Finance and Government Services — Issue No. 30 — Thursday, May 29, 2014 (HTML)

Present: Dan Ashton, MLA (Chair); Mable Elmore, MLA; Eric Foster, MLA; Scott Hamilton, MLA; Gary Holman, MLA; Marvin Hunt, MLA; Jackie Tegart, MLA; John Yap, MLA

2. The Committee discussed plans for the upcoming 2014 budget consultation process.

3. It was agreed that the correspondence dated May 27, 2014 from the Chief Electoral Officer to Dan Ashton, Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, would be considered at a future meeting of the Committee.

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


CONTENTS
Page
Budget Consultation Process: Preliminary Planning	679
Other Business	685

D. Ashton (Chair): Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much for coming. If you don't mind, we'll get started. I know that some of us have to run to other things. Welcome back. Nice to see everybody. I know that we'll have a couple of stragglers coming along, but very good to see everybody, and glad everybody is….

It's the whole committee again, and I'm looking forward to another productive fall. The travel schedule is a bit brutal. We'll blame that on Susan after.

D. Ashton (Chair): Mike — we'll blame it on Mike, because he's not here today.

Preliminary planning. We'll just go through it very quickly. Everybody got it in front of them? We can have a look, and there may have to be some adjustments.

Essentially, in the e-mail I sent you I sketched out the dates that the committee has available for travel given that the House is sitting this year probably in the fall, starting October 6.

We have the week of Monday, September 15, to Friday, September 19. The following week is UBCM week in Whistler; that's from the 22nd to the 26th. Then we would have Monday, September 29, to Friday, October 3, as another travel week; possibly Friday, October 10 — one day of travel that first week that the House sits — if committee members wanted; and then the week of Thanksgiving, so Tuesday, October 14, to Friday, October 17.

We'd have those three weeks. The rest of the time, as I said, in October the House is sitting, and then, of course, the report is due by November 15. So those are your dates.

In terms of locations, you have in front of you the chart of all the locations the committee has visited since it started in 2000. I had made some suggestions to the Chair and Deputy Chair regarding the locations in each region. These are suggestions. In the northeast we would do Fort St. John, since we visited Dawson Creek last time. In the northwest it would be Smithers and Prince Rupert.

D. Ashton (Chair): I have a flag about Kitimat. Somebody threw a flag up about Kitimat. Somebody was talking….

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): And 2010. We had five presenters in 2010 when we went.

D. Ashton (Chair): One of the issues in these smaller towns, and it might be something for us to consider, is that there's probably access for video conferencing in some of these. We noticed last year — remember? — in some of these smaller communities that we just didn't get the people out, and we do want to have input from those smaller communities. Maybe we can get that input video-wise.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Central British Columbia — Prince George and Williams Lake; Thompson-Nicola — Kamloops; Okanagan — Kelowna; southeast — Cranbrook.

For the Lower Mainland we could add a day in Vancouver so that we do two days in Vancouver, because we're always oversubscribed for Vancouver, plus a full day in Surrey and then two half-days in either Port Coquitlam, Chilliwack, Whistler or Abbotsford. Whistler would work well, given that UBCM is there, if we did it, let's say, the Friday of UBCM week. That would be an option.

Then on Vancouver Island, again, two full days in Victoria. One would cover the video conference sessions, and then two half-days. There's Nanaimo, Courtenay or Campbell River. The last time the committee went to Campbell River was in 2007.

S. Hamilton: I understand what you're saying about Vancouver and the oversubscription, but we're hearing the same thing. You know, we're oversubscribed, but it's essentially the same message coming from different groups representing, maybe, the same kind of interest. So I'm not too concerned about being oversubscribed in Vancouver, because we're going to go to Surrey and….

We had this discussion last year, Mr. Chair. That one
[ Page 680 ]
in particular that took place in Cranbrook — we heard exactly the same speech. He read it off his iPad in Trail later that afternoon. I think it was later that afternoon.

I'm wondering — and maybe now's not the time to talk about it — how we're going to deal with that going forward. I understand the need for reiterating messages, and we're hearing from several of the same groups. That one was particularly poignant. And I'm wondering if….

S. Hamilton: No, it wasn't Decoda. It was one of the student unions. I remember distinctly. We heard a speech in Cranbrook, and a few hours later we heard exactly the same speech in Trail.

