[ Page 385 ]

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1971

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

The Honourable W.D. Black presented to Mr. Speaker a Message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

On the motion of the Honourable W.D. Black, Bill (No. 28) intituled An Act to Amend the Civil Service Superannuation Act was introduced, read a first time, and Ordered to be placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

On the motion of the Honourable L.R. Peterson, the following Bills were introduced, read a first time, and Ordered to be placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading at the next sitting after today:

Bill (No. 26) intituled An Act to Amend the Sale of Goods Act,

Bill (No. 30) intituled An Act to Amend the Variation of Trusts Act,

Bill (No. 31) intituled An Act to Amend the Testator's Family Maintenance Act,

Bill (No. 29) intituled An Act to Amend the Settled Estates Act.

On the motion of Mr. H.P. Capozzi, Bill (No. 34) intituled The Protection from Computers Act was introduced, read a first time, and Ordered to be placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

BUDGET DEBATE

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister of Rehabilitation.

HON. P.A. GAGLARDI (Kamloops): Mr. Speaker, I thought that because of the extent of the introductions and the Bills that maybe I could get away without speaking today, but they finished a bit too soon. I'd far sooner sit back and listen, than I would talk any day, because it's always a lot easier, particularly to criticize someone else, than it is to be criticized by someone.

Mr. Speaker, both the Premier and myself, when in Ottawa, impressed or tried to impress upon the Federal Government the tremendous necessity, today, for doing something about the unemployment situation in the whole of Canada, as well as the Province of British Columbia. Many times we have been asked the question, and I was asked this question while in Ottawa, how come the rate of unemployment was as high as what it was in the Province of British Columbia? I had to explain that B.C. seemed to be such an attractive place that people from all over Canada flocked to our shores, particularly from Quebec and from Ontario, and, because of that, the major portion of the people whom we have today, who have swelled the rolls, both of social assistance and unemployment, come from other Provinces in this Nation.

We are proud to be able to have such an attractive area and such an attractive Government and such an attractive climate, but it does work a hardship upon the people of this Province. We suggested to the Federal Government that it would be a good thing for them to consider some type of portability so that we be reimbursed, on a reasonable basis, for taking care of the load for other parts of the Nation.

We are not too anxious about many of the policies of the Federal Government and some of the statements of the Prime Minister of the Nation. I think that, many times, people think in this House that we try to relieve ourselves of our own responsibilities by pointing our finger at the Federal Government. But, after all, this is not so. Because the Province of British Columbia is one of the contributing Provinces, the Province of British Columbia is what helps make Canada, Canada. The Province of British Columbia, I believe, carries a load of green from B.C. into Ottawa as no other western Province, apart from Ontario, does. Yet, we are the only Province in this Nation that doesn't seem to be able to enjoy some of the participation programmes that other parts of this Nation enjoy. We don't mind being treated on a rather obscure basis, but we hate to be always continuously mistreated as we are. I believe that we are worthy of better attention from the Federal Government and I want to cite some of these policies today. There are many things I could say, but I don't want to take up too much time because there are other speakers. But I did hear the Prime Minister of this Nation…at least, it was recorded in the press that he said, "That there was a consideration of taking Canada out of the Commonwealth if England did certain things." I want to tell Mr. Trudeau that he's not talking for me. As far as I'm concerned, we will stay with the Commonwealth of Nations. I admire a man of the intestinal fortitude of Mr. Heath, and I pray that every day people will pray that this man's fortitude will be sustained. I believe he is a powerful man in the right place, at the right time, trying to clean up the mess that the Socialists left behind. He has a tough job cleaning it up.

I think there is far too much interference. We believe in federalism and confederated federalism in this Nation. I think that everybody subscribes to that policy. I know the Premier has enunciated it a number of times. Everybody believes in it. We want to be as much of Canada as anybody else. We want to make our contribution but we want to get whatever we have coming back. I don't think we should be pushed around in any way. I think that, maybe, we are getting a bit of a run around in many of the policies, today.

One of them is that the Federal Government seems to want to interfere on the basis of social assistance cases and in some other affairs of this Province that I don't think it should interfere with. They pay 50 per cent of the social assistance load. We appreciate that, but only out of the money that we send down to them in the first place. It's our money. Then they lent us $35 million and I said that was a joke. I meant it…for the municipalities, not for the Government, but the Government acting as an agency. Do you mean to tell me that it is a fair thing for the Federal Government to take our tax-dollars down to Ottawa, let them sit down there for a little while, rush them back here to our municipalities and charge us 8 per cent interest on our own money? That's adding insult to injury and I don't appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, I noticed in the newspaper the hiring of a man by the name of Alex Bandy, that was the name mentioned in the paper, but his name is Bonde, at least it was. Now, he may have changed it, I don't know. But Alex Bonde is a man, who, I think came into this country some years ago, 1956 or so, with some other Hungarian refugees, and there's nothing the matter with that. But I don't know how a man of this calibre, a man who has refused to work when he has been given a job…we offered this man a job and he could have made $500 a month as an assistant in a car wash plant…refused to take the job. We…(interruption). As the assistant manager, yes. Then we told him to come back if that wasn't suitable and we would find him something

[ Page 386 ]

else to do. But he's never been back. He doesn't have to. He has, as an employer the Federal Government, about $830 a month. Now, what to do? Amazing what this fellow, today, is doing — running around the country teaching people on social assistance how to defraud the taxpayers of this Province. That's what he is hired for. There is the Mayor of Chetwynd, right in our midst, today, and he heard him with his own ears. I have a statement of fact here from some of my people and it's an amazing statement. It says that this man encouraged, definitely encouraged, social assistance allowance recipients to commit fraud.

AN HON. MEMBER: Tell the Attorney-General.

MR. GAGLARDI: I've told him. I don't need you to tell me. Just wait till I get through. I want you to know also that the moment I read that in the newspaper, I didn't wait for the Leader of the Liberal Party to start cranking on his old Gestetner machine. I phoned the Prime Minister of the Nation. I said to the operator, "Get me the Prime Minister." In about three minutes I had his office, but he wasn't there, or he wouldn't come.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you phone collect?

MR. GAGLARDI: I sure didn't. We can pay for the call.

Mr. Speaker, when I couldn't get him I tried the Secretary of State, Mr. Pelletier. I couldn't get him either, but I got his assistant. I told him to straighten that situation out in a hurry. But he didn't know what was going on. He said, "What are you talking about?" So I had to explain and it took me half an hour. It cost us a lot of money to tell that fellow what was going on. He didn't know. Then I got Ray Perrault on the telephone and I said, "Ray, I want you to do something about this." Poor little Ray. You could see his feathers drooping, he knew he couldn't do anything about it. Tangled up in a bureaucracy so that he could get nowhere. Now, here's a man that, just a couple of weeks ago was brought in front of a Court of Law, was charged with carrying a secret weapon, was found guilty, charged, or fined, then put on a bond. Then, the Federal Government pays this man, with your money and mine, to go out and teach fraud against the Government. Is this a Liberal policy?

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, on the floor of this House, I was called a windbag. I don't mind. After all, you are like the old farmer. He looked around when he got kicked from the mule and he considered where it came from. But I'd like to tell the man who called me a windbag, that he's using the same tactics as Goebbels used years ago. He invented the policy of attacking the strongest, most fundamental point to try to create doubt and, when you can't do it any other way, then tear down personalities. If I had any word for that individual, I would say he's a blabbermouth. Not a windbag, a blabbermouth.

I'll tell you what — this man had the colossal gall, it was stated on the floor of this House, he had the colossal gall to try and carry on a facade, a false affair with the Secretary of Labour in the Province of British Columbia. What for? To fool the public. That is the equivalent of fraud. I'd suggest to the Member that he get out and stand in the aisle and the first Federal employer who comes along will hire him, like they hired Bonde. They need men like that. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm a windbag, he's a blabbermouth.

I've also heard so many things on the floor of the House that I want to take a minute or two to answer them. And you are coming, Mr. Member from Cowichan-Newcastle, because, after all…. (interruption). The former Leader of the Opposition. There was a day when they had a Member in the Opposition called Strachan, a Scotchman. He wasn't very much but he made a lot of noise. I'd say that he's sort of a gas-animated…one of these bull horns or something. He does make a lot of noise, at least, he says a few things. The present Leader of the Opposition…these Scotchmen eat mush. He could take the present Leader and put him in a bowl of mush and pour some milk on him and dissolve him and gulp him in one fell swoop. He wouldn't even know he had taken him down.

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

MR. GAGLARDI: He suggested on the floor of this House that, after calling the system that we stand for and some of the policies we stand for, he said, "….and you people stand for this kind of a rotten system." Now, Mr. Member from Malahat, I'd say that was pretty hypocritical, because all you were doing was making a straw man and knocking him down. Well, I'll challenge you, Mr. Member from Cowichan-Newcastle, to show me where there is any Government in the world that tackles the problems of its people in a more vigorous, animated, powerful, progressive basis than this Government.

Do you want to talk about Quebec? Do you want to talk about Manitoba? Do you want to talk about Ontario? Do you want to talk about your beloved Scotland or England? Or Africa, or Germany, or even Russia, with its dictatorship? Or Italy, or any country in the world? You show me one place in the world, Mr. Member from Cowichan-Newcastle, and I'll say that we have many faults in the system. I'll say we will continue to have, but I suggest to you, Mr. Member from Cowichan-Newcastle, there is not one place in the world where the people are treated better than the way they are treated here.

Along with the hypocrisy that you hear on the floor of this House, and I think this comes from everywhere, I'm not just saying the Opposition, but all of us, we all entertain a certain amount of it…I've seen the Member from…now, where is he from? Brousson? North Vancouver. I was going to say Baboon from North Vancouver but it's Brousson. I'm sorry…and Capilano. He talks for days and days about the great problems of flooding the Skagit Valley. Now, that certainly is something to fight for. I don't think there is anything wrong with fighting for that, if you believe it. You made a great political issue out of it. I think that everybody gets up and talks about ecology, and we talk about different things that are wrong, and pollution and so on. But I wonder how genuine we really are, in the final analysis. I think that the Book says it correctly, when it says we strain at gnats, and swallow camels.

I think Nader used this exact same policy. Nader went out and made a name for himself attacking the most influential, powerful automobile organization in the world — General Motors. He took on a giant and he lifted his own stature by fighting a big organization. You have to give him credit. But what was he fighting? He was fighting the mechanical failures of a vehicle. It's shown by statistics that only 6 per cent of the accidents are caused by the mechanical failures of a vehicle, so Nader was spending 100 per cent of his time on 6 per cent of the problem.

Now, surely, if oil is to be spilled out here in our ocean and birds die, everybody is going to be concerned. I wouldn't

[ Page 387 ]

like to see a seagull or a crow, or a canary, or a hummingbird, or anything, die. But, Mr. Speaker, I notice, here, in this article, that comes from Look magazine, I think it is just a few days ago, it says that drunk drivers will kill 673 people every week of this year. Drunk people. Well, 35,000 in a year, more than Vietnam. Do you know something? There isn't a voice raised in this House about that. A seagull can die and everybody goes crazy (interruption). What are you talking about? That's what you think the killing of a person is. That's the nature of you, my friend, because you don't believe in the lives of human beings. All right, then, what are you talking about? I'm saying that these things are far more important than anything else. We do nothing about it, absolutely nothing about it. You know, Mr. Speaker, I think we could do an awful lot for unemployment if we introduced a law that said that everybody who wanted to go to a beer parlour or a bar or wanted a drink — after all, you should give people freedom — should have somebody else drive their car. That would create a tremendous amount of employment and it would save an awful lot of people (interruption). That's what they do in Sweden. You are in the insurance business, you should know. Do you know what Japan does? Japan has an insurance policy along with their liquor and, if you are killed by drinking their liquor, then, they pay the shot. That's the way it should be here. That might be a good thing (interruption).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

MR. GAGLARDI: Now, Mr. Speaker, another couple of things and then I want to get onto something more solid. I can't go by the hatchet man for the NDP Party. They have had three of them to date and now they have fastened on the Member from Vancouver East, Second Member from Vancouver East. First, it was the Member from Burnaby and he lasted for a little while, but he became so discredited that he had to drop out. Then they used the very famous lawyer at the end of the line and it was too distasteful for him and so he dropped it as well. So it was picked up by that character and I listened on the day…(interruption). If you did drop me, I must have landed on my head because I didn't get hurt (interruption).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

MIL GAGLARDI: Mr. Speaker, I sat here the other day and I listened to the machinations of a Member of this House rip people up and down, who have no opportunity of standing on the floor of this House and defending themselves. I don't appreciate those things any more than anybody else does. I'd like to suggest to the Member that the Book says that, "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh." If you are bitter inside, then you are bitter everywhere. One of the tragedies is that people, who make a success of anything, are always abused by those who can't seem to make a success of anything.

I noticed the other day there has been a number of things that have been said by Mr. Haynes, the Secretary of the B.C. Federation of Labour. I think most everybody has missed the main point of, really, what happened at the opening of the House. And that, Mr. Speaker, was simply this — that Mr. Haynes does not have the leadership of those who were here, the labour leaders who were here. They can't have the backing of labour. The decent labour people of this Province are upstanding individuals who have made a fantastic contribution to this Nation. They are called people and they are good people. Mr. Speaker, I suggest to you that Mr. Haynes, in his desperation, picked up anything and everything he could get and he disgraced labour. Advertising in Georgia Straight! You can't get any lower than that, even the Vancouver Sun is above that. Imagine advertising in Georgia Straight to get a crowd over here to demonstrate, when you are supposed to be the lead man in the labour movement. Now, that was a disgrace to labour and Ray Haynes should stand on the first box he can get on and should shout to the world that he is ashamed of that display, and he should give the labour of this Province the recognition that it deserves. I don't think that anybody in this House wants to say, for one moment, that labour doesn't deserve good wages, good working conditions. I want to call on labour, today, to go to their own union meetings and throw out this rebel-rousing leadership that puts them into disgrace. That's what they should do. I believe that the labourers of this Province deserve a far better deal than to be inflicted with that type of a situation. Mr. Member, you tell me that he's elected. All right, I suggest to you that every member of labour should be down there to elect him and they would throw him out and you, too.

