[ Page 7933 ]

CONTENTS

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Municipal Affairs. (Hon. Mr. Ritchie)

On vote 59: minister's office –– 7933

Mr. Lockstead

Mr. Mitchell Mr. Blencoe Mr. Reynolds Mrs. Johnston Mr. MacWilliam Mr. Stupich

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1986

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

Prayers.

MR. REE: Mr. Speaker, this morning in the gallery above me we have 19 young students from Queen Mary Community School, who were probably up about five o'clock this morning to get over here for the opening. They're under the guidance of their teacher, Mr. Smith. I would ask this House to welcome the students from Queen Mary Community School to this chamber and to Victoria.

Orders of the Day

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS

(continued)

On vote 59: minister's office, $189,745.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, yesterday in this House during debate on this particular vote – and I have in front of me the Blues – the minister responded to questions from both the second member for Victoria (Mr. Blencoe) and myself regarding the financial situation in certain communities here in British Columbia, and I'm now referring specifically to the community of Powell River, and the minister did say in his remarks as quoted from the Blues that he stands to be corrected if he is wrong. Well, Mr. Chairman, I have been in touch with the administration and His Honour the mayor of Powell River since the minister responded to our questions yesterday. It's now, I think, my turn to correct the minister, and hopefully receive some answers and perhaps some apologies to the community of Powell River, because the minister was obviously not familiar with the situation there.

First of all, the minister indicated – as can be verified in the Blues, which I have before me, and Hansard – that the administrative staff in the municipality of Powell River were among the highest-paid administrative staff in British Columbia. Not so. The top salary in the administration side in Powell River is less than top salaries to the local school board, the local hospitals, and municipalities such as Prince Rupert, Port Alberni, Kitimat and so on. In fact, I have an exact figure for that salary if the minister cares to hear it.

Powell River's management staff had salaries rolled back, Mr. Chairman, in 1985 by 7.3 percent, and frozen completely in 1986. Has any other municipality in British Columbia done that? Powell River council knows that increases have been considered for municipal management staff in other communities such as, once again, Kitimat, Prince Rupert and Port Alberni, and for the administrative staff for the Powell River hospital. Since 1981 the management staff has been reduced in that municipality by 20 percent. Since 1982 the total amount of money spent on staff salaries dropped as well, by about 20 percent.

The minister referred on two to three separate occasions yesterday morning, as recorded in Hansard, to the recreation complex in Powell River. First of all, what's the minister got against recreation? That's what I'd like to know. The total difference between the municipal budget for municipal expenses between 1981 and 1985 was only $100,000 over those four years – now that is what I call restraint, and the minister should understand that.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

One other factor, Mr. Chairman. The municipality of Powell River has quite a low debt factor at the present time, and its CUPE workforce has been reduced by 13 percent since 1981. Their unionized staff has been reduced by 13 percent.

Mr. Chairman, I have an extremely serious matter to raise with the minister. I wonder if the minister understands and is aware that the municipality of Powell River at the present time is technically bankrupt.

Interjection.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Well, Mr. Minister, that isn't good enough. You'll get your chance to answer in a couple of minutes.

I have been informed that while there has been some communication with the staff within your ministry, since the minister became aware of this situation, not once has he bothered to respond personally as the Minister of Municipal Affairs to the mayor or that council; not once has he indicated that he would meet with them on this extremely serious issue. There has not been a municipality in this province, since the Great Depression, that has gone bankrupt. Here we have a minister who sits here in Victoria, while we have communities in deep financial problems because of the policies of that government and that minister. The minister has not made one serious effort to contact the mayor or the council in that community on a personal level.

Mr. Minister, as a result of your responses yesterday in this Legislature, and the fact that you have said the government is in no way going to come up with the $3 million shortfall, in spite of the fact that you know very well of the financial situation of that particular community.... I'm going to take my place and eagerly look forward to your response.

[10:15]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, in response to the member's remarks, first of all he is totally incorrect that I have not had any personal communication with the council of Powell River since this problem arose. I would suggest that because of such an open mistake, it's quite obvious that he has either been misinformed for some reason, or he hasn't done his homework. I recall quite vividly the last time I was in Powell River, which isn't that long ago, when I met with the mayor and with council and with many other people up there, all excited about the visit, because we were there together, talking about what we could do to help stimulate the local economy. The occasion was when I spent some time in Powell River with the council, signing their partnership agreement.

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Would you quiet nattering from the background. You'll have an opportunity a little later.

[ Page 7934 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You natter, natter, natter.

In any case, on that occasion, as we do on all of our visits to municipal governments when we're signing, we sat down and discussed other matters of interest and concern. The member points out that council did move and, I believe he said, cut and froze salaries by 20 percent, a clear admittance that they were overspending. They were overspending, and I will have the exact figures with me shortly. I've asked my staff to locate the exact figures not only on the wages but also on the large amount of money that has been spent in the recreation facility.

Let me make it very clear that this minister and our ministry, like our cabinet, are very, very supportive of recreation facilities. They're required, they're essential, and they will be provided, and we'll continue to provide them; but there is no room, particularly in a community such as Powell River where they rely on one taxpayer for about 60 percent of their total taxation, for them to go and spend as freely as they did. I am concerned about it.

You talk about the way that they've been able to balance the budget. Oh, great! There was only a hundred dollars difference between what was spent and what came in, or a thousand, or whatever — some minute figure. Well, let me assure you, Mr. Member, that the technique in managing the affairs of the local community is not having the ability to spend all the money that's possibly available to them. The management skills of those people should be challenged by way of them determining exactly how much money they need to carry out the essential services for the people, not how much they can grab off. Just because the Assessment Authority places a high assessment on buildings, that doesn't mean to say that council should just take that money down and spend it. If the assessment values go up beyond what is needed for the essential running of the municipality, then the rate per thousand should come down. They should not take it and spend it and take credit for living within it. That is what has been happening in a number of places, and it has created a lot of problems.

Let me assure you, Mr. Member, that my concern is not for that member over there; it's not for the council; it's for the people of Powell River, because I am concerned about the way money has been spent up there in the past. I am concerned for the people of Powell River. I am also concerned for the people who are employed by that company up there, because that kind of spending, that kind of tax load on that company, weakens the company, and by weakening the company you are jeopardizing jobs.

Interjections.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Tomorrow morning at 7 o'clock, Mr. Chairman, I will be speaking to quite a large audience in the Esquimalt–Port Renfrew constituency, as I do periodically, and you're welcome to come there as the MLA and make that statement. Be my guest.

But, Mr. Chairman, on September 30 I was in Powell River.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The second member for Victoria will have his chance to stand in his place on the estimates. In the meantime, the Minister of Municipal Affairs has been recognized. Will the minister continue.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: So I want to come through very clearly: indeed it is not a case of being critical of the council or the administration of Powell River, but rather....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Why don't you go oil your voice, or keep quiet? It's irritating. You know, it's squeak squawk, squeak squawk. Go get some oil and oil it, or keep your mouth shut.

The fact is that we are concerned for the people of Powell River, because the people of Powell River carry the load. They carry the load either through having to pay more property tax, or they carry the load because there is going to be more unemployment if they continue to place the tremendous financial pressure that they have been placing on that major employer in that community.

My first concern is not for you, Mr. Member, through you, Mr. Chairman, nor for the council, but rather for the people of Powell River, the taxpayers.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, that was a very interesting tirade by the minister, who didn't answer all of my questions and obviously can't stand to be corrected.

First of all, one of the questions the minister did not answer was whether he will undertake this now in this House to the person who is elected to this House to represent the people of Powell River, along with many other communities in my riding.

Secondly, I would remind that minister that the council in Powell River, which he obviously has very low regard for, have been duly elected by the taxpayers in that community in democratic elections – we still have those for a while at least. I don't think the council and the staff and the taxpayers in Powell River are going to appreciate those remarks from the minister.

Furthermore, the minister defends the company. Fine. The MacMillan Bloedel Pulp and Paper installation there is, of course, the largest single employer in that community. But let me tell you that the layoffs that have taken place and caused much of the havoc in that community are not because of taxes or anything like that; the company has spent a considerable amount of money in plant modernization, as a result of which 600 to 700 people have been laid off, terminated, whatever, in that operation over the last six or seven years. In the meantime, production at that facility has increased. So there you are.

Look, I'm not knocking the company. They have, by and large, been good corporate citizens in that community. They've donated lands for various parks and recreation centres, which is a topic I'll get to here in a minute. But nonetheless, I want the minister to know that that community has deep financial problems. The minister has had no contact with that council for approximately six months, by his own admission here in this House this morning. He has had no contact personally to undertake solving the serious financial problems facing that community.

Is the minister condoning or allowing the possibility of that municipality and possibly some others in British Columbia going bankrupt? He didn't talk about that.

[ Page 7935 ]

One other item. The minister questions these figures — my research, as he calls it. Well, the fact is that I received these figures, as did one of my colleagues, directly from His Worship, Mayor Colin Palmer. We checked them again this morning with His Worship, who left a meeting, by the way, to give me this information. He's furious about the high-handed way that the government is treating this particular problem in that community. If the minister is going to treat that problem in that community in this manner, then what can any other municipality in this province expect from that government?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I think the least that member should understand is that companies don't modernize in order to lay people off. They modernize in order to compete in world markets. My simple question to you is: would you rather see the plant fail as a result of their inability to compete, and see everyone out of work, or would you rather see a major taxpayer — a major employer in your community — take the initiative and modernize in order to compete and survive?

MR. LOCKSTEAD: That's not the question, Bill, and you know it.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Well, that's the preamble that you used, and I responded to it.

We're talking here about a problem that has been created in Powell River as a result of past spending. Mr. Chairman, I give credit to Powell River for having cut back. But let me quote you some figures.

MR. BLENCOE: Changing your tune, are you'?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Why don't you either get out of the House or quit your squeaking.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. members. The Minister of Municipal Affairs has the floor. Other members will have their opportunity to stand and speak on these estimates. In the meantime please allow the courtesy to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I had a terrible nightmare last night: I dreamt that Blencoe and I had dinner. Now I understand why the Victoria council campaigned to get him elected MLA – to get him out of council.

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I'll try to avoid the inexperienced youth....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You know, you're annoying your colleagues. Most of them have left. You shouldn't chase out the three who are staying with you now.

In 1984 the administrator's salary was $74,280, with a population of 13,243. You said that Port Alberni were paying more. The same year the administrator's salary in Port Alberni was $59,916, and the population was 19,894. So you see, here is a salary of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $14,000 more to administer a community with a population of 6,000 fewer. This is where we have to be concerned.

Interjection.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: You can prove me wrong later. We have the records.

This is where we must concern ourselves. It's not the Member of the Legislative Assembly or council member paying this bill; it's the people of Powell River. They're the ones I'm concerned about, and if 1 have any apology to make at all, Mr. Chairman, it will be to the people of Powell River — that I did not catch on to this sooner than now. But again, I give credit to the council that they have acted swiftly and accurately. I hope they will take another look at what they're spending and make sure that they're not spending money that could be avoided, and thereby make it easier for the taxpayers and that company that is trying so hard to maintain jobs in the community.

[0:30]

MR. LOCKSTEAD: First of all, Mr. Chairman, a quick correction of the salary figure that the minister refers to. That position is no longer in existence in Powell River; it was done away with approximately a year and a half ago. The top administrative salary in that community at the present time is an even $60,000 per year — that's $14,000 a year less than the minister quoted, I believe. Just by way of comparison, that salary, for such a high administrative post, is lower than the top administrative salary on the school board or hospital board in that district, or as I mentioned earlier, in the communities of Port Alberni, Prince Rupert and Kitimat. According to my information....

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Agriculture and Food (Hon. Mr. Waterland) will come to order. If the minister wishes to participate in debate, he will have every opportunity to do so when he is recognized — if he is still in the chamber. Please proceed.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Mr. Chairman, I just want to reemphasize that Powell River's management staff had their salaries rolled back by 7.3 percent in 1985 and totally frozen for this current fiscal year of 1986. Has any other municipality done that? I don't know.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: They recognized their problem, and they acted on it.

MR. LOCKSTEAD: Yes, but you see, Mr. Minister, the reason I dwell on this point is that.... I very carefully underlined the pertinent statements that you made in response yesterday. I can understand that mayor and council.... I certainly hope one of the local papers prints this — which they will. You're going to have a very angry populace in that area.

Last but not least, in terms of that recreation centre, I wish to remind the minister that it was his government that abolished the recreation facilities fund for starters. That's neither here nor there; that's old news and long gone. But the people

[ Page 7936 ]

of the district of Powell River and surrounding areas have as much right to a recreation centre as any other community in British Columbia, and I make no apologies for that. I'm sure most of the people in Powell River would not either.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The RFAP is a different ministry.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Again, the action taken by council has to be commended. It is recognition that they did indeed have a spending problem.

As far as the rec centre is concerned, the removal of that particular funding source at the time has absolutely no bearing on it. You know, it's not the capital cost of these facilities that hurts the taxpayer; it's the operating costs, and that's what they're suffering under right now. We must, Mr. Member – you must, and I will help you – pay more attention to your taxpayers and to those who are employing the people in your community, so that we don't allow a council to fire off and....

MR. LOCKSTEAD: I didn't mean to get up again, but there is one very important question: will the minister undertake to meet with the representatives of the council of Powell River, particularly to attempt to resolve this technically bankrupt situation that currently exists in that community, and perhaps in one or two others in the province, but certainly in that community which I represent'? Will the minister undertake to assist in resolving this matter and meet with His Worship the mayor and council members and attempt to once and for all resolve this $3 million shortfall that happened as a result of the legal case undertaken by the company in the community in which they were successful? A $3 million shortfall — a further taxation problem that the taxpayers in that community are going to have to face up to if that problem is not resolved by this government.

MR. ROSE: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

MR. ROSE: I would like to introduce an old colleague of mine from the federal House who now is a very successful Minister of Labour in the Mulroney government, Mr. Bill McKnight. He is here to sign a federal-provincial agreement. I would like the House to welcome Mr. McKnight.

MR. MITCHELL: I wasn't going to enter into this debate, but when I sat here and listened to the minister, his only answer to a serious problem that the member for MacKenzie (Mr. Lockstead) brought to this House — a problem that is affecting his community, a problem that is affecting many communities because of the change in the economic system and the change in the status of this government when they took over the taxation for industry, and they took all that money into their pockets....

This is a serious problem, and I don't say there is a simple answer; there isn't. But it's something that we have to discuss, that we have to sit down and come to a solution about. What is his solution? It is to attack the rights of the people in that community to make a decision to build a recreation facility because they are living in an isolated area, they have a one-company town, they don't have the facilities that they have in Vancouver or Victoria that they can share with employees from other industries. He attacks that decision because those elected people wanted to provide facilities for the children and the workers of that community. Maybe the decision was wrong; maybe we shouldn't have facilities for sports and for recreation for people who live in the boondocks. Maybe that is his policy, but we philosophically believe that everyone from every community has rights to some of the facilities and some of the recreation that we in the larger communities have. To attack that, and to make out that these people shouldn't have these facilities, is going back into the 1880s.