We're talking about the schedule now. That's another…. But it talks to the oversubscription issue. If we're hearing from the same people, are we too worried about it being oversubscribed? I'd be more interested in hearing people on different topics in Vancouver, make a full day of it and then move on to Surrey, as opposed to….

D. Ashton (Chair): Or pick up another community. Pick up another community in the Lower Mainland. Do one.

S. Hamilton: Or pick up another community, absolutely. Maybe our friend in the lederhosen will show up again on the bus and ream us out for not getting him into Vancouver this time.

M. Hunt: I, too, am less concerned about the oversubscription in Vancouver, simply because there's easy transportation between whatever we do. I really have to tell you, I was really ticked with the wonderful gentlemen that was so upset that Vancouver didn't have…. He had to come "all the way out to Surrey" to speak to us. I mean, give your head a shake.

Anyhow, if we're in Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam — something like that — or we're in Surrey, that gives the people of the Lower Mainland greater opportunities. I don't see that travel being as critical an issue as if we're talking about the Terraces, the Williams Lakes — that sort of thing.

The other one I was looking at is we also…. I'm sorry, Susan. I think I heard you say Williams Lake when we were up at central B.C. I just sort of noticed there's been a roll between Williams Lake and Quesnel for a while. What was the response at Quesnel, and is that why we're saying Williams Lake is a better one?

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Yes. We went to Quesnel in 2012, and we had eight presenters. We had 11 in Williams Lake last year. We had 11 in Williams Lake in 2011. The last time we went to Williams Lake before that was in 2008, and we had five presenters.

M. Hunt: I see that. You've got the roll between, like, Dawson Creek and Fort St. John, which has just been consistent across the years. I have no problem with that. It's just that when we see those rolls going back and forth, I just am curious as to…. Also, you see the same thing with Abbotsford and Chilliwack sort of thing — going back and forth between those two.

D. Ashton (Chair): How about a Burnaby or New Westminster or something in the Lower Mainland?

Northeast, half a day in Fort St. John. Northwest, half a day — and these are only proposed; these aren't cast in stone — in Smithers and Prince Rupert. Central British Columbia, half a day in Prince George and Williams Lake. Don't forget we're trying to line the flights up, too, right? That's something with these half days….

M. Elmore: So half a day each — half in Prince George, and a half day in Williams Lake. Okay.

Thompson-Nicola is half a day in Kamloops. Okanagan, half a day in Kelowna. The southeast, half a day in Cranbrook.

The Lower Mainland was one or two days — this is proposed — in Vancouver, one day in Surrey plus two half days for Port Coquitlam, Chilliwack, Whistler or Abbotsford. So we can choose.

M. Elmore: Okay. So we've got the option of two half-days and the choice between Port Coquitlam, Whistler, Chilliwack and Abbotsford.

D. Ashton (Chair): Yes. There'd be two of the following: Port Coquitlam, Chilliwack, Whistler or Abbotsford. Whistler might be a stretch, but that would be itself a full half-day, or almost a full day, right?
[ Page 681 ]

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): We could do a full day in Whistler. It would make sense to do it during UBCM week. Whether members have a full day during that week….

D. Ashton (Chair): Well, Friday is a travel day. If it was in the morning, a lot of them try and scoot out of there before lunch. Because usually the Premier's speech — right? — is around lunchtime.

D. Ashton (Chair): Maybe if we did it in the morning, we might be able to grab a few of them.

M. Elmore: And then two days in Victoria, and one day including the video conference.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Certainly, the other thing we could do is half-days in Victoria while the House is sitting — like on a Wednesday morning. The week of October 6 is another option.

M. Elmore: Right. Then for Vancouver Island, the other was a half-day in Campbell River.

D. Ashton (Chair): Plus two half-days. So in Nanaimo, Courtenay, Campbell River.

M. Elmore: So choosing out of Nanaimo, Courtenay and Campbell River. Two of those.

M. Elmore: Then just to follow up with regards to the discussion of our friends from south of the Fraser. Also in favour, certainly, of our hearings in Vancouver, just in terms of the concentration of organizations in the area. So just adding that to the mix.

D. Ashton (Chair): Mable, I'm open. I want to make sure that we be as fair as possible, and we spread it around. So if we did one day in Vancouver and then we started picking and jumped in between…. So let's have a boo at it.

