[ Page 8463 ]

CONTENTS

Oral Questions

U.S. lumber tariffs and free trade. Mr. Howard — 8463

Bud Smith's expenses. Mr. Stupich — 8463

Casino gambling. Mr. Hanson — 8464

Ministry of Tourism TV advertising. Mr. MacWilliam — 8464

B.C. Rail cost overruns. Mr. Williams — 8464

Financial Disclosure Act. Mr. Lauk — 8464

General insurance. Mr. Cocke — 8465

Ministerial Statement

Proclamation of environment week. Hon. Mr. Pelton — 8465

Ms. Sanford

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Attorney-General estimates. (Hon. Mr. Smith)

On vote 10: minister's office — 8466

Mr. Lauk, Mr. Macdonald, Mrs. Dailly, Mr. Barnes, Mr. Rose, Mr. Cocke, Mr. Nicolson

On vote 11: ministry operations — 8479

Mr. Lauk

On vote 12: judiciary — 8480

Mr. Lauk

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Provincial Secretary and Government Services estimates. (Hon. Mrs. McCarthy)

On vote 65: minister's office — 8480

Hon. Mrs. McCarthy, Mr. Hanson

MONDAY, JUNE 2, 1986

The House met at 2:05 p.m.

Prayers.

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. members, visiting with us today is Mr. Hayden Kevin Shell, a Member of Parliament with the Australian Labour Party. I'd ask the House to make him welcome.

MR. ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, also visiting with us today is a well-known British Columbia local politician, Mrs. Helen Boyce, with some friends from Vancouver. Would the members please make her welcome.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Cowichan-Malahat (Mrs. Wallace) I'd like the members in the House to welcome 50 grade 5 students from Queen of Angels, an independent school in Duncan, and their teachers, Miss Hannon and Mr. Scigliano.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, in the gallery this afternoon we have some visiting students, and on behalf of my colleague from Langley I would like to ask the House to welcome the students from Credo Christian High School, who are accompanied by Messrs. Siebe DeJong, Bert Moes and Harold Leyenhorst.

MR. REE: This afternoon in the gallery we have two lovely ladies: Mrs. Helen Lindholm, the wife of that esteemed lawyer, Louis Lindholm of Oak Bay; and with her is Mr. Lindholm's cousin, Inger Hakansson of Ystad, Sweden, who is here to visit the Lindholm family and also to attend Expo. I ask the House to welcome them both today.

Oral Questions

U.S. LUMBER TARIFFS AND FREE TRADE

MR. HOWARD: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of some 10 or 11 cabinet ministers, including the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations (Hon. Mr. Gardom), I'd like to direct a question to his backup minister — or whatever they're called these days — and ask whether or not the trade agreement that may result from the trade negotiations between Ottawa and the United States will be presented to this Legislature for ratification before any other action is taken on it.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please, is there a minister to whom the question is directed?

MR. HOWARD: Yes. Just in case the minister has forgotten who he is, that backup minister is the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Speaker, I would certainly appreciate it if the member would repeat his question.

MR. HOWARD: Are you running for office of any nature?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

MR. HOWARD: I asked the minister whether any agreement resulting from the trade negotiations between Canada and the United States of America will be presented to this Legislature for ratification before any executive action is taken on it.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that my colleague the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations will be pleased that that question has been presented. I will take it on notice and convey the question to my colleague.

MR. HOWARD: Will the minister also present to his colleague what I'm sure would be the unanimous view of this House, that that assurance must be forthcoming because British Columbia's whole economic foundation is at stake?

I'd ask the acting minister another question with respect to a report emanating from Washington over the weekend that a senior Canadian diplomat had wrongly advised the United States government that it would be no big deal in Canada, maybe a couple of days of rhetoric and that's all, if the Reagan administration put a tariff on Canadian shakes and shingles. The report is that that conversation took place well over a month ago. I wonder if the minister can advise whether that situation has been investigated, and will the facts thereof be related to us?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Hon. members, again, questions must be directed to a minister on his or her responsibility. With the greatest of respect, hon. member, the statements by a member of another jurisdiction would be very difficult to direct to a member of this body. The member may wish to somehow rephrase the question.

MR. HOWARD: With respect, Your Honour, the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations is charged by this Legislature with the responsibility of dealing with another government — namely, the Canadian government — and this is a representative of the Canadian government in Washington who is reputed to have made the statement that he did make. That needs an inquiry, I submit, to protect the lumber industry in B.C. I think Your Honour should permit the question to be advanced. There is too much at stake to quibble about some minor point, with respect, Your Honour.

HON. MR. RITCHIE: I am sure that if my colleague the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations were here he would indeed refer the question to the proper minister. That minister is the Minister of International Trade, Science and Investment.

BUD SMITH'S EXPENSES

MR. STUPICH: In the absence of the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Curtis), I'd like to put a question to the acting minister. It has been reported that Bud Smith was involved with a Social Credit Party membership drive in which he travelled throughout the province, during which time he was also principal secretary in the office of the Premier. In his capacity as minister responsible for the office of the comptroller-general, can the minister assure the House that Mr. Smith received neither salary nor expenses from the government for this activity?

[ Page 8464 ]

HON. MR. HEWITT: I'll take the member's question as notice and refer it to the Minister of Finance for review and comment.

MR. STUPICH: Would the acting Minister of Finance also ask the minister whether or not he has undertaken to determine whether the taxpayers paid all or a portion of Mr. Smith's preview political tour of the province?

HON. MR. HEWITT: Mr. Speaker, I think the answer to that question is yes, I will take the question to the Minister of Finance and ask him to review and comment on it.

CASINO GAMBLING

MR. HANSON: I have a question for the Minister of Environment in his responsibility as a backup to the Provincial Secretary. The press release issued by the Provincial Secretary (Hon. Mrs. McCarthy) on Friday announced new casino gambling regulations. Our staff contacted the lotteries branch today and were advised that no such regulations are currently available. Could you tell us what the deal is here, and is this according to Hoyle or...?

[2:15]

HON. MR. PELTON: I certainly know it doesn't make for a very interesting question period when we have to stand and give an answer such as this, but I'll have to take that question as notice and pass it on to the Provincial Secretary. I'm sure the minister will be pleased to answer the question at the first opportunity.

MR. HANSON: I have one other question. Has the minister decided that the public should have some opportunity for input into the new casino regulations before they come into effect? That process was undertaken with bingo but no such public input is in place for casinos — the wheeling and dealing and what have you. Will the minister undertake to provide information on that?

HON. MR. PELTON: I certainly will undertake to bring that question to the attention of the responsible minister and I'm positive she'll respond at the earliest opportunity.

MINISTRY OF TOURISM TV ADVERTISING

MR. MacWILLIAM: To the Minister of Tourism. The minister has taken the extraordinary step of inserting himself into Ministry of Tourism ad promotions on television. I might add that until now, this has been one of the few areas of government advertising untouched by the partners in propaganda program. I wonder if the minister could advise the reasons for this change; is the politicization of these TV ads for Tourism in fact the kick-off to his leadership campaign?

MR. SPEAKER: Part of the question is in order, hon. member.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: The answer is quality.

MR. MacWILLIAM: That in itself is a debatable subject. In view of the importance of the travel industry in British Columbia, would the minister agree to return the ministry advertising program to promoting tourism in B.C. rather than promoting himself?

B.C. RAIL COST OVERRUNS

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister responsible for B.C. Rail. Recently the president, Mr. Norris, indicated that there had been cost overruns on the Tumbler Ridge line to the northeast coal fields. Could the minister advise us how significant those overruns are?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, I do not have an answer to that particular question. I will take it as notice and make the appropriate inquiry.

MR. WILLIAMS: Could the minister then also check on the actual losses on the operating of the line relative to those costs and report back?

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE ACT

MR. LAUK: A question to the Attorney-General, Mr. Speaker. This is a filler question. [Laughter.]

In the absence of the entire inner cabinet, to the Attorney-General. The Premier promised in 1975 and in 1977 and in 1986 that his government would pass stringent legislation regarding conflict of interest. Has the Attorney-General decided to make good on this commitment prior to the Premier's leaving public office?

MR. SPEAKER: Hon. members, again with due respect, questions of legislation cover a very thin line in our question period, and on that basis I would recommend that members give some time to reviewing the questions during question period.

HON. MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the hon. member knows that the Financial Disclosure Act is administered by the Minister of Finance, and that he inadvertently asked the question of me.

But since he did, can I say that the subject to which he alluded is having the serious ongoing study of the government, and that we are well aware of the problems that he refers to.

MR. LAUK: Does that study include either exposing a program to deal with a conflict of interest or devising an inner cabinet program dealing with the whole matter of conflict of interest in secrecy?

HON. MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I think that one thing that has been learned on that subject in the past six months in Canada is really how inadequate the legislation that the members opposite passed when they were government has become. Indeed, the....

Interjections.

HON. MR. SMITH: Well, if you don't have any holdings, Mr. Speaker, I guess it's difficult to have conflicts, isn't it? But there are people who want to run for public life who have built some holdings, who have portfolios, who have successfully achieved things, and they might be a little bit

[ Page 8465 ]

concerned about the method by which disclosure and conflicts are going to be dealt with. The object is to ensure that there is a form of open disclosure that is fair and also to ensure that able people and people who have achieved things in this society are encouraged to run for public life, and are not discouraged from running.

I will tell the hon. member that a full study of conflict-of-interest legislation and disclosure legislation is underway. I also should say, Mr. Speaker, that no form of legislation devised by man in the United States or in other countries can replace an honest approach to one's affairs when in public life.

GENERAL INSURANCE

MR. COCKE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Health, the Minister of Human Resources, and various other ministries, in his responsibilities for ICBC. The Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Hewitt) sold the farm and got rid of general insurance. By virtue of the fact that the casualty companies — the general insurance companies — in this province have reneged on their responsibility to provide general insurance for various groups including driving schools, municipalities, etc., will the minister get us back into liability insurance, since they've broken their contract? They haven't made available that contract in this province.

HON. MR. NIELSEN: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say that the conclusions reached by the member at the moment rely to a very large degree upon his opinion. I would be very pleased to put those questions to ICBC to determine if they feel there has been any breach of understanding or contract. ICBC is contractually obliged to live up to its end of the understanding of the contract, but I'll be pleased to send those questions to ICBC to see if they feel that there is a base for the member's conclusions.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Mr. Speaker, I'm really pleased today to be able to welcome to this House Pastor Lennox of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church in Abbotsford. I believe that Commissioner Helen Boyce, vice-chairman of the Board of Parks and Recreation, has already been introduced. I'd like to welcome her and her guest, Mrs. lva Mann.

PROCLAMATION OF ENVIRONMENT WEEK

HON. MR. PELTON: Mr. Speaker, I rise to make a short ministerial statement.

I have the pleasure today of announcing that this week, June I to June 7, has been proclaimed as Environment Week in British Columbia. During this special week I'll be asking British Columbians to pay particular attention to the ways in which they can personally contribute to the preservation and enhancement of our environment.

Since British Columbia Environment Week also coincides with Canada Environment Week and World Environment Day, which is to be observed on June 5, we have the opportunity to show our concern in concert with both the national and international communities. I would ask that members offer their encouragement to any groups in their constituencies who may be undertaking appropriate community activities during this week.

Among the events in which my ministry will be involved is a free clinic co-sponsored with Environment Canada whereby vehicle owners can have their vehicles' exhaust tested for harmful emissions and unburned fuel. This event will take place at the Lansdowne mall in Richmond, June 2 to June 5.

I would also like to take this opportunity to inform the House of an initiative which we have taken in concert with the other provinces which will significantly benefit the quality of the environment in our province. It concerns polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, which have been causing considerable concern because of the potential health hazards and because of their tendency to persist in our environment. The use and the transportation of these materials has been severely restricted under a variety of federal and provincial legislation, but we have recognized for some time that an effective strategy for dealing with them also requires the establishment of rigorous standards for determining the allowable levels that will be permitted in the environment. I am happy to report that during a recent meeting with the other members of the Canadian Council of Resource and Environment Ministers, interim environmental quality objectives were approved for PCBs in both ambient air and ambient water. These objectives will provide a clear standard for the future management and control of these troublesome materials.

In addition, I would like to announce the introduction of a new program which I believe will make a substantial long-term contribution to environmental awareness among our province's younger citizens. During this Environment Week of 1986, my ministry will be releasing a new education kit on waste management and recycling entitled "Resources and Wastes." This program was developed for use in secondary schools in a variety of subject areas, including consumer education and science and technology. I urge educators to help make this valuable material available to as many of our students as possible. We want to ensure that young people are fully equipped to deal with both present and future challenges of waste management and resource conservation in our province. To make sure that teachers have access to the kit, copies are being sent to each of the province's 87 school district resource centres.

In the future, my ministry will continue to focus its efforts, as it has in the past, on ensuring that environmental information is available to British Columbians of all ages, and especially to the province's school and youth organizations. I can think of no better way to make the spirit of Environment Week a reality, not just during the first week of June but for all 12 months of the year.

MS. SANFORD: In the absence of the member for Cowichan-Malahat (Mrs. Wallace), who is attending an environmental conference in Ottawa, I would like to congratulate the minister on ensuring that we do have a week that focuses some attention on the very important issue of environment and environmental protection. There is a lot that we as individuals can do. There is also a lot that governments can do, and I hope that during this week and throughout the following year the minister will harken to the requests from this side of the House related to improvements in the environment in British Columbia and will also harken to the words of advice from the federal minister, who indicated that the provincial

[ Page 8466 ]

ministers should get tough with those who pollute the environment and make sure they're taken to task for any damage they might do.

[2:30]

Orders of the Day

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL

On vote 10: minister's office, $200,422.

HON. MR. SMITH: I'm not going to make an opening statement on these estimates, just to say it's been an absolutely fabulous year in justice. The police have received strong encouragement to enforce the law; the corrections system has received strong encouragement to keep convicted people behind bars, safe and secure; and the court system has flourished. I have very lengthy speaking notes here, all of which I will defer to comments from the gentleman opposite with the seminal brain, who is waiting to pounce.

MR. LAUK: Mr. Chairman, I'm a little disappointed that the Attorney-General would not report on the many controversial administrative issues involving the department over the last year. It may be that he is not aware of them, so I will try to refresh his memory.

Before getting into some of the events that have some vintage, it is of great disturbance to the.... I'll wait until the Attorney-General settles himself. There has been some public reaction over the.... Can someone bring the Attorney-General his medication? Or what is he looking for? Mr. Chairman, just prior to the weekend four individuals who have been charged with the attempted murder of a visiting minister from India were granted bail. I am not aware of the details of the evidence, and I understand evidence was called before a provincial court judge, His Honour Judge Sarich, and I would not want to second-guess His Honour's decision with respect to granting bail. I want to make two or three comments, though. One is that the granting of bail in this case from a policy point of view has already attracted some negative public attention. The law-abiding Sikh community is of the view that the law in Canada is soft on fanatics who are political assassins. With this in mind, they find it difficult to explain why the court granted bail. I am told that it is the view of some in the administration of justice that the provisions of bail were stringent. It is still very difficult to explain to the average citizen why people charged with a serious offence such as attempted murder on a visiting minister of government should be released.

Internationally the demand on Canada by the United States and Great Britain to get tough on terrorism, it seems to me, should be taken seriously by provincial governments as well as the federal government. With that in mind, I simply ask the Attorney-General whether he has directed regional Crown to appeal the decision of His Honour Judge Sarich and have the bail reviewed by a supreme court judge.

HON. MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, when those unhappy events occurred last week near Campbell River on the Gold River road, I was in touch with prosecutors and police for several days on that matter as to the evidence and the strength of the case. The bail hearing took place, I believe, starting on Thursday, and the decision was made by the provincial court judge to grant bail, but it was bail in a fairly hefty amount with a number of sureties required. I should also say that, yes, we have appealed it. We took the position before Judge Sarich that it was not an appropriate case for bail.

I have absolutely no quarrel with the hon. member at all on really anything he said in regard to this matter. It is my own belief that the provisions of the Bail Reform Act are wanting in cases of this kind. The primary ground, of course, which the obligation is on the Crown to show is that the detention of the prisoners is necessary to assure their attendance in court. When you have people who don't have anything but roots, and reasonable roots, in the community, it is sometimes difficult to justify on the secondary ground that their detention is necessary in the public interest. But we made the case, and we made submissions and put material before the learned judge who granted bail, and I can assure you that promptly and immediately we appealed that decision.

Now I don't intend to comment on that case, nor was my friend specifically commenting on that case. He was commenting on something much larger, and that is the ability that we have in Canada under our existing law to deal with this kind of political terrorism or assassination or attempted assassination. I would even go farther than my friend. I am absolutely appalled when I hear of arguments being made before the federal court that persons have the right in airports to have mass demonstrations and to advertise their points of view in airports in the vicinity of departure lounges, and that that is somehow freedom of speech and something that is justified under the Charter. How are authorities going to keep our airports and our transportation avenues safe if freedom of speech reaches into that kind of area? We have serious problems, and it may be that changes are going to have to be made to national security legislation and to the Criminal Code to allow the police the tools to act promptly and swiftly in the face of terrorism and international crime. Of course, we had a very bad incident earlier in Ottawa, where an attack was made on an embassy and a person was killed. I think all of this heightens the fact that we've got to not only look at our security and services to see whether they're adequate, but also look to see whether the criminal law is adequate. So you don't have to pitch me on that, hon. member. I agree.

I also want to second something else that you said, and that is that the Sikh community in this province is a law-abiding community, and it is a very old community. It is a community that has been with us for the better part of a century, and the stable, law-abiding Sikh community in this province is absolutely appalled by these kinds of incidents, and also appalled at latent backlash against a community which we should be proud of. I spoke yesterday with Deputy Commissioner Venner of the RCM Police and asked him to address this whole issue very specifically, and to give me some recommendations and a plan of action, because we cannot allow any threats to the safety of our law-abiding citizens to occur because of international terrorists.

MR. LAUK: Is the Attorney-General satisfied that Crown counsel presented an adequate case with respect to bail — that is to say, sufficient evidence of the likelihood of repeat offences while out on bail, having regard for the fact that this was or appeared to be a politically motivated assassination attempt unique to our law and to our experience?

[ Page 8467 ]

HON. MR. SMITH: Having not been in the courtroom or seen the brief, I can only say that the counsel who argued the case, Mr. Jim Taylor, is not only experienced, but a very determined and tough Crown prosecutor, and I would be very surprised if he hadn't put everything that could possibly be put in favour of that case before the court. I can tell the member that the appeal has been prepared and will be heard this Friday in county court in Nanaimo.

MR. LAUK: Mr. Chairman, one other event has occurred, and because it was a jury verdict I do not want to reflect too much on it. I'm a firm believer in juries, and apart from the concerted attack of both bench and bar on jury verdicts, I fundamentally believe in them. Recently a jury decided that a bus driver charged with murder was innocent by reason of self-defence. Have the Attorney-General or his officers reviewed that case, and has the Attorney-General decided to launch an appeal?

HON. MR. SMITH: No decision has been made, but the charge to the jury is being reviewed. As the member knows, I too am a strong supporter of the jury system. The Crown's position on an appeal from a jury verdict that we don't like, if indeed we don't like that verdict — and I am not able to say what the review will find.... You cannot appeal a jury verdict unless it's on the basis of an error in law on the charge; you can't appeal it because it's perverse. An accused can appeal a jury verdict on the basis that it's perverse, but the Crown cannot. So if we were going to appeal, we would have to be able to find a material error in law on the charge that could have influenced the jury. So it's an uphill thing to appeal in a jury verdict. But we are reviewing the charge and the facts that were before the jury.

MR. LAUK: Mr. Chairman, I've given the Attorney-General notice of a very serious problem that has occurred in this past year in the community around Quesnel. In all 14 years I have not, gratefully, called into question the conduct of a judge. I have provided the material to the Attorney-General and I have serious questions to put to the Attorney-General with respect to the conduct of His Honour Judge Cullinane in the provincial court in Quesnel.

[2:45]

As the committee will remember, three men in that community were charged with violent sexual assault of Dora Laurent, who is an aboriginal person, a woman in that area. The facts, which I'm told are not in dispute, are that this woman was picked up by these three men, driven to a remote area, was raped and was the victim of other sexual acts, was beaten and left.

Charges were laid against the three men. In advance of the date set for trial, one of the three men, Wade Parrish Joyal, appeared before His Honour Judge Cullinane — that is to say, January 13, 1986 — and was given the opportunity of pleading guilty to an offence of mere common assault. The facts, as read to the court, indicate that Joyal was probably guilty of sexual assault. Judge Cullinane, in spite of a previous conviction, although somewhat minor in comparison, gave the accused a discharge. The transcript of that sentencing I have provided to the Attorney-General.

To complete and round out the picture, the two other accused were committed for trial before a superior court judge and again both the other two accused were allowed to plead guilty to common assault. They received, under the circumstances, a jail sentence of short duration, but pretty well a heavy sentence for the mere charge of common assault.

I have two complaints that should be aired. One is with respect to the conduct of Judge Cullinane and, two, the conduct of Crown counsel before the provincial court and the superior court.

Firstly, dealing with Judge Cullinane, one of the accused was named Reimer. Joyal was the one who received a discharge from Judge Cullinane. There was some evidence sufficiently grave for the chief judge of the district to caution Judge Cullinane and advise the chief judge of the provincial court, Judge Coultas, as follows. The evidence was that the accused Reimer was known to Judge Cullinane and was a friend of one of the judge's children. Secondly, the accused Reimer received an automobile ride from the judge to court on one occasion when he was appearing on this charge. Thirdly, Judge Cullinane talked to Reimer's father about these charges prior to their being dealt with by the court.

These allegations were brought to Judge Cullinane's attention, but he still proceeded in advance of the date set for hearing to take a guilty plea from Wade Joyal to mere common assault. I am advised that Judge Cullinane may take a retirement and will not be hearing any further cases. I ask that the Attorney-General assure the House that Judge Cullinane will not proceed to hear any further cases whatsoever until there is a review by the Judicial Council or he accepts retirement.

My second complaint has to do with the role of Crown counsel. It is clear that before Judge Cullinane the prosecutor presented the facts to His Honour as interpreted by the defence. No other characterization of the role of Crown counsel is available, I submit. Although I have not had the opportunity to read the transcript of the superior court sentencing of the other two accused, I am advised that a similar position was taken.

This is not the kind of situation that should pass as an aberration in the system. In the interior of British Columbia there are large populations of white and Indian communities who must live together in peace and mutual respect. The administration of justice must be applied with equal force and equal fairness.

My research has not been exhaustive, but I cannot arrive at any other conclusion than that Dora Laurent, the victim, has not received justice in this case, and it is interpreted as a racist issue throughout the province by many representative groups. It is therefore incumbent on the Attorney-General that he order an inquiry to determine the conduct of Crown counsel involved, both in the provincial court and in superior court — they may have been the same person — and the responsibility of regional Crown, who, I am informed, was aware of the circumstances.

This inquiry may or may not have the effect of bringing justice to the victim in this case, but it most certainly may have the effect of bringing the message to those involved in the administration of justice, in Quesnel and elsewhere, that a vigorous prosecution must be undertaken for victims of crimes and on behalf of the public irrespective of who they are and who the accused may be.

I am urging, therefore, that the Attorney-General assure the House that Judge Cullinane will retire or that the Judicial Council will review his appointment; and secondly, that a thorough investigation by way of inquiry be conducted into the conduct of Crown counsel in the handling of this case.

[ Page 8468 ]

HON. MR. SMITH: As to the first point, Judge Cullinane has agreed to and has taken sick leave leading to early retirement. He won't be sitting again. As to the second point, I will have to review the reports that we have on that aspect of it and report to the member tomorrow, or to the House if my estimates are still before it.

I must say that I looked at that case primarily from the standpoint of what was done judicially, and the Chief Judge did take action and communicated that to me.

On the other aspect of it, I would not like to give an off-the-cuff answer; I would have to review that and get back to you or the House tomorrow.

MR. LAUK: I thank the Attorney-General for his reaction to that serious problem. It is important that we get the message to all British Columbians that justice is available to them all.

One other matter that I wish to raise to the Attorney-General before my colleagues raise other specific issues is the question of police complaints procedure. Recently this was brought to public attention by the case of one Jacobsen, who I believe settled out of court with the city of Vancouver for $75,000 in damages as a result of a beating that he received from officers of the city police in the cells in Vancouver. It was also clear that one or more officers in the vicinity at the material time are guilty of perjury. I'm convinced that the chief constable was absolutely committed to determining who the culprits were and is still making every effort to bring them to justice and to provide discipline to the force. He, more than any of us, is of the view that to escape justice individually, as apparently happened as a result of perjury, will destroy or at least negatively affect the heretofore high morale of a very fine police force.

The Jacobsen case has served another purpose, however, and that raises the question of the review of complaints about police conduct. A rigorous system of reviewing and acting upon such complaints can only enhance the morale and the quality of our police forces in British Columbia. The announcement by the minister that a review of the process is underway has left me with some residual questions. It is always appropriate for the public to know who is assigned the task of undertaking the review, when the review will be complete and if it will be published. Will there be an opportunity for public input? The Attorney-General might also mention whether amendments to the Police Act are contemplated and in what form, bearing in mind that federal changes are effective as of October I and that residents in municipally policed areas will then have different and arguably less effective complaint procedures.

When does the minister expect this government to act in a timely way so that a disparity in this procedure does not exist with respect to the Jacobsen case and others?

[3:00]

HON. MR. SMITH: The Jacobsen case: I don't think there was any better action I could have taken than to refer that whole matter to the B.C. Police Commission and ask them to inquire into it under their own powers and under the powers of the Inquiry Act, and they are doing that. As you know, applications were made to the Supreme Court based on the same arguments used in the Nelles inquest in Ontario that the matter should not go ahead at an inquiry level of this kind, and those arguments were not successful. A decision of Mr. Justice Legg in the Supreme Court directed that the inquiry could go ahead. That has been appealed, and I'm told the appeal will be heard sometime before the summer recess. In the face of that early appeal, we decided not to try to push ahead with the inquiry when the same issue was under appeal, but it would be our determination to have that inquiry by the independent B.C. Police Commission and try to get at the truth as to what occurred when Mr. Jacobsen was taken into custody.

If I could deal with your other more general observation about the complaint procedures under B.C. police legislation, as opposed to the federal legislation, you are absolutely correct that the RCMP legislation has been changed. The new set of procedures will be in place later this year. There will be some primary difference as a result of that between the procedures of someone complaining about RCMP or someone complaining about municipal police in Vancouver, New Westminster or the greater Victoria area.

The difference is that under the RCMP Act appeals from decisions of the commissioner of the RCMP will go to the Public Complaints Commission; under the B.C. Police Act you appeal to the board and then to the B.C. Police Commission. But there is a new procedure under the RCMP Act which seems to us to be both a little faster and a little more objective; that is, there's no police board involvement in the appeals. It recognizes that a complainant may prefer to complain to persons other than to the police. It also provides options to the appeal body in handling appeals. They can refer it back to the police, they can review and issue findings, or they can hold a hearing of inquiry. It also provides specifically for an independent inquiry into complaints by the commission whether or not the police have decided to investigate.

So I might say that those procedures commend themselves to me, and I have some time ago had my branch prepare amendments to the citizens' complaint procedure in our Police Act, to give our B.C. Police Commission the authority to investigate complaints when in the opinion of the chairman it is appropriate to do so. We intend to have a procedure for municipal forces which more closely parallels the RCMP summary procedure that I've outlined.

We would be bringing those forward. I would expect before the amendments are brought forward to allow some time for discussion and at least an initial time for some short experience with the new federal force under the RCMP Act. But I would see it as being important that in the session of 1987 we have legislation in place.

I don't like the idea of two procedures. When the RCMP Act was under consideration for change several years ago under the previous government, I did go to Ottawa and urge that we have not only parallel procedures but that we have one reviewing and disciplinary body for both the RCMP in British Columbia and the municipal police. I just wasn't able to get anywhere with that, but I was able to get a more cooperative approach in that we would become involved in RCMP discipline in the sense that we would know of it and we would have reports of it so that I would be able to answer for it as Attorney-General. It would not just be something that only an official in Ottawa had knowledge of.

So I would like to see parallel and ultimately common provisions for discipline, and I would like to see them summary, simple and providing for an objective view so that citizens do not just feel that the police only are investigating the police. I think that's one of the perception problems. I'm favourably inclined towards the new summary federal RCMP procedures.

[ Page 8469 ]

MR. MACDONALD: The Attorney-General has referred to a problem that's been extant since at least 1974, when the present Police Act was passed. The RCMP and the feds are jealous of jurisdiction, and it's very difficult to bring those two procedures together. I hope he succeeds.

I wanted to ask about the background of the New Cinch Uranium case, which I daresay the Attorney-General is familiar with. Just to recall, the Attorney-General's last response to me in the chamber was that he had considered the matter and there would be no criminal charges. It wasn't a very forthcoming statement, I must admit. It was a matter of three or four words from an Attorney-General who can be more voluble on occasion and is seriously considering a higher position. There could be two Smiths after the same job. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's confusing to the public.

Anyway, there was a lawsuit, as the Attorney-General knows, with Lac, a big Toronto mining company, claiming the defendants, who included Canarim, Peter Brown, the Vancouver Stock Exchange and two or three others, conspired together to send out only assays showing significant gold deposits to create a substantial demand for New Cinch shares and warrants. A great many millions of dollars were made by the underwriters and Canarim. There were a couple of other underwriters, but this was the principal one. They 'fessed up to this extent, that they paid $4 million in damages, and then everybody clammed up as part of the terms of settlement: "Don't say anything." The examinations for discovery are now sealed in court. Brian Power of the Vancouver Sun did a very good investigative article on the matter, and it hasn't been challenged.

So I am asking the Attorney-General just a series of questions. Did the Attorney-General in the course of his investigation receive any statements from any of the principals? Would they talk and give an explanation of their conduct? The thing came down to the shares jumping in a five-month period in 1980 from $2.50 to $29. Then when they found that there were three other assay reports that had been with the Vancouver Stock Exchange from reputable Canadian mining firms saying there was no gold or silver there, the dammed stock fell to 15 cents. But in the meantime an awful lot of money had been made and Lac itself had put $25.6 million in, and the case was settled. The statement of material fact on which all this happened — the certificate with the statement — was signed by Peter Brown on behalf of the underwriters, Canarim, Continental and McDermid. And then the underwriter in addition to the usual thing picked up warrants and stock options of insubstantial amounts. Then, of course, Michael Opp was killed in Phoenix, Arizona, and the allegation is that it was related to the salting of the mine in El Paso or close to there.

I don't think just saying there were no charges satisfies public curiosity or public justice, and I am asking the Attorney-General whether his investigators received any statements from any of the principals — people like Peter Brown or any of the lawyers — and, secondly, did he have access to the examinations for discovery which took place prior to the civil suit being settled? Those are my first questions.

HON. MR. SMITH: I am just going to pass on that for a few minutes if I might, so I can respond a little more fully. Do you want to move on to something else? I will respond to it.

MR. MACDONALD: Well, Mr. Chairman, I'll ask another couple of questions. As the Attorney-General knows, the Securities Act is under the direction of another minister as such, but the offences under the Securities Act come under the Attorney-General. But of course the horse had left the barn. There was a stop-trading order on the shares of New Cinch Uranium. Those are fairly common, but it was very late. It didn't take place until January 1981, after the shares had taken their skyrocketing up to the $29 or $30 apiece. Presumably a lot of people had got out at a very fancy price. The superintendent of brokers has power to make an investigation. You have a corporate and financial services appeal, and stop trading did take place. I suppose there would be reasons given at that time, and I ask the Attorney-General whether they could be made public.

But in addition to that, you have section 135 of the Securities Act which says that a false or misleading material statement of fact.... Well, this material statement of fact was unquestionably misleading. To issue such a thing is an offence subject to.... Maybe I should just look at the exact words. "If the person issuing it did not know that the statement was false or misleading, and in the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have known that the statement was false or misleading.... Well, here you had four assay reports, one of them by this fraudulent outfit, Chem-tec, in the United States, which was financed by a principal of New Cinch Uranium, Applegath and one other fellow whose name I forgot. I can remember that name, but I can't remember the other. I think it was White. But here when you have the source of the rumours, the assay of Chem-tee, and Chem-tec had been set up by the company for whose benefit it discovered rich silver and gold in three holes down in the United States, then you've got a very strange situation, and an extremely undesirable one. But in addition, it says reasonable care shall be taken to make sure the statement wasn't misleading. In this case there were the four assay reports, and it seems perfectly obvious that reasonable care could not have been taken in respect to making sure that the statement of material facts was not misleading. So that would be an offence under the act. I ask the Attorney-General, in the light of that, what is the explanation as to what materials were before him when a decision was arrived at that this was not an offence, or that it shouldn't be a charge leaving it up to the court to decide whether it was an offence?

[3:15]

HON. MR. SMITH: I'm hesitant to answer any of this in detail without going back and making some reference to it, which I will. But certainly I know that an RCMP investigation took place into these matters generally following the civil action. When the civil action was settled, it was brought to our attention that there were allegations in the evidence of the civil action that needed investigation. So we launched an RCM Police fraud investigation into that at the time, and the advice that we received from the investigators was that there was no evidence that would support a charge. As for dealing with the Securities Act, as the member has already stated, the administration of that would not fall under me; but if facts were presented that would give rise to a charge, that would have been investigated along with the RCM Police investigation. It might well be that the charges were time-barred under that statute, but I'd have to refresh my memory. I'm absolutely clear that we had an investigation. It wasn't just a peremptory investigation that they were cognizant of and

[ Page 8470 ]

looked at. The discoveries that took place in that major civil litigation.... The police attended, and interviewed persons in Vancouver and in Toronto with a view to ascertaining if there was evidence to support the laying of a charge. The advice that we clearly received was that there was not. Now those matters are in my recollection because I remember them very specifically, but I cannot tell you if we considered a securities charge or not. I simply don't recall. I'd have to go back and refresh my memory. But there was no evidence that would support the laying of a charge under the Criminal Code.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, did the Attorney-General receive from the RCMP investigators a written report setting out what they had found and what they had been able to look at, which is their custom, as I understand it? There is the famous Butler report, which takes us back in B.C. history. But the Attorney-General says: "I received advice that.... Was this in the form of a report summing up the evidence and coming to the conclusion that a charge would not be sustainable, and explaining what sources...?

HON. MR. SMITH: Well, there was some written report, and then there was a verbal report as well, which was made to my deputy and assistant deputy at greater length. There was a written report, but I can't recall how extensive it was.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, it does seem to me that when that much money is raised in Vancouver on one flotation, based upon what was unquestionably a misleading statement of fact, the Attorney-General should be able to make a statement about the elements in the case and as to why he arrived at that conclusion. I know the argument that you can't file the police report, but it appears the Attorney-General hasn't really studied it and is saying that he'd received this advice. I don't think that answers the complaints in this charge.

May I ask the Attorney-General another question? Michael Opp was murdered in El Paso, I think it was. He worked for this lab that were getting away with murder, financed by Applegath and connected with New Cinch Uranium. That's pretty good, you know, when the company floating its shares in B.C. can finance the setting up of the assay lab which is going to bring that company very good news. It's not very good. Anyway, Michael Opp was involved down there with the assay lab. Then one night two people kicked in the door of his apartment, marched him into the bedroom and shot him through the head. The man who was said to have done it was Trujillo. He came in with his girlfriend, and when the suggestion had been made at the trial that this was an attempt to steal an old TV set and things of that kind and not a killing, because he knew too much about New Cinch Uranium, the girlfriend disappeared and has never been heard of since — she said it had all been a lie, that the break-in wasn't to do with stealing a TV set but with New Cinch, and she's gone. Did this police report or advice cover whether or not the killing of Opp...? There's a long letter from the father of Michael Opp that says that he was killed as a result of the suppression of information about New Cinch, and that it might come into the public. Did the RCMP come to the conclusion that the Opp killing was not related to what happened on the stock exchange here?

HON. MR. SMITH: I have absolutely no recollection of investigating the Opp killing, nor was it ever put to me that it should have been. I can't comment on that, but I can comment on the Lac-New Cinch matter.

Yes, there were allegations, and those allegations arose from evidence or allegations that were made in the civil action. I know that that was investigated by the commercial fraud department, and I also know that my deputies received full briefing from the RCMP on that. There was a written report of some kind. I did ask questions about it at the time — not recently, when you brought it to my attention — and there was not a scintilla of evidence that would support the laying of a criminal charge. But I am quite happy to go back and review that. I have no intention of just dealing with it on the basis that there was evidence. I'm quite happy to acquaint you with how extensive it was or what occurred in the investigation. My recollection simply doesn't allow me to go any farther than I can today, but I'll be quite happy to talk to you about it.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, in my capacity of trying to help the Attorney-General in this matter — and not to spoil a good relationship.... I don't know whether the Attorney-General has one, but Peter Brown.... I don't know who he's backing in this leadership race. It may be the Chairman for all I know.

In terms of Michael Opp, you have to hand it to good investigative journalism; no libel suit came out of this. The story is in the.... I don't know whether the Attorney-General has read it, but he should, because sometimes investigative journalism is quite wrong. Sometimes they're sued for libel and slander, but not in this case. It's the Vancouver Sun, June 20, 1985. Referring to the late Mr. Michael Opp, it says: "An 18-page letter found in the dead man's apartment by his father outlined Opp's belief in Chem-tec's involvement with New Cinch. That letter was ruled inadmissible in the murder trial of Hoyt Trujillo of Phoenix, who was acquitted."

I would think that that would be something of interest not only to the commercial squad but to the RCMP generally. I would have hoped that this kind of thing, when it involves that much in terms of sheer dollars, would result in a full report to the Attorney-General with which he would be familiar in detail. I regret that that appears not to be the case.

I don't know about the time limit under the Securities Act, but clearly, at a certain point, the superintendent of brokers did step in, because he made a stop-trading order in January 1981. I would have thought that that would have alerted the superintendent and the authorities to a possible offence when the facts came out.

There are other cases I hear about where the superintendent conducts a hearing, and there's an appeal to the corporate and financial services division, involving far less than this kind of thing. There's one going to the court of appeal right now — Lionheart Resources Corp. The main reason it's going up there is that the superintendent states that there is stop-trading, that there appears to be insufficient information to explain the rapid escalation in the share price. It went from 30 cents to $12, something like that.

So they do investigate things, but in the New Cinch case the silence is astounding.

MRS. DAILLY: Mr. Chairman, I'll be changing the subject here now to the area of the Willingdon. detention home. I know that the Attorney-General received a report

[ Page 8471 ]

from the former ombudsman, made out I believe in February of 1985, to do with recommendations for changes at the Willingdon Detention Centre for the young people who've been sent there.

First of all, I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the former ombudsman, Mr. Friedmann. He and his staff initiated a very comprehensive, detailed evaluation of the situation at Willingdon. I also want to pay tribute to the members of the Attorney-General's staff in Corrections who actually went to work to follow through on some of the changes recommended in that report. However, time marches on and I'm afraid that unless constant vigilance is kept in areas such as homes for delinquents — I hate to use that term, but I can't think of any other; young offenders, I suppose, is the term now — unless we keep a vigilance over the conditions under which they are placed, I'm afraid things can become lax. The only way to prevent that, of course, is to keep this constant vigilance.

My first question to the Attorney-General is this. A recommendation was made by the ombudsman that there be a regular external monitoring of the conditions in Willingdon. I would like to know if that has been set up, if there is presently a structure that is monitoring what the conditions are in Willingdon on an external basis, or from an external group, rather. That's my first question.

I'm also wanting specifically to know if the minister can tell us what the status is of the educational programming in Willingdon at this time. That was criticized. I know that extra staff was to be hired. I'm wondering if the minister can tell us if he has any idea of what the percentage is attending regular classes. One of the weaknesses, apparently, in the past was that there were a number of these young offenders who were not attending any programs, any educational facilities that were available for them at Willingdon. Have you any idea if that has been checked on? Because let's face it, according to the School Act you have to have education up to a certain age. It does seem a bit ridiculous to think that that would not be enforced in one of our own provincial institutions. As far as I'm concerned, it's very important to have that enforced where these young people are being incarcerated, put into locked facilities, because if anything can cause problems, as we all know, it's boredom. If those young offenders are not given proper programs, proper educational facilities, then we do see problems resulting. And so it would be very foolish not to do a constant check on the educational programs being offered.

I know some people say that we shouldn't coddle inmates. Recently there was a discussion about possible strikes at Oakalla by the inmates over the food quality. We also had a report on the poor food that was being contracted by an individual caterer at Willingdon well over a year ago. I know that Corrections, in charge of Willingdon, did make some improvements and we thank them for that. However, there was to be a constant monitoring by the Burnaby Public Health department, and I wonder if that has been put into action and if it is being undertaken.

[3:30]

Personally I don't think it's coddling to ensure that proper food is provided. I say that because I think if any of us were locked up day after day after day in a facility where you cannot get out, food is probably about the only thing there that keeps you sane at times. I've talked to people who work in these institutions. These are pretty toughened correctional officers who are certainly not the type to coddle any inmate, and they say it is important to ensure that there's a high standard, or decent standard anyway, of food provided. It makes the whole situation less volatile in the institution. So it isn't a matter of coddling; it's a matter of being rational and sensible about the handling of the situation in these institutions. So I'd like to know about that situation, whether the Burnaby health department has been regularly checking on the food.

The other area of concern that was expressed was the number of hours that the inmates had to spend in the lock-up facilities, and I wonder if that has been checked on. Is it being watched over? Usually it's not the staff's fault if they're locked up more than they should be; it's because of lack of staffing. I'd like a kind of update on the staffing facility.

Another very important thing is.... Well, to begin with, I think it's tragic that we have to put in one institution young offenders, young people who have, many times through no fault of their own, ended up there. Yet I'm quite aware in talking to staff that it is a terribly difficult job to deal with some of these young offenders. Some of them, unfortunately, are psychotic. Some of them need serious care and treatment, and to lock them up without proper forensic treatment, of course, is negating the whole principle and the reason for locking them up. I would like to know the status of treatment for those seriously emotionally disturbed cases — perhaps even, as I said earlier, psychotic cases. What kind of treatment is presently being given to them in Willingdon? I remember that the thing that hit the headlines when this report came out was the amount of slashing being done by the inmates. There was much discussion on this and a detailed reference to it in the report. I'm not going to go into that at this time; I can't hold the Attorney-General's department, or the correctional officers, responsible for the slashings. But when I talk about slashings, I do want to refer to the Attorney-General my concern about access to weapons. I know some of them perhaps are made there, but I am concerned that....

Actually, what I'd like to know is, has the Attorney-General any update information in the last year since that report? Have these slashings decreased? I realize I'm asking for details that I don't expect the Attorney-General to have at his fingertips, but I know some of his staff may have them. If they don't have it here now, I would appreciate some information on it.

It's unfortunate that an institution such as Willingdon has to exist. The NDP government came under great criticism back in the early 1970s when one of their first acts was to close it. People complained: "What's going to happen to those young inmates? What's going to happen to the ones who are serious offenders? Are you just going to send them back into the community where they can commit more acts of violence or disturbances to many people?" I think the NDP's objective — and I'd like to ask the Attorney-General's reaction to this — was that the philosophy behind the closing of Willingdon was to say that we don't think putting young offenders with a mix of problems — some violent, some not violent — together is at all healthy. We realized, however, that there had to be closed containment for certain offenders. What moves are actually being taken to get some of those young offenders who are not violent out into the community?

That leads me to a specific question. How many youth containment facilities in British Columbia today are closed custody? We have Willingdon and there's the Victoria detention centre. Are there any other closed custody centres? I

[ Page 8472 ]

accept that you have to spread them around the province, but I think it's not good to have them in large group areas, because you catch in that net young people who should never be with some of these others who have very serious problems. God knows what happens to them when they leave that institution. What have they learned? Roughly how many open custody camps do we have now? I'm getting into detail, so I don't want to make too many specific questions. What I'm really trying to get at is whether there's a move in the Attorney General's department to provide more of the open custody camps throughout the province.

We've also heard about a possible move of 20 youth beds within the grounds of the Nanaimo correctional centre — formerly Brannan Lake — which I understand is an adult correctional centre. For the life of me, I can't see how anyone would conceive of putting youth beds in with the adults. I hope the minister can tell us that this is not definitely a policy. I would also like to know if there are any ongoing forensic services — mental health services, psychologists, psychiatrists, etc. — for the youth who are detained outside of the major centres. I know I was concerned about Willingdon, but at least they're right beside the mental health centre, so more services are available. Are there any ongoing forensic services for youth outside of the major centres?

I think at this time those are enough specific questions. I know it may take the minister a few moments to find the answers. While that's being done, I'd like to switch, although still in the area of Corrections, and talk about another area involved in it.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. SMITH: If I interrupted the member and tried to deal with the Corrections questions while they're fresh, would I be interfering with her train of thought? It might be better to try to keep some sequence.

Is an external review of Willingdon arising out of the ombudsman's recommendations? I was very pleased — and I think the member was — with the way in which the corrections branch responded to the ombudsman's interim recommendations last year before his final report was presented to the Legislature in June of last year. I think that the vast bulk of the queries that he had raised had already been addressed and were.... And indeed the corrections branch had addressed some other things that he had not. So I think it was a very cooperative attitude, and a number of changes were made.

Now the external review at Willingdon is an annual inspection. There's an inspection division in the ministry, hon. member, that makes these examinations. I can't say that they're external in the sense that it's a separate entity, but they do this according to criteria and standards, not as a subjective thing. They found that Willingdon provided.... They did find that a greatly improved educational curriculum existed and that an increase in teaching staff and courses.... Based on the program that the Burnaby School District provides in there, everyone in Willingdon now who is there for more than six days gets whatever education they're capable of taking. If they're capable physically and emotionally of being in a classroom for six hours, they go there. Some aren't and don't, but the opportunity for them all to do that is there. So I think there's been a much higher participation level, and that has been stressed.

You mentioned food, both at Willingdon and the problem of food generally. There's no doubt that complaints about prison food are just legion. I can never remember a year in which I was in this place, let alone in this job, when we didn't hear complaints about institutional food. Of course, I guess it's true about all institutional food.

Interjection.

HON. MR. SMITH: That's true about the ferries, although I think that the food on the ferries is pretty high calibre now.

MR. LAUK: Compared to the legislative dining room?

HON. MR. SMITH: No. The company on the B.C. Ferries is much better, though, and there's considerably more privacy, I might say, dining on B.C. Ferries, particularly when they're full, than there is in the legislative dining room. But, of course, if we had the resources of the parliamentary dining room in Ottawa, we would all cease to complain, and we'd all just disappear into our stomachs.

The member for Coquitlam-Moody (Mr. Rose) is an expert on parliamentary dining rooms, I think.

Interjections.

HON. MR. SMITH: He certainly is. Confess!

But seriously, the prison food services are now monitored externally as well as internally, because we just don't trust the palates of those among us who supervise only. We have a consultant with a very fine palate who monitors these matters.

Interjections.

HON. MR. SMITH: That's right — an official taster. Approximately 12 prisons are monitored annually, and meals are generally found to compare favourably to community standards: so says the bureaucratic brief that I'm referring to.

In any event, we're very responsive to any complaints about food. They are always checked out. But one is certainly left with the impression that some complaints about food are based in other problems, and they are not food problems. But they focus on the food. It's a good one to....

Interjection.

HON. MR. SMITH: The Burnaby health department does monitor Willingdon, hon. member.

You asked me also if the inmates are spending extra lockup time arising out of staffing. I can say that there was a complaint about that about a year or year and a half ago, and that we did add additional staff. We also built an outside track and increased the recreational activity at Willingdon.

Interjection.

HON. MR. SMITH: Well, it's a stretched track.

We also increased the forensic facilities that are available. You asked me, I think, what forensic facilities were available outside the major centres.

Interjection.

[ Page 8473 ]

HON. MR. SMITH: I'd have to give you, I guess, some breakdown, if you want it, on the amount of time that that branch spends in smaller communities. It travels to these communities, and it is available to provide this service. It is not just service that is provided in Kamloops, Prince George or other major centres outside of Vancouver and Victoria.

The incidence of slashing, which was of great concern at Willingdon last year and which was addressed by the ombudsman, seems to have abated. The staff have maintained a very careful surveillance of that problem. It may be that some reorganization and some greater stress on recreation and education has assisted as well in the abatement of that serious problem.

You asked about closed custody centres and where we have them. In addition to Willingdon and Victoria we have them at Boulder Bay Camp at Haney, and also we will have them in the Prince George unit that is approved for construction.

You also asked about the youth beds that are proposed in Nanaimo, and it is correct that there are 20 beds proposed in the facility in Nanaimo, but they will not be in the same building as adult inmates. It will be an entirely separate building, and indeed under the Young Offenders Act that is an absolute requirement: you cannot have shared custody; you have to have separate facilities. We are spending a very large amount of money in this province, as we are across the country, to meet that separate-containment provision. We took the position that we thought the legislation had gone too far, but if your philosophy accords with that, you should be pleased in any event that the facilities will be separate. That will include secure containment.

We have a number of facilities around the province; the majority of facilities are open. In fact, since the early 1970s if you looked at the ratio, you would find that there has been, certainly in youth corrections, a philosophy of decentralizing and trying to have as many open containment facilities as possible. The only ones in closed facilities are those who are a danger to society. It's a last resort that you want to have a young offender in a closed situation. I think that's fairly general correctional philosophy, and it's not a philosophy that this side of the House has and that side of the House doesn't. It generally is modern penology in Canada that absolutely nobody is advocating trying to move all young offenders into tighter security. But we do have a small number of those who are dangerous to themselves or to people around them, and they have to be kept in close and secure facilities.

I think that's the list.

[3:45]

MRS. DAILLY: Thank you for the detailed answer.

I want to move to the women's facilities at Oakalla. I always forget the name — is it Lakeside? Something I've never understood is why judges sentence people who are mentally disturbed; for example, schizophrenics. Known schizophrenics, I know, are sent to places like the women's section at Oakalla. The correctional officers, by and large, I'm sure, do an excellent job within their capacity. But I'm quite sure that correctional officers who are hired to work at the women's section of Oakalla are not trained psychiatrists or psychologists. That's not part of the requirement for them to be brought in as correctional officers. I can't help wondering how on earth these people handle inmates who have serious mental problems; those, for example, who happen to be schizophrenics. They are not trained; they are, by and large, lay people. I know that they have no choice but to accept when the judge sentences them there.

I wonder if the Attorney-General could tell me his opinion of that. What could be done if they're not placed in that section at this time? What facilities would be available? Would it have to be Riverview — which, frankly, would probably be preferable? I'm not quite sure of the chains of command here. Would it be under the rights of the Attorney-General to see that someone was sent to where they would get some help for a mental problem, rather than being put in where there will be no help received, except that I know they have the odd visiting psychiatrist? I don't think it's required for the inmate to go and see the psychiatrist.

The other final question on the women's section at this time is: what are the plans? We did hear that it was going to be all.... I believe B.C. was going to end up with the mix, was it, which they already have now of federal inmates who have been sentenced to over the two years and are now in the women's section of Oakalla. What are the plans? Are we going to end up with a certain group of federal prisoners in one area? Are they still going to be separated for those under two years? What are the plans? I heard that Kingston was being broken up to allow for this regionalization, and we have never heard anything more about it.

HON. MR. SMITH: So far as women incarcerated at Lakeside who are mentally ill, that happens at Oakalla. Indeed, it happens in provincial institutions. When people are awaiting trial it happens. If there has not been a psychiatric remand, that does happen. There are people who fall through the stools and in doing so they put immense strain on our correctional officers who work there. But there is provision to have them remanded to the forensic unit at Riverview, which is the appropriate place if there is that medical evidence available. It is not common, but it does happen. That's all I can say. We try to prevent it from happening.

The need to have a women's prison in British Columbia is something that we've recognized for some time, and we are still in the process of trying to plan a joint facility with penitentiaries Canada, whatever its current nomenclature is. We would hope to have a 126-bed female remand and sentence facility which would replace both Lakeside and Twin Maples in Maple Ridge. Our proposal is that that centre would house 40 federal inmates, and we would have joint federal and provincial capital construction money. We would like to go ahead with this, but I can't say that we are yet quite ready to launch it. I hope that we will be.

We support it. When we have arrived at an agreement with our federal counterparts, we will do so because it has long seemed inappropriate to us that everyone sentenced to a greater sentence from British Columbia of two years less a day, if female, has to go to Kingston. So there is no quarrel with us on that.

MR. BARNES: I would just like to read into the record excerpts from a letter by the Mount Pleasant block parents, April 7, to Justice Minister John Crosbie, MPs Margaret Mitchell and Ian Waddell, the Attorney-General, to myself and my colleague, the second member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Lauk), the mayor of the city of Vancouver and council members, Chief Constable Stewart, Inspector Canuel, Judge Libby, Chief Justice McEachern and even to the president of Expo, Mr. Jim Pattison.

[ Page 8474 ]

"Let us begin by saying that the citizens of Mount Pleasant are outraged at the slow progress our government has made in dealing with our situation. It seems we are back to square one in a lot of issues, for example prostitutes, that should have been resolved this time last year. Our police are not really at fault here; after all, they are only in power to enforce the laws you have provided. The public knows those laws have been proven inadequate time and time again. Bill C-49 is a prime example of the patronizing attitude being shown toward our problems. We really do not need band-aid solutions to old wounds that keep reopening.

"The prostitutes are not going to be dealt with effectively unless our police are better equipped legally to handle it. It is sickening to keep hearing of cases being thrown out of court because of legal loopholes that should have been closed years ago. Mount Pleasant may not be the only area affected by the 'pass the buck' legislature that governs our country. But this is one teeny statistic that is going to stand up and be heard.

"We will continue shouting our rights as human beings to be granted a safer environment for our community until we are sure to get some positive action on our part. If you people do not have the power to change and strengthen our legal system, then please inform the public who the hell does."

That is signed by the Mount Pleasant block neighbours' representative, Mr. Richard Lloyd.

Mr. Chairman, I am raising this issue because I believe that it is one that puts the real test before all of us on all sides of the House and from all quarters. I'm not here to badger the government, but I am here to ask the Attorney-General to respond, perhaps as a legislator, perhaps as the Attorney-General, perhaps as a human being, just perhaps as a citizen. The issue is real enough. I'm not sure if it's the role of the Legislature to concern itself with the morals of individuals in a free and competitive society that elects on its own, by individuals, to engage in various enterprises, of which one, of course, historically is the sale of sex or the trade in sex. It is not unique to Mount Pleasant or to any other place on the face of the earth.

Nonetheless, we have attempted in this society to enact legislation prohibiting the sale of or the trade in sexual acts in public places. Perhaps that was wise or unwise. Nonetheless, point number one is that, for whatever reason — community standards or the government of the times or just the way it is in our society — we are offended sufficiently to want to stop that trade in public places.

The problem that I'm having, and I'm sure that the Attorney-General is having, is to what extent do you enforce a law that seems to be desired by the community, when at the same time there are other citizens in society who are saying that to impose a law that says a person doesn't have the freedom of movement in a public place or the right to association or any number of fundamental principles in a democratic society.... We have then the problem of how you enforce.

What is the real problem? It's not one that can be resolved without an understanding of what the alternatives are. This is why I'm hesitant to suggest that locking people up and coming down heavy-handed is a solution; but nonetheless, the Attorney-General is faced with that problem. The citizens in Mount Pleasant, and before that in the west end, and I'm sure that it would be in Shaughnessy if they were to move from Mount Pleasant, or it would be in Point Grey if they were to move from Shaughnessy.... But you are going to have to deal with their problem.

If the methods that we are using today, Mr. Chairman, are not successful, if we have been unable to get legislation sufficiently airtight enough to withstand a challenge in court, as Bill C-49 has, unfortunately or not, obviously failed to survive, then what are the options? Are we to simply walk away from the issue?

[4:00]

I want the Attorney-General to tell the Legislature, this committee, what steps he is taking in light of the challenges being made to try to appeal the decision — turning down the legislation as currently enacted. Assuming that he will lose again, that his appeal will be unsuccessful, what realistic options are there? What must we do? I don't think that it's good enough to simply say: "If we can't enforce the law, there is nothing we can do."

Many of the debaters on this subject know that the New Democratic Party is very concerned about civil and human rights and about the fundamental freedoms available and guaranteed in our democratic society. Because of this, we have had to experience criticism for not being willing to enforce stringently laws which will, in effect, punish offenders for violating the appropriate legislation that is in effect.

Even the courts are hesitant to accept measures which will offend fundamental democratic rights, arm's-length courts, the body that we rely upon to assist in an impartial way to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all people. So it is a dilemma for us as legislators. It is a problem when your constituents day in and day out phone you and complain and protest and send letters and describe the awesome conditions under which they have to live in their communities, when they can't get any sleep, when they are being abused, men and women finding themselves subjected to propositioning by the so-called strangers of the night. Now I haven't personally had to experience what it is like, but I am satisfied that Mount Pleasant at one time was a pleasant place. I am satisfied that those residents know what they are talking about when they say that it is no longer a comforting, secure environment in which they live.

But I am not anxious to thrown stones. I think the issue is sensitive. It is an issue that we as politicians and legislators will have to come to grips with, but we are going to have to think in terms of the common good. We're going to have to think in terms of cooperation, and we are going to have to have the resolve — perhaps the political resolve or the personal resolve if you can't find your way clear to do it politically — to be able to go to the community and find solutions. I don't think it's acceptable to simply say that we have no legal means by which we can deal with a very real human condition and people who are screaming for assistance.

There has to be some merit in people complaining about the integrity of their community, their fight to be able to live in peace and raise their families in peace and walk the streets without offence. At the same time, I wouldn't be too anxious to say that someone has no right to freedom of movement. But maybe we don't talk straight to people. Maybe we don't listen to those people on the streets. If I am to believe the comments that are being made by sociologists who are studying the situation, who are talking to the people who are on the streets, by and large most of those people do not want to be

[ Page 8475 ]

there. In fact, consider yourself in the position of a person who is selling their body in order to find the economic means to function in this so-called free society where everybody has equal opportunity. Hundreds of children are down there, let alone the adults. They are down day in and day out. That is the other side of the coin. There may be a law that we are trying to bring into place to try to stop this activity, but why are the people down there? Are we suggesting that they enjoy being down there? Perhaps a few do, but maybe the Attorney-General should have an initiative, a task force that goes and starts to talk to the people — himself, not some group that finally go and do it on his behalf. Get down there and find out yourself, find out if people are willing to cooperate and will want to find some of the solutions.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

I suggest that many of the people are down there for reasons other than those that are pleasurable. There was one report, in fact, just completed earlier this year with young people. These are minors who are also on the streets. They claim that they find it to be a feeling of disgrace in many instances when they have to get up each day, and many of them have to get high on some kind of drug before they can stand on the streets and sell themselves. They do not find it a comforting experience. Each time they do it it becomes that much more difficult for them to accept themselves. These are the personal tragedies that I think we should care about and try to understand.

If the initiative is to lock people up, to create additional court costs, more institutions and a punitive approach, what happens to that person? Are we suggesting that that person must be permanently banished from society and that the taxpayers will pay to keep them off the streets at enormous expense, when there may be other options? Isn't it about time we began to look at the quality of life that people are having to live under and began to realize the value of investing, as the member for North Burnaby was just pointing out earlier, in preventive programs, to have a head-start approach? What is happening in the Attorney-General's department? Corrections is after the fact. What we want to have is preventative, to begin to respond to the needs of those people.

I think that we have become so engrossed in the legalese that we forget that there have to be new options in the future. There has to be a different approach. I am not sure if there is an approach that is going to be handled strictly from a legal point of view. This is what the courts are telling us. They are telling us: "Try as you may, we have problems when it comes to telling people that they cannot be on the streets." So what do we do? Maybe we should go to those people and find out what the options are.

I am asking the question. I am not telling the Attorney-General what the solution is. I don't think that any of us know. What we're doing is attempting to find a solution. Politicians are trying all kinds of means within this system, but this system is perhaps not the only system. At least let's recognize that there is a serious problem and one that we had better begin to address, because our youth, our families, the quality of life, our value system, the concept of morality, all of those things are at risk because we are turning a blind eye to the human element, to the emotional side of what society requires.

HON. MR. SMITH: Well, Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree with some of the remarks that have been made on this subject, but I think the solution does not lie in protecting the rights of people to solicit on the public streets. I do not understand why that is a necessary ingredient of the solemn right to express yourself freely in a free and democratic society. Surely if you have rights in society that are guaranteed, those rights have to bring responsibilities, and people have a responsibility not to disrupt a peaceful residential neighbourhood.

I'm sure the honorable member has seen firsthand evidence of street prostitution in his riding. I certainly saw it in the West End and in Mount Pleasant. I've been through Mount Pleasant from time to time and through the West End observing it, and I had many people come and give me firsthand accounts as to how it affected their lives. It was not a mild interference with their lives; it was a major disruption every night. At its height in the West End there were between 300 and 400 prostitutes in about four city blocks actively working from eight in the evening until about two, three or four in the morning. There were cars with pimps keeping them in line, and the customers were mobile during those hours. People were unable to sleep, their tranquillity was disrupted, their parking lots were used for customer services, their lawns were in disarray from filth and litter, they were pushed off the streets when they walked to the stores to shop, they were harassed, and children were threatened and harassed as well by these prostitutes and their pimps.

I cannot believe that freedom of expression has anything to do with the right of someone to ruin my neighbourhood or your neighbourhood or that of the law-abiding people of Mount Pleasant. Mr. Justice Harry McKay, in the appeal we took, said that. In the case of McLean and the case of Tremayne he said that the fundamental freedoms in the constitution were never meant to enshrine values such as the right of someone to sell sex on a public street. Surely society has to pass rules to prevent this kind of thing.

That is not to suggest that the honorable member for Vancouver Centre is not a very kind and compassionate man who feels personally some sense of responsibility and also feels some sense of compassion and the need to help women who are on the streets. I commend him for that, because he is a very warm-hearted individual and he would feel that way about them, and I'm not denigrating that point of view. But prostitution on the city streets has got to be ended in Vancouver. We're having considerable success since that recent court decision, and we will press on. The police are doing an admirable job and so are the member's constituents from Mount Pleasant who are coming forward to cooperate, testify and provide evidence for bail hearings. We have to use the law to clean this matter up, because it is a gross interference in peoples' rights and tranquillity.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, I don't think what I have to say will take very long. The minister is well aware of one of two representations that I made on behalf of a constituent which has to do with the requirement of the land title office being unwilling to release an original document which has to do with power of attorney and the problems that policy causes. Just to refresh the minister's memory, whether or not he needs it, my constituent lives in Toronto and he has a mother who apparently is incompetent to handle her own affairs. There are many affairs that he has to handle on her

[ Page 8476 ]

behalf, some of which, notably banks, mortgage companies and the like, require original powers of attorney.

The land title office maintains a proprietary interest in the original power of attorney, and copies of that will not do for their purposes; neither will other copies do for other purposes and institutions. So the man's caught in a catch-22. When I raised it with the minister earlier, I got, with apologies before I say this, a rather bureaucratic response. The minister responded, not for the minister directly, I assume.... But when the minister responded orally, he said he had had a chance to think about it and that it would require some sort of legislative measure, or at least a regulatory measure, or an order-in-council, to change that requirement, and that upon reflection he thought it wasn't insurmountable — although my constituent, and perhaps many others, was caught in the catch-22 of this requirement of the land title office — and that it would be altered. My question is: when?

[4:15]

HON. MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I agree with him. I think it is a lot of bureaucratic nonsense. We're going to change the legislation. I've got it drafted now.

MR. ROSE: I'm sorry, I missed the last part.

HON. MR. SMITH: The legislative changes are drafted, and we hope to put it in in this session. I commend you. I think you and your constituent were right.

MR. ROSE: Modestly, as I cough into my handkerchief, I say I was under extreme pressure from my constituent.

Interjection.

MR. ROSE: No. But it might be someday.

I thank the minister. I wanted to have it in the record, because my constituent will be jubilant when he sees it in print. Hearing it from me was thrill enough, but seeing it in print will make him even more enthusiastic and enchanted.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The hon. member will appreciate that legislation is not a subject matter....

MR. ROSE: Well, I'm not commenting on it. I'm merely recognizing its existence. I hope the Chair will not remonstrate with the A-G, because he was the one who first brought the matter up.

Another question on a completely different subject. That has to do with.... I don't know whether this is the proper choice of words, but the lack of facilities for female inmates in federal institutions in the west. One of the extra punishments, and it's been long recognized, which greets someone who is incarcerated is to be deprived of that person's relatives, friends or their visits. In the case of female prisoners, or inmates convicted of federal charges.... I'm not questioning the convictions or anything flowing from those convictions — the incarceration or the like. That is not my objective today.

My objective, though, is to ask the minister to consider again the extra punishment meted to someone who is female and convicted of a federal charge, where the only federal institution is in Kingston. I know why that is. There are fewer females convicted of federal charges than there are males. So if someone is convicted and considered dangerous, the only maximum security prison setting available is in Kingston. There have been and are, though, both provincial and federal coeducational institutions, mainly at the community level. I know one particularly. I don't know about these in any great detail, but I know they do exist. I also know that sometimes "arrangements" are made between federal and provincial authorities for the transfer of female inmates to institutions, whether they be federal or provincial, closer to their original place of residence so they can have family and friends visitation.

I'd like to know, since a year has now passed since I brought this matter up previously during the estimates — at least I recall that I did — if there's been any movement in the direction to which I've addressed myself.

HON. MR. SMITH: We're having more and more transfers of that kind taking place. I think we've done about 20 of them. I'll just go back to the remarks I made a little earlier when the member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly) was speaking on the women's facility at Lakeside. It's certainly our ultimate intention to have a joint facility constructed within British Columbia for provincial female prisoners and federal female prisoners. We think that's the answer and the way to go, and we've done quite a bit of planning work on that already. I think that's a must. I don't like the fact that they're in Kingston. I think the member is correct.

MR. ROSE: Well, since the debate leader is not back here.... I don't know if someone else wants the floor right now, but I wonder if the minister could give us.... He mentioned the vague word "planning" and gave his intentions, and I'm pleased with that. Is there any further detail available at this time?

HON. MR. SMITH: At the risk of repeating what I said to the member for Burnaby North, I said that the plan is to have a 126-bed female remand and sentence facility, which would replace Lakeside and Twin Maples at Maple Ridge and, in addition, house 40 federal female inmates. That's the plan. We would have to identify location and the sharing of the cost, and that would be something that would go forward as a capital proposal. The exploratory discussion and planning with federal officials has already taken place.

MR. ROSE: I take it then that what you're planning is a kind of merger. I know that that's likely to spark a keen interest in the future of Maples as a rural facility of that kind. Even though the contemplated changes will be welcome, I hope there will be some real interest in preserving Maples as a kind of rural facility rather than a sort of urban Heartbreak Hotel.

HON. MR. SMITH: Well, we most probably would have it in a single facility and not keep the Twin Maples facility separate. I can't say that that's crystallized in stone, but that's certainly the present thinking, which would be to move to a single facility which would be jointly provincial and federal.

MRS. DAILLY: I want to briefly ask the Attorney-General a couple of questions on the matter of guns and licensing and so on. I want to preamble my questions by saying that I was really shocked listening to a CBC broadcast the other day in which they talked about one of the biggest problems they face today in schools in the state of Texas, where more and

[ Page 8477 ]

more young people are turning up in the classrooms carrying guns. One young boy found that he was being bullied by another boy who kept stealing his lunch, and he said: "I've put up with enough of this." So he went and got a gun out of a pawnshop, walked into the classroom and shot this boy three times in the stomach. He got off. It was considered that he had a right to do this. I'm sure the Attorney-General would also be shocked at this thing. However, I'm bringing up what happened because of the looseness of being able.... In my opinion, the way you can procure guns in the United States is absolutely shocking. I'm just glad that we live in this country and have the gun controls that we do have.

Another interesting thing in the United States is that the country which has the most accessibility to guns also has the most murders, and yet they have, of course, recently created almost a bloodbath with the number of executions that have taken place. I think I've heard the Attorney-General state that he is in favour of capital punishment for certain crimes. I know this is going to be done in the federal House, and this is not the floor for that debate, but I just want to go on record as saying that I completely disagree with capital punishment for any crime. But it's interesting to note that a country like the United States, which allows and has such lax gun control also, I want to repeat, has the most crime per capita and certainly the most murders. That leads me to the specific things in British Columbia to do with gun-licensing. What I'm concerned about is how a society can be formed to have not just rifle practice but the actual gun practice. I understand that there are some shops, not in B.C. but in other provinces, where guns are sold and at the same time an almost, I think, shooting-gallery can be located close to that shop or right beside it.

I wanted to ask the Attorney-General if such a thing exists in British Columbia, where a person who has a retail shop selling guns also is allowed to have a shooting-gallery with a society formed so that people can be members of that society and go there and practise using these guns. I'm bringing it up with the Attorney-General because I feel if we follow what's happened in some other provinces we are perhaps going to find ourselves creating more access to guns by people who should never have them in their control. I wonder what the status is in this matter in British Columbia.

HON. MR. SMITH: Presently those are not permitted. Commercial shooting-galleries or ranges operated in conjunction with firearm retail businesses are not permitted in this province. There certainly are organizations and people in Canada who wish to see them happen, but it is not permitted here.

I don't think I'll join in the capital punishment debate today, but I appreciated your point of view.

MR. COCKE: I would ask the Attorney-General what is happening to the Counterattack program. My understanding is that it's been either suspended or certainly rolled back to a large extent. I would think that right now is not a good time, particularly with B.C. celebrating the way they are, for us to be moving back on that program. B.C. has led Canada, to some extent, in the attack against drunken driving. I think we should continue in that stance. Now what's the Attorney-General saying vis-à-vis the Counterattack program?

HON. MR. SMITH: I certainly agree with the member. The Counterattack program has been an enormous success. It has brought awareness publicly and produced a number of very safe young drivers who have been introduced to safe driving through the Counterattack program in the schools. There is absolutely no move to lessen or diminish the Counterattack program so far as my ministry is concerned. There was some reorganization at ICBC, which I'm not responsible for, but I can assure you, hon. member, that what I have said to them is that I don't want any reduction of initiative in this field. Indeed, I think that Counterattack is absolutely necessary, and I'm a strong supporter of it. I would be very distressed if there was a slackening at all in those initiatives. It is true that in the last little while, with Expo and so on, maybe Counterattack and its thrust have been a little blurred by other advertising. But I can assure you that there is no intention of cutting back on it.

[4:30]

MR. COCKE: I'd like the minister to comment on a article that appeared recently: "Expo Forces Police to Drop May Blitz on Drunk Drivers." It says:

"Expo has temporarily stalled the provincial government's Counterattack program, but police say they are still keeping a sharp lookout for drivers under the influence of alcohol. S. Sgt. Grant Tyndall of Vancouver RCMP says that while traditionally a Counterattack program has been held throughout the province each year at this time, a decision was made to omit it this year because of the unknown demands Expo would place on the force. 'Rather than plan a big campaign and then have to cancel at the last moment, we decided not to hold it this May."'

It seems that that is somewhat contrary to what the Attorney-General just said: that he would be very distressed if the program was cut back. The fact is, the program was cut back, and I would like the minister to stand up and express his distress in a far more eloquent way than he just did.

HON. MR. SMITH: Of course, the individual forces, and particularly the municipal forces which have their own boards, have a considerable amount of autonomy in how they deploy their men and their priorities within their own region. You have the Vancouver force very heavily committed with Expo security. I think that's all you can read into that. It's not a policy directive or authorization by me at all.

If I can just say a tiny bit more about Counterattack to show the importance that I place in Counterattack, the percentage of traffic accidents that caused injury or death where alcohol was a significant contributing factor dropped from 20 percent in 1982 to 12 percent in 1985 — just in that short period. This year Counterattack will continue to serve on traffic safety committees, to assist the police in their drinking-driving road checks, to produce and distribute public education materials and mass media messages and to research and evaluate traffic safety issues.

There will also be new initiatives, including the production and introduction of comprehensive 700-square-foot drinking-driving displays for use at Expo and in shopping centres across the province, and six portable display units for community and police use. There will be new public education materials, including brochures and posters which identify specific issues. There will be field testing of the new approved screening devices, and three RCMP subdivisions have been selected for introduction of those. Introduction of

[ Page 8478 ]

three Counterattack station wagons to replace retired BATmobiles; eight regional student leader conferences will be held; production of an expanded database to allow the analysis of traffic accident reports, records and so on.

So the provincial thrust in Counterattack has continued and is even being extended. I think the explanation of the Vancouver situation is really temporary deployment elsewhere; they're getting no message to do anything like lessen up on Counterattack. They're not to do that.

MR. LAUK: Apropos a statement this afternoon by Ms. Messier, the coroner investigating the death of young Karen Ford at the revolving theatre at Expo, I want to draw to the Attorney-General's attention the fact that on February 12, 1985, at page 4927 of Hansard, I drew to the Attorney General's attention that safety sections of several statutes were being eliminated with respect to the construction of theatre sites on the Expo site. I quote what I said to the Attorney-General:

...I caution the Legislature to look at other legislation dealing with the Expo site. What kinds of theatres are they building on that site that they have to eliminate these safety features? What kinds of dangers are being posed to the people who are attending Expo, with respect to theatres, as a result of the legislation being introduced by this government?

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

The Attorney-General will recall that this was a debate under the Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 1985, dealing with construction and safety of theatres as well as other matters. It was treated, it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, not with a great deal of seriousness. In light of the ongoing inquest, has the government decided to impose building code amendments and other inspection criteria for all of the sites at Expo? I don't want to raise this issue in an inflammatory way, but just to point out that these things escape our attention. Even though they're brought to our attention, we don't think they are serious until a fatal accident does happen.

What bothers me is, could the death of this child have been prevented by stringent requirements? Mr. Pattison of Expo says that Canada Harbour Place is a federal government project and out of his jurisdiction. John Powles, deputy commissioner-general of the Canadian pavilion, said that he thought the city had inspected the turntable and that an occupancy permit was issued. Mr. Roger Hebert, the city's director of permits and licensing, said that those things are not covered in the code. There are several other relevant questions that must be answered.

You remember that you were eliminating provisions of the Fire Services Act, and the projectionists' union was exercised about that. Under that act.... Your argument was that this will all come under the building codes. But it seems that it has fallen between the stools you were mentioning before. Nobody did an inspection on these sites from the construction point of view.

HON. MR. SMITH: You certainly made those caveats in that different context, when we were talking about whether one needed to have a projectionist who had a certain ticket when the type of job he now performs is so different from what he did ten or twenty years ago. But I fail to see that that qualifies you as an oracle in this unhappy set of events. Here you had a round revolving theatre platform which was not covered, as I understand, by any code, and wouldn't have been covered by a code prior to those amendments either.

Interjection.

HON. MR. SMITH: I don't think so; I'm informed otherwise.

But the Vancouver city building inspection office approved this revolving stage. They did the inspecting. The inspecting wasn't done by the planning and advisory committee of Expo, and that's because it was off-site — it was at the Canadian pavilion. So the inspection was a Vancouver city inspection, and they approved it. I haven't yet seen the coroner's findings, but we will certainly study them. I do not believe, hon. member, that the change in those fire regulations would have made any difference to this event.

MR. LAUK: I just want to point out — and I don't want to belabour it, and I'm not placing the responsibility on the Attorney-General's shoulders — that it was a thing that escaped all of us to the extent that the city says it was not covered by the code. I mentioned in Hansard that the Expo site theatres were falling into a no-man's-land and that these problems could arise.

Interjection.

MR. LAUK: I have every right to defend my well-known capacity as an oracle.

I am somewhat surprised that Mr. Hebert, the city's director of permits and licensing, said that those things — the theatre's rotating stand — were not covered in their code. I take it from that that they didn't inspect it for safety. So there we have it. It would be appropriate, I would suggest, for the province and the city to get together to ensure that inspections are now being undertaken.

MR. NICOLSON: I'd just like to bring to the minister's attention remarks made by Chief Justice Brian Dickson of the Supreme Court of Canada when he was being offered an honorary degree at the University of British Columbia. He implored governments not to continue the trend of turning our educational system into a second-class system and eventually turning us into a second-class nation. Mr. Chairman, I would certainly concur with the thoughts of the chief justice in this instance. It certainly is a contrast with his predecessor. It certainly stands in contrast, I suppose, to reaction in the case of former justice Thomas Berger. It seems to be becoming the trend, and I would ask the Attorney-General if he agrees with this trend — that members of the bench, particularly the supreme court, should be speaking out on general interests of public concern.

MR. CHAIRMAN: There's also a question as to whether or not in Committee of Supply for the estimates of the Attorney-General we can discuss what would appear to be irrelevant items. But the Attorney can reply.

HON. MR. SMITH: I would think that by no stretch of the rules would this fall under my estimates, but it would be appropriate to raise with the Minister of Education or in his estimates. Tempted as I might be to leap onto this ground, I think I'll resist the temptation in this forum.

[ Page 8479 ]

MR. NICOLSON: I don't want to prolong these estimates, Mr. Chairman, but the Attorney-General has entirely missed the point. It wouldn't matter whether the Chief Justice had spoken out about education or, as in the case of Thomas Berger, matters dealing with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a departure from the predecessor of the Chief Justice, namely Bora Laskin. I would like to know in what direction the Attorney- General feels we should be....

MR. LAUK: Do you think judges should speak out on political matters?

MR. NICOLSON: That's right.

HON. MR. SMITH: I haven't seen his remarks, except a very brief account of them in the Saturday evening paper. I would want to see those remarks. I too attended convocation that same day at the University of Victoria and addressed the student body, and I may have strayed into the field of politics as well. When a Chief Justice is receiving an honorary degree at one of the great universities in this country, maybe he will stray into the realm of social policy, and I wouldn't think that it was the end of the world if he did.

MR. NICOLSON: Let the record show that the Attorney-General said that the Chief Justice had gone astray.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall vote 10 pass?

MR. LAUK: May I point out to the Chairman that vote 10 is an amount for economic renewal of the agricultural market and food industry development. I believe we're on vote 11. I wouldn't want to vote on vote 10, having discussed the ministry's....

[4:45]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member might have the estimates book from the past year.

MR. LAUK: No. Oh, dear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it 1986-87, hon. member, or '85-86?

MR. LAUK: What year is this again? I demand to know.

I was just pointing out that you people switch numbers on us every year. [Laughter.] Now let's get on with vote 11.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It does happen annually, yes. Shall vote 10 pass?

Vote 10 approved.

On vote 11: ministry operations, $253,095,928.

MR. LAUK: I wanted to speak briefly on police services.

Mr. Chairman, year after year the city of Vancouver has pleaded with the provincial government to meet its fair share of cost for the police services in this city. It's clear that the provincial government has been riding on the backs of the homeowner and the city taxpayer with respect to the provision of police services in the city.

The city of Vancouver, apart from its uniqueness.... It's downtown British Columbia. Citizens from all over the province, and all over the world now, require the police force of the city of Vancouver to service their needs, at tremendous cost. This is the most appropriate year for the Attorney-General to stand in his place and advise that a new agreement with respect to the provision of those costs has been entered into, and the province is now more willing to accept a greater share of those costs. That is the only fair way to approach the city's unique position as the downtown area servicing the province and the lower mainland, in addition the fact that it's a municipal force funded almost entirely by municipal taxation.

I ask the Attorney-General to indicate if the policy is either regrettably the same as it has always been, or if he is making a stab for ever more popularity within the city by announcing a new policy that will increase the contribution of the provincial government.

HON. MR. SMITH: I think that the unfair burdens of police costs from community to community are long known and well documented, because you've got some communities with a small population who do not contribute to their policing costs directly except in their general levy in the unorganized area. Some other communities pay 64 percent, some pay 86 percent, and others, like the municipally policed areas such as my area and the hon. member's area, are paying 100 percent of costs. So that situation has been one that has long been in need of being addressed.

Underway at present is a joint committee of the provincial government and the Union of B.C. Municipalities who are studying police costs. That is composed of a number of the municipal representatives: the mayor of Richmond, the mayor of Saanich, the mayor of Lillooet are on it, as are representatives of both Municipal Affairs and my ministry.

We have had for quite some time a great disparity of view in the UBCM as to how to handle this, because they had representatives from both situations, zero percent and 100 percent. But they seem to have a pretty good resolve now that they want to be part of the solution. So I am very hopeful that this study will produce a recommended formula so we can move to much greater equity than we have now.

MR. LAUK: With respect to this section on statutory services boards and commissions, the Criminal Injury Compensation Board is now achieving a notorious reputation with respect to the quantum of awards. They are statutorily limited. The awards are rather small. They have been from the beginning. Is it now not appropriate for the province to move in a direction of a more substantial award for serious injuries?

I interviewed a young chap three or four months ago, and I remember his case coming up in the newspapers. He was standing at a bus stop and somebody who he still doesn't know to this day came up with a baseball bat and smashed his head in. They didn't think he was going to live. I don't think they ever found the kid — or the assailant. I'm not raising it as an example that I am asking the Attorney-General to respond to, but a young man who was employed, rising in his company, is now on welfare. Criminal Injury Compensation has awarded, I think, $20,000 to $25,000, and there may have been what I would call a nominal pension attached.

But the $25,000 award for a permanent, total, lifetime disability is minuscule in today's terms, and I am wondering whether there is a token operation going on here. Is the

[ Page 8480 ]

government considering expanding criminal injury compensation to be more substantive and meaningful to those seeking compensation?

HON. MR. SMITH: There is a review generally on victim services underway. While the criminal injury compensation fund has never been viewed as really providing anything that remotely would approach general damages as he knows them, Mr. Chairman, or as I know them, it is supposed to be a bridging payment during the period of rehabilitation or to take care of some of the medical needs and the obvious out-of-pocket expenses. It does not even begin to address general damage compensation.

I daresay that it could be improved and strengthened. I think all of our victim services are under review, so I will take his comments seriously. I have some sympathy with him.

Vote 11 approved.

On Vote 12: judiciary, $15,430,735.

MR. LAUK: I am sure the Attorney-General would agree that this sum should be doubled.

Vote 12 approved.

Vote 13: corrections, $118,251,524 — approved.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF PROVINCIAL
SECRETARY AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES

On vote 65: minister's office, $194,140.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The chair will recognize the second member for Vancouver Centre. Is this a point of order?

MR. LAUK: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Vote 13 was passed, but the committee must also deal with special account, land titles survey, under the Attorney-General, and I wanted to speak on that point briefly. It's being listed as written out of estimates. It's not a vote. You mean I can't debate that?

Interjection.

MR. LAUK: I'll just issue a press release and the Sapperton Review will cover it on page 13.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, it's a general policy of the Committee of Supply that, really, anything under the minister's purview, or as it indicates in the book that the amount is now nil, could have been discussed under the minister's salary vote. I am sure all members of the committee are aware of that. The Committee of Supply has been given vote 65, the Ministry of Provincial Secretary and Government Services, and with that said the Chair recognizes the minister.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: First of all, let me say I'm very pleased to be representing the Ministry of the Provincial Secretary and Government Services. May I, in standing for the first time in these estimates in this House, remind the House that I did have this portfolio once before. I want to say that I am pleased to be back in it again. I would like to pay tribute to my colleague, the member for Columbia River (Mr. Chabot), who carried this portfolio or this ministry until about six or seven weeks ago.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

I know that all members of this House have had a lot to do with that member, as he is one of the oldest members in this House, and we all have appreciated the service that he has given. I know that he has announced his retirement from politics after the next election, so I would like to add my congratulations to those of all members on both sides of the House who have appreciated his service.

I want to tell you that this ministry handles a wide range of subjects, and I am going to, if I may in some opening remarks, just address them in the various areas in which we serve — the arts and culture and sports and the various other services that we have in government. The diverse and broad range of programs to the general public and to the government itself is very great indeed. In administering the programs and services, we have achieved a greater efficiency and have been able to redirect those funds into public programs. If I may just say it again, I give credit to my predecessor for having accomplished that, as I've been in this portfolio for such a short time.

The cultural services are a matter of great concern to all in British Columbia, and it is a matter of considerable satisfaction to me that the arts have been very well assisted. The cultural communities of our province have been very well assisted, and unquestionably the social and economic trends point to growing demand for cultural services.

This has certainly happened in the very past years because there has been a recognition that, in partnership with arts organizations and the municipal government, we have been able to increase our assistance to the cultural community significantly. We do this through the use of lottery funds in the province. That money flowing to the arts community by way of grants administered has seen an increase over last year of $7.5 million, so the arts and cultural services are richer by $7.5 million over the year before.

We all know that in order for the arts to survive, they must receive adequate support. We must recognize that these cultural events become an important part of the provincial economy and are significant factors in the tourism industry. It's clearly time for communities throughout the province to enter into partnerships and increase funding levels to reflect the importance of the arts in British Columbia. Cultural industries form one of our largest business sectors. They are the country's fourth largest employer.

[5:00]

One-third of all tourists who visit Canada come here for cultural activity, and for every dollar earned by a Canadian cultural institution another dollar is earned by the community surrounding it, the restaurants in those communities, the hotels, the manufacturers and other industries. Directly and indirectly, Canadian cultural activities contribute approximately $16 billion to the economy each and every year. The most recent census in British Columbia indicated that there are 28,000 people directly employed in arts-related activities. This is an increase since 1971 by a dramatic 88 percent.

Our arts challenge fund assisted major arts organizations to overcome current financial difficulties. Grants will be on the basis of $2 from this fund for every $1 provided by local or regional governments. The idea behind the arts challenge

[ Page 8481 ]

fund was that we would be able to assist those organizations that had fallen on hard times to, along with their municipal government, get to a level where they could have their organization in the black and then continue from then on to build for the future. Assistance of over a quarter of a million dollars has been provided to the Vancouver symphony, which matched a grant of $125,000 which was forthcoming from the city of Vancouver. The Courtenay youth music company received $15,000, which was matched by the Courtenay Comox and Cumberland councils. The Bastion Theatre of Victoria received $50,000, matched by the capital city municipality,

Staff are presently developing Partners in the Arts programs, the primary thrust being to assist arts organizations to manage their own resources, develop new marketing plans and plan their financial futures using this partnership and having, hopefully, more stability than they've had ever before. This will benefit all British Columbians and their visitors in coming years.

While we're on the cultural part, I would like to address the B.C. Festival of the Arts, and in that vein, I would like to pay tribute to the Prince George festival that was held between May 4 and 8. It was a unique opportunity for artists to learn together through competition, instruction and exposure to other experts. Our two members for Prince George (Hon. Mr. Heinrich and Mr. Strachan) were both active in the Festival of the Arts and tell me that their feeling about the Festival of the Arts is extremely positive. This time we had the presence of their Royal Highnesses, the Prince and Princess of Wales, to officially open the festival, and it was a splendid opportunity for the showcase of the arts. The festival serves to increase public awareness of the role and the value of the arts in our society. We feel that the positive impact of having over 2,500 visitors in Prince George early in the tourist season, May 4, was, in itself, an impetus which Prince George would not have had without the arts festival. It will have a lasting economic impact on the community. The five provincial amateur arts organizations by working together bring the best of British Columbia amateur artists to the B.C. Festival of the Arts. The festival is the climax of year-long development, programs and competitions showcasing the very best of theatre, the dance, music, speech, arts, film and video.

This year the B.C. Provincial Museum, one of the finest museums in the world, and recognized as such by other museums and communities throughout North America and the world, celebrates its 100th anniversary in our city of Victoria. Because of the celebration, it will provide the travelling public with a myriad of activities, the highlight being the opening of a dramatic new exhibit called "Open Oceans," the first of three revolutionary new marine exhibits. The museum will be 100 years old on October 25, 1986. Celebrations will commence from that date to October 25, 1987, and this allows our celebrations for the museum to follow Expo 86 and assist in the tourism promotion of 1987. A new exhibit entitled "May It Please Your Honour" is a recreation of the first curator's room in the provincial museum 100 years ago. "Open Oceans" is the first of the museum's water exhibits, and the techniques used in this particular exhibit break new ground in museum exhibitry. The visitor to the museum will be treated with a view of the open ocean and the floor of the ocean and feel as if they are really in the ocean and walking on the floor of the ocean.

It's interesting to know that of the 1.2 million visitors which the museum receives every year, during our summer months more than 65 percent are from outside British Columbia. In the summer of Expo we expect to receive one million visitors within the months of June, July and August alone. If the percentages of previous years are any reflection, we can expect 650,000 people from outside British Columbia to enter the Provincial Museum's doors to find out more about our province. We must not underestimate the value of this. It is a provincial asset, and a remarkable asset to the provincial economy. The Provincial Museum has been assisting the provincial economy by hosting major national and international conferences, and this year the three major conferences will be drawing 3,000 people to the city of Victoria.

Now let me address library services in the province. British Columbia has an excellent public library system. Our partnership with library boards and local communities is working very successfully. There are over 280 communities reaching 96 percent of our population. In British Columbia, 50,000 people visit their local library each day; that's over 17 million a year. The circulation rate of library material in this province is the highest in Canada. The production of audio cassettes brings the library to the print handicapped. We have managed this year to increase the grant support to libraries, and I am very pleased about that. That's a clear reflection of the fact that government is committed to maintaining the high quality of library service British Columbians deserve.

The Pacific Northwest Library Association will hold its annual meeting in Vancouver August 13-15, bringing together representatives of the library community from Alaska, Alberta, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana to meet with their British Columbia counterparts. Another highlight of this year will be B.C. Libraries Week, taking place November 2-8, which will give communities provincewide an opportunity to rediscover and celebrate their libraries.

Now I would like to tell you about the government's initiatives for recreation and sport. In amateur sport, the ministry continues to build on the success of its development program. Our cooperation with Sport B.C. assists over 90 provincial sports organizations reaching over 625,000 registered members. Our accomplishments are a result of sports organizations, local volunteers, corporate sponsors and our government working together. This year my ministry will make available additional funds to provide training and coaching and will increase the number of British Columbia athletes on the winter Olympic team for the 1988 Olympics in Calgary.

The Canada Games. The quality of British Columbia's fine young athletes was obvious this year in New Brunswick. We came in second to Ontario, ahead of Quebec. We missed by 1.5 points out of over 200. But there's always the next time, and we are training now for the next time. This fine performance was only possible through the contribution of thousands of dedicated volunteers. Significantly, our region of the Canada Games team was more representative of the province than ever before, thanks, we believe, to the quality of our provincewide sport development program.

We are pleased to have seen the successful completion of the Winter Games in Terrace, B.C. Over 268,000 athletes compete in the playdowns for the games, drawing a tremendous citizens support for the B.C. games. We look forward to the Summer Games in Cranbrook and the 1987 Winter Games which will take place in Fernie. Our cooperation with Sport B.C. assists over 90 provincial sports organizations,

[ Page 8482 ]

and the enthusiasm of reaching out to over 625,000 registered members is prompting recreation and sports activities, encouragement of participation and athletic excellence, and it is all to be commended.

The Premier's sports awards program is yet another program in which we are very pleased to report that more than 80,000 young children participated. I strongly believe that the development of sports skills at a young age significantly increases the adoption of lifetime involvement in physical activity, and we are delighted that the Premier's sports awards program has been so well taken up.

The National Coaching Institute. Once again British Columbia has taken the lead in the area of coaching. The financial assistance of our ministry enabled British Columbia to attract the first national coaching institute in Canada to the University of Victoria. As a result, many future Canadian coaches will receive their basic training in this province, and our athletes will be able to benefit from their skills and talents.

I am pleased too that the disabled are very much involved in our recreational programs. In British Columbia we have the highest proportion of disabled individuals who are involved in physical activity; that's not surprising, given the models we have had in the past in Terry Fox, Steve Fonyo and of course Rick Hansen. However, I would like to recognize all those individual sports and recreation volunteers who give very much of their time to assist the disabled, because without their help it couldn't have been done — to make recreation and sport a daily part of the lifestyles of the handicapped.

Sport is a very important component of our economic activity. Major international events bring millions of dollars to British Columbia. This year we attracted over ten world-class events. It is our aim to attract more in the post-Expo era. We will be working hard, in collaboration with other ministries, to maintain the attractiveness of British Columbia to the international sport community.

The volunteer skills program. I am pleased to tell you that British Columbia is ahead of all other provinces in its introduction of a comprehensive program to train sport and recreational volunteers. In British Columbia we have more than 50,000 working to help develop others, and this program provides high-quality training at a very low cost. It is significant that this program, although it is managed through my recreation and sport branch, is promoted widely in the arts community and is attracting considerable involvement from the social service volunteer field.

The support of volunteers adds a new dimension to the program of our ministry. Whether we are talking of recreation, culture, libraries, heritage or the museum, volunteers are involved. To all of these people we say a sincere thank you. During Volunteer Recognition Week the B.C. Provincial Museum provided boutonnieres and corsages, and recognized five- and ten-year service with special commemorative pins to the many volunteers in the area.

The goal of British Columbia's cultural heritage adviser is to facilitate communications between our ethnocultural communities and all levels of the provincial government. For the past five years the cultural heritage program has been successful in maintaining this valuable dialogue. The principal role of the cultural heritage adviser is to act as a coordinator and liaison between the government and the community and as an animator for intercultural exchange. Twenty-two percent of British Columbians have a mother tongue other than English, and 50 percent of British Columbians have non-English ethnic backgrounds. Forty-five percent of the elementary school population and 33 percent of the secondary school population have English as their second language in the city of Vancouver, the largest city in our province. Statistics Canada indicates a continuous flow into Canada of immigrants from non-English-speaking countries, which will influence the future make-up of our communities.

[5:15]

Racial tensions in British Columbia have grown as the visible minority population increases. Positive provincial government action is needed to show ethnocultural communities that provincial services are available to them. Government-community interaction is essential for planning social services directed to ethnocultural communities. The cultural heritage program established an ongoing dialogue with these groups. Through recommendations and input from the community, the program brings the social, educational and health needs of these communities to the government's attention. The cultural heritage adviser can assist in the coordination of services, and does.

An important part of the mandate of this ministry is the provision of support services to the government. Our postal, personnel, printing and information services have continued to strive to reduce the cost to government of its administrative overhead. New procedures for the management of the government vehicle fleet, astute management of mailing and postal services, new technology in printing and publishing, and an aggressive program of records management all contribute to the increased efficiency of government operations.

I appreciate that this is a very detailed report, but in a ministry like Provincial Secretary, where we cover so many facets of things which touch on the lives of British Columbians, it's really important, as we introduce these estimates, that we cover a few of them.

In postal services my ministry this year is implementing a full cost-recovery system for postal services. It's estimated that about 65 million pieces of mail will be processed by the postal services branch, of which about 45 million pieces are outgoing. In recent years postal costs of Canada Post and other mail carriers have dramatically increased. But with administrative efficiencies and technological improvements the branch saves the taxpayer over $10 million. This figure is the difference between the retail cost of mail and what the postal services branch produces in services and payments.

My ministry is responding to concerns over increasing liability insurance premiums in the public sector by establishing a comprehensive risk management and insurance program. During the next six months we will be carefully reviewing the government's insurance practices.

I would just like to touch on vehicle management. A recent report by the auditor-general concerning government passenger vehicle travel identified a number of positive things being done through our ministry. By monitoring and control of ministry fleets, establishing a vehicle advisory committee to coordinate policy development and resolve government-wide transportation issues, and negotiating a car-rental agreement for government-wide usage, my ministry will continue to work towards more efficient use of government vehicles to reduce the overall cost.

The amalgamation of central personnel agencies and the overall review of personnel policies and procedures has considerably reduced the cost of personnel support services. Increased decentralization is designed to increase efficiency

[ Page 8483 ]

in personnel administration by giving ministry managers more control over the cost of their human resource.

Negotiations are now underway with the unions and the public service — the B.C. Government Employees' Union, the Professional Employees' Association, the Queen's Printer, the ambulance workers and the nurses. This process is in the hands of my ministry's professional negotiators, and we will not jeopardize their sensitive discussions by commenting further on that.

If I may just address a few words about B.C. Transit, the 1986-87 transit program reflects a genuine desire to provide the best possible service to the travelling public in the safest and most efficient manner. The merger of B.C. Transit with the Metro Transit Operating Co. has been successfully completed, and it is expected that over the next few years efficiencies and reduction in costs will result from that amalgamation.

The unquestionable highlight of the transit program this year has been the successful development, construction and introduction of the SkyTrain in Vancouver. This project came in on time and under budget. The provincial share of costs is estimated to be about $162.1 million. The increase of $87.7 million recognizes a change in the cost-sharing formula, and includes for the very first time the cost of funding and operating the SkyTrain.

The Vancouver cost-sharing formula has been amended to recognize a new revenue target of 35 percent, which compares with the target of 45.6 percent in the previous year. The effect of this formula change is to reduce the share of costs recoverable through the fare box and apportion these additional costs between the province and the local commissions. The provincial share of this is $6.9 million.

SkyTrain operations are estimated to cost $27.2 million for a full year. To this must be added lease fees of $74.6 million and the cost of funding the provincial share of the guideway of $41.1 million, giving a total cost of $142.9 million. The provincial share of these costs is $80.8 million, which includes $39.7 million in operations and lease fee costs and the $41.1 million of provincial funding of the guideway. The integration of the Vancouver bus and SkyTrain services will result in a reduction of costs, the provincial share of which is estimated to be about $1.36 million. Wage increases, lease fees and other programs will result in a provincial share increase of $2.45 million.

Included in this year's operation budget is the cost of providing additional bus service for Expo visitors. This cost is estimated to be $5.1 million, of which the provincial share is approximately $2 million. This budget includes provision for some 56 conventional bus, custom and paratransit services which are expected to provide 126 million annual riders in 1986-87. This includes the recently announced Abbotsford-Matsqui service.

The B.C. Transit operating grant of $118,745,000 shows an increase of $46,679,000 over the previous year. This increase includes an increase in small community services of $244,000 and a small decrease in the Victoria cost of service of $31,000. The balance of $46,466,000 relates largely to the introduction of SkyTrain and a change in the cost-sharing formula for Vancouver. The grant of $2.3 million relates to the custom paratransit services in the province. The grant is increased by $62,000 over the previous year. The final grant of $41.1 million relates to the costs of financing the provincial contribution to the cost of the SkyTrain guideway.

In summary, I am very proud of the way the Ministry of Provincial Secretary and Government Services has streamlined its operation and improved productivity. We look forward to a vibrant and exciting year — along with all British Columbians in hosting the world for Expo 86 and in the months to follow 1986, a very exciting year indeed.

MR. HANSON: Mr. Chairman, we've been served up a healthy serving of puff-pastry codswallop like we haven't heard in this chamber for an awfully long time.

There were some glaring omissions in the minister's remarks. She didn't mention the lotteries: that pork-barrel of the lotteries operation. She didn't mention the fact that there hasn't been a lotteries disclosure report in over a year. She hasn't told us about the election situation in this province, which is a national disgrace. She hasn't told us about the extensive travel and abuse of travel arrangements in terms of cabinet and ministerial travel in this province, which all comes under her jurisdiction — it's called protocol vote. The political abuse around the advertising and political propaganda in this province again is an absolute travesty.

You know, there are more fluffers and puffers and doughnut-hole-punchers on contract with this minister than the public would tolerate if they had access to look at the vouchers. As a member of Public Accounts, I have gone and I have looked at the vouchers that come under that portfolio, and it's an unbelievable river of...

AN HON. MEMBER: Woe.

MR. HANSON: ...of woe. People are really hurt in this province. The food lineups are long, the housing situation is difficult, people can't find employment, and when you find former aides to the Premier getting $1.2 million of grease every year, it is really something else. We'll be going through these items in detail, but not once was it mentioned about the extensive filming and the other kinds of production that go on around the cabinet: filming them meeting people, filming them opening roads and highways. For example, Jem Productions. That minister knows who Jem Productions is. That person, who is under contract with the provincial government, in '84-85 got $1.2 million of taxpayers' money to make home movies of the Premier and the cabinet on issues they don't even want to mention today.

Today that Provincial Secretary talked about cultural activities, sports activities, recreational activities; all well and good, but underfunded by this government, because the money that goes into political propaganda and advertising.... The taxpayers of British Columbia are now subsidizing the Social Credit Party in British Columbia. No doubt about it. Every night when you turn on your television you're going to see one of these smiling 20, Dave Brown or some other fluffer, puffer and doughnut-hole puncher who has collected massive contracts — $71,000 just to film the Premier up at northeast coal; $71,000 for a ten-minute film they'd be ashamed to show on television now, because they were digging in the wrong hole.

HON. MR. HEWITT: There are 3,000 people out there working.

AN HON. MEMBER: Pork-barrelling.

[ Page 8484 ]

MR. HANSON: There's another side to the remarks of the minister, and that's the kind of story we have to communicate to the public; the expenditures, for example, of these fluffers and puffers and doughnut-hole punchers that the taxpayer is subsidizing all over the province. Here's one here: Hayhurst Communications, another contract advertising company. They operate out of Burrard Street in Vancouver. What are they supposed to do? Provide evaluation and analysis of issues in support of the provincial business development program; develop communications strategies and creative plans; prepare advertising to meet specific mandates of the government in support of the province's business development program — in other words, advertise the failed economic plan of the provincial government; produce materials required to implement advertising plans, including subcontracting and all manner of things.

What do they get for hanging around and doing this little fluffing and puffing and doughnut-hole punching? They get $277,000, $72,000 in fees. They just pick up $12,000 a month; up to $150,000 in net costs for subcontracting of such production services as are required to complete the work; up to $5,000 for copying, mailing, courier and telephone tolls; and up to $50,000 for purchase of media time and space not covered under the agreement with the province's agency of record. This is outside of McKim Advertising, Mr. Chairman. This has nothing to do with the regular advertising program of the government. This is the huffing and puffing and doughnut-hole punching that the taxpayers are paying for every day of their waking and sleeping lives.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. member. Possibly some of this is more relevant to Public Accounts than to the current estimates...

MR. HANSON: Not at all.

MR. CHAIRMAN: ...of 1986-87 of the minister.

MR. HANSON: Mr. Chairman, that is not so. These are contracts entered into by the Provincial Secretary's ministry through the communications counsel of her ministry with contractors. These are the only documents that we have access to because of that fiscal year, but those individuals are still under contract. This information is as current today as it would be when it was under the year of the expenditure of the voucher. I think it's important, because this ministry is more than sports events, summer games and new exhibits at the Provincial Museum. If the Provincial Museum of Victoria was given the money that you gave Dave Brown to do home movies of the Premier of this province, they'd have their budget increased by 25 percent.

[5:30]

[Mr Strachan in the chair.]

As the minister pointed out, the people of this province get very, very good value for that Provincial Museum: 1.2 million people visit that museum. It has a budget of $9 million, and they give $1.2 million to a former aide of the Premier to make home movies of him and follow him around the Coquihalla and northeast coal and everywhere else in this province. It's ridiculous. And you look at the vouchers.... Let me just tell you, you know: sometimes it's not the big contracts that catch....

Interjections.

HON. MR. HEWITT: Why do you get so worked up about all this?

MR. HANSON: Because it's the taxpayers' money, that's why.

You know, this cabinet, after spending all of those millions of dollars of taxpayers' money....

Interjection.

MR. HANSON: Mr. Chairman, would you bring that minister to order?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order! Okay, let's cool it, dear friends. That applies to all sides of the House. There have been a lot of unparliamentary expressions used, and I think we can carry on debate in a parliamentary manner. I'm sure the committee is quite prepared to do that. The Chair recognizes the first member for Victoria.

MR. HANSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know I get a bit exercised over this, but you know, it would jar your mother's preserves to see the way these people spend the taxpayer's money in this province. For example, they went up to northeast coal to have the big opening — you know, the big nosh-up that they had up there. They took their guests up and went up in helicopters and so on. Hayhurst Communications printed up a little menu for them. Guess how much it cost to print the menu alone? It cost $5,500 to print the menu. My God, Mr. Chairman, that averaged $4 per person just for the cost of the menu. There are a lot of people who could have that $4 to eat in this province, to have lunch or breakfast or something else. I think it's grotesque. I think the things that were omitted in the minister's remarks are grotesque.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I think you're obscene.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order! Now we'll have to have that withdrawn. The Minister of Education will withdraw the personal reference to another member.

MR. LAUK: Why don't you just go....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

HON. MR. HEWITT: I withdraw, except the member is out of order all the time.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order! The Chair will maintain order.

MR. HANSON: What happens is that this ministry has a communications counsel. There's a signing authority for that. I believe the person now is Mr. Laundy; his predecessor was Mr. Heal. This ministry enters into contracts with advertisers, with polling firms, and work is carried out for the provincial government. This is the propaganda and advertising arm, and that is why my remarks are in order, because the communications counsel is the one who coordinates the research under this ministry. For example, Gallup poll. They conducted a survey through the government on education. At three different times — December 1984, January 1985 and

[ Page 8485 ]

February 1985 — a total of $65,000 to survey the attitudes around education and education professionals and the general public about their views on education, on teachers and so on.

That minister said: "My ministry is complex because it has libraries, it has all these different facets to it." You're dam right, Mr. Chairman, it has a lot of facets to it. It has facets where the Social Credit Party, elected to power in this province, is reaching into the government service and using taxpayers' money to advertise, to poll, to do focus groups, to do media campaigns, to try to ingratiate themselves with the public of this province. It goes far beyond any tolerable limit. It would not be tolerated in any province of Canada.

Let me just tell you about another little Goldfarb study. Some $6,000 of the taxpayers' money went for this little item. That wasn't the production cost of the ads, it wasn't the time booked on a television station, but $6,000 for three focus groups. The contractor, which is Goldfarb, will conduct three qualitative research sessions with men, women and young people in Vancouver to reassess the attitudinal environment and to use the findings as a check against which to review and, if necessary, modify and update the questionnaire designed to conduct a random telephone interview with basically the same sample and questionnaire as a 1979 study and so on.

So we've got polling, we've got focus groups, we've got ad campaigns, and the taxpayers that are paying the bill have never had a proper reckoning of all this money — $20 million a year in average of advertising this year. The total is something like $21 million. Five and a half million has been moved over to tourism advertising. Some of it is statutory advertising, but Government Services advertising and publications is $12,436,000. The total is $21,670,000 of taxpayers' money used to try to ingratiate themselves with the taxpayers after failing them in education and failing them in the job creation projects they've undertaken.

Let's take a look at some other ones — $15,500 a year of taxpayers' money paid to Goldfarb to get their annual trend-data service of sociopolitical and economic material. That's just a standard, comes like clockwork — pay it out of operating expenses.

Here's a focus-group one. This is Provincial Secretary — Goldfarb commercial pretest; two focus groups; initial payment, project No. 847084, $15,000 contract: "The contract will perform, on authorization of the communications counsel of Provincial Secretary and Government Services, to provide market pretesting and post-testing of three two-minute commercial messages in connection with British Columbia's industrial development program." That's northeast coal in the wrong hole, and on and on it goes. "On prior authorization of the communications counsel, hereinafter called 'the work'...." That's $15,000 of taxpayers' money. For somebody who would like a summer job, a student loan program, a bursary or funding of a child-care centre or something? No, it's $15,000 of taxpayers' money to pretest political propaganda in your ads. You don't have enough confidence in your political action without having to use taxpayers' money to do that. It would make you cry to see the bins and bins of vouchers that the taxpayer has paid for while people in British Columbia desperately needed a government that cared about their future.

Jem Productions — $32,800 to produce a film, "Say It With Music," in English and Chinese versions; $5,800 to film the Premier with the Premier of China; plus a whole series of other bills on that. Actually this one is a contract for $15,000 to film "Take a Giant Step: A Story of Northeast Coal and Transportation Development." Boy, that was a giant step, I'll tell you, for the people of this province. They're going to be thinking about that step for an awful long time.

"Production of a northeast coal promotional videotape, $7,000. Project coordinator's rate" — how much? $235 a day. "Contract for northeast coal videotapes, a sum not to exceed $15,000." All this through the communications council of the person in the Provincial Secretary, negotiated. "Jem Productions, $156,000. Sound effects related to northeast coal development." Here's a whole list of items, and that's one of the items. "Health Care — Our First Priority" — $66,000 of taxpayers' money to make a promotional movie. That money should have gone into health care. "Funds related to northeast coal film promotion," a 10-minute home movie of the Premier blowing up the wrong hole, $71,000. "To services related to the filming of the new provincial highway linking Hope and Merritt, including film crew, helicopter rental, film stock, printing and processing, production of two 16-minute home movies, $17,900."

Interjection.

MR. HANSON: Just the sound of the taxpayers' anguish in the background, Mr. Colleague.

And all the new editing that's going to have to take place to take out the present Premier.

Filming a B.C. film — $12,000 — on emerging opportunities to be shown at the Bayshore Inn, June 14, 1984. "Filming of the events of the official opening of the northeast coal transportation development between June 5 and 8, 1984, 35 min colour film plus a trip by Jem photographer." How much did the taxpayers pay for that little fun? $59,000. "To services related to filming of the following specific events relating to the preparation for Expo 86...." Here's just a little filming around Expo: Jem Productions, Dave Brown, former employee in the Premier's office — and just to reiterate, 1984-85 fiscal year. How much did Mr. Dave Brown get from the taxpayers of British Columbia? $1.2 million.

To services related to filming of these Expo 86 related little shoots: shoot number one, Lord Mayor of London to the British pavilion, $2,200; shoot two, at the Canadian pavilion, $5,000; shoot three, to film Governor Spellman going to the Washington pavilion, $5,800; shoot four, ceremonial completion of the Expo preview centre dome, $9,246. I think that they would rather have had that money for caulking so it didn't leak.

Interjection.

Mr. Chairman, the minister over there may laugh and think it's funny, but when the people of this province see $20 million being spent every year on government advertising and publications when their kids haven't employment and their kids don't have opportunities, they don't think it's very funny.

I wouldn't like the members of this House to feel that this is the only contractor that's getting this money. As I said, Mr. Chairman, there are just an endless number of people with their hand out for this type of money, and they're getting it. There's the Jem contract, dated February 1, 1984, numbered 5314 to Jem Productions for the production of 13 half-minute films for use in promoting B.C. and its opportunities:

[ Page 8486 ]

$98,000. You know, there are a lot of students at the University of British Columbia or at Simon Fraser taking media communications who would have happily had that $98,000 put into their whole program so students could have worked on a film like that, rather than $98,000 to Dave Brown's consulting firm for half-minute movies. There's an information film on education in B.C. — I don't think I've ever seen that; I'd love to see that one — $13,000 for that; an information film on health: $71,000.

[5:45]

Mr. Chairman, the people of the province of British Columbia don't get access to see those vouchers, because it's very difficult, but that is where the core of the abuse of power rests in this province: the political propaganda, the polling, the misuse of government employees for political purposes.

HON. MR. HEWITT: You've been really researching, haven't you.

MR. HANSON: I have been researching. I've been researching a great deal, because the people of this province have a right to know. Here's another contract.

Interjections.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The second member for Surrey (Mr. Reid) will not interrupt, and especially will not interrupt from a place other than his seat. The member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) will not interrupt as well.

MR. HANSON: There are just a couple of other items before I want to go on to some other aspects of that ministry. I just want to talk again on how people close to this government get large contracts that are not out to tender. They're there for advertising and political propaganda purposes, and to try to shore up this government. Here's one for the production of information tapes on current B.C. development programs for use on the Knowledge Network and for other promotional purposes as required, to include programs related to Expo 86 construction, export-oriented filming, with particular reference to Asian markets, northeast coal opening, Coquihalla development and so on; the cost of these not to exceed $142,000. And on it goes.

You know, we often see in the news that we have an agency of record, which is the advertising firm that books production time, contracts out for photographers and filmers and so on. We've got a plethora of people doing advertising for this government. There's Baker Lovick; Craig Aspinall is doing advance media work; there's an endless list of people.

MR. LAUK: Wallowing in the public trough.

AN HON. MEMBER: Wallowing?

MR. LAUK: Drowning in the public trough.

MR. HANSON: You know, it's sad, though. It really is sad. You hear a lot from this government about working people and their wages, and how the working people or ordinary people are greedy and so on. Let's just look at what the charge-out rate is for some of these people and their professional time. The public really must know. This is what Baker Lovick, an advertising company, charges the government for their services. Service fee for agency, hours up to and including March 31, 1985, for media work, advertising and so on: the vice-president, director of client services, gets $150 an hour; the vice-president, group supervisor, $125 an hour; accounts supervisor, $90 an hour; accounting manager, $75 an hour; accounting assistants, $35 an hour.

I think the public deserves and has the right to know how much they are paying and what rates they are paying on these contracts. All of these contracts have confidentiality provisions. The company can't release what they are doing, the results of their work or whatever. This is information from the vouchers, Mr. Chairman.

Here is a little program on B.C. enterprise, municipal partnership, the advertising program done by Baker Lovick. Here is what the people paid for just for putting together the promotional work for the advertising. The vice-president, group supervisor, 20.5 hours at $125 an hour. His fee was $2,562.50. The accounts supervisor put in 31 hours on the job at $90 an hour to make it $2,790. The art copy director, 35 hours at $80 an hour, $2,800. The production manager, five hours at $75 an hour, total of $375. Traffic coordinator, 0.25 hours at $35 an hour, $8.75. Accounting assistant, two hours at $35 an hour for $70. Secretary on the word processor, ten hours at $40 an hour for $400. So the production around putting together a little promotional package that they would then go and book time and get people to film, and do the actors and the filming — just the conceptual work, the artwork and so on around trying to sell Partners in Enterprise for that little group.... They paid all those people $9,000 just to look at that.

Interjection.

MR. HANSON: No, I'm just getting warmed up.

We've got election abuse in this province. We have gerrymandered electoral seats, by people who have studied it and people who know. We have an Electoral Commission that needs to be freed to redraw the electoral boundaries in this province to give everybody a fair chance whether they're in a rural or a metropolitan environment. Mr. Chairman, we've got lottery abuses, where they don't disclose where the lottery money and proceeds are going. We've got more advertising abuses.

And it makes me very angry when a minister in charge of voter rights will stand up in this House and try and gussy up a report and talk only about the fluff and the puff and not the real core of the problem in this province, which is that the people are being sold short. They're not given the democratic right to free and easy access to the vote. There are obstructions put up all over the place. Do you know, Mr. Chairman, a person seeking to get on the voters' list today doesn't even get the courtesy of a confirmation card? Yet every month or every two months they get junk mail with their hydro bills, junk mail with their Pharmacare cards, junk mail through the Provincial Report: political propaganda which shows those people over there, with their gussied-up and made-up reports that cost the taxpayer a fortune.... Every day government junk mail!

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: I really do take exception to some of the remarks made by the member for Victoria, and particularly the huff and the puff of some of the things that he said I talked about. I'll tell you that I will give the message to the sports organizations. I'll give the message to the museum people, who number 250 museums around this province. I'll

[ Page 8487 ]

give the message to the arts groups and the cultural heritage groups, and you consider that just huffing and puffing. I felt it was important enough to give a report of those groups and the volunteers surrounding them and the services that we give in the province of British Columbia, and share with the communities in British Columbia; I felt it was important enough to note them. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, that the intonation was given that that is an unimportant group of people to consider.

May I just make three or four remarks regarding some of the statements. The member for Victoria said that Jem Productions gained $1.2 million in the year we're discussing. The member for Victoria is wrong. Jem Productions had seven contracts for a total cost of $408,397, so his statements were three times exaggerated. He commented on the Hayhurst advertising agency, who he says had a contract or contracts for $277,000. Hayhurst did the Helpline for abused children and seniors, and Fortune and Euromoney ads for economic development, for a total of $28,000 — only ten times exaggerated.

In discussing the total budget for the Ministry of Provincial Secretary, he managed to bring out....

MR. HANSON: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. The minister is trying to take us on a spurious point....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hold it. Is that a point of order?

MR. HANSON: The point of order is that it was very clear that the vouchers referred to are 1984-85 fiscal year.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That is not a point of order, hon. member. In committee you will have every opportunity to reply, and I'm sure the member is aware of that. Rising on a point of order to enter into debate is most unparliamentary.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: In terms of the amount of money mentioned regarding the total budget for our ministry, for government information services it's $15,338,000, of which $3.5 million is designated for salaries, benefits, operating costs and asset acquisitions. All of the rest total $11,814,000. So again it's an exaggeration, a result of simply doubling or more than doubling a number which was given on the floor of this House. It's too bad, because that is.... I suppose it's purposeful exaggeration to mislead the people of British Columbia, but I'm glad I'm able to put that....

Interjection.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: Does that sound like something that is unparliamentary, Mr. Chairman?

MR. CHAIRMAN: It was a reflection on another member. Perhaps the minister will withdraw.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: I certainly withdraw that reflection. I certainly would do so.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Please continue.

HON. MRS. McCARTHY: May I please just put the record straight regarding polling. The only contracts that we have with the Goldfarb firm are a subscription to annual reports which give a reflection of the province's economy, etc., and market testing of commercial messages related to economic renewal, education and social services. Those two contracts add up to $21,500, not the amount of money that the member said.

You have to know that market testing is a normal process in planning television advertising, and is used by all agencies to test the comprehension of the message. It is not a poll in the accepted sense, but a planning tool when one is placing advertising, and a perfectly normal business procedure as an internal guide to test the effectiveness of a particular commercial or a program.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to move that the committee rise, report resolutions and ask leave to sit again.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

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

Hon. Mr. Nielsen moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 5:59 p.m.