We have to have rights for British Columbians, and we have to be prepared to adjust for those people who are living in communities that are not part of the central area. You know, in representing northern communities, there are a lot of areas where you would like to bring up the facilities for the children there, for their education. It is a problem. But that area has produced millions and millions and millions of dollars of revenue that has come to this province by the processing of lumber, the processing of pulp. It is one of the generators of the wealth of the rest of British Columbia. You know, we have to recognize that, and we have to recognize the rights. It is a problem. We have to come up with an answer, not attack the wages of one particular administrator, who I imagine negotiated with elected people. We can pick out isolated situations, where if you go through — which I have — the estimates, there are all kinds of deputy ministers who get different wage levels. They're not all the same. You look at the wage that was paid to the previous Deputy Minister of Health, compared to some of the other deputies.

But you don't attack individuals; we come up with solutions for problems. You know, it bothers me when we have personal attacks made on individuals, and that is the solution. That isn't the solution. We have to come up with solutions, and as the member for Mackenzie said, all he's asking is for the minister to meet with the council members and to work out some kind of solution that is going to be just. It's just a simple thing like that, and let's not get down to personal attacks. All it does is add another list of reasons why we have to get rid of this government.

When I talk to the kids, the children in my school district, I'm always quoting that minister. He's the buddy MLA from my riding, and I'm trying to make him something with some dignity. If they're going to come into my riding, I want someone with dignity.

MR. CHAIRMAN: All members have dignity. Would the member please relate his remarks to the estimates?

MR. MITCHELL: All I'm trying to do is.... Let's not attack personalities. Let's come up with positive solutions, and let's all work together.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Briefly, we will continue to support rec centres, and I am really pleased to indicate that to that member. Unfortunately the member from Powell River is not here, but credit must be given to Mayor Colin Palmer, who is quite new in the community. We have to give him credit for his courage and ability to take control of the spending and start doing something about it. It is as a result of his actions that we're now seeing corrective measures taken, which started in 1985.

[ Page 7937 ]

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I think what we've had since late yesterday — the minister's attack on the council of Powell River and his subsequent changing of his mind back and forth this morning in terms of where he is coming from — is an indication of frustration the municipalities have had with this current minister.

I have travelled across this province and met with many municipalities and council aldermen, and consistently the theme comes up that this minister confronts them all the time. We had a classic example here where he incorrectly attacked the council of Powell River; incorrectly he gave the wrong impression and indeed, Mr. Chairman, I believe, misled this House.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Withdraw.

MR. BLENCOE: I withdraw the term "misled." Confused, shall we say, the situation, and this is consistent of this minister. Over and over again, in my meetings with mayors and aldermen and councils, I have found this theme comes through. We've got a minister who is not prepared just to sit down in an amicable framework, in a consultative framework, but always wants to try to find some way to attack local councils. He never seems to recognize the years of frustration they have gone through in the last few years under this administration; the lack of resources and finances that they have gone through, in terms of Powell River, Tahsis and other resource communities; the frustration they have with the lack of finances and the assessment changes.

He seems to take any request of him for some action as a personal attack upon his abilities, which is an incredible kind of position to always take.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, whatever. I don't know what his problem is, Mr. Chairman, but all the local councils, mayors and aldermen across this province are asking for is some basic understanding, some fundamental understanding, of the critical issues facing local government today. Over and over again it comes back to me and others on this side of the House — the frustration local councils face with this minister. Indeed, over and over again I have heard quite quietly and candidly from hundreds of elected officials at the local level....

MRS. JOHNSTON: Name one.

MR. BLENCOE: I'll tell you what, Mr. Chairman: I daren't name those people. You know why? Because this government is so vindictive it would indeed go ahead and cut back or make some changes in those local councils. You can't name people in front of you people; no way can you name people. We know what happens to them. We know the phone calls start....

Interjections.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, this minister has been very good at seek and destroy missions in terms of housing and Expo tenants. We know that. What I am trying to say is that there is a deep frustration with this minister's competency, this minister's administration of his portfolio, and we've had it again, symbolized this morning and yesterday, in his attack on the community of Powell River and his confused changes of position this morning. One minute he is attacking the council again; then he's saying: "Well, they've done the right thing." You know, he really doesn't know what's going on, Mr. Chairman. That's the message that comes through to us over and over again.

Quite categorically I state in this House that many times people have said to us: "When are we going to get a change in ministers? When are we going to get someone that understands our real problems? When are we going to get somebody who has actually worked at the local level, been elected at the local level, struggled with the budget, struggled with the lack of resources, struggled with the everyday sometimes very mundane but important issues that local governments face today?" Yet we have a minister who comes into meetings — and I've been there — and confronts them, does his political spiel about partnership, which has failed in this province, and does not address the real, critical issues facing local government today. He confronts; he attacks; he won't sit down. He won't support a review procedure that's been asked for by local councils for years, a normal review procedure, for example, of the Municipal Act, so local government can work in true partnership with a senior government.

[10:45]

There have been years of frustration with this government and this minister about its centralization and its erosion of traditions that local government have always held high, in terms of being able to administer themselves, an independently elected people. This minister again said it today: "I'm going to step in and take care...." I would remind that minister that those people in Powell River, and all those other municipalities he attacks consistently, elect their people to council. They elect their people. The democratic process continues at the local level.

This minister and this government's continuous erosion of local government and the traditions of local government is a major concern to those who are at the local level. And how this government treats local government has become, in the last few years, a really serious situation about its refusal to deal with things like liability insurance; its refusal to deal with some of the critical maintenance problems and infrastructure problems; its refusal to deal with the tax problems and the assessment problems; its refusal to deliver relief programs to communities that are in trouble; its refusal to sit down in a partnership framework, in an atmosphere of conviviality and partnership with local government.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: "Conviviality," yes, a word you wouldn't understand, I suspect, Mr. Minister; but I suggest you check it out. That was the tradition, until this government came in, of the relationship between local government and the provincial government. They worked hand in hand; they had respect for each other. This minister, over the last two or three years, has shown total lack of respect for local government.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Why don't you sit down? You don't know what you're talking about.

AN HON. MEMBER: It's the truth.

[ Page 7938 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The members will come to order. The second member for Victoria continues.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, these members opposite don't like to hear the reality. They don't like to hear what we're told in the various meetings we attend across this province — meetings we attended last year, and we're going to start this year to attend area municipal association meetings. At the meetings I have with mayors and councils and alderman, they quietly and discreetly ask me: "How can we deal with this minister?" He won't even come to terms with some of the basic problems that local government are facing. It's there; he knows it. Unfortunately it appears the Premier doesn't recognize it, because the alienation, Mr. Chairman, of local government from this administration is enormous. They indeed do feel alienated. They feel that when they come to Victoria to speak to the minister, they really don't know what they're dealing with. It used to be, some time ago, that when local representatives came to Victoria, they thought they were going to be dealt with in a respectful way. They hoped that they would — and they used to — sit down and try to work out their problems. I've attended meetings with the minister, where it's always a win win situation with this minister. How is he going to come out of this? Is he going to look good or is he going to be able to look like the hero, never really trying to settle the issues at stake? He's always playing petty politics with municipal government, always being small minded with municipal government. We've seen it with the infrastructure program, Mr. Chairman: province after province supporting municipal infrastructure in a national program, and this minister, because one of the finest mayors in this country, Mayor Mike Harcourt, happens to be involved, can't endorse that program.

Municipalities over and over again are saying financial problems are their major criteria for trying to get problems resolved. We need the resources and we need to start to take care of some of those basic infrastructures. But we need the help, and we need understanding from senior government. Sure, we're not going to solve the problems overnight, Mr. Chairman, but we've got to start.

In the last three years, under this minister, there is a list as long as your arm of issues this minister has continued to avoid. On a daily and a weekly basis I am talking on the telephone or meeting with local elected people of all political persuasions who feel a deep sense of frustration with this minister. They want somebody who understands their financial problems.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who does?

MR. BLENCOE: If you took a secret vote, Mr. Chairman, of the representatives of those area meetings and those UBCM meetings, I can tell you what would happen. They would want some changes.

AN HON. MEMBER: They'd want Hugh Curtis back.

MR. BLENCOE: Anybody would be better than this minister, Mr. Chairman. It's time that local government gets someone who is prepared to quietly and effectively show leadership in municipal affairs.

He went on a crusade against planning, Mr. Chairman. Staff in Municipal Affairs these days are scared to show their planning degrees — years of work that have gone into gaining academic credentials so they could help their province and their communities through the planning process in Municipal Affairs. They're scared to show those planning degrees anymore. You daren't whisper the word "planning" around Municipal Affairs today. You daren't, because they know that minister has some sort of naive, simplistic view of planning, that somehow if you plan regions and communities, you frustrate development and you frustrate communities and you frustrate the people who live in those communities.

Mr. Chairman, we have planning legislation on the books, and if there was frustration before, the legislation this minister brought in last session is an absolute disaster. Councils have to meet far more on planning issues. I tried to get this before the minister a day or two ago, but of course he didn't want to answer any questions.

I think it's a sad day when dedicated public servants, planners in Municipal Affairs, have to hide their degrees in their drawers, in their cabinets at work. They have to hide their credentials, something they're proud of in terms of planning and organizing our communities across this province. When civilized people get together in contiguous areas, you do have to have planning, despite what this minister feels and despite his simplistic attitude to planning.

That's just one area — and there are many areas that I've brought to this House before — where he cannot drop his personal bias, his naive kind of approach to issues. I suppose the one that's come to mind this morning is the whole area of planning. He has staff in Municipal Affairs who can't even be called planners any more, Mr. Chairman. What are they, urban development officers or urban officers or something? I don't know what you would call them. You've changed their name. They're scared of you. Mention the word "planning" and you'll chop them off at the knees.

You've got a staff there. I know many of them. I shouldn't admit that, because this minister will go on some witch-hunt. They live in this community. Municipal Affairs used to be a department of high morale. They used to be proud of working for government. They used to be proud to plan for the future of British Columbia. They used to be proud to lead on economic development issues and to consult with communities on future growth and regional planning, laying out the foundations for the future of this province. They used to be proud.

This minister, Mr. Chairman, through his simplistic, naive, ignorant ways, has gone on a hunt to damage that ministry and its approach to planning in this province. We cannot support that, and we wait and long for the day when this minister, or somebody else who takes over, will bring back a sense of dignity and a sense of worth in that ministry.

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Well, I thought it was very important to put this stuff on the record this morning, because this minister continues to attack local government.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Your time has expired. The member will take his place.

MR. REYNOLDS: It's always a pleasure to get up and give the member for Victoria a little bit of a rest.

I have an introduction before I get into a few of the things I want to talk about. I won't need leave for an introduction because I'm already on my feet, but a gentleman in the

[ Page 7939 ]

gallery, Mr. Bob Thompson, is the provincial coroner for Pemberton and a very hard-working citizen of that community. I'd like the House to bid him welcome.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I welcome our guest as well, but leave should be required because we are in estimates and debate must be strictly relevant. But it's done and over with, so please continue.

MR. REYNOLDS: It's interesting to listen — or maybe it's not so interesting — to the second member for Victoria, who's been up here now for two or three days. All we've really received is an excellent exercise on the activities of the mayor of Vancouver, the Downtown Eastside Residents' Association and their anti-American, anti-everything Mr. Green, and also personal attacks on the minister.

I would hope that if there's one thing the second member for Victoria would learn it's that the people of this province don't appreciate those personal attacks on the integrity of people who are elected to this Legislature.

MR. BLENCOE: I was questioning his administrative ability.

MR. REYNOLDS: If that member knew the abilities of that minister in his private life and his private business to be a success, he wouldn't question those abilities.

Interjection.

MR. REYNOLDS: The second member for Victoria says that's not contiguous with public success, well....

MR. BLENCOE: Coterminous.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, this government has had great success with the public business, because we have success election after election. Only his party sits there and gets elected for a short period of time, and the public couldn't wait to boot them out of office. So I would hope that this member and his party would get off these personal attacks. Give us the alternatives. They talk about what is happening in municipal affairs, but they don't really give us any alternatives.

MR. BLENCOE: They're all there.

MR. REYNOLDS: He says they're all there, Mr. Chairman, but I haven't heard them.

MR. BLENCOE: Liability.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, if we're going to have liability, how's it going to be paid for? If we're going to have planning, how are you going to do it? You know, it's interesting that he talks about witch-hunts. Those things just don't happen, but they want to plant those seeds in people's minds.

Interjection.

MR. REYNOLDS: I don't notice that member talking. Maybe this will gear him on to talk about the Islands Trust, which falls under this minister. When this minister took over his portfolio, one of the first things he did was to take a close look at the Islands Trust to see how they operated. He brought a piece of legislation before this House which was passed. But we heard the second member for Victoria get up and fight that to the bitter end. He yelled and screamed about all the terrible things that would happen and how the Trust and people living on the islands would never ever vote for this government again because of that piece of legislation.

He said: "You just wait." Well, we waited. We had the elections last November on some of the islands. We had the GVRD election on Bowen Island, which is a good example. It's an island that used to be totally controlled by members of his party. The GVRD rep, who is a card-carrying member of the NDP, Mr. George Helenius, is very active in supporting their causes, active against this government and what we were doing with the Islands Trust. He ran for re-election again. Another person ran, whose name escapes me at the moment.

A lady by the name of Gail Taylor ran, a very prominent Socred in the Bowen Island area. She also happens to be a member of the board of directors of the Social Credit Party. She fought on the principles on Bowen Island and what we were doing with the Islands Trust and where we plan to go in this province. Not only did she win but she got more votes than the other two candidates put together, because the people of Bowen Island were tired of the politicking in municipal affairs between the government and the Islands Trust.

They got that message back to the NDP members in that community. They voted in a person like Gail Taylor, who would stand up and say: "I don't want to play these political games with our Islands Trust and with what's happening on Bowen Island. I want what's best for all of the people, not just a very small minority." Because she took that approach, she won with that big majority. She won because of the way she handles her job, which is not to send a copy of every letter she writes to the local newspaper, because publicity is their game, not the solving of problems. She has worked at solving the problems in that area, and because of that their problems are being solved.

[11:00]

I think that's a lesson that the second member for Victoria should learn, because I'm really looking forward to coming back to this Legislature after the next election. He may still be here, he may not. But if he isn't, I'll go find him somewhere, just to say: "See? I told you so."

The people of this province like the job that this government is doing. They like the job that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is doing. You can see that by the number of municipalities that have signed up for the partnership program, by the number of letters that I get from my constituents that say: "Thank you for the revitalization of downtown West Vancouver. Thank you for the downtown revitalization in Horseshoe Bay," which is turning into just a phenomenal spot.

MR. REID: And Port Moody, and New Westminster.

MR. REYNOLDS: And other areas that are represented by NDP members — Port Moody, New Westminster. They're getting downtown revitalization.

This government, unlike the stories you hear from this member, who says we only spend money in our own constituencies, we only promote the spending of this government's money in their constituencies.... We're spending money for revitalization in NDP ridings.

AN HON. MEMBER: Victoria?

[ Page 7940 ]

MR. REYNOLDS: We're spending money right here in Victoria — convention centres, revitalization. We're building bridges. We're building highways through NDP ridings in this province, because this party just doesn't work for the few. It works for all of British Columbia. We don't say: "Who voted for us? Who didn't vote for us?" We say: "Is it worth doing? Should we do it?" Then we do it.

MR. BLENCOE: What did Bud Smith say about that?

MR. REYNOLDS: What Bud Smith said about anything doesn't bother me. I'm sure the NDP member for Victoria is pretty naive if he doesn't think his people say certain things in political meetings also. The second member for Victoria will take something that somebody says at a meeting out of context, and want to play it up in this House....

MR. BLENCOE: No, I didn't; newspapers reported it.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, newspapers can report it, but....

MR. BLENCOE: The Minister of Labour (Hon. Mr. Segarty) has said it in Sparwood. You don't vote for Socreds, you don't get money. Partnership in patronage is what you practise.

MR. REYNOLDS: Well, what they may have been saying, you see, is that if you don't vote Socred there won't be any money left to spend in the province. That's because the people of this province know what happened in the last term of the NDP after three years of patronage, with all their buddies getting jobs that they weren't competent for. They were just being pulled out of the socialist province of Saskatchewan into here for jobs: jobs for their friends, jobs for the party.

MR. CHAIRMAN: This debate is getting quite irrelevant, hon. member. To the vote, please.

MR. REYNOLDS: Mr. Chairman, it's very hard to stay on the topic when you keep on getting the second member for Victoria throwing in his little barbs about some of our great members.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order!

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The second member for Victoria will come to order as well.

MR. REYNOLDS: I will close by saying that I really appreciate the job that this minister is doing. The second member for Victoria can talk about his witch-hunts and his patronage and all the things that don't count, but what really counts is the election, when we're elected because of the policies of this minister. I can't wait for the day.

MR. BLENCOE: As usual, we've had an intelligent response from that member. I don't know what he added to this debate, however. What I was expressing — and obviously it's resulted in some response from this government — was the attitude of local government to this minister over the last few years. Indeed, that member brings up the issue of money being spent in ridings, and the facts are there. The media have done the analysis of where the Socreds spend money in ridings in this province, where Municipal Affairs spends money in ridings in this province. We all know, and the people of British Columbia know, that this government over the last ten years has set up the biggest patronage machine in the history of this country.

[Mr. Chairman rose.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now just a moment.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The member for West Vancouver-Howe Sound (Mr. Reynolds) was told to withdraw remarks like that, and the same applies to the second member for Victoria. We are discussing the estimates of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, and debate in Committee of Supply will be strictly relevant.

[Mr. Chairman resumed his seat.]

MR. BLENCOE: The member for West Vancouver Howe Sound brought up certain topics that had to be responded to. I have to tell you that when you take a look at the numbers and the figures that come in from this minister and other ministries, in terms of where they allocate the people's dollars in this province.... We know where they go. We heard the various ministers say: "If you want money for your riding, you've got to vote Socred. You've got to have a patronage system in place." That's how this government runs this province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. As the Chair has already indicated, the member for West Vancouver–Howe Sound was called to order on the same issue, and so will the second member for Victoria. To the estimates, please. Please continue.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I think the record has to stand about the attitude of this government in municipal affairs, and in other areas, about how they allocate the resources of this province and determine the priorities, and about how this minister determines his spending priorities and where he puts the dollars. The people have seen through it. They've seen through how this minister uses the ads for partnership. The member for Okanagan North (Mr. MacWilliam) showed it yesterday — showed those ads of manipulation, using taxpayers' money to try to convince the people of British Columbia that this minister and other ministers are doing a good job, that this province and this minister in cahoots with his cabinet colleagues haven't raised the province's debt to historically astronomical proportions. The record speaks for itself, and the evidence is clearly stated in the estimates, in the budget, and in this minister's estimates. The people of this province can see what this minister and others have been up to in the last few years. The people of British Columbia are tired of that manipulation and those ads.

Partnership in enterprise. We don't know how many jobs.... How many jobs? You heard the member for Comox (Ms. Sanford) report from five councils in her area —

[ Page 7941 ]

not one job through partnership. What do you call it? Partnership in patronage? No, Partners in Enterprise. Not one job. But the machine rolls on. The manipulation rolls on. The ads keep running, and the people keep being manipulated by a sad, manipulative government.

It's time for change in the province of British Columbia. It's time this minister and his way of carrying out his portfolio are removed forever.

MR. SKELLY: Even his constituents are offended.

MR. BLENCOE: Yes, even his constituents are offended, and we hear that he's being challenged in his own riding.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That's not relevant, hon. member.

MR. BLENCOE: They don't want him anymore.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

MR. BLENCOE: They don't want him anymore, Mr. Chairman. They want him out. He has blown his portfolio, he has blown his job, and he's an offence to the province of British Columbia.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Before recognizing the next member, just let me quote from standing order 43 regarding relevance in debate:

"...the Chairman of the Committee... after having called the attention of the House or of the Committee to the conduct of a member who persists in irrelevance or tedious repetition... may direct that member to discontinue speaking and, if the member still continues to speak... the Chairman shall follow the procedures of standing orders 19 and 20." Standing order 19 states that: "... the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole shall order a member whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House or Committee of the Whole for the remainder of that day" — which is soon going to happen if we don't maintain strictly relevant debate.

On vote 59, the second member for Victoria.

MR. BLENCOE: I want to cover a couple of other issues, and try to get some answers from this minister. For three days now we've been trying to get some answers.

MRS. JOHNSTON: You haven't asked a question yet.

MR. BLENCOE: Oh, this member for Surrey — Bose knows your number, Madam.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The first member for Surrey will come to order, and so will the second member for Victoria. To the estimates, please.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, for close to three days we've been trying to get some answers from this minister, even though he doesn't treat municipal affairs very seriously — he sees it as a way to stay in cabinet; it's a way to stay in cabinet for this minister. That's the only reason he's there. He doesn't care about local government, Mr. Chairman.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

Interjection.

MR. BLENCOE: Why don't you get up and say something? You haven't said anything....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The hon. member will refrain from personal comments, and will address comments through the Chair. We'll continue on the estimates.

MR. BLENCOE: I will address through the Chair. I'm pleased to announce, though, that the first member for Surrey is going to follow me in this debate. We'll be very pleased to hear what she has to say.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Chair would be very pleased to hear debate, also.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask the minister about regional government and the election of regional directors. It was our policy when we were in government that all positions, either municipal or regional district, should be elected. People have the right to have that elected kind of accountability. So far this government hasn't been able to cancel elections in municipalities or to school boards. Actually we know they have on school boards. They stepped in with their Big Brother hand. College boards, hospital boards, the history of local affairs, a Big Brother Socred government is a standing record, we know that, but they haven't yet dared to step in and cancel municipal elections for mayors and councils. The Premier of this province hasn't quite dared to take that....

MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry, hon. member, but it appears the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Leader of the Opposition are having a conversation. If they would please cease or have it outside, it would be appreciated so the second member for Victoria may participate in the debate in a responsible and courteous manner.

MR. BLENCOE: I was saying that this government, which has cancelled elections in other jurisdictions and other areas like school boards and college boards, has not yet dared to move in on municipal councils. We all know that major decisions like that come from the west annex over here, from Premier Bennett and Dr. No. But we used to have elections to regional districts in the province of British Columbia.

The New Democratic Party believes in the autonomy and the traditions of local government, in both municipal and regional boards, Mr. Chairman. We believe in that process. We believe the people living at the local level, either municipal jurisdictions or towns or villages and regional districts, by tradition under the British parliamentary system and democracy have the right to elect people to regional districts. This government a number of years ago found a way-didn't find a way, they just did it — to take away that democratic process of electing people to regional districts. Now we have an appointment process, which means that the people other than unorganized areas such as we have in Langford, where they do elect members.... The majority of directors now are appointed.

[ Page 7942 ]

MR. ROSE: Like college boards.

MR. BLENCOE: It's like college boards; that's right. A nice internal organization that makes sure the right people get to be appointed to regional districts. Mr. Chairman, when we get elected we will reinstate democratic elections at all levels of local government. We will bring them back to hospital boards and college boards and regional districts, because we believe in that democratic process.

[11:15]

AN HON. MEMBER: And accountability.

MR. BLENCOE: Accountability process, Mr. Chairman.

Regional districts are a very important level of government in this province. They represent a lot of people. They make some big decisions. They have big budgets, and they control a lot of resources. Here we have in the province of British Columbia direct elections to regional boards killed by the Social Credit government. Centralization and Big Brother as usual in local government.

I'd like to ask this minister if he believes in the traditions of local government, believes in the democratic system at the local government level, believes people have the right of direct accountability by people being elected to positions on regional boards. Will he consider bringing back direct elections for regional boards? Because I believe and our party believes that one of the basic reasons why there is a lot of frustration with regional government is that people don't know who their regional directors are. They don't have to be elected, most of them.

Let's get back to some democratic principles — I know it is very hard for this government- at the regional board level and have direct elections for regional directors. Does the minister wish to comment?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, the administrative action of a ministry is open for debate, but necessity for legislation and matters involving legislation cannot be discussed in the Committee of Supply. In future would you please contain your remarks to the administrative actions and not necessity for legislation.

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, need for legislation is not even admissible or in order in Committee of Supply; it's the administrative functions of the minister's office. The need for legislation, existing legislation or legislation presently on the table are not subject matters for debate in Committee of Supply.

MR. BLENCOE: The minister wants to answer anyway because he knows....

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, we've seen another example of the member's ignorance of what happens out there. Neither this minister nor this government appoints anyone to regional boards. All directors at the regional level are elected. I'm surprised, Mr. Chairman, that that member, who's served on council, who's been in this House now for a short time, doesn't know that. Why would he take the time of the House to be critical of the government for not electing all members to regional boards, when indeed they are all elected?

MRS. JOHNSTON: I think it's important, during the minister's estimates, for the record, to indicate several of the very positive actions that have been taken by this ministry. The revitalization program that is in effect throughout this province is one of the most exciting programs, I believe, that this government has undertaken. When you visit a community that is participating in this provincial program, there's no secret at all, from the expression given by each member of the local council, that it is an overwhelming success. Even the famous mayor of the city of Vancouver, who is mentioned so often by the members of the opposition, supports that program.

In my role as parliamentary secretary, I had the opportunity to participate in a sod-turning in Vancouver some weeks ago at the station location on Cordova Street. Among the other members present with Marathon Realty was Mayor Mike Harcourt. The words he used to describe the provincial program could be nothing but supportive and flattering. It was made very clear by the mayor and by the property owners involved that this development, this improvement to the city of downtown Vancouver, would not have been possible had this program not been in place. The program certainly is a great credit to this ministry. That's one of the programs that have received local government support, much contrary to the comments made by the second member for Victoria (Mr. Blencoe). One would wonder whether he does leave the Island to find out what goes on in other regions.

I was also privileged to represent the minister at a sodturning in Ladysmith very recently. This was for another revitalization program. Mr. Chairman, the expression of support from the local business community was so very evident that most of the shops that morning were vacant of staff; they were all there to participate in the sod-turning. Following the sod-turning, the mayor and the local community committee invited any of the attendees to join us for lunch at one of the local restaurants. The support is there. We visited many of the merchants on the main street in Ladysmith. One of them was so supportive, they even felt that they should be receiving approval for interior changes, rather than just the exterior changes to their building. The interest is there; the support is there. I think it's really a credit to this minister and to the ministry staff that we have such a program in place.

Once again, contrary to the very negative comments made by the previous speaker, there's certainly no lack of support in the province for many programs put forward by this ministry. This is just one of them.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, heeding your words about legislation, if I may be permitted to ask the minister: does he support direct elections for regional directors? Direct elections, not appointments by councils.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, all directors on regional boards are elected. In the case of those representing a municipality, they are elected twice. Need I answer any more?

MR. BLENCOE: I don't think the minister quite understands that a few years ago when you ran for city council you had the opportunity to run directly for regional board. The minister probably doesn't remember, because he has never

[ Page 7943 ]

been involved in local government. But when people ran for local government, they ran for regional boards separately. On the ballot you ran for alderman, and people also voted for who they wanted for regional director. I know the minister may not remember that, because again he hasn't had any history of local government.

Can I ask the minister this: does he support direct elections by ballot — say, in the city of Victoria, regional directors to represent the city of Victoria being directly elected by ballot by those people who are going to be represented by that regional director? Does he support that concept? I'll ask him again.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that the member save the time of the House at the moment and come to my office, and I'll explain how the election of all members to the regional boards take place. They are all elected. I mean this is becoming absolutely silly. Those representing....

Interjection.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Do you want an answer or don't you? Do you want to keep nattering?

It is becoming so silly, so I would suggest that in the interests of the time in the House here, you come to my office and I'll explain how they are all elected today.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, this is the minister of the Crown. There is a process going on in this House where we are elected and given a responsibility dutifully by the people of this province to act as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to ask the minister questions. He has the audacity, with a patronizing tone in his voice, to say: "Come to my office, and I'll explain it to you." Well, we don't do the people's business behind closed doors. We do it in this Legislature, Mr. Minister; we don't do it behind closed doors where you can manipulate as you usually do. It's the people's business; it's their right to know. It's their right to know exactly where you stand on very important issues facing people in the province of British Columbia, and you're being patronizing. The audacity of your little comment: "Come to my office, and we'll have a little chat"! This is where we do the people's business, Mr. Member. This is the Legislature. We are elected to do that business, and I won't go to your office for a little chat. I will ask you questions, because that is our job.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Then don't come to my office. Go to the office of Mayor Mike Harcourt. Go to the office of Mayor Don Ross. Go to the office of Mayor George Ferguson. Go to the office of Mayor.... I could go on and on.

What you are really saying here, Mr. Member — through you, Mr. Chairman — is that you don't trust councils. That's what you have said. This government does not appoint anyone to the regional board, no one. They are all elected. The directors representing electoral areas are elected by that community, and those representing municipalities are elected in that municipality. So really, what are you saying here? We'll make sure that the councils hear that you don't trust the decisions of any one of the 144 municipalities in this province, because you are claiming here today that they are appointed behind closed doors in council. Member, please understand – and I don't intend to rise to my feet again to answer you – that there are none of those appointed; they are all elected. Those representing municipalities are elected twice: first by the people; secondly by the council. You have to trust the councils of our province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Chair's patience is being tried considerably. The Chair has indicated a number of times that legislative matters are not subjects of debate. The appointment, election, or whatever, of regional directors is pursuant to existing legislation. The Chair refers every member who wishes to check it to section 778 of the Municipal Act. It is not an administrative function of the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The Chair will not tolerate any further debate on this issue. Will the members please confine their debate to the administrative functions of the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I heed your advice. As far as I'm concerned, I was only asking the minister for his opinion about how directors get elected. He knows there used to be a ballot, and the people directly voted. Again, he's trying to confuse the issue. But I will leave it, with the understanding that the minister does not support direct election of regional directors by the people. That used to be the system — not just through the council. I will leave it there.

[11:30]

I want to move on to another topic: regional districts. When are we going to get the Dan Campbell report on regional districts, Mr. Minister?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. In future would the member direct the questions through the Chair, not direct to the minister.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Which report? There are 28 of them.

MR. BLENCOE: I'm wondering whether we are going to get a collective report encompassing all the various things Mr. Campbell has been doing. We've been hearing a lot about it through the media and various other places. We've been hearing that some great things are coming. I'm just wondering whether we can expect some sort of report, because the taxpayer is paying Mr. Campbell's salary, I believe, and we would like to have some report on his findings. Are we going to have some report or any recommendations in this Legislature?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: The review of regional districts is quite different from that of the past. Mr. Campbell has reviewed all regional districts and produced a report on all of them, and if that member would care to tell me which one of those he would like to have, I would be pleased to do that. This is not done in the usual manner that he is accustomed to — a great costly road show putting together reams and reams of paper — but we have a report and a review of each of the 28 regional districts.

MR. BLENCOE: I can assume by what the minister is saying that all these reports are being put together but there will be no action following these reports. What kind of exercise has this been? Are you going to have some basic recommendations for changes or processes in regional district administration?

[ Page 7944 ]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: There have been changes taking place throughout the regional system over the past two or three years. There has been a great improvement as a result of this exercise, and I can indicate to the member that there is a possibility that there may be need for further change. However, only time will tell as it unfolds.

MR. BLENCOE: May I have the assurance of the minister that this chamber and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition will be given every opportunity to look at those changes and recommendations?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: It's normal procedure that anything that requires the attention of this House comes here, and that's when they have their opportunity.

MR. BLENCOE: Just a final question on this topic. It is an important issue to regional districts because this thing has been going on for two years, I guess, and no one quite knows where it's all going to end up. Can I ask the minister if we can expect in the very near future some final report and recommendations to this House on the status and future of regional districts? Mr. Chairman, I'll leave that there.

I want to quickly pursue another topic. One that often comes up in municipal and regional jurisdictions is the whole question of sewage treatment and municipal support and financial support for treatment programs. There are some key communities that are very interested. The member sitting here, the member for Okanagan North (Mr. MacWilliam), I know is very interested in this topic. There are some key communities that constantly face some rather unfortunate sewage problems. Victoria, as I say, is one of them. I brought that to the attention of this House, as the first member for Victoria (Mr. Hanson) has done many times. In the last session the proposal was made by the New Democratic Party in the Municipal Affairs Committee, Mr. Chairman — I think you were there, as a matter of fact — that we in this province strike a bipartisan, all-party research analytical group, whatever you want to call it, to take a look at the sewage problem in key areas in this province.

I don't think there's any bigger issue that raises public interest and awareness and concern. I know in Victoria the dumping of virtually raw sewage onto beaches and therefore the effect on the community and the health and everything else.... Here in the capital of British Columbia, I have to say, and I've said many times, it's a very sad day when we continue to dump virtually unprocessed sewage and all the ancillary things that go along with it out into the saltchuck out there. If you've ever been in an aircraft, Mr. Chairman, you can see it. That stuff, we all know, comes back in, and our children and our families walk on the beaches. It really is quite an embarrassment and quite a scandal.

We proposed — and unfortunately the Municipal Affairs Committee did not go along with it and voted against it — a thorough review of sewage treatment facilities, sewage treatment concepts, funding proposals or inadequacy of funding. And we in this party on this side believe that there is really a very definite need to deal with this issue as quickly as possible. The member for Okanagan North may wish to talk to this. I know he has some problems. We have tried diligently over the years to get this government to recognize that this is not only a health issue but a social issue and an environmental issue. We would like to know.... This minister has these kinds of funds and support mechanisms available. Obviously, Mr. Chairman, I recognize — and you could have ruled me out of order, I suppose — that this is cross-ministry. We all know that — Environment, Health — but there's no question the Minister of Municipal Affairs does have within his mandate the ability to apply resources, financial or otherwise; or research; or the Municipal Affairs Committee to take on the job of really coming to terms with the problem of sewage treatment and proper facilities in key areas of this province.

I'd like to ask the minister if he has on his working agenda or his staff agenda the topic or the task of starting to come to terms with key sewage problems in the province of British Columbia. It's been brought up many times, and we brought it to the Municipal Affairs Committee of this House. Is any work being done in this area? Can we look forward to, once and for all, some diligent work in sewage treatment? Obviously the area I know best is Victoria, the CRD. Much money is spent on big pipes, Mr. Chairman, but people of Victoria, and I know in other areas, really don't agree with dumping virtually raw sewage out into the saltchuck or any other place.

Can the minister tell this House that through his ministry, and the work he does with other ministries...? Can we start to see some hard work done in this area? And maybe we'll start to look at treatment facilities in key areas of this province.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, in addition to having announced additional funding for sewage treatment this year, the member should be aware of the fact that there has been considerable work done over the past year or two. For instance, in the Red Bluff area outside of Quesnel a serious sewage problem for a number of years was resolved. In Ganges, a serious problem that was fought by that party: 24 years of frustrations, hardship, rising costs and all sorts of activities to stop the sewage treatment plant on Ganges by that party.... They were behind the opposition to it. We finally resolved that.

The east coast interceptor line here in this part of the community, again something that was opposed by their party.... We finally come in with a decision, and I'm delighted to think that the mayor of Victoria, who doesn't hide the fact that she is supportive of their party — and that's all right — commended the government for having made that decision to get on with it.

Here we go. We keep marching on, working hard, and providing more and more funding for that. The Okanagan Basin is another good example of what's happening.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I want to make a few comments in regard to the issue being discussed, but just before I get to that, I want to clear up a few minor things that were left hanging over from yesterday's discussion.

Going specifically to the municipal partnership program, where the minister and I were discussing yesterday what the impact has been in terms of renewed economic activity in the interior areas of this province as a result of his program: if the minister can recall, I asked him in the House yesterday if he can detail exactly how much increased activity there has been in the north Okanagan specifically, subsequent to the signing of the agreement. The minister's reply was that he was unable to respond accurately to the question because there has been

[ Page 7945 ]

so much activity throughout the entire province as a result of this and other initiatives that it would be virtually impossible for him to reply at that time. However, he did indicate that he would be pleased to provide information to me in the near future. I would like to ask the minister if he now has that particular information available to him, specific to the north Okanagan area.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: That member knows that his colleague, my critic, kept us in the House here until I believe after 6 o'clock last night, and kicked off today with the same stuff; so no, there hasn't been time to communicate there. But have faith, my friend. When people come together in harmony and in partnership with a commitment to work together, things will happen in spite of the negative attitudes that may be with some.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I do take issue with the suggestion that it's a negative attitude. Part of the mandate of the official opposition is to look at issues in a critical manner and to ask probing questions. Now if the minister wishes to respond that that is a negative approach, so be it. But I think that is our responsibility on this side of the House in order to get to the bottom of affairs.

I might add that I had mentioned yesterday that the year-to-date totals for industrial development in the city of Vernon show that there was no new industrial development as of the end of 1985, despite the signing of the provincial municipal partnership program. The minister took issue with that, and suggested that things cannot happen overnight — which I agree with; they can't happen overnight. So I took the opportunity to place a few phone calls this morning to members of the business community. I asked one particular individual who is involved in some of the local economic development activity through the local chamber if he could detail for me specific initiatives that have come onstream as a result of the partnership agreement. Unfortunately, the only response I got back was dead air; he couldn't recount any specific initiatives. But he did agree that he would look into it in more detail. I think the reality there is that these individuals, when asked a very honest question, gave me a very honest answer, and that answer was that they couldn't come up with any specific initiatives that have come onstream as a result of this.

[11:45]

Now I don't mean that in a negative fashion; I mean it in a spirit of realism, to point out to the minister that maybe this isn't as far as we should take it. I think that the concept of Partners in Enterprise is valid, and I'm willing to give the minister a certain amount of credit in that direction, but I want to say that I don't think it goes far enough. I don't think that you have followed through with the concept as adequately as you might have. I want to point out that just to bring down a program and leave it at that is only taking the first step and not completing the exercise. Throughout the province in every community and every region there is a considerable amount of energy and a considerable amount of talent that is going to waste. I would like to suggest that the minister consider taking this concept much further than he has taken it at present and get directly involved with community groups and with action teams throughout every municipality and area in British Columbia, to involve the people themselves in coming up with initiatives and ideas for economic development in those regions. It has to come from the bottom up, Mr. Minister. The old-style bureaucracy, the top down hierarchy of making up policies and programs in the smoky back rooms of Victoria, and then expecting those programs to work, is no longer valid.

I would like to suggest to the minister that it's high time that we harnessed the energies and the talents of the people throughout this province and involved them in the process of local economic initiatives, through this municipal partners in enterprise program. Take it further than you've taken it. Involve the people. Involve not only the people in the chambers of commerce — that's one sector of the community, certainly, that has to be involved — but involve every group in the community: involve the labour groups, involve the social planning councils, the native peoples, the unemployed. Involve every cross-section of that community, so that you begin to develop a broad consensus of what needs to be done throughout the communities in British Columbia. When you take that process, Mr. Minister, I think we will find that we are able to harness these talents and energies, and focus them in a positive direction, and actually do some good through this program.

Perhaps the minister wishes to respond to that.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Quickly, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the member's observations. I will be sure that he receives past copies of our monthly update of the program, indicating what's happening, and also indicating that we have only now come to the completion of step one; there are many other steps in the process.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

MR. MacWILLIAM: In regard to another issue that was left outstanding as a result of yesterday's discussion, I mentioned to the minister a number of ads placed in regard to the municipal partnership program in the papers in the north Okanagan. I showed one ad, which is an average-sized ad that sold for about $300. The minister had confirmed that about 130 partnership agreements had been signed. If you use simple arithmetic, if only one ad was placed per agreement, we're looking at a figure of $40,000.

When we're used to dealing in figures in millions, $40,000 may not be a lot, but it is still a lot to the people out there who are unemployed. I would like to suggest to the minister that in fact not one ad has been placed for each partnership agreement signed, not two ads, but perhaps three, maybe even up to half a dozen when you consider all the different newspapers involved. You start adding up that $40,000. For example, if you ran three ads, that's well over $100,000 that has been expended for what is really a purely political message.

I would like to ask the minister if he has perhaps had time to review the figures, and if he can at this time let the House know what his expenditure has been for the placement of those ads throughout the province.

HON. MR. GARDOM: I'd like to respond to the question. It's an economic message.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Also there were 41 ads at a cost of $34,750 to advise people what is really happening out there economically.

[ Page 7946 ]

MR. MacWILLIAM: Are you saying, Mr. Minister, that there were 41 ads for a particular region in the north Okanagan alone?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I said 41 ads.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Forty-one ads for the entire province of British Columbia.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Forty-one ads.

MR. MacWILLIAM: For the entire province of British Columbia. I leave the question as it stands. Is that a provincial perspective, or just 41 ads for one particular region?

MR. STUPICH: There is a problem that arose in Nanaimo over the assessment on a specified area with respect to a parking lot development. The city council did appeal to the minister and came away from a discussion with him some six months ago with what they thought was a clear understanding that the required amendment to the Municipal Act would be introduced in the late sitting in 1985. They were very disappointed when nothing happened. To date, to the best of my knowledge, we are still in that position where the minister has made no progress in bringing in the necessary amendment. I understand there are some 50 municipalities in the province that are waiting for this particular amendment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Hon. member, the Chair has advised the committee many times that the administrative action of a ministry is open to debate, but the necessity for legislation and matters involving legislation cannot be discussed in Committee of Supply. I quote the seventeenth edition of Sir Erskine May, page 739.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, as I say, the minister gave the city council of Nanaimo an understanding that necessary changes would come in. This is my only opportunity to ask the minister whether indeed he gave that undertaking and whether he has any plans to deal with that problem. I've asked the question.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir Erskine May applies. Members have many opportunities of discussing matters that are not subject to debate in estimates. There are other opportunities in the Legislature for asking questions.

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: I'm getting help from the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations (Hon. Mr. Gardom). He tells me I can do it in question period. Mr. Chairman, as you well know, this is the only time that I can ask for an answer and hope to get one. In question period I may or may not. Let the minister speak on something. He has asked to be recognized.

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister is prepared to answer a question about a problem that developed in Nanaimo, whether it involves changes in legislation or not. I ask the minister: what response does he have to deal with this particular problem? I'm not asking for legislation at the present time. I'm simply asking him how he's going to deal with this problem that is affecting, I'm told, some 50 municipalities in addition to Nanaimo.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I will not respond to any question on legislation. But I'm aware of the problem, and yes, I did indicate to the parties out there that we would be looking at it, and we intend to.

MR. STUPICH: I have an acceptance from the minister that he will look at the question. I believe that's all he has said to this point. He told the city administration some six months ago that he would look at the problem. Are we as far ahead now as we were some six or seven months ago, with the minister still saying that he will look at the problem?

Interjection.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure how to handle this. The minister now tells me that we are further ahead. At the time that this was discussed with the minister the solution seemed to be fairly easy to come by. At least, that was the impression that the city council and staff got in their discussion with the minister — that it was a relatively easy solution. After some six months, is the minister only able to tell me that we are further ahead, and he's still in the position of simply promising to look at the problem, and he's a little closer to looking at the problem'? Is that all he can say at this point, Mr. Chairman?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Yes, it will be resolved in the fullness of time.

MR. STUPICH: I'm certainly satisfied now that it will be looked at in the fullness of time. There will be an election; yes, it will be looked at. Does he mean that after the next election it will be looked at by a new Minister of Municipal Affairs? If that's what he's saying, let him say so.

MR. MacWILLIAM: With respect to the sewage disposal program recently implemented in the Okanagan area, as the minister will recall, the Okanagan has been declared an environmentally sensitive zone, with $26 million allocated for sewage assistance in that area. Could the minister advise whether that funding is going to be made available through his ministry, because that was not made clear at the time of the original announcement.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: That, Mr. Chairman, will be dealt with through Environment, and you were made aware of that.

MR. MacWILLIAM: With respect to the funding recently implemented for the Rutland sewer program just outside of the city of Kelowna, that program went through apparently with 75 percent provincial funding, whereas the present funding allocation under the sewage assistance program allows a maximum of 25 percent funding. Can the minister explain to the House why there's the special dispensation for the Rutland sewage program within the Premier's riding, when there is $300 million outstanding in other sewage assistance programs that have not been met?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Chairman, that member should know that certain commitments are made in the course of administering these programs, and that is one of

[ Page 7947 ]

those that was approved quite some time ago. Now you wouldn't want us to go back on our word and deny the people of Rutland the funding for that project that had already been approved, would you?

MR. MacWILLIAM: Precisely my point, Mr. Chairman. There is approximately $300 million outstanding in other programs that were due to come on stream, apparently, before the funding was altered back to the 25 to 75 formula. At least, that's my understanding. All I'm saying is: why the special dispensation for the Rutland program, when there were apparently other programs that had also applied?

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

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

Hon. Mr. Gardom moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.