Just by way of some further information about the consideration of whether or not you might want to align a public hearing in the Whistler area with UBCM week. We did do that in, I believe, 2010. The conference was held in Whistler at that time.

What we had tried to do at that point was to coordinate with the UBCM staff, to advise the delegates that this event was going on. It was the hope of the committee at that time to attract some of the municipal representatives into the public hearing. Unfortunately, the UBCM program was relatively full. I'm sure that that's part of the time…. Marvin will know well what the dynamics are around that planning.

I just mention it as a possibility, because we do have some good connections with the UBCM staff there. Perhaps with a bit of earlier facilitation, we might be able to get it announced on one of their pre-meeting days, if that worked for members' schedules.

It's just an opportunity. I guess two things to consider are: if you wanted to try and attract the local councillors to your public hearing, that's one piece of it; or is the intent more to capture the regional voices in the Whistler area, in terms of citizens and other groups that might be based in the Whistler-Squamish area.

I just thought to provide you with that bit of background. We had a bit of experience with that a couple of years ago, but certainly, it's up to the committee to determine how to proceed this fall.

S. Hamilton: I see us popping into the same communities. Like the PoCo-Chilliwack one. We did that last year. I understand the advantage that Chilliwack has an airport. We fly out to the next community after that. But as was mentioned a little earlier, what consideration…? If we're going to do one day in Vancouver, why don't we consider Richmond and Delta for a day as well? They were omitted last time.

Nanaimo, Courtenay and Campbell River. They're just so close together. I know they're a bit of a drive apart, but we were in Nanaimo last year. Should we maybe concentrate on Courtenay and Campbell River and stay one day on the Island?

Anyway, I do like the idea of trying to exploit the fact that a lot of us are going to be in Whistler. So by all means, if we can get a few hours there…. I don't know who all we're going to attract from Whistler, but at the same time, it's a good opportunity to at least take this committee somewhere else.

As far as the…. I want to go back to the oversubscription. When people are signing up as a witness, do we try to encourage them…? Let's put it this way. When we're in Vancouver we're going to hear from six student unions, and it's going to be the same message. Do we encour-
[ Page 682 ]
age them to appear as a delegation and say: "You've got one message"? You know, there's power in numbers, obviously. "All come together and communicate that message on line with everyone else at the same time." That way we can hear more people — more people can talk about more things.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): We have not, in the past, done that. Some groups will do that, especially if we are oversubscribed. They'll join together. The other thing is we don't censor or try to predetermine what a group is going to say, right?

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): It is a public hearing, and if different groups want to come and they're trying to reinforce a message, it's….

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Exactly. It's not our role to, I think, prevent people from presenting to the committee when…. It's not by invitation, right? It's essentially first come, first served.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): Also, just to clarify, if a group was to try and book two spots, even in two different locations, we would respectfully ask them to consider perhaps supplementing one presentation with a written document — that kind of thing. But many of the groups will identify themselves by their unique name, so although they may all be student unions, for example…. Of course, being associated with a variety of institutions, they will contact our office with the intention, I guess, of speaking on behalf of that distinct organization.

So in that way, we haven't been able to filter it unless they do two or more proposed bookings for the same association name, and then in that case we'll have a conversation.

S. Hamilton: Okay. Thank you. And just on that, just to understand…. I'm using student unions as an example. I mean, there are others out there like Decoda and so on. But I just hate the fact that, you know, people will jump on the subscription and sort of block out Vancouver, and we're hearing from four different people from Decoda from different areas, or five different people, and there are other people wanting to talk about different things that are being shut out. I guess we could spend all year on the road listening, you know, if we wanted to, but at the same time….

D. Ashton (Chair): But they have the opportunity of giving a written submission also, right?

S. Hamilton: You're right. There's more impact at the public hearing, but…. Anyway, I understand. Enough said.

G. Holman: I think it is a bit dicey to try and control who comes to the committee. Maybe there are some things on the margins one can do.

Just in terms of locations, in the northwest I do wonder about Terrace, since we did Smithers and Prince Rupert the last couple of years. And in the southeast I wonder about Nelson versus either Cranbrook or Trail. It's been a few years since Nelson was done.

D. Ashton (Chair): Yeah, and Castlegar. Turn left as soon as you head off…. It's a big lot, Gary. About 4,000 feet high, right at the end of Castlegar Airport.

In the Lower Mainland–Fraser Valley, I wonder about Maple Ridge–Mission, on the other side of the river out there, since we did….

G. Holman: Yeah. Anyway, those are just some thoughts there. And in terms of the Island, I think maybe going up a little further north, because we did…. Campbell River was mentioned, and I would be supportive of that since it's been a while since….

E. Foster: I think Mable made the comment about the number of the larger organizations that are housed in Vancouver.

I hate to use your term "censor," but if we were going to start clipping a little bit, I think we need to look at Vancouver, because it is oversubscribed, but make sure that we, if we're going to have to limit the number of organizations that are there, take a serious look at sort of the groups that are everywhere else. And if you're oversubscribed in Vancouver, for example, make sure the ones that get on the docket in Vancouver are ones that aren't getting an opportunity in every other community.

We had the student unions, noxious weeds, Decoda,
[ Page 683 ]
and there was one other, that presented in pretty much every community. The noxious weed guys were great, because they actually talked about different weeds in every place, but essentially, the message was the same.

I would just suggest — especially in Vancouver, where the majority of the organizations have their home base — that we make sure that the ones that are only in Vancouver get an opportunity to speak in Vancouver, whereas the ones that are speaking in all the other communities…. I don't know if you do a first-come, first-serve on these things.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Kate could probably give a bit of background as to when this started. E-mail invitations are sent to, I think, all the major stakeholders in the Lower Mainland. Spots are reserved for them, and they're invited to appear. Many of those groups are provincial organizations and could appear in Victoria as easily as in Vancouver.

One of the suggestions could be that rather than reserving spots for these groups, we send them an invitation to register on a first-come, first-serve basis just like everybody else, rather than reserving spots for them.

E. Foster: But if they are organizations that have…. The other thing, too, is some of these big organizations that are housed in Vancouver can go somewhere else. They have a budget to travel. Some of these other communities, some of the groups that present to us that are doing good work in their communities don't want to be using money to be travelling around, when they could be putting it on the street where it belongs.

The first-come, first-serve is easy, and it's sort of the way we've done it, but I think if we get into a situation where we're oversubscribed and we are excluding people from an opportunity, then we've got to kind of look at the way we sign people up to make sure that everybody does get an opportunity, as opposed to some people not getting an opportunity and others getting many opportunities.

M. Elmore: I'm in favour of, since we're going to be in Whistler, trying to have a hearing in Whistler. I think it's a good opportunity, invite local councillors. It's a different area.

D. Ashton (Chair): Well, it gives them a great opportunity to speak directly, because they're new.

D. Ashton (Chair): So Campbell River I'm hearing. Just before I go to Marvin, should we look at the north side of the Fraser, then, like the Mission area?

M. Hunt: That's part of what I want to speak to. I notice that if we go back to '08, '08 is the one time that we had two opportunities in Vancouver, and it looks like we killed the Lower Mainland. You got Surrey, Abbotsford, Coquitlam, Burnaby. In fact, that is one of the years we had the least number of presentations to the public hearing.

M. Hunt: I find that an interesting sort of view: oversubscribe and nobody shows up.

I think if we looked at the concept of basically having 2½ days in the Lower Mainland…. With all due respect to Delta, when you've got Surrey sitting next door and the volume of stuff that we have in Surrey….

In that context, if you just sort of look at the Lower Mainland, you have one towards Vancouver, which takes care of the west side, you have something south of the Fraser, which takes care of south of the Fraser, and you have something in the northeast sector — okay? That relatively makes sense as to how to deal with the Lower Mainland.

Then you get the Fraser Valley. If I look at this, you go back and forth between Chilliwack-Abbotsford, that sort of thing, because technically Abbotsford isn't part of the traditional Metro Vancouver kind of concept. It tends to be a little by itself. Mission has an easy access into Abbotsford. Chilliwack has relatively easy access to Abbotsford. So Abbotsford could easily take care of the upper reaches of the Fraser Valley.

That sort of makes sense in a mental picture that you have. Like 2½ days, and the other half-day is up the valley, so you've got three days dealing with the Lower Mainland. For most of us on the Lower Mainland, we have easy access.

The other thing is concerning the UBCM. If you had it either on the Monday — because, again, Monday is your optional day of different stuff — or Tuesday morning…. I think those would be the three potential blocks to work with the UBCM, the Monday and Tuesday, because then you get into the main program of the UBCM, and no, you haven't got a hope. Everybody is consumed there. It's the Monday and Tuesday that you'd have the greater ability to….
[ Page 684 ]

M. Hunt: Friday morning you're going to cross the Premier. I wouldn't do that, sitting on this side of this group.

S. Hamilton: I remember at the UBCM last year we did it in the afternoon on the Friday, after the Premier's speech in the morning.

J. Tegart: I'm going to put in the request, if we're doing it at UBCM, that we not be the 7 a.m. meeting. Thank you.

D. Ashton (Chair): Mabel, you're in back there. You had a suggestion and Marv had a suggestion that we look at Vancouver. Do we look in the Burnaby–New Westminster corridor for one, and then we head out? Is that where we're looking?

M. Hunt: I would say…. Look, let's be honest with ourselves. New Westminster is across a bridge — a lousy bridge, falling-apart bridge. It might collapse the particular day that people are using it. It's right beside Surrey. I wouldn't have New Westminster and Surrey, because you're blocked in one spot. I think you have to look at the physical logistics. If you're going to have it in Delta, then don't have it in Surrey, because we're across Scott Road from each other.

S. Hamilton: On the record, I would say Delta-Richmond, that area, because it's an area that's been omitted in the past. We also have to keep in mind that Surrey is just across the river from New Westminster, as New Westminster is just across the river from Surrey.

S. Hamilton: Geographically, I think, if we have something that can satisfy, essentially, in that condensed area of the region three meetings….

D. Ashton (Chair): East Fraser Valley, north Fraser Valley, west Fraser Valley somewhere, right? If we count Surrey….

D. Ashton (Chair): South of the Fraser in the Lower Mainland somewhere. Can we figure that out? I'll talk to Mike about it. Is that okay?

D. Ashton (Chair): In addition. Am I correct with this? We're going to have Vancouver plus three outside of Vancouver in the Lower Mainland, plus Whistler, so that's five. Is that okay with everybody? Mike and I will have a chat, and we'll try and figure something out. Are we okay with that?

D. Ashton (Chair): Now, Nelson, Castlegar, Cranbrook. Cranbrook is East Kootenays. There is a big difference between the East Kootenays and the West Kootenays. Do we want to look at a Kootenay day, which would be West Kootenay and East Kootenay?

S. Hamilton: That's what we did with Cranbrook-Trail, right? That was the concept of Cranbrook-Trail. So Cranbrook-Nelson.

D. Ashton (Chair): Yeah, so we're either looking at Nelson or Castlegar. Now, Castlegar is a hub these days.

E. Foster: Are we going to go to Nelson, or are we going to go to Castlegar? You fly into Castlegar to get to Nelson.

D. Ashton (Chair): No, but you'd have no problem with that airplane going there.
[ Page 685 ]

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): I don't think we've been allowed to land in Nelson before. When we've had a public hearing in Nelson previously, the committee was bused in from Castlegar, if I'm not mistaken.

D. Ashton (Chair): Okay, how about Castlegar, then? Is Castlegar okay? It's only 45 minutes from Nelson, if they want to come over. Okay, so Cranbrook and Castlegar, then. Okay?

M. Elmore: That's an extra half-day, then, because we had half a day for Cranbrook.

Any other suggestions, then? We've got the Island, we've got the Lower Mainland, and we've got Whistler. Now the north. What are we going to do about the north?

D. Ashton (Chair): We've got Fort St. John in the east, and in the west what are we looking at?

S. Hamilton: I suggested Terrace. We did Smithers. As you said with regard to Castlegar-Nelson, Kitimat is only 45 minutes from Terrace as well. But as you said, there are not a lot of great places to stay in Terrace, but we could do the half-day there.

E. Foster: Yeah, going in and out of Terrace is fine. But last time I was there, the accommodations were a little rough, and I stayed in the best place in town.

D. Ashton (Chair): So can we go in Terrace and then end up somewhere that night, then? Smithers? Is that okay?

D. Ashton (Chair): That's right, Terrace. We don't say in Terrace, but we have a hearing in Terrace, and then we do Smithers.

M. Hunt: As I recall, Prince Rupert was a full day, whereas we could knock off Terrace in Smithers.

D. Ashton (Chair): Okay, what do we do in the northwest? Terrace — where else?

M. Hunt: So instead of Smithers, we do Terrace. I'm just clarifying — that's all.

D. Ashton (Chair): Yeah. But in Terrace we can't stay, so we have to stay in Rupert, though. We'll have to arrange it because of the accommodations. Okay, Prince Rupert–Terrace? Any other suggestions? I will bounce this all by Mike, and if there's anything….

D. Ashton (Chair): Exactly, because we can pick up days here — right, Kate? — if we need to.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): Oh yes, absolutely. That might be a convenient option to keep in mind during the parliamentary sittings should the House sit this fall. You would have the option, if you were based in Victoria here, of using that.

I would also recommend, as you monitor the level of registrations and the response you receive with the various communities, that that be considered perhaps a cost-effective option for your planning. Should you not be able to attract a sufficient number to factor it into a travel schedule, it's always an alternative to use video conferencing.

E. Foster: Absolutely. If you've only got two or three, there's no sense flying to Prince Rupert.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): Members will see that the Chair of the committee received some correspondence just yesterday from the Chief Electoral Officer regarding the anticipated completion of Bill 20, the local
[ Page 686 ]
elections statute amendment act.

You may recall that just a few months ago, in April, Dr. Archer had approached the committee at that time. After a meeting with respect to the proposed funding request at the time, the committee recommended that Elections B.C. be granted $75,000 for operating funding and $75,000 for capital funding in the current fiscal year to deal with the anticipated preparations should the bill receive royal assent — which is, I imagine, expected later today.

We've brought this correspondence forward to you to seek your direction with respect to how you'd like to proceed, should you have an interest in having another meeting to consider the matter. We would of course convey, as we did in April, the desire of the committee to have a detailed breakdown of operating and capital expenditures, including any contingency spending that might apply in the current fiscal year.

M. Hunt: Obviously, we're going to have to do this sooner rather than later, because he's got to get ready for November, right? This takes effect for this coming election.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): That's correct. That's my understanding. Based on your schedules, I'm sure the Elections B.C. official would be very appreciative of some direction as soon as possible.

I'm just looking at my June schedule. Unless you want to do it on a Sunday afternoon, I'm pretty much hooped. But as long as we can call it in and as long as we've got good detail on it…. I'm not going to support: "I need another million and a half." We really need some good detail on where this money is going.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): We'd be happy to. Then in order to support the…. If it is a meeting with some members connecting by telephone conference call, I would imagine that Dr. Archer and his officials will be present in this room. Should it assist with your schedules, please join us in the room, but otherwise, we'll ensure that you're fully supported wherever you connect to the meeting.

M. Elmore: I just have one question, to go back to the Kootenays. I was just looking…. We haven't been in Nelson since 2008. Is it not possible to travel into Nelson?

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): We had an arrangement, actually, I think the last time the committee was heading to Nelson whereby the plane was scheduled to land in Castlegar and then we would be bused over. Ironically, one year the community had decided to go to Castlegar because it was told that they couldn't fly into Nelson, and then the Castlegar airport couldn't take us, and they rerouted us to Nelson. Then we ended up in the place that we had intended to all along, and we were all bused back to Castlegar. So it was a lot of fun.

Nonetheless, I'm sure we can make any option work for the committee. But my understanding is that we usually get told, based on the size of the airplane, that we're heading to Castlegar.

D. Ashton (Chair): But Nelson has a very good strip. I'm quite sure they can get in.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of Committees): They do. It was funny, because we were told we couldn't land there, and in the end, we ended up there anyway. But all of our cabs were in the other town.

D. Ashton (Chair): Okay. It's a nice spot, and you get the south Slocan area. Leave it with me, okay?

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.

Chair:	* Dan Ashton (Penticton BC Liberal)
Deputy Chair:	Mike Farnworth (Port Coquitlam NDP)
Members:	* Mable Elmore (Vancouver-Kensington NDP)
	* Eric Foster (Vernon-Monashee BC Liberal)
	* Scott Hamilton (Delta North BC Liberal)
	* Gary Holman (Saanich North and the Islands NDP)
	* Marvin Hunt (Surrey-Panorama BC Liberal)
	Lana Popham (Saanich South NDP)
	* Jackie Tegart (Fraser-Nicola BC Liberal)
	* John Yap (Richmond-Steveston BC Liberal)
	* denotes member present
Clerks:	Susan Sourial
	Kate Ryan-Lloyd
Committee Staff:	Byron Plant (Committee Research Analyst)

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES