[ Page 6381 ]

CONTENTS

Vital Statistics Amendment Act, 1985 (Bill 44). Hon. Mr. Nielsen

Introduction and first reading –– 6381

Notaries Amendment Act, 1985 (Bill 47). Hon. Mr. Smith

Introduction and first reading –– 6381

Cooperative Development Act (Bill M213). Mr. Blencoe

Introduction and first reading –– 6381

Employment Cooperatives Act (Bill M214). Mr. Blencoe

Introduction and first reading –– 6381

Oral Questions

Advertisement for student employment at Expo. Mr. Skelly –– 6382

Hazardous chemicals. Mrs. Wallace –– 6382

Victoria Mortgage Corp. Mr. Blencoe –– 6383

Mr. Lauk

Student mental health services. Mr. Barnes –– 6383

Tabling Documents –– 6384

Consumer And Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1985 (Bill 40).

Committee stage –– 6384

Mr. Lauk

Third reading

Low Interest Loan Assistance Revolving Fund Act (Bill 27).

Committee stage –– 6384

Mr. Williams

Third reading

Industrial Development Incentive Act (Bill 46).

Committee stage –– 6385

Mr. Williams

Mr. Lockstead

Mr. Passarell

Third reading

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs estimates. (Hon.Mr. Hewitt)

On vote 15: minister's office –– 6389

Hon. Mr. Hewitt

Mr. Lauk

Mr. Williams

Ms. Brown

Mr. Macdonald

Mr. Cocke

Mr. Reynolds

Mrs. Wallace

Mrs. Johnston

Mr. Michael

Mr. Barnes

Royal assent to bills –– 6405

Appendix –– 6405

MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1985

The House met at 2:05 p.m.

Prayers.

HON. MR. GARDOM: Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members to bid a very cordial welcome to Mr. Sam Fromowitz, deputy director of the office of Canadian affairs in the United States State Department, who is here in company with the U.S. consul, our good friend Mr. George Ogg.

MR. STRACHAN: In the galleries today is an eminent Prince George broadcaster from CJCI. Would the House please welcome Miss Mary-Ann McKenzie.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I have a few introductions to make to the House today. In the gallery today are a number of executive members of the Licensed Practical Nurses' Association of British Columbia. I'd like the House to welcome Elinor Turrill, president of the LPNA, from the town of Vernon in North Okanagan; from a town just south of Vernon — I think it's Kelowna, a suburb of Vernon — Miss Terri Ambler, who is corresponding secretary of the LPNA from the city of Victoria, Laura Lewis, secretary of the Victoria chapter and the new chapter convener of the LPNA; and lastly, Beryl Chapman of Victoria, second vice-president of the provincial association. Would the House please welcome these ladies today.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I'd like to make an introduction, if I may. I'd like to introduce two people in the gallery who are here from Calgary: Mr. Bob Muir and Mr. George Lechner, former chairman of the B.C. Petroleum Corporation, who works in Calgary but spends his quality time in Aldergrove in my constituency. They are both attempting to start an exciting new business in British Columbia.

Introduction of Bills

VITAL STATISTICS AMENDMENT ACT, 1985

Hon. Mr. Nielsen presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Vital Statistics Amendment Act, 1985.

Bill 44 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

NOTARIES AMENDMENT ACT, 1985

Hon. Mr. Smith presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Notaries Amendment Act, 1985.

HON. MR. SMITH: I should make a short statement, if I could, as to what this is about. There seems to be a great deal of interest in this chamber, Mr. Speaker.

The notaries' society is one of the many self-governing professions that provides valuable services in the province, and this bill provides for the establishment and maintenance of a Notaries Foundation. It includes several amendments which will improve the effectiveness of notaries.

The Notaries Foundation will be similar to the Law Foundation, serving as a vehicle for the collection and disbursement of moneys earned from the interest of general client trust accounts. These accounts are used when the amounts being held in trust for clients are too small or are being placed for short and indefinite periods, making it impractical to establish separate trust accounts.

The interest from these moneys now, of course, accrues to the benefit of the chartered banks, which is what my friend from Vancouver Centre would like. Now these moneys are, under this bill, going to be used for beneficial public purposes. For instance, about half of the Notaries Foundation money will be earmarked under the amendments for legal aid, and the rest for legal education, research, education for notaries and law libraries. This will be a very beneficial change. There will be some procedural changes as well, dealing with notaries' vacancies and making it more possible for disciplinary activity.

Bill 47 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT ACT

Mr. Blencoe presented a bill intituled Cooperative Development Act.

MR. BLENCOE: A brief explanation, Mr. Speaker. The bill calls for the creation of a cooperative development office in the Ministry of Industry and Small Business Development. This office would assist the development of worker-owned enterprises through feasibility studies and advice on incorporation as a cooperative. The office would ensure that co-ops benefit fully from existing business assistance programs, especially those which extend financial help through low-interest loans and loan guarantees.

Bill M213, Cooperative Development Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

EMPLOYMENT COOPERATIVES ACT

Mr. Blencoe presented a bill intituled Employment Cooperatives Act.

MR. BLENCOE: In explanation, Mr. Speaker, the bill intends to facilitate the establishment and viability of employment cooperatives. The bill refers to employment cooperatives, because the primary function of those co-ops is to provide employment and profit to the workers who own and operate them. The bill updates the Cooperative Association Act, to provide for an employment co-op as a distinct type of cooperative enterprise. The proposed bill would allow for distribution of dividends according to labour contributions, and it will permit employees to serve as the majority of the board of directors of the enterprise. The bill brings to the workplace the democratic principle of self-government, combined with the principle of basing financial rewards on the value of each member's labour.

[ Page 6382 ]

The bills ensure access to development inputs and support equal to that available to other businesses. The proposed bills create the climate in which innovative co-op enterprises can develop throughout B.C. Both bills represent a community-based economic development strategy, which is very different from the current approach we have in the province of British Columbia today.

Bill M214, Employment Cooperatives Act, read a first time and ordered to be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

[2:15]

Oral Questions

ADVERTISEMENT FOR STUDENT
EMPLOYMENT AT EXPO

MR. SKELLY: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of International Trade and Investment (Hon. Mr. Phillips), or his temporary replacement. In the weekend newspapers the government placed a large display ad which appeared to offer job opportunities for students at the B.C. Pavilion at Expo. The fine print of these ads reveals that the positions are not available until April 1986. Would the minister advise the House what the purpose is of running the ads at this time?

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the minister, I'll be happy to take that question as notice and make him aware of that question as quickly as possible.

MR. SKELLY: You obviously have lots of time.

Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Minister of Labour. In view of the serious problem of youth unemployment in this province, with youth unemployment running at approximately 22.5 percent and 67,000 young people in British Columbia out of work, will the minister advise the House why he has not increased the funding to student employment programs this year, rather than making the promise for next year?

HON. MR. SEGARTY: Mr. Speaker, I understand that supplementaries to questions taken on notice are out of order.

MR. SKELLY: A new question for the Minister of Labour.

MR. SPEAKER: Now it's a new question, hon. minister.

HON. MR. SEGARTY: Mr. Speaker, I want to say that the government of British Columbia and government of Canada are cooperating in every way to provide new opportunities to get our young people employed. It is without question a problem across our province and across our country, and both governments are working hard to try to resolve that serious problem at this particular time.

MR. SKELLY: A supplementary to this minister, Mr. Speaker. I think the evidence of that cooperation is obvious when this government is spending less than one-third of what the NDP government spent on student summer employment ten years ago.

Why is the government advertising jobs now that won't even commence until April 1986? Why are you spending money on ads now when you could be using that money to create student summer employment, so that some of those students could work this summer and be able to afford their tuition fees to go through school next year, so they'll be eligible for these jobs in 1986?

HON. MR. SEGARTY: Mr. Speaker, the government of Canada and the province of British Columbia cooperated this year in the summer employment program and cut out a great deal of the duplication that existed in previous years. The ad was placed, as I understand it, by the B.C. Pavilion and not the government of British Columbia. It would be important, from the B.C. Pavilion point of view, to be able to put on a training program for people who would wish to seek employment at this particular time, and be able to plan what they will be able to do next year in terms of employment opportunities at the pavilion.

MR. SKELLY: A further supplementary. If the government isn't responsible, why do they have the minister's name on it? I can understand that that minister might be not directly related to this government and a bit of a loose cannon. But in view of the cooperation that the minister is talking about, Mr. Speaker, and the fact that there are 67,000 young people out of work in British Columbia now — a 22 percent unemployment rate among young people up to the age of 24 years — what impact will the federal and provincial cooperation that the minister is talking about have on that number? How many young people does he estimate will be out of work in this province after the impact of his program, which is one-third the size of the NDP program ten years ago?

HON. MR. SEGARTY: Mr. Speaker, I think the objective of our government and the government of Canada would be to see full employment among our young people in British Columbia and across the country. What we need from the opposition and from their members in Ottawa is support for the concept and not lip-service.

HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS

MRS. WALLACE: During the past week we have seen a series of unrelated illnesses and possible death that may have been caused by spraying with various chemicals: Roundup, MCPA, Amine 64 and agricultural sprays. What action has the Minister of Environment decided to take to ensure the safety of British Columbians against these hazards?

HON. MR. PELTON: I thank the hon. member for the question. I think two incidents are being referred to — two that I am aware of at this point in time. I'll deal with them separately.

In the case where a child died in North Vancouver, we in the ministry do not believe it is linked to the spraying, but we are very concerned because all of the children who were involved in the little tea party that day ate some English cucumbers. We believe these cucumbers may contain some toxic residue from spraying. We've become involved in this, as have Health and Welfare Canada and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, and we're looking into the matter. I'll be pleased to bring further information back to the House when it becomes available to me.

[ Page 6383 ]

The other matter that the member referred to is under investigation in my ministry at the moment, and I'll take that one as notice and bring an answer back later on.

MRS. WALLACE: Last night I watched a television feature which indicated that the fish in the Great Lakes are subject to cancer — cancer of the liver, cancerous tumors — because of chemicals in the water. My question to the minister concerning all of these problems with chemical use — it's becoming just a proliferation of chemicals — is: has he decided to appoint or establish some kind of review body which will look into both research and licensing of chemicals in British Columbia, rather than allowing the haphazard situation that's presently in existence in Canada and the United States?

HON. MR. PELTON: The answer is no at this time.

VICTORIA MORTGAGE CORP.

MR. BLENCOE: I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs regarding Victoria Mortgage Corp. Has the minister determined why Victoria Mortgage Corp. is not registered under B.C. legislation as a mortgage broker, even though it is publicly advertising itself as a mortgage corporation?

HON. MR. HEWITT: I believe I followed the question correctly. It is a mortgage corporation, and it is registered as a mortgage broker. Maybe he could clarify it for me.

MR. BLENCOE: The question is that it's calling itself a mortgage broker, but it is not registered under B.C. legislation as such. I want to know if you have conducted an investigation to determine why it is calling itself such when it clearly isn't, under legislation.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I have had no information from our superintendent of brokers as to whether or not Victoria Mortgage Corp. is acting in contravention of any legislation or regulation. I assume that all their necessary filings have been done and that they have met all the requirements under the mortgage brokers legislation, but I will take the question as notice and ask my superintendent to report back.

MR. BLENCOE: I think that when you discuss this with your superintendent you will find that they are not registered in B.C. as a mortgage broker, although they advertise themselves as such.

On a supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I obtained a copy of the Victoria Mortgage Corp. pamphlet which advertises as follows: "Secure, high-yielding debenture certificates: our debentures are similar to term deposits." The concern is that this could be false advertising in terms of utilizing the words "secure" and "similar to term deposits." Is the minister prepared to recognize that these statements are misleading at best? Has he decided to investigate?

MR. SPEAKER: Is the member seeking a legal opinion, hon. member?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Speaker, first of all, just to go back to the first part of his question, he may find that although the corporation isn't registered, it may well be that all staff members are registered as brokers, as employees of the corporation.

As to the other, although the member was in my office last week, he didn't advise me of these matters, though they may have just come to his attention. If he'd supply me with them, I'd like to look at them. I can tell him that there are meetings going on — I believe today or tomorrow morning — with the auditors of Victoria Mortgage Corp. and the management, the people who operate it. Some of the questions that he raised in my office will be answered at that time, I believe.

MR. LAUK: Supplementary to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Many people who have invested in these so-called secure debentures have requested of the officers of Victoria Mortgage Corp. a full accounting, and that has been refused so far. Has the minister decided to take action with respect to disclosing the real financial affairs of this corporation so that the debenture holders know what their position is?

HON. MR. HEWITT: The member for Victoria raised that same question last week, and he asked if I would investigate it. I did. I talked to the superintendent of brokers, and he advised me that because there was a concern about getting audited statements there was a meeting scheduled with the auditors either late today or first thing tomorrow morning, and he would be reporting to me immediately following that meeting.

STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

MR. BARNES: A question to the Minister of Education. The city health officer in Vancouver has noted that the number of students experiencing social mental difficulties is sharply increasing: at the same time, preventive services are being reduced. Has the minister investigated the virtual disappearance, under the government's restraint program, of professional help for students with mental health problems?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, I am not in a position to give a specific answer to the member's question. I will take it as notice and bring the appropriate answer back to the House when it is available. To date I have not been advised of any particular problem. It seems to me there is a fair amount of money in the Vancouver School District budget to handle some of these matters. I know they are being addressed by the official trustee.

MR. BARNES: While the minister is investigating, I would point out to him that students whose families are facing the crunch of poverty are being left high and dry by the government's restraint program, which has cost thousands of jobs, has frozen welfare rates and has now eliminated professional care for students in trouble. I hope that when the minister does his investigation, he will restore the funding for mental health services.

After his investigation, will the minister undertake to assure the House that the funding for mental health programs will be restored?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, I took the question as notice. The budget has been set. The amount of money available to the district is adequate. It's ample, as a matter of fact. I told the member that I would look into the particular

[ Page 6384 ]

concerns that he raised with the first part of his question, which I took as notice. I don't know what the ramblings were on the second part.

[2:30]

HON. MR. BRUMMET: Mr. Speaker, subsequent to my estimates debate last week, I would like to table a list of the board of directors of Gibson Pass Resort Inc., the operators of Manning Park. I've been given to understand that one of the directors is a member of the NDP executive. Perhaps the opposition could check that out for me.

Leave granted.

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. GARDOM: Committee on Bill 40, Mr. Speaker.

CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS
STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 1985

The House in committee on Bill 40; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

On section 1.

MR. LAUK: There's a phrase in section 1, Mr. Chairman, that causes me a modest amount of concern, and that is the phrase: "seriously misleading." I wonder if the minister has received a legal opinion with respect to that phrase, and whether or not it has been judicially defined. What does he understand the courts will find, under these curative provisions, as seriously misleading?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, the curative provisions are designed to ensure that minor errors in the completing or filing of the documents do not invalidate the documents or impair their effects in any way. It's only when in the court — I assume, Mr. Member, it would be a situation where the court had to deal with this matter — the statement of particulars was challenged that such an error was seriously misleading. Then, of course, if that was the case the court could rule that it be put aside.

I think you asked about legal opinion. Yes, we had that legal opinion, and it was the response from the learned people who do the advising of politicians — namely the lawyers — that it would be an issue which the court would decide whether it was seriously misleading or not.

MR. LAUK: Arising from that, could the minister indicate whether it is the policy of the government, with respect to the introduction of that phrase, that the Legislature does not intend to preclude a court from finding that a mortgage document fails if it is misleading on any one of its major terms or, to put it another way, that it would fail if the statement of particulars misled on one of the major terms — in other words the normal legal terms — of a mortgage?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure I can respond to the member's question in the detail he would like, but I am aware that it is uniform with other legislation in the western provinces and that it also follows the recommendations with regard to these matters from the Canadian Bar
Association. Whether or not it sets aside a contract on one of a number of items contained within the statement of particulars, I cannot say. I think the test is in the court. If the individual who is affected wants to challenge it, and he does and it's found to be seriously misleading, then the document fails.

MR. LAUK: The problem that I have, Mr. Chairman, is that the court, in deciding whether or not the intention of the legislation was to uphold a document even though one of the major terms was seriously misstated within the particulars filed with the document, looks to the intention of parliament. All I'm trying to get from the minister is: is it the intention of the government to allow a document to stand, even though there's a misstatement in the particulars, unless that misstatement is to a fundamental term of the mortgage document?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, I think we're approaching the same problem, only from different ends. I'm saying that if the mortgage document, the statement of particulars, that is now looked to is in error — but a reasonable error; not one that is seriously misleading — the statement of particulars and the mortgage document stands. Where it is determined, first of all by those affected, that it is so serious that they wish to challenge it, then they challenge it, and if the court finds it seriously misleading, then the document can fail. I'm not sure, Mr. Member, how much further you want to go beyond that, but it does indicate that we don't want to see these documents fail, if you will, or the mortgage to be put in jeopardy because of a minor error. So we've said it must be identified as a serious error and it must be determined by the court.

Sections I to 12 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Bill 40, Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1985, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

HON. MR. NIELSEN: Committee on Bill 27, Mr. Speaker.

LOW INTEREST LOAN ASSISTANCE
REVOLVING FUND ACT

The House in committee on Bill 27; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

On section 1.

MR. WILLIAMS: On the question of the fund, could the minister advise us of the details in terms of the amount of the fund, Mr. Chairman?

[ Page 6385 ]

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Chairman, as of March 31, 1985, the fund will have a value of approximately $25.3 million.

MR. WILLIAMS: So that was $25 million unallocated and available. Is that correct'?

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: It was certainly available. As the member will know, this program was set up, first of all, as a straight loan program. It was decided that it would be put into a revolving fund so that the program could take advantage of the repayments that were coming in. We ran into some difficulty with the auditor-general. This really makes the fund legal under the new Financial Administration Act. It has been operating for some time. But that money is certainly available to be allocated.

Section 1 approved.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It is the Chair's opinion that section 2 will include the schedule, since that's where it's mentioned.

On section 2.

MR. WILLIAMS: We're dealing here with low-interest loan assistance for business in the province. One should really stop and reflect on the state of small business in British Columbia at this time, and on the unavailability of funds for small business generally. You check with any small businessman; they'll check with your department, ask about help in terms of small business, and generally it just isn't there. The pattern is really there to see. The fact that we haven't made funds available to the small business sector on any scale is apparent. It's apparent in our unemployment figures; it's apparent in our bankruptcy figures, and the like. The projections this year for bankruptcies are something like....

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: This sounds like second reading.

MR. WILLIAMS: This is second reading?

Interjection.

MR. WILLIAMS: Oh, I see.

The question of a low-interest revolving fund, and having it available for those who need the funds, is certainly the core of the statute.

Interjection.

MR. WILLIAMS: That may be, but it is the core of the statute.

The fact is that this administration has not been providing the funds that are needed in this sector — throughout a period of high interest, and throughout a period of slack demand created by government policy; through the spinoff problems of a restraint program that has been disastrous for the small business community, as much or more than anything in the province.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: On a point of order. Mr. Chairman, I know that member thinks that he can come in at any time during debate in this House and just do anything he wants, but it gets a little tedious after a while. This is not second reading. We are not debating the principles of this bill; that was done last week. The member had an opportunity last week to make the speech he's making now. I won't make any further point of this, but I believe he is totally and irreparably out of order.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The point of order is well taken, hon. members. In Committee of Supply we deal with a statute clause by clause, and our debate must be strictly relevant to the clause before us. Section 2 specifically deals with the purposes of loan programs and how they will be dealt with. Really, that is as far as we can go in this debate.

MR. WILLIAMS: You could have a loan program for half the citizenry of British Columbia at this stage in time, as a result of this administration's economic programs. Since 1983, since the last election, 39,000 more people have gone on UIC. There are 33,000 more on welfare. We could extend this lending program to tens of thousands of British Columbians, and that might make more sense than some of the government's other programs. While this is a housekeeping statute in some ways — dealing with problems that the auditor-general has brought to the surface in earlier reports to the Legislature — nevertheless, the question here is a major revolving fund in terms of low-interest loans for business.

We in British Columbia have pretty well the lowest success rate in the nation in the growth of retailing. Clearly we could have a range of programs, an expansion of funds like this, to deal with the kind of wreckage there is in the economy. It's clearly a need in the community, and it's the result of previous policies.

Another problem of our lending in the past has been that the bias has too often been in favour of the large companies rather than smaller-scale operations in the smaller communities. There has been a bias in funding toward the large, and no look at regional questions. Smaller-scale regional needs tend to have been ignored in terms of these and other funds that the government has had to allocate. I think the economic strength of the province has lost in such circumstances.

[2:45]

Sections 2 to 8 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Bill 27, Low Interest Loan Assistance Revolving Fund Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

HON. MR. NIELSEN: Committee on Bill 46.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE ACT

The House in committee on Bill 46; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

[ Page 6386 ]

On section 1.

MR. WILLIAMS: One should compare the approach of this statute with the venture capital statute that the House considered earlier. It's interesting to see how this one was formed versus how the other was formed. It's clear that this has a very simple, limited style, with none of the checks and balances one sees in the other statute. We have here funding, piece by piece, of some $125 million in terms of the range of programs. This one is the small manufacturers' incentive program. Of course, that's to be desired, and there is a need for these kinds of programs in British Columbia, particularly with the economy in the state it is and unemployment at the levels it is.

Again, there aren't the checks and balances. The statute that this is replacing essentially just said that this is in the hands of the minister, and this is little different. There is a need for regional input, in terms of the various economic regions of the province, in terms of need, and in terms of communication with business people and manufacturers in the various regions of the province. The biases will be toward the lower mainland, because it's going to be handled out of the lower mainland and southern Vancouver Island. We're all losers when we don't have regional participation built into the statute. Our areas of greatest unemployment in British Columbia are outside the lower mainland. The need is greater in places like Kamloops and the Kootenays. So there is a need for regional input, and for some kind of consultative process in terms of how lending policies are established. None of that is built into this statute at all. It's essentially carte blanche for the minister to allocate $125 million. In this day and age that's really not good enough.

The idea that the minister has full discretionary powers to allocate $125 million is really quite disturbing. There is a need for a consultative process, for checks and balances, and for participation in the process by manufacturers. You know, how can one measure one project against another? How can one measure one loan against another, unless there has been some kind of consultative process and some kind of benchmark established in terms of how one is going to lend? It is totally open to all kinds of dangers, and it isn't good enough to bring legislation before the House that doesn't have the checks and balances within it. The chance for discrimination and political bias is there. There's nothing built into the statute in terms of letting fresh air in throughout the process, and that's a danger.

Who can vote readily against a $125 million package for a range of useful projects, particularly small manufacturers and the like? That's a very real need. But at the same time, all we've got is a very simplistic bill that allocates money and puts it in the hands of the minister. Elsewhere, I just don't think this would happen any more. In an earlier day and age you'd get legislation like that, but in most provinces of the land and in most states in the U.S. you'd have a pattern of participation and checks and balances and involvement by people in that particular sector in the process and review and recommendation aspect of this. I would think most politicians in this day and age would want that kind of thing for their own peace of mind in terms of avoiding charges of discrimination and problems of political patronage and favouritism. I for one would want that in the statute if I were the minister.

Maybe the minister can advise the House in terms of something else — whether there's something outside the statute wherein he might set up a consultative task force to advise him by sector and to review proposals, so that we have some assurance that there will be an outside breeze in terms of this allocation of a tremendous amount of money.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: This program is not new. It's been operating for a number of years now. It has allocated a lot of money. It's created something in the nature of 4,600 full-time jobs in the province in this fund alone, and in all of the time it's been operating.... As a matter of fact, it is achieved as a result of a lot of consultation with the sectors, with the manufacturers in the province. We have a very close relationship with the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, which represents most of the small business people, small manufacturers of British Columbia. So it hasn't been done in isolation.

It has the checks and balances of the Financial Administration Act, which doesn't allow the ministry to stray beyond the boundaries, which are quite strict and quite inflexible. It also, of course, has the checks and balances built into the ministry that allocates the loans. I don't allocate the loans, and in all of the time that this fund and others like it have been operating I challenge the member to cite even one instance of even a charge of political interference or some other kind of interference. There just hasn't been any. You might not like the nature of the program, but it has been quite successful.

MR. WILLIAMS: I guess I'm willing to accept that the bulk of these things are in fact administered by the BCDC and agencies within the department, but at the same time it does seem to me that there is an automatic bias in it that avoids the regional nature of British Columbia. The availability of these programs in other regions is a serious lack, and while I don't think it's conscious at all, I think it's the end result of being focused in the lower mainland. The bias in manufacturing certainly is toward the lower mainland because there are certain advantages in locating within the lower mainland. But at the same time it excludes a lot of players that might well be significant players and innovative people in developing new programs and new processes. I think that's inherent in this kind of structure, or lack of structure, and I think that's something the minister might consider in terms of review in the near future if the program is to be more meaningful in the areas of higher unemployment in the province.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I'd be happy to give that member an assurance that I would send to him, the first time I can put it all together, a geographical list of where our programs have gone. I have it all ready for BCDC, but I'm not sure that I have it all together for the other parts of the programs. I think the member would be quite surprised at how money has been disbursed around the province in the various regions, certainly outside the lower mainland. I would certainly give that assurance to the member. As soon as I possibly can I'll put it together and send it to him.

Section I approved.

On section 2.

MR. WILLIAMS: Again I appreciate the offer of the minister and took forward to the material.

[ Page 6387 ]

The agricultural incentive program is something that I think everybody in the House would commend. But I've been talking with people just back from Japan — we have some on their way, or just arriving — particularly with respect to Hokkaido, which is their northern island. and less populated, with some 5.5 million people. It strikes me that we are again maybe at least a generation behind. I don't know if the minister is aware of their "technopolis" program in Japan: 15 major science cities, with universities and corporations attached, are proceeding now in Japan under MITI — the Ministry of International Trade and Investment. We have a somewhat different ministry here. These are tremendous. The new technopolis in Hokkaido, proposed by people in that region of Japan, will represent the twenty-second university in Hokkaido — 5.5 million people, 21 universities now, university No. 22 coming up. What will it specialize in? It will specialize in aquaculture, oceanography and related studies.

Here in British Columbia we have the beginnings of a modest assistance program in this field. We're a generation behind the Norwegians, who have done great things in this field. We're going to be a generation behind the Japanese. In terms of having the moxie and the kind of planning and macroeconomic analysis that's necessary to keep up in the modern world, we are at least a generation behind our competitors. It's frightening stuff.

The perspective one gets is that we, 20 years from now, will be a dismal backwater in too many ways. In too many fields, because of the lack of competence of this administration, which has been in power for a decade. In aquaculture we have significant physical advantages beyond these other societies, beyond the Norwegians or the Japanese, and yet we really haven't got it together. We have only now the beginnings of a modest program in this field. Compared to our competitors, the Japanese and the Norwegians, we are indeed a generation behind. It doesn't bode well for the employment for people in the future of British Columbia as well.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: 1, too, under this section want to address a few remarks through the Chair to the minister. My colleague from Vancouver East, I think, has said we're a generation behind. Because of the nature of my riding and the budding aquaculture, mariculture and fish-farming industry in my riding, I think that in some instances, compared to what's happening in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Japan, we could be more than a generation behind at this point.

Part of the problem has been that various governments of this province, but particularly those in the last few years, did not recognize the importance of the industry on the coast of British Columbia. I might add that in my riding we have one of the prime potential mariculture and aquaculture areas in all of the world: the Jervis Inlet area, Okeover, Desolation Sound, and on and on. I recognize that governments have assisted some of these people attempting to get into the industry. The provincial government has extended outright grants — through your ministry, as a matter of fact, Mr. Minister — and/or long-term low-interest loans to others. So I know that the government has taken an interest recently in these activities. I know that some of these businesses have gone under, have been unsuccessful. Others are successful and hopefully will improve and grow.

[3:00]

The only question I really have for the minister at this time is: will these funds...? I'll back up a bit. One of the things that has bothered me a bit is that it seems like if you are a very large company, it's easier to get these long-term low interest loans than if you are a small oyster farmer, for example, with a single lease somewhere, barely surviving, trying to make a living. A lot of these people do go under, by the way, and do not survive as oyster farmers. They have to take on other jobs. I know people who perhaps work in the woods or do other things in order to survive. I would like the minister to tell me if some of these funds will be made available to the smaller operators who are attempting to get into the business — you know, have a single lease, say, in Okeover or wherever.

I know that the minister may or may not know this. I know that some of the larger companies are getting larger. In one form or another they're taking over leases currently held by individuals here, there and everywhere. I know that your ministry sends around the sheet once or twice a year, telling us who received what in terms of grants or loans and these kinds of things. So I know who is getting the money to date. I'm just asking, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could perhaps clear that up for me.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Well. Mr. Chairman, as far as we're concerned, the program will be available more to smaller producers than it will be to large ones. Most of our programs are geared.... One of the prime criteria is: does the company need our assistance? Or can it go ahead without? That's the same with the federal government. Any programs that are shared by the federal government have the same criteria. So we're geared to help people who need our help, and primarily they'd be the small businesses.

These loans are at a maximum of $100,000, so that really means it's a small operation in terms of.... I guess $100,000 doesn't sound small to us, but in terms of business it's a small operation. So the program is geared primarily to the smaller shellfish operators and aquaculture operators.

Sections 2 and 3 approved.

On section 4.

MR. WILLIAMS: On section 4, again, I think there is a need for significant regional input in this area. Is the minister prepared to pull together consultative groups in the region and share the benefits? Try as various regions might, the prospect in the coming year is a focus on the lower mainland of British Columbia. Let's not kid ourselves.

In terms of tourism in British Columbia next year, some university studies have indicated that there won't be the spinoff in the regions at all. In fact, it will be the opposite. The focus will be on the lower mainland, not the regions of British Columbia which have so much to offer. So there's no doubt there will be a surge in tourism next year. You can't spend $40 million in advertising and $1 billion on a world's fair and not have some kind of blip on the graph. But the focus will be the lower mainland. The lower mainland, in many ways, until currently, has avoided some of the worst of the Social Credit depression that we've been living through over the last couple of years.

But next year, as tourism increases, the need will be greater than ever for help in terms of support in the various regions of the province.

[ Page 6388 ]

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I guess there are some other studies that say that there will be some spinoff benefit. We're going to do our very best to ensure that there is. But I want to say that this particular program is an example of private sector input into the changes that will be in this program this year. We did a private sector study of the tourism industry, with the tourism industry providing us with information, and came up with the new program as a result of that. So I think that answers at least one of the member's questions.

Section 4 approved.

On section 5.

MR. PASSARELL: Just a quick question regarding the message my colleague from Vancouver East brought up concerning regions. Under section 5 is the industrial incentive fund, the establishment of new industry. Is the minister going to meet regionally under this program? Will you be be travelling, for instance, to Stewart, a depressed area with the mines closing down, and meeting directly with the new industry proposals coming out of Stewart, Cassiar or Telegraph Creek? Or will it be done on a regional aspect? Will it come right through, for instance, to Terrace or Prince Rupert?

If the minister doesn't meet with specific areas instead of regions, then the program could be lost in the paper shuffle, and the north will be left out again. Just a quick question to the minister on that regard.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Chairman, to the member, you two have patched up your feud about north versus south, I guess, eh?

I would just comment that I think from my point of view it's useful for me to do both of the things that the member has talked about: meet regionally with people and meet individually with people. I can advise that member that since I've had this job I've met at least twice and perhaps three times with the mayor of Stewart, and have gone over the plans that they're talking about for port development and other hopeful development at Stewart. I would want to continue to do that. The member will know that I've been in his riding on a lot of occasions, and that I like it very much.

Interjection.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Well, it's a nice riding. I intend to continue to visit there. But I would not meet with a region, or take advice from a region to the exclusion of the individual areas having the opportunity to have their input as well.

MR. PASSARELL: Mr. Chairman, in regard to the industrial incentive fund, does this act preclude any development on reserves?

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I'll have to take that as notice, Mr. Chairman. Providing that the reserve gave the approval and that it met the other criteria of the fund, I can't see why it would. But I'll certainly check that out and make sure the member gets the information.

MR. WILLIAMS: Again, it raises the whole grand issue that we face in British Columbia in terms of rebuilding our forest industry. Fifty million dollars is the total allocation here in terms of this industrial incentive fund, part of which might be used for new technology. We have an industry that's been looked at by many experts, some from outside. Professor Nilsson from Stockholm has looked at our forest industry, and tells us that $35 billion is needed in the next 15 years in terms of both reforestation and rebuilding of the industrial plant. If we assume just 60 percent of that in the industrial plant, we're talking about something like $20 billion in terms of the need in the forest sector to move into new technology.

What we've got in this statute is $50 million for that purpose; $50 million versus a $20 billion need. It's an indication of the kind of scale that this administration operates on, an indication that it hasn't sunk in how serious our position is in terms of industrial competence in our major sectors. If we have a $20 billion need and all we have is a $50 million fund, it tells you that they really haven't been grappling with the realities of the outside world that are impinging on British Columbia and on our economy today. It isn't a matter of sending the Premier to Korea and Japan; it's a matter of giving him a briefing session in British Columbia in terms of understanding the problems within our own industry.

MR. CHAIRMAN: To the section, please.

MR. WILLIAMS: To the section, indeed.

All we have here is $50 million. If we were to upgrade one pulp mill in British Columbia, $50 million would probably be inadequate. If we were to replace Woodfibre, which desperately needs to be replaced right now.... The plant at Woodfibre is an old junk piece of antique; similarly, the one in Port Alice has a limited life. It's just an inadequate amount in terms of the very real industrial problems within our major industry. In terms of new technology, even in terms of sawmilling on the coast, our productivity is now far behind our competitors. Our productivity in British Columbia is now 20 percent behind the Scandinavians. That's not a reflection on the workforce of British Columbia; that's a reflection on management. It's a reflection on the people responsible for putting the various pieces together in terms of resources, labour, capital and technology. We haven't been doing that anywhere near the state of the art that's available to us today.

The state-of-the-art material that's available in our basic industry is there. You can tie numbers to it, as some of the professors have done. All we have in this bill is this modest amount of $50 million, and without any particular focus — without any focus at all. So it's $50 million available for all industries in British Columbia in terms of moving into newer technologies throughout a range of sectors. That's pitiful and very modest in terms of the very real need that is there. We're not going to build up productivity of our workforce in British Columbia until we've retooled the bulk of our plant. This fund won't really begin to do that at all.

Sections 5 to 8 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

[ Page 6389 ]

The House resumed; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

Bill 46, Industrial Development Incentive Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Kempf in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS

On vote 15: minister's office, $208,370

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 15 pass?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, if I thought we'd get away with it, I'd say "aye," but I don't think we will.

I just have a few remarks prior to responding to questions that I'm sure will be raised by the opposition. I just want to touch on what we've done in the past year. I can say that we focused on innovative ways to improve and streamline our legislation and its policies to make it easier for economic development in this province while still ensuring that the public continues to receive a high level of protection in the marketplace — that high level of protection that we've come to expect in British Columbia.

[3:15]

During the year we incorporated approximately 14,000 companies and amended our corporate statutes to improve administrative procedures and keep our legislation current with the business community. Public access to our corporate data base will be improved even more with the upcoming implementation of remote computer terminals for search access by the private sector. In the central registry we will be introducing a new on-line computer system to enhance current service levels and increase productivity in that section.

In the office of the superintendent of brokers we tightened requirements for companies listed on the Vancouver Stock Exchange and for companies seeking new listings. You may recall that in the first of this year we amended the policy to require greater investment by investors prior to a company going public. We required that more funds be expended on development of the product or exploration of the mine before the company was able to go public, and we increased the minimum share value in which the issue would be introduced. Those efforts provided further protection to investors without distracting from the VSE's role as one of the leading venture capital markets in North America.

Another major corporate innovation during the year was the transfer of licensing responsibilities to the Investment Dealers' Association and to the Real Estate Council and the Insurance Council. In a further move to stimulate the private business and financial sector of the province, we began extensive studies in conjunction with the Ministry of Finance, and we've made some recommendations for the establishment of international banking facilities in Vancouver — an initiative that I consider most important as British Columbia assumes its rightful place in the world economy. Those studies are continuing.

Consumer matters also received attention during the year. In our consumer credit and debtor assistance branch we provided assistance to more than 5,000 debtors. As a result of our efforts, more than $3 million was returned to creditors who would otherwise have had to write off these debts. That's as a result of a cooperative effort. I should explain that our debtor assistance branch basically works with the debtor, recognizing that the debtor has had difficulty meeting his commitments.

In having cooperation with the creditor, we're able to work out, if you will, a payment plan, a procedure by which the debtor can work his way out of his financial difficulties and at the same time allow the creditor to recover part of the debt that's owed to that company. To a great extent that protects the credit rating of the debtor who finds himself in difficulty and turns to our ministry personnel to ask for assistance and guidance on how he can work himself out of his financial problems. It's working quite well.

We also circulated guidelines to the business community with regard to automatic telephone dialling devices. Partially as a result of our efforts, the CRTC introduced amendments to their regulations controlling the use of these devices in the sale of consumer goods and services.

As an important part of our consumer program we produced a number of informational and educational materials to help the public deal effectively and wisely in the marketplace not only as consumers but as investors, borrowers and renters. For example, during the year we printed a booklet describing the new Residential Tenancy Act and the role of the new residential tenancy branch. During the first eight months of operation of this new office, we conducted more than 1,000 arbitrations. In addition, we interviewed a considerable number of landlords and tenants with questions regarding the new legislation.

Mr. Chairman, you can go back a year or so when we did away with the rentalsman's office and brought forward our new residential tenancy branch legislation and our arbitration procedure. I can say that the new procedure of the new residential tenancy branch is working well. Serious disputes between landlords and tenants have been resolved in a fair and efficient manner. I will, however, continue to monitor the function and effectiveness of this branch, to ensure that we continue to provide fair and equitable assistance to both landlord and tenant.

In the area of liquor control and licensing, we conducted the most complete study of our liquor licensing policies in the history of the province last year, with a view to making our liquor laws fair and reasonable, and still promoting moderation and the responsible use of alcohol. I can report that as recently as a week ago we announced a number of changes in our liquor policies, changes that have been well received by the industry and by people concerned about the social side and the abuse of alcohol. We feel that we have accomplished a number of things which are well received in the community and which will provide consumer convenience, but at the same time recognizing that there is a downside to alcohol consumption — that being the excessive use of it.

I would also like to compliment a group of men and women in this province who often go unrecognized because "it's just part of their job," and that's the RCMP. In conjunction with our liquor regulations and legislation and the need to ensure that alcohol is not abused, these people — the RCMP officers, both men and women — do on a regular basis what they call their walk-through of our various licensed premises. Just their presence, being there. has done a great deal to reduce the number of under-age drinkers in our licensed premises. I would just like at this particular point in time to compliment all the RCMP officers, both men and

[ Page 6390 ]

women, who have assisted us in ensuring that we have a good handle on the problems related to alcohol in this province.

With regard to legislation, in the past year we proclaimed the Partnership Amendment Act, which is to encourage increased development of the province's resource sector. We also brought in amendments to the Real Estate Act, to streamline development procedures and thereby reduce costly delays that have in the past held up important new development projects unnecessarily.

Administratively, during the year we reorganized the Consumer and Corporate Affairs programs, to give increased recognition to the role of the residential tenancy matters as an important Consumer Affairs function, and to the increasing importance of financial institutions to the future of this province. As a result of this internal reorganization, our consumer and corporate programs are now known as consumer and tenancy relations, and financial and corporate relations, respectively.

Mr. Chairman, these are just a few of the activities that have occurred and the new initiatives that will be coming before hon. members in the coming year. As we all know — sometimes all too well — my ministry primarily acts as a regulator. Since I became Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs in 1982, I have attempted to adopt and I feel have adopted the policy that the ministry should establish its programs, its regulations, its legislation and its policies to allow the private sector to operate without being hampered by excessive regulations and red tape, while still giving protection to the consumer.

In short, Mr. Chairman, I feel that it is the government's responsibility to set the rules of the game; to make the public — the consumer, the promoter, the investor — aware of what those rules are, recognizing that the rules are established, hopefully in all cases, for the benefit of the public; and then to allow the marketplace to work. Should the work in the marketplace fail — should the rules be abused — then the penalty will be severe. I have a great deal of difficulty, in this day and age when we're trying to achieve economic recovery.... If our people who put up the dollars — the investment — to create jobs are hampered and delayed by excessive regulation, then we are doing nobody any favour. But I will assure all members, and the public, that my ministry will keep a watchful eye for those people who would abuse the marketplace; and if they do, as I said earlier, the penalty will be severe.

Mr. Chairman, with those remarks, I'd be pleased to respond to any questions the members may have with regard to the Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

MR. LAUK: Mr. Chairman, the minister has presided over the last few years of economic disaster for corporations and for consumers in this province. He's the minister of lack of consumerism; there are other members of the opposition who will deal with that in due course — except I'll say that consumer demand has never been lower since 1945, in relation to our wealth and the number of consumers that should be there.

What has this minister presided over as well? He mentions 14,000 incorporations. Anybody can incorporate a company. It costs $160 in government fees and a small nominal fee to the lawyer who does the incorporation — a token fee. But the chamber should know what most British Columbians know, that we've had a higher rate of bankruptcy in this province than anywhere else in Canada. More companies — going concerns.... Incorporations don't mean a thing. It's estimated that 60 percent of incorporated companies are shell companies or shell-type companies to be used and abandoned and so on. So incorporations are just legal mechanisms. How many of these companies are going concerns? Not very many, and those that have been going concerns over the past few years have been going broke. Well, I can't blame it all on the minister. In terms of caretaking a ministry, I suppose he has done a fair job, but not an imaginative one.

Interjection.

MR. LAUK: Caretakers are caretakers — you know what I mean.

But I want to discuss a couple of important points. The stock exchange in the city of Vancouver is an embarrassment for many reasons. There was a day called.... Was it Black Friday or Black Tuesday?

Interjection.

MR. LAUK: Black Friday, yes. Some of us remember it better than others. The problems presented by that series of events have not been addressed by this government and this minister. There's a new Securities Act, and I won't discuss that — it has to be debated. But nothing in that act addresses the problem that occurred on Black Friday. It was a problem of inside information. Mark you, I'm not saying insider trading; that's a question for the exchange and the ministry to investigate. But inside information, false or correct, affects the market in an extremely dramatic way, and it's not enough to throw up your hands and say: "Well, look, there's nothing we can do about people gossiping on Howe Street or Granville Street or whatever."

Interjection.

MR. LAUK: You know, that shows the Minister of Forests' (Hon. Mr. Waterland's) complete lack of understanding of the situation in the stock market.

AN HON. MEMBER: We can't wait for his estimates.

MR. LAUK: We'll come to that in a moment.

The major problem with Black Friday is that a small group of people promoting companies and, really, in stock-trading activities can supply a great deal of misleading and sometimes false information without policing and without regulation, to the great detriment of small investors on the exchange. Black Friday was a classic example of what can happen when that kind of manipulation and misinformation hits the exchange.

Part of the problem of the new exchange is the technological advance — quick buys and sales and information floating around — and the slow ability of the exchange to correct something that's seriously wrong. It was three or four hours while stock prices of particular trading companies dramatically fell to the detriment of investors, apparently on no public information, demonstrating either a lack of confidence or a manipulation of the market.

Since Black Friday there has been no adequate explanation from the minister, his ministry or the stock exchange as

[ Page 6391 ]

to what happened. We've had pious statements of reform from both the exchange and other people in the financial community, but nothing publicly verified that this kind of thing cannot repeat itself in the future.

Wouldn't you know that the major investors in the exchange don't seem to suffer as greatly as the small investors in the investing community? It seems to me that the minister could have a close look at that. Why is it that the minister finds it difficult? Why is it that the minister regards the exchange as being the temple of free enterprise and not to be tampered with, when it has such serious financial effects for individual investors and for the economy as a whole. It seems to me that in the interests of the exchange, and of investment generally, the minister should apply his mind to more effective regulations that would prevent such a disaster recurring.

[3:30]

1 won't name the investment stock, because it's not really important. In the last year there have been about nine or ten occurrences; Black Friday exemplified two or three of them. But there are certain personalities involved in the stock exchange who were part of.... I don't know whether I can say they were culpable, because we don't know, and we don't have enough information. But there are serious implications when one reads press statements from promoters promoting an investment stock — mostly mining, or a new company or even a new issue in an intended going concern — where the press releases clearly indicate misinformation or, at the very best, information that seems to be designed to deceive the investing public. It starts out by rumours in the investment community — hot tips, I think they're called. They generate some interest, and then the promoters hold a press conference and serve tea and hors-d'oeuvres, and wine and champagne, and, without producing documentation to support their contentions, release an official press release that is so worded that it gives the impression that the hot tips or rumours are correct, and people are deceived in that way.

Now it's not enough to say "buyer beware" and so on if the scheme itself — the events — are so designed, looking at the events of a week, two weeks or three weeks, to give the impression that this is the coming investment, that there is something behind the rumours, and that an official release says that there is.... Then the minister and the exchange can take some action. Because buying or selling in a marketplace depends upon information, and when it's broadly based in the stock exchange, which is privileged.... The stock exchange is privileged. It's not an open market; it's a closed market. It's special.

Only certain people are licensed to trade. Only certain people are allowed to buy and sell officially on the floor, and through your brokers. You depend upon your brokers, and you depend upon that network for information. When it's misinformation and unreliable, it defeats the purpose of the exchange's attracting investment into the province and into going concerns. As I say, the minister and his ministry, and indeed the exchange, to my knowledge, have not really addressed this problem. The changes that are being proposed, I would say, are minor, and do not address the serious aspects of investment in the exchange.

I am not asking the minister for an answer. I don't think that he, because of his style as minister, is interested in taking a more aggressive approach to these matters, but I think that even from the point of view of the Social Credit Party, which claims to be interested in increased investment, he should take a more imaginative and aggressive approach.

The other point I wanted to raise has to do with the travel industry, and a news item that appeared in January of this year. It said that the provincial government has taken control of financial assets of Century Tours of Vancouver. Stewart Goodings, the travel registrar, said this. He said he expects and believes the province will be able to recover all money paid out to bring home passengers stranded in Hawaii through the company's bookings. What I want to know is: could the minister now report on the state of affairs of this seizure of financial assets? What's happened to them? How were they expended? How were they collected? What's going on? We haven't had a financial report from the minister, either through Stewart Goodings or him, with respect to what's happened with these assets.

The reason I ask in this particular case is so the minister can perhaps explain what procedure is involved when this kind of thing happens. When the government seizes assets, we should have an accounting about what happened to these assets and what decisions were made, because it is an extraordinary measure for a government to take. I m not saying that they shouldn't have in this case. I would suggest they should have, and they did, but what I want to know is: what's happened to them? I think we'd like an accounting today during the minister's estimates.

I have a series of questions on the new liquor arrangements as they were announced. First of all, I would like to say that I personally, speaking for myself. agree that wine and beer in grocery stores need a lot more careful examination before we jump into that boat. My concern is law enforcement — with respect to isolated grocery stores having an increased cash flow — as a result of liquor sales being prime targets for robbery. When that generally increases, the sophistication of robbery increases, including hand-guns, masked bandits, schemes whereby they can design to hit certain grocery stores selling wine and beer in particular areas — sort of lightning strikes, four or five in a row — and get quite a haul.

It leaves the storekeepers very vulnerable, and they're pressured from two ends. One is that they don't want to miss the opportunity to keep the customers they have by adding this service in their store, and also the increase in profits that I assume are available in selling wine and beer. But I think my major concern is that. I have a secondary concern with respect to selling liquor to minors, although with certain procedures it will become no more of a problem than it would be in liquor stores or beer parlours.

But I think the major problem is the vulnerability of the small storekeeper in a neighbourhood, relatively isolated from a commercial area, to the lightning-strike bandit. So I'm pleased that the government has not jumped into that and will examine it more carefully.

The new arrangements that have been announced, however, cause me some concern. I'd like to know from the minister: what is the projected revenue effect of the changes? I'm told that a $4 million loss will arise from hotels buying beer wholesale that they currently buy retail. Perhaps the minister can elaborate on that. I'm assuming that there will be no increase in volume. It's not in the interest of the government to encourage that, and I don't think the industry expects an increase in volume from our liquor distribution outlet.

The second question I have is: will the municipalities have control of hotels? Not just the liquor distribution branch, but municipalities — will they have any input into whether

[ Page 6392 ]

hotels will be adding such liquor outlets? In my own constituency the downtown east side community groups expended a lot of effort to get the Main and Hastings liquor store removed. Under the minister's predecessor it was. But there was a lot of effort over many years to get rid of that liquor store. It was causing serious social and law enforcement problems in that area. Once it was removed there was a dramatic improvement in the neighbourhood. We have been monitoring that, and we think that was a good move. Has the government set to naught all of those efforts? Will the municipalities have an opportunity to express their opinion and provide a veto to a particular hotel beer parlour expanding to off-premises sale outlet? This is causing us some concern in particular areas, because it will increase the social and neighbourhood problems and law enforcement problems unless the municipality that has a close monitoring of those situations is included, and included in an official way, with a virtual veto. I want to ask the minister to express his views on that.

I suppose the government will argue that off-sales are permitted now, and all the changes do is add a sales area to do whatever they are doing now with the addition of B.C. wine. B.C. wine in some areas is the added problem. I won't elaborate on that; I'm sure the minister knows what I'm talking about. In some areas it will be an added convenience to consumers, but it will be an added problem to the neighbourhood in some other areas. That's why I want the municipalities involved. But in addition to that, there's nothing to say, and there's not enough information available to say, that an added retail outlet on hotel premises won't add sufficiently to a problem for the municipality to be concerned. I don't think there's sufficient information available to the liquor distribution branch, or to the minister, that says that all it will be is just adding an area whereby off-premises sales will be permitted that are permitted now. The changes that I can see as possible, and even probable in some instances, are the added traffic and the attraction, depending upon where these new premises are allowed — people outside of neighbourhoods or communities, even in the identifiable downtown areas, that will cause social and police problems.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

There's also the question of discrimination between hotels and how these are awarded and under what circumstances. Additionally, will hotels be permitted to sell beer at different prices for off-premises consumption from both the bar and the store? If so, how will that be policed, if at all? Will stores be required to stay open as long as the hotel bar? If hotel managers have discretion in this, there is a potential for further revenue loss to the liquor distribution branch.

There is this whipsawing effect about hours of sale, with respect to our own liquor store outlets and to the premises on board in hotel premises. That whipsawing effect will be to the detriment of revenue to the government, but an additional sort of off-hours windfall to hotel-owners. The question of competition with respect to the sale of wine and beer is a question in the government's revenue interests. We have seen hints in the past that this government will sacrifice its own revenue interests to benefit.... Perhaps it could be open for some uncharitable person to say it might be to the benefit of some of the friends of the party in power — to benefit from the revenue loss to the government. What measures has the minister contemplated and is going to put in place that will prevent this whipsawing effect? I ask the minister if he would reply.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I want to go back and deal with one of the items the member raised with regard to a comment I made in my opening remarks about incorporations. He mentioned something about shelf companies or shell companies or that all you had to do to incorporate is pay a lawyer a fee to draw up the documents and have it registered, and it really didn't mean anything. I think that can work both ways, because if he claims that there are companies being set up, and they're of no value and no employment, I guess it also applies that those companies can disappear.

But I want to give him some statistics. In doing so I don't deny that we've had some economic difficulties in this province and in this country and, I guess, in the western world. But just to go back in comparison of incorporations of businesses and bankruptcies recorded in my ministry, in 1991 we had 23,300 — I'll just give you the approximate numbers — incorporated in British Columbia, and 8,000 bankruptcies in that year. In 1982, when things really started to get into a pretty tough state, we had 11,400 incorporations, 10,700 bankruptcies. In 1983 we had 13,787 incorporations, 10,200 bankruptcies. In 1984 — and this is a good statistic, I think — we had approximately 14,000 incorporations and 9,600 bankruptcies. So there is a good number of bankruptcies, but there is a spread there, and in the latest year a considerable improvement over the number of new incorporations. Mr. Member, that doesn't include those companies that are extraprovincial; it only deals with companies that are incorporated within the province.

[3:45]

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Member, in response to your question of what's the projection for this year, I don't believe I have the figures right up to date, but I'll do my best to maybe try to get those up to date this year. Hopefully they'll be as encouraging as I think they will be.

Black Friday. The member can recognize that I can't comment in too much detail with regard to what we are doing about it and whether it will happen again, but I would refer him to the Securities Act, to the bill, and mention to him that....

MR. LAUK: It doesn't address the problem.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Well, it does in one way, and I just want to touch on this, and if the Chairman doesn't find me out of order I will. There is something new in there, which is called a halt-trading order. If there is a signal that indicates that there may be difficulties, trading can be halted temporarily until further information is gathered. That's all I'll say about it, but I'm sure we'll debate that during the bill. I'm quite confident that that will help. If we're aware of a problem, we can at least move to do that, whereas before we had to have a hearing before we could take any action.

Century Tours. Mr. Member, it's still under review with regard to the total cost. I think the registrar of travel agents or the fund said we were hopeful that we would recover. He was being optimistic; I don't think we'll be that fortunate. There were bank accounts that were frozen. The Attorney-General's department is carrying on an investigation with my ministry.

[ Page 6393 ]

I'm just giving you notes that my deputy has brought forward to me.

The board has approved a number of claims, and it appears that we will have to look at something at around $300,000, which relates partially to Century Tours and other ones that have got into difficulty at the same time, but we are unable to determine the total amount of the claims at this time. There are funds, of course, possibly, that we can make recoveries on, and that will reduce the amount. No question about it: it was rather a tragic event to happen, a very expensive claim, probably one of the highest claims on the fund to date.

There are a number of things that we're doing in that regard. I've had meetings with the association of travel agents. We have advertised for a full-time travel assurance fund registrar, and we look to input from the travel agents as to where we tighten up the criteria or the requirements for new people coming on the scene. A lot of them, I think, in the past have felt that the travel agent business is pretty attractive. They get the opportunity to see various things, go various places, but they don't realize that it is a very competitive business, and if they aren't properly financed, properly capitalized, they can get into difficulty very quickly. We've got to tighten that up, and we're working towards that goal.

MR. LAUK: Are any charges contemplated with Century?

HON. MR. HEWITT: I can only tell you that the Attorney-General is investigating. I can't tell you any more than that. It's the information I have here.

With regard to the new liquor policy, the member stated that he does not agree with beer and wine in grocery stores. That was the conclusion we came to. A number of people would tell you that they can't see anything wrong with it, and that it does provide convenience to the consumer. But the member himself has identified some of the areas of concern I had, and therefore we didn't proceed as far as some would have liked us to.

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEWITT: That could well be. I don't know where you get your information, but quite often it seems to come out of our offices. I think it's just a pure guess, for my part.

The beer stores. We anticipate that there will be some reduction in revenue. How much that is offset by the operating costs of our stores and how much that will be offset with regard to increase in volume.... That's not encouraging excessive drinking; it's just convenience to the consumer. At the present time if a consumer would like to purchase a bottle of wine or a case of beer and finds that the government liquor store is closed or that it's across town.... This will allow him to be able to go to a local hotel and pick it up at their convenience.

The municipalities do have input via their zoning and their building standards. They do not have a veto; it's a provincial liquor policy. But I can assure you that we certainly request and receive input from the municipalities, as we have in the past. I'll harken you back to a court case some time ago — I think it was the Supreme Court of British Columbia — where it was determined that only the province could set the closing hours for a licensed premise, and as a result one of the cabarets or licensed premises in Vancouver was allowed to stay open later than the city council wanted them to.

That is a decision that the courts.... We have no control over that. The only control, I guess, is probably to look at legislation and bring it in and put it back on a municipality. I think the role that I've taken is that I'd like to know what the municipality feels about hours of operation before we make the decision.

With regard to B.C. wines and the member's concern, regulations relating to the beer, wine and cider stores that are now permissible are being worked out. One of the areas we felt we could assist in with regard to abusive alcohol is that we would not look at fortified wines in those stores, nor do I think the hotels would probably want them — or the large volume 4-litre packages as opposed to a bottle of dinner wine. Really, it's to serve a consumer who normally may not wish to go into a liquor store, but if they wish they could go into a nice modern facility adjacent to their hotel, or part of the hotel, on their way home and purchase a bottle of wine or a case of beer.

But I would point out that the policy that we announced with regard to wine shops, wine kiosks and beer and wine stores through hotels, is permissive. In other words, I don't expect 200 beer stores to mushroom up overnight. We've said to the hotel association: "Here is an opportunity for you. If you wish to take advantage of it, if you think it is of benefit to your clients or to your neighbourhood, fine." The rules will have to be set so that there is as little abuse of alcohol as possible, but it is permissive. I think over a period of time we'll see one or two, or three or five or ten start to show up and then we'll phase into it.

Where I see the big benefit is in some of the smaller communities around the province, where you may have a liquor store or you may not have any store at all, and now the hotel can put in a nice beer and wine shop and have refrigerated beer. It's a convenience to the consumer in that community. That's the type of facility I see. I don't see downtown Vancouver — the Four Seasons Hotel or any of the other ones — having it, but I do see a big advantage to it in the local community.

MR. LAUK: Not with B.C. wines, you won't.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I didn't hear any negative comment from that member from Vancouver Centre about B.C. wines. He knows and I know that B.C. wines are an excellent product, and the result of a lot of hard work of good B.C. grape growers in B.C. wineries.

I think I answered most of the questions, if not all of them.

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEWITT: The setting of price. They will purchase the product at cost, and they can sell it at anything above their cost. We don't want them to have loss-leaders, but they can be as competitive as they want to be. The amount of discount or the wholesale price to the hotel is being established now through somewhat of a negotiation to determine what is fair and reasonable for them to cover their costs of operation.

MR. WILLIAMS: I'd just like to raise another subject. The Credit Union Reserve Board is under the jurisdiction of

[ Page 6394 ]

this minister, is it not? Maybe the minister could advise us whether he's reviewed this operation, particularly in the last year, and given some thought to the structure and its adequacy and the results of the past year or so.

We presently have a system where the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council appoints the reserve board, and the reserve board carries out the monitoring process with respect to the lending policies and review of the lending policies of the credit unions within the province.

The adequacy of CURB, I think, is questionable. It's a very important issue relative to western Canada in these times. I don't intend to go into details, but as currently established it definitely needs an overhaul. It's not fair to the larger entities within the credit union system to live with the situation as it currently is. The largest of the credit unions is responsible, in effect, for one-fifth or 20 percent of the operations in the province. I don't think that's realistic in terms of what's happened in the past year. Clearly there should have been signals to the minister and his staff at an earlier stage in terms of this operation. Those signals should have been clear some time ago. If they had been listening to those signals, we would have seen legislation by this time to deal with this question.

The question is: what kind of review have you undertaken, and are you anticipating any changes in the terms of the structure and the appointments and responsibilities of this whole operation? One can't look at North America these days in terms of the various institutions in America and in western Canada and not feelt that you should have had a handle on it some time ago.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, in regard to reviewing the operation or looking at the policies, we have ongoing discussions. The board meets with me periodically to keep me apprised of some of the difficulties in the credit union movement.

Personally, I think the Credit Union Reserve Board has done an excellent job in dealing with the requests for primarily commercial loans in the credit union field. Some members may or may not know this, but under the system that we have, credit unions, should they move into commercial loans above their exemption, have to apply to the reserve board to have the reserve board look at the application, at the security offered and at the ability to repay the loan, and give its approval or deny the application. If the reserve board in its wisdom denies the application, that's it. The credit union loan officer or manager has to go back to the applicant and say: "I'm sorry, we cannot service you. You will have to go elsewhere."

[4:00]

For the member's benefit, had the Credit Union Reserve Board not been in place or not been doing — in my opinion — an excellent job, we would have been in considerable difficulty in this province, because a lot of loan officers, a lot of managers of medium-sized credit unions, were influenced by values of property back in 1978-81 and were convinced that the security was adequate. They were very frustrated and upset when the reserve board said: "I'm sorry, we won't approve that commercial loan." Now, looking back, there are a number of managers and boards of credit unions in this province saying: "Thank God for the Credit Union Reserve Board. Had we proceeded, our difficulties would have been far worse than they are at this time."

What we have, Mr. Chairman.... It is evidenced by the Canadian Commercial Bank and by a number of other lending institutions such as Victoria Mortgage. It's evidenced by the Bank of B.C., where appraisals were done, commercial loans were made, and the value of the security was cut in half because of the downturn in the economy. I think it's fair to say that the majority of credit unions in this province have survived very well, considering the particular times we're in.

There was a famous expression — some of my colleagues here might recall it — with regard to official appraisers and appraisals. They carry a designation behind their name; I think it's AACI. The definition of those initials quite often when I was in the business of granting mortgages was "Appraisals According to Client's Instructions." Basically, a lot of financial institutions, banks and others got into a great deal of difficulty because of those appraisals that were done by "qualified" people in the heady times of inflation back in 1978-79-80. Then when the downturn came, there were a lot of lenders caught in a bind. I named some of them just a few minutes ago.

I think, Mr. Member, that the Credit Union Reserve Board has done an excellent job. That's not to say that we just let it sit there, and not monitor it nor have discussions with representatives from that board and from the credit union movement. But it was there. And for the member's information, if he already isn't aware of it, I was one of the people who set it up in the first place. I was one of the representatives who came to government a number of years ago and said: "We need to have some type of insurance protection." And we set it up. Granted, the fund, if you compare it to the total assets, probably isn't as much as we would like it to be. But it's an ongoing fund. It's an assessment on the credit unions; it's not an assessment on the taxpayers of the province. If time permits, and if good management prevails, I would say that the credit unions will be as stable as any other financial institution in the province.

MR. WILLIAMS: I didn't raise the question for standard pap, Mr. Chairman, and that's what I got. If the minister doesn't think it's standard pap, then he's not in charge of his department.

We can look at a local situation, if you like — projects within a mile of this building that were funded on a significant scale by and have created significant problems for the credit union involved.

Interjection.

MR. WILLIAMS: No question about that. And you want to reflect on the current size of the fund and how the fund has been affected this year by those kinds of decisions?

Interjection.

MR. WILLIAMS: All I'm saying, if you'd just listen....

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: One at a time, please.

MR. WILLIAMS: Understand that the member's background is with respect to a small credit union in the interior of British Columbia and not the major institutions operating

[ Page 6395 ]

elsewhere, including this community. There are some lessons there. The fund has been affected. In many ways CURB is redundant; it does a lot of work that is done by competent people, certainly in the larger institutions. It doesn't have the kind of system in place, it seems to me, to give you the kinds of signals you need early in the game. I'm saying that with the kinds of problems you faced this year the bells should have been ringing at an earlier stage. I'm saying that you have an institution there that is not adequate to the job. I'm saying that you need some different personnel. I'm saying you need a different monitoring system, because the fund has been seriously affected. It isn’t ignorance from which I speak, I assure you.

The minister has some serious responsibilities here. It's not quite adequate to have this little five-person group appointed on some kind of basis by the Lieutenant- Governor-in-Council. It is a major financial responsibility for the entire province of British Columbia. Whether the legislation says so or not, in effect the responsibility ends up here; the buck ends up at his desk. I suggest that the system is inadequate. I suggest that the signals in other provinces have been clear, indelibly so; that there is some obligation to reflect on the processes and personnel now in place, and to make sure that the obligations to the public of British Columbia are not impacted.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, the member is eloquent, I guess, in his attack on the Credit Union Reserve Board and, I guess, on this minister because of philosophical differences. I did say very clearly that, yes, there was a need to monitor the Credit Union Reserve Board and its policies, to make sure that we are up to date and don't fall behind. I then went on to say what we had achieved and what value that reserve board has — the board is made up of five people, with a number of staff, of course — as a good sounding-board. It turned aside a number of "good" applications at the time, to the dissatisfaction of member credit unions. In some cases the credit unions were very upset with the quality of the reserve board's decision. In hindsight it was an excellent decision, and in many cases it protected credit unions from getting into serious difficulty.

I don't think the Credit Union Reserve Board is redundant, as the member said. At the same time, I'll agree with him that we must make sure we are up to date and don't fall behind — as he seems to think we are doing now. I can assure him that I will continue to have dialogue with the people, and if we feel there should be a move to improve systems.... If he has any suggestions, I'd be pleased to hear from him.

I'm well aware that he sits as a director of Vancouver City Savings Credit Union and certainly has the opportunity to hear from credit union personnel around the province. And yes, Mr. Member, I was a manager of "a small credit union," in comparison with Vancouver City Savings. However, I travelled around the province and set up accounting systems, and worked with credit unions for a number of years before I went there; and I sat on B.C. Central Credit Union's board for a number of years thereafter. I had the opportunity to hear submissions from accountants, lawyers, etc. to make sure that we attempted to develop a good sound credit union movement in this province. One of the reasons I'm in this House today is that a government in power between 1972 and 1975 determined to create a B.C. savings and loan company; they passed legislation for it and didn't have the opportunity to institute it. In my opinion, that was going to be the first move in the demise of the credit union movement in this province, because it would have ended up being a government-owned financial institution, and the credit unions would have been lost.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We are straying from the estimates, hon. member. To the current estimates.

MS. BROWN: Mr. Chairman, first I want to make a couple of comments about liquor. The government talks a lot — and does a lot — about raising the age for drinking and driving; it designs BATmobiles, has all kinds of penalties for drinking and driving, but never really looks at its own role in the distribution and pushing of alcohol. I don't want to give the impression that I think we should go back to the days of prohibition, but sometime the minister should look at the role of the government in making it, as you like to say, more accessible or easier or more convenient for people to get alcohol.

One of the things I find very strange and almost schizophrenic about the way in which alcohol is dealt with by the government is that at the same time as we have laws against drinking and driving, we have a rule that when a neighbourhood pub is put into place it must have parking for at least 100 cars. Why would we have parking for cars at a drinking establishment when we are telling people not to drive after they drink? This government also allows the sale of alcohol at football games in the stadium, at hockey games and that kind of thing. Does the government really think people walk to those games and then walk home afterwards?

So I want the minister to comment on the role of this government, which spends very little money on education against the use of alcohol, or against the abuse of alcohol; very little money on rehabilitation for alcohol-related accidents. It reaps an enormous amount of money from the purveying of alcohol and then puts into place these rules that force people to drive and drink. What's the point of the BATmobile? What's the point of arguing about raising the drinking age to 21 when the government itself is insisting that drinking institutions must have parking spaces attached to them? And the question of beer and wine in grocery stores — well, I'm certainly glad that the polls indicated that most British Columbians recognize that that would not have been in the best interest of the people of this province. So the government has postponed its decision on that. I also know there have been recommendations from members on the government benches about permitting the sale of wine on the ferries, and I certainly hope the government will poll before making any such decision. I know the polls will indicate again that the people of British Columbia do not want drunks rolling off the ferry onto the highways at the end of an hour and a half of sitting and drinking.

Again, I want to state that I think the government should be upfront and straight about its role as pusher of this drug — the only person who sells alcohol in this province. It controls the sale of alcohol in this province and spends very little of the money raised from the sale of alcohol on educating young people on the abuses and health hazards of that particular drug, and certainly spends very little on rehabilitation.

The other point I wanted to raise with the minister had to do with his statement about an on-line system. I'm quite interested in that, because I know that a number of other ministries — Human Resources, for example, and Health — have that system at this time. I recognize that the use of

[ Page 6396 ]

computers is really helpful to government; it helps government to do its job more efficiently and more effectively. But I'm wondering whether, in putting these systems into place, anyone is seriously looking at the privacy aspect in terms of the individual's right to protecting privacy and private information. Is there going to be an interface between the on-line system in the Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and the Ministry of Human Resources, the Ministry of Health, the Attorney-General's ministry and other ministries?

I just returned from a trip to Sweden. I was there last week, as a matter of fact. I brought back with me some of the legislation, which the minister might be interested in, around this whole business of privacy and the use of computers and the exchanging of personal information between various ministries in government. They have a law against that. They go even further than that: they have a commission to monitor various ministries to be sure that personal and private information isn't being exchanged by these different departments. They have an ombudsman on privacy also to see to it that personal information is just that.

[4:15]

[Mr. Veitch in the chair.]

I'm wondering whether the minister, in responding, would say whether the on-line system in Consumer and Corporate Affairs is going to interface with the on-line system in some of the other ministries, such as Human Resources, Health, the Attorney-General and whatever other ministry has a system at this time.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, in regard to the liquor distribution, the fact that we push liquor sales and yet we, the taxpayer, the government, pick up the cost.... First of all, that's the old sawoff about privatization and then taxing to get your revenues, or do you have the government control and government distribution, or do you get the halfway measure, which I think we're coming to in trying to resolve these problems.

If we went the privatization route, then it's just a matter of.... They buy it from the wholesaler, and they sell it, and we pick up the tax. You know the downside of the abuse of alcohol probably as well as or more than I do, because of your involvement with the social side of the community. We have struck that point to say: consumer convenience, but there's got to be a reasonable amount of government involvement in the sale.

With regard to neighbourhood pubs and the parking, that's municipal. That's a municipal requirement, and the zoning bylaw says if you're going to have X number of seats, then of course you've got to have X number of parking stalls. I agree with you. The name "neighbourhood pub" is a misnomer. No neighbourhood wants a neighbourhood pub, but they don't mind it on 4th Avenue or on Main Street or in the shopping centre. We try to discourage all this. Someone says, "I'd like to put a neighbourhood pub in a location," and we allow them to do the survey, and the people come back and say: "We don't want it there, because we don't like the noise; we like our quiet area or quiet neighbourhood." But they wouldn't mind it down in the shopping centre. You do that and you get the cars and the transportation. So that's a problem. It's not really the true neighbourhood pub as you know it in England, where you could walk to it.

The sale of alcohol at sports events, at football games. Yes, we have a problem there too; there's no question about it. But we've taken steps and have excellent cooperation with Mr. Renaud, I think, of B.C. Place. You can't buy an alcoholic beverage there without showing identification. You can imagine what that does to the efficiency. Somebody mentioned how it slows things down. You can imagine what it does to the sales, but the problem is of that concern that they're demanding identification. We've also got separate sections in B.C. Place now for non-drinkers and drinkers. That doesn't solve the problem of excessive alcohol.

I believe B.C. Place has cut off the sale of alcoholic beverages — the beer and wine — at the end of the third quarter. That doesn't solve the problem, but at least it gives them a half an hour to get their mind back in gear so they can drive that car on the way home. We also have increased security. We've done all those things. I for one can tell you, because I've been at some of those games and have got very upset with the guy in front of me splashing everybody, that if we can't educate the people who go to sports events that drink in moderation is acceptable but drink in excess is not, and if we can't seem to resolve the problem, we may end up by not having alcohol in B.C. Place or other sports events. We've just done it, as you know, over the past year or so, and I think we have to try to correct the problems and see whether it will work. As I say, if it's done in moderation, there's no problem at all. But we'll have to monitor that.

You mentioned something about the poll saying not to put beer and wine in grocery stores. I can tell you that we use the public opinion survey as a tool. Interestingly enough, on some of those issues like beer and wine in grocery stores it's amazing how it sort of just seesaws back and forth. I'm not an experienced or educated pollster, but you ask one question and they seem to go all this way — which would indicate to you that, yes, everybody wants it — and you ask another question and it goes to the other side, and they're all over the ball park in regards to what should be done. But we didn't just take the poll and say: "Oh-oh, if more are opposed than are for it we won't go with it." Not so. We did a lot of analyzing of the public opinion survey, but we also talked with the RCMP, the Salvation Army and the Mothers Against Drunk Drivers to get their feelings as to whether or not we should go that far. We've talked to the manufacturers, the wineries and the breweries, and we've talked to the retailers, etc., and we came to the conclusion that we weren't prepared to go that far.

Moving on to your last question regarding on-line computers and the problem of security or privacy. I'm also the minister responsible for the B.C. Systems Corporation, as you know. I've only been in that office for a short period of time, but I've quickly become aware that the Systems Corporation is a very security-minded organization. All its systems are geared to protect against any cross-use of information, and will continue to be so. The latest equipment in systems that can be available to ensure the privacy of the citizen will be maintained.

But what it does allow for — if I can just quickly touch on my ministry and the on-line aspect — is the turnaround time for information with regard to chattel mortgages or other things that we can put on the computer through central registry. We can give information to people who are interested in whether or not there's a mortgage against a chattel, etc. We can give that quickly, whereas you used to have to wait several days, and maybe the opportunity had passed to make the loan or sale or whatever. So we're pretty excited

[ Page 6397 ]

about it, and I think the business community would be as well. But we'll sure attempt to do our best to make sure that the privacy of the individual is maintained.

MS. BROWN: The thing about the computer is not that I'm afraid of someone breaking the code and getting information that they shouldn't have access to; I'm talking about interfacing, the ministry deliberately giving information to another ministry. I know, for example, that the computer in Human Resources is going to be affected by this on-line system because Human Resources is thinking about using the electronic banking system. This means that they immediately are going to have access to recipients' private information as far as their accounts or lack of accounts or whatever are concerned. But worse than that, where you are not allowed to garnishee and take money out of a Human Resources cheque — because in fact the banks are allowed first dibs when you overrun your account or whatever — we could have problems with Human Resources cheques going out electronically, where the person actually ends up getting only a portion of the cheque because they have overrun and the bank has paid themselves off first.

So I know that the computer is very efficient. There isn't any question about the efficiency of the computer. That's why governments use it. The problem we have with it is that the recipients or the victims or the whatever of this government service have no input into the system that is being designed and put into place, and often it has a negative impact on them.

Certainly interfacing and sharing of information about personal and private matters is something that ministries and departments do do with each other. I know that Human Resources, for example, is thinking of interfacing with the WCB and with ICBC. Who knows who else? Unemployment Insurance? Maybe there's going to be interfacing federally and provincially with the unemployment insurance information. As someone who is responsible for B.C. Systems Corporation — and I forgot that I have a whole different kind of thing to talk to you about when we get into that — that's what I'm concerned about.

I'm not impressed anyway with the privacy system. When I was in Oslo, they were sure they had the most absolutely security-proof system. It turned out that two high school kids broke the code and were running riot. Let's not pretend that there's privacy.

Interjection.

MS. BROWN: Sure. I mean, let's not pretend that there's that much security. But that's not what I'm concerned about; I'm concerned about the legal exchange of information that there shouldn't be. I'm just saying that if you look at the Swedish model, it's not permitted. They literally prevent you from giving information from here to there electronically.

I want to get back to the alcohol thing. I want to establish right off that I'm not in favour of any form of privatization at all in terms of the distribution of alcohol. I am saying that the government, as the body that controls and pushes the stuff, has to take more responsibility in terms of the damage that alcohol can do. There no point to starting at the accident level and throwing drunken drivers into jail when there are rules that say a drinking establishment must have parking space to it. I recognize, as you pointed out to me, that that's a municipal law. But as the minister responsible, there is absolutely no reason why an edict can't go forth from you to the extent that neighbourhood pubs should be small enough in size that there should be no parking spaces necessary — maybe one for the person who works in the pub, and nobody else.

But this business of alcohol at sporting events, why is it necessary? Aside from the fact that it's another way of the government raising revenue, there really isn’t any justification for it. Certainly the tragedy in Brussels last week that forced the Prime Minister of England, Mrs. Thatcher, to prohibit the use of alcohol at sporting events.... Do we have to have our own experiences? Can't we team from the experiences of other countries"

I've had season tickets to the Lions football games for years, and we used to sit through the games without needing a drink. It became pretty bad after a while, when the Lions kept losing every single time. You really needed a drink, but that was precisely the time when you shouldn't have access to the drink. So I want you to really reconsider the whole question of drinking at sporting events. Cutting off alcohol for the last quarter isn't going to do it. What you do is double up and make sure you have enough to sort of see you through until....

Interjection.

MS. BROWN: No. but let's be honest about it. If you're in a pub and someone says "last call," you go two instead of one. It happens. But I really think you should seriously look at the whole question of drinking at sporting events, because the linking of alcohol and driving.... The government is the guilty one now where that happens, so take responsibility for that.

Okay, moving along. I want to bring to your attention, because I'm sure you don't know.... Do you know that British Columbia is one of only two provinces left in this country that still throws people in jail for the non-payment of debts? Yes, it still happens. Alberta and Saskatchewan and Manitoba and everybody else find more innovative and humane ways of dealing with debt. Debt is not a crime; it's not a federal offence; it's not a criminal offence. Yet we still put people in jail because they don't meet their debts or can't afford to meet their debts.

I think the time has really come for the minister to look seriously at the kind of legislation that Alberta, for example, had prior to 1985 that dealt with this issue in a more innovative way, whether it's garnisheeing of wages, getting a judgment or whatever it is. It seems to me that there should be other ways that the government can deal with people who are unable to or who just absolutely refuse to pay their debt, rather than throwing them into jail.

[4:30]

1 couldn't find anything on the B.C. experience, but the Australian study of debtors who go to jail indicates that for the most part they were people on very low income with little formal education who had been unemployed for a long period of time. I would tend to suspect that that is the case in British Columbia too, and the reason I do is because of this evaluation of the debtor assistance program, which indicates that most of the people who use the program were referred by the Ministry of Human Resources. So we really are talking about poor people and unemployed people, and as the Australian research indicated, people with very low levels of formal education. So I'm hoping that the minister will bring in an amendment or do something. We've got to stop this business of debtors' prisons. We're too sophisticated and civilized.

[ Page 6398 ]

You can't have an on-line system in a province with a debtors' prison. It doesn't make sense. Debtors' prisons belong with Charles Dickens, back in those days.

At the same time, we need a piece of comprehensive exemption legislation. It should not be possible for a person to lose their house. It should not be possible for someone who makes their living fishing to lose their boat, for people to lose the tools that they need in order to work, because of the nonpayment of debt. We need some exemption legislation if we are serious about a more enlightened creditor-debtor relationship. Again I want to recommend to the minister the Alberta model. I know that we have a $2,000 exemption here in British Columbia. That's totally inadequate: that's not good enough. What we really need is to be sure that people don't lose their tools, their fishing net, the car they need for work; that farmers don't lose the basic things they need to farm; that people don't lose their family home because of non-payment of debt.

I want to tell you this story — I'm sure you read it in the Sun on Thursday and Friday, and you'll probably read it again today — about a 75-year-old widow in Burnaby who was evicted just today from her home for non-payment of debt. This is a widow living on old-age pension, plus her husband's small Canada Post pension — a maximum income of about $400 a month. Regional Trust loaned this woman $400,000. They did! It was a mortgage. She was going to lose her house because she couldn't keep up the mortgage payments, so they loaned her — on her $400 a month pension — $400,000. Of course, at that time the 1.5 acre property in the centre of Burnaby, which as you know is one of the most pleasant parts of British Columbia to live, was worth $550,000. Somebody offered to buy it from her for $550,000. She had no intentions of ever moving; she's lived here all her life.

The trust company loaned her $400,000 and said: "You have a year to pay it back." On $400 a month income, she had a year to pay back this $400,000. Well, she said: "I'll sell a part of my land." One of the lots was about half an acre, so she put it on the market. The bottom fell out of the real estate market. At the end of the year, come January 1 this year the lot wasn't sold and the trust company said: "Now we're ready for our $400,000." In the meantime, the value of the property had dropped from $550,000 to $450,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: What did she do with the $400,000?

MS. BROWN: She used it to pay off another mortgage company. She just hadn't met her mortgage payments in the last 20 years, or whatever.

The reality of the situation is that as the value of the property began to drop, the trust company became more aggressive in terms of wanting their $400,000 back. She got extensions; they gave her 10 days. She appealed to the mayor. The mayor phoned the trust company; they gave her 10 days. Then she appealed to me and I phoned the trust company. I said: "Look, it's your house. Let her live there; when she dies or moves to extended care or whatever, you're going to get it. It's 1.5 acres in the centre of beautiful Burnaby. The bottom is out of the market now, but one day that land is going to be worth a heck of a lot more than $400,000. Leave her alone; she's 75." He said he didn't have the jurisdiction to make that kind of decision. Her lawyer tried to get them to let her live there and pay a token rent, but the trust company said no, and she was evicted this morning.

It seems to me that if we had good exemption legislation in this province, as it was the family home, she would have been protected. She would not have lost that house. She could not have been evicted, at 75 years of age, from that house in which she has lived for all these years. Human Resources now has her, and they're going to try to find a place for her to live. It raises a number of issues about the responsibility of trust companies, but I'm just using it as an example to support my request for some good comprehensive exemptions legislation to protect the kind of basic necessities of life that people have. Also, in the meantime the minister can get the trust company to change its mind and allow her to stay there. Apparently the sheriff and everyone is there, and she still is refusing to leave. Maybe the minister could intervene on her behalf.

HON. MR. HEWITT: A number of the items raised by the member are interesting, and I think it would be worthwhile for me to have discussions on some of them with the Attorney-General (Hon. Mr. Smith), because I think some touch on his jurisdiction as well as mine.

The one about the minimum of $2,000 for possessions.... I believe I'm right in saying it was $500 or $800 a number of years ago. Not too far back, we raised it to $2,000. I believe that maybe $2,000 is somewhat low, and we should take another look at that. That's one of the areas.

I don't know any particulars about the 75-year-old lady you talked about, but with regard to that it's pretty difficult to get involved between two parties to a contract, with one party getting value of — I gather from what you say — $400,000 and in return giving a mortgage on the property and then not being able to meet the commitment. That's somewhat different than somebody who, you might say, is destitute, has nothing and just needs a roof over their head. This lady evidently got a fair amount of value for giving her house and property as a mortgage.

I'd be interested in looking at the material, but I have some difficulty understanding what jurisdiction or what right we would have to move on the party to the contract. She received value and gave her property as security. What she did with that money I have no way of knowing. If you want to provide me with information, I'd be glad to receive it.

MS. BROWN: Mr. Chairman, I just want to recommend again to the minister the Alberta legislation which they had prior to 1985 when they moved an amendment and took a part of it out. What the legislation said was exempted were necessary clothing, necessary farm animals, farm machinery, tools of one's trade, seed and grain for farming, necessary books of a professional, the homestead and up to $8,000 for one's house or the cash from its sale. It's not money I'm talking about, but basic necessities, and the one group that really needs this kind of protection is people who fish for a living.

Now you know the tragic stories about these people who fish who have lost their boats. I can't call them fishermen anymore, Mr. Chairman, because there are a lot of these fishermen now who are women, so I have to refer to them as people who fish for a living, or fisherfolk.

There was actually a man who submitted a recommendation. He was a counsellor working with the ministry at one time, but he drew up some recommendations for these people who make a living fishing, in terms of what he referred to as an advocate, really. He recommended that there be a borrower's advocate for these people, but in fact at the same

[ Page 6399 ]

time, linked with the advocate, would be this exemption of the fishboat. There is absolutely no way that a person who has lost their fishboat is ever going to be able to go fishing to raise the money to meet the debt. So that doesn't make any sense. It's the same thing with anybody else in terms of the tools of their trade. So it's not the money I'm talking about.

I want to be clear that Alberta's legislation is not as perfect as it used to be, because they've now eliminated goods and chattels or something. I'm not quite clear what they've done.

Okay, mortgages. Is it possible for your ministry to design a mortgage document that people with a basic average intelligence can understand? I mean do we always have to have someone to explain the party of the first part to the party of the second part to the party of the third part? I understand that the Bank of Nova Scotia has actually created such a document; that there is a contract that ordinary human beings can read and understand that says: "You pay this, you get that. This is your interest payment." Could you encourage your ministry to draft such a thing?

I realize that you're going to have a heck of a time trying to educate the lawyers into understanding it once it's been drafted.

MR. MACDONALD: A short form of mortgages, eh?

MS. BROWN: That's right.

Your consumer storefront offices — they're all gone. Not even one exists any more. I think that's very unfortunate. But I want to extend some accolades in terms of your debtor assistance offices. They're hard-working people doing a good job. How many top staff do you have? Could you tell me something about your administrative positions as opposed to just straight staff people? I find it appalling that there is something like $49 billion outstanding in consumer credit in this country, and that it's the fourth largest industry in B.C. — something like $4 billion to $5 billion. That's really quite an incredible statistic.

Collection agencies. Although the employees have to be licensed, they don't have to be trained. There have been a number of complaints about the tactics used by these collection agencies. If the minister hasn't got the information, I'd be very happy to share with him some of my documentation, all of which came from the public media, about collection agencies and the tactics being used. Is there a plan in the future — near or far — to require training for the employees of these collection agencies? What is the ministry doing about some of the strong-arm tactics being used by these collection agencies?

Another question that I have to raise has to do with cemeteries. I think the minister is also responsible for them. I had a clipping about a widow who was.... "Funeral Homes Pitch Prepaid Death Rites." "Cemetery Dunning Widows." "Old Contracts Vague On What Survivors Get." This is in terms of paying their bills and things. Can the minister just comment very quickly on his responsibility for cemeteries and funeral parlours, and on what's being done about that? I know that my colleague from Vancouver East has some very important questions, so I'm moving very quickly.

[4:45]

Interjection.

MS. BROWN: My responsibility is for consumer problems. That's the reason I've got so many of them.

Spas. Apparently complaints are just rolling in about these long-term contracts that are being signed. I wonder if the minister would like to respond to the fact that his ministry is supposed to have been investigating some of these spas. Could he give us the results of some of these investigations? Let's find out what's going on.

What about these private fundraising companies that are charging fees of up to 60 percent to raise money for charitable organizations? Can the minister comment as to whether there are any plans to legislate in the near future a percentage or some kind of ceiling on the percentages these private fundraising companies can charge for raising money for charitable organizations?

There is also a complaint about the nuclear war games in the stores — that you can vapourize a million Russians with your own intercontinental bomber. I find it absolutely horrendous, at a time when all of us are working so hard to not only de-escalate this mad rush towards the end, really, but even to remove some of the warlike tones from our language, that we actually have games in the stores, being sold to our children, that talk about them having their own intercontinental bomber, for as little as $10, to help them vapourize a million Russians. I'm wondering whether the ministry pays any attention to the kinds of things that the consumer organizations recommend and say about their displeasure and discomfort with these kinds of things.

[Mr. Kempf in the chair.]

HON. MR. HEWITT: There are a number of questions that the member has asked. I may have missed some of them, but I'm quite happy to try to come back later on and answer them if she feels I haven't responded fully enough.

I'm all in agreement with a standard mortgage document — one that's easily read, one that the lawyers haven't muddified to the extent that nobody can understand it. I'm also very much in favour of a disclosure in a mortgage statement that tells the mortgagor precisely what the penalty is for prepayment. Every mortgagor should have the ability to prepay his mortgage. I feel very strongly about that; I've seen too much hardship because the mortgage company has been silent on what the penalty might be or they've held the borrower locked in, you might say, to a document that is unfair. I'm very pleased to have seen some of the longer-term mortgages come into being recently: seven years, ten years. I shudder at the variable interest rate mortgage, although I can understand why lenders had to go to it when inflation was rampant. But there has got to be a heart maintained in the finance business, in my opinion; otherwise we'll rue the day, sooner or later, when the consumers rebel because of some of the abuse that they've taken over the years.

The debtor assistance program. You'll be interested to know, Madam Member, that through all the downsizing and the reduction of staff, that's one section of my ministry that was never touched. In 1982-83 we had 26; in 1985-86 we have 26 in the creditor and debtor assistance program.

You mentioned cemeteries and funeral parlours. There's concern about the pre-selling, the phone calls, the door knocking. We haven't had any resolution on it. There's some question as to whether or not the consumer should be denied this service, or whether the service is objectionable. I am having ongoing meetings with the representatives of the

[ Page 6400 ]

cemetery and crematorium industry, and also the funeral parlours. As recently as this morning, I met with Father Defoe in Vancouver, and another representative of the crematoria industry — did I say that right?

Spas. There is concern about the "lifetime" contract. I asked staff, when all that sort of hit the headlines of the paper, and I believe there are some unproclaimed sections of legislation which would indicate that we could possibly define what a "lifetime" contract is; in other words, put in a period of time when it would have to be renewed. At least it would allow the applicant not to have to pay a large sum of money up front — an excessive amount of money — only to find that the spa fails and they've got nothing of value.

Fundraising. No legislation is anticipated at this time.

The advertising of tickets to the Lions Club circus. It's professionally done, and it brings entertainment into the community, and then the show people who put on the show take a fairly large percentage. The consumer is getting something of value; they're getting the entertainment, and there's a price for that — the performers aren't going to perform for nothing — and the balance, after costs, goes to the charitable organization or the service club. I'm not anticipating putting in legislation at this time. I believe the province of Alberta has legislation in place; their maximum amount allowed to the promoter, or show people, I think, is 45 percent; that's pretty high. My deputy has just advised me that she believes that's the figure. So even with legislation it's a fair size. I don't think our claims by promoters on charitable organizations have been that high. They've been around....

Interjection.

HON. MR. HEWITT: As high as 60? But in most cases, I think the consumer gets the entertainment, and a portion of their ticket price goes to the charity. The charitable organization can look to a different avenue of raising funds. They've decided to go that way — to put on a show and to raise money, and that's their decision.

One talked about war games. Madam Member, I guess I'm of the opinion that in the purchase of games by young children who are under the control of their parent, I have to say that it's the responsibility of the parents to ensure that their child.... Should they not want him or her to buy that product, they should say no to young Johnnie or Jane, and say: "You're not going to have that. I don't think that's good for your educational well-being." I'm not sure if we should, as government, hold ourselves up to be that involved in family life, and tell parents what toy they should buy for their children; I hope we haven't come to that yet.

MS. BROWN: I'm just about through. I asked the minister to comment on jailing people for non-payment of debt. Maybe he could tell us, for example, how many people were incarcerated last year for non-payment of debts, and how many so far this year. Also, one of the complaints about the debtor assistance program is that not enough people know about it. In the study that was done, the evaluation said that you're really not doing a good job of advertising it. Certainly the research indicated that a lot more people would use it if they knew about it. Also 13 percent of the people who use the program, when asked what they would do if this counselling had not been available, said they would have committed suicide. They probably just said that, but if people say something often enough, sooner or later a number of them do carry it through. So it's a program that you should be blowing your horn about — not you specifically, but certainly the program should be better known. During the same time when bankruptcies are escalating, we certainly need the kind of service that debtor counselling provides.

So would you mind giving me the figures on jailing debtors and also indicate whether there is any plan to amend the legislation so that we can stop sending people to jail for non-payment of debts.

HON. MR. HEWITT: With regard to the assistance to debtors, I'll take the member's comment under advisement. If we're not doing a job of making people aware that that service is there, we will improve our efforts. As I mentioned earlier in my comments, we've recovered $3 million, and we've assisted a great number of people. We've interviewed over 5,000 people, and we've handled, I believe, almost 60,000 phone calls. So a lot of people are aware that the program is there. It's a good program, and I can assure you we'll do our best to make sure people are aware of it.

The jailing is of course a decision of the court, and it only applies to small claims court cases. The reason the person is faced with incarceration.... The question is usually put to them to please explain why they can't pay the debt. In the vast majority of cases, the explanation that is given is acceptable to the judge. It's basically: "Mr. Judge, I've been out of work for six months. I can't pay. I'm living on welfare." That is sufficient reason not to put the man or woman in jail. However, if it's a case of not showing reason why you can't pay, then the judge has the ability to determine if the person should go to jail.

I don't have the figures of how many. I hope I'll be able to get them for you. If I don't get them for you before my estimates are through, I'll certainly provide them directly to you.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, just before I say anything important, on that latter point, I wouldn't think there are very many in jail unless the judge has come to the conclusion that the person was deliberately hiding assets or deliberately evading and could make the schedule of payments. The common case of people in jail for non-payment of a debt are defaulting husbands who are not supporting their wife and children in the family court. There are quite a number of them in the jails of British Columbia. But we have no choice but that they should be there. Perhaps the member agrees with me in that particular instance.

In terms of the beer and wine in small stores, I have a slightly different emphasis on that point. My jury is still out. I notice everybody talks about polls and so forth, but I notice the Liberal Party in Ontario had that as a major plank in their platform and won. I'm not sure having beer and B.C. wines more freely available in corner stores would mean an increase in the consumption. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you often have the case where somebody goes to the liquor store and says: "That was a real trip, eh?" They take two dozen whereas they might take a half-pack from a comer store and go home and enjoy it with their families.

As for the availability of alcohol in sporting events, I must admit I was at the Wimbledon once, and there was some guy who must have been tiddly — he must have had a glass of beer — because every time a good shot was made, he was saying: "Bravo, bravo." But he was enjoying himself too,

[ Page 6401 ]

and that's a little bit to do with some of our public entertainments. It's a factor. I know we're in a puritanical age, but a little bit of enjoyment sometimes makes life go farther, and if you have something available at a sporting event, you're less likely to pack a mickey.

[5:00]

You know that you're really dealing with human nature and not necessarily the availability of fairly harmless things such as beer. Although I was pleased to see that when I was at B.C. Stadium for the visit of the Pope, I was unable to get a glass of beer on that occasion. That's a sporting thing I go along with.

Interjections.

MR. MACDONALD: I don't know whether I'm talking to my colleagues or to the minister here, but I have a specific question to the minister.

If the minister wouldn't mind, I've got two questions, and one is a more serious consideration. The first one is plebiscites for the neighbourhood pubs that are taken in the area, and they're taken now, I gather, at the expense of the person who's applying and has had initial approval for the pub licence. I don't think it's proper that that person — the applicant — should be able to hire a firm to take a poll and include in the poll that goes out propaganda in favour of his proposition. I just want to ask the minister: what controls are you putting upon the process? If that poll-taking must be contracted out and left in the hands of an applicant — sometimes this happens in residential areas — are you taking some look at the thing to make sure that propaganda isn't also disseminated at the same time as the voting cards?

The final point I want to make is quite serious, because we're coming up against Expo 86, and I've seen some advertisements of it. I'm well aware it's coming along, and I've talked to people, some from other parts of Canada, who tell me that there's quite a lot of interest, in places like Montreal, in bringing the family out. Are they going to be able to accommodate themselves in British Columbia at reasonable rents? I'm talking about hotel rates and rooms to let and things of that kind. If I'm not mistaken, in Los Angeles during the Olympics Mayor Bradley imposed a form of rent control, and it was very successful. I'm asking the minister point-blank if he will protect the tourists who come in, by having some rent control over the kind of places they'll be looking to for lodging in the night, and in most cases for several days. I don't suppose it would apply in the far-flung regions of British Columbia, but in the lower mainland very definitely during the period of Expo. Has the minister any plans to protect visitors to Expo in terms of what they'll pay for their lodgings?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, the plebiscite for neighbourhood pub applications. The member is probably aware that the process and I guess the material that's used in going around and carrying out the plebiscite has to be approved by the liquor licensing branch. That doesn't say it's perfect, and it doesn't say that in some cases there has been abuse, but my staff are aware that the question has to be put, hopefully without bias, and where they feel that the decision is attempting to be influenced, then we may not be satisfied with that poll and they may have to redo it. Because there's usually several thousand dollars paid to have a plebiscite carried out by an unbiased individual or company, that company may not get any further work. We may not accept them as the company to carry out the plebiscite. So we're aware of the possible problem, and I can only say that if you have instances where you feel that the answer has been influenced by material sent out, then we should know about it, and I'd be pleased to receive it.

Expo 86. We have two things. We have tourism and the licensed hotel that rents rooms by the night; we haven't considered any control on those. However, I can tell you we are reviewing what has been done in places like Knoxville and Los Angeles to see what they did in regard to rent controls or protection of people living in accommodation now who may be asked to move because somebody wants to take advantage of a short-term benefit — i.e. ability to rent out their rooms by the night. So there are two parts to that problem, and I can tell you that we're a year away from Expo, but I've asked my staff to do some investigation and to consider what we might do.

MR. COCKE: Mr. Chairman, first to that last question that the minister spoke of. Unfortunately, the estimate was called a day or two too early for a letter that is being issued by a downtown Vancouver hotel to its customers indicating that the rates are going to be sky-high at Expo time, and I think that that's what's going to happen. We had better be cognizant of that. If the government is really interested in Expo being a fantastic event with all of the accompanying great things that happen, then I think they should immediately call a meeting of all the major hotels and places of lodging and indicate to them very clearly that they'd better not try the Montreal trick, because if they do, then it's going to put a cloud over us all.

Mr. Chairman, one other thing. My colleague the member for Vancouver East says that his jury is still out. I hope his jury stays out for a long, long time, and let me tell you why. The one thing that he didn't take into consideration, in terms of putting beer and wine in a comer grocery store, is that you're asking that the storekeeper — that is, the merchant — become the police person in terms of judging the age of the person that's going to be buying the booze. I can tell you right now, Mr. Chairman, that kids will be getting notes, and they'll be going to the store. and they'll be buying their halfpacks and so on — the same as they used to buy cigarettes, saying that it was for the parents and all the rest of it. They are going to have available, even more then they have now, that particular drug.

Mr. Chairman, I don't think that anyone can indicate that I am notoriously anti-booze, but I am notoriously anti....

AN HON. MEMBER: You don't buy it very often.

MR. COCKE: I don't need to. I make it, and according to all people with fine palates, it's very good.

AN HON. MEMBER: You've never invited me.

MR. COCKE: Well, just be a good boy, and you never know. It might happen some time.

In any event, Mr. Chairman, I believe that we should be very careful. I was pleased to see that the government decided not to go that route. I believe that going that route could cause us a good deal of misery. One of our problems that we have found to date is that too many first-year drivers and first-year drinkers are getting themselves into an awful lot of trouble.

[ Page 6402 ]

We're talking about 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds. As far as I'm concerned, if the availability is increased, it's going to do us some damage.

The third thing, Mr. Chairman, that I want to talk about is this business of the on-line computer and exchange of information. When we were government, I had a lot of pressure put on me as Minister of Health to get our computers compatible for medicare — that is, using the social insurance numbers. We resisted that for one good reason, and that good reason was the fact that once you start using that number, others use that number in their retention of information regarding people, and before you know it there will be nothing private about a person's health, about anything that's private — finances or anything. Eventually, Mr. Chairman, we will live in the Big Brother world. We're getting so terribly, dangerously close to that now that I would suggest that we made a monumental mistake in this province when we turned over medicare.... The medicare numbers now, for the most part, are social insurance numbers. I don't think it should have happened. I think we should have had separate numbers. It just makes it that much easier to exchange information and to access information.

We talk about these kids, these brilliant little busters — what do they call them? — that break into computer information. If they can do it, then others can do it, Mr. Chairman, or others can prompt them to do it and get information that none of us would want to have available to the folks out there. I want my life to be a private life in terms of that sort of thing, and I'm sure that everybody here does. I'm sure that on behalf of our constituents, we want that for them as well. We're not going to live a private life very much longer if in fact we have the common number, the access to the computer, the interchange of computer information. You can rationalize anything. You can say: "Well, we have the right to know." We don't have the right to know. We haven't got the right to know personal things about people, and many of those personal things about people are available on that on-line system. If it's interchangeable between departments, and it's much more readily interchangeable when you use a social insurance number as the basic identification, then it worries me and will continue to worry me.

Mr. Chairman, as the minister responsible for the Systems Corp., I wonder if he would indicate to me just what kind of safeguards they have in place for protecting people's personal information.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. HEWITT: I'm going back to your first comment about accommodation. I know the Minister of Tourism (Hon. Mr. Richmond) has had ongoing discussions with the hotel owners' organization to encourage them, and for that matter the whole service industry, not to abuse Expo 86 to the point where it'll reflect on the hospitality industry and British Columbia. I think he's had good cooperation with them. As I mentioned earlier, my staff is looking at the residential side of it.

In regard to computer security, the B.C. Systems Corporation and the mainframe operation are primarily servants, if you will, to the ministries, and the concern that you and I think everyone has, that they want to protect their privacy.... The systems are designed to protect the individual, and the interfacing or cross-use between ministries.... If it's not common information that can be obtained through normal channels, it wouldn't be available through the computer system. I can assure you, Mr. Member, that I feel as strongly as you do about the protection of the individual's privacy and the misuse of computer information. I can assure you that I as the minister responsible will make sure that that isn't abused.

[5:15]

Interestingly enough, while you were talking I was looking at my medical plan card, which has a distinct number separate and apart from the social insurance number. I looked at my dental plan card, and it has my social insurance number. That is outside of government, but they have it. It's interesting, because there you are. We have that number used, I think, far too often. I'd hate to be deemed to be a number as opposed to a name, and I often get concerned when the Minister of Health brings in vital statistics legislation. I was afraid we might be numbered instead of named from now on.

MR. REYNOLDS: Just a couple of short questions to the minister with regard to agency stores. I'm wondering if he's taking any steps, with tourism in mind. I think everybody's experienced, say, if you're out in a boat up near Desolation Sound, you go into the local store at 9 o'clock in the morning....

AN HON. MEMBER: Not everybody.

MR. REYNOLDS: Maybe not everybody's been that fortunate. But you go into an agency store at nine in the morning only to find that you have to hang around until 10 o'clock before you can buy a case of beer or a bottle of liquor. It's no different up in great areas in the northern part of my riding where they have agency stores, or in the Okanagan or Shuswap areas where there are many tourists who will go into a store and see the liquor section of the agency store sitting there only to be closed because the hours are maintained the same as liquor stores. I think it's absolute stupidity. If a store owner wants to open his store seven days a week, 24 hours a day, everything he's selling in that store should be for sale to the public. I don't think you'd have the same problems you may have in a liquor store with staff costs and arranging those types of things. Most agency stores are a Mom and Pop operation. They're in areas where you wouldn't have people.... I can think of many, when you talk about Desolation Sound. If you were that in need of a drink it's a long way to go to get one, I'll tell you that. Certainly in some areas in the Okanagan and in northern British Columbia where we have the agency stores I don't think you could say that they could be used as a bootlegging type of device, because they're so far away. They're meant to service remote areas; they're meant to service tourists.

I'm wondering if the minister can advise us — I know he's had many requests, probably from both sides of the House, on this issue — if he's about to make any changes in that area, especially in 1986 with the millions of people who will be visiting this province to visit Expo. Can we modernize at least in that little area?

HON. MR. HEWITT: I should at least respond to the member. I'm concerned about the people heading up to Desolation Sound who need a drink at 9 o'clock in the morning. That bothers me.

Seriously, I think it's fair to say we have taken some steps, albeit small, and along the way we've modernized the liquor

[ Page 6403 ]

policy in the province. We have a number of agency stores where you can buy beer, wine and spirits in remote areas at a grocery store, and have had no complaints at all. That's a good pilot project. If people treat alcohol with maturity maybe we can move towards that, but at this time we're not considering allowing any change of hours. The earliest they can open is the earliest hour that our liquor stores open.

MR. REYNOLDS: For the minister's information, most people who are up in those areas looking to buy some liquor at 9 o'clock in the morning are planning to go out to other areas. They don't intend to drink it at 9 o'clock in the morning, but they're trying to stock up and instead they have to stick around for a while, because when you get north of there there are no places to go. I would just hope that.... I know the minister's taken some little steps here and there, but maybe take the odd jump in some of these areas and modernize so that people who visit this province will be able to go to those areas knowing full well that all services are available.

1 think an example the minister mentioned is that he gets very few complaints when we modernize. I think Whistler was a great example, and the World Cup when it was there. We allowed the bars to open up on Sunday night. He has continued that policy. There have been fewer drunken drivers in that area since that policy was initiated. Business is up for all the businesses in that area. They've had one of their most successful years, with no problems created at all. I think it was a modernization of his policies that was certainly progressive. The tourists appreciated it, and also the people who own businesses. The Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Curtis) has to be happy, because he's probably getting a lot more sales tax. That was one area where the minister took a giant step, and I think the other area would do much the same.

MRS. WALLACE: I want to change the subject slightly. It's a bit devastating to hear the back-bench Socreds telling us that the way to make money in this day and age is on our liquor tax. Apparently they don't realize that for every cent we make on liquor tax we spend two or three times that on alcohol-related health care. But my subject has to deal with an issue that I think falls under this minister's jurisdiction, because it has to do with the non-payment of debts.

The particular case that I want to bring to the minister's attention concerns a lien that was filed under the gold-mine act against a particular mining company on Vancouver Island. This particular situation occurred when a contractor took on a $3 million construction contract and then contracted some $2.5 million as a subcontract. A lien has been placed under the gold-mine act for the amount outstanding, and my constituent, a Mr. McLeod of Indora Industries, who brought this matter to my attention, has a lien for $20,000. While these outstanding debts are not being paid, this particular gold-mine is continuing to export ore and receive payment for it, but they're dragging their feet on paying what they acknowledge to be a legitimate debt.

I don't know whether the minister can involve himself in something that relates to an act that is the responsibility of another minister, but it certainly seems to me that the collection of debts, and this whole business of contracting and subcontracting and not being paid for it, falls under his jurisdiction. I would like to know whether or not he is aware of the situation. The mine in point is the Westmin mine at Campbell River, and the general contractor is Regent Construction, who have the $3 million contract and have subcontracted some $2.5 million worth of that work out to other organizations and small contractors. So there's a tremendous amount of money owing in this situation to small contractors around Vancouver Island. The one I have raised is one in my own constituency. He has come to see me about this, and I would like the minister's comments on what, if anything, he can do.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I think the best way to approach this is for the member to come and see me, to bring the material she has to me tomorrow, or as soon as possible, and we can look at it. I'm not sure whether it falls within our purview, or whether it's a matter under the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources or under the Attorney-General. So it's best, I think, if I ask you to come and see me, and we'll investigate it.

MRS. JOHNSTON: The subject of agency stores was brought up earlier, Mr. Minister, and I was wondering if there had been any decision made with regard to the establishment of agency stores in some of the lower mainland areas. I'm referring particularly to the Newton area of Surrey, which has been waiting for several years for any type of a liquor outlet. I would appreciate very much hearing your comments, because I would support an agency store over and above a government-operated store.

HON. MR. HEWITT: The member for Surrey has certainly been persistent in her efforts to make me aware of the need in her community for either a government liquor store or an agency store. No decision has been made yet, but we have completed our review of the liquor policy, and now I think we can address the question of upgrading stores, agency stores or new stores in various parts of the province.

I'm well aware that the member has advised me previously that Newton is a high priority. I agree with her, and I hope I can respond favourably.

MRS. WALLACE: The member for Surrey took my next question almost. What about the Mill Bay area?

HON. MR. HEWITT: We'll look at Mill Bay as well, now that we've completed our review of policy. There are a number of locations where my staff and the liquor distribution branch advise me that the population growth is sufficient to warrant a small store or an agency store. That's another one that.... I know that the member for Cowichan-Malahat has pursued me as effectively as the member for Surrey, so I'll get some information on that as well.

MR. MICHAEL: Mr. Chairman, not on any more agency stores, but I've got to say that the current policy of the minister which prohibits the opening of agency stores on statutory holidays, in my view, makes the minister look a little bit foolish.

People in Shuswap-Revelstoke have thousands and thousands of tourists that come in there: Victoria Day weekend in May is a big weekend, with thousands of people around; Labour Day, B.C. Day, the July 1 weekend — all big weekends and all falling on Mondays. We literally have thousands and thousands of tourists in the area during those days. If they want a cold beer, as most people holidaying on a hot summer

[ Page 6404 ]

day in the Shuswap enjoy, the liquor stores are closed on statutory holidays.

I can understand that because of your overtime problem. However, Mr. Minister, what you're really doing is forcing those people who are way out at St. Ives, some 60 miles from a beer parlour, to drive all the way in to Salmon Arm or to the closest pub that's open where they can buy beer right across the counter and cold, and I think it's ridiculous if the agency stores are set up to service the public. I'm not advocating any more usage of alcohol or more sales. I'm talking about straight convenience to the customer, the tourist and the visitor, whether he's from Alberta or the United States. It really is foolish, in my view, not to open up those agency stores on statutory holidays, particularly during the tourist season, which would be May to September.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, I've heard comments from some of my colleagues with regard to, I think, Desolation Sound, and with regard to St. Ives in Shuswap. I've heard about the Okanagan; I've heard about other places from other members. I can only say that at the present time the liquor policy is that we don't open liquor stores or agency stores, or allow agency stores to sell alcoholic beverages on a Sunday. The argument is put that people are miles away from whence they came. However, I can remember a motto that I learned when I was a young Boy Scout. Lord Baden-Powell said it, as the motto of the Boy Scouts, and I say it to all people who consume alcoholic beverages on statutory holidays: be prepared.

[5:30]

MR. BARNES: Mr. Chairman, just a couple of questions to the minister. Possibly the minister has already addressed the question of the abuse of alcohol, the problems associated with excessive use of alcohol, the reasons some people perhaps consume more than others, etc. I apologize if I missed his comments in regard to this, but I wanted, just for a moment, to bring the minister's attention to a piece published in the Vancouver Sun around mid-May. The headline was: "Life of Death — Drunkenness Haunts Natives on the Reserve." There is some risk in introducing this subject, as the headline would indicate that native people are experiencing detrimental effects, at least on a per-capita or racial basis, more than perhaps the rest of the population. I do not wish to indicate that they have the exclusive misfortune to suffer a higher rate of difficulty than the rest of the population; nonetheless, there are some startling statistics that I'm wondering if the minister could respond to.

For instance, the incidence of violent death among native people is about five times that of non-Indians in the province of British Columbia, according to federal statistics; twice as many commit suicide; newborn babies die before their first birthday twice as fast as the rest of the population; the rate of alcoholism generally is about 13 times that of the national average among British Columbian native people; the death rate of B.C. Indians is among the highest in the country, and among the infants it is the highest. I wonder if the minister could clarify the extent to which his ministry is studying the impact of alcohol or spirits on this particular community in the province of British Columbia vis-à-vis these startling facts, and to what extent he is in consultation with the Ministries of Health, Education, Attorney-General, etc., in trying to study the impact of this major source of revenue in the province. As well, could he indicate what amount of that revenue is specifically earmarked toward rehabilitative programs, educational programs and specific programs that enlighten the public on the very serious risks involved in misuse?

Those who smoke cigarettes at least get somewhat of a warning on the package that the smoking of cigarettes could be injurious or dangerous to their health. I don't know if we have such a designation on the labels of alcohol, but certainly it is beginning to be recognized that although.... We certainly all have had quite a bit of input this afternoon into how the public appreciates the drinking of spirits. I certainly don't think that that practice is likely to diminish in the province of British Columbia, because I'm sure the overall revenues generated from the sale of alcohol probably.... If they are not leading, they are certainly beginning to rival some of our other major industries as a source of income. So it's probably here to stay.

But I think it would be very helpful for all of us if we could learn the real facts behind the excessive use of alcohol, because as one who has been drinking most of my life, and probably before legal age, as most of us can appreciate.... Mind you, I had to do it illegally, and I'm sure we all know how that's done: a bottle of beer here and a bottle of beer there from a willing friend or perhaps an oversympathetic adult, an adult who is perhaps thinking: "What can I do? If you want it, you can have it."

I think we have to take a positive outlook on this. This isn't to condemn people who are not enlightened. I think we have to be prepared to accept that all of us are party to the problem, but the problem is of a very serious nature and is one that costs us dearly in health care, remedial programs and makeup programs where people have suffered serious and quite long-term consequences as a result of misuse.

So perhaps I could stop here, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could respond to some of these questions.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the amount of revenues allocated to alcohol abuse from my ministry or from liquor distribution, that revenue goes into general revenue. It's allocated, of course, to the Ministries of Health and Human Resources, so moneys do flow through.

Your comment about designation of the excessive use of alcohol as dangerous to your health — that's an interesting concept, maybe something that I would want to explore. The only concern would be the imported label. It may be that we could put that on domestic bottles, but it would be a cost if you were looking at imported products. It's something to consider, though. You're quite correct in saying excessive use is a problem.

Those were the two items. I may have missed your last one, Mr. Member, but your comments are well taken.

MR. BARNES: This is one of those issues, Mr. Chairman, that quite frankly I think we'd do well to think of in terms of non-partisan approaches, because at one time or another we all have had our problems with alcohol. I think we have to come clean with ourselves and face it: alcohol consumption is on the increase, not on the decrease. The incidence of social breakdown problems is on the increase; the cost of health care.... I'm sure the Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Nielsen) can attest to the fact that the statistics related to alcohol abuse, automobile accidents.... All of these, ad infinitum, are the problems associated with the misuse of alcohol. Maybe not even the misuse; it's just that

[ Page 6405 ]

alcohol affects people differently, depending on your constitution. Not everyone can drink the same amount. There are so many variables involved in the consumption of alcohol.

I would like to suggest to the minister and to other ministries that there be a commitment to work jointly to try to pool statistics with respect to the impact of alcohol on individuals in various parts of the community; really make it part of the core curriculum in our schools. People who drink, including even myself, do it for a reason. Most people say.... I know that some of the information from Alcoholics Anonymous is that people drink because it makes them feel good. It gives them relief. I think people should begin to understand that they have a duty to themselves to know why they drink, what benefits they get, and what the consequences and costs are to themselves. This is not to be a punitive thing; this is common sense. It's just the intelligent way to develop your habits of enjoyment and pleasure. Certainly alcohol is one of those areas that requires a lot more responsible analysis in terms of its impact on society.

I hope the minister will follow up with some plan of a joint effort on the part of other ministries to try to enlighten the drinking public in British Columbia so that we can enjoy this beautiful province and our health, and cut costs at the same time — in the interest of restraint, if for no other reason, Mr. Chairman.

Vote 15 approved.

Vote 16: ministry operations, $18,996,243 — approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported resolutions, was granted leave to sit again.

HON. MR. GARDOM: Mr. Speaker, I understand that His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor is in the precincts.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. members, possibly we could keep our places for a moment or two until His Honour does enter the chamber.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor entered the chamber and took his place in the chair.

CLERK-ASSISTANT:

Low Interest Loan Assistance Revolving Fund Act

Compensation Stabilization Amendment Act, 1985

Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1985

Industrial Development Incentive Act

CLERK OF THE HOUSE: In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth thank Her Majesty's loyal subjects, accept their benevolence and assent to these bills.

His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor retired from the chamber.

Hon. Mr. Gardom moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 5:43 p.m.

Appendix

WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

27       The Hon. J. Davis asked the Hon. the Minister of Industry and Small Business Development the following questions:

For each of the fiscal years ended March 31, 1981 through March 31, 1985?–

1.   What payments were made to the Hon. Ronald Basford for services rendered to the Provincial Government and/or the Ministry of Industry and Small Business Development?

2.   What expenses were claimed by the Hon. Ronald Basford in the performance of services rendered to the Provincial Government and/or the Ministry of Industry and Small Business Development?

The Hon. R. H. McClelland replied as follows:

"The Ministry of Industry and Small Business Development did not make any payments to Mr. Basford from 1981 to 1985. The Ministry engaged Davis & Company to provide the services of Mr. Basford, for which the following was paid to them: