic programs who are picking up some trades training.

We've been expanding trades training in some areas — for example, agriculture. We recognize the unique opportunities here in the Fraser Valley. In fact, we recognize our responsibility to be assisting with the development of agricultural technology, so we are moving strongly in that direction.

Again, we have waiting lists for the programs we have established.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you. We've run you out of time. I have MLAs Thornthwaite, Donaldson and Routley still on the list. They'll have to catch up with you outside of this and get their questions answered. Thank you both for taking the time.

M. Evered: Well, thank you very much for the opportunity.

R. Howard (Chair): Next up we have Dr. Peter Fry.

P. Fry: Good morning. Thank you very much for giving me this very great opportunity to appear before you. I wasn't expecting it.

R. Howard (Chair): Yeah. You're very welcome. You've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark I'll give you a heads-up.

P. Fry: That will be plenty.

I apologize, as well, for reading this. I've been on-call for the last six days, and I've had to put this together in a hurry.

I'd point out that I'm making this presentation as an individual who's very experienced in the health care field but not in reference to any specific group in the Fraser Valley, although I do work as a vascular surgeon in Abbotsford. Our regional hospitals are in Langley.

I'm a very concerned citizen, and I want to put that across today, if I can. My objective in appearing here today is to see the establishment in British Columbia of a provincial health care ombudsman in accordance with section 2 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act.

[1110]

My rationale for this is as follows. First of all, the public, in my view, has a very unrealistic expectation of what the government, both federal and provincial, can or should provide, and the public needs to be better informed and educated.
[ Page 1607 ]

Secondly, issues such as the real or perceived lack of anaesthesiologists, for example, and other health care professionals or other physicians in the province needs to be addressed openly. The public does not know who to believe when it hears media stories, which are immediately refuted or dispelled by either administrators or politicians, and the subject gets buried.

Thirdly, the health care system, in my mind, should and must be transparent to both government and taxpayers alike. Currently it is not.

Specific concerns. There's an obvious lack of anaesthesiologists in British Columbia, particularly in the non-teaching hospitals, and particularly where those hospitals have high obstetrical workloads and no dedicated anaesthesiologists to cover deliveries and Caesarean sections particularly.

Some facts in obstetrics. The obstetrical caseload in British Columbia, particularly in the Fraser Valley, as you probably all know, is rapidly climbing, as has been seen in Abbotsford, Langley Memorial Hospital, Surrey and lots of other hospitals throughout the region and, in fact, throughout the province.

Some of you may have seen the report in Maclean's magazine, as recently as last week, October 3, by Aaron Caughey, who is chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Oregon Health and Science University, who confirms that the population we take care of today is very different compared to the population studies carried out in the '60s. For example, the rate of obesity has doubled in the last 15 years, and obese women tend to have bigger babies and tend to be in labour longer.

He also demonstrated that the utilization of epidural anaesthesia, which obviously requires an anaesthetist to perform, is between 70 and 90 percent now compared to 8 percent in the '60s, so there's a dramatic increase.

Today 33 percent of the births in the United States are C-section deliveries, and if the current trends continue, by 2020, 56 percent of births will be by C-sections. Now, once you've had a C-section, you're going to have another one. If you have one on the first delivery, inevitably further deliveries will be associated with C-sections. So you can see why that would climb.

These simple numbers would indicate a tremendous new burden on anaesthesiologists and other surgical services utilizing the skills of anaesthesia, which I'll come to in a minute. Those are obstetrical facts, if you like.

The facts in anaesthesiology go like this. The Canadian Institute for Health Information has indicated that British Columbia has the oldest cohort of anaesthesiologists in Canada. About 50 percent are expected to either slow down or retire from practice in the next five years. In the last seven years British Columbia has gained only nine anaesthetists, about 3 percent, even though the number of surgeries carried out in the province has increased by 17 percent in the same period.

By comparison, Alberta gained 76 anaesthesiologists, or 36 percent, and Ontario gained 62, or 7 percent. The Canadian Anaesthesiologists Society has recently concluded in their workforce assessment that the national vacancy rate has improved overall, while the deficit in British Columbia has worsened since 2002. Our vacancy rate, or shortage, is now three times the national average.

These startling facts would attest, at least to me, to the fact that we are on a collision course with being able to provide safe anaesthetic services in this province in an area of increasing demand.

A comment regarding costs versus value. In the operating room there is a cost to not providing timely access to emergency and urgent care problems. The cost in terms of suffering and increased mortality and morbidity is difficult, actually impossible, to quantify, but we know they exist when we work in the hospital system.

There are more direct costs, however. The cost of keeping a patient in hospital overnight is over a thousand dollars per night. At ARH there are frequently multiple patients waiting for their surgeries for two or three days or longer. This has an effect throughout the hospital, including backing up patients in the emergency rooms so that they are stuck there and cancellation of patients awaiting elective surgery.

[1115]

The costs of running an additional operating room during daytime hours would be more than offset by the reduction of overtime costs, after-hours charges — which, if you like, are surgeons and other health care workers working overtime — and extended hospital stays.

Additional money spent providing timely care frees up significant resources in the hospital and ultimately will provide either decreased cost or increased value. The problem is that the savings come out of different budgets, and everybody in the hospital departments tends to have their own budgets and mandates to deliver the goods in that particular area. That makes for a problem. They don't see it as a global issue as taxpayers might. There are lots of similar examples, which I won't detail at the moment, in the hospital system.

Administration's concern for cost containment is obviously necessary, but measures of value for the money spent must be incorporated into health care reporting and management. In ARH in one month, August, we saw our 28 operating room days reduced in addition to our usual two-room-per-day reduction for summer vacations. This is due to anaesthesiology shortage.

Savings, of course, were achieved, but there was no analysis of the cost of suffering and increased mortality and morbidity as far as patients were concerned. Again, this would illustrate how these facts impact on the time urgent patients wait for appropriate care, not to mention waiting for elective surgery.
[ Page 1608 ]

If I may, I want to give you a glimpse into my own life as a busy vascular surgeon working in a community hospital. I've worked in the system for 40 years, and much as I love my job and have huge respect for the administrators who look after our system and are trying to do their best, it's very clear to me that parts of the system are broken.

For example, patients should not be waiting three or four days in the newest, most high-tech hospital in Canada on an emergency list to get into an operating room, several of which are closed because we cannot attract an anaesthetist to join the staff. City hospitals — i.e., VGH, St. Paul's and so on — can offer much better financial incentives for anaesthesiologists to work there. This is a problem that is causing huge frustration for patients, relatives and, yes, even surgeons, who are more than willing to do their job, even in the middle of the night if that's what it takes.

Imagine being a surgeon performing — and these are all my own experiences — a life- or limb-threatening procedure and being informed there is a code OB, which means a baby deteriorating and requiring urgent delivery. How does that affect his or her performance in finishing the procedure under further stress? Imagine the surgeon being left with a patient anaesthetized and the anaesthetist having to go to another operating room and start an anaesthetic for a stat C-section. They don't have a choice. The surgeon is left with a scrub nurse, who then unscrubs to keep an eye on the patient, who may be under spinal anaesthetic. Imagine being unwilling or unable to complete a planned emergency operation because more-urgent cases are waiting as stat surgical intervention required. If you only have one anaesthetist, you can only be in one place.

Imagine having to apologize to an angry colleague because you bump his case, for which he has been waiting in the surgeon's lounge three to four hours, so that you can do your own case, which in your eyes you feel is more urgent. Trust me: it's extremely stressful to surgeons, anaesthesiologists, nurses and of course to patients.

Finally, imagine being a patient who has fasted for three to four days waiting for the promised procedure while repeatedly being cancelled for cases deemed more urgent. We're not talking about Kandahar. We're not talking about war-time surgery. We're talking about shortages in one of the world's most advanced and sophisticated health care systems, while the public remains largely oblivious to the politics of our health care system.

There's a critical shortage of anaesthesiologists throughout British Columbia, and in reality VGH and other big hospitals have been able to achieve an income status for those individuals that has not been awarded to other hospitals in the province, making it almost impossible to recruit for more peripheral areas. I'm talking, of course, about anaesthesiologists.

[1120]

There is no question in my mind that many of us are skating on thin ice as clinicians and that inevitably an error will occur because of the lack of the availability of anaesthesiology colleagues, and this will result in litigation. It's only a matter of time, and those of us exposed to this issue are only too aware of this problem. If such litigation occurs, administration will clearly have to carry some of the share of the responsibility.

In summary, we all know who Sheila Fraser was — a federal Auditor General. She was non-partisan. She had the trust of the government, who appointed her, and the public, who respected the findings of her audit.

What I'm asking for is an MD who trained here and who has been practising here for many years, who is still practising as a vascular surgeon and is a health care ombudsman who can provide transparency, in a very complicated area, to the public, who are paying for the system and for the government that needs to understand the nuances of trying to deliver good care as a health care provider.

The public needs to be better educated and informed, as does the government.

Finally, we should be striving for gold in health care and not accepting bronze. A health care ombudsman would go a long way, I think, to resolving some of these very difficult and pressing issues. Thank you very much for listening to me.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you, Doctor. We have a question.

M. Stilwell: I'm curious if you could expand on why the anaesthetists, in a hospital with a huge demand for service, don't have similar income potential as downtown, given that anaesthetists are paid by the time.

P. Fry: I can't give you the details of that. I worked at VGH and UBC for many years. A few years ago a contract was signed with the government.

M. Stilwell: Oh, the CASCs.

P. Fry: The CASCs agreement was signed, which put that group way in excess of other areas in the province. They just can't match it.

M. Stilwell: Can I just ask one quick question? Is Abbotsford a teaching hospital?

P. Fry: Well, it is teaching in the sense that we have residents and junior interns, if you like.

M. Stilwell: Do you have anaesthesia residents there?

P. Fry: No.
[ Page 1609 ]

M. Stilwell: Okay. Hence no anaesthetists are coming.

P. Fry: And we don't have anaesthetic technicians or respiratory technicians that VGH and other big hospitals would have.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Thanks. A pretty impressive presentation, being on call for six days in a row. Well done.

We had a presentation yesterday from an anaesthesiologist representing the association — I suppose that's what it is — in Surrey yesterday. He told us and presented material on, I believe, 15 or 16 recommendations that had been put forward two years ago, when, he said, nine of them would immediately help with backlogs.

Are you aware of those recommendations? What's your take on why they haven't been implemented?

P. Fry: I don't really know much about the politics of anaesthesia in the hospital. I just see it as a practising vascular surgeon, and it's so frustrating, and it's so unfair, and it's dangerous. I know they've had huge frustrations — our anaesthetic group — in trying to correct the balance, if you like.

But it seems to me ridiculous that some of our guys are going to Edmonton to work because they can get paid two or three times what they can get paid in our system. And that's bad.

J. Thornthwaite: Can you just explain why it's different now than it was? You're competing for space and bumping your colleagues, etc., and obviously have been in the field for many years. So why is it different now than before?

P. Fry: Well, in most hospitals you can pull in another anaesthetist. You know, in a jam, you can pull somebody else in.

I have to be frank. In our system, if we're in a jam on the weekend, we have a list of anaesthesiologists who may be in town. They don't answer their cells. It is almost impossible to get somebody to step into the breach. So this is why you get a system where there is nobody on backup, nobody willing to take a call, just in case. There's no remuneration for that individual to be on call.

The bottom line is that a hospital like ARH…. And Langley is the same, and Surrey. They need a dedicated anaesthesiologist to take care of the huge load coming through so that the other emergency cases can be dealt with safely.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you, Doctor. We've run you out of time. We appreciate you taking the time to come out with us this morning.

Next up we have the Alzheimer Society of British Columbia — Jean Blake, Jim Mann and Barbara Lindsay.

Welcome. As you may know, you've got 15 minutes. At about the ten-minute mark, I'll give you a heads-up. You can stop and take questions or go straight through. Your choice.

[1125]

J. Mann: Mr. Chair and members of the committee, my name is Jim Mann, and I'm into my fourth year as a volunteer member of the board of directors of the Alzheimer Society of British Columbia. With me here this morning is Barbara Lindsay, the senior manager of advocacy and public policy. Jean was here, but I think she's still in the parking lot.

We thank you again for giving us the opportunity to make a statement in your prebudget consultations.

Alzheimer's is the second most feared disease amongst our peer group — baby boomers. So we believe it is incumbent on us to share with you an innovative partnership program and its impact on British Columbians from our successful provincewide pilot and show how more people in our province might be aided through First Link, to the benefit of our province's bottom line.

Thirty years ago a small group of caregivers got together for support. From that first meeting, the Alzheimer Society of British Columbia was formed. Today we have a contingent of 58 staff provincewide, a network of over 400 volunteers and 19 resource centres.

We hold support group meetings, offer a wide variety of education sessions and provide essential information to families affected by dementia. In this computer age we provide video conferencing and teleworkshops to connect with people around our province.

For me personally, the society was there when I needed information about dementia when my mother was diagnosed. When I received my diagnosis of Alzheimer's, my wife and I both were helped with information, support and education.

With that introduction, Mr. Chair, the Alzheimer Society of British Columbia and families affected by dementia are extremely grateful for the foresight and vision of the B.C. government for funding the first phase of the society's successful First Link program in B.C.

On behalf of all the families touched by dementia, we thank you for funding this innovative and responsive program. Thanks also to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services for your recommendation last year for the continued funding of First Link.

For the past two years the Ministry of Health has provided a contract for $1 million to the Alzheimer Society of B.C. to operate First Link in key areas in the province. First Link is currently available in the following regions: North Fraser, Greater Victoria, North and Central Okanagan, north and central Vancouver Island, northern Interior and Skeena, and Richmond–south Delta.
[ Page 1610 ]

Through First Link, the society has worked with physicians and other health care providers to connect people with a diagnosis of dementia, their family and caregiver, to a community of learning, services and support.

First Link has five components. Partnering with physicians, health professionals and community organizations builds awareness, strengthens health care and social system linkages and ensures a more effective use of resources.

Formal referral as soon as a diagnosis is made or at any other time in the dementia journey. This formal referral sets the stage for proactive outreach.

Proactive outreach to individuals newly diagnosed with dementia, their caregivers and families. The society's First Link coordinator calls the family to give them the opportunity to ask questions, receive information about the disease and learn about community support services and resources.

Information and connections. The First Link coordinator invites the family to society programs and services and makes referrals to other community and health care services.

There is a planned follow-up at three months, six months, one year and on. As well, we issue a bimonthly First Link bulletin to keep both the family and the health care providers informed about ongoing education and support programs offered within the community.

In B.C. today a diagnosis of dementia comes with no prescribed course of action. Most families receive the devastating news and are left to sort out for themselves their next steps. Families most often find themselves bereft of ongoing support or engagement from the formal health care system.

However, research indicates that the period immediately after diagnosis is critical for families. This is the optimal time for the person with dementia, their family and their caregiver to focus on managing the disease and putting together a plan for living as normal a life as possible — a life of quality.

[1130]

Families who connect with the Alzheimer Society of B.C. learn how important it is to put their affairs in order, to educate themselves about the disease and to effectively maintain their health and well-being. Families who are not receiving help from our society are more likely to find themselves in crisis, making it necessary to resort to the more costly interventions — in particular, emergency services, the acute care system and early access to residential care.

In developing and implementing our First Link program, our society built on the experience of the First Link program in Ontario; consulted the research literature showing the impact of support for families and caregivers affected by dementia; incorporated our learning from our successful pilot project in Victoria, with support from VIHA; and held conversations with families and health care providers about what is most important to them.

We are confident that First Link is an innovative and proven program with the capacity to build knowledge and resilience in families living with dementia, enabling them to utilize the health care system prudently and appropriately.

First Link is a solid example of the B.C. government's health policy direction, such as the Patients as Partners approach, which focuses on building a collaborative relationship between patients, their families and caregivers, and health care professionals. This way, patients, families and caregivers are able to achieve better health and a better experience at a reasonable cost to the health care system.

The Alzheimer Society of Canada's Rising Tide study, 2010, and our own B.C. demographic statistics indicate that the numbers of people developing dementia in the coming years will accelerate more quickly than our health care system can properly provide for. Strategies like First Link will help B.C. more successfully meet the growing demand.

The Alzheimer Society of British Columbia asks that the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services recommend the continued financial support to the Alzheimer Society of B.C. for the operation and a phased expansion of First Link so more British Columbians affected by this disease have the opportunity to live a life of quality.

Again, Mr. Chair and committee members, thank you for this opportunity to hear from the Alzheimer Society of B.C. in your prebudget consultations.

R. Howard (Chair): Thank you very much, Jim. Could you just describe what the continued support would look like?

J. Blake: Good morning. I'm Jean Blake. I'm the CEO for the Alzheimer Society of B.C. The contract that we currently have with the Ministry of Health is for $1 million. It enabled expansion beyond the Victoria pilot that the ministry and the Vancouver Island Health Authority funded in Victoria so that all of Vancouver Island currently does have access, through First Link, to the society's programs and services.

We were also able to start a program in Vancouver Coastal. These programs' location was decided in partnership with the health authority, where they felt that they had the best systems already in place. Richmond was the chosen location to begin in Vancouver Coastal, as they felt they had good community integration there and would be able to support us in providing this portal into our programs more easily.

It's also in the Fraser Valley. The centre is Burnaby–New Westminster, and we are also able to handle some referrals from surrounding communities. In the Interior
[ Page 1611 ]
it's based in Kelowna, and it's mainly Kelowna and Vernon that we service. Up north it's Prince George.

Prince George is a bit innovative. We've been doing some work with them, using their video conference technologies so that we're able to reach out to eight to ten smaller communities in the surrounding area.

The phased-in approach. We have about a four-year phased-in approach that we were looking at, for an additional $1.5 million, bringing the total contract to $2.5 million. Of urgency, really, is to expand into Vancouver Coastal and Fraser Health, with the much larger demographics, so the additional money that we would like to see as a priority is an additional $650,000 for the coming fiscal year.

[1135]

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Thank you for your presentation again this year and the good work the organization does. I had some questions on the charts in the presentation — the great jump in some of the regions. North coast is especially apparent in the bottom chart, what we're looking at, just 2010 to 2036. Is this a reflection of the current age population getting older, or does this also take into account immigration into the area of people coming who are over 65 as well?

B. Lindsay: I think that the number represents the increased number of people that are staying in the communities. I think recently we met with people from the Northern Health Authority, and they indicated that in the past older people left the northern communities and came down to the Lower Mainland, but now they're staying in those communities. I think that lower graph really is saying that people are staying in their communities now, so that people are aging in place.

P. Pimm: A similar question. Thanks for the presentation.

One thing I did notice during your presentation is that you talked about going to the north, but I didn't hear anything about the real north — Fort St. John and the Peace country and the Northern Rockies. The north of the province doesn't end at Prince George, as most think it does.

What are you doing in our area? I see the numbers for the Northern Rockies have just more than tripled, and in Peace River it's doing the same kinds of things.

J. Blake: In conversation with the health authorities, that's where we expand. So it would really be working with them. For example, we had a conversation not too long ago with the director of primary care for the Northern Health Authority. The next priority for them would be more in that Peace River country, because they are really seeing…. They told us that in their statistics for B.C., that is the fastest-growing seniors population in all of B.C.

We have a part-time support person there, based in Dawson Creek. They would really like to see more support for seniors throughout that whole corridor. That would be down the road, because if we do a phased-in expansion, it is really where the biggest numbers are that the society did the staged-in approach.

For another $1½ million, we would be able to expand some service into that area immediately. But again, we realize the economic straits that the government is in. So to do any kind of expansion, we thought perhaps a phased-in approach would be more acceptable.

B. Lindsay: Just to add to that, we do have a staff person, as Jean was saying, who does service that area. She is able to get to Fort Nelson on occasion. But Fort St. John and Dawson Creek are where she's able to deliver support and education programs in that area. But with First Link, we know that we will be able to bring in….

There are a number of people who just don't come to the society — reluctance, the stigma of the disease. So they really stay at home, thinking and stewing and not really moving ahead and getting their health management process in place. With First Link, they just get a little bit of that helping hand to come and get that support.

J. Blake: We also have some services that are available no matter where you live. Rural and remote is one piece of it, but remote can happen anywhere. So we do have a 1-800 number that people can call in to. We also have webinars that we offer on a regular basis. So again, if you are doing 24-7 care and you can't leave your loved one for any period, you can at least call in and access that. I'd also invite you to have a look at our website, which is pretty remarkable.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. Thank you. Well, I know at least one family who either uses or did access through First Link, and they found it very helpful. So that's good work.

B. Lindsay: We appreciate that.

R. Howard (Chair): That's all the questions we have. Thank you.

We have our open-mike session now. We have two gentlemen that would like to come forward and take their five minutes at the open mike. We have Eppa — Gerard Peters — and David Skerik, In-SHUCK-ch Nation.

[1140]

G. Peters: Not an awful lot of time, I think, for us to make our case, but we're going to try. I want to say this to the committee. We appreciate the opportunity, and I have to say that I've been observing this morning, and you have to be commended for the stamina that you have.
[ Page 1612 ]
I think that it takes some commitment to do what you do, and I want to acknowledge that.

I originally asked for the opportunity because I was concerned about a recent review that was done of the B.C. Hydro policies. I have a concern, of course, because I've been negotiating a treaty, actually, since December 15 of 1993. In the lead-up to it, for probably the preceding ten years I made it my business to participate in generating discussions and obtaining feedback from my people. So we've been at this for a very long time.

You know, a couple of the presenters made a point of speaking to their ages but not being completely frank about it. I've been around for a long time. I'm going to be 64 years old inside of two weeks. When I started negotiating, my hair was all black, and you know, I want to be around to sort of babysit and monitor through the implementation of the treaty.

Now, if I'm going to do that, the parties that I'm engaged with have got to get serious. We are among, and have been among, the lead tables in the process. Since we began, of course, bits and pieces have broken off, and I'm left with two First Nations, the Skatin and the Samahquam, which I represent at the treaty table.

We are 750 souls, and of that number, fully 600 reside outside of the home territory. To put that into some perspective, in 1970 there was virtually no one at home. In more recent times — for example, over the course of the past year — we've finally been connected to the B.C. Hydro grid. We are negotiating with the province of B.C. over major infrastructure, like the Forest Service roads that my people who do live at home depend on to get out to service centres in Pemberton and Whistler.

As we move to close the negotiations that we've been a party to, we think that the reasons that we embarked on the negotiating process — involving treaties, involving outstanding issues between ourselves and Canada and B.C. — are still there, and we're very anxiously awaiting our own opportunity to be contributors to the economy and to the social and political give-and-take in the region, in the province and in fact in Canada.

When we have done so, I think we will look at the process that we have been involved in and probably have a thing or two to say about whether or not it was the optimal process. It was not.

The B.C. Treaty Commission has, as recently as yesterday, released their annual report. They ask a fundamental question, and it goes to, I think, a query that all of us should be asking: has the investment been a good one in terms of the return? I have to tell you that from the chair I occupy at the treaty negotiations, it has not been.

My people have borrowed millions of dollars, which we're obliged to repay. In the meantime, most of my people live in transient circumstances — many of them, by the way, in Chilliwack and in other points of the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley.

[1145]

When you have an opportunity to look at the one-pager…. And I have to tell you that it was a challenge to produce one page. I asked David to supply me with what the questions were that the committee would likely wish to have responded to. He did that, and I made it my business to put on one page a summary response that I believe is appropriate to what it is that you're doing.

When we have, I think, taken this opportunity, as we have…. You know, I look forward to completing my set of negotiations and having the treaty ratified.

We were talking yesterday, among my team, about a likely ratification date, and it all depends upon the renewal of treaty mandates, provincially and federally. I'm here to say that, for their own reasons, it's taking Canada much longer than it does take B.C. to respond in situations like this.

Assuming that they receive a mandate for our set of negotiations, I think that our time frame — and I've been pushing, I have to tell you, at the treaty table — is to conclude negotiations by the end of March of next year, which means that in all likelihood, we'll be going to a ratification sometime in 2012. We're looking at November. It poses challenges for us over weather and travel and that sort of thing.

I have to tell you, I'm very serious about completing these negotiations and embarking on a new chapter in our relationship with other jurisdictions.

I'll end my comments there and invite questions, if you have any.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent. I think we do have one question. We're a little over time, but there are two of you, so we'll give you ten minutes.

D. Donaldson (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation.

The story of almost 20 years in the negotiating process, from December '93 and then previous to that, is not a unique one. You said the parties must get serious in order to get some resolution of treaties. What would you say "getting serious" would mean? Can you give me a recommendation around that?

G. Peters: I did refer to Canada, and I'm hopeful that they do respond. I've asked for a meeting with the federal minister, and I'm asking, as well, for a meeting with Mary Polak in B.C.

When we have the opportunity, I think the issues that are central to completing a final agreement are the usual tangibles of land and cash. I have to tell you, those are going to be easy, from my observation, compared to other things.
[ Page 1613 ]

Those other things aren't as quantifiable, and they go to the effect of the B.C. Hydro policy, for example, that I referred to. Among the things that we had in the final agreement up to the end of December of '09 was a commitment of an early transfer of a portion of treaty settlement lands. Those lands would be made available to us so that we could use what I'll call the real estate to engage with IPP, independent power producer, proponents.

Now, with a new policy possible, we won't have that opportunity. It's one of the things that give me some real concern.

If that is one of the pillars of our economy that is removed, then I want to talk about something that will replace it and allow us to ultimately pay our own way in contemporary society. To participate in the economy has been our intention from the time we started talking about these things in the early to mid-1980s.

R. Howard (Chair): Excellent, gentlemen. That takes us to ten minutes.

I would have to close with saying I'm sure the whole committee appreciates your very serious attempt to answer the questions that were asked in the budget consultation paper. Thank you.

G. Peters: Thank you.

Just to make a point of this, I'm going to leave some of my cards with Arlene back there. I welcome any contacts that I might have from members of the committee.

R. Howard (Chair): Please do. Thank you.

All right, committee. We will adjourn now and reconvene this afternoon in Cranbrook.

The committee adjourned at 11:50 a.m.

[ Return to: Finance and Government Services Committee Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

Copyright © 2011: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada