[ Page 1331 ]

CONTENTS

Routine proceedings

An Act for Suits Against the Crown (Bill No. 135) Mr. Gardom.

Introduction and first reading — 1331

Oral Questions

CUPE strike at Prince George. Mr. Morrison — 1331

Government policy on Bill No. 42. Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1332

Ferry cancellations. Ms. Young — 1332

Procedure on Bill No. 42. Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1333

Valleyview appeal. Mr. Fraser — 1334

Instructions regarding Man and Resources meeting. Mr. Schroeder — 1334

Delivery of new buses. Mr. McGeer — 1335

Diphtheria inoculation programme for schools. Mr. McGeer — 1335

Committee of supply: Department of Highways estimates Mr. Dent — 1335 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1357

Mr. Gardom — 1337 Mr. McClelland — 1357

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1338 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1360

Mr. Phillips — 1339 Ms. Sanford — 1360

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1340 Mr. Phillips I — 1360

Mr. Morrison ; — 1340 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1361

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1341 Mr. Chabot — 1361

Mr. Wallace — 1342 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1362

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1343 Mr. Chabot — 1362

Mr. Chabot — 1344 Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1362

Mr. Nunweiler — 1346 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1362

Mr. Williams — 1347 Mr. Curtis — 1363

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1347 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1363

Mr. Fraser — 1349 Mr. Curtis — 1363

Mr. McGeer — 1349 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1363

Mr. Kelly — 1352 Mr. McClelland — 1363

Mr. Smith — 1353 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1363

Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1355 Mr. D.A. Anderson — 1364

Mr. Rolston — 1356 Hon. Mr. Strachan — 1364

THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 1973

The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Oak Bay.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): Mr. Speaker, I am happy to deputize for the Premier today in welcoming a teacher and her class from the Pleasantside School, Port Moody. In fairness to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, he was busily engaged when the class arrived and I was asked to introduce Mrs. Hilbert and her class of pupils from Pleasantside School, Port Moody. I would like the House to give them a welcome.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Premier.

HON. D. BARRETT (Premier): To return the compliment, I want to ask the House to welcome today the Leader of the Conservative Party. (Laughter).

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Langley.

MR. R.H. McCLELLAND (Langley): Mr. Speaker, thank you. On every Member's desk you will see British Columbia's newest newspaper. I am very happy to have given each Member a copy of the first issue of the Fraser Valley News Herald which I hope will be serving the great Fraser Valley for many years.

MR. SPEAKER: And you are not supposed to read them in the House. The Hon. Member for North Vancouver–Seymour.

MR. C.S. GABELMANN (North Vancouver-Seymour): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry the Premier has taken the words out of the mouth about one of my opponents in the last election. I want to introduce a group of students from Windsor Senior Secondary in North Vancouver and their teacher, Roy Jonsson.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. First Member for Vancouver-Point Grey.

MR. P.L. McGEER (Vancouver–Point Grey): Mr. Speaker, I wondered if there was some special room where the Members could go to smoke these cigars.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Columbia River.

MR. J.R. CHABOT (Columbia River): Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome all those people who have come to Victoria today to see democracy in action. Unfortunately they couldn't get a seat in the galleries. There are too many here, but nevertheless I hope they get the message while they are here. They are all farmers and they are very interested in what is taking place in Victoria today.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Burrard.

MS. R. BROWN (Vancouver-Burrard): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Member for Langley (Mr. McClelland) if there is any significance to the fact my cigar says, "it's a boy." (Laughter).

MR. McCLELLAND: No significance.

AN HON. MEMBER: What have you got against boys?

Introduction of bills.

AN ACT FOR SUITS
AGAINST THE CROWN

Mr. Gardom moves introduction and first reading of Bill No. 135 intituled An Act for Suits Against the Crown.

Motion approved, Bill No. 135 read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Oral questions.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. First Member for Victoria.

CUPE STRIKE
AT PRINCE GEORGE

MR. N.R. MORRISON (Victoria): Mr. Speaker, I would like to address my question to the Minister of Education. Does the Minister of Education intend to let the strike of CUPE at Prince George interfere with schools in the same way as the Victoria situation?

HON. E.E. DAILLY (Minister of Education): The Minister of Labour (Hon. Mr. King) and I have both been consulting on this matter. Naturally we are concerned and we will be making a further announcement later on in the week.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Second Member for Victoria.

[ Page 1332 ]

GOVERNMENT POLICY ON BILL 42

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): My question, Mr. Speaker, is to the Premier. May I ask the Premier whether the statements made last night in Kamloops by the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Stupich) regarding alterations to Bill 42 are Government policy?

HON. MR. BARRETT: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker, at the very introduction of the bill we made it publicly clear there would be amendments to the bill.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker, may I further ask the Premier, in view of the fact that the amendments proposed by the Hon. Minister in Kamloops go to the heart and principle of the bill, whether or not this House will have this bill withdrawn, amended and brought back to this House so that the true principle of the bill can be discussed by Members of this Legislature?

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, it is not the intention of this Government to withdraw the bill. It is the intention of this Government to protect farmland for our children and their children and all future generations.

It is our intention to ask the people of this province to suggest amendments to us and I think the people of this province should know that of this date there is not one amendment on the order paper from any single Opposition Member.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order. Order! Order please. I remind the Hon. Members that this is question period. It is not a period for debate.

FERRY CANCELLATIONS

MS. P.F. YOUNG (Vancouver–Little Mountain): My question is to the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr. Strachan). Were any scheduled ferries cancelled for today on the Tsawwassen-Swartz Bay run?

HON. R.M. STRACHAN (Minister of Highways): No, Mr. Speaker, there were no scheduled ferries cancelled. Today the 7 a.m. ferry had seven buses aboard and left an overload of 35 vehicles. The 9 a.m. had eight buses aboard and left an overload of 32 vehicles. The 10 a.m. had four buses aboard and had a full load but left no vehicles behind. The 11 a.m. ferry had five buses, a full load, and left no buses behind. There were no scheduled ferries cancelled.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

MS. YOUNG: A supplementary question to the Minister of Highways. Were any scheduled ferries cancelled on the same run last night?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, there were no scheduled ferries cancelled last night. The Queen of the Islands was broken down and the Queen of Victoria was put into service on the Tsawwassen-Swartz Bay route and the Queen of Sidney picked up the Gulf Island calls. There was no disruption whatsoever in the Swartz Bay-Tsawwassen service. The Tsawwassen-Salt Spring Island traffic was routed through Swartz Bay on the Queen of Victoria.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Those false statements that were put out were completely untrue. There was no cancellation of any ferry last night.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order. Order please. You are only consuming the question time by interruptions. The Hon. Member for North Peace River has a supplemental.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. SMITH: Point of order? I have a supplemental question, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Well, I'm trying to recognize Members who are dealing with the same subject.

MR. SMITH: And I am on the same subject.

MR. SPEAKER: I would therefore ask the Member for Victoria to defer.

MR. SMITH: Supplemental question to the Hon. Minister of Highways. On whose authority, Mr. Minister, was the 8:00 a.m. ferry cancelled that was asked for by the B.C. Federation of Agriculture and agreed to by the B.C. Ferry Authority? Whose authority?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I would ask the Member to check the schedule, which I have in front of me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh!

[ Page 1333 ]

HON. MR. STRACHAN: It calls for a ferry at 7 o'clock. It calls for a 9 o'clock. I've given you the figures. You don't want the figures. The ferry service was adequate. It met the needs of the day. It's not the answer you want, but it's the truth. I'm not going to part from the truth for you or anyone else.

MR. SPEAKER: On the same supplementary, the same Member.

MR. SMITH: A further supplemental question to the Hon. Minister of Highways: It is our understanding that the B.C. Federation of Agriculture were promised a ferry at 8 o'clock this morning. On whose authority was that ferry cancelled? What notice was given to them and who gave them that notice?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: There is a scheduled ferry system.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, order.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'm not dodging. It's obvious that the existing schedule met all the requirements. That's what we're concerned about. There was no cancellation of scheduled ferries.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I've answered the question. There was no cancellation of scheduled ferries. The schedule was met and the people's needs were met.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Any further questions on the same subject?

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I have a supplemental asked by the Hon. Member for Langley.

MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Highways investigate whether Pacific Stage Line buses — four of them — were put on the 7 o'clock ferry this morning, empty, to take up space on that ferry?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I will certainly investigate. I doubt that that's the case but I'll certainly investigate whether or not that's true. I'll try to get the answer for you this afternoon for my estimates. As I told you, my information is that seven buses were put aboard the 7 o'clock ferry and that only 35 vehicles were left behind. I have no knowledge of any empty buses being put on to take up space.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: My friends across the way and Pat Burns are upset because the schedule met the needs of the people.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Now, is it on the same or on a different question? There's also the Member behind you. I'm trying to find out…Is that on the same subject?

AN HON. MEMBER: It's on the same subject.

MR. SPEAKER: Would you defer to the Hon. Member for Saanich and the Islands?

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR, SPEAKER: I'm trying to observe the supplementals that the Members want to ask. I think we should keep them in order.

MR. H.A. CURTIS (Saanich and the Islands): Mr. Speaker, thank you. A supplemental question to the Minister of Highways: At any time yesterday or the day before, was B.C. Ferry Authority management giving consideration to an 8 o'clock ferry for increased traffic today? We know the regular schedule, but was there to be an 8 o'clock ferry or was one requested — an unscheduled 8 o'clock departure from Tsawwassen? Yes or no, Mr. Speaker.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'll check with them and find out.

PROCEDURE ON BILL 42

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to a previous question which unfortunately, due to the out of order remarks of the Premier, you then switched onto another subject. The question arises, however, out of the Premier's remark where he said that he intends to ask the people of the province what they would like to see done with Bill 42. I'm not questioning Bill 42. I'm asking the procedure, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to know whether this means that the committee on agriculture of this House will be permitted to travel throughout the province before Bill 42 is passed to get the views of the people of the province.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, it is Government policy that second reading of Bill 42 will proceed with the hope that those people who have already written in will continue to write in if they have further proposals. We would hope that everybody will speak during the second reading and give

[ Page 1334 ]

their specific proposals. There will be no committee travelling the province. The bill will be properly dealt with in this House as the rules provide. I ask the Members that if they're seriously concerned about preserving farmland, they will submit their proposals as quickly as possible.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Hon. Member have a supplementary?

MR, D.A. ANDERSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Our supplementary is this: As we on this side of this House are seriously concerned about preventing….

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We're trying our best to keep this from being argumentative on both sides. I'd ask both sides to restrain their arguments to simple answers or questions.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: May I ask the Premier a supplementary? May I ask the Premier what objections there are to consulting with the people of the province by way of…

MR. SPEAKER: There again, that is argumentative. It's not a proper question. The Hon. Member for Cariboo.

VALLEYVIEW APPEAL

MR. A.V. FRASER (Cariboo): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Municipal Affairs said yesterday that his lawyer had not advised him on appeal action in the Kamloops case. On whose instruction was the appeal notification given to the Valleyview Municipality on Tuesday?

HON. J.G. LORIMER (Minister of Municipal Affairs): I don't know anything about what you're suggesting about some statement made in Valleyview. I do know today that the appeal has been filed.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon Member for Langley.

MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs if, to his knowledge, subpoenas were served in Valleyview on Tuesday to appeal this decision?

HON. MR. LORIMER: To my knowledge, there was no service of any sort. There was a notice of appeal filed, as I understand the usual procedure. I don't know exactly what day it was filed, but I learned today that it has been filed.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. Member for Chilliwack.

INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING
MAN AND RESOURCES MEETING

MR. H.W. SCHROEDER (Chilliwack): This question is for the Hon. Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources. Were the Man and Resources Programme employees of the Government given any instructions to hold a meeting in the Oak Bay Junior auditorium March 13 last? If so, were they advised to place the Government's position on Bill 42 before the assembly?

AN. HON. MEMBER: That was answered yesterday.

MR. SCHROEDER: No answer yesterday.

HON. R.A. WILLIAMS (Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources): I'd be glad to answer and repeat the answer that I gave earlier. The Man and Resources Programme is one that has been initially sponsored by the Canadian Council of Resource and Environment Ministers. They are totally independent, although there is funding provided under the previous budget and I hope there might be some supplementary funds in the coming budget. That hasn't been decided as of yet. They are totally independent, make their own decisions, and will relate to the future conference in eastern Canada later this year, along with people from all the provinces of Canada.

MR. SPEAKER: I believe the general nature of that question was asked yesterday and was answered yesterday. You're not simply beating over old straw, I hope.

MR. SCHROEDER: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, I did not get an answer yesterday — and, I'm sorry, I did not get an answer today.

MR. SPEAKER: It's in your Hansard.

MR. SCHROEDER: I'll have to ask it as a supplementary question, since apparently the Minister has missed the question entirely. Was any instruction given to hold the meeting? Yes or no.

HON. MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I made it abundantly clear that all of the people in all of the regions are totally independent in this province and make their own decisions about meetings that will be held or subjects that will be discussed. They are totally independent. There were no instructions. It's abundantly clear there were no instructions.

AN HON. MEMBER: He doesn't understand

[ Page 1335 ]

English.

MR. SPEAKER: The Hon. First Member for Vancouver-Point Grey.

DELIVERY OF NEW BUSES

MR. McGEER: A question, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Lands, Forests and Water Resources in his capacity as a director of B.C. Hydro. To the Minister's knowledge will the buses ordered by the B.C. Hydro from Flyer Industries be delivered? Will the order be filled and will it be on time?

HON. MR. WILLIAMS: I must say, Mr. Speaker, the transit questions with respect to expansion of Hydro system have not been under my direct concern, so I can't comment regarding that.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. SPEAKER: I think that question was asked two days ago. Does not the Hon. Member recall that?

MR, McGEER: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to learn from both the directors of the B.C. Hydro. I have a question for the Minister of Health.

MR. SPEAKER: You mean that you repeated the question although you were given an answer two days ago?

MR. McGEER: I asked "to the Minister's knowledge," Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, you know that one of the rules is that we do not repeat questions that have been asked on other days.

MR. McGEER: I'd like to ask a question of the Minister of Health Services and Hospital Insurance, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Proceed.

DIPHTHERIA INOCULATION
PROGRAMME FOR SCHOOLS

MR. McGEER: A few days ago the Minister said there was no programme for diphtheria inoculations in British Columbia. In view of the spread of the disease around the province, I'd like to ask if he's revised his opinion and if there will be a mass inoculation programme for school children.

HON. D.G. COCKE (Minister of Health Services and Hospital Insurance): Mr. Speaker, that's a rather outlandish question, coming from a scientist. The fact of the matter is that I checked very throughly with my department since I learned of sporadic outbreaks of diphtheria of one or two different types. We're watching it closely.

We've found that the majority of children in the whole province have been inoculated. There is sufficient toxoid in the province to handle the situation, and it's relatively confined. There are only two major districts that are involved at the present time. They are the upper island and the mid island, where there are just two or three cases. Then there's a case over on the lower mainland, in the Squamish area.

Let me suggest this: last year we had 13 cases in the province. There are some 30-odd carriers in this province — known carriers of diphtheria.

That's something that just cannot be eliminated. But we're very careful and we're looking after the situation so that people need not worry about a major outbreak of diphtheria.

Orders of the day.

House in committee of supply; Ms. Young in the chair.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The committee will come to order. However I'd like to preface before we begin our business. There's been some confusion over how to address me when I'm in this chair. May I suggest the address "Ms. Chairman" or "Madam Chairman" would be quite sufficient. I think that such a thing as "Ms. Chairperson" is quite a mouthful for anybody to handle.

I think everybody will feel comfortable with those proceedings.

ESTIMATES, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS

(continued)

On vote 110: Minister's office, $ 64,592.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Member for Skeena.

MR. H.D. DENT (Skeena): Thank you, Ms. Chairman. There are a number of matters that I would like to bring up in regard to the estimates of the Department of Highways.

The first one is one that's been in my mind a long time, because I've driven the highways and the roads of B.C. a great deal during my Ministry and also because I live in the north. One thing that I've observed is that many very bad accident locations on the highways and the roads are left for some time. Even though warning signs are put up and care is taken by the highways department, nevertheless accidents continue to recur at these places.

One example is the McCallister corner. But there

[ Page 1336 ]

are others. there are some in my own constituency. It appears that when accidents happen they have a tendency to happen in these same places all the time.

Now, just south of 100 Mile House they had a very bad accident corner, where there were a couple of sharp turns and a level crossing. Efforts were made to cut the accident rate down at that point by putting up warning signs, and by various other means. These failed, and accidents continued to occur.

One incident, for example, took place on the weekend. On Friday night I drove along, and there were flares on the road — a car had gone over the bank and several people were injured. The car was a total write-off. The next night I came along and there were flares on the road again — another car had gone over and again there were people injured, and it was a total write-off. I would imagine that the amount of money paid out just on that weekend alone in insurance benefits would have been considerable.

Finally, after many, many accidents at that corner…

MR. G.R. LEA (Prince Rupert): Point of order.

MS. CHAIRMAN: What is your point of order?

MR. LEA: I believe it's against the rules of this House to read a newspaper, Madam Chairman.

MS. CHAIRMAN: Would the Hon. Member desist from reading newspapers?

MR. DENT: Finally a permanent solution was arrived at, and they made an overpass over the railway, which removed the two corners and the level crossing. I think it cost around $50,000 to do. It was a most welcome move for the people of 100 Mile House, because while it didn't end the accidents, it certainly reduced the frequency of them.

Similarly in McCallister they are now straightening out that corner finally, after many years. Hopefully it will mean the end of frequent accidents at that location. But again, there were probably many hundreds of thousands of dollars paid out in accident benefits.

Now, the question that I would put to the highways Minister (Hon. Mr. Strachan) is this: now that the Government will be operating automobile insurance — and I trust that the highways department will work very closely with the insurance companies, perhaps by loaning them an engineer from the highways department, or vice versa — will co-ordination take place at the level of improved safety on the highways of British Columbia? I feel this would be the time that we could get a solution to some of these problems.

On the second point, I want to move into my own constituency of Skeena. There are just a number of brief questions.

First of all, I would like to have some idea when the bridge will be completed across the Skeena River at Terrace. I might point out that the bridge is now under construction and was promised for many, many elections. It is now finally being built, which is a most welcome thing.

The second one arises from the fact that now that the highway has been virtually completed to Terrace I would like some idea of when we can expect it to be completed to first class standards between Terrace and Prince Rupert. What is the plan to have those projects completed in that area?

Thirdly, are there plans to build a bridge across the river at Kitwanga this year? I'd heard rumours that it might be in the estimates this year, and I would ask the Minister if, in fact, it is and whether construction will be starting this fall.

The fourth point is this: there is undoubtedly going to be a great deal of activity in the Dease Lake area and the Stikine area, and we are still without a connecting first class highway between Highway 16 and Stewart. I would ask the question: when can we expect to see work begin on that highway connection between Highway 16 and Stewart? I think it is most urgent that it be started.

Then there is the road from Smithers to Granisle. Now there are some people who built an unauthorized road for forestry purposes, which was just used for the first time about two weeks ago. I sent a telegram to the mayor of Smithers and some other people wishing them well on the first, you might say, "usage" of this particular road. Now it's a forestry access road by a company. But it's now connecting Granisle and Smithers.

I would point out that the Granisle area has developed very rapidly. The people wish to shop in Smithers, because it's a logical shopping area. I would ask the question: when can we look for a public road built by the highways department up to proper standards connecting Smithers with Granisle?

A third area is co-ordination with the Indian affairs department with regard to roads on reserves and access roads to reserves. In my campaigning, both in 1966 and in the more recent provincial election, I had to visit Indian reserves. I was shocked at the condition of roads that gave access to reserves only, where there was nothing there but the reserve, even though they were public roads outside of a reserve. It seemed to me that we could have provided much better road maintenance on these roads. I think of the one particularly in Dog Creek — connecting Dog Creek and Canoe Creek, in that general area.

There are also some in my own constituency, and the one I think of in particular is the one at Fort Babine. The Fort Babine reserve has no public road connection at the present time. It has a forestry access road which is only maintained in the summer

[ Page 1337 ]

time, and has not been maintained recently.

I'm concerned about the general policy. I understand there are discussions underway between the federal Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the provincial Department of Highways. I would like to get some information on the progress in these discussions, because it's most urgent to the people of my constituency who live on Indian reserves.

A further point concerns the B.C. Ferries. There is now B.C. Ferry service between Vancouver Island and Prince Rupert. The good people of Kitimat when they want to take this ferry must drive around to Prince Rupert. They have requested frequently, and I would echo their requests, that consideration be given to having alternate service to Kitimat, and that a B.C. Ferry slip be built at Kitimat. The larger population area is in Kitimat and Terrace, not Rupert. Rupert is not as large, population-wise, as Kitimat and Terrace combined. If the highway connection is built further north to Stewart, then it becomes even more pressing that we have a ferry slip at Kitimat.

In regard to the ferries, I might make an aside about this morning. I came over from Vancouver this morning. I arrived at the ferry slip at 6:30, but I couldn't get on because I was in a camper. There were too many buses and trucks and whatnot on the ferry. I would point out that I did have to wait — I was a little annoyed — until the 9 o'clock ferry. But I noticed no great rush of traffic on either ferry. I was left behind on the first one because I had a peculiarly shaped vehicle. But, very few other people were left behind — just the normal number.

So you might say that the only person that was discriminated against was the NDP MLA in this particular case.

Now, the final question. I feel this again is an urgent matter. I'm not satisfied with the standard of sanding and snow ploughing on roads in the north. I am just not satisfied with it. I have driven personally from Terrace to Smithers and I know the highway superintendent was doing a first class job. So was the one in Terrace. They were doing the best job they could. There are many times when they have to move equipment to clear snow on the road to Rupert, and they are making the best use of their men and equipment. But I felt it wasn't enough equipment or enough men to properly maintain the roads in the peak part of the winder season. It's not so much manpower but equipment.

Sometimes the road becomes very treacherous, especially along the Skeena River. I would request that some consideration be given to more frequent sanding and more frequent snow ploughing during the peak season in the winter.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Point Grey.

MR. G.B. GARDOM (Vancouver–Point Grey): Cherchez la chair. Madam Chairman, a couple of questions to the Hon. Minister.

MS. CHAIRMAN: I'll have to get my French-English dictionary out.

AN HON. MEMBER: It won't help you a bit.

MR. GARDOM: The Hon. Minister has always been very interested in the Wootton Report. That commission did point out some very, very serious shortcomings in the field of traffic safety, and all these things depend upon priority, as we all know. However, it did advocate there was a very great need for better coordination between all levels of government in order to reduce the fantastic amount of social damage and senseless waste of human life and material that results from the slaughter on our roadways. It further recommended that there be a considerable improvement in the liaison between the Department of Highways and the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles.

I would like to have the attitudes of the Hon Minister as to these two positions taken by the Wootton Commission and what, if anything, he has planned to attempt to correct the items that were referred to.

HON. R.M. STRACHAN (Minister of Highways): Coordination of safety programmes. What was the point?

MR. GARDOM: A greater degree of liaison between the Department of Highways and the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles. Maybe that is now cured, I do not know. This seemed to be a criticism at the time and place of the Wootton Commission. It also advocated, Madam Chairman, better construction of roads — more divided one-way freeways and the frictionalization of road surfaces.

HON. E. HALL (Provincial Secretary): There's the rub.

MR. GARDOM: There's many of the rubs. Aye, indeed. Good pun for this time of the day, Mr Minister.

It advocated provincial-wide motor vehicle testing and provincial-wide driver training in all of the schools. Furthermore, it went along with the suggestion that I made in a variety of speeches in this House, that licences may not be issued until the age of 18 years unless people happen to pass a driver training programme and be so certified.

I raised this question to the Hon. Attorney General, but perhaps the more appropriate forum for the question is under the aegis of the Minister because he pays a great deal of attention in his report of the

[ Page 1338 ]

Department of Highways to accident involvement. I would like to ask the Hon. Minister whether it will be the policy that he will attempt to have the Government accept, to proclaim the section that was passed in 1969 in this House, which was not opposed by any Member in the House, to the effect that, except with the consent of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles, no person under the age of 18 years may drive a vehicle unless he is certified under an approved driver-training programme. I would like to ask the Hon. Minister: why has that section not yet been proclaimed, and will it be his intention to have it proclaimed?

I would also like to again reiterate a plea I have made many, many times. I think this perhaps will fall within your aegis, Mr. Minister, because I see that in your report you say that in 201 cases, or about half of the 405 fatal accidents, the consumption of alcohol was present in one or more of the parties involved. So in about half of the fatal accidents we find the presence of alcohol.

There is another very, very alarming statistic following from that. It says that excessive speed is a factor in 93 people out of the 405 total who were killed. Wrong side of the road — very, very startling figure: 194, or 48 per cent, of the 405 fatal accidents resulted from a vehicle or a pedestrian being on the wrong side of the road. You will see, Mr. Minister, that speed and the wrong side of the road account for 71 per cent of the fatal accidents in the province, or 287 deaths out of 405.

Now this to me points very dramatically to two needs: 1) we have to have more one-way and more divided highways, and 2) the existing highways we have should certainly have a far greater amount of markers than are evident at the present time.

Travelling in the United States — no doubt your officials have the expertise in this — I did come across one very, very remarkable little marker. It was sort of a star in the middle of the road such as we have in B.C., except ours are white and this one tended to reflect orange. It was most illuminating. It was not the type of thing that caused any glare. To me it was just like coming in on an airport in an aircraft; it just beautifully lit up the whole road surface. Furthermore, it was elevated so that if your wheels hit it you would know that you were on it, and that would be a little bit of a signal to an errant motorist that he was crossing the line.

Dealing with the alcohol side, I would again make the plea that in order to try and cout down what is amounting to "roadway roulette" in B.C. we for goodness sake indicate in every liquor outlet in the province and every gas pump in the province what the penalties for drinking-driving are and what the consumption and the impairment levels are. It wouldn't disturb me in the slightest to see that this type of caveat was put on every bottle of hard liquor in the province of B.C. It could just be a little sticker saying, "Don't drive and drink in the Province of British Columbia. If you do the following will happen to you and these are the impairment levels."

I think we have got to get that message completely across to the public and let them thoroughly know that in the Province of B.C. we are going to have one rule and one rule only — Don't drink and drive.

I would like to have the Hon. Minister's comments on these points.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I have a page of notes already — I've just started. I think I have to agree with practically everything the Member who just sat down has said. I agree we have to get the information out with regard to the consequences of drinking and driving.

Speeding on the wrong side of the road: you say we need more divided highways and I agree. We have very few divided highways in the province. They are very expensive and if we can get enough money we could build divided highways all over the province.

No licence until 18 unless you pass a driver training programme: I was aware of that particular section. I discussed it verbally with the Minister of Education (Hon. Mrs. Dailly). There is no sense proclaiming it unless you have the driver-training programme available all over the province. I discussed it verbally with the Minister of Education. I wrote her a formal letter just a month or so ago asking her to get the statistics as to what would be required, the cost of the programme, the curriculum, how we would fit it in the curriculum and so on. So we are looking at that particular aspect of it.

Testing stations as asked for by the Wootton Royal Commission: as you know, it is now compulsory in Vancouver, the lower mainland and Victoria. I understand new testing stations are going in in other places and gradually, I expect, the whole province will be covered by compulsory testing of vehicles.

Better construction of highways: well, we like to build them as best we can. But I agree with you there.

Liaison between the Department of Highways and the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles: yes, there has been liaison and there will be continuing liaison between the two departments.

Better coordination of safety programmes: I agree there that there should be 100 per cent coordination. You will notice in the automobile insurance legislation that there is the allowance for the insurance corporation to participate in safety programmes on the highways and they will all be tied together into one comprehensive programme.

The Member for Skeena (Mr. Dent) referred to the crossing south of 100 Mile House and if it is the level crossing I am thinking of, just a few miles south of 100 Mile House, I couldn't tell you what it cost, but it cost more than $50,000. I rather suspect it was

[ Page 1339 ]

more than half a million dollars to build that particular crossing. As you know, I have driven that particular piece of road quite frequently over the years. It would have been a fairly expensive crossing.

Bridge completion across the Skeena: we expect that to be all wound up in the next two years.

The road to Dease Lake needs a first class highway? Well, we have to get the existing highway just upgraded to a better level before we can get into a first class highway. I make no promises as to when that particular road will be classified as a first class highway. The road from Smithers to Grandisle will be finished this year.

Access road to the reserve: as the Member indicated, I have already had an initial meeting with the B.C. Indian Affairs Branch top man in this province. I'm concerned about the relationship between this department and the needs of Indian Affairs.

Until now, I have only been called on when individual reserves wanted some action by the Department of Highways to serve their particular reserve requirements. That is a completely unsatisfactory way of meeting the needs of the native population. As I said in an earlier debate we must get the Indian population, insofar as roads are concerned, on exactly the same basis as the non-Indian population.

I have a standing offer, as part of these negotiations and discussions, that I am quite prepared on behalf of this Government to serve the Indians in exactly the same way as we serve other communities and other needs of the non-Indian population. In return of course, the department must be given the same rights with regard to Indian reserve land for the requirements of the province.

In many areas the needs of the province are being thwarted because it's on reserve land and we simply can get no action from the federal authorities in order to solve some of the problems. I am thinking of the Penticton bypass, for instance, where we're just simply told to go away. They don't want to talk to us, even though there's no other solution to that particular problem. So it's a two-way street. We'll continue these talks until we have a satisfactory solution.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Member for South Peace River.

MR. D.M. PHILLIPS (South Peace River): Thank you, Madam Chairman. I certainly don't intend to delay the debate on the Minister's estimates this afternoon. I'm going to take the attitude that he'll probably do a reasonable job and I'm going to wait and see.

Now as the Minister knows, I have forwarded to him a list of requirements for our area. Certainly roads are one of the greatest priorities in our area, and I am sure that the Minister will look at that. I haven't heard any reply yet.

I would like to ask him a couple of questions on specific areas this afternoon. Is the construction that has started on the Hart highway from Erris to Groundbirch going to be completed with the new bridge over the Kiskatinaw? I'd like to ask him if he will give top priority to three-lane passing on the Hart highway at the East Pine River and also on the Wabi Hill out of Chetwynd.

If and when the Sukunka coal project goes ahead, the traffic between Chetwynd and Dawson Creek could increase by 300 or 400 per cent. These are long hills, all three of them, on both sides of the Pine River. Out of Chetwynd there are very long hills and there will be accidents there unless we have some way of speeding the traffic out of these long hills.

I'd also like to ask the Minister's consideration for special funds for next summer, over and above what might normally be expended, to help upgrade our rural road conditions. The reason that I am asking this, Mr. Minister, is that due to the early snowfall and the early wet weather that we had in September of last year, the department was not able to keep up with the normal maintenance. The rural roads are in terrible condition at the present time. We actually had wet weather from the first of September through freeze-up. Normally we can carry on with gravelling through to even sometimes the middle of November.

This has created a problem. It's hard on the farmer's equipment. It's hard on the roadbase, if they continue to chew it up. It's much more costly to repair if the road is chewed up and the present base of gravel is ruined. So I would ask your consideration, Mr. Minister.

I would also like the Minister to speed up the engineering on the bridge over the Kiskatinaw River on the Alaska Highway. We have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on repairing slides on both sides of this river. To date, with the development that is going on in the northern part of the province, all of the heavy equipment has to move over this bridge — cats still have to be unloaded. I've complained about this bridge in this House in the previous three years when I was here. I know there is an engineering study going on, but there again, with the tremendous development that could take place in the north and in the Mackenzie Delta or even if the Premier's plan for the railroad goes ahead, this Alaska Highway is still the main route into the north.

The Kiskatinaw River bridge is a bottleneck. It was built, as you know, during the construction of the Alaska Highway by the Americans. We haven't replaced the bridge yet. It was built in a hurry during the war. The bridge should be replaced and the approaches on both sides of the bridge should be re-engineered and rerouted.

The only other thing that I'd like to ask the Minister: is construction at the present time going

[ Page 1340 ]

ahead on the Fort Simpson-Fort Nelson highway? Is it going to be by day labour or by tender? Does the Minister plan on pushing right ahead with it? Will the construction of the road from Dawson Creek to the Alberta border, with a new bridge over the Pouce Coupe River, which is now under construction, will that project be finished?

I'd just like to make one comment further to the Second Member for Vancouver–Point Grey (Mr. Gardom) with regard to head-on collisions. I advocated some years ago that it be mandatory that all drivers, both during the daytime and at night, be compelled to drive with their headlights on. When I'm on the highway myself I always have my headlights on. I know that if I can't see somebody coming, a dark car or one that fades into the landscape, they're sure going to see me; because I always drive with my headlights on.

The replacement of a few bulbs in your automobile is a very cheap way to prevent an accident. With the electrical systems they have in cars today, it certainly doesn't hurt the battery. There's an alternator system which is far improved over what it used to be. I would sincerely like to see it become compulsory that all automobiles, trucks and buses on the highway drive with their headlights on 24 hours a day.

If you meet a Greyhound bus now, you'll see they have their headlights on. When they brought in that policy in the United States quite a few years ago, they cut down their sideswipes by, I think it was 50 per cent. I think it's a good policy. I do it for my own safety and the safety of anybody who happens to be driving with me.

Since the department of airplanes comes under the Minister's portfolio, I would like to say that I am in favour of the Department of Highway's having airplanes. I think there should be a good fleet of airplanes available to all of the senior civil servants if they have to make a trip somewhere; because this island is very difficult to get off of by scheduled airlines.

So far as I am concerned, the fiasco that was raised in this House a few years ago about Gaglardi's airplane was a smokescreen. I agree with airplanes being made available to all the cabinet Ministers and to MLA's on both sides of the House to go about the business of this province. We just voted on a budget of $1.7 billion. It's big business and I think we should be able to expedite that business.

HON. A.B. MACDONALD (Attorney General): Families too?

MR. PHILLIPS: No, I didn't say families. I said available to the senior civil servants, the people who are travelling on the people's business, the cabinet Ministers, and I see no reason why MLA's, when they're coming to and from a city, if there's a flight going out, shouldn't have the availability of the airplanes. I have always felt that way.

I think that what was talked about and caused such a big stink about is not that great an amount of money. Today you know that anybody who has a large business, and who has the available in large cities, like Toronto, Montreal and so forth, a lot more scheduled airlines than we do — the connecting flights from Vancouver Island are sometimes very difficult. You get over to the mainland and then you have to wait for some other flight. It's not an easy place to get out. I certainly want to put my views on record that I think there should be airplanes and they should be made available.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I would appreciate some positive answers to some of the questions that I've asked.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I agree that roads are important in that particular area. I remember attending a convention of the Farmers Union in Fort St. John. I think there were 23 resolutions before that convention; 19 of them were on the state of the roads in the area. I have driven some of those roads and I know how difficult they can be.

We want to take a look at the three hills you were speaking of and three passing lanes.

The Erris bridge — there's money in it for this year.

The John Hart Highway — progress to Erris section will be done by day labour. There's money in there.

The Pouce Coupe bridge, completion of the Spirit River road and the Spirit River Bridge — there's money in this year's estimates for that.

The new Spirit Road to Briar Heights — there's money in the estimates for that too.

MR. PHILLIPS: The Kiskatinaw bridge on the Alaska Highway?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, that's not in this year as yet. It's on the "A" list as a matter of fact.

You asked about the work from Fort Nelson to Fort Simpson. That will be done this year by day labour. I indicated in earlier debate or in answer to a question that we'd go right ahead with it as far as the river and try to prod the feds into starting down their side too.

MS. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. First Member for Victoria.

MR. N.R. MORRISON (Victoria): Madam Chairman, I too would like to talk about ferries for the moment if I may. Since my riding is the City of

[ Page 1341 ]

Victoria a tremendous number of our people use the ferries on a very regular basis. This ferry route to the mainland is our sea bridge. It's very vital to us that the ferries are available and are frequent.

On October 14 last year, the Vancouver Province had a comment about the tourists causing considerable ferry problems last year. I'd like to ask the Minister of Highways what plans he has proposed for the tourist season of 1973. I'd also like to ask him what programmes he has planned to cope with the request, as he has mentioned earlier, about extending ferries, also about additional runs if possible in the summer.

There also has been a number of requests for one or two ferries a day where residents may make reservations, so that a business person who is regularly required to travel to and from the island may, on at least one ferry, in each direction have some form of a reservation system so that he could be sure that he, for example, could catch the 7 o'clock ferry over in the morning and the 7 o'clock ferry back again at night with a reservation and be sure of it.

I personally would like to see a night ferry of some kind put on, but I can appreciate the problems.

I'd also like to ask the Minister of Highways what the situation at the moment is concerning the relocation of the ferries and their terminals, and specifically what the situation right now is concerning Gabriola Island.

I'd also like, if I may, to read a letter from the Minister of Highways to the Victoria Chamber of Commerce, which is quite recent — it's dated March 2, 1973. It's addressed to Mr. Farmer, of the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce. In that particular letter, which I won't read in its entirety, the Minister of Highways indicates that the argument that the ferries are part of the highway system is really not valid. This is the part that I'd like to have a comment on. If the ferries are not our sea bridge to the mainland, and are therefore not part of the highway system…

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That's a letter from me to the Victoria Chamber of Commerce?

MR. MORRISON: That's right. It's dated March 2, 1973, and it's addressed directly to Mr. Terence W. Farmer, President of the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce, 1020 Government Street, Victoria. It's headed, "Re: Night Ferry." It's really discussing the night ferry, but I don't want to go into that night ferry issue at the moment.

I simply want to get a comment on his statement which is at the beginning of paragraph 2, that the argument that the ferries are really part of the highway system is really not valid because there is no 100 mile section of the highway in British Columbia that costs $32 million a year to operate. That's the comment that I'd like to have him comment on, not the balance of the letter.

[Mr. Dent in the chair]

I would also like to comment on the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce and their highways recommendations, which I'm sure the Minister has. Some of the proposals and resolutions in that he's already answered and so I won't go any further on them, but there's one in particular which I'd like a comment on. It's concerning roadside airstrips.

If I may, I'll read their report. It says:

"In view of the ever increasing reliance on air transportation in the north, and the obvious limitations on the use of float equipped planes for load speed handling of heavy cargo to and from a ship on water and the time off between floats and skis twice a year…"

Their recommendation is:

"that the Government of British Columbia investigate the feasibility of constructing small airstrips in the remote northern areas of the province, preferably adjacent to new or existing roads, in such a manner that basic maintenance could be handled by the highways department graders and maintenance crews."

I'd like to extend that. As an active pilot and aircraft owner, this problem is one that I'm very much aware of. I believe that the Minister of Highways should consider looking into the possibility of airstrips near or adjacent to every small community, and certainly to all the islands in this general area, There should be an airstrip for emergency use, if for no other, but also because so many of these islands are recreation areas and are very difficult to get to — yet there are a tremendous number of private aircraft who could use small airstrips.

As I understand it, most aircraft today can use an airstrip of about 2,000 feet, and a width of about 100 feet. Gravel and grass would be more than adequate. It's no longer necessary that the airstrip be into wind, because most aircraft today are quite capable of 35º cross winds. It's an area that I would certainly like to see expanded.

I have other questions which I'll get to later. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: The Member suggests that the highways department construct small new airstrips along highways on the island and throughout the province to be maintained by Highways graders and Highways crews. I can't even hold out a hope that we'll engage in that sphere of activity until we stop getting complaints from people on the roads and side roads of the province that they're adequately

[ Page 1342 ]

being maintained. We're not in that position right now. We're hoping to improve it, as I indicated the other day, through getting an increase in the sums allocated for the new equipment. This is a soft spot with the Member from Cariboo (Mr. Fraser).

I'm hoping that there'll be additional funds that we're going to get over and above what's in the estimates and that part of that will also go into the purchase of even more new equipment so that our equipment quality can get up equal to that of the Forest Service. So until we get the roads looked after, really we haven't got the right to embark on the luxury of creating airstrips, or putting out crews to work doing that.

As to the letter I sent to the Victoria Chamber of Commerce that no section of highway cost $2 million — was it $2 million I said a year to operate? Whatever it was, it's a statement of fact. There is a difference between a section of highway and a ferry run, because there's an operating cost attached to a ferry run that isn't there insofar as a piece of highway is concerned. It's a form of transportation, really. It's the equivalent of a car on the highway, rather than the highway itself.

Relocation of the ferry terminals on the Gabriola Island run: no decision has been made. We're still at the investigating aspect of it.

A night ferry: I've already answered that.

Additional runs: one or two runs a day with reservations. We have the ferries going full blast, as you know, and every run we can possibly get in between Victoria and Vancouver, we have operating.

AN HON. MEMBER: What about reservations?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I didn't mention that. I've been in the same position — many times I've felt that reservations would serve a purpose. I've pointed out that the ferry service does eventually carry those who are waiting before the day is over. There are no overloads left there at the end of the day, so they finally get there.

But I'm told that on a $5 ticket, the cost of reservations is completely out of line. The reservation systems today, such as the air companies operate, are for a ticket that costs anything from $15 to $300, so that the cost of the reservation is very minimal compared to the value of the ticket that is sold. We're selling tickets that are worth $2 or $5 or $10, something like that. To implement a full reservation system would be very expensive, on that basis.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Member for Oak Bay.

MR. G.S. WALLACE (Oak Bay): Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to touch on a few points. It's been mentioned that the quality of a highway and the safety measures have a great deal to do with cutting down accidents. One particular highway on which I'd like to comment is the Pat Bay Highway and the installation of these dividers or medians, or whatever the technical phrase is.

I'd like to ask the Minister, first of all, to what degree this particular model was compared with other existing — I realize that this is a technical question, but I drive that road very frequently, day and night. As far as one can determine, while this particular median division may eliminate or cut down on head-on collisions, I'm just wondering how long it's going to be until someone on the inside lane runs into that median and is ricocheted off into the lane on your righthand side.

I don't think this has happened, but two or three things are rather obvious. As you drive, particularly in the dark, there's a considerable reflection of your headlamps off the surface of the divider. Secondly, the traffic coming in the opposite direction — because of the angles or the geometry of the situation the headlamps just seem to come over the top of the divider. It's my impression that you are actually getting more light effect from the oncoming cars than you do when there is no divider. Is that divider too low, or should it be higher or lower? I'm not just expressing a personal opinion — but many comments from other people that drive that highway. It might be that we're all unaccustomed to that type of divider. There has been a lot of research done into this and I'm quoting from a U.S. magazine which talks about the tremendous importance of road design in relation to cutting down of accidents.

One of the statements it makes is that this is the result of research which was done in Great Britain, I understand: "that accident rates are significantly lower where opposing traffic is separated by medians; and that median barriers of suitable design are effective in reducing the severity of accidents."

I would just like to know what other types of design are available and to what extent these alternatives were considered in the construction of the Pat Bay Highway. I would like to know to what degree the one that is now installed has been evaluated. Have there been any accidents on the highway to this date — I know it hasn't been there very long — attributed to a vehicle first of all hitting the median before hitting another vehicle? That is one question I'd like to ask.

I would also like to comment on the degree to which the Department of Highways does conduct research, either of its own or in contact with the other agencies and countries which obviously do carry out a great deal of research. I am thinking, for example, of this article which took information from various souces — and it also comments on an example on a freeway in Wyoming to deal with the person who nods off to sleep or almost goes to sleep at the wheel on the freeways on long, straight runs.

[ Page 1343 ]

They've cut grooved sections in the highway which produce a very distinct vibration which jolts the driver if he's tending to go off to sleep. The other points they mention are the use of posts that break very easily when a car hits them and other types of energy-absorbing barriers. For example, when you drive some of our highways in the interior or in the Fraser Canyon, I notice some of these curved metal rails with the steel posts, their object I presume being to protect the car going off the road and at the same time to minimize the risk of fatality if they do hit the barrier.

I would just like some comment from the Minister as to what degree we study the research in other countries and compare what, we are installing at the present time in British Columbia with what is available as a better energy — absorbing barrier to not only save the vehicle going off the road but at least to cut down the risk to the driver and the occupants.

I would also like, in terms of preserving the highway, to know what comment the Minister might make, if any, on the use of studded tires on the highways in British Columbia. I gather it's a somewhat controversial issue in that it's certainly well worth while on bad roads in wintertime, but on dry roads at other times of the year I gather that it can do considerable damage to the highway. I wonder if the Minister would make some comment on the whole matter of studded tires. To what degree are we collecting information from other sources?

Like the former speaker, I too have a great interest in the ferry system. I make no apology for the following question, which I've asked in this House before, and the question was asked today: whether or not island residents should not be given some preference in the use of the ferries at the peak of the tourist season?

It's my personal feeling that people on the island in the peak of the tourist season generally try to avoid the very busy hours if at all possible; but there are times certainly when I have had to go to Vancouver and return and not be in a position to choose when I go. I really feel that it's just a bit much that our tax money has no choice but to subsidize a loss on the ferries. I am not questioning that. I accept that as being something the province should do.

Nevertheless, as a resident and a person who is paying taxes to support the ferry system, it is rather galling to spend two, three, or even four hours waiting for a ferry when you're trying to get to Vancouver on business, or trying to get back the same night.

I know that the answer of the previous government was that this was not practicable. I question that. I think that the people living on the island depend intimately on the ferries. While we must show every courtesy we can to the tourists who have come to our island and to our province, I really would suggest that the Minister reconsider — and if he doesn't want to answer it now, that's fine — but I would hope that some reconsideration should be given to the degree to which island residents can be given some consideration at the peak of the tourist season.

One of the Members who have had correspondence is obviously the Member for Vancouver–Point Grey (Mr. McGeer). He was talking the other day about the very small area on the ferries which is devoted to non-smokers. I've had some pretty strong letters on this subject — not just in relation to the ferries — but this whole question of non-smokers not asserting their rights; that in public places and in society generally the non-smoker just seems to have put up with the inconvenience and the physical hazard of being polluted with somebody else's smoke.

While I am not proposing some great anti-smoking crusade — I have talked about that under the Health estimates — I wonder if the Minister would comment. I am quoting from a letter saying that the space on the ferry for non-smokers is just one small section and the rest of the ferry space where the public mingle, by and large, can often be very unpleasant in the evening.

Finally I would like just to question the Minister again regarding the answer given earlier today about this 8 o'clock ferry this morning. My secretary phoned the information office of the ferry system this morning and was told that an arrangement had been made for an 8 o'clock ferry, but that the arrangement was subsequently cancelled.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Who did she phone?

MR. WALLACE: The information officer, whoever he is. I don't know the man's name. She phoned the ferry system and asked to speak to the public information.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: This was in Victoria?

MR. WALLACE: Today. Yes. And the statement was made that an arrangement for an 8 o'clock ferry had been made but had subsequently been changed.

When the question was asked why it was changed, the comment was that, "Well, that's something else."

I think that the Minister's earlier promise to look into this particular issue would be well justified.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon, Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: The Member just referred to the ferry this morning and I was asked if any empty buses had been placed aboard the 7:00 a.m. ferry this morning. There were no empty buses placed on the Swartz Bay Ferry at 7 o'clock; there were no

[ Page 1344 ]

empty buses placed on the Tsawwassen Ferry at 7 o'clock.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I've already answered it. At 9 o'clock people walked on the ferry from two buses because they weren't sure the buses were going to be able to get on. After the people had walked aboard there was room for the two empty buses and they then drove on the ferry so they would be able to serve the people at this side.

At 10 o'clock there were no overloads anyway; so there was no problem.

Island residents to get some preference at the peak of the tourist season. To be quite frank with you I just don't know how you could work that out.

I try to put myself in the place of a tourist who arrives to get on a ferry. He is told he doesn't require a reservation. Then he finds that cars that come two hours after he has been waiting drive past him onto the ferry with a reservation. You would almost have to give the tourist the right to a reservation too; which gets us back into that…I think it would give B.C. a bad name if we followed that sort of preferential procedure.

I will certainly take a look at the size of the area on ferries for non-smokers. You must have been talking to my wife, because she says the same thing.

Studded tires, excessive wear. These are indications they do cause excessive wear on the highway system. That is being studied.

With regard to posts and so on, the signposts are of the kind that break off easily. The lighting posts are not yet of that type, but we're hoping to get eventually to that.

We haven't tried that change in the road surface to jolt the drivers awake.

The Department of Highways does stay in contact with other groups that are doing research.

They do have meetings with other groups, at which technical papers are given and slides shown. The first convention I went to of the Roads Association of Canada was almost all given over to these technical lecturers and displays of what is happening and what is being done in other places.

It's my attitude, as the Minister, that if there is a technical seminar that is worthwhile, then our people should go to it and meet the people. I've put no limits on their ability to do so. I feel we must keep in touch with developments and utilize them for the benefit of the Province of British Columbia.

The dividers; those particular dividers were developed by the highways department themselves, based on their own experience in developing other dividers and based on, as I say, these discussions and experiences of other jurisdictions. There aren't too many types of dividers that you can use. You have the median. In Oregon I've noticed they have a type of screen — bushes that divide the highway.

Even when you have the wide median, people get off and cross the median right in the way of cars coming in the other direction. This is the shortcoming of just a straight median that can be driven across. This particular median here was developed…The signs are there; obviously some cars have tended to go up on them. But they are designed to bring the cars right back onto their own lane and they keep on going. We have no reports of any accidents where cars have hit the divider and been bounced back to the otherlane.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Columbia River.

MR. J.R. CHABOT (Columbia River): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few brief questions for the Minister of Highways. A few days ago the cabinet was submitted a brief by the British Columbia Federation of Labour. In that brief they did bring up some matters of concern to them relative to highways.

One was dealing with the ferry service between the mainland and Vancouver Island. They urged the Government to give consideration to an increase and an expansion of the ferry service, as well as a reduction in fares. I'm wondering whether the Minister is giving consideration to the reduction of fares on the B.C. ferry service.

I remember many years ago the now Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources (Hon. Mr. Nimsick) stood in this House on several occasions and suggested that ferries between the mainland and Vancouver Island should be free; that there should be no fares. This was really, in his opinion, a continuation of the Trans-Canada highway into Victoria. Consequently, there should be free ferries. I want to know whether the Minister of Highways considers that suggestion made by the present Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources as a ridiculous suggestion, or is he considering carrying out the suggestion so eloquently put many years ago by the Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources when he sat on this side of the House.

Now, speaking very briefly on matters of concern within my constituency, I want to know whether there is any consideration being given to improvement on the Westside Road between Invermere and Dutch Creek, or Fairmont Hot Springs if you want. There has been a programme of improvement on this highway. It's about an 18-mile link. It has been paved about 10 miles on the south end of the highway. Really, that is the least travelled portion of that highway. I understand from the Department of Highways that the reason for starting at that end was because it would eliminate the necessity of travelling great distances for the maintenance of that particular

[ Page 1345 ]

highway.

Also, last year there was money budgeted for improvement on the north end of this highway. Nothing actually took place. The money was diverted to other highway projects within the constituency. There remains something between eight and 10 miles of the highway that needs improvement.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Where's that?

MR. CHABOT: The Westside Road, between Invermere and Dutch Creek. It's the northern end, and that's the section that is most travelled. Incidentally, on that portion of the highway the provincial government owns a large tract of land called Sunshine Ranch, purchased many years ago for future recreational development. It was a very wise purchase.

However, I think that there's a need for improvement in this road. I was wondering whether some consideration will be given this year. I'm not suggesting that it's necessary to complete the unfinished portion this year. But we were promised last year that there would be two to three miles of it finished at the north end and paved. Nothing took place and I'm wondering whether consideration could be given to improving it. The money was budgeted but was diverted somewhere else.

Now, another point is a bridge called the Pontoon Bridge that links the community of Wilmer and Highway 95. It's a long-established bridge. Apparently the deck has deteriorated and is in need of new decking. I understand also that there's need of improvement of pilings. What really alarms me is the fact that I understand that the attitude of the Department of Highways is that the bridge should be torn out rather than improved.

It's not a major bridge. It's a bridge over the Columbia River, which is fairly narrow at that particular stage of its flow because it's only about 28 miles from the source. It's not a large bridge; it's not a costly bridge. It's not anything that would cost any great sums of money to improve. Without the improvement of this bridge, it would involve an additional six-mile detour each and every day for the people who live in Wilmer and work in Radium Hot Springs.

Also, one other consideration on this bridge — why I think there's a need for improvement and not the destruction of the bridge — is the fact that the only access we have between the east and west sides of the valley is the bridge at Athalmer. Without the Pontoon Bridge linking Wilmer and Highway 95, if anything was ever to happen to the Athalmer bridge, the people from Invermere would have to make a 40-mile detour to get access back to the west side of Highway 95 on the way to Radium.

I think there's justification for the maintenance of this particular bridge. I would hope that some consideration will be given to this.

AN HON. MEMBER: You say that you've been told that they're going to tear it out?

MR. CHABOT: Yes, I have information from the district superintendent that he feels that the bridge should be taken out. I don't support that theory myself.

One other point is the level crossing at Athalmer, which has been investigated in years gone by by the Department of Highways in conjunction with the Department of Transport, to see whether the rail traffic in that area justified the expenditure — or, on the part of the Department of Transport, whether it justified participation — in the construction of an overpass. At that particular time — this was about five years ago — it was concluded that there wasn't sufficient train traffic to justify an overpass.

However, since that time there's been an upsurge in rail traffic with the developing of the Fording River coal deposits. Also, additional tonnage is coming in from the southern Alberta coal fields. The people of that area are experiencing longer delays at the rail crossing. Certainly there could be an improvement on the part of the railroad in blocking of this level crossing for the periods in which it's blocked from time to time.

Another consideration which has been brought to my attention on several occasions is the fact that the district hospital is on the west side of the community. Those people who it serves on the east side — Radium Hot Springs, Fairmont Hot Springs, Athalmer, Windermere, and other little communities — are quite concerned with the lengthy blockages that take place.

I'm wondering whether the Minister would, probably in conjunction with the Department of Transport, take into consideration the re-examination of the traffic pattern and the length of delays that are taking place on this level crossing, to see whether some improvements can be made and whether an overpass really is needed. I think the time is coming that if there is any further increase in rail traffic, an overpass should be built at this location.

Now, one other point is in the southern end of my constituency — that is a link between Skookumchuck Prairie and the Wasa cutoff. I understand that plans are all ready for a bridge — either a bridge or a link on the east side of the Highway 95. I personally support the maintenance of the present highway location on the west side, rather than a new highway from Springbrook across to Wasa, which cut through a lot of very valuable farmland.

Also on the west side there is the pulp mill — Freshbrook Forest Industries Pulp Mill. The highway is a good highway on the west side but what is really required is a bridge across the Kootenay River from the Skookumchuck Prairie, down into Wasa. Why I'm

[ Page 1346 ]

suggesting there is a need for a bridge is because at the moment there are two level crossings that people must negotiate, as well as a single lane traffic bridge. People have to wait at the bridge.

I think that there are plans, and I'm wondering how far these plans have progressed. Also, there have been suggestions that if the road is going to be maintained in its present location it might be necessary to have some adjustments on the curvature of the existing bridge over the Kootenay River at Springbrook.

There is concern by one small service station operator there as to really where the plans are, where we are going, what's going to take place, and when it is going to take place. Because he's considering renovating his service station there.

One other question that's been brought up from time to time by the Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources (Hon. Mr. Nimsick), is the question of Rose Pass. It's a highway that leads to nowhere. It leads to the Kootenay Lake. However, the Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources used to push very strenuously for the establishment of this road. I remember in years gone by there was a survey carried out.

I'm wondering whether you believe that there is justification for this road. What is the present situation? Are you progressing? Is construction going to start in 1973? Or is construction going to start in 1974, 1975, or never? Which is it, Mr. Minister? Those are the only questions I have.

MS. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Fort George.

MR. A.A. NUNWEILER (Fort George): Thank you Mr. Chairman. I would like to make one or two comments about highway problems in my area as well.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. NUNWEILER: Do you want to include yours? I'll talk to him about that too.

I think this is a high priority in my area. It appears in many circumstances that highway planning has been several years behind, probably 4 or 5 years behind, in certain parts of the riding. Our area, as you may be aware, is at the confluent of the two major rivers, the Nechako and the Fraser, and the city is inside the confluence.

There's a population of approximately 60,000 in the area. We've got heavy industrial traffic as well because of the fact that three pulp mills are on the northwest — northeast end of one part of the city — and then we have a major industrial site on the opposite end of the city.

We do have a major highway that divides the entire city. We've got a high intensity of industrial traffic, largely logging trucks, continuously travelling this road. At the same time we have the cross traffic from both sides of the city, which has a traffic density much greater than the highway itself, even though the highway itself has a large volume of traffic — not only industrial but, of course, heavy vehicle through-traffic and local city traffic.

It's a real hodge-podge and does create a lot of problems for the motorists, for the industries and also for the highways.

We do have a city council which is continuously grappling with this as well. And also regional districts.

We've got a rather unfortunate accident record in the area, according to the records. We do have a long hill going east, Highway 16 East, with the same kind of traffic, that does not have a passing lane for trucks. Highway 16 West has the same problem — no passing lane for trucks. In effect it is a road that we would find passing through a small community, even though this is the crossroads of the north.

I would like to suggest the Minister of Highways (Hon. Mr. Strachan) consider visiting the area and having a good look at it. Because really and truly it hasn't had the planning that is necessary. It has also been noted in the past that many schools are on the heavily-travelled parts of the highway, which adds to the hazards.

It sometimes strikes me strange, the planning that does go on, whether it's construction of schools, of industry, and so on. The department people from education do their school planning. The department of forests does their planning. Yet somehow or other these different departments, when they build a school, don't seem to be able to talk with Highways to see how the volume of students and the volume of traffic are going to mix. Somehow or other transportation planning should involve all departments that are related to it.

We also have snow clearing problems in the area. We do have snow up there, it's a little different than down here on the Island.

We've had a tough winter in many respects this year. But in checking the equipment — the snow fighting equipment — it has been noted that in our area a lot of the equipment has been much too light to cope with the conditions. The average age of the equipment in the area is 12 years old. And there's even some of it that's 25 years old. It would appear that this is something that should be looked at.

We also have the problem with the Hart Highway area. What the answer is I don't know. Obviously it has to be looked at. We can give one answer and not have the right one. I would suggest that highway planning might take a very good look at copying with accident hazards and reducing our accidents.

There's also been a problem with expropriations in the east end of the riding where a highway was put

[ Page 1347 ]

through prime agricultural land. It involved about six different small farms. The delays involved in compensating these people, along with the question as to why it was necessary to go through prime agricultural land, is still really not answered to my satisfaction, and many others.

I would like to ask the Minister to comment on these matters, because I do think that they do deserve prompt attention.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for West Vancouver-Howe Sound, followed by the Member for Cariboo.

MR. L.A. WILLIAMS (West Vancouver–Howe Sound): I shan't be long, Mr. Chairman. I have a number of requests to put to the Minister, and some questions. My first request is an unusual one. Would the Minister please assure me that his department will not build any more highways in West Vancouver. That's No. 1. If I could have that assurance, I can assure the Minister that he will be held in high esteem in that particular municipality.

However, there are some other areas which need his attention.

Interjection by an Hon. Member

MR. WILLIAMS: No more highways in West Vancouver, please. You've done enough damage there. But I must say, Mr. Chairman — and I say this seriously to the Minister — that great difficulties have been encountered in the construction of the widening project of the Upper Levels Highway; and his staff, under very difficult circumstances, performed their job admirably. That goes from the chief engineer all the way down through his staff. On some of the performances of some of the contractors, I can't quite say as much. But at least, so far as the staff is concerned, they're doing their job.

Now, would the Minister please indicate to the committee why his department has control and operation of ferries not in the British Columbia ferry system. I draw attention particularly to the ferry which runs between Darrell Bay and Woodfibre. It seems to me that with the discontinuance of the townsite at Woodfibre that that area now only serves to move employees from the mainland, really, across to Woodfibre. And we're certainly providing a service for Rayonier.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. WILLIAMS: For Rayonier, the company which operates at Woodfibre. There's no longer any town there; they're virtually all gone. I think there should be some reconsideration of the method of operation of that ferry, particularly because the workmen move to and from every shift on that ferry. But that ferry is not adequate to accommodate the number of passengers who now must travel.

As a matter of fact it's got quite serious. Because I now understand that a consideration has been given to putting a bus on the ferry in order to provide enough seats for the men to sit down on when they're on the trip. And while this may provide some comfort for the crossing it is very dangerous to have passengers riding inside a closed bus on a ferry.

There was, two or three weeks ago in foggy conditions, a near miss between a ferry and a commercial vessel heading for Squamish, or from Squamish, I'm not sure which. If there had been a collision and there had been men in the buses with the doors closed, I'm not sure whether they would have all got out safely.

I think that needs to be very carefully considered; a better ferry, and some real consideration as to whether the highways department should be responsible to provide that crossing.

Now moving farther up in the constituency, Mr Chairman, would the Minister indicate to what extent his department is exercising control over the highway which runs through the Pemberton Valley from Mt. Currie through Duffy Lake and on to Lillooet? That's a first class forestry road, largely built by Evans Forest Products and it is being used increasingly by members of the public. It constitutes a great saving in time in moving to Kamloops from the northern part of the constituency, access which never was available before.

I would just like to know if the department is taking control of that road, and whether the highway district in North Vancouver is going to be expanded to take in some part of that responsibility or whether it will all be dealt with from Lillooet.

Now the last question I have to ask. Has the department shelved altogether the more direct connection with Lillooet, by going through up Anderson Lake and Seton Lake and over the top There is a sort of satisfactory jeep road that can be used from time to time if you are courageous. I wondered if the department has shelved consideration of that route for all time. Then there's the other route which goes west from the Pemberton Valley and around through to Bralorne. I believe that route is almost complete. Is that to become a public access road?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I have nothing in answer to your last question. I have nothing in this year's estimates for that. With regard to the Shalalth Road, yes, we're giving that one up. With regard to Mt. Currie — Lillooet Lake, that's the Jeffrey Creek to

[ Page 1348 ]

Cayuse Pass, there's money in the estimates to work on that road this year. It'll be handled through the North Vancouver office.

The Woodfibre ferry: I agree with you completely that now that the townsite has been removed, it really isn't the responsibility of the public or the Department of Highways to continue to provide a ferry system to get the workers from where they are to their place of employment.

To close the townsite was a decision made by the company. When this was drawn to my attention, I wrote the company because they had written to me asking that the ferry service be improved and that we spend all sorts of money to do so. In a letter to the company I pointed out that it was an action of theirs that had caused this changed condition — which made the requirement for additional ferry service necessary — and I felt the company had some responsibility.

I suggested to them that if they wished that ferry service improved, because the need came about through an action of theirs, they should be willing to pay 50 per cent of the additional costs. I'd be quite prepared on behalf of the government to continue to participate for the rest.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Well, I didn't get a very satisfactory answer from them. They want us to take the public purse and pay the whole shot. I'm not very happy about doing that because it was an action of theirs that brought this situation about. Did they consult with the department before they took the action? No, they didn't consult with the department before they took the action; so it's my opinion that they have a responsibility here too. So I'm digging my heels in a little because it is the public purse and I feel that I should protect it as much as possible — at the same time fulfill the needs and participate where we can.

Thank you for your compliments to the staff. I agree with you that they're a very good staff.

No more highways in West Vancouver–Howe Sound.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, alright, I'll agree with you. But I'll remind you of those words perhaps later on as the years go by. I think that pretty well answers all the matters you raised.

The Member for Fort George (Mr. Nunweiler) claims highway planning is behind. Well, had the planning and the work been done some years ago, it probably would have been behind now because it would be out of date.

Old equipment: I've indicated earlier that there's more money in the expenditures this year for new equipment, and I hope to even increase that, The expropriation in the east end of his riding: I'm not familiar with what went wrong there. It was before my time, but we'll take a look at it.

The Member for Columbia River (Mr. Chabot) wanted some answers. The Rose Pass route: when is it going to take place? We have nothing right now for that. We haven't got anything for the foreseeable future.

That Skookumchuck-Kimberley area: they were in to see me about that. The Wasa cutoff to Skookumchuck: they were in to see me, and because of their submissions, we are looking at that whole bridge route thing again at the present time. They want us to take another look at it and we're doing that.

The level crossing at Athalmer: we will take a look at that to determine traffic; the pontoon bridge, we're looking into that; the West Side Road, we're going to continue to work on that this year.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes, there's money in there for that this year.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes, there's a good chunk of money, just about the figure you mentioned I think. It's not $30,000. I'll tell you later. There's money in there. I don't want to have to tell everybody how much money's in every vote. (Laughter).

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: In regard to the speeches made by the Minister of Mines (Hon. Mr. Nimsick), I think the Member agrees with me that the Minister of Mines always makes great speeches.

AN HON. MEMBER: He talks through his hat sometimes.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, no, you're confusing yourself with him.

With regard to the free ferries: I think the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Stupich) has made the same suggestion on occasion. I looked at it even before I was Minister of Highways and it sounds great, but you know what would happen.

AN HON. MEMBER: I know what would happen.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Well let me explain to you, just in case you don't. Free ferries — it would

[ Page 1349 ]

mean that every Sunday driver in the lower mainland would decide to take his family for a cruise, and they'd be lined up there for miles. The whole system would break down. That's why we simply can't have it free.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: They wanted the B.C. Ferries, and the labour people suggested an increased ferry service. Certainly, it will have to increase over the years, But I don't suggest or ask you to hold your breath if you're waiting for any decrease in fares.

So in this session as I've said, we're not looking at increase; we're not looking at a decrease. So that means it will remain pretty well the same. I think that answers all the questions.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Cariboo.

MR. A.V. FRASER (Cariboo): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a few things here to take up with the Minister on a province-wide basis and also in my own riding. The first item I would like to know from the Minister: is the Department of Highways looking at an alternate route to the Fraser Canyon for the people from the interior going to the coast?

You know the load on the canyon is getting heavier all the time — not only the part of the canyon from Hope to Lytton but also the Thompson Canyon from Lytton to Spences Bridge. I believe that the planning department has taken some looks at that but have any decisions been made; and where is the new route going to be? Is it going up through the Coquihalla? Has a policy decision been made? just where is it going to go? Quite frankly, in the summertime now the Fraser Canyon is just about impossible for tourists and local people alike.

Getting into my own riding: I've sent a list of the requirements in my riding, and you kindly answered and said, "Get hold of the staff before the session is over and we get booted out of here."

I would just like to re-emphasize that my riding of Cariboo has 3,800 miles of public roads, by far the largest mileage of any riding in British Columbia. I'd like to point out to the Minister, when he's thinking about the riding, that 10 per cent of the 3,800 miles are paved. The rest of them are in one state or another of being worn out, or are cow trails, and so on.

What I'm mostly concerned about, and where small starts have been made is Highway 20 from Williams Lake to Bella Coola. It's a distance of 300 miles. We got started on it and 15 miles are done. We only have 285 miles left to go. The first 15 miles cost $4 million for the reconstruction and paving. There's a large task ahead of us here, I'm concerned that something keep on going this year, in the way of a tender call or day labour, and push from east to west — from the 15 miles that was done, which was Williams Lake going west. I'd certainly like to see at least another 15 miles done this year or put up to contract so the work can proceed. There's a large job to do there.

This goes through the Chilcotin Plateau, and I might say that the local citizens don't want a blacktop road all the way but they want a better standard of gravel road than they've had. I would suggest that the first 50 miles out of Williams Lake certainly should be reconstructed and capped. After that, keep on improving the gravel base.

Highway 24 is another substandard road running south of 100 Mile House on Highway 97 through to No. 5 Road, Yellowhead. It's a connecting route. In the Cariboo and in the northern part of the province, and I think even in the southern part, this would be a connector so we could have more circular trips. This is another distance of 50 to 60 miles. There's a lot of traffic on it now. It's a very poor grade of gravel road. I think the Department of Highways should get on with that.

Part of this road is in the Kamloops riding but about two-thirds of it is in the Cariboo riding. I think you have some real tough construction where you leave the Yellowhead. You've got rockwork coming west. But it's not that tough in the Cariboo section, proceeding from Highway 97 east towards the Yellowhead. I'd like your department, Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister, to give special consideration to these two really main sideroads — that's what they are — in my riding for this year.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. First Member for Vancouver–Point Grey.

MR. P.L. McGEER (Vancouver–Point Grey): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I went without lunch today in the hopes of getting up to say just a word or two on behalf of the highway system in the rural part of Vancouver–Point Grey. Of course, during these debates of the Minister of Highways — and I can remember with the former Minister — animosity is completely gone. It's always appropriate to compliment the Minister on the very fine job that he's doing. Mr. Chairman, I really quite sincerely want to compliment the Minister because I think that he's really doing a fine job in highways. Perhaps he doesn't do quite so well when he is the den mother for errant cabinet Ministers and plays the role of Minister of "defence," but in highways he's just excellent.

Mr. Chairman, I would like a Page here to take across a development plan for the ferry system so that others will have an opportunity to look. Would you take one up to the Press gallery as well, after

[ Page 1350 ]

you've delivered it to the Minister.

Mr. Chairman, this is a plan that was drawn up a few years ago for a ferry crossing from Iona Island to some station on the other side. I know that's under debate at the present time. One presumes that it will be somewhere on Gabriola Island. What I want to draw the Minister's attention to is what can be done in an exciting way with a new ferry terminal on the mainland side. This particular plan calls merely for widening the present Iona Island causeway out to about the standards of the present causeway at Tsawwassen.

If the Minister will look at this plan, he will probably see that there is a potential recreational area there — between that Iona Island causeway, which now exists, and the North Arm jetty, which now exists — half the size of Vancouver harbour. The other thing he may notice, if he looks at it, is that since the building of the North Arm jetty, silt has accumulated at Iona Island to the point now where a huge unused potential recreational area exists. It's large enough for two 18-hole golf courses in an area — I'm talking about the lower mainland area in general — that's short of greenbelt land.

Inside the two jetties — this great big "Y" that now exists - it would be very easy to dredge a part of it produce a marina that, at this stage, could hold at least 2,000 small boats but which could eventually contain more berths for recreational craft on the lower mainland than exist in all other marinas put together. There's enough room there for small-boat moorage that would last us into the hereafter.

The connection of this particular area to downtown Vancouver is very close. It's not more than 10 minutes drive. A new bridge is being installed at the present time — the Hudson Street bridge — that will connect up with the Vancouver International Airport. But that could be widened. I'd like the Minister to tell us whether he is considering, at this important time, providing additional width to that bridge, both for rapid transit and for potentially increased traffic to serve a ferry terminal.

Mr. Chairman, the point about it is that, were this to be done now, we would be able to look after future ferry traffic needs at the best possible dollar cost. If one is going to make a visionary decision in this regard, now is the moment to do it — when that bridge is about to be built — and include this safety factor for the future — except that it isn't a safety factor. It's a use factor for the provincial ferry and highway system.

An additional advantage of the particular plan that I've sent across to the Minister is that one can develop picnic areas for the people. You'll see room in the "Y" for a trailer court area. One could even put in a housing project and hotels along the strip that faces the North Arm jetty.

Imagine this, Mr. Speaker; having for visitors in North America the possibility of taking a transcontinental flight from Ottawa about this time of year — when Ottawa is just barely better in climate than Lower Slobbovia with all the ice and snow. For a long weekend, these people can climb on an aircraft; fly out to the Vancouver International Airport; be whisked away by a jitney to the hotel right here next to this recreational area, where there would be charter fishing boats and this marine underwater park that we were going to establish.

They could have a game of golf in February on this new golf course, which incidentally will be very well fertilized because the Iona sewage treatment plant is right there. They could have their game of golf; go out and enjoy catching a salmon off the bell buoy or right along the edge of Roberts Bank; come in and enjoy a seafood dinner; and then there would be the new rapid transit system that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is going to put in, able to whisk them to downtown Vancouver where they could enjoy the theatre, or plays or whatever it is.

Then, Mr. Minister, if we ever get that late-night ferry that so many people talk about, even after that they could consider coming across to the island. But these are all ways in which an area that is now little more than a mud slide could be created into a major recreational area, a delightful patch of green, and a service area for this growing traffic volume. I'd just like to hear the Minister's comments on this idea for developing the ferry system.

Next, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister — now that we're taking a new look at the ferry system — if he'd like to make a comment on the possibility of having one lane for reservations.

This is so that people who are on tour or people who have important meetings can get a commitment in advance that their sport will be saved. Charge a premium for it — $1, $2, whatever it is — but so that people know if they have to get a particular ferry sailing they can do so.

AN HON. MEMBER: He's already answered that question.

MR. McGEER: Well, we can keep asking him.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister if he'd think again too about a late-night sailing. As I understand, what the people from the island would like to have most is a midnight sailing from Vancouver — heaven knows why they want to be in Vancouver until 11: 00 or 11:30 at night.

One was this could be done, Mr. Chairman, is to dispense with the 4 o'clock sailing. Then what we would be able to have is a sailing instead starting at 6 o'clock. Then the regular shift would finish at 2:00 in the morning, with a 12 o'clock sailing from the Vancouver side. One wouldn't have to put on new crews; one would just have to forego a less important

[ Page 1351 ]

sailing for a more important sailing. I wonder if the Minister might be prepared to make a try at the system of undertaking a partial late-night sailing in that way.

Once more, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister if some consideration might not be given to the ferry service regarding the movement of heavy trucks off the ferries first. I've witnessed too often the risks that motorists take in attempting to get past the lumbering trucks that have got off the ferry first and are holding the traffic up. As they attempt to get by these trucks, they meet the other motorists who started out late and who are coming 75 miles an hour down the highway, trying to make the ferry before it leaves the dock.

I am certain that many fatal accidents have been caused over the years because of this policy of allowing the slow traffic and large trucks to lumber off the ferry first and get in a postion where they plug and block the faster vehicular traffic.

Unlike the Member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound (Mr. Williams), I don't wish to make of the Minister a request that no highways be built in Vancouver–Point Grey. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to specifically request that improvement be made in the access roads to the University of British Columbia.

Mr. Chairman, believe it or not, there's a city of 20,000 people out there — more than 20,000, probably closer to 25,000 — that empties and fills up once a day.

Very few people live there. They all arrive by car because, Mr. Chairman, the bus service really isn't that great to the campus. I'm not saying that it's any worse than any other area that's served by buses, but it still isn't adequate to carry 20,000 people there and home again. So twice a day there are these traffic jams.

One is always certain that this is going to be cured by just a few miles of road being built, and each year we're disappointed. Well, Mr. Chairman, the specific roadlinks that need to be improved are from 29th Avenue through to 16th. There's a road that runs through the bush there which isn't paved and which has to be graded, though I don't think very often, by sending heavy equipment out — but in any event not enough to keep it in shape. So why not just pave it and have done? Then you won't need to keep bringing these lumbering graders out to do this little stretch of road, which can't be more than 11 1/2 to 2 miles.

The road going out, Marine Drive, started out in a spectacular fashion as a four-lane divided highway all the way out to the Shaughnessy Golf Course, and then it kind of petered out about half a mile beyond the Shaughnessy Golf Course. One wonders why it was never properly finished. I'd like to ask the Minister if he intends to extend that highway significantly past Shaughnessy Golf Course to where it was intended to go, namely the University of British Columbia, and when that would be done.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I understand that the president of the university wants to come and see me about that and a number of other items relating to the roads around the university.

With regard to instructions to the ferry crews to hold the trucks once they're off the ships until the faster traffic is past, this was looked at some time previously and it was decided that it not be done. We'll take another look at it.

I would remind you in the meantime that the Pat Bay road is now four lanes and there's going to be some four-lane on the other side.

MR. McGEER: Even with four lanes you find that people skid out from behind. It's dangerous.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: All right. We'll take another look at it.

Late-night sailings: when the stretched ferries go on the Nanaimo-Vancouver run, the shift requirements of the new schedule — it will take longer for them to make a run and turn around — I understand will in essence give us a late-night ferry to Vancouver Island. The time will have to be increased for each shift; when you start and take a  21/2 hour turnaround instead of a 2 1/4 hour turnaround, you then have actually a late-night ferry. So that in all probability will be coming up to Vancouver Island from Vancouver.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Not the Swartz Bay, no. It's the natural shift work-out, you see. Two full shifts will get us to a much later period in the evening.

One lane for reservations: well, it's the whole business of reservations and people who have been waiting for hours seeing other people go aboard ahead of them.

The Hudson Street bridge: the width of the bridge is geared to the capacity of the street system in Vancouver to carry that traffic. The widening of the Hudson Street bridge would not solve the problem, because the street capacity of Vancouver, into which it.'s feeding, just isn't great enough to handle any more traffic that can go on the existing designed width of the Hudson Street bridge. There would have to be a massive re-do of the Vancouver city street system and a massive change in the attitudes of people towards driving before the Hudson Street bridge would serve what you propose.

[ Page 1352 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Omineca.

MR. D.T. KELLY (Omineca): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to speak to the Minister concerning some of the things that I think are very prominent concerning highways in Omineca.

I'd like to relate back seven years ago to the first time I arrived in Omineca. Just west of Fraser Lake there is a one-way bridge, a wooden, one-way structure on Highway 16. Within a quarter-of-a-mile of this highway there is a railroad crossing.

At that time there had been preparations made for a new construction at that point. In fact on the side of the road there was a sign that said "Pardon the Inconvenience," or something to that effect.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That was seven years ago, wasn't it?

MR. KELLY: Seven years ago, Mr. Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman. You know, they actually made the cuts for the new highway and the new overpass and put in the mounds of dirt that were required to build a bridge over the top of the crossing and the cut and a fill in towards where the new bridge would be located. You know, I'm thinking of asking the Department of Lands, Forests and Water Resources if I could get a permit to cut the timber that's growing on that ramp and on the mounds of earth. No kidding, the trees are five or six feet high. In another few years I think they would be fit for sawlogs of some sort.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Is there still a one-way bridge on Highway 16?

MR. KELLY: That's a one-way bridge. That's correct. On a main highway, on the northern transprovincial highway.

I see you have in your estimates, Mr. Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, $150,000, I believe it is, for part of that construction. But I am very concerned, because in this particular instance many people have been either injured or killed at this location, either through one or the other of these two obstructions — the overpass has a detour through where the old road would have led and the ramp leading onto the bridge is a downhill ramp.

In the wintertime, when the ice is on the road and it's snowing, we have had several accidents, where trucks have gone into the river, where men have been rescued unconscious. In one case a man was left permanently disabled, although his life was saved. He received brain damage through an accident that occurred there.

Two people have been killed within a few yards of the crossing that I am referring to.

I would consider, Mr. Minister, through you Mr. Chairman, that if you were to put all the money that is to be allowed for other projects in that area this year into that bridge — I would like to see that bridge started and in fact a final date sought as to the completion of this project.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That's the Nechako River bridge, is it?

MR. KELLY: No, Mr. Minister, that is the Stellako River bridge and Stellako overhead — 802 is the project number. The complete project, of course, is $710,000. If it were even just doubled, or half the project undertaken this year, I think that at least we could see a completion date for the end of next year. This would really be a benefit to the whole province.

The actual damage that is being created at that location I would have said would have paid for half the construction in the first place. It's just gone too long, that's all there is to it.

Mr. Chairman, although maybe Cariboo does have the most miles of road in its constituency in comparison to all the other constituencies in the province, I think I have the highest number of gravel roads, or dirt roads, or any other kind of roads, including mining roads. It's been a problem for the fellows working on the highways to find sufficient gravel to fill the potholes on these roads.

I have lived in the rural part of the province a lot of my life and I have found that if people have decent roads — even if they are only gravel roads that are reasonably smooth — they are reasonably happy about this. They don't have to be high-speed roads.

On the main travelled rural roads I would like to see a good gravelling programme go on this year. We haven't had any gravel on our roads up there since I moved there, that I know of.

Mr. Minister, through you Mr. Chairman, yesterday the Hon. Member for Cariboo (Mr. Fraser) mentioned to you about the speed limits. I don't know whether I'm supporting him or he's supporting me, because I did speak about it in my maiden speech.

I am anxious to see the speed limits increased in those parts of the province where the roads are up to that standard. I don't know how you would apply this increase, but I think that at least the model of car would have something to do with it. If it's a brand new car, I'm quite sure that that car is adequate to cover those roads without flying to pieces or falling apart because of the construction. Old model cars I don't think can hack it.

I don't believe for a second that there is a person in this room who doesn't at some time drive at 70 miles an hour on our roads, even if they're listed at 60 miles an hour. I think all you have to do is drive

[ Page 1353 ]

towards the ferry on a Friday afternoon and you will see people going above the speed limit, in many cases much faster than the speed that I'm asking for. I think that a speed of 70 miles an hour would be considered a decent rate of speed.

In many cases if you traverse the highways of the province, you will see that the buses, the freight trucks and everything else are going several miles above the posted speed limit. I think that we would only be doing them a favour to bring speed limits to that region so that they won't have to break the law to travel from point to point.

A lot of these people are professional drivers. If a man isn't qualified to drive that fast he shouldn't drive that fast. But I think that if the roads are there, and especially with the modern equipment they've built now, this speed limit wouldn't be out of order. I would think that some of the highways could be posed at a higher rate of speed than at present.

A problem that we've had in our riding, Mr. Minister — and I don't know whether it's prevalent all over the province — is that because of the police being spaced at distant points as far as our riding is concerned, we've noticed that whenever an emergency vehicle was operating, and especially if they're pulling a wreck out of a ditch or down the highway, with all their warning lights and blinkers going people at large don't seem to recognize them.

Just recently, at the very location I was referring to a minute ago where this bridge and railroad crossing are located, a person went in the ditch. The wrecker came down to haul him out and in the course of pulling out this car that was several yards off the road, another car came along and, although his lights were very bright and very clear, this other man drove into the wrecker and seriously hurt the operator. I feel that the colour of these wreckers' lights should be changed to red or some other colour, because I don't feel that people are recognizing the amber lights as indicating that it's necessary to slow down or stop or at least to make sure they avoid what is going on. They just shoot past these particular wreckers.

I've had two or three of them complain to me that this was happening all the time. For some reason or other the public needs to be educated as to what is going on — that these lights are going they are obliged by law to slow down.

One other thing that I was concerned about was that not long ago a bypass was put in at Houston. In doing so the highway came out in a different part of town from where it was originally routed. In coming out at this different location, of course, it had bypassed some of the service stations.

In most instances the municipality will allow the service station to put a sign that there's a particular garage down this road a block or so, because he's been bypassed. They usually give him some assistance in having the traffic directed to his garage. But in this particular case the garage is now located so far back from the main highway that most people won't even consider going near him because of the inconvenience of having to drive back to that particular location.

It's my feeling, Mr. Chairman, that this man should have been compensated for this particular action. He's serving the travelling public. When that road was re-routed he should have been considered; they should either have allowed for a new establishment for him or at least purchased his property and turned it into another type of business.

But here he is. That's the only kind of business he knows. No property is available for him and his business has been depreciated considerably. I am of the opinion that this man should be compensated for the loss of his business, as should any other man in the same particular kind of business who is affected by a re-routing of a highway. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for North Peace River.

MR. D.E. SMITH (North Peace River): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I see the Hon. Minister has left the chamber for a few minutes, so I'll deal with a couple of local problems. I know that his assistants who are sitting here are very familiar with them. Then I'll get around to some other items.

While I'm on the matter of local problems, I would like to bring to the Minister's attention a problem regarding the replacement of a bridge at the Halfway River on Highway 29. This is the highway between Fort St. John and Hudson Hope.

The bridge is in a very sad state of repair and while it is adequate to handle traffic, part of the bridge is an old bridge and the rest of it is presently a Bailey bridge that replaces a span that fell down. I understand plans are in the mill for the redesign of that bridge. I believe there was some problem with regard to the original design, and the information I had from the Department of Highways is that you are redesigning the type of structure that you would use there in replacement of the existing facility.

One of the problems, of course, with the existing facility is that it is very narrow. While it can accommodate some traffic, anything that is a wide load cannot go between Fort St. John and Hudson Hope via the Halfway River and must reroute by Dawson Creek and Chetwynd, a distance of sometimes another 100 miles. I would like to know from the Minister the situation concerning the replacement of the Halfway River bridge and when we could expect the tender to be called on that particular project.

There is one other project that I believe is of immediate concern. As a matter of fact, I know it is of immediate concern to the residents that live in the Cecil Lake area on Highway 103, which is east from

[ Page 1354 ]

Fort St. John. I appreciate the fact that the Minister has indicated there will be some more paving done in that area this year to extend what is presently in existence. We have a very bad problem on the Beatton River hill itself. The department is well aware of the problem. It is a slide area that we have to get across and we have a very sharp switchback. It is unstable ground, it has been the source of consternation to the people who have to travel between Fort St. John and Cecil Lake for years.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: That's on "103."

MR. SMITH: That's on "103", yes.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: What area — Boundary Lake?

MR. SMITH: The highway going from Fort St. John to Boundary Lake and the Beatton River hill that we have to cross to get to the Boundary Lake area.

There is a bad slide there. It was as a result of shifting ground, and it looks to me like they will have to eventually reroute that particular section of road if that is possible. I know the engineering staff have looked at it but it is not the easiest thing in the world to find a location on the Beatton River hill that looks like it will be stable location for a new road. The suggestion has been made to me by the engineer in Fort St. John that we get across that slide area as quickly as possible and, instead of the sharp switchback, continue along in a westerly direction to get up the hill at a little different location than at present.

I would like to know what will be done in that area because it is a source of real concern particularly to heavily-loaded trucks. They come up and they hit that switchback. In wintertime they spin out and we have trailers across the road and a number of problems in that respect.

There are a couple of other items that I would like to raise with the Minister at this time. One is the recommendations made by the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce. A couple of them at least, are regarding highways in the Province of British Columbia.

One of the first I would like to refer to is the investigation of accidents. Now I think we are all aware that sometimes the accidents occur because of road conditions and quite often these bad accidents occur because of driver problems. It may be the fault of the driver or it may be the fault of the road.

The B.C. Chamber of Commerce has suggested to the Minister that where we have an increasing frequency of accidents in certain areas, a board of researchers be employed by the Department of Highways to investigate such accidents and to recommend to the Department of Highways what they would think would be means of correcting the problem. I think it is a good recommendation and perhaps one that the Minister is presently investigating. If not, I would like to know his opinion on it.

There is one other matter that I would like to raise in the Minister's estimates right at the moment, and that is this matter of the Alaska Highway. As you know, the Alaska Highway is under B.C. jurisdiction to the end of pavement at mile 83 and beyond that point is federal government matter under the federal Department of Public Works.

This has been the case for a number of years and there has been a great deal of agitation and lobbying to have the Alaska Highway paved. Many people have attacked the problem from many different areas. There has not always been unanimous agreement on how or when it should be done, but I do believe that we now have the ear of the federal government concerning the fact that the Alaska Highway should at some time in the near future be paved.

As a start of this, they have launched a programme to straighten out a number of miles of the highway between Fort St. John and Fort Nelson and they have replaced a number of bridges which would have to be replaced if they get into a paving programme. They have reconstructed and regraveled a number of sections.

While that is not the concern of the provincial government as such at the present time, I would hope that we have the support of the Minister of Highways in any discussions that he has with the federal department, and his persuasion wherever possible to see that what is considered to be the first priority, the stretch between the end of the pavement beyond Fort St. John and Fort Nelson, paved as quickly as possible.

To this end the Peace-Liard Regional District prepared a brief in 1972. If the Minister doesn't have the brief, I would be happy to supply him with a copy of it. They have suggested in their outline that the matter of paving the Alaska Highway be broken down into four priorities: number one being from Fort St. John north to Fort Nelson; number two, from Whitehorse to the end of the Canadian division; number three, from Whitehorse back south towards Watson Lake; and number four, that section between Watson Lake and Fort Nelson.

I think they have their priorities in line with the traffic patterns and the heavily-used sections of the Alaska Highway. I would hope the Minister would support that particular position.

Their brief is fairly comprehensive, as a matter of fact, and very up to date. They point out, basing their calculations on the known cost of maintenance, that if the highway is paved, thereby reducing the cost of maintenance in those sections that are completed, that over a period of 20 years the actual costs will work out to be about the same as if they just continue to maintain the Alaska Highway as a gravel road.

If the Minister does not have a copy of the brief that is being presented by the Peace-Liard district —

[ Page 1355 ]

and they have done a lot of work to get this — I would be happy to see that he receives a copy of it. It is a good factual presentation and one with which we hope we have the support of the Minister whenever he is in correspondence with the federal department in Ottawa.

One other matter that I would like to bring briefly to the Minister's attention: this matter of frontage roads abutting provincial highways. Invariably we get involved with subdivisions of land outside municipal boundaries. Whenever that happens we also have a problem with the control of traffic coming into arterial highways.

It has been the policy of the department for some years to require frontage roads to be built by the subdivider. I don't think this is a bad policy because you cut down on the number of entrances and exits from your main arterial highway. But it does provide a problem to those people who may be in an area not easily serviced by any frontage road.

I would wonder if the department might look over their regulations again with respect to how far or how close together frontage roads could be. I know it presents a problem in some areas because if you get all kinds of little entrances onto an arterial highway then you have a real traffic hazard.

In other areas we have had experience in the past where people who may be half a mile removed from the nearest exit or entrance to the highway were being requested to build a frontage road. In those areas I would hope the Minister would give some consideration to relaxing the rules a little bit to allow these people accommodation either on or off a highway where they may need entrances or exits — particularly in the farming areas where they want to get on and off their property where they may not live but use a frontage road. I know there is some latitude extended to them at the present time. I would just like to suggest that sometimes, in my experience, the department has leaned a little heavily on some of these people to the extent they have created a hardship which, in my opinion at least, was not necessary at the time.

I have raised a number of points with the Minister of Highways. I'd appreciate it if he has some comments on them. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Frontage roads along highways: as the Member stated, it is imperative that we do try and control the traffic that flows onto the main highways. If you have any specific instances where you think development is being held up and is not going ahead and where you think the restrictions are too severe, then certainly go and see my deputy. He'll consider it.

Remember always that we have to protect the future. Once you've given an access it's very, very difficult to take it away. You have to avoid creating problems for yourself.

But certainly, if there's a hardship and it's reasonable, we'll take a look at it.

Alaska Highway paving: naturally, I want to see it paved, and this Government wants to see it paved between Fort St. John and Fort Nelson. I think the blacktop goes up about 60 miles north of Fort St. John now…

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes. It's about 50 miles. That would leave 220 miles really.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'm inclined to think — and this is a straight bargaining point — that when they agree that they have the whole thing and they've got it all fixed up and paved, then we take it over. Otherwise, they're liable to drag it out. They're anxious to get rid of it.

If you say, "Yes, as soon as you pave it, we'll take it over," then they haven't really got the push to get the whole thing which I would like to see done.

Investigations of accidents, road conditions and the condition of the auto: I agree that there should be real research on this. This is part of the new programme that I hope and expect will develop out of the centralized automobile insurance service. This is why that's in the legislation — to allow us to have a group where it's part of their responsibility. It's in the interests of the automobile insurance agency, whether it's public or private, to find out what causes accidents and to reduce them. We're prepared to go right into the research to determine this, because it can only bring benefit to the people, in two or three ways.

I agree. I have seen the reports of some very intensive research done on individual accidents that have been done in several places in the States. The answers they come up with are really amazing. They find that the cause of the accident very often is completely unrelated to what the superficial reports of the accident would indicate. This is why, ever since reading those reports some years ago, I've been a firm believer in this kind of intensive research into the cause of accidents to determine what really causes them. As I say, sometimes the results are just amazing.

The Beatton River hill, a new route: we have a number of places in the province where there are problems of this kind, Shifting ground is shifting ground. What do you do with it? It shifts and you put in another highway — like that road from Terrace to Kitimat, where the whole road just went zoom! We'll certainly take a look at that.

The Halfway River bridge: that is a high priority It's on the top list, as a matter of fact. It wasn't in the

[ Page 1356 ]

expected estimates for this year, but in view of the fact that the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Barrett) has promised me more money than is in the estimates, I'm hopeful we can at least get a start made on that this year.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes, I know. But as I say, it wasn't in the estimates that were allowed for this year. Now that we're getting some more money I'll certainly take a look at that one to see if we can move it up.

I think that pretty well covers the questions.

The Member for Cariboo (Mr. Fraser) sent me a note reminding me that I hadn't answered some of his questions. Highway 20 to Chilcotin — there is some money in there that will do some work on it.

Highway 24 — there's going to be quite a bit of work done on that.

The Coquihalla route — certainly next year we are going to make the snow surveys to determine what the deep snow situation is. We're certainly looking at that as a future route to the interior.

I don't know how many Members of this House remember when there was a railroad on that route, but I do. That railroad closed down every winter. They never operated that railroad, they didn't even try to keep the road open in winter time.

Now a highway is not confined to the same route as the railway, because you can have steeper grades. That's why we're going in to look at it and get the snow surveys. Then we can determine whether or not it's possible to construct a highway through that route that can be kept open all winter. It's on the basis of that information that we'll make the determination, but certainly we're looking at it.

I think that answers all your questions.

HON. MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Dewdney.

MR. P.C. ROLSTON (Dewdney): Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the Minister of Highways — and ferries — a question about the pricing theory on the prices you're changing for cars to go on the ferry. You and I have talked about this. I am only speaking now as an MLA and not for the Government, but I really ask you: have you done any studies on price discrimination on various weights and sizes of cars to go onto the ferries, especially the ones that go to Vancouver Island? I've really never understood why an LTD, for instance, still pays $5 and the Volkswagen pays $5.

In very elementary economics, I would have thought these questions would have been worked out long ago. Do you have information of this? I am first of all asking if, for instance, the heavier and more expensive car — heavier, which incidentally can be very quickly measured. We have weigh scales which can instantaneously register on the cash register at the wicket gate to tell us what that car weighs and whether it should pay $6 or $7 to go onto the ferry; the small car, let's make that $4. Has work been done on that? I don't think we're ever going to resolve the volume of ferry traffic to the island unless we start making some distinctions. If you go to the Continent from the U.K. there definitely is price discrimination.

The second thing I would like to ask you, sir, is about preference to small cars getting on the ferry first. It appears to me, and it has ever since the inception of our Government being in this business, that the first three lines going on our large ferries anywhere in the province should be little cars. I'm obviously out to encourage the smaller car. More small cars probably mean more people onto the ferries.

We are concerned about the loss of resources. The difference in the fuel consumption of the small car as compared to a big car is obvious. The wear on your highways is also very obvious.

So I am asking you this question. I am also pointing out, sir, that these cars should be first up the ramps. They obviously can load more difficult parts of the ferries more quickly. Also maybe they could have a head start back off the ferry.

I am also asking you again about the Albion ferry. I appreciate your letter, but the Albion ferry has more trips than any other ferry in the whole system, whether you're talking about the small inland ferries or the large coastal ferries.

Our party had something to do with taking off the tolls on the Albion ferry. At the same time we asked Mr. Blanshard about either the idea of a larger hull and a faster kind of loading system — this goes between Albion and Fort Langley. I'm sure the Member from Fort Langley (Mr. McClelland) will agree with me that it's a very, very serious situation. It is part of the highway system; it is totally inadequate; it does not help the commuters that we're trying to help go from the north side of the river to the south side to get to work. You wait for three ferries now. The volume on the Albion ferry has gone up to around 40 per cent over what it used to be.

I have some hope from you at least that a hull design for another ferry is in the works and that this same design hopefully could be for the Albion ferry.

I also want to remind you, Mr. Minister of Highways, that my riding has seen a great influx of people into the riding. They go along the Lougheed Highway out through the new Haig Highway, which is a very excellent highway. They take the loop through Hope and back down the south side and come back into Vancouver as a weekend or even a daily trip. I still appeal to you and to your deputies to give us some indication when there will be a bypass around Mission.

We're looking forward to the opening of the Mission bridge in May. We thank you and I think we have in all fairness to thank the previous adminis-

[ Page 1357 ]

tration for the work they've done on that. But we still would ask for a bypass around Mission. It's a small town, it's very dense. The shopkeepers really don't want the kind of density that we would expect with more and more ears using increasingly good highways. I remind you that they now will have to drive through Mission and then back up a cloverleaf and then down and over the bridge. It's very, very confusing. So give us a bit of an indication.

Lastly, I would ask you to consider a bypass around Maple Ridge. There are tandem trucks going through there at 40 miles an hour, admittedly 5 miles above the speed limit, but they're going through there with tremendous weights of gravel.

The Bank of Nova Scotia has lost two complete sets of windows facing Lougheed Highway. My predecessor told me that all of Maple Ridge is shakey ground.

AN HON. MEMBER: He was speaking politically.

MR. ROLSTON: He might have been speaking politically. I think that's true. But we have to ask that there be real work done. I have urged your engineers; I have talked to Dudley Godfrey a number of times. We've got to look at a bypass around Maple Ridge — just one lane each way dropping down onto River Road, and eventually out onto the Lougheed Highway. Those big trucks have got to get out there and I think we must protect them.

The last thing, sir, is that I don't want a fatality on the Lougheed Highway. We're still waiting for cats' eyes. We had a very serious accident on Monday with six cars. It's a new four-lane highway from the Pitt River to Haney. We're still waiting for these cats' eyes. We're still assured they're coming but they're still not there. I, as an MLA for Dewdney, don't want to face a fatality on that large — I don't think particularly well conceived — four-laned highway. I would again ask you for cats' eyes in that section. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I understand the cats' eyes are on order or on their way.

Bypass around Mission and Maple Ridge: I can only promise we'll look at it.

Albion Ferry: you're just getting that big new bridge across the Fraser not too far from the Albion Ferry.

Passenger cars price discrimination — that's an interesting point. You mentioned Europe. Perhaps Europe showed their inherent wisdom in their taxing of automobiles when they started off with a straight tax based on the horsepower of the automobile, with the result that it was an economic incentive to stay with a small automobile. That's why so many of their automobiles are smaller. We in this jurisdiction and in most jurisdictions in North America, didn't go that route. We just gave it a flat licence cost irrespective of size, and it could be that in the future we will have to give this break to the small cars as a method of changing people's attitudes toward utilizing of the big gas burning buggies.

So I'm not going to lose sight of that. I think it is something that we have to keep in mind, not necessarily because it costs less to put a car on the ferry, but as a vehicle for changing public attitudes and overcoming some of the problems we do face. Right now, as you know, it's a flat $5 whether it's a 20 ft. station wagon or a 10 ft. Volkswagen, or an 8 ft. Volkswagen or whatever it is. Certainly we'll keep that in mind.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Langley.

MR. R.H. McCLELLAND (Langley): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We don't have too many provincial highway problems in our constituency, but all of them are very urgent — the ones we do have.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to echo the Member for Dewdney's (Mr. Rolston) concern about the ferry at Fort Langley-Albion, because it's a most necessary problem to have that alleviated somewhat. It's amazing to me how the elimination of a 40 cent fare can so drastically increase the use of that ferry. At the moment most of those people using that ferry are working people who live on one side of the river and work on the other and it's vitally necessary that they're able to get back and forth to their jobs. The quicker we can do something about that problem the better. I think we should have moved that bridge that the highways Minister talks about downstream several miles. The Member for Dewdney doesn't like that idea.

Mr. Chairman, for a long time some of us in our community fought for a new highway access into our City of Langley from the 401 freeway. We felt that we had a first-class city with a second-class access for many years. We finally got it. Many thanks to the government for giving it to us — the previous government, that is.

Recently, with probably the best highway in the whole area, the speed limit was reduced from 50 miles-an-hour to 40 miles-an-hour. Some of the Members in the House have been talking about 70 miles-an-hour speed limits, and here we have a beautiful highway with two wide lanes and wide paved shoulders — 6 ft. shoulders or something like it — and a 40 mile-an-hour speed limit. It just doesn't make any sense. Really, all we've developed there at the moment is a speed trap, a six-mile speed trap. It doesn't make any sense to the people that live in that area and it doesn't make any sense to me. I wonder why the highways department moved that speed limit down to 40 miles-an-hour from 50, shortly after the highway was built.

[ Page 1358 ]

Some of the questions that I'll be asking I have discussed, Mr. Chairman, with some of the staff members in the Department of Highways, but I'd just like to talk about them again for a moment so that I could get the Minister's thought about some of these specific items. I too am concerned about a bypass, around the City of Langley particularly. I've talked about this for a long time. Langley city in the last census was one of the fastest growing cities in Canada. In a five-year period over the last census there was an 84 per cent increase in population, which is unbelievable and certainly creates a whole lot of problems with regard to traffic in that city.

Now we have, as do many cities in the province, a major highway link going through the centre of our commercial area. At the moment it has become almost totally unacceptable, because the traffic just cannot move through Langley city. It's compounded, I admit, by some of the problems that the city has itself because of an inadequate interior traffic system within the city. We want to fix that and we've talked with people from the highways department about some ideas we have there. We hope that that soon will be alleviated.

But none of it makes any sense without a major input from the highways department in that they get a bypass around our city and give that highway to the city. We want to take it over from you. We'll look after it, we'll spend the money on it, we've paved the roads, we'll look after the traffic lights — but get those big trucks out of the middle of our city and all of the traffic that goes from east to west. We'd like to have that done as quickly as possible before we strangle in our own traffic.

There's another problem on Highway 10 just east of Cloverdale, Mr. Chairman, in that it's probably the only major highway in the whole of the lower mainland and perhaps in much of the province that has a relatively steep hill approaching the area with no passing lane. It's about the only one that I know of in the whole area that doesn't have a passing lane. It's in the area where a major auction barn is. People come from all over the Cariboo with their cattle and bring them down to that auction once a week.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Where's that?

MR. McCLELLAND: It's on the Highway 10, Mr. Minister, just east of Cloverdale. The Cariboo is up that way somewhere — I don't know which way.

There's a lot of farm vehicles going up that hill and no bypass, and consequently it's also an area of rapid growth so that we find ourselves with a situation there where traffic is crawling. Accident potential is quite high in that area because of the slow traffic. We'd like to see if something can be done about that bypass. I recognize that it's a difficult engineering problem because of the terrain there, but we ask that perhaps something could be done.

A more recent problem in the area has to do with this — we've asked in our area for a long time for improvements on the Glover Road, which leads to that Fort Langley-Albion ferry. The Department of Highways has provided a partial bypass. The road is in excellent shape up to that bypass, but from there to Fort Langley — which once again is a heavily travelled area of road because Fort Langley Historic Park is, as I understand it, the second most attended national historic park in Canada…So we'd like to have a decent access to that very important national historic park. We finally have some commitments, I think, from the highways department that they're going to look at it.

But as soon as we get the commitment that they plan to do something, it conflicts with a rather important aesthetic and health problem that we have in that area. Trinity Western College, who have been having problems getting rid of their sewage and are in a few problems with the pollution control board, have come up with a plan that will not help get rid of their sewage but will also help to develop a recreational area right on campus. The highways department, after all of these plans were done, came along and told us: "I'm sorry, you can't do it because that's where we're going to put an underpass under the railroad."

So there we are with all those beautiful plans, working on them for years, waiting for the highways department to do something in that area for years — and they're all in conflict, the first time anything has been done. Now surely you would think there might be some way we could come up with a compromise there, so that we could have both the improvement on the Glover Road and the improvement to the area, both from a pollution control standpoint and from the standpoint of an aesthetic value that's going to be very important to the community.

I know, Mr. Chairman, that the people from the municipal council in Langley have tried to get in touch with the Minister, and I think they've been in touch with some of his staff. But this is an important problem and it seems a little ridiculous that we should come into that kind of a conflict at this time.

Mr. Chairman, another problem we have is Highway 13, which is once again becoming a major link from the 401 freeway, both to our community and to the United States border. Once again the highways department has built that road from the Fraser Highway down to the border and done a fine job of it. It's a good road now, but from the Fraser Highway to the 401 freeway, it's a mess. That's all I can call it, it's a real mess. It needs to be rebuilt and I wonder where that road lies in the priorities.

Now only is that traffic increasing to the United States, but it's also increasing Mr. Chairman because of a major game farm that went in there and is a very important tourist attraction in the whole of the lower mainland now. So all of these things tend to increase the traffic, the road gets worse instead of better.

Just before I deal with the specific traffic problem,

[ Page 1359 ]

Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister, I don't know whether your staff has passed on this problem or not. There is a new phenomenon in all of the lower mainland and it's an example of the people going ahead and doing something about a specific problem while waiting for the government to act.

I'm talking about the proliferation of commuter buses in the lower mainland. We now have commuter buses running out of Delta, Ladner and Surrey. We've got them running from as far away as Chilliwack up into Vancouver. Every morning they head out. We've got two of them coming from that area now, a number from Delta, and a number from Surrey. It's people fed up with waiting for rapid transit to develop and they've gone and developed their own form of rapid transit.

They also have a problem in that the government hasn't provided them with any place to park their cars. So they have to park their cars where they can find room. Sometimes, I suppose, they're even illegally parked, but nobody has bothered them yet and I don't think anyone will because they're taking those cars off the freeway at peak periods.

It's amazing the kinds of people who use these commuter buses. They're not just working people but they're people who go in to shop for the day; some of them working people, both ladies and men. They also have many people who are getting up in years and who have a little difficulty getting around.

The specific problem, Mr. Chairman, is that they have to clamber up the side of the banks in order to get back up onto the road so that they can reach their cars. The commuter buses can't come right off the freeway because they could not get back on again without a whole lot of difficulty; in some cases it's next to impossible.

What they generally do is pull off onto the access road, so that they're not a hazard to traffic. Then the people literally have to climb up the side of the bank in order to get back to their cars. As you can understand, Mr. Chairman, it's very difficult for them, particularly if there's snow on the ground and particularly if they happen to be getting up in years. For the ladies in many instances it's a very severe hardship.

My suggestion, Mr. Chairman, was: why not put some people to work? Get some people on either winter works or day care, or whatever it is that it comes under, and send them out to build some little steps up the side of those ramps or whatever it's called. The engineers will tell me what it's called. I don't know what it's called.

It would not only put some people to work but it could be made to be very attractive, In addition, it would help the people who are getting their cars off the road in the peak traffic periods — help them get up with a little more ease.

I know that it's not the normal kind of thing that a highways department does; but why not look at it and see if you can help some people with that programme.

Mr. Chairman, I have written the Minister on one occasion about people who live on Barnston Island, who are also served by ferry. The Minister answered my letter by telling me what the hours of the ferry service were. I knew the hours of the ferry service already. I didn't really need to know that.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I just wanted to be sure you knew.

MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Chairman, some of the people on Barnston Island are very, very concerned because they've heard there may be a cutback in that service. That's what they want to know. They want to be assured that there will be no cutback.

The people in Barnston Island, Mr. Chairman, are the purest people in the world, I'm sure. They have to be home by I I o'clock at night or they miss the last ferry. So they don't have any chance to run around They're darn good people, chaste, pure, they can't get into any trouble because of the ferry service.

All they would like to know is: will you assure them that that ferry service is not going to be cut back; and is there any possibility some time in the future of having a ferry a little later than 11 o'clock at night so that they can go out and see a show in Vancouver from time to time on weekends?

Mr. Chairman, one other problem that I'd like to bring up has to do with an on-ramp in the Matsqui area. I'm sure the department is very familiar with this one too.

I know that they're very reluctant to develop this on-ramp. It's at the Clearbrook road exit from the freeway. There is an exit on that road and what happens is that the tourists who are coming down the freeway will take that exit to go into the town of Clearbrook, do their shopping and then come back out Clearbrook Road and they're gone for weeks because they can't find their way back onto the freeway.

AN HON. MEMBER: We want to keep them in B.C.

MR. McCLELLAND: I realize that we'd like to keep them in B.C., but some of these good people have things that they'd like to get back to in their own homes, I guess.

The road isn't very well signed either. So that these people really can't find their way back. They don't understand why they can't get back onto the freeway the same way that they got off.

I understand the problem there too is that there is another off-ramp not very far from there. Nevertheless, the people of Clearbrook would like to see that on-ramp developed. The Department of Highways owns the property. It's a simple matter, I'm sure, of just developing it.

At one time they were planning to develop it, but

[ Page 1360 ]

since then it's just lain there and nothing has happened.

I have some other questions but I'll hold them, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps I could get some answers to the ones I've asked.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Highways.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: With regard to the on-ramp, it's really not too far. They can go right on down Clearbrook Road and they can hit the other on-ramp. It's not too far, really.

Barnston Island: they have to be home by I I o'clock so they're all good, chaste people. Maybe if we made the latest ferry at 10 o'clock, they would be even better. Or 9 o'clock, they would be even better still. Is that what you're suggesting?

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, no. You said that they were good, solid, sound people because they had to be home by 11 o'clock. We want to keep them that way so if we're making the last one at 10 o'clock or 9 o'clock, then they'll be even better.

MR. McCLELLAND: That's what I'm asking you, if that's what you're planning to do.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, I haven't heard this proposal, that if you go home at 11 o'clock you're a good guy. I haven't heard that proposal before. But to the best of my knowledge there's no intention of cutting it back. I just wanted to be sure you knew what the ferry service was back and forth.

I imagine making it later than that involves you in this shift thing again, of two shifts a day. If it's more than two shifts you're into overtime and all the rest of it. This is the problem of going more than two shifts.

Put stairs in for the freeway: yes, the department is looking at that.

Our staff will be glad to meet over this conflict of plans on the historic park. The staff will be very happy to meet with the group involved.

An inadequate interior grid system in the municipality is part of the problem. This is a failure in most municipalities.

AN HON. MEMBER: We're working on it.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: The Cloverdale east truck route is fairly well up the list. It's not in this year's estimates.

You know, I'm going to have to call a recess and re-examine these estimates. Every time an Opposition Member asks for something I discover it's in here. I'm going to have to take them back and call a recess and re-examine them.

MR. McCLELLAND: You're starting to see things.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: No, no, I'm not seeing things.

What's in here definitely is the Highway 401 to Fraser River Highway 13, county line road. That's definitely in the works for this year.

The speed limit reduced from 50 to 40 on that new highway access from 401: I'm not aware that that was so but we'll certainly take a look at that. If it's unreasonable we'll…O.K.?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Comox.

MS. K. SANFORD (Comox): Mr. Chairman, I have a large number of problems concerning roads, ferries, bridges, bypasses and so on in the Comox riding. Because I spend a lot of time over in the Department of Highways talking to the various officials about this long list of problems, I'm not going to mention any of those in the House today.

I have just one brief question that I would like to ask the Minister. This is something which has been brought to my attention by several people in the riding. They have complained that when the highways are being widened, particularly in some of the rural areas where the roads have been very narrow, the Department of Highways leaves along the side of the road a mess of trees, twigs, branches, roots and so on which they do not clean up after they have finished the job of widening.

Now this disturbs some people who are concerned about the attractiveness of a particular area. They object to the highways department leaving this kind of mess behind them, I realize there would be extra expense involved in cleaning up all of these trees and branches after they have widened the road, but I am, wondering if any consideration is being given to this so that we won't have this unsightly mess left.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: The highways department generally is under instructions anything that's unsightly — or any individual, and I would tell people this too — I suggest that they phone the district engineer and complain about it. That's the speediest way. But generally speaking the highways department is under orders to clean up any mess. It's natural that it should be done on any job anywhere.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member, for South Peace River.

Before the Hon. Member speaks I would just ask the Members of the Opposition in the front bench if they wouldn't mind being quiet while the Member speaks.

MR. PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have

[ Page 1361 ]

Just one question that I forgot to ask the Minister while I was talking about highways in my own constituency. I was wondering if the Minister would make this Boundary road from Dawson Creek down to the Monkman Pass. The road is already there; widen it and make it into an all-weather road.

I was certainly very disappointed in the Member for Dewdney's (Mr. Rolston) remarks of discrimination against people who drive anything but a Volkswagen. I think that is a very threatening statement that he made here in this House this afternoon. I would certainly hope the Hon. Minister of Highways wouldn't pay too much attention to it.

To let little cars on the ferry is definitely discrimination and we don't want the government to tell the people what size car they can drive. I'm a family man and I need a bigger car than a Volkswagen. That would mean it's discrimination against anybody who has a larger family.

I would hope the Minister would pay little attention to the Member for Dewdney when he wants you to discriminate against people who drive anything other than a very small car. I think we should increase families as being the way of life — we certainly want to have family life as a part of British Columbia. I would hope the Minister of Highways would not listen.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: We are taking a traffic count on Monkman Pass. We are keeping it clear the rest of this winter.

Interjection by an Hon. Member.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Well, I'm not going to make a commitment to rebuild that road unless I know what the traffic is.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. PHILLIPS: If you are going to take a traffic count across the river before there is a bridge, there aren't going to be very many people who swim there. Taking a traffic count on a road that is impossible at certain times of the year doesn't add up to me. The potential is here and the potential is there, and that is what you have to base it on. Now, if you were taking one once the road was there and some traffic flowing, and then you took a traffic count as to whether you were going to upgrade it or pave it, well, yes, I can see that. But you're taking a traffic count on it. My gracious, Mr. Minister.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I didn't say I wasn't going to do anything about it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote I 10 pass?

Vote 110 approved.

Vote I 11: general administration, $4,429,600 — approved.

Vote 112: roads, bridges, ferries, wharves, tunnels, maintenance and operation, repairs, snow and ice removal, $53,485,814, — approved.

On vote 113: roads, bridges, ferries, capital construction, $102,400,000.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for North Peace River.

MR. SMITH: A question to the Minister of Highways. Do you have the breakdown between roads, bridges and ferries with regard to this capital construction? We have $102,400,000 there in total; do we have the figures broken down into the departments?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes, roads and miscellaneous: $42 million. Day labour: $19 million. Bridges and ferries both together — and that's docks and whatnot: $25 million. Paving is $17 million.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 113 pass?

Vote 113 approved.

Vote 114: vehicle damage claims, $125,000 — approved.

On vote 115: highway signs, signals, traffic control, et cetera, $1,230,840.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Columbia River.

MR. CHABOT: On that vote 115, the $1,230,000, I am wondering whether it will include the cost of the erection of a traffic signal on Highway 95 in the community of Golden, an area that is very hazardous for school children. Hundreds of school children go by and cross this very wide highway on a daily basis. I am wondering whether the appropriation for the erection of this sign is in this vote and if so, when will this traffic signal be installed?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Where was that again?

MR. CHABOT: Golden, B.C.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Yes, but where?

MR. CHABOT: Highway 95, right in the community — Ninth Street. You have had correspondence on that, Mr. Minister. You have had petitions.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Highway 95 at Golden; yes, it is in there.

[ Page 1362 ]

MR. CHABOT: Could you give me an approximate time or date when it will be installed? April 15?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Just as soon as we can get it in there, it will be in there. The money is there; we have the staff. We will go right at it and I'll come down there personally and install it and open it.

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

MR. CHABOT: Are the necessary materials on hand? If not, have the necessary materials been ordered? If they are on order, when are they expected to arrive? Will they arrive in Langley? Will they arrive in Victoria? Will they arrive on site in Golden?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Would the Hon. Member be seated while the Minister answers?

MR. CHABOT: Just a moment, wait until I sit down, I have the floor.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: As a rule, from the time of the design until the installation of any light, it takes anywhere between two and four months. I haven't got the information here as to whether or not the design for that particular light is completed. But until the design is completed, you can't order the materials. Usually there is from two to four months delay between the O.K. and the installation of the light.

MR. CHABOT: One brief question: you will make this top priority, I hope?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Let's see. It's two-thirds of the way up the list, alphabetically.

MR. CHABOT: Alphabetically? What does that mean?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: …just as soon as we can get it in there.

MR. CHABOT: Can we say that there is a strong possibility that it will be in place prior to June 15? That's being reasonable.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I would say, considering all the facts related thereto and remembering that consideration has to be given to lights, not only in Golden, but all over the province; when one realizes the work load the Department of Highways has in this and many other areas, including roads, bridges, ferries, drainage, subdivisions, and — considering the possibility of continued bad weather — I think we have to realize that it is very difficult at this time to say with any assurance, any certainty or any irrevocable consideration, that, whatever it was we were talking about, can be accomplished in the time laid down by the Member.

I want to assure that Member.

MR. CHABOT: Just a short supplementary.

MR. CHAIRMAN: On the same subject?

MR, CHABOT: On the same subject; I'm trying to follow through. Whatever it was he said, he never really gave me a reply as to whether there is a possibility that the signal will be installed prior to June 15. There is a great concern out there in the countryside about the failure to have this particular safety device installed. Now if the Minister is unable to say that it will be installed prior to June 15, I'll give him more time. Can he advise me whether it will be installed prior to the next school year which, should start sometime before September?

It's not a costly thing; it is just a matter of getting the design as the Minister said.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I want the Member for Columbia River (Mr. Chabot) to take a personal message from me. I want him to tell every citizen in Golden that there is no person in this province more anxious to have the people of Golden see the light than 1. (Laughter).

MR. CHABOT: I'll tell them, Mr. Minister, I'll tell them. That's where you put the priority on their light in Golden. I'll tell them.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Second Member for Victoria.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON (Victoria): Mr. Chairman, under this vote the highway signs are mentioned. I wonder whether the Minister would like to give us an estimate of the amount of money that has been wasted, first in taking down Trans-Canada Highway signs, establishing B.C. 1 signs and, second, in taking down B.C. 1 signs and putting up Trans-Canada signs?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I don't know whether you would call that money wasted. Certainly there was work undertaken that, in my opinion, wasn't necessary. Sometimes it is necessary to spend money, which I authorized very quickly, to re-institute the Trans-Canada signs.

I don't know what the exact cost was. Isn't there a question on the order paper about that? Are we still working on it? Anyway, I don't know what the figure was. It wasn't a cost item. I don't know whether it

[ Page 1363 ]

was $10,000, $15,000 — I expect between $15,000 and $20,000 to replace the signs.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Saanich and the Islands.

MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, thank you. To the Minister with respect to two points along the Patricia Bay Highway. The first is the intersection of Trans-Canada and Patricia Bay Highway, Highway 17, in the immediate vicinity of the Town and Country Shopping Centre.

I noticed the erection of one new sign in an attempt to assist southbound traffic. But would the Minister agree that this intersection, with its increasing traffic, is very hazardous? I don't know what kind of signal system would be installed there but I would really urge the Minister to have his Deputy direct his attention to that location.

The other one is the need for advance signing or additional advance signing, particularly for northbound traffic on Highway 17 — traffic which would wish to turn off to the Royal Oak area and West Saanich Road. I have met with a delegation in this regard. I believe the matter has been brought to the attention of the department. In both instances I would urge better signing at the earliest possible time.

Would he comment please.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: With regard to the Town and Country Shopping Centre, probably the only answer there is to shut off the access to Town and Country off that highway so you cut out that quick cut-across. Now, whether Town and Country would be happy if we took away that access that they already have, I doubt very much.

I think we may have to come to that anyway, because that is a danger area in that particular very bad intersection. I agree with you, it is a bad one. With the increased traffic it is creating more and more problems. Certainly we are looking at that one continuously and we have to find some way of improving that facility.

What was the second one?

MR. CURTIS: Royal Oak. Advance signing for Royal Oak.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: We will check into that. The department thought it was all right but they will check into the advance signing.

MR. CURTIS: May I ask a supplemental question? I'm not sure that the problem at Town and Country relates to Town and Country Shopping Centre. I'm speaking of southbound traffic coming from Highway 17 which must join with inbound traffic from Highway 1. With respect, Mr. Chairman, that has nothing to do with the shopping centre at that intersection, as far as I can see.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Just a minute. You will recollect that when you are coming from 17 and 1, cutting right through both of them; just before you get to the point of the "Y" there is a take-off from No. 1 that cuts right across into the Town and Country Shopping Centre. Now if you took those two out of there, those two cuts, I think it would be much easier to put on lights or control. That cuts right across there. If that was taken out of there…that was all I was suggesting. That may be part of the answer.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Member for Langley.

MR. McCLELLAND: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just briefly, I share the Member for South Peace's (Mr. Phillips) concern about traffic counts. I wonder how relative they are all of the time. We have had several traffic counts in Langley city conducted by the department with regard to a very dangerous intersection at which we would like to see a traffic signal. It is the corner of Fraser Highway and 208th Street.

We are perfectly willing to put this traffic signal in ourselves at our expense. I wonder if the Department of Highways has given any consideration in cases like this where a city which seems to know, or should know, its own priorities as well as anyone, is willing to do this on its own.

Would the department come up with some kind of a programme whereby the city could put that light in on its own; and when the signal reaches the necessary warrant then the Department of Highways could refund the city the department's share of that cost. I think that would be not only a fair programme on behalf of the Department of Highways but it would also solve some serious problems in regard to cities like Langley which have fast-growing populations and major problems with traffic at the moment.

The other question: I am wondering if the Minister could tell us if there is any programme going on in the province to supply the advance warning amber signals at all major intersections in the province. They are a great help. The road from here to Swartz Bay is well signed that way and so it is on the mainland and I would like to see that at every major intersection in British Columbia because I think you would really cut down on automobile accidents.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: If it is a high-speed highway, we put them in. With regard to the traffic light you were asking about: if the city wants to put it in, that's fine with us. If they want to put it in without payment, that's fine.

[ Page 1364 ]

Interjections by some Hon. Members.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'm only kidding, we have it in this year's estimates, that particular light. We have it in here. It'll be in this year.

MR. McCLELLAND: Okay. Well, just a supplemental: I would like to know if the Minister has announced policy about letting the city put in lights on its own?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Oh, no.

MR. McCLELLAND: We don't want the money back, we'll put it in.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 115 pass?

Vote 115 approved.

Vote 116: grants and subsidies, $20,775 — approved.

On vote 117: purchase of new equipment, $4,500,000.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Second Member for Victoria.

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: A quick question to the Minister, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether he could comment on the tendering procedures that will be followed with that $4.5 million? I ask this in the light of the non-tendering of his colleague, the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mr. Lorimer).

HON. MR. STRACHAN: It's all done through the Purchasing Commission. Bids are called in the normal way by the Purchasing Commission. On the basis of the bids…

MR. D.A. ANDERSON: They will be tendering and there will be bids?

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Oh, yes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 117 pass?

Vote 117 approved.

Vote 118: British Columbia ferries, $46,547,720 — approved.

HON. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise, report resolutions and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Speaker, the committee reports resolutions and asks leave to sit again.

Leave granted.

Hon. Mr. Barrett moves adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 5:25 p.m.