Now, I represent, Mr. Speaker, a labour riding and I've got a bunch of proud people up in my part of the country. There are no smarter people or better people on the face of God's earth than up there in that Kamloops labour force because, well, they keep sending me down here. They couldn't be brighter than that (interruption). No, it was the Liberals who did that.

Mr. Speaker, they spent a lot of money. People are still…. I'll tell you, the Leader of the Liberal Party is a clever strategist. They are still trying to figure out how those gaps in the parade appeared and how it seemed to be able to continue on such a continuous basis. I think, the next day, a lot of garages were working on steering boxes to try to get them unlocked. They were locked in a circle.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to suggest to you, today, that the Budget that was brought down the other day — any Government, any free Government, or any government in the world, would be mighty proud to be able to bring down this kind of a Budget. I believe that. I've looked at a number of periodicals. I've been in a number of places around the country and I've clipped out a few clippings here and there. I don't know of any place in this Nation, or in the free world, or out of the free world, that is in better financial shape to tackle the problems of people than we are in the Province of British Columbia. I think that has to be recognized and it is a creditable act of a group of people and, particularly, the Minister of Finance, who manages the financial affairs of this particular Province.

I know many people, when we first started, came to scoff and now they have gone away as believers, because they have seen what has been able to be accomplished. When you can put up a Budget of a $1,300,000,000, Mr. Speaker, I suggest to you, to represent this amount of people, with no indebtedness that the taxpayer has to pay off, I think that's a creditable account of a marvelous fiscal policy. The thing that makes me proud of that Budget is that 80 per cent of it…that's right, shake your head, Mr. Ballpoint Pen, but don't shake it too far, it will fall off…I suggest, Mr. Speaker, the reason why you can be proud of this Budget is the fact that it is geared to help people, that's what it is geared to. Eighty per cent of this Budget is for services to people. I think that's a record. That's an outstanding

[ Page 388 ]

achievement, because this is extremely important. I don't think anybody can quarrel with that. I think that it is hard, sometimes, for the Members of the Opposition, because people are important. We believe that. We also believe that every segment of society has to be taken care of. We're interested in that secretary and in that housewife and in that labourer and in the enterpriser and in the jobless. Speaking of the enterpriser, there seems to be some idea from the opposite side of the House that it's a sin to make a profit. You know, there isn't any greater hypocrisy on the floor of this House than these legal people, who stand up and talk about profit and enterprisers in such a fashion. There is nobody here that makes more money on nothing than these legal people on the other side of the House. Now, pray tell me, do you work for a profit or don't you work for a profit? (Interruption.) I haven't got enough money to hire a lawyer. They are good people. I wouldn't hire you. That's right. Lawyers, but not you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

MR. GAGLARDI: Listen, Mr. Insurance Man, if I were you, I'd go bury my head. Because the type of insurance that you sell shows how a person has to die and those who are left behind collect it. The type of insurance that I sell, when you die, you go home and get it.

Mr. Speaker, because people are important is one of the reasons why, today, we have such a fantastic amount of money poured into the social services and the education and health services of this Province. And that's important, that's important.

Unemployment is a very serious thing and, today, we are concerned about it. Unemployment came about in this Province on two bases. Number one, when Mr. Benson, that famous professor…and if I had anything to do with him, I would ship him back…no, I wouldn't put him back in the university, I'd put him in a rocking chair, because he'd ruin any university with those policies. I'd put him in a rocking chair, leave him his pipe and a great stack of tobacco so he wouldn't have to move off that chair and could stay there…because those policies, certainly, have been devastating to this Nation…Number one, that White Paper, the people of this Nation have never gotten over. The scare of the White Paper, they still don't know what's going to happen. Do you know that when Mr. Benson brought in his White Paper, there were literally hundreds of millions of dollars that were diverted from the investment field of this Nation to other parts of the world? That's a tragedy. That's a tragedy and they've done absolutely nothing about it to this day, except talk, nothing concrete about it, except, maybe, in one or two small areas — in the mining field and, maybe, one or two other areas. That White Paper, literally, shattered the confidence of every enterpriser right across the entire Nation. Talk about taxing! Even if a person sold his home, if you please, it would be a tax situation. Why, jumping Jupiter, what kind of a Nation are we, anyway? They are pretty hungry people for dollars and cents, when you have to get down to that kind of a level. Then spend that money, if you please, hiring fellows like Bonde to run around the country and teach people fraud, or else build the Bonaventure. They got the horses off the payroll, but the Bonaventure's and the Bonde's are on the payroll. And that's not right.

Mr. Speaker, I think it's about time that some of these things were remedied. The second thing, I believe, that has hampered a tremendous amount of investment in this Nation, of course, has been the inflationary measures that they have taken, or, at least, the measures to curb inflation. You can't be too hard on the Federal Government for trying to curb inflation. Nobody is going to quarrel with that. I think that was a justifiable thing. I can quarrel with the methods that they used, but I can't quarrel with the desire to curb inflation. I must say that labour certainly hasn't given too much cooperation in this field and I think that that's not to their credit.

Nevertheless, this Government is anxious to do something as far as the labour situation is concerned. Now, the problems, today, are as numerous as perhaps the people on the floor of this House. We have embarked on a number of programmes that are helping in just about every sector of this Province, as far as unemployment is concerned. From the Department of Rehabilitation, alone, up to 1,500 people a month, Province-wide, arc coming off the roads every month and going into areas of employment. Now, along with that, we have men coming in and, sometimes, more are coming in than are going out. That's only because, from across the Nation, more keep coming into the Province. It seems that the shovel that we've got shovelling them out, isn't quite as big as the shovel that the rest of the Nation has, shovelling them in. We're doing everything we possibly can and I think it's a credit to this Province and a credit to the Department of Finance, that has said, "Don't put the brakes on in helping out where there is genuine need." That's what we're doing. After all, we're not interested in hurting people but we are interested in helping.

Now, to be able to tackle the problem, number one, you have to first analyze the problem and categorize it. This we have done. We have separated the unemployed employables and have them on a separate list. Then we know exactly what people we are dealing with. Then we categorized all that list. We put the mechanics on the mechanics' list, the waiters on the waiters' list, and every type of employment — 70, 80 or 100 different divisions of employment all on different lists. Then, when anybody calls for a man, we know exactly where to go, and we don't need social workers, necessarily, to deal with that thing. Then we have the pure social assistance cases and, incidentally, the Provincial Alliance of Businessmen has been ridiculed so many times, particularly by the Lady Member of the Opposition…always seems to be on the back of the people who are doing the PAB work. Go ahead and deride, all you like. But I want to tell you I'm proud of the job they are doing. They have a record of about three and a half to one; for every application that's come in they have been able to place, on a three and a half to one basis, one individual on a job. That's not easy. Then a lot of people have said to me, "Well, you are duplicating in the manpower field." Oh, no we're not, we are supplementing. How many agencies are there in Vancouver or in British Columbia that are employment agencies? You can't have enough and, as long as there is one person unemployed, there's got to be agencies to look after every segment of society, not just one or two. We take care of people that Manpower doesn't take care of and Manpower takes care of people that we don't take care of and we have good co-operation with Manpower. I must say that. Manpower is helping us out on some programmes that I will tell you about in a very short time.

Now, the programmes that we have implemented, in the different cases, run as follows. We have an incentive programme for social assistance cases. We've taught them a number of things and we're using them as case aides, nurse aides, teaching aides, and library aides. We have a variety of

[ Page 389 ]

clerical and stenographic positions in the Provincial Government and also in the private agencies. We have given them the opportunity, that is, the pure social assistance case, as long as they fit the category and it's not an abuse of earning up to $100 a month, as an incentive. The private sector is doing a lot to help us out. A company, a few days ago, gave us hundreds of thousands of screws to fit washers on. So, we took them over to one of the social assistance cases, a home where the lady could sit down in front of the fireplace, during the day, and put washers on screws and make $150 a month. Nothing the matter with that. We have different art work. For instance, we take an empty box and we've taught the people, the social assistance cases, how to do art work in their own home. Take plates, paint them certain colours and make certain things out of them, and take empty boxes and do the same thing. In fact, empty creatures like the Leader of the Opposition, you know, we could really paint him up and do something with him but you could never make him useful.

We're teaching a number of different things in the homes, so that these people have a work-oriented atmosphere. Then we've taken the unemployed employables. We've taken many of the young and we've allowed them in these hostels. We're paying for them while they are there for a few days. We teach them incentive programmes, work-orientation programmes. The amount of young people that have been able to go to jobs is kind of fantastic. In one month alone, over five hundred people out of one hostel in Vancouver found areas of employment after teaching them proper incentives; what the employer desired and what he didn't desire; what he was looking for and what he wasn't looking for; what he expected and so on; and a proper motivation of the young people. Fantastic programme.

Now, we are also using many other areas of activity, particularly with the unemployed employables. We're finding, today, that, in many instances, there are a lot of young people, who have no skills of any kind. In fact, one employer said to me, yesterday, he had asked for an accountant. He put an ad in the paper. I think he got a hundred and some odd requests to fill that job. Do you know, out of all those requests, all those applications, he said that he could only see five out of those applications that, really, could fit the job? Out of that five, he thought he might be able to get two people, who could actually, be employed. Now, there's something wrong. I'd say there is something wrong with the schools that are not meeting the demands of this day. Even vocational schools, with all the good jobs they are doing and they are…You can send people to a vocational school and he'll come out of that school with a certificate in his hand but he still will not be able to meet the qualifications of the job, without a lot more training.

A company contacted me and said, "Mr. Gaglardi, we've got a training school up in Nanaimo which trains drillers. But," he said, "we can't use them after they come out of there." I said, "Why aren't they properly trained?" "Oh, yes, they are properly trained, but they live in a cafe, eat the best meals, work eight hours a day or less, five days a week, sleep in the best motel in town, sitting in the midst of a very fine community. When we send them out on the job, they have to walk through a foot of mud, work ten to twelve hours a day, sleep in a bunkhouse, work seven days a week. They last five days and quit." He said, "We want to set up our own training programme, where they are properly work-oriented." That gave us an idea. That's where the idea came from. So I said to my people, "We are going to start a new programme." That programme is "in industry" or "on the job," not on job training because we started that over a year ago. But in industry training. Today, we have asked Manpower to help us out and Manpower has given us good co-operation.

We have perhaps, one hundred people, right now, in about 15 different areas in the cities of Vancouver and Victoria who are embarking on this programme after only a few weeks of activity. We have set an objective of ten thousand people in areas, or in plants, or in all different areas of activity, on a training basis — in a hardware store, in a grocery store, training as clerks, in butcher shops training as butchers, in secretarial offices training as secretaries, in shops, training as welders and mechanics, and everybody who we can train. Will there be jobs for them when they are through? Not for all, certainly not, but after they are trained, on this kind of a basis, these people can walk into any shop or any store or any area that they are trained in, in the Nation and say, "I'm properly trained and fit the job, right now."

Now, do you mean to tell me, Mr. Leader of the Opposition, who is seldom in his seat, that this is the programme of a windbag. I tell you, this programme is an active, powerful programme that I believe will change the entire… In fact, when we were back in Ottawa, they were jumping like jackrabbits and grasshoppers, back there, about the plan. Manpower has given us good co-operation and they are paying 50 per cent, 75 per cent. Manpower is paying, in some instances, the entire shot. Where they don't, they pay 50, or telling industry to pay 25. The Minister of Finance has given us the OK to pay 25. That means that a man will be trained for three months to six months, so that he's qualified for a job. He's going to be getting welfare, anyway, and, this way, we are doing something that is active, helpful, and beneficial and dignifying the human being, creating confidence, giving him stature and giving him a feeling that he belongs to a Nation and a Province that believes in him and has something for him to do.

I don't know of anything that could be more inspiring than that type of a programme. Now, there are many other programmes that I could talk about, here, for hours, in that particular area of activity. We've got a programme for misguided youth. We're working on this problem and, today, young people are really misguided. You know, everybody that walks into the Chamber who wears a band, or you see on the street, who wears a band, and lives as a Hippie…you can't class all young people in that category…you only class a very small majority. The great majority of young people of this Nation have been turned out and find themselves in the situation they are in, because of the failure of the home, the Church, the schools, the universities, the municipalities, the communities and the Government. Everybody's played a role, a part, particularly the home, schools and the Church. It's about time we quit this monkeying around and fiddling around, and did something worthwhile with our young people. Quit mollycoddling them and do something substantial that's going to make human beings out of them. Young people don't need mollycoddling. And these do-gooders! I tell you, they are the ones who have caused a major portion of our trouble. You take in our schools, today…We can blame the schools, but also blame ourselves. I remember when I was a young lad going to school, if I came home and told my dad or my mother that, "I got a spanking today," or "the strap today…" In one school I got the strap for three years every day of the week. That lady who gave me that strap, she wrote to me, when I became a Minister of this Government, and she had nothing but praise for me. God

[ Page 390 ]

bless her, she was a good old soul (interruption). Whether I deserved them or not, I got them. Yes, she should have given me more, it wouldn't have hurt me at all.

I want to tell you something. If I went home and said to my father or my mother, "I got a strapping today," they never phoned up the teacher. They took me to the woodshed and, before I got through, I'd think that the school teacher was using a cream puff to give me a spanking. Today, whenever a school teacher tries to correct a child, the stupid parent phones up the teacher and says, "Don't touch my child." All the bleeding hearts who stand behind that type of a policy have hamstrung the police, and the school teachers, and the authorities, until we've made these young people what they are today. It's about time we woke up, straightened the situation out and did something about it. This is a tragedy.

When a Member, on the floor of this House, stands up and says, "We need help in our small community because we have over a hundred addicts," I want to tell you I feel like getting out of here, on my hands and knees, wondering what in the name of commonsense we are going to be able to do to stem the tide of that situation. If we don't stand behind our police force, today, and enforce the rules for these young people the way they should be…They admire that. Young people, today, they like to be corrected, and they want to be corrected. The way we mollycoddle young people and fuss around with them and monkey around with them, we've ruined more than we've ever helped because of this situation. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that it's time that it was straightened out. I don't know what kind of an upbringing you've had over there, the Member who is used as the hatchet Member for the NDP, because there's certainly something lacking in your background, that's for sure.

Misguided youth needs help today and we're giving it to them. We're trying to train them, we're trying to create proper motivation, we believe in them. I've had them walk into my office. I'll never forget and this is only one case. He walked into my office and he came in with no shoes on. The man who runs the Vancouver office said, "You get out of here. I don't want to talk to anybody without any shoes on. If you haven't got any respect for yourself or this place, get out." And he got out. He came back the next day with his shoes on. Then we found him a job. He walked into my office and he shook my hand and he said, "Mr. Gaglardi, I've been in jail two, three times but I think you people believe in me, now, and I'll make you proud of me." He went out in a training programme and as far as I know, he's still there. You know that we had, I believe, one of the assistants in Ottawa… No. I won't say that, because somebody might find out who it is and it might hurt his life. I don't want to do that. We help all cases, because we believe in young people. We believe that they have to have help, but we think, more than anything else, they need guidance, they don't need mollycoddling. This stupid policy of the Federal Government to try to load them up on buses and carry them around the country makes tramps out of them, that's what they do. They don't make men out of them. Young people don't like to be given everything on a silver platter, they like to earn their way. Walk in the front door. Lift their head high. Say, "I'm walking under my own steam." Stupid policies, the Federal Government, sometimes, puts in. I gave them a piece of my mind, when I was down there. I told them on a television programme that it was about time the Federal Government quit some of the foolishness. When they tried to…when the Minister, who I was on the programme with, when they asked him what he was going to do about the unemployment situation, he said, "Well, we are going to spend $200 million here, $300 million there, $150 million here, $400 million there." So, the announcer looked at me and said, "What do you think?" I said, "You know, you can't create solutions by standing in a mud puddle and pulling at your own bootstraps." It's impossible. Whose money does the Federal Government think they are spending, but our money? So, after they spend all those hundreds of millions of dollars, what are they going to do for the encore, but go back to the taxpayer to get some more'? So, the taxpayer has to pay the shot and the Government goes out and keeps spending more and more. Government should only spend what they get in. That is fiscal policy. I said to the Federal Minister and to the television audience, "Get rid of that White Paper business. Give this Nation a sound basis to walk on, unleash the private sector and let them go out there and build." Twenty million people in a territory larger than the United States of America…I want to tell you that, if they unleashed the private sector today and gave them a proper opportunity…they should use the shepherd plan. At least, that's what I called it. The sheep herder he takes his sheep and leads them around in the pastures and he feeds them the best hay and grass that he can, so that they grow more wool. When that wool grows nice and long, he shears the sheep. All the Federal Government has to do, Mr. Speaker, is to make the pasture and let the sheep wander around and eat, and then collect the taxes. That's all (interruption).

That's right. The Federal Government pulls the wool over their eyes, that's right. And kills the sheep, that's right.

I want to tell you that the policies should be that, if you take care and look after people on a proper basis, look after enterprise on a proper basis, Government's job should always be to create the climate and then collect the taxes from the success of the enterpriser. That's what we should be doing. The Member on the Opposite side, who got up the other day and said that some people were making fabulous profits on the sale of land, he doesn't know what he's talking about. He couldn't even run a peanut stand if that's all he knows about business. Nobody in this Province can even make $3,500 dollars without paying tax and the more he makes, the more taxes he has to pay, so, who gets the rake-off every time, but the Government? (Interruption.) You had better believe you've got a good idea. If you've got the intestinal fortitude to say what you are thinking, get up and say it, because you're nothing but a sham, a tragedy.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that all governments should follow that policy. Free enterprise is a good system and it weeds out those who can't make a success. Because that's the proper way. Nature does that. I think it's proper for governments to help those it can help and do its best. I think that collection of taxes, when a government can take 80 per cent of everything it takes in, and gives to those who need, then, Mr. Speaker, that's good policy.

We have policies for the long-term social assistance cases. I don't want to take the time to tell you about them, now — the paraplegic, the retarded, the incapacitated — each category we are looking after and we'll continue to look after them.

I have one more thing here that I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, before I sit down, and then I'm through. It's this. I want to read to you an advertisement that appears all over the world in newspapers. It says, "Only a few hours away from big, young, growing Canada. Canada rewards ambition and hard work with one of the highest standards of living.

[ Page 391 ]

You and your family will be protected by social welfare programmes." (Interruption.)

Yes, that's a Federal Government advertisement. "The Land of Opportunity," it says. The Federal Government is telling people from all over the world to come to Canada — and go on welfare. Then, they go to Quebec and they go to Ontario and they don't like it, so they come to B.C. We get them all. We are at the bottom of the hill. They come rolling into our lap and there is no place else for them to go, except into the ocean and we won't put them there. We'll look after them.

Mr. Speaker, again, with the good sense of the Minister of Finance, who, I believe did one of the most outstanding things that has ever been done in any government, when he said that everybody in this Province should own their own home and should have the privilege of living in their own home…those policies are sound policies. People should belong, that is, if they want to. If they want to own a home, they should have the privilege of doing so. I will be submitting a brief that I presented to Ottawa, and this is something the Minister of Finance has looked over and thinks it's a fair plan. Long before this plan was ever thought of, this Government is so far ahead of every other government in this Nation or in the world, as far as housing is concerned, for we have incentive programmes on housing like no Province in this Nation has. You'll find, when you get this brief that we presented to Ottawa, that we have a system of subsidizing the interest payments on housing, so that a man, even making $4,000 yearly, will be able to live in his own home. By the Federal Government, it would have to be on a National basis, or everybody would be in B.C. It has to be on a National basis. This policy will see to it that even a person earning $4,000 a year could own and survive easily in his own home. So, this will be handed to you in just a few minutes and you can look over it yourself. What we are suggesting is that the Federal Government, through NHA, should put a billion dollars worth of money on the market and should give loans at whatever rate, that is, to everybody, at whatever rate of interest is the going interest rate. Then the Federal Government should, apart from that, use about $200 million a year, or whatever is necessary, to subsidize interest, alone, and there would be a sliding scale on the interest payments whatever wage category you are in, so that the poor, so-called, the individual, who hasn't got the capacity to earn as much as others, would have exactly the same privileges. That's the objective of this Government. They talk about guaranteed annual wage, this Government's been giving a guaranteed annual wage for years. Nobody in this Province ever goes without. We look after them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh. Oh.

MR. GAGLARDI: Oh, yes, you go ahead and moan all you like. The Federal Government, give them credit, they give unemployment insurance. The Provincial Government, along with the Federal Government and the municipalities, give social assistance to every case that qualifies (interruption). Mr. Member, you don't know what you are talking about for, if you did, you wouldn't say that, because a person with eight children can make as much as a wage earner who is making $850 per month. That's right. I can show it to you.

AN HON. MEMBER: What does a 60-year-old widow get?

MR. GAGLARDI: Mr. Member, that's the Federal Government's responsibility, and they are the ones who have shirked on that. The Provincial Government has given them more than any other part of this Nation. That's right. I'll tell you something else, Mr. Member, the Province of British Columbia, for every old age pensioner, for every person that is in this kind of need, will allow any organization to build senior citizen homes and we will give them one-third of the cost. (Interruption.) What do you mean? Nobody else? Not only nobody else, the Federal Government won't do that for you. They will charge you interest rates on the money we give the Federal Government and they'll charge it against the old age pension. Don't you ever tell me that kind of trash. I want to tell you we have an admiration and we take a pride in doing our best for our senior citizens because we appreciate them. God bless them.

Mr. Speaker, there are many other things I could say, but I'll leave them for a while. If there are any other opportunities, and I'm sure there will be in the time when we are on our estimates, I shall go into any details and answer any questions at that time. Thank you for the opportunity and all the best.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burnaby-Edmonds.

MR. G.H. DOWDING (Burnaby-Edmonds): Mr. Speaker, in speaking on the Budget Speech and the Budget Debate, I want to say that I will cover a number of topics that I think reflect the problems of policy of this Government.

It is rather a happy choice that I was going to discuss some of the problems that we have in British Columbia with pollution, in that I was following the speech of the Minister, who just sat down, and we can deal with that subject of pollution, at the same time.

In all the years I've been in this House, Mr. Speaker, I have never heard a more unrestrained example of insult, innuendo, smear, and vacuous nonsense, as that Member has been guilty of. We could have, fifteen million times, drawn him short in his tracks for the insults and the parliamentary garbage of which he was guilty, in terms of the rules of this House. We thought we would let that good Christian go on and have his say, get all the bile and venom out of his system. And he talks about hypocrisy. He doesn't know what charity is. He doesn't know what Christian grace is. All he knows is how to smear everyone around. And he showed it today. By innuendo, he called one of the Liberal Members a baboon. I don't know how anyone can tolerate that kind of conduct in this House, Mr. Speaker. I don't intend to allude to it any further, but I ask the people, who have heard his speech, to draw their own conclusions about the Minister of Rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is the right word for him, he needs it. You know, he takes a great deal of pride in selling insurance to people who are going to die. This is what he told us today. The only thing is the people who die, he makes sure he buries them six feet under and then he never gets sued for breach of contract when they don't come back to say that his policy was no good.

I'm willing to bet you that he's the most successful Minister in the country when it comes to his insurance policies, because I haven't heard of a single case of one of his clients suing him for breach of contract, not one. So it must be working, Mr. Minister. You must be really selling a good policy of life insurance to those about to die.

One thing that the Minister said about the job employ-

[ Page 392 ]

ment agency is that it's working hard. Maybe it is, but, you know, it's really a closed book to this Legislature what is happening in that agency. When you look at the Budget and the estimates, what do you find under that Minister's department? You find that those things that have been established over the years, in the department that he inherited, indicate the number of employees who are hired, what their wages are, what their duties are, all laid out in the department estimates under the Minister of Rehabilitation. Then, what do you find at the end of it? Provincial Alliance of Businessmen. And what does it tell you about the employees? What they earn? What their duties are? Their classification? Not a thing. It's just a mystery. All there is is a vote for the Minister in that department of $500,000 — a blank cheque, without any explanation to this Legislature by that Minister, without any participation by the people of British Columbia in the opportunity to get a job in that particular agency.

It's obvious. I think you'll see why. This particular branch of Government is such a mystery, such a conundrum, such an enigma. When you read the Civil Service Act, what does it say? "The duties of the Civil Service Commission are…." section 5C, "to report upon the organization or proposed organization of the personnel of any department of the Government and upon any proposed change in such organization." Now I ask, Mr. Speaker, if the Civil Service Commission, pursuant to the law, pursuant to the Act, has reported upon this organization of the Minister or its personnel, or taken them under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission? They have? Why isn't it in the book? Why aren't the positions filled in the Provincial Alliance of Businessmen offices? Why are they not classified? Why are they not advertised and gazetted? Are you saying that they are now under the Civil Service Commission? Since when? (Interruption).

Then, all I can say is, you are in violation of the Civil Service Commission Act. Absolutely, because none of this has been set out in accordance with the Act. I'm going to ask the Minister to present to the House the Civil Service Commission's advertisements for employment in his agency in that department. By all means, I want you to table them with the House. I find it extraordinary that two years after… (interruption). No, it's not. It's the second year. You know, it's a great mystery why you're not prepared, if you are in operation as you say, you have nothing listed in your estimates that show that the Civil Service Commission was charged with the responsibility of any part of that department. When you look, Mr. Speaker, at the kind of people the Minister hired, on his own, without the assistance of the Civil Service Commission, you can see it's a political boondoggle, that's all it is. I point out that, always, this House has the duty of approving the salaries, the amounts, the classifications, indeed, the salary of the Minister himself.

It was quite….

AN HON. MEMBER: Right. We are supposed to approve every salary in that book and you don't list a salary.

MR. DOWDING: Not a thing listed, a complete mystery. You know, it was quite amusing, also, to hear the Minister, Mr. Speaker, telling us that labour deserves good wages. Saying how wonderful labour is and how they deserve good working conditions. It's that Minister and his employment agency who got a bunch of Portuguese people, who are in this country illegally, who had the fear of deportation over their heads, sent them up on the PGE where they were working a 17-hour day, at $1.75 an hour, where they couldn't protest, working overtime, without any supervision from the Department of Labour, and always in fear of being taken out of this country. You call that good working conditions to send men to! Talk about hypocrisy. Talk about rehabilitation. The Honourable the Minister had something to say about he didn't want to see the younger generation with a silver platter from their parents. It makes me laugh when I think of the silver platter he was handing out around Kamloops and Blue River, and Del Cielo Heights. Talk about mollycoddling the young.

Some mollycoddling. You know, the average young person, today, is anxious to get work. They are anxious to get training and education. But the problem we have, and it's exemplified by this Budget, is that this Government has so circumscribed the field of education and discouraged the schools and the school boards from developing an educational system that they want, that young people are beginning to feel cribbed and confined in the school system. The teachers are feeling the same frustration. The school board and, indeed, the parents, everyone is dissatisfied with the school system and, when you try to find out the reason, I think, you can see that it mainly has to do with the failure of this Government to have an imaginative programme for education or, indeed, any encouragement of imagination at the local school level.

The best demonstration of that is in regard to the formula which, in effect, not only circumscribes the school districts in their desire to take a bold leap forward in education, but actually, inhibits the school boards from daring to come close to the budget they need. One has only to look at what is happening throughout British Columbia. Some of what are called the lighthouse districts, such as West Vancouver, Kitimat, Powell River — these districts had one of the highest standards of education in this Province. Then came this new Bill 86, two years ago, which, in effect, said that a school budget could not exceed 110 per cent of the previous year, without having the assent of the electors. There hasn't been a successful referendum yet, but people are suddenly realizing what they lost, too late. What is happening with this, it has meant the cutting out of kindergartens at the local level. Now, is that something to be commended? Is that something that should be dispensed with — kindergartens? It has meant that special teachers and teachers' aides have been eliminated. Is that in aid of education? But this is the effect, psychologically, on the school boards. They try to cut the budget in fear and in anticipation that they will not meet a referendum successfully and get the money they need for the programmes that the schools desperately cry for.

Any school districts who have had the courage to start what can be termed a lighthouse experiment in education finds it is punished, punished by this Government. The whole idea and philosophy of the Government is to keep expenditures down. But, you know, when you think of it, half the time, the restraint on certain expenditures leads to the very things the Minister was talking about in Nanaimo. If you don't have a challenging and appealing school system, the kids turn off. They drop out. They take up drugs and they become delinquents. Then you wonder where all the money has to go. It goes to the Attorney-General's Department instead of to the Department of Education (interruption). It isn't nonsense, my friend, I see them every day in the Courts, the ones who are turned off and dropped out, who see no future in the school system, see no challenge in it, who are

[ Page 393 ]

fed up with the hypocrisy of this Government and the system. They don't like it. They hate what their elders stand for, now, they think their elders are hypocritical. They think that the whole system is based on greed and materialism (interruption).

You say it is. The whole system is based on greed and materialism. You simply confirm what the young people are beginning to think and I wish you wouldn't confirm that. I wish you would hold some hope out to them that there is a better way of life than greed and materialism. What young person could get enthralled with the statement made last night by the Honourable the Member for Delta, who said, "The Government should stop all capital grants to universities and, instead, give the money allotted to them to vocational and technical schools." What is he saying? He is saying they are just bolts and nuts for an industrial machine, that they don't count as human beings, they are not there to develop as individuals, they are just fodder for a machine. This is what he was saying. What is the philosophy behind it, Mr. Member? I can only draw my conclusions from the fact that he's saying we don't need universities, we need technical and vocational schools (interruption). Well, you see, I can only draw my conclusion as to what he was driving at. Why did he want to deprive the universities of assistance and grants? Why did he want to give them to technical and vocational schools? I'll tell you this. This Government should hang its head in shame over its attitude over vocational schools and technical schools. When…

AN HON. MEMBER: Rubbish.

MR. DOWDING: The attitude is rubbish, I agree with you. Do you realize the money this Government has foregone by its indifference, over the years, to Federal grants in the field of technical education. You just have to compare the figures for Ontario with British Columbia. Just compare the figures for Ontario. Do you realize how much money they have got from the Federal Government for technical schools in Ontario? It's staggering. Because they were alert, because they were imaginative, because they saw the benefit of technical and vocational schools five years before this Government.

Now, I'll agree that, maybe, the Member for Delta had some motive. I don't know what it is, he didn't spell it out. I can only surmise, and my surmise is that he thinks that technical and vocational school training is essential but that university education isn't. Now, I seem to recall him having said that previously in this House. Well, he's the man who says that wives should stay home, that wives with children should not work. They shouldn't believe in women's liberation. If that were true, there would be about four women in this House who should be at home (interruption). Five, that's right. What kind of nonsense is he preaching? You know, Mr. Speaker, I say that women grace this House. I say the women deserve to be in this House. I say that at least half the Members of this House should be women, as long as it doesn't include my riding. The reason I say that, Mr. Speaker, is that there would be less of the hypocrisy, less of the dishonesty, that we have heard in this House from that Member, with women here. Women are sincere in their beliefs, they are practical in their beliefs (interruption). I'll withdraw, if he withdraws the insults that he made across the Floor, attacking this Member, that Member, for dishonesty and insincerity, and hypocrisy.

You know, Mr. Speaker, that the word hypocrite, or hypocrisy, is a political word that's banned in this House. This Member was guilty of it all through his speech and he didn't have the grace to apologize. Yet, he demands an apology from me. I'm the injured party, Mr. Speaker.

As I was saying, Mr. Speaker…

HON. P.A. GAGLARDI (Kamloops): Are you going to withdraw? I demand a withdrawal. Do you know what you called me? But you can't take it, can you? You can give it, but you can't take it.

MR. DOWDING: People will just have to judge on their own what they think of you. And they do, they do.

But, you know, Mr. Speaker, the idea that women should go back a hundred years to button shoes, is just ridiculous and it shows the attitude of Members of this Government, Members on that side, that they would even attack their own lady Members. I think it's disgraceful. It's true that the lady Members have been prevented from expressing themselves fully about their criticisms of this Government. They were forced, I think, reluctantly, to accept Cabinet posts, knowing full well that the Premier had no intention of having them be outspoken in regard to the problems of British Columbia. It's been a disappointment, in a sense, that they have not spoken out, as most ladies would have. The reason is obvious. The Cabinet's solidarity. What a shame it is.

But, you know, I expect those ladies on that side of the House to support day care centres and I'll tell you why. I want to point out to the Honourable Minister of Rehabilitation, who has something to do with welfare, that studies that have been made in the United States and Canada make it abundantly clear that one of the reasons we have, in British Columbia, 130,000 people on welfare is because we don't have day care centres. You may think that is an unusual conclusion, but I refer you to the Report on the Commission on Emotional and Learning Disorders in Children, which is sponsored by the Canadian Association for the Mentally Retarded, the Canadian Council on Children and Youth, the Canadian Education Association, the Canadian Mental Health Association, and the Canadian Welfare Council. And what do they say? They point out that one of the basic problems of the poor is that mothers with children are tied down in a way that will not allow them to earn income, so they can get off the welfare rolls. What do they advocate? They advocate this Government and the Federal Government, together, sponsoring more day care centres around the Nation to help eliminate the welfare problem and to give these children the headstart, that so many of them need. The same is the situation in the United States. I want to refer to an article in Fortune magazine of July, 1968, dealing with the welfare mess, and one of the things it says there is, "The only objective that makes sense is an across-the-board attack on the whole problem of welfare dependency. By now it is widely accepted that this Nation is rich enough to provide a minimum level of subsistence to those who have missed the train of the U.S. economy. This means supplementing the incomes of everyone genuinely in need, through a system that is efficient and dignified, and that contains built-in incentives for families to stay together and for the able-bodied to seek work. While childrens' allowances and the negative income tax have their merits, most of the same advantages could be gained by revamping the present welfare system. This approach should be tried first before more radical changes are attempted.

Such a strategy will be self-defeating, however, unless it is

[ Page 394 ]

coupled with an intensive effort to pull as many as possible aboard the economy… To get some of these people into the labour force will require not only financial incentives, but education, training, and a major expansion of the country's grossly inadequate day-care facilities for children." That's one of the prime things it points out as a solution. Now, you are not doing it for the silly reasons attributed by the Member for Delta. Day care isn't there to introduce the State into the education of our children at pre-school age. Day care is there to make a family self-reliant, to get them off welfare, to help the children in proper surroundings, so their mothers can go out part of the day and do a little of whatever they want to do, when they want to do it, in the way of other activities, particularly, perhaps, when they are on welfare in work projects.

How has it been worked out, where it has been tried? I mean, really, tried. Fortune magazine points to the situation in Chicago, Cook County. Here's what it says. "To stem the rising tide of welfare dependency, the U.S. must turn idle people into useful workers. For the past two years, some of the 44,000 mothers on welfare in Chicago have been attending the training centre shown in the pictures on the left, set up in the George Westinghouse Vocational High School by the Cook County Department of Public Aid." It shows pictures of it. "They get basic education courses to bring them up to, at least, an eighth grade level, plus various types of vocational instruction. Many mothers would ordinarily be unable to take such training because they are tied down at home by small children. The Chicago training centre has solved that problem by providing day care, right in the same building. Each morning, the mothers and their children come to school together and, while the mothers learn various skills, their children receive pre-schooling of the headstart variety. Government not only must provide more training in day care, but it also must create jobs for welfare recipients, who cannot find any employment elsewhere." The men shown in another picture, in this same article, are drawing welfare in West Virginia but, instead of sitting idle, they are obliged to work, in this case, on a public building project. But they are paid and they are paid at union rates. What a difference. Not the idea of slave labour on the PGE in the north, by frightened men coerced to work at $1.75 an hour. That isn't freedom, that's slavery. That's like turning them into the welfare camps of the 1930's, where they sent men out to work for 20 cents a day. That, certainly, is not something any government should advocate.

But I emphasize the vital importance, not just from the standpoint of the children and the mothers, of a day care centre programme across British Columbia, but from the standpoint of a new approach to the welfare mess created by this Minister. Now, you realize, Mr. Speaker, that, two years ago, when he took over this Portfolio, there were less than 75,000 people on welfare. Today, under his administration, the B.C. welfare roll has now swollen to over 130,000 persons in the Province each month. Now, I don't know what he's trying to do in this Province but, if this is the kind of capitalism that he believes in, pretty soon everybody is going to be on welfare. When you add together 130,000 souls on welfare, with 12 per cent of the work force unemployed, when you see figures anywhere from 90,000 unemployed registered getting cheques in British Columbia this month, to a figure in excess of 100,000, and add together the families that go with those unemployed names, you'll get a staggering picture of stagnation in this Province. Just add it together. Two hundred thousand people unemployed and their families, 130,000 on welfare. Those aren't duplicates, because the ones on unemployment insurance have families. If you average it, you can see that there must be 200,000, including the families, on unemployment insurance. There must be 130,000 on welfare who are not getting unemployment insurance. Add them together, my friends, and it's a staggering picture of economic decay in British Columbia.

And this little kind of Budget, we've got to deal with that? What does it propose? Where is the imagination? It is status quo. What are they going to do? Are they going to help make jobs? I'll tell you, my friends, do you know where the jobs are in this Budget? I found them. They are in the welfare department, that's where they are. I found several positions in the welfare department, several positions (interruption). They may have 25 new jobs. The only other place where there were jobs, I could see, was where they were going to have to expand the Division of Laboratories because of pollution in this Province. So the way they create jobs in British Columbia is out of catastrophes. Pollution, on the one hand, unemployment, on the other. The way they make jobs is that they service the people that they create the problems with (interruption).

Well, I certainly have. My honourable friend from Burrard, surely, would accept that the way out of the welfare mess is not just handing out cheques. I suggested to this House that we tackle day care centres. If that isn't constructive, what is? (Interruption.) Of course, we should be working in the field of secondary industry. It's not a great proposal, it's one that has been tried elsewhere, with success.

But I ask this House to adopt day care centres everywhere and, particularly, where the welfare rolls are the heaviest. I might point out that the day care centre is covered under the Canada Assistance Programme and we would get Federal money. What are we turning our backs on it for?

Now, I am going to say another thing about education that I think has to be said. That is, that too long in British Columbia this Government has managed to play the teachers off against the school trustees, with great success. What I want to point out is that there is another way, a peaceful way, of getting co-operation between school trustees, school boards and teachers. I notice that the Vancouver School Board wants to know how much value it is getting for the $20,000 a year it kicks into the half a million dollar annual budget of the B.C. School Trustees' Association. Burnaby had to take a good look at that, too, and they decided to opt out. I don't think that that is the answer. I hope that the school boards of the Province will not find themselves in that position. But what started it? The School Trustees' Association has tried to regard there being an inseparable wall between them and the teachers on the subject of education. They regard working for school boards as a job where you get paid a salary, where, annually, you meet on the field of battle and you don't talk to each other very much for the rest of the year.

Now I don't like that philosophy. In Burnaby, they had a school board that had a little imagination and a little bold determination, and that school board said, "We'll sit down with the teachers. Maybe, the teachers can help us spot the inefficiencies in the system (interruption). Yes. Rather than sit on them, sit down with them. So they met with the teachers, the Burnaby Teachers' Association, and they said, "Would you sit on committees with us, to discuss the school system, to discuss working conditions, to discuss the prob-

[ Page 395 ]

lems of teaching in the schools, and what suggestions you can make that will make it more efficient, more desirable and less expensive?" The school teachers of Burnaby said, "Yes, we will sit down." And they did and they worked out an agreement with the school board which, in effect, put teachers' representatives on committees that were set up by the school board. They hope to bring in students, as well, which I can only say is participatory democracy and a wonderful thing. That's why kids are being turned off. They are not consulted. What happened? They signed an agreement. It was a good agreement because it did not go round the Public Schools Act. It said that this agreement is subject to the overriding jurisdiction of the school board in any matters that are decided. In other words, the ultimate authority still resided in the school board in any determinations arising out of any committees that met. So they took nothing away from the school boards.

What happened in Victoria? The President of the B.C. School Trustees' Association immediately got on his high horse and charged around with his spear, attacking the Burnaby School Board, saying this was giving in to the teachers, that this was selling out the school boards, that they must stop this, that they should take them to Court and appeal to the Government to prevent the school boards from cooperating, in any way, with the teachers. The Minister, he jumped in a hole and pulled it in after himself, instead of standing up for the right of the Burnaby School Board to work out this experiment in participation. It is working out very well. They have suddenly found that they have common ground where they can help each other. When the school boards find out the problems the teachers face and what the students face, they can work out ways of saving money, and that should appeal to the Members over there. They can also find out ways of getting a better spirit and morale in the teaching staffs in Burnaby. More than that, the teachers feel that they are contributing to the work of the school board and they have, now, got a new sense of responsibility. I think that responsibility is an important aspect of any participation by any group in the community.

I say that this is a notable achievement, this is a step forward that the other school boards should study and watch, see how it works. Now, if one school board, out of some eighty-odd districts tries this experiment and it leads to good results, then, I say the others will see the benefit of it. It shouldn't be stopped, it shouldn't be discouraged. It is experimentation that leads to progress, and is the opposite of stultification that, so often, is the role of this Government.

I wanted to deal with another matter. I'm afraid the Attorney-General isn't here, but it's this question of the loss of man-hours, during the last year, we have suffered in British Columbia in 1970. It is completely disparate figures that have been bandied around in this House as indicating the time-loss occasioned by lockouts and strikes in British Columbia. I noticed an item in the Province of February 10, talking about a credibility gap on lost time. I quote from that article. It says, "Those who think legislation will eliminate strikes are whistling in the dark. One has only to look at what has happened in British Columbia to understand the rougher legislation is not the answer." The above was said by none other than the Federal Labour Minister, Bryce Mackasey in Calgary last week. Now, the article goes on, "It's general knowledge that our controversial rougher legislation, properly called the B.C. Mediation Act, but popularly known as Bill 33 because it is easier to fit into headlines, was enacted early in 1968. Working days lost due to strikes and lockouts since that time have gone up from 327,000 in 1967, to 406,729 in 1968, over 407,000 in 1969. Last year's figures varied between 1.7 million and 2.9 million man-days — a credibility gap of 1.2 million man-days, because of discrepancy between what Provincial Labour Minister Peterson told the Legislature the B.C. total was, and the Federal Government's Labour Department preliminary figures for the year."

The Minister of Labour never told us how he arrived at his figures. But I say, Mr. Speaker, it was a political arrival on a political train. What he did, apparently, to reassess the figures he had originally announced, is lost in the clouds. He doesn't reveal how he got these figures and the people who were questioned by the reporter, in this case, said, "Our figures are based on confidential figures supplied by the unions and the companies to Deputy Minister of Labour, William Sands. He said these confidential figures could not be made public. He also said the reassessed figures represented a very strict definition of who was involved and who was not. Those workers counted in the Provincial Government figures include only employees directly on strike or locked out." But you know, Mr. Speaker, aside from those who were locked out or on strike, there were thousands of workers who were unable to work as a result of the strikes or lockouts. They weren't counted but they were man-days lost, and they were lost as a result of a lockout or a strike. Why weren't those figures included in the totals? If they were included, it would be the most devastating attack on the labour policies of this Government that it's ever had. A devastating attack. I just repeat to the honourable Member who didn't hear it, "Those who think legislation will eliminate strikes are whistling in the dark." Then it quotes this, at the end of the article, "It is significant that the countries with the least labour disruptions are the ones with the most liberal labour legislation," said Mackasey.

You would think, after a year of disastrous economic slowdown, with more than 250,000 people involved in the stagnation of a lost economy, that this Government would review its labour policies that have led from 1968 to this disastrous result. Not a sign of repentance. The Labour Minister has stuck us with a Mediation Commission that has done two minor jobs during its life. Two minor jobs by those three commissioners.

AN HON. MEMBER: Half a million dollars worth.

MR. DOWDING:…and this Government is going to pay them, as the Member says, a half a million dollars for seven years of this kind of stultifying nonsense (interruption). Oh, yes, they've got a new pension plan. There is one set of employees who are back to work all the time without having anything to do. That is the Mediation Commission. I'd say it's time that you reviewed the whole tragic affair of trying to get tough in the field of labour management. They don't invite your assistance. When you interfere in it, you only cause a further extension of the strikes and lockouts.

I want the Attorney-General to lay it right on the table. I want him to say where he got his figures. I want the sources of his figures. I want the names of the persons who supplied those figures. I want to find out how many other casualties of last summer are not mentioned in the man-days lost that he reported to this House.

Now, there is another area I said I was going to speak on very briefly and that's on the question of the damage that is being done to this environment in British Columbia by the

[ Page 396 ]

lack of policies of this Government. It's absolutely scandalous that they take pride in setting up new pulp plants, without any guarantees, throughout the Province, that they have met the problem and the challenge of pollution before those plants were built. If ever there were a time when we had to consider where this planet is going, it is today. Just read this item that you may have seen in the paper and reflect upon it: "Air-borne Metals Foul Rain. Study charges poisonous chemicals tested on people. A Government agency which started analyzing rain and snow to see if phosphates and nitrates were getting into the Great Lakes through precipitation reported Wednesday that it had discovered a major new problem — air-borne lead and cadmium. Canadian Centre for Inland Waters in Burlington, Ontario, disclosed that cadmium and lead concentrations in rain and snow were above the Government safe drinking water standards in some areas. A spokesman for the Centre said, 'Scientists had no idea there was so much heavy metal pollution suspended in rain and snow. It will be two or three years before we can reach any definite conclusions about the source and extent of the problem, but this is a whole new aspect of the pollution situation that has just been opened up."' That's in the snow and the rain. If you've ever seen a Province with lots of snow and rain, despite what the Minister from Kamloops says, it's British Columbia. We've got a pretty heavy rainfall here, a pretty heavy snowfall.

I want to know what the Minister of Health is doing about this. Is he monitoring the rain and snow to determine whether we're getting lots of lead and cadmium? I don't know whether the Members really understand, yet, the extent of the problem that this poses for our people in our environment. I read an interesting article on it to see if I could find out what is being discussed. Here, again, Fortune magazine, which seems to have excellent articles on scientific subjects, January, 1971, a recent issue, deals with metallic menaces in the environment. It says this, "Toxic metals can get into our food, air and water by devious and unexpected paths. A disturbing case in point has to do with the introduction of NTA as a substitute for phosphate in detergents. The toxicity of phosphates to people is very low, but they foster the growth of algae in lakes and rivers. NTA alleviates that problem but creates another. Being a chelating or binding agent, it can lock up metal ions and carry them from metallic surfaces, such as those of water pipes, into the tap water. NTA also may be capable of mobilizing heavy metals, such as mercury, from lake sediments. The possibility of such dangerous intrusion into environmental processes is leading some scientists to conclude that we may be better off not replacing phosphates." Fancy that! We are supposed to have eutrophication of lakes from phosphates as the alternative, to the means of seeking to stop the use of phosphates. "Concern for the protection of the environmental quality is no reason to replace a relatively defined and otherwise controllable ecological problem by potential hazards to human health of undefined dimensions. We may well be jumping from an ecological frying pan into a toxicological fire. Another unexpected hazard, transformation of a metal into a form much more dangerous than its elemental state, is illustrated by this seemingly sudden emergence of methyl mercury as a potential threat to public health. The mad-hatters of yesterday suffered mental instability and tremors as a result of inhaling vapours from methyl mercury, used in processing fur and felt. Today's concern about mercury, chiefly, has to do with exposure of the public to organic compounds of mercury in fish and other foods. Among these organic compounds, methyl mercury is the worst offender because it can penetrate biological barriers with great ease. Reaching the brain, it can cause insidious damage that may not show up for months or years. Now this methyl mercury danger has come out in Japan. Starting in 1953, they found more than a hundred people had died or suffered serious neurological damage after eating mercury-contaminated fish." And, here, fish is one of the staple diets of this Province, one that we want to protect and foster because, more and more, as the population grows, we are going to have to turn to the sea for help in keeping our population alive.

I say that it's time that a serious, a really serious, effort was made by Government in British Columbia to monitor, so we know what's happening in the atmosphere, to monitor the rain and the snow and the water and the rivers and the lakes and the fish. But we're not doing the job. The Budget makes no real provision for monitoring. Where we once had a place like Ocean Falls, remote, far up the Coast, or Powell River, still remote from really settled areas, today, the whole Province is now spotted with pulp mills that belch their effluent out. Those pulp mills are not immune to the poisons that I'm talking about. It's getting better but, you know, we're lucky if we survive. Quoting again on this subject, on the long-littered past of clean air and water: "Stopping industrial waste at the source would be economically advantageous. Some materials might be recovered and reused and beneficial from the standpoint of public health, as well. To take one example, indiscriminate discharge of compounds of mercury, used in production of caustic soda and chlorine and in other processes, has created a public health hazard that is only now, being recognized in the United States and Canada. Analobes, micro-organisms that live without free oxygen, break the compounds down into poisonous methyl mercury which passes from organism to organism through food change to fish and man. In Japan, episodes of poisoning from eating fish that contain mercury go back to the early 1950's. Just this year United States and Canadian scientists began to detect high mercury concentrations in the fish taken from various lakes and streams. Mercury is only one of many kinds of harmful substances that man is discharging into the environment and, to cope with their combined accumulative effects, will take much more than just tinkering, even expensive tinkering. Above all, it will take a lot of thought. Efforts to remedy environmental ills are often lacking in imagination and perspective. It is not enough to deal with this or that pollution problem on the piecemeal, short-run basis. We must consider the complex inter-action of a myriad of pollutants and their long-run impact on the web of life, and undertake co-ordinated systematic remedies. Unless we think more about the future, the future will turn out to be more polluted than the present."

I just want to point out, bringing that right to home, in Penticton, right now, there is a new tertiary treatment plant being built to combat the use of phosphates getting into the waters of Skaha Lake. This tertiary treatment plant is for the partial removal of nutrients in municipal wastes and it will be tried out in Penticton, this year (interruption). No, I'll explain what it's about, so you can see what I'm talking about. "Construction is now under way on a $400,000 renovation programme for the city's activated sludge plant, which is expected to result in 90 per cent removal of phosphates from the city's effluent, according to city engineer J.M. Hamilton. Work on the plant is expected to be completed before January 1st of next year." Now, that was

[ Page 397 ]

October, 1970. This article is in the Water and Pollution Control magazine. "Although Penticton's new treatment plant has been compared with the reclamation project on Lake Tahoe on the California-Nevada border, there are striking differences. Both projects have sought to remove nutrients from the effluent as a means of arresting eutrophication. Both Penticton and Tahoe have had a vested interest in keeping the lakes clean because of their recreational value. The Tahoe experiment cost $18 million." The one in Penticton is $400,000. I don't know how they are going to work out but I want to point out one thing. That, if they are going to be faced with the problem that I was mentioning earlier, of getting rid of the phosphates by putting chemicals into the treatment centre, then, we are going to have real trouble — if you read the report that I was just reading from to the House. I think that that should be studied by the Minister of Health. I think he should get in touch with those people and make sure what the consequences of this type of treatment will be on Lake Skaha and the Okanagan.

In my own area, in Burnaby, we are quite concerned about what is happening there, in regard to the industrial and sewage contamination of Stiff Creek and the Burnet River and Deer Creek. As you know, the Burnaby Lake was to be designated as a park area for the lower regional park and we're hoping that the lake will be available, with the help from this Government and some from the lower mainland regional authorities, for development in a natural setting. But to do that, there has to be a lot of rectification of the pollution that exists along what were once pleasant streams where fish could be caught, which have now degenerated to the point that these streams are not safe for man or fish.

Looking at the industrial and sewage waste there, it is evident that quite a number of industries are dumping into that water system. I have a list of them here. I think I'll deal with it, later, in the particular estimates from the Minister of Health. But you get Canadian Forest Products Mill there, dumping into the Burnet system. You've got Domtar, Seagram's Distillery, Crain Potteries. When you look at Bordar Chemicals that makes rosins and so on, all this stuff is going into our water system, where we are expected to have recreation, where we're expected to hold the next summer games. I can't see athletes swimming in that lake, unless something's done by the authorities and the Pollution Control Board. When you look at the Pollution Control Board, they are not prepared to talk to the public about their findings. They are not prepared to talk to the public about what they are doing. They expect it all to be held in a sort of a mysterious wonder world, where the public is never told. If you don't like something that's going on, you're supposed to go to them. You have to prove that there is something wrong, instead of the onus being put on the polluters to prove that they should have a permit and that everything is right. This pollution control legislation has the whole thing turned around. It is totally ridiculous. Why should a man be entitled to pour his poisons into the river or the stream? Why should he? Why has he the right to contaminate the earth with all the industrial waste? Who gives him that right? This Government? Surely, the onus should be on him, before an industry is started, to prove that he will not harm the environment.

One thing they have done in the United States, in many States, in Maine, Wisconsin, Washington, Minnesota, just to name a few States, they have come around to the realization that the citizen should be armed with the right to stop pollution by laws that say he has a right to stop it. What can you do if you are a citizen in this Province? Sue the polluter or nuisance? You have no way of succeeding, unless you are directly affected by being right next door to the pollution. If you are a citizen and you want to stop pollution, you can't go to Court. But, in the United States, they have passed laws, now, that any citizen or any groups of citizens can stop this kind of poisoning of the world, wherever it exists, so that the industry must clean up or be closed by the Courts. I think that's what we have to think about here — whether this Government and this Pollution Control Board are not prepared to police the polluters…they don't appear to be at all interested in policing the polluters. Somebody's got to do it. Why should volunteers always have the duty cast on them at their own expense? Why should volunteers have to fly all the way up to Port Hardy at their own expense, stay wherever they can get accommodation, for a hearing of the Pollution Control Board, which was apparently prepared to grant a license to pollute to the Utah outfit, without studying the matter, itself, on its own research?

AN HON. MEMBER:…pre-ordained by the Premier. There he is, right there.

MR. DOWDING: That's another thing I'll deal with, later on. There is this whole question of auto pollution and what's got to be done about it. He's got to take a brave new look at it and I'll be dealing with that, later. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for North Peace River.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Mr. Speaker, it's nice to stand in my place and take my turn in this Debate. I see that you are in your usual good frame of mind, this afternoon. I was interested in listening to the previous speaker. All I can say is that I acknowledge you, sir, as a master of misinterpretation. I listened and listened, and there were very many of the statements that you made that were taken out of context from somebody else, and explored and exploited and blown up, and, then, given your own twist. So, all I can say is, that it was a speech with about an ounce of fact, and two pounds of fancy. The title was a "Fancy Speech."

Mr. Speaker, I have before me a headline from the Province newspaper. The headline is dated June 20, 1971. That's a little unusual, because the paper for June 20, 1971, has not yet been published. So I'll give this to the editors of the Province when I'm finished with it. But the headline reads: "Ecologists Flee for High Ground." Under that I see, "A team of scientists and their field personnel, working on a ecological study of the Mackenzie delta, abandoned their camp and ran for high ground last night. All their equipment was lost in the flood. Government officials say that last winter's exceptionally heavy snow pack, coupled with the last three days of continuous rainfall, has caused the whole Mackenzie system to reach almost record high flood levels." The next headline I have is under the dateline of June 22, two days later. The headline: "Town of Peace River Flooded. Many residents fled their homes last night as the waters of the Peace continued to rise. The mayor, after an emergency council meeting, wired Dr. Shrum of B.C. Hydro, asking him to shut down at least three generators, thereby reducing the volume of water until after the flood crest had been passed. Weather office officials predict this will be in three days. The

[ Page 398 ]

mayor said, 'Better the residents of Vancouver have a brown-out, than to flood my town off the map."'

Mr. Speaker, people may laugh at this but it could happen. It could very well happen this year because we have had, in the whole northern part of British Columbia, the heaviest snowfall that we've had in many, many years, probably, in about ten years. If you combine that heavy snowfall, which hasn't dissipated at all yet, everything that has come down is still there, if you combine that, in the spring, with heavy rains in June, regardless of the effect the dam at Portage Mountain has on the upper reaches of the Peace, we could very well have a flood condition that would again flood the whole Mackenzie delta area. We could have a flood condition that could be detrimental to the town of Peace River and, instead of suing B.C. Hydro, they'd be asking them for help to solve their problems. And it could happen.

Mr. Speaker, I'd also like to speak a moment about another matter with regard to flooding and that is an article that appeared, last night, in the newspaper. The article says, "Skagit Flooding Backed by Hope Board of Trade." It's quite an interesting little article, not very long but it does indicate that the Board of Trade of the city of Hope, rather than fly into this argument about flooding Skagit, did a comprehensive survey which covered a period of four months. The survey, after it was completed and they had all the facts before them, they decided that this was not such a bad idea and they had the courage to get up and say so. Now, I'm no authority on the Skagit Valley. I'm not referring to any motion. I'm no authority on the Skagit Valley. But, I do say, Mr. Speaker, that the Hope Chamber of Commerce is to be congratulated for taking a stand. Nothing more. They made their statement and they took a stand. They are to be congratulated for that because, in this day and age, very few people are prepared to do that (interruption) No, not at all. Mr. Speaker, I have some knowledge of the misinterpretation and the misrepresentation that goes on with regard to areas that have been flooded, because I live in the area where the Portage Mountain Dam is at and I have seen the result of telecasts, and newscasts, saying what a holocaust that lake is going to be. True, I agree that when it was first flooded it was a very great mess, unpleasant to look at, unsightly (interruption). But, just a moment, sir. If you had followed the progress of that particular project the way I have, you would see that, today, the reservoir behind that lake couldn't be compared with the condition of it, two years ago, there's been such a great improvement. In less than, I would think, another three years, three to five, it will be one of the greatest inland bodies of water for recreational purposes in all of British Columbia and in all of western Canada. It is a tremendous body of water, right now (interruption). You can't, right now. I'm saying in a few years' time, Mr. Member, if you were listening. I agree, you shouldn't go on that reservoir, right now, until they can get it completely clean. But when it's done, it will be a tremendous recreational resource. Right now, Mr. Speaker (interruption), I'll tell you what time, Mr. Speaker, right at the moment. You can go into the reservoir into the…no, not a 300 ft. boat…into the streams that run into the lake and, this year, many of the sportsmen from that area took rainbow trout anywhere from 3 to 5 lbs. in size. These same streams, that we fished a few years ago when they were just running into the Peace River, produced rainbow trout never larger than one pound or a pound and a half. These streams now produce rainbow trout running from 3 to 5 lbs. They are being taken out of that lake right now (interruption). Fly fishing or small spinners.

Mr. Speaker, there has been an attempt, I think, by the Leader of the Opposition to play down the development of the north. He made a trip up that way this year, I guess, although I didn't see him in Fort St. John. It was a very fast trip and, so, after making a very fast trip through the area, he became another one of the ten-minute experts who we have to deal with. Everything that he saw was terrible. There was no progress taking place in the north, according to his statements. I would like to spend just a few minutes talking about a few of the things that are going on right now.

For instance, the town of Chetwynd. Sure, they have a problem, that they are overcoming with regard to housing for native people. They are making a genuine attempt to overcome it by creating a subdivision, especially for those people, by getting a low-cost housing project going. There's also the prospects of a very large coal mine, a few miles from Chetwynd, and they are gearing up for that. He called it a shack town. He couldn't be further from right. He mentioned Hudson Hope and said that the place was collapsing and falling apart, mainly, because of the reduction in the work force. Certainly, there has been a reduction in the work force up there but, also, there has been a great increase in the tourist industry into that area. There is a prospect of a very large coal mine. It's being actively looked at by a firm of consultants, engineers and the local people, Mr. Speaker, have sunk a considerable amount of their own money into a survey to determine just how feasible this coal mine will be. It looks good on paper, the financing is being arranged and this is another one of the projects that could be off and running before long. So there is a tremendous amount of development taking place in the north.

Fort Nelson is a town that's gearing to receive the benefits of the rail extension which is being pushed northward. It already is a centre servicing a tremendously large area. Its population will grow by leaps and bounds in the next few years and, I think, it's good to see that happen.

I'd like to spend a few minutes if I may, Mr. Speaker, talking about the Budget, with respect to the Department of Highways. I see that there is a slight increase in the amount of money that will be allocated for highways this year — $8 million, if I am correct. It is interesting to see that, because that's about what I really need to get on top of some of my secondary and market road problems in the north. So, I am sure, he must have allocated that especially for those of us who have a tremendous amount of roads to look after. As a matter of fact, I checked the road register, here, just the other day. All of us talk about roads and road problems, so, I thought I would take a look to see just how many miles of road some of the different constituencies and areas in the Province have that must be serviced.

In Saanich, there are 559 miles of road open that are the responsibility of the B.C. Government. North Vancouver, 608; Chilliwack, 394; Kamloops, 1,235; Kelowna, 603; in the Nelson area, the Minister's own area, 601; but, in Fort St. John, 855. So, if you go on the basis of the number of miles of road that we have to service in relation to some of the other areas, it's not much wonder that I stand in my place in this House and tell you I have highway problems till they are coming out of my ears.

I'm also happy to see the allocation of $15 million for parks and a parks programme in the Province. I'm sure the Honourable Minister is going to put this to good use. I would like to know, though, if, perhaps, the whole $15 million are going to be allocated to, perhaps, two large park projects in

[ Page 399 ]

the Province, such as Long Beach and Cypress Bowl. Perhaps, he would take my suggestion, which would be to develop a hundred smaller projects and put $150,000 into each one of them. I would think that that would be a better way to handle the matter, or, if he can't do that, put half of that money into some of those major projects and the other half into some smaller projects within the Province of British Columbia throughout the whole area.

May I comment for a few minutes on the use of snowmobiles in the Province? You know, I spoke on this matter, last year, in the House. At that time, I suggested we needed legislation. I'm on my feet today to reaffirm that fact. There was a mention of it in the Throne Speech Debate and I hope the Minister does come in with legislation, in this respect because it is creating a problem, not only in the control of snowmobiles used in the areas where they can rightfully be used, but also it's creating a problem of a nuisance effect in organized communities throughout the Province. Not too many people appreciate having their next-door neighbour wind up a snowmobile at ten, eleven, or twelve o'clock at night, and this is being done thoughtlessly by some people. Not too many people appreciate having a snowmobile roaring around on the streets of a town or a city, and this is being done. A lot of young people are using these machines, which now can reach speeds of 80 miles per hour. They are far too young, really, to be handling a machine that is that dangerous. Some of them… I've seen children 10 and 12 years old, on a machine by themselves. This isn't right, Mr. Speaker, those machines were never built for children to handle. Yet, parents, for some reason, allow their children to use those machines. I don't think we can legislate against children using the machines if their parents, themselves, won't look after them. We can put something in legislation over the control of snowmobiles, but we can't legislate parents into looking after their children the way they should. But it's about time that people who own these machines realize that they can be as dangerous as any type of motor-driven vehicle that we use today. They are killing people, today, on snowmobiles. There are just too many accidents. I think we need legislation to control them and I think we need not only legislation but we need people who have a more genuine concern about the use of those machines, themselves, or when their families are using them.

Mr. Speaker, the Members of the House have all been circulated with a notation that they would be allowed to bring student groups into the gallery this year and I think this is a good thing. I, myself, have had the pleasure of introducing students to this House on two occasions in the last two years. Those students travelled a long way to get here and I know they enjoyed their stay in Victoria. This year, however, I thought I would like to tell you about a special Centennial project that the high school in Fort St. John is planning. I'll read from a letter I just received from the supervising principal of North Peace Secondary School, because I think it is something worth sharing with the Members of this House. He refers to the legislative trip and says, "We'll not be coming down this year. Instead, we are trying to arrange a one-day flight around the Province for approximately ninety students as a Centennial event. On this trip, we will hope to develop history and geography of our Province by flying over, around and near historical and geographical points of interest. Essentially, we plan to leave Fort St. John, fly down the Rocky Mountain trench, over Mica Dam to Kimberley and Cranbrook, thence west over the southern part of B.C. to Vancouver and, after a meal stop, up the coast to Skagway, Whitehorse and back to Fort St. John." I think it is a tremendous project and it's going to cost the students in the neighbourhood of $100 a piece to charter this aircraft. They are working hard on the problem of trying to raise the money. I would hope that the Provincial Secretary, who is not in his place, and the Minister of Finance, would hear my plea, if later on this year, I have to come to them ask them to help bail out the students and make a grant, not a large one, in order to see that these students have an opportunity to take a trip, which they probably will never repeat in their lifetime.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to spend a few minutes talking about a part of Canada, which is relatively unknown to the majority of our population. It is called the Green North and it covers an area of Canada running from Newfoundland through Labrador and Quebec, south of James Bay and then across northwestern Ontario and through Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, where it splits into three parts. One leg goes into the Northwest Territories, up to the Mackenzie River Valley to the Arctic Ocean at Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk; another into the Yukon Territory; and a third into the Prince Rupert sector of British Columbia. It is called the mid-Canada development corridor. It is really the boreal forest area of Canada, one which many experts refer to as the future mining-hydro-forestry and petroleum empire of this continent.

Today, I wish to confine my remarks to that area in British Columbia, which runs from Prince Rupert through Prince George to the Alberta boundary and, hence, north to the top of the Province. This is our part of the area which we classify as the Green North. The question most often asked me is this one: Should it be developed? The truth is, most of the area has been under development for years. Firstly, by individuals and, often, in a random fashion. Later, by groups and small companies, who had the initiative and the fortitude to take high risks and gamble everything they owned in the hope that they would come out of the venture with a reasonable income. This is an area which I am more than a little familiar with because I live in it. Conversely, it is also an area few Members of this House and an equally small number of residents of southern British Columbia, have ever really visited or know much about. Many people still consider northern B.C. to be a cold, desolate, inhospitable land, inhabited by a few white people and, according to a CBC television programme, a tribe of Indians losing their traditional hunting grounds because of the rising waters of Williston Lake.

Both concepts, of course, are completely false. Anyone who has spent part of his life in the Prairie regions of Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba, immediately realize that weather conditions and life, generally, is comparable and compatible with what he has experienced before in those areas of Canada.

To some extent, those of us living in northern B.C. must accept part of the blame for these uninformed opinions. We, apparently, do not sell our story often enough, or tell it well enough, or tell it to sufficient people to convince them differently. This is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, for, in my opinion, British Columbians, including all the recent immigrants to this Province have one of two choices, really. Either they will join with those people willing to take some risks, in order to accomplish goals in life which are not readily available to individuals, today, and will join in the ever-increasing number of people occupying the growth centres of north and northeastern British Columbia, or they will

[ Page 400 ]

become part of an ever-increasing population in the lower mainland areas of this Province, a population whose density soon will become such that it will suffocate us in our own pollution. It is a serious problem. You cannot continue to pile ever-increasing numbers of people into the area between Hope and the sea, without multiplying many times your social, psychological and economic problems, which are beyond your capacity to deal with. We will add another two million people to our population well before the turn of the century. As a matter of fact, by the turn of the century, it is estimated that our population will be in excess of eight million. I hope that, for the benefit of ourselves and the children who will follow us, that density of population is spread out into the whole length and breadth of this Province, spread out in 20 cities, each with a population of 100,000.

The undeveloped areas of this Province are rich in minerals, forest products, gas, petroleum resources, we have water in abundance. It will be with improved transportation facilities, a tourist's paradise. The climate is acceptable for working and living conditions and, I think, I can attest to that. The terrain is accessible and suitable for development. The resources are abundant and well distributed. Many settlements upon which we could build modern cities already exist. North and south transportation routes already exist in most of the Province. One of the only missing links, not presently on the planning boards or under construction, is a road from Fort Nelson to Fort Simpson. Believe me, Mr. Speaker, when I say this is a matter that I am working particularly hard on.

All we need are people, capital, foresight and initiative to develop the greatest Province in all of Canada. This should be our goal for Centennial Year. What better way could we honour the pioneers of British Columbia than to set our sights on developing the whole Province, not just the southern section? This is why, Mr. Speaker, I make no apologies for placing upon the Order Paper the motion I did, concerning regional disparities, and I completely and irrevocably reject as just so much claptrap the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition, when he said B.C. was negligent in their duties by asking for Federal aid in development of these great resource areas.

The development of northern British Columbia, and for that matter, all the great Green North, should be part of the National development policy. The development should be a total Canadian undertaking, financed by both public and private funds. We should not accept anything less. Mr. Speaker, we are not a bunch of carpetbaggers going to the National Government, hat in hand, asking for a hand-out. We are part of a great Nation, whose greatest concern at this time is to find jobs for unemployed people, and we want part of the money back that we, at the present, distribute to Ottawa.

You do not provide jobs by increasing the number of welfare recipients. You do not provide jobs by increasing the amount of money that we dedicate to welfare purposes. You create jobs by developing our natural resources, by creating instant towns, with all the attendant services and vocations, where a few years ago there was nothing. Look at the Budget. The blueprint for a prosperous British Columbia in the next decade and, really, for many decades to come, lies in the map shown on page 13. This Government's contributions are told many times over, in pictorial form, starting with the cover and continuing through the full 56 pages of the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, living in northern British Columbia is just as normal as purposeful minds and competent hands can make it. True, we need planned, co-ordinated and orderly action. If there ever were to be a Centennial project, worthy of testing the metal of every British Columbian, this is it.

It grieves me, Mr. Speaker, when I look around and see many British Columbians too busy trying to keep up with the Americans, or too busy trying to imitate the big city slickers, to realize that they have, within their grasp, the greatest opportunity left in the Western Hemisphere. The challenge is there and so is the opportunity. But who are the people that are, really, looking at it with more and more dedication? I'll tell you who it is. It's not our fellow Canadians, it's not British Columbians. It's people from across the line, it's the Americans, the same people we are trying to imitate, today. They realize the type of opportunity that still exists in northern B.C., at this time. We have no one to blame but ourselves if, through our ignorance and our lethargy, we sit on our hands while our neighbours to the south take full advantage of the opportunities available, opportunities available to every man who has the guts to grasp them. They are there.

Northern B.C. residents are fully aware of the development policies of the Honourable Premier and the Members of this Cabinet. They are not deceived by the waffling and the smokescreens that are thrown up by the Members of the official Opposition or the Members of the Liberal rump group across the House. They are not deceived by that. They know and applaud the fact that the policies of this Government have always been predicated on the development of all of British Columbia, not just a small section of it. But, today, more than ever before, the residents of northern British Columbia have their eyes pointed to the south. They are looking to the south, particularly to the city of Vancouver, Mr. Member, to the businessmen of the city of Vancouver, to the industrialists of the city of Vancouver, to the financial institutions of the city of Vancouver, to the labour unions concentrated in the city of Vancouver, and to the everyday citizens of this great city. The question they are all asking is this one, sir: Where do you stand on northern development? You either support it or suppress it. You are either for it or against it.

Mr. Speaker, in this respect we are not prepared to accept halfway measures. We are looking for more than lip service from the combined business acumen of the greatest city of western Canada. We hope for, we look for and we expect that, with the help of people from the lower mainland, we will be able to build British Columbia into the greatest Province in all of Canada. And that, Mr. Speaker, should be the Centennial project of every British Columbian. Thank you.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable the Minister of Agriculture.

HON. C.M. SHELFORD (Omineca): Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to have this opportunity this afternoon. I'm sorry to say, first of all, that there isn't an apple on your desk for your apple a day,…. I don't want to see everyone leave at once but there is an apple for everyone in the Sergeant-at-Arm's room. I hope every Member will do as much as I've done to promote the apple industry in this Province. I hope you will, when you move around your constituency, rather than talking about how bad this Government is, you would just do a little promoting and try and sell some of our products. You can come up into my area any day you like. We like you up there because you make…no better time

[ Page 401 ]

than summer to come up…best place in British Columbia to live in the summertime. We welcome anyone to come up there, whether it be summer or winter.

I was interested in what my friend from Cowichan-Malahat had to say yesterday and I'm sorry he isn't in his place. He showed a tremendous lack of imagination and I suppose that's the reason why he never was Premier of this Province, because of his lack of imagination. When he was discussing, in answer to my friend the Minister of Mines, multi-use, he called over and said, "What else can you use on land from a strip mine?" I think that was his correct statement and I would refer him to an article in the Colonist of February 2, where it says, "Apples Coming from A Coal Mine." It goes on to say, "Today some of the juiciest apples in the supermarkets may come from a coal mine, everything from schools and $500,000 homes to golf courses and State parks now occupy abandoned strip mines in various areas of the U.S." Apparently, it is quite possible to grow…(interruption). You'll never grow them up in your area. But it does point out that one of the nicest racetracks in the U.S. was developed from a strip mine. We only need to look at Butchart Gardens, if you think that nothing can be done from an old mine. You all say, "So what's a hundred million dollars?"

Another point and I don't want to take too much time…

MR. SPEAKER: The Member from Vancouver East is not in his place.

MR. SHELFORD: If he were in his place, Mr. Speaker, he would not be in this House. He'll say that about me. The only other point I want to bring up, Mr. Speaker, which I took exception to this afternoon, was the remark by the Honourable Member from Burnaby-Edmonds, when he was criticizing the Member from Delta for his statement about pushing vocational schools and technical schools, which are doing a mighty fine job. He went on to say that he didn't think these people in the vocational-technical schools, by pushing them this way, would become people. They would just end up as nuts and bolts in the machine for scientists. Now, I think this is an insult to every person in this Province who hasn't got a degree and I would expect him, the next time he's on his feet, to apologize to those people in this Province.

I think most of us here, certainly, the majority, of us will agree that this is a wonderful Budget for the people of British Columbia, about which I will have more to say later on.

Now, although there were many bright spots in the agricultural industry, during the past year, naturally, there were also some dark ones besides. It is my intention, today, to report to you on the important developments, during the past year, so that you will have as clear a picture as possible of the achievements of the Department of Agriculture in this Province. In 1970, the gross farm cash receipts for sales in British Columbia were $206 million, just up slightly from the previous year, when it was just over $200 million.

No doubt, a great deal of this increase, or all of it, will be eaten up by inflationary trends, higher costs, etc., for those things the farmers have to buy. The increase was mainly brought about by better sales of tree fruit, even though it is no way near as good as we want to see it — grapes and berries, and in the grain industry in the Peace River region.

One of the most noticeable things to which we should draw your attention, I think, in the Agricultural industry this year, is the report by the Canadian Agricultural Task Force, a Force appointed about two years ago to analyze the problems of Canadian agriculture and make recommendations to the Federal Government for improvements. British Columbia does not agree with all the recommendations made. Because of this, this department, together with organized farm groups in this Province, made a strong presentation at the Second Canadian Agricultural Congress in Ottawa. British Columbia was the only Province in Canada to make a joint presentation with its organized farm groups. It's the first time we've ever gone to Ottawa, with complete cooperation from all farm groups in this Province, and agreed on one presentation for all of us.

We made it known that we were concerned about the possible loss of Federal feed freight assistance, without some other compensating measure. Removal of feed freight assistance in British Columbia would leave the livestock and poultry industries, as well as the feed grain industry, in a very, very difficult position. We also expressed concern about the apparent trend in Federal thinking, which would allow Canada to become a dumping ground for low-priced surplus agricultural commodities from other countries. This Province, because it is close to the large food-producing areas in the western United States and Mexico, is particularly vulnerable to the dumping of these products.

I am certainly not opposed to foreign money being invested in Canada but, certainly, there are problems in this area. I'll go on to the report, and this is what the Task Force has to say. It's not what I'm saying, this is the Task Force statement. The Task Force estimated that over 70 per cent of the annual Canadian pack of fruits and vegetables is processed in foreign-owned processing plants located in this country. The report goes on to say that the parent companies of some of these firms appear reluctant to use, in Canada, the advanced machinery and technology used in their foreign plants, and service foreign sales, mainly, from their own plants. These are very serious findings and I believe that no more time should be lost in launching a thorough investigation as a follow-up to this Task Force recommendation.

Now, we've already asked, during the second Congress, that the Federal Government carry on and find out just what is going on and we'll follow it up, later on, by letters on the same subject.

The horticulture and dairy processing industries in British Columbia have been involved in this foreign take-over to some extent. We urge, too, that a National policy be developed to reverse this trend. There is no point in developing foreign markets if plants can be sold out, or left inefficient and markets serviced by their parent companies in other countries. This is just not good enough.

I suggested to the Congress that Canada has got to take some bold steps to solve its agricultural marketing problems. I called on the Government of Canada to establish a producer export development corporation of not less than one billion dollars, funded and managed by the Bank of Canada, with one director appointed by each Province. This corporation would encourage agricultural and forestry development, or any other development, which is not presently accommodated by existing financing methods. The purpose of the fund would be to make it possible for producer organizations to obtain money for export development. With low-interest money available, producer groups could compete in establishing long-term contractual arrangements with developed countries or even underdeveloped countries, thus doing away with the need for many subsidy payments by the

[ Page 402 ]

National Government and adding incentives that will help get the economy moving again. Without this, Canada can only expect to slip further back in the marketing of agricultural products. I think this is the most important thing that Canada, as a Nation, should face up to this year, that is, to try to find better ways to compete, as I mentioned earlier in my speech, with those from subsidized areas of the Common Market. We have to find ways where we can compete with this. Our producers can compete with any grower anywhere, I'm quite convinced. But they can't do it when others are subsidized as they are at the present time.

During the year just ended, 22 separate projects were approved under the joint Federal-Provincial ARDA agreement, representing a total commitment of slightly in excess of $6.7 million. Since the beginning of ARDA activities in British Columbia, in 1963, a total of 169 projects has been approved under the ARDA programme up until December 31, 1970. The estimated total cost committed for these projects amounts to approximately $36.7 million.

The staff of my department has been involved, along with other departments, in multiple land-use studies in the Maxan Lake area in the Bulkley Valley. There are also further areas to be studied and we hope to do a project in the east Kootenays. A committee representing agriculture, forestry, fish, wildlife, lands and parks, was established during the year to determine the feasibility of using the Maxan Lake area as a multiresource-use research site. The approximate area of this is around 3,500 to 4,000 acres. We're hopeful of proving, here, that we can have true multi-use, as some very small experiments have shown that, with proper spacing in the different types of grasses planted, we can get an increase of wood production of up to 40 per cent and further grass production of up to 200 per cent. Now, we hope we can prove this on a large scale so that it will become a general practice through the grazing forest areas of British Columbia. I'm quite hopeful of this project, because I believe it is the first one that has ever been tried anywhere in North America on a large scale. They have done very tiny ones down in the States and I had an opportunity to visit one such project. I must say that's where the idea came from. It came from our friends across the line.

Agricultural extension activities among Indian people have increased substantially and some early progress can be reported. A special project of assistance to the Vancouver Island–Cowichan Indian band was initiated in co-operation with the Canada Department of Agriculture. A comprehensive land-use plan for some two hundred acres of reserved land was developed. This assistance is expected to continue, as required, in the future. Among other departmental activities with Indian bands are: a workshop on principles of farm production was held in the Merritt area; staff of the department supervised the planting of agricultural crops for the Deadman Creek Indian band at Savona; proposals were developed for a beef cattle operation on the Upper Nicola Indian Reserve; and training course on Christmas tree farming was conducted at Canoe Creek. We're quite hopeful that co-operative efforts among the bands of Indians, in some of these areas, can be very successful. We're also working on another possibility up in the Speaker's riding, up in Prince Rupert. A ranch management course was conducted for Indians in the Chilcotin area.

It is expected that these activities will accelerate. Already, discussions are under way with the National Government to clear the way for extension of land clearing assistance to Indians in this Province. This is something that I think is required and it looks very hopeful that we will reach an agreement with our National Government in this regard.

Soil survey crews of this department surveyed on 75,000 acres and did reconnaissance soil surveys on 6,900,000 acres. Agricultural capability ratings were made on 6,500,000 acres and forestry capability ratings on over 12 million acres. Approximately 200,000 acres of agricultural land were cleared and an additional 100,000 acres of land broken under the terms of the Farmers' Land Clearing Assistance Act. Now, that is a point where we were criticized in Ottawa, because we still maintain an Agricultural Land Clearing Assistance Act. They claim that, with the surplus land, as they call it, in Canada, we shouldn't be trying to put more land into production. Now, I certainly don't subscribe to those in the Department of Economics in Ottawa, who recommend that 300,000 farmers should be taken off the land in Canada. This is, certainly, a step backwards and I, certainly, for one, don't want to be any part of such a move. No doubt, progress in the future won't be based so much on dollars as it will on a comfortable environment for people in which to live.

On the subject of farm machinery, we are getting tired of waiting for the Barber Royal Commission Report on machinery to be published. This is the final report. As you know, one report came out, then the small second one, and you'd almost wonder whether someone had strangled Dr. Barber, because the third report hasn't been published. I hope it will recommend a single National farm machinery policy for Canada. I also hope it will make farm machinery manufacturers responsible for establishing and maintaining a supply of replacement parts and servicing centres in all of the major areas of crop and livestock production. I hope, too, that it will bring about some standardization in design of farm equipment, as well as a minimum change in the design from year to year. There is no reason whatsoever why models of farm tractors should be changed every year so that the farmers of this Nation…a part won't fit from one year to the next. We will ask the Federal Government to grant import permits to only those companies that give our producers a fair deal with our competitors. This is one of the sore points in the farm communities, especially in Ontario, where the tractors coming out of the same plants, doing the same job, and they have to pay twice as much for them as their competitors would in the Common Market countries or elsewhere.

Marketing activities were very brisk in the 1970's. I don't think I need spend too much time, because all of you have heard a great deal about the chicken and egg war in Canada. One thing we are asking the National Government in their Bill 176, which is before the House of Commons at the present time, is that, for goodness sake, leave the producer in control of his own agency. As far as the council is concerned that controls those agencies, we think it is proper that there should be Order-in-Council appointments. But there is a lot of fuzzy thinking across Canada, where they think that the farmers are not businessmen and they can't run their own businesses. If they can't, there is no question but that they will go out of business. I don't think Government appointing people to run these agencies will solve their problems at all. I pointed out, when I was in Ottawa, that I was quite confident that the farmers could make enough mistakes of their own, without an assist from the Federal Government.

The establishment, in 1970, of the British Columbia Grape Marketing Board brought to ten the number of such commodity marketing boards now operating in this Province.

[ Page 403 ]

It has brought an increased return to the producer. I notice there are some interesting articles written about British Columbia wine. I'm sorry that so many articles in Canada have knocked British Columbia wine because, in my experience, we do turn out some mighty fine products. I test them myself, once in a while. One thing that we noticed in most articles, they refer to the chemicals used in British Columbia wines. This is an interesting statement by Dr. Bowen. He says, "….that the loose usage of the word, 'chemicals' appears in many writings concerning North American wines." No doubt, sulphur dioxide is the chemical referred to. In fact, our industry uses much less than, for example, the French wines. They think that's where the taste of the French wines come from, because they do use more of these chemicals than they do in Canada. He goes on to say that they use levels up to 2 to 400 parts per million, whereas in British Columbia it's only less than 100 parts per million. I think our formula is really quite good. If you are a real expert on wines, and I started juggling a few bottles of our produced wines and French wines, I'm afraid you'd flunk out in your tests. An awful lot do, because it has been tried. I think our products are very good. I'll admit they could be improved, but whose can't? (Interruption.) That's because a lot of people are a little bit snobbish and they think they want to have an imported wine as it's better. They tell me our wines are the same as in Japan.

Milk production in British Columbia increased by 3.5 per cent, in 1970, to an estimated 127 million lbs.

British Columbia beef cattle industry enjoyed a good year in 1970. I would say it had one of the best since 1951. I was interested to note in the paper this morning that the cost-of-living index was up, due to the cost of food. I'm getting in trouble here…but it is interesting to note, other than beef, they are the only ones that are up this year. The rest are like chickens, for instance, they have dropped from 25 cents down to 21 cents this year, to the producer.

British Columbia cattle industry, as I said, did the best of all. The industry in the interior of the Province is primarily composed of cow-calf operations, with the great bulk of the calves being sold to Alberta, Ontario and the United States, for finishing in feed lots. The peak year for these exports was 1969, when 122,700 head entered the Prairies to help eat up some of their grain surplus. There was a slight drop in 1970 and this was due to more farmers keeping a few more of their female animals for breeding stock. It dropped to 118,000. Good prices were received for calves and have been of great benefit to the beef ranches. Large feed lots are not likely to be established in British Columbia until grain, at a reasonable price, can be guaranteed on a long-term basis. That's why we're so concerned about the feed freight assistance policy. No one would want to put too much money into a feed lot operation if, in the next year, it is recommended by the Task Force…in fact, they recommended August 1, this year…but if it were cut off next August, and a person had invested a lot of money, they would stand a chance to lose a fair amount.

A special project of interest to both beef and grain producers is under way in the Peace River area in co-operation with the Dawson Creek Vocational School. I think these schools do a mighty fine job and I think we should all pay tribute to what they do. As I mentioned before, I was shocked at what the Member from Burnaby-Edmonds had to say about it. This is a beef feeding demonstration project using high moisture barley. The main objective is to demonstrate the value of feeding this type of barley ration in relation to the standard dry-type feed. This demonstration has stimulated interest in cattle feeding in the Peace River and, if successful, as expected, will have an added benefit for the grain growers and the creation of a potential use of "wet" grain for livestock feed. You don't even have to dry it, so, if you get a wet year, you can put it into your silo, feed it to the cattle and they, apparently, we think, will do better. So far the experiment is working excellently. We're very hopeful, in the case of a wet year, they will be able to put it into silos and they won't lose grain like they have in the past. We're very pleased with the cooperation, as I say, received from the vocational school and also the Federal Beaverlodge Research Station, just inside Alberta, because, naturally, they are interested in research for the rest of Canada, too.

I am sorry to report that, due to the world overproduction and a tightening of money, the mink rancher is having a very difficult time, and quite a number…you had better go out and buy your wife a mink coat to help them out.

One of the programmes we were working on this year was knapweed control and the knapweed has already established itself in the Kamloops, Okanagan and Boundary regions, and small plots appeared in the Kootenays this year. Now, we took steps to control those small plots in the Kootenays and I'm happy to report that it was very, very successful. We hope that we can keep this weed out of the Kootenay area. Now, one of problems that seriously hampered this programme was the fact that the tordon material which we used, is a very expensive material and it's too expensive for farmers, for instance, in various large areas to use this material… They'd likely get in trouble, anyway, now (interruption). We tried to get tordon at a better price. Through trade and industry and other channels, we tried to get tordon from Japan. This was a failure as it was a subsidiary of Dow Chemical. Then we tried Germany, France, Great Britain, and ran into a blank wall, in all cases. There was no way to get this material, as far as we could find, from any other country. It appears they control the patent rights to this particular chemical.

The horticultural industry had bright spots and also bad spots. Apple production is facing a crisis which, if not dealt with by those in a position to change it, could mean a serious reduction in this multimillion dollar industry. The situation, briefly, is that world production of apples is up sharply. Major producing countries have increased their production to a point where there are too many apples for the present available markets. Sharp increases have occurred in the U.S., France, West Germany, Italy, Australia and South Africa. Most countries are increasing their production, due to technology and such like. New lands are being planted to apples, just across in the State of Washington. The U.S. alone, last year, increased production from 129 million bushels up to 160 million bushels. It could have been a lot higher than that if they had had a good year. I was amazed at all the apple orchards being planted, across the line.

Because no National action has been taken to correct the situation, an apple-producers conference was held in Toronto on January 12 and 13 of this year, to study what action could be taken. The British Columbia apple industry was represented by five growers and two industrial officials, along with two members from the staff of the Department of Agriculture, to find out what could be done.

Now, among the horticultural crops which are imported into British Columbia in quantity, with a value in excess of $1 million, are apples with a value of 1.8 million; grapes, 2.8

[ Page 404 ]

million; strawberries, 1.3 million. Oranges and bananas, of course, valued at over 9.3 million were also imported to compete with our locally-grown fruit. Volume imports of fruit in processed form which entered British Columbia in 1969 were: frozen strawberries, 1.3 million; canned peaches, 1.9 million; mixed canned fruit, 1.6 million.

The main vegetable crops imported included asparagus, 1.3 million; lettuce, 1.7 million; tomatoes, 2.6 million; processed and fresh mushrooms, 2.3 million.

In spite of these pressures from imports, British Columbia growers are increasing their efforts to fight the competition as best they can. Acreages of asparagus have increased quite a bit, because there is a very strong market in this regard. Our lettuce industry, through combined efforts of production and marketing, together with the addition of new vacuum-cooled facilities, has made it possible to ship lettuce, for the first time, into the Prairie markets, into Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary and, this year, for the first time, we hope, for a short period, to ship quite large quantities into Toronto and Montreal. Our lettuce comes on the scene, you might say, at just the right time, when other areas can't send supplies. To the United States, greenhouse tomatoes, we shipped 4,000 crates, and cucumbers, 12,000 crates. Now, lettuce, to the Prairies, which we hadn't shipped until the year before last, was a trial shipment made, we shipped 805,000 cartons, which is a pretty nice bunch of lettuce. Mixed vegetables, we shipped 26,000 cartons. It more or less went mainly into the Seattle-Tacoma area, Los Angeles and such like. We shipped even cauliflower and celery, the other way, for a change.

We have been making advances on many fronts in research and, as I mentioned before, we're quite concerned about the cutbacks at Saanichton, Prince George and Kamloops, and have seen also the Research Station at Smithers lost. As I mentioned before, we are very concerned, especially about the research programmes at Summerland. Research on vegetables in British Columbia has all but been eliminated by our National Government. Federal research functions in British Columbia have been clearly defined for years — the research is the responsibility of the National Government and we do the work, with districts and such like, that help people put that research into practice.

The following table you will find, when you receive my written copy, is a table of the amount of produce that has been imported into Canada. Apples, during the 1960-70, and you'll see a tremendous change. This is why we were quite concerned and took this to our National Government. From Australia, for instance, in 1960, they were exported to Canada 1,548 bushels, or 65,000 lbs. By 1970, they had jumped from 65,000 lbs. to 3,062,000 lbs. Now, South Africa, for instance, didn't send any to Canada until 1963, when they shipped 48,000 lbs. and now they are shipping 7,500,000 lbs. into British Columbia. This is the grand total — in 1960, Canada imported 51,771,000 lbs. of apples and this year, 62 million lbs., which is quite a jump, in that short time.

New pesticide regulations — I believe all of you have read about them. If you want to take a drink of that, you are welcome to go ahead, but you'll have a hard time getting aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor and DDT after March 1, so you'd better get at it pretty quick. One of the things that we are watching very carefully, of course, is the mercury content. Our laboratory equipment, at the present time, is being used just as fully as it can. But we're not getting altogether a clear story on this mercury count and I think anyone that deals with mercury should deal with the whole picture before they go into any of it, because it can be extremely misleading. In the first place, there was no equipment whereby they could test mercury in water, until recently. Second, I would point out that a test was taken, that you have no doubt heard about, up at Pinchi Lake and all H. broke loose. But, since that time, they have tested Cunningham Lake, which is 35 miles over the top of the mountains and not connected in anyway with Pinchi Lake, and the mercury content is actually higher than in Pinchi Lake. Believe me, they've got prospectors running all over the country now, thinking they can find another mercury deposit which, no doubt, there is. There is natural mercury all through that Fort St. James–Pinchi–Takla Lake area. No doubt, there must be natural mercury seeping into those Cunningham, Trembleur, and Pinchi Lakes. We can't argue, it might have come from mines during World War II. I think that anyone that does make a study of mercury should go into it, real deep, to find out what the count is in these lakes where there is no way that they could have got polluted, because Cunningham Lake is one of them (interruption). Cominco, my friend? It is absolutely 100 per cent impossible, to pollute Cunningham Lake. Now, Pinchi, that is possible, but Cunningham Lake,100 per cent impossible. All of my friends, the Indians, up in that country, they look very healthy, too, and they have been living on fish from Cunningham Lake for about two hundred years and, no doubt, there has been a high mercury count during all this time.

Finally, I would like to report on a number of developments in our information services. In co-operation, again, with the beef and dairy cattle industry, this department is participating in the production of a film designed to increase the marketing of the British Columbia cattle in overseas markets. It is expected that this film will show the excellence of our livestock. As I mentioned earlier, they are well accepted anywhere overseas, and various Government and industry programmes surrounding it to show that, when they buy our product, it is going to be a good product. For instance, if they buy a good dairy animal, it will be capable of producing 12,000 lbs. of milk without any problem. This film should be ready for showing in the upcoming Impo-Expo Trade Fair in Vancouver. Sound tracks on this film will be made in Japanese, Korean and two other languages and copies of this film will be available for showing in foreign countries.

I would just like to read a copy of the sales of dairy cattle out of Canada this year, and quite a number of these came from British Columbia. There were 36,159, in total. It is interesting to note that 14,000 of these went to Cuba, 3,900 to Mexico, 1,400 to Korea, 904 to Italy, 587 to Uganda, 335 to Hungary and 310 to Puerto Rico. Recently you will have noticed, and since I was in the Soviet Union, I don't think I should try and take credit for what our trade representatives are doing over there, but, as you notice there is a very good possibility that we will be selling between $4 and $5 million worth of cattle to the Soviet Union this year (interruption). If that's your policy you'd better get up and say so. I also wrote a letter, just about four days ago, suggesting that they buy some dairy cattle from us and, I think, there is quite a good possibility that they will. And…

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you correspond with them'?

MR. SHELFORD: Certainly. I told you my philosophy some time ago, that anyone who is not shooting at you is not

[ Page 405 ]

your enemy and could very well be your friend. As you will note what I said earlier on, I certainly speak in support in this Budget, which will be received very well by the people of the north. My friend from North Peace River covered it very well, I think, as far as the north is concerned, today, especially the increase in highway spending, where I hope to see the completion of a number of projects within my own riding. I'll send a copy to my friend, Wes, when I give him an apple.

I was very pleased to see additional money available for rural power, as we still have many areas yet to service in the rural areas of this Province. Now, when the north is developed, it certainly will bring millions of dollars in revenue to both the Federal and Provincial Governments. The Federal Government will get more than the Provincial Government and it is doing absolutely nothing to get out as far as doing something in the building of the link through the Stewart, which my friend from Atlin, certainly, wants to see completed and so do I, the northern extension of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway, both up to Fort Nelson and up to Dease Lake, or the many forest and mining access roads through other areas of the north, not even, so far, to the Port of Prince Rupert or Kitimat.

The Federal Members of Parliament for British Columbia, I think, should hang their heads in shame for not speaking out for, at least, an assist in the vast development programmes of northern British Columbia, which help every single person in this Province and most Canadians, with the vast revenue which will come from the development of the north.

I toured the PGE extension, north of Fort St. James, and I'm happy to know that my friend who was speaking about the rate of wages for the workers was not correct, which is not news, I suppose. But I was pleased to see that so many Indians were working on this line. I would like to congratulate Mr. Broadbent and all the others responsible for getting these people to work. This should be standard policy for all northern development projects. When I went north, there was a crew of between 30 and 40 Indians, who were working laying steel north of Fort St. James and there was only one white fellow with them. They were running the cranes and the hammers to drive the spikes and, as one of the Indians put it, "We've got this white fellow here, because we want to add a little bit of colour."

I would say here we are celebrating one hundred years in Confederation and, with all of the tremendous strides forward in many ways, it would be difficult to claim that most of the Indians or Eskimos in northern Canada are better off than they were a hundred years ago. That's why it's so nice to see that the Pacific Great Eastern Railway is doing something. This should be standard practice for development in northern areas. The Indian Department, as such, has not had an original idea in a hundred years, even though some of the junior people in that department have done a mighty good job with the antiquated policies of the various Governments, both Liberal and Conservative, that have been in Ottawa since that time. When major projects are approved, I think we should attempt training programmes for the Indians and Eskimos so that they can fit into these development programmes. Both professional groups and unions and I'm not just speaking to one group, I'm speaking to all, both professionals and unions must show some leadership in how the young people, after taking training in universities, technical or vocational schools, can get into these professions or unions so that they can go to work after they take this training. This is one of the reasons why so many young people, very well trained, are unemployed today. I hope the professional groups and unions will tackle this problem, themselves, and find solutions to it, so that these young people, when they come out of school, can get to work and fit into building a better Nation. Otherwise, if this is not done, there is no question that the time will come, and it's already come from some of us northern Members, like the Member from Atlin and myself, there is no question that, if they cannot solve that problem, then, of course, Governments will be called in to do it for them. The native people of northern British Columbia and the Eskimo people, after all, are our founding races, if you want to get down to it. I think we should do our utmost in Canada to bring these people into being part of development. The only way in which they can bring themselves up is when they actually feel part of that development plan. Thank you.

On the motion of the Honourable G. McCarthy, the debate was adjourned to the next sitting of the House.

The Honourable R.R. Loffmark (Minister of Health Services and Hospital Insurance) presented Regulations made pursuant to section 37, Hospital Act, chapter 178, Revised Statutes of British Columbia, 1960.

The House adjourned at 5:44 p.m.