[ Page 8565 ]

CONTENTS

Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1986 (Bill 35).

Hon. Mr. Veitch

Introduction and first reading –– 8565

Oral Questions

Government advertising. Mr. Hanson –– 8565

Liability insurance. Mr. Cocke –– 8565

Quality of ResWest accommodation. Mr. MacWilliam –– 8566

Provincial participation in free-trade negotiations. Mr. Williams –– 8566

Municipal infrastructure program. Mr. Blencoe –– 8567

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Transportation and Highways estimates.

(Hon. A. Fraser)

On vote 72: minister's office –– 8567

Mr. D'Arcy

Mr. Rose

Mrs. Johnston

Mr. Cocke

Hon. Mr. Curtis

Mr. Stupich

Mr. MacWilliam

Mr. Davis

Mr. Blencoe

Mr. Williams

Health Improvement Appropriation Act (Bill 5). Committee stage –– 8584

Mr. Stupich

Third reading

Education Excellence Appropriation Act (Bill 4). Committee stage –– 8584

Mr. Stupich

Mr. Williams

Mrs. Dailly

Mr. Rose

Third reading

Tabling Documents –– 8590

THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1986

The House met at 2:06 p.m.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Speaker, in the gallery today we have a number of senior students from Claremont Senior Secondary School in the Cordova Bay area of Saanich and the Islands. I wonder if the House would welcome them.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Speaker, I'd like the House to welcome a long-time resident of the city of Victoria, Mrs. Laura Jefkins. Would the House make her welcome, please.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mr. Ritchie) and his many friends on the floor of the House, I would like to introduce the mayor of Nanaimo, Mr. Graeme Roberts, and Alderman Vicki Kuhl of the municipality of Saanich.

HON. MR. BRUMMET: Mr. Speaker, as I think everyone is aware, ongoing communications with B.C. Hydro are very important to me. Three people who make that possible are in the gallery today: Sheilah Henderson and Thom Thompson from B.C. Hydro, and Linda Babb, my executive assistant. I'd like the House to welcome them.

Introduction of Bills

CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS
STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 1986

On behalf of Hon. Mr. Veitch, Hon. Mr. Gardom presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Consumer and Corporate Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 1986.

HON. MR. GARDOM: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to inform all hon. members it's chock full of housekeeping goodies best addressed in committee.

Bill 35 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

MR. HANSON: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Finance, in his capacity as a backup to the Provincial Secretary (Hon. Mrs. McCarthy), but also because he is the minister in charge of the public purse. It's been very hard on the public to endure the bills for the advertising campaign carried out by the government. A number of cabinet ministers are currently appearing in partnership-in-propaganda ads on television. Also, one declared candidate is appearing on television and may be losing votes as a result of it. My question is: is the minister not concerned that these ads may give an unfair advantage in the leadership race?

HON. MR. CURTIS: It seems to me that the question is so phrased as to advance some hypotheses with which I don't necessarily agree.

MR. HANSON: On a supplementary, at least five members of cabinet are featured in current taxpayer-financed propaganda ads. Will the minister give the viewers of B.C. a break and pull all of these political mugs off TV?

HON. MR. CURTIS: I now take that question as notice on behalf of the Provincial Secretary, who I am sure will be delighted to provide a full and complete answer to that member, notwithstanding the rhetoric which preceded the actual question.

MR. HANSON: A new question. In view of the fact that a number of others on the front bench may be involved in the campaign, would it not be fair for the taxpayers and all of the people of the province, in terms of their pocketbooks, to pull all of those ads?

HON. MR. CURTIS: I wonder where the opposition front bench is? I see seven or eight missing.

Interjections.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

LIABILITY INSURANCE

MR. COCKE: On behalf of the opposition front bench, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Human Resources and of Health, particularly because he's the minister responsible for ICBC. The minister is aware of the impossible situation facing many small businesses because of what amounts to a strike in the general liability insurance industry. Since I raised the question with the minister a few days ago, the B.C. Safety Council has been forced to close its motorcycle driving school for want of liability insurance. Has the minister decided to instruct ICBC to re-enter the field of liability general insurance?

HON. MR. NIELSEN: The problem facing a number of organizations, particularly those engaged in driving instruction, with respect to the apparent inability to purchase general liability insurance has been reviewed in some detail by people within ICBC, and others. More questions have been asked of the insurance industry generally to try to determine precisely what this problem is; whether it is part of the overall problem with liability insurance or whether it is something specific to these schools and instruction. ICBC, as I understand it, is not in a position to offer this type of insurance. My understanding as well is that I would not be in a position to instruct them to offer this type of insurance, because it appears that that would be a breach of an understanding or a contract.

The question is being examined by some representatives within the insurance industry, and I have asked for a determination as to precisely what difficulties these instructional schools are having in obtaining the insurance. It seems that until recently this type of insurance was available to these companies. That insurance is now simply not available to them; whether it is because of the overall problem respecting liability insurance, or something peculiar to that type of service, has not been identified precisely to me. We have asked for further information.

Specifically to the member, I do not believe ICBC could be instructed to offer this type of insurance. I'm led to believe

[ Page 8566 ]

that it would be contrary to the terms and conditions of the contract when they sold the general insurance to Northern Shield. But we're still reviewing the matter, and I will bring as much information as I can find out.

MR. COCKE: Mr. Speaker, if someone is in breach of contract, it would strike me that the breach is on the other side; the breach is in terms of those who are offering insurance and not selling it. Can the minister assure the House that there is no way around a contract that has been breached by the insurance industry, not ICBC?

HON. MR. NIELSEN: Mr. Speaker, I have no difficulty in again asking the officials within ICBC if they feel there has been a breach in that contract. The information I've received so far is that ICBC would not be in a position to offer that type of insurance, because they would be in breach — quite a different situation, the member suggests, to examine the role of the industry overall. I'm not sure whether that would be a breach of any contract, but I'll have the legal people examine that particular idea.

[2:15]

MR. COCKE: Well, thank you. I sure hope they look at it. If it's unavailable, surely ICBC can offer it. But it goes beyond this. It goes to the municipalities who have been gouged. It goes to school districts who have been gouged. It's right across the province, Mr. Speaker, and it strikes me that we should make a very strong move. Will the minister make a strong move toward providing liability insurance for every small business, for every municipality, for every school district? What a market!

Interjection.

MR. COCKE: They would want it. Through ICBC, what on opportunity.

HON. MR. NIELSEN: Mr. Speaker, I'll take that question as notice and get more details and information and respond later.

QUALITY OF RESWEST ACCOMMODATION

MR. MacWILLIAM: My question is to the Minister of Tourism. In reference to my question back on April 22 of this year, the minister gave his commitment that any accommodation booked through ResWest "must measure up to certain standards." Since then there have been a number of embarrassing incidents. At least one hotel has now been embargoed after numerous foreign visitors referred to it found that the living conditions were nothing short of appalling. I wonder if the minister would advise why he failed to heed the warnings and why his commitment to this House was in fact not honoured.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: The last part of that question is totally incorrect. I take umbrage with the remark about not honouring a commitment to this House. In fact, I think it borders on the verge of being unparliamentary. However, the accommodation sector in Vancouver has been well looked after. Yes, there has been the odd incident where accommodation has not measured up to standard and we have moved very quickly to rectify that. The latest case happened just the other day when one of the hotels, namely the Patricia, was singled out as not being up to the standard that we wanted and it was quickly removed from the reservation system.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Supplemental to that question, the minister was made aware of this on April 22. He was also made aware of the situation on April 29. Since that time an embarrassing incident has occurred, an incident which is internationally embarrassing. Why did the minister fail to investigate this when it was first brought to the House at that time?

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Perhaps, if the member would point out the specific incidents on those two dates to which he refers.... I don't happen to recall which properties he is speaking of. So if he would like to elucidate and name the properties, then maybe I could respond.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Well, I think the member knows quite well which incidents I am talking about.

The fact is that the result of the minister's failure to act in this matter is that the British Columbia travel industry has been embarrassed nationally and, I might add, internationally by unfortunate incidents — not just the few that have been covered in the press but many others as well. I wonder what type of apology the minister has decided to tender to the people of the province and to this House for his failure to act when he was first notified of the problem.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Speaker, all I can say in response to that is that ResWest alone is booking some 1,200 rooms per day, and the room-nights to date have numbered in the millions. The number of "embarrassing incidents" that the member speaks of can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I think that's not a bad track record for this province.

PROVINCIAL PARTICIPATION
IN FREE-TRADE NEGOTIATIONS

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Forests, yesterday a delegation including the Canadian ambassador and representatives of three political parties from Parliament met with the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. Could the minister advise whether provincial representatives from this Legislature were invited to participate?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: Mr. Speaker, the province was not invited. I don't believe any of the provinces were invited to attend with the ambassador. There were representatives from three political parties on a national basis — one from the Liberals, one from the Conservatives and one from the New Democrats.

Attending from the province of British Columbia was a gentleman by the name of Mr. Grimmer, and I can advise the House that a report was filed with us yesterday morning as to what transpired at the meeting. My apologies. Anyway, most of that has been reported in the press.

MR. WILLIAMS: Could the minister advise the House who the province's legal counsel is in Washington, D.C., with respect to the softwood countervail?

HON. MR. HEINRICH: The law firm of Arnold and Porter is the firm which has been retained by the Canadian

[ Page 8567 ]

Forest Industries Council. That particular council represents all members of the forest industry across the country. I also believe a Mr. Herb Fierst is providing information and assisting the law firm which is taking the leading role, acting on behalf of the Canadian forest industry.

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM

MR. BLENCOE: I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The leaders of Canada's municipalities are getting tired of waiting for a federal commitment of funds to a municipal infrastructure program: that's according to the mayor of Edmonton. One of the reasons for that delay is that British Columbia, out of all provinces, has refused to participate in rebuilding municipalities in the province of British Columbia. Has the minister reviewed his decision not to share costs with other levels of government?

HON. MR. RITCHIE: There is no need for this minister to review the position taken. The position taken by the minister has been supported generally by the members of the UBCM, and that is that this is no time to be going to the federal government looking for funds for infrastructure which, no doubt, would be at the cost of education and health.

Now I'd like to point out to the member and to the House that indeed the reason why the infrastructure, and particularly the sewer and water portion of the infrastructure in this province, is in pretty good shape is because we have had a formula whereby the income of the province has been shared with all municipalities in providing this service. There is in excess of $100 million per year going into that same program.

In addition to that, we just recently reviewed the condition of our infrastructure provincially, and noted that indeed the road portion had slipped somewhat behind that of sewer and water. As a result of that finding, we have doubled the funding into that part of the infrastructure program at the municipal level.

HON. MR. GARDOM: Before calling orders of the day, might I have leave for an introduction?

Leave granted.

HON. MR. GARDOM: I'm sure every member in the House would like to join with me in wishing great success and congratulations on the eighty-fifth birthday today of Mr. Bruce Hutchison, one of Canada's most renowned editorialists and journalists. The very happiest of birthdays to you.

Orders of the Day

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS

(continued)

On vote 72: minister's office, $226,849.

MR. D'ARCY: This morning during debate on this particular vote members on both sides of the House got up to ask for highway improvements, some of them involving fourlaning of various highways. I want to make a plea, as I usually do in these estimates, that the Trail end of Highway 22, known as the west Trail approach, be completed as soon as possible. Mr. Chairman, this highway doesn't even have two usable lanes. In fact, on the hairpin comers, if an individual is trying to get a large vehicle down or up the hill, they don't even have one usable lane and have to pass through an industrial complex because they can't negotiate the regular highway.

I want to remind the minister that this particular highway was not even built by the Ministry of Highways or by Public Works. It was built by private interests way back in the 1920s and has since come into use as a public road. It's at the southern end of a modem 60-mile-an-hour highway which was rebuilt by various governments in the '60s and '70s. There's this one section which is one-third complete and I would ask the minister to make a commitment to the taxpaying public in my area, who have been very patient on this particular project. I want to note that since the original estimates were done, the price has gone down, in spite of the fact that the federal government has reneged on their $1 million commitment to assist with the removal of railway crossings. But I'd like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that it's not the fault of the people in my riding that the federal government changed its policy in this regard, nor is it the fault of the people in my riding, the taxpayers there, that the provincial government has dragged its heels on this project.

Mr. Chairman, I know every member can get up in this House and have a pet highways project which has been of long standing. But I want to point out to the House here that this was something that my predecessor, Don Brothers, wanted Phil Gaglardi to do and wanted Wes Black to do, and since I've been in office, I tried to get Bob Strachan to do, and after that the member for Prince Rupert (Mr. Lea) when he was Minister of Highways, and more recently, Mr. Minister, yourself. So this is a project which has been due and pending and promised by various political parties and candidates over a period of at least five elections that I know of, and through, I think, about five different Highways ministers. So we think we're overdue. We know we're overdue.

I would also like to point out that there's a major safety problem here because of these hairpins and the steepness of the grades. The old C.W. McCall record about Wolf Creek Pass may have been put out as a comedy, but we have had similar incidents that weren't so funny, particularly involving truck drivers and rigs that were not from B.C. or from our area. It seems as though people from outside the area are not aware and overestimate their own capabilities as drivers and the capability of their vehicles. On these particular very steep grades and hairpin comers that I would like to see the ministry improve, we have a situation where utility lines involving acids, steam and other chemicals are very vulnerable to a runaway vehicle. I would hope that the minister would move very fast to issue a second contract on this project.

[2:30]

I note that the city of Trail, due to a property acquisition in 1979-80, has lost a considerable amount annually of tax revenue, and that the western entrance to the city of Trail is somewhat blighted — I use the word kindly when I say "somewhat" — by the property clearing, the clearing of perfectly functioning houses and commercial buildings, which the Ministry of Highways did for a project which has not proceeded. I do want to express our appreciation that at

[ Page 8568 ]

least in this past year the local Highways district office has done a fair amount of levelling; I won't call it "beautification, " but they have certainly improved the appearance of that rather monstrous-looking urban-renewal project which just barely got off the ground and has never been completed. I would hope that the minister would move very quickly there.

I want to also ask the minister to, if he can, get us a contract to repaint the Trail bridge. It may sound like a trivial item, but if I had some photographs here to show the minister, he could have a look at the paint job on that bridge. Not only is it incredibly unsightly, but I am concerned that there's going to be structural damage to that particular bridge if it's not repainted quickly. I want to remind the minister that it's not just the regular environmental or atmospheric fallout that that bridge is vulnerable to, but it happens to be in the lee of the lead stack, so that the industrial emissions that interact with the steel and the paint on that bridge are far in excess of what you would normally find in other parts of the province. Even though it was repainted in the mid- I 970s, it is, I would say, three or four years overdue for painting. It's getting to the point where structural damage will indeed be done if something isn't done to refinish the paint on the bridge.

I want to note that one thing we have appreciated in my constituency — it's the Rossland highways district — is that there have been a number of right-turn lanes completed in the past year, right-turn lanes that were needed from both a public convenience and a safety point of view for many years. We need paving on them; they're pretty messy. Hopefully a contract will go out this summer, either under minor betterments or a capital contract, to pave those.

What we have a real major problem with, though, Mr. Chairman, is that we need some left-turn lanes, particularly at the northern end of Highway 22 just before it gets to the Kinnaird interchange. In that particular area, I want to point out to the House that in the early seventies the ministry spent a considerable amount of money doing design and survey work for a curve and gutter project which would have widened the road. I believe even some right-of-way acquisition was done. That project has never gone ahead, but in recent years a recreational complex has been constructed at the extreme northern end of Highway 22 just before it gets to the interchange in the middle of Castlegar. There also has been a major hotel and watering-hole constructed, which is very popular. Both of these require left-hand turns off the main highway. Without left-turn lanes here, we have not only a major inconvenience to the publicly we also have a major safety problem. We're happy with the right-turn lanes that have been installed near Selkirk College Road near the Castlegar airport, and with the exit lanes onto Highway 22 off Highway 3, but we certainly need some left-turn lanes installed very quickly.

I want to ask the minister if he could tell us what the progress is of major reconstruction on Pass Creek Road. This particular road has a lot of private vehicle traffic, a lot of truck traffic, a lot of school children transported in school buses. It's very narrow, very winding. The hills are steep, they're blind, and the paving is in horrible condition. The ministry has had a contract project ready for some time. There were some difficulties with the Raspberry-Robson water district, which I understand are pretty well resolved at this point. Whether he does this through his ministry directly in Victoria or through region, I would urge the minister to proceed very quickly in calling a contract to reconstruct Pass Creek Road.

I want to raise the question of maintenance on the three major gravel highways in my constituency. The minister said this morning — I hope I remember his remarks accurately — that somewhere in the neighbourhood of 600 kilometres of gravel roads are Highways responsibility. I don't have nearly that many, but I do have in the Rossland-Trail constituency the Syringa Creek to Deer Park road, the Sheep Creek road 14 miles west from Rossland and Pend-d'Oreille Road between Seven Mile Dam and Nelway Customs. All of these are what I would call well-graded gravel roads in terms of construction, but they're incredibly dusty and washboardy in summer and pot-holed in winter in the wet season.

I would hope the minister could institute a better maintenance program, even a program of grader-mixed paving on these particular roads. I don't think any of them, at this point at least, need major grade improvements, but they certainly could use a surfacing. I don't think any of them have significant truck traffic, so it would be a tremendous convenience to the public if some work could be done. The people out in the Sheep Creek valley have been waiting for a paving job on that road since the 1920s, so I think they're a little bit overdue.

Straying from highways work for just a second, Mr. Chairman, this summer is going to see the national little league championships in Trail — I've got to get this out fast before the Chairman asks what relevance this has. The group putting it on in Trail made a request to the minister some time ago for some guard-rail for their parking lots. I haven't seen the approval, but they say they have an approval directly from the minister for the local Highways yard to supply them with a certain length of concrete guard-rail for this national tournament. But the guard-rail hasn't been delivered, and when I contacted our region and district office I was told they could have it but there would be the regular charge of so much per foot. I would like the minister to clarify this for me and for them. Either the minister and/or the ministry is going to make this guard-rail available at no cost or there is going to be a charge for it, but we would certainly like to know what the answer is on that one.

I'd like the minister hopefully to approve a repaving contract for this summer. According to not only a lay observation by the public but also Highways own paving engineers, parts of 3A and 3B are in great need of resurfacing. There are cracks that are breaking up, and if these aren't resurfaced soon, I think the preventive maintenance costs are going to go up significantly in the next few years. Parts of the Rossland hill on 3B and parts of the Fruitvale to Meadows highway which were not resurfaced last year are in special need of attention.

I want to put in a plea, in case the minister or any of his advisers have any opposite thoughts, to make sure there are no further thoughts about closing down the Castlegar ferry. We go through a paranoia and fear every now and then in my area. I want to remind the minister that next to the Albion–Fort Langley ferry, this is perhaps the busiest ferry in the province. Certainly it's the busiest of the freshwater ferries, next to the Albion–Fort Langley. Even though the ministry reduced the hours a few years ago, nonetheless the occupancy and usage rate of that particular ferry is extremely high.

I want to make a brief comment on maintenance, and suggest to the minister that winter and summer maintenance in my riding has been extremely good. We thank the ministry for that. In a way, I hesitate to say that. I like to compliment the minister and his ministry; on the other hand, I don't want

[ Page 8569 ]

him thinking things are so good that he can afford to chop us back at all. One thing we would like, though, from a safety point of view, is a paint crew a little earlier in the summer. When you have a lot of ploughing and sanding during the winter months — I hope the minister knows this in his constituency — you obliterate a lot of white lines and yellow lines. We certainly could use a paint crew a little earlier in the spring, instead of waiting till June to see one.

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask for an intervening speaker here. I think the member for Port Moody could possibly ask a question or two about the weather. We'll see whether he'll cooperate in that regard.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member for Coquitlam-Moody — on the weather.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, I've never had a more eloquent introduction, nor a more surprising one. Nevertheless, like most politicians I'm always pregnant with at least three speeches, so I'll drag out my annual speech to the Minister of Highways. We usually touch on two or three topics.

When is he going to do something about the bottleneck in Port Moody because of all the traffic? That's number one. What are we going to do for the good burghers of Belcarra and their problems because they happen to sit right on the edge of a GVRD park? And the other one is, what are we going to do to speed up the zoning approvals associated with the Highways department? Those are my three topics.

I also have some supportive ones involving commuter rail and the like and the minister's efforts to assist as a cabinet minister in convincing the transit authority, along with the minister, the Provincial Secretary, to assist in getting a lot of cars off the highway which are clogging Port Moody daily upwards in the thousands. Maybe we could seek his cooperation to convince his deskmate over there to consider the use of commuter rail not strictly on the basis of its economic benefit, but on the fact that it would cut highway costs and reduce the clogging of traffic.

I think that that is my introduction, and I will defer again to my hon. colleague from Rossland-Trail. Then perhaps some of the minister's people, his officials, might be able to have some answers ready on those topics which I have just raised.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The last two points were out of order with respect to transit.

MR. D'ARCY: Signing, Mr. Minister. I know this is possibly an issue which every minister has wrestled with, and I know that every chamber of commerce and every municipal council thinks that they are being unfairly treated by the method of signing, and the distance and information signs on the highways. However, I would like to see a more consistent and defensible policy.

We used to think in the southern interior that every sign you saw told you.... It didn't matter where you were in the southern interior: every road sign you saw told you how far you were either from Nelson or from Vernon. I have nothing against Nelson or Vernon, but there are a few other communities in southern British Columbia that people would like to know they're on the road to occasionally. So I would like a consistent and defensible policy of signing.

I also would like to see more service-describing signs. When you are outside of British Columbia in the western states or in the Prairies, it doesn't matter what you are coming to: whether it is a very small town or a large city, there is a board there telling you whether you can find sleeping accommodation, gasoline, groceries, bars, hardware stores and so on. In British Columbia we need more of these types of international signs, letting people know as they approach a community or a cutoff for a community what indeed is available — waterslides, campgrounds or whatever. That is not just in my region, the West Kootenay, but throughout the province. So let's have a consistent distance and signing policy regarding places, and let's have a better policy for locating service-describing signs.

I want to talk briefly about the access of people from my riding and the southern interior in general to the Coquihalla Highway. The minister may want to get up and say: "Well, you guys can use the Hope-Princeton." Well, we can, but people from the southern interior are on the hook as taxpayers for that magnificent creation, the Coquihalla Highway, and we like to access it every now and then. If you want to access it from the southern interior, you have to go all the way up to Merritt and then turn back on yourself once you get on the Coquihalla, We would like a better cutoff route from the Aspen Grove area, or south of that on Highway 5, west to the Brookmere area on the Coquihalla, in order.... By the way, we would still get on the highway before the toll booth, if that is what the minister is worried about.

[2:45]

But I would suggest that the people from the extreme South Okanagan, the West Kootenay, the Boundary-Similkameen area and the East Kootenay — indeed, any traffic up to the Crowsnest Pass and beyond — may wish to use the Coquihalla Highway rather than the Hope-Princeton. Right now the Coquihalla is 39 miles further. The minister will have to forgive me if that is not in kilometres, because I still think in miles. It is 39 miles further than using the Hope-Princeton, and it doesn't need to be that much further. Certainly the minister this morning quoted some figures on revenue from tolls on the Coquihalla. I would suggest that if it were more accessible to people from the southern interior part of the province, who, I repeat, are equally responsible as taxpayers for this highway, then he might find that the traffic levels increase even more than what they are today.

Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about safety inspections for commercial vehicles. I know there was some discussion this morning, and I welcome the inspection program and the tougher inspections that the minister has instituted. But one of the complaints I have had, both from trucking operators and from operators of passenger vehicles, is that when a vehicle is flunked.... And the ones who have talked to me say they have been flunked for what sound to be pretty minor things. I don't say there is anything wrong with that. After the owner repairs the complaint, then they have a very difficult time finding an inspector or scheduling time with an inspector to get that vehicle back on the road again. The minister probably knows from his time in the trucking industry that it's a very competitive business and you can't afford to have a vehicle off the road. I'm not suggesting that some vehicles shouldn't have been pulled off the road or given repair slips. What I am saying is that when the owner-operator moves very quickly to rectify whatever the inspector requires, then there should be a quick approval process so that he can get that vehicle back on the road, whether it be a passenger-carrying or a freight-carrying vehicle.

[ Page 8570 ]

Finally, I would like to make a point here again on behalf of my constituents for the road improvement projects that I mentioned here, which are way overdue. People in my area, every bit as much as the minister's constituents and people throughout the interior, pay taxes into general revenue for all of the road improvements: for the Coquihalla, the Annacis crossing, for the entire highway system. Yet capital improvements of any significance have been few and far between in recent years. I hope the minister will take that into account, now that some of the megaprojects are completed or near completed, and note that there are tax-paying citizens who work very hard and contribute a great deal of money to the revenues of this province.

HON. A. FRASER: The member for Rossland-Trail asked a lot of questions, and I'll try to answer some of them.

First on the famous Smelter Hill. This is a 2.4 revision of Route 22, the Castlegar-Trail highway, to replace the Smelter Hill section which bisects the Cominco plant. As the member knows, the first phase, consisting of some earth-moving, a right-of-way underpass and a pipeline underpass, has been completed. The next phase will include the revision of the Trail Creek culvert and the moving of some Cominco facilities. The third phase includes the completion of the grade construction and paving. We haven't anything in the program this year to get on with that, but that's where it's at.

On the painting of the bridge, we are planning on getting money to paint the bridge again in 1987.

On the fight-turn and left-turn lanes I believe you made observations about, it entails paving and construction. The hold-up there is that a right-of-way is needed. We're doing what can be done, but we don't have a major paving contract at this time.

The guardrail. To clear that up, Mr. Member, the ministry has a policy on surplus guardrail, and the cost is $4 a foot for local governments and public agencies. The actual cost of the guardrail, for your information, is $10 a foot. Maybe that clarifies to some degree your question on that.

On Pass Creek Road, we've got problems there with a waterline relocation. Highways is paying for a study for the local water authority to determine requirements to protect and relocate the waterline.

You mentioned the Castlegar-Robson ferry. There's no intention to do anything other than what we're doing with the ferry; in other words, it will continue its operation and be maintained at its present standard. I got enough hue and cry about it when we suggested taking it out in 1983.

I'm happy that you appreciate the winter and summer maintenance, and I think that generally speaking that applies all over the province, that our people and crews do a real good job. It is particularly emphasized in the winter months; they do a good job, they are well organized, they work around the clock, and we should be all thankful for that. We have no intention, I might say, of cutting back on that. As a matter of fact, each year our maintenance costs go up, and we don't have any trouble with the Treasury Board agreeing to increased costs for the maintenance side of the ministry.

I agree with you, Mr. Chairman, being from the interior. I'd like to see the paint crews out earlier, but there are some problems there operational-wise. There is a system in place. We get them started in the lower mainland where they have the moderate weather conditions and work them north to cover the whole province. Maybe they could start a little earlier, but not very much. As an example, this year the inclement weather we've had I think has held them back. We also have some operational problems where commercial traffic wants to keep running through the wet paint. We've even had to ask for police help on that, but generally they do a good job.

I think the other thing this year that won't happen again is that they're extremely busy doing all the painting on the Coquihalla, a brand-new piece of road added to their duties. You really can't start much earlier than about March, even on the lower mainland, and there are some big problems to get around.

Signing came up this morning. We are improving our signing, but in my opinion it's still not enough. We have entered into an agreement with the Ministry of Tourism on a joint basis, and between Tourism and ourselves get community signs put up. Some communities are taking advantage of that. Again, the Ministry of Tourism provides the fluff and we provide the money, which is usually the case in Highways. With any ministry we work with, we end up paying the bill. By that, I mean the access, egress and the paving of the pull-off, and so on and so forth. We're glad to do that and have done that, or are stepping that up.

I'm not sure that that was what you're getting at, but that is an increase in signing activity that we started a little bit on last year and stepping up this year. As I told the people in communities in my riding, the fastest way is pull everybody together and then we will cooperate, tell them where we will allow a pull-out, and we'll even put the sign up for them. Believe it or not, we have to do that in some cases. We also have the Ministry of Tourism tied into it now.

You asked a question about commercial inspections. As you know, that's new, but I gather that when they do get a ticket, then they can't find an inspector to get back on the road. I say to the member, to the committee, that I think we've overcome that; they go back to the shop and they can get clearance from the shop where they had the repairs done. They don't have to, in other words, find an inspector in the certified shop. We don't want to detain them either, but that would speed up the process.

Now to Port Moody, Coquitlam-Moody. The Port Moody bypass is a major item in the....

Interjection.

HON. A. FRASER: Sure, okay.

MRS. JOHNSTON: Well, it won't be necessary for the minister to use his voice in response to my statements, but I think the point has been made by several previous speakers with regard to signs, particularly highway signs, in the various communities. We're faced with the same type of problem in the municipality of Surrey. It appears that the Highways ministry staff, the bureaucrats in charge of signs in the various communities, particularly in my community, do little if anything to pay attention to the request from the local mayor and council, or the local chamber of commerce. Really, that's where the input should be coming from, not from the staff sitting behind the desks and really not operating day to day within the community.

I would like to ask the minister if he would personally sit down and have a discussion with the manager of our local chamber of commerce in Surrey, Mrs. Dianne Remple, and go over the concerns they have with regard to signs in the municipality. There really is something lacking in the type of

[ Page 8571 ]

signs that we have on the highways, and it's of great concern to the manager of the chamber and the businesses in our community. But that really is the only concern that I care to express at this time.

[3:00]

I would like to throw out some bouquets. Some time ago I commented on the concern expressed to me by one of my constituents, and certainly witnessed by me, with regard to the quality of the food served us on the ferries. In the last couple of weeks I've had great compliments paid regarding the buffet service currently instituted. I think it's really a feather in the minister's hat, because something has been done. As well, the ferries have obviously been spruced up thank goodness, in time for our Expo tourists.

As one of the MLAs for the constituency of Surrey, I would like to commend the minister for the work that was done on the Pacific Highway, No. 10, and the work that is being done in the area of the Pattullo Bridge. There was a great deal of work required in our community, and I'm very pleased to see that some of it is being attended to. There's no argument with regard to the need. We have two major freeways going through the constituency. Certainly the traffic is very heavy at all times, and particularly in the areas that have been addressed by the minister.

With those very few comments, I would just like to leave him with the request that he personally meet with the chamber of commerce, to listen to their concerns; and possibly it can be used as an example for other community concerns to be addressed as well.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

HON. A. FRASER: I want to thank the first member for Surrey for her kind remarks. I share with the committee that, as that member knows and most members know, I meet as many people as possible. But I get very nervous when I deal with the elected council of the area and then the chamber of commerce comes along with a different opinion.

MR. ROSE: They're not elected.

HON. A. FRASER: That's correct. Maybe I shouldn't get nervous, and listen to both sides of the coin. When I was out there myself I was on both sides of that chamber of commerce, as well as council. In the communities, oftentimes, they sure have different opinions about what should happen. The only thing that makes me nervous: they want me to be the referee. But I'll meet with the chamber of commerce.

Your kind remarks about the work and that.... I guess you were here this morning. Hopefully before the end of the summer we'll have more help for the south side of the river, with the Annacis bridge. I think that's going to be a big help to everybody south of the Fraser River.

MR. COCKE: Mr. Chairman, I can't imagine that minister getting nervous about anything. He and I were both elected at the same time, 17 years ago. I've been waiting for some sign of nervousness, and I haven't seen any. He's just Mr. Cool.

Interjection.

MR. COCKE: I don't know. I wouldn't want to see him in Treasury Board, because then he'd be dealing with the Minister of Finance, and that would even make me nervous.

Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of things I'd like to say to the minister. I still think that we're in for a bit of a disaster in Westminster in terms of that Annacis bridge. If the bridge had maybe gone all the way, or something, and there were ways of diverting traffic.... I'm not sure we're going to be able to handle all that traffic when it gets into town. Queensborough has been quite severely affected. One of the unfortunate things about a situation like that is the disaster that occurs to some of the small businesses along the way. There's one chap with a service station — who incidentally tries very desperately to keep his price for diesel down at a reasonable rate, because there are a lot of truckers go by — and all that traffic is going to be diverted and there's no access near his particular service station. There are two or three in that kind of category, but he's the one I know best, because I've been in there on a number of occasions. I went to the Highways office and got the maps, and it strikes me that he is going to have a darn tough time raising the $3,000 a month that is his rent. And that's it. He's in jeopardy in terms of his business life.

Beyond that, I'm still not at all happy that the 20th Street hill is going to be a major thoroughfare off that freeway. I would imagine that Burnaby residents are also just a little bit nervous, because it's going to funnel a lot of traffic through there. I know that you've done the best you can in terms of diversion on Marine Way and the major new connector in Richmond — when and if it gets finished — but in any event I think that we're in for some tough times.

I've often said in the House, and I've said it with a lot more vigour than I'm going to say it today, that we are thrice-cursed in Westminster. We have the Port Mann Bridge on one side of us, we've got the Pattullo Bridge right in the middle, and how we plugged up the west end of Westminster! That poor little six-square-mile town is the artery for the whole lower mainland. Just to give the minister an idea, my MLA office is on 12th Street. That's the extension of Kingsway. I live at 5th Avenue and 1st Street, by Queens Park, and unless I go up and down alleys, oftentimes it will take me half an hour or more to get home at the height of traffic because there's a little bit of a jam on the Pattullo or anywhere else and traffic then starts wending its way around, up and down alleys, side streets and everywhere else, and so it is very tough on our town.

The one thing I want to see as long as I have any breath in my body is that New Westminster remain a functional city on its own and not become a part of the bedroom of Vancouver. Vancouver is already over endowed with everything in terms of business, commercial development, to the extent that any further great development there is to their detriment. So let's hope that we're able to work it out so that Westminster can maintain its identity and its integrity. It is a first-class place and a great place to live, with the exception, of course, of some of the problems that have been given us.

Just on the side, I'd like to tell the minister that after dealing with the Highways department for almost four years and after hearing what they wanted from me for our property at the lake, which was to take enough of it so that I'd have very little left except a wee bit of a ribbon, what we decided to do was give it to our children. Thankfully the guy in Ottawa decided to relieve us of capital gains, so now the kids have the property, and I hope that they never come to you and ask for any kind of subdivision, because the worse thing people can

[ Page 8572 ]

do in this world is go to Highways and ask for a subdivision. The minute you ask for a subdivision....

AN HON. MEMBER: Why?

MR. COCKE: They told me they were going to build a highway along the side of that lake. It's a winding trail and anybody who's going to build a highway there has got holes in their head. But anyway, aside from that, thanks a lot for not very much.

I would like to say something about the debate that was going on in here this morning. You were talking to the member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly). I agree with her totally. I think the Minister of Highways is suffering a bit of an eye problem. I would recommend an ophthalmologist. If you can't see the wrecks that are driving on the road today.... And I'm not talking about commercial trucks or taxis; that goes without saying. They should be all checked, they should be properly maintained, and they should not go on the road if they're in any kind of dangerous condition. You've told us in your reports that you've caught more than half on those spot checks that they're doing up in the mountains. More than half of them had to be brought up to standard. But I'll tell you something: private cars and trucks are exactly the same.

Drive around at night. The number of cars with one headlight, which in the old days used to be caught at the inspection station.... People driving around without mufflers.... You know, there are people driving cars in the city of Vancouver, New Westminster, the lower mainland and elsewhere in the province that are so smokey that were they to drive in Los Angeles, they'd be thrown in jail for the rest of their life for adding to the smog.

We have a bunch of wrecks on the road, through you, Mr. Chairman, to the minister. I told the minister last year about a car that was next door to our house that these kids bought, and that car was brought in so that he could take the motor or something out of it and junk it. But it should have been junked months before. There was a piece of sheet tin holding up the seat that the kid was driving on. Imagine — one good little bounce, and he would have been dragging right along the ground. That is the kind of stuff we've got out on the road. Until the day when the minister stands up in this House and says, "We are going to again have motor vehicle inspection in this province, " we are in jeopardy.

I would also like to ask the minister, for heaven's sake, as he is the minister in charge of the motor vehicle branch, to talk to the Minister of Health (Hon. Mr. Nielsen), who is the ICBC rep from the government, and tell him to get us back into the liability insurance. It is absolutely ridiculous that people training the drivers who go to your branch to get their licence can't have any training by virtue of the fact that people offering the training can't offer it by virtue of the fact that they can't get liability insurance. We've got to do something in this province, Mr. Minister, and you, I think, probably are in the best position to have a perspective on this of any member in the cabinet. Your other perspective can be outside of your own ministry, but anyway, we won't go into that for fear that I will get off the track in terms of the vote.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister how the drunk driving situation is going in terms of mandatory blood testing at the hospitals, whether or not this is holding. We were the first jurisdiction to go that route, and I certainly most appreciate the fact that I did bring it up because of a terrible misadventure in our family. I was very pleased that the Minister of Highways and the Attorney-General at the time — and it was this Minister of Highways, and the Attorney-General was Allan Williams at that time — decided to go that route and go for it. I can't talk about it too much, but I note that the minister is toughening up some more in those terms. But there just has to be a real watch kept.

Let me get back to what the minister was saying this morning in terms of testing cars. The RCMP and the local police are going to be asked to keep a wary eye out for lousy vehicles. Well, I think they should be spending a lot more time watching out for drunks on the road and other criminal activities, and I honestly wonder whether or not their capability.... You know, they are not trained mechanics. Sure, they can see something that is absolutely obvious. A tail light is banged in or a car has no muffler or something like that, but there are so many things that they can't see. For example, if a kingpin is ready to go, you know what happens if it does; it's dynamite. So I would really like to see the minister pay a lot more attention to this. I think that he is looking at it far too lightly, the whole question of motor vehicle testing.

[3:15]

So I heard your answer to the member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly), but I sure am not satisfied with it. I am satisfied with a lot of things you have done, but I am sure not satisfied with that. I feel that is one real big mistake that has been made. Whether you are the author of that mistake or not, I don't know. But I sure know that the mistake has been made and should be corrected.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, it is with pleasure that I rise to speak in the discussion of the minister's office. I rarely have the chance to do this. I want to congratulate the minister for his very capable handling of the Ministry of Transportation and Highways, with its other entities.

There is something I have discussed with the minister on a number of occasions that, when first raised with me, certainly appeared to be something which would affect a very small number of people in British Columbia. The minister may by now know what is coming. I seek no particular commitment from him today, but rather wish to determine if in fact this has been attempted in any other jurisdiction, either in Canada or the United States.

The point has been made to me by one of my constituents, a retired doctor on one of the Gulf Islands, that there is a significant number of people in British Columbia and in Canada who have varying shades of colour blindness. I'm fortunate that, insofar as I know, I do not have any such difficulty. These are not individuals — men or women — who have complete colour blindness, but rather they have certain difficulty discerning the difference between, let us say, amber and green.

The suggestion has been made, a suggestion which I have passed on to the minister and he has looked at it on more than one occasion, that perhaps a pilot system could be put in place in a well advertised, identified intersection, or a series, without changing every single traffic light in the province, where there would be varying shapes for green, amber and red. It commends itself to me and yet I don't have the responsibility for this portfolio, Transportation and Highways, nor have I determined if it has been attempted in other provinces. We've seen this happen in the city of Victoria in another way, and in other parts of the province, and that is

[ Page 8573 ]

with a traffic bell, whistle or identifying sound for pedestrian traffic for those who are visually impaired. That has been tried. I do not know the extent to which it has been proven to be successful.

Nonetheless, it is an idea in a ministry which is noted for its innovation. If you are the Ministry of Transportation and Highways in a province as challenging as British Columbia, with its terrain, with its rivers, lakes and coasts, it may be that at some point the ministry, working with the minister, could identify a test area where these specialized shapes for traffic lights might be tried on a two; three- or four-year pilot basis. The minister may have an opportunity to respond to that at his leisure.

HON. A. FRASER: I'll go back first to the Minister of Finance. I appreciate his observations and I met the good doctor. I'm all for trying to do something that seems to be complicated. I don't know why it should be. I'm talking about a test. What we did, I don't think the doctor was too happy. We've referred it to a national organization to see if they could help. I'll give you my assurance that we're not going to let it drop. We'll keep pursuing it. I think it's a good idea to have a test on the thing.

Now to the member for New Westminster. It's come up several times. I don't know whether it came up today or not, or in the question period, but liability insurance.

I think there is one thing that hasn't been said that I want to say about liability insurance across the board. Our government has a cabinet committee chaired by — it wasn't replied to this way today, probably overlooked — the Minister of Municipal Affairs on all aspects of liability insurance, whether business, municipalities or I think involved in the same thing you raised, Mr. Member. It's my information that that committee's going to report to the Legislature before we adjourn. So maybe there's something coming in government policy that ought to be of some help. I'm not a member of the committee, but the Minister of Municipal Affairs is the chairman of the committee. I think you can look forward to something on the general liability insurance mess, as we'll call it, coming from government through that committee.

Regarding good old New Westminster, I have a soft spot in my heart for New Westminster. You know it used to be the capital. I had a brother who lived there. I wasn't there when it was the capital but soon afterwards. The problem, and you know it, Mr. Member, as well as I do, with New Westminster is its geographical location. Everything converges from all directions and it tends to be cut up. That sure has happened, and it's sure had its effect. I don't think you agree with me, but the Annacis crossing we're hoping will relieve the Pattullo Bridge traffic by 25 percent. That might give some relief to New Westminster. The 20th Street — I'm aware of that. I guess we're working on it now to make it so it'll handle more traffic. We've rebuilt Marine Way. It isn't a big help to New Westminster, but we've got a new Marine Way now from New Westminster to Vancouver.

The other observation I have is that with SkyTrain terminating at the present time.... I think it has been some help. I think they've done a fair job on the bus feeder lines for SkyTrain. Again, that should be some help.

As you know, we rebuilt the Queensborough Bridge, and we should be getting full use out of that bridge because it's a four-lane bridge.

The other comment I have — and I appreciate your concern about all the work that has been going on there — is that we've got the sanction of the city council. I think they share some concerns.... We appreciate the support we've had in our ministry from the city council on the different items in New Westminster. I did hear the other day that New Westminster was booming because of the new SkyTrain, but I don't know whether that's so or not.

Now with the Coquitlam-Moody....

Interjection.

HON. A. FRASER: Okay, fine.

MR. COCKE: Mr. Chairman, I would ask you to give the minister a lesson on the pronunciation of New Westminster. His brother would be very angry with him for calling it, "minister." You see, he's so used to being a minister that he thinks we live in New Westminister, but we live in New Westminster.

I don't have much more to say. I notice that the minister didn't deign to answer my question about motor vehicle testing, but I guess he's just going to repeat what he said this morning. So I bid him a good afternoon. See you later sometime.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I would just like leave of the committee to make an introduction, if I may.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I would like to introduce an old friend and political mentor of mine from Kamloops, a dedicated British Columbian. Terry McQuillan is sitting in the gallery, and I would like the House to make him welcome.

MR. ROSE: I'd like to welcome him as well. I don't know him, but I was afraid for a moment that the minister was going to introduce Phil Gaglardi, so I'm kind of relieved.

I gave a bit of a summary on some of the things that I was interested in, but I'd like to say two or three words in addition. I was interested in what the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Curtis) had to say about the different colours in testing lights for people with visual impairment or partial colour blindness. It seems to me, though, that we are going to international systems in many other things and maybe we could do it here — not just the colour, necessarily, but the shape too. For instance, a stop sign has a peculiar shape. If you had the light coming out of that hexagonal shape, it wouldn't matter if you were colour-blind or not. If you bought your light that way, you could understand what it was — I don't know. Similarly, an amber could he square as well as amber, and a green could be any shape you like — a circle for all I care.

Another idea they used to have — and it has gone out of fashion now; it's probably 50 years old — is writing "Stop" and "Go" on the lights.

Interjection.

MR. ROSE: Not in terms of your recollection? Well, you're far too young for that, but I recall it. Some people say I see everything in this world through rose-coloured glasses, but that's not true either.

Let's deal with these in order. Last year the municipality of Belcarra was assisted in their highway problems to the tune

[ Page 8574 ]

of about $30,000 from the ministry, in spite of the fact that they didn't qualify in terms of the regulations, because a highway has to go from somewhere to somewhere, and theirs dead-ended at that park. I think they've got ten years in total for.... The GVRD owns and operates a major park at Belcarra — a very attractive area and park, a regional park that attracts thousands of people every year. Belcarra municipality has to pick up the road costs for the tremendous number of cars and traffic congestion.

I know this is probably not very much fun to listen to. You know, every area has got potholes, and I feel a little bit like a ward heeler standing up here and asking him to fix my potholes, and everybody else is standing up and doing the same thing. It reminds me of the way politics is played in Nova Scotia: if it moves, pension it; if it doesn't move, pave it. I'm certainly not asking for that.

I would like to suggest to the minister that Belcarra deeply appreciates the grant made for its assistance. It will be seven years, I think, before GVRD takes over that road maintenance. They've got traffic congestion beyond their ability to pay. We need some solution. It's a tremendously difficult place to get into in the summertime, because at Sasamat Lake there are cars parked all over the place; you can scarcely get in and out. What would happen if there was a major fire I don't know. The congestion would be intolerable. Any kind of assistance that they can have until the GVRD does actually take them over would be helpful. The traffic congestion along Sasamat Lake, I think, will be relieved a year from now, because the GVRD is putting a beach across on the other side and a big parking lot; so that will be kind of helpful there too.

[3:30]

Now we just completed a major highway project, the Mary Hill bypass. I haven't heard any complaints about that, beyond the Pitt River Road and Mary Hill bypass light; and that's now installed. The residents are grateful for that. I think that was a useful thing. We thought, for a little while, we might not get it.

I wasn't invited to the Mary Hill bypass opening; I don't know why. I was the sitting member. Maybe I was just overlooked. I'm kind of invisible, and so it was perhaps quite easy to overlook me. I remind you, though, that when the Barrett government opened the bridge at Mission the ex-MLA, George Mussallem, was invited; the MLA from across the river, the present member for Chilliwack (Mr. Schroeder) was invited to that, along with just about everybody in the area. I thought that was class. I think leaving out the local MLA in a function like that is not a very class act. I want to make that protest. I think the minister is a classy guy, but I don't think that that's the way to go. I don't think it does you any good anyway; it just makes for hard feelings. I wanted to let you know how I feel about that one.

The other thing that I want to talk about just briefly is Port Moody. Port Moody's got an application in for a railway overpass. It is a part of a cost-sharing program. A specific question: I would like to know the status of that application. As everyone knows — and I've told this House a number of times until everybody's sick of hearing it — we have a terrible bottleneck in Port Moody. It's one of these typical air-inversion zones. We have just literally thousands of cars; I've given the numbers before. It doesn't get any better; it gets worse. There doesn't seem to be any immediate solution to it. It's a long-term thing. I know that there's going to be some work around the traffic lights at St. John's and Barnet, but that doesn't even start until after Expo, and I can understand why; I'm not quarrelling with that. But they do need help there.

What really terrifies me is that it's such a bottleneck and there's so much congestion and there's so much traffic, much of it dangerous cargo going in there and through there, that if there was a major disaster, it would be major with a capital M. We saw on the news how they tried out a crisis-team approach to a mock disaster in Toronto the other day. I don't know if there's ever been anything done along those lines here, but I would suggest that that would be an area that might be well worth testing your emergency response teams on. It isn't just dangerous cargo in there on trucks or highways; there's dangerous cargo there frequently on boats, as well as on rail, because it's a main rail line. So it's a very serious matter for those people who live there. They don't want their town centre carved up. They certainly need a bypass. I know it's not cheap, but it seems to me that they deserve one perhaps ahead of some other areas — not that I want to be grudging to some other areas. That's why I suggested, as the minister did, about SkyTrain relieving the traffic. Commuter rail would relieve a lot of traffic in that area — and it's not out of order.

The minister talked about how SkyTrain would relieve the Pattullo Bridge traffic by approximately 25 percent. He just said that a minute ago. I've no quarrel with that. I don't know if he's right or he isn't; I hope he's right. But the areas in my riding.... And those people are not only represented by me. People from Dewdney use that area; they are stuck in that traffic jam every day of their lives, twice a day. Commuter rail, with the support of other members of government, would provide that assistance. I will.... that SkyTrain ever gets out to Coquitlam Centre. So I'm not looking forward to that. So that is that one.

They'd like some cost-sharing. I'd like to know the status of the cost-sharing applications for the railway overpass over to.... I think the street is Moody Street, but I'm not certain. It's just below St. John, anyway.

I want to say a word or two about Port Coquitlam. This has to do with the approval of rezoning which is required under the act. Any time rezoning takes place within 400 metres — or roughly two blocks, I guess that would be — of a major and limited-access highway, approval has to be given by Highways. I've had a little fun with Highways in the past, and they move with great lethargy. I don't know whether it's because of regulations. It's certainly not because of the lack of will, and they don't seem to be angry or rancorous. Sometimes they seem a bit inert, but they certainly don't react aggressively. But it takes a long time to get things done. I finally got one done myself, and if I had it to do over again I wouldn't.

Demands are excessive to me.... To require roadside standards, highway standards, for a dead-end road of half a block seems dumb to me, but those are the requirements, and I had to comply the way everyone else does. But this is specifically the city of Port Coquitlam. They complained that their application for approval of a rezoning — maybe two blocks away from the highway, at least 400 metres — has to go first to Westminster. First of all the hurdle has to be their own council. Once that's accomplished, the application goes to Westminster. You know what Westminster does with it then? It sends it to Burnaby. And then Burnaby sends it back to Westminster and finally it gets back to Coquitlam.

AN HON. MEMBER: It's New Westminster.

[ Page 8575 ]

MR. ROSE: New Westminster.

They claim that this is an extremely awkward kind of arrangement. They might even use the word archaic. I'm sure it must have some bureaucratic.... It must make some bureaucratic sense. They say also — I was just talking to the city clerk this morning. He likes the people. It's not an attack on the people who have to.... They're stuck with the structure. Maybe there might be some thought to a revision of that kind of procedure in that area, because it holds them up about six to seven weeks. I don't know whether it's the mails or what it is that adds to the total, but certainly it doesn't seem to make much sense to me that it has to go through all these stages. Surely the public could be protected, highways and limited access could be protected — their rights, needs, traffic flows — a little more rapidly. So they're asking for that.

Finally the minister ultimately came to the conclusion that it would be in the interest of British Columbians to have seatbelts for children. That's the law of the land, and I approve of it: protective seating for young kids in the car. This is an example where legislation actually leads public opinion, in many cases. I don't think it occurred in this case, because it took so long to come about. But again, I get sick.... It's like a broken record, and I'm sure the minister.... What scares me half to death is going down the highway seeing little kids lying on their bellies in cab-over campers, peeking out the window. Have you ever seen a wrecked camper or a wrecked trailer? It's just like a matchbox. I think that there should be some kind of safety devices for these cab-over campers. I know that it's not practical to say you can't ride in them, like you can't ride in trailers. I approve of not being able to have occupants in trailers and towed vehicles. I'm not sure what the stats are on the safety of cab-over campers, people riding in those, if there happens to be a serious wreck. The minister agreed that this was a very frightening prospect. I think I raised this three years ago, and I want to know what's happened to it and what the thinking of the department might be on that subject. With that, I'll sit down.

HON. A. FRASER: I'll reply to the member for Coquitlam-Moody. Back to the start, the Port Moody bypass. For the information of the committee, presently route 7A, Barnet Highway, utilized the city's main street St. Johns as its route; daily volume downtown is in the order of 40,000 vehicles a day with a fair level of congestion in rush hours.

The city proposed a bypass route in the vicinity of the Barnet-loco Road area north of the downtown, joining route 7A Barnet about one kilometre north of St. Johns. This is an extraordinarily expensive route involving considerable structure and requiring considerable traffic volumes to justify it. The ministry proposed a different routing to reduce costs, but this route is also very expensive. The notes I have here, the bypass is premature; the ministry proposes operational improvements associated with the proposed Barnet upgrading.

I think in your second series of questions you ask about a railroad overpass, and I don't know where that is at. But I will agree with you completely that there is sure lots of congestion in Port Moody. One other thing has happened which might be of some relief. I understand that recently a new parking lot has been created which is east of Port Moody a short ways, and people there, commuters, can park their car and take a bus to the SkyTrain.

I don't know whether that is....

Interjection.

HON. A. FRASER: Yes, Coquitlam centre. They have that fountain. It might be of some help.

Now dealing with Belcarra. As you know through your representations in the House last year, Mr. Member, we met them and we gave them a grant. I realize that their problem is created by a greater Vancouver regional park, but when we gave the grant, I thought we cleaned up the problem. I think that was agreed to, but I don't know.

I have one other observation, and I guess our government people.... My opinion is, being a former municipal councillor, I don't think Belcarra ever should have been incorporated. That is my personal opinion. I think that is one; it's very small, and they just haven't got the finances. My understanding is their population is below 500 or thereabouts. It is my personal opinion, for what it is worth, that that creates the problem, will create it until it is addressed. But we did help, and I think I sent a time to them when I met them. They also have a problem with the — maybe part of their problem is the Greater Vancouver Regional District; it is their park. But I sympathize with them, and as I say, we have done something to help.

Zoning approvals. Well, Mr. Chairman and the committee, zoning approvals aren't as simple as we would like to think. I am talking about our senior people. Some zoning approvals are $40 million and $50 million shopping centres. Our concern then becomes what that shopping centre is going to do to the traffic patterns of the highway system. But in conclusion of that, we have now shifted some staff to overcome the problem that you brought up. In other words, to shift staff from less busy areas to busier areas so there isn't as much delay as has been the case in the past.

[3:45]

The last item that I have here — oh, I want to deal with Mary Hill bypass. Yes, we completed that finally, talked about it for years. We are still getting some observations about they don't like how we connect with the freeway. I think our engineers are looking at improving that. I don't know when that will be corrected.

What I am leading up to, the reason I mention the Mary Hill bypass, is that the opening of the Mary Hill bypass was on a foggy morning, real foggy. That isn't any excuse. I want to apologize to you, Mr. Member, for not inviting you, and I take the full responsibility for that. It was a complete oversight. I'm sorry about that. But they did get it open. I didn't make it myself, as a matter of fact, but they have a new road system in place that I think has been talked about in the Legislature for 20 years.

Commuter rail? That's not my responsibility, and that's an easy way to brush it off. I have had discussions, I believe with the Provincial Secretary in charge of SkyTrain — I'm pretty sure — but I've also talked to the Member of Parliament for the area, Gerry St. Germain, who seemed to be promoting a lot. It just seems to go around and around; I don't think commuter rail is going anywhere. That's the impression I got. There's trouble with the CPR as well. They want big fees for using their tracks and so on.

The last item I’ve got here is seatbelts for children. Yes, we finally went ahead with that, I think in 1984. We are concerned with the observation you've made about children and campers, and our ministry is presently looking into it to see what we can do about it. We'd like to do something. It looks like if they come up with a solution.... I don't think

[ Page 8576 ]

we can do it by regulation. We'd probably have to do it by legislation. But we are concerned about it, and it looks like something might happen in the next 12 months.

MR. ROSE: Just briefly, I thank the minister for his comments about Belcarra, but it is a fact that that municipality exists; whether or not it should, it seems a little tardy to argue about it. I was a member of this House when the approval was given for a municipality, but they are stuck with a certain number of problems. Mayor Drew and some of the other people involved in it have to solve them, and they're grateful for your help. I don't know that anything ever ends. They're not asking for a handout, but until the GVRD takes them over they do face a terrific problem.

On the highway approval stuff, if it's a big shopping centre and it really spews a lot of extra traffic, I can understand approval taking a long time. But if it's a house going from, say, single family dwelling to duplex two blocks away, I can't see it as a major hurdle that would take five or six weeks.

Finally, to the minister's apology about the Belcarra thing and the opening, I'm sorry to hear he was in a fog that morning. I was so angry with him. This probably wasn't the first time he's been fogged in, but I do wish him all the best. I'll just tell him that I ordered the fog, I was so mad at him for that.

MR. STUPICH: I have a number of questions to refer to the minister which I've raised over a number of years. Some of them I did get answers for in earlier years, but it's so long ago that.... I haven't forgotten them, but I'm concerned that the minister may have forgotten. I'd like to find out whether he's still thinking as he was some years ago.

One of them was the pedestrian crossing at the entrance to Transfer Beach Park in the city of Ladysmith. I did raise this with the minister about six years ago, I think, when I was asked by the city of Ladysmith to raise it. The minister at that time promised an underpass when the rebuilding of that highway took place. I don't know whether there are different plans now or whether there may even be a possibility of bypassing Ladysmith, but it is a pretty serious problem. There is increasing traffic crossing the Trans-Canada Highway — pedestrians getting to Transfer Beach as well as cars. I wonder whether the minister is still thinking about an underpass for pedestrians or whether there is something different in mind.

Traveling just a little further north, there is a dangerous situation at the south end of Diamond Bridge for traffic that is proceeding northerly on the highway and wanting to turn left to go on to Christie Road. There is a road off to the side. I don't know what you call it; you call it a frontage road if you use it for commercial purposes, but this is a road simply to get you off the highway and out of the way. Then you approach the highway right at the south end of Diamond Bridge and wait until traffic slows down from both directions long enough for you to dash with the car across the highway and hope that you don't hit or get hit by anybody coming from either the north or the south. A left-turn lane at the south end of Diamond Bridge, while we are waiting for the replacement of Diamond Bridge that the minister said was on next year's program.... I think that was five years ago. I can appreciate again that things change, but I think that the replacement of Diamond Bridge must still be a fairly high priority in the ministry's plans.... But I wonder if, in the meantime, a left-turn lane at the south end of Diamond Bridge would not be a safer way of getting onto Christie Road from the south, rather than that side road that people line up on and close their eyes and dash.

Another place where I have been asked to request a left turn lane is where traffic from Takala Road at Oyster Bay enters the highway from the westerly side. I have had a letter and visited the site at the request of a Shirley Lamontaigne. There has been some improvement done there. It was a very bad situation in that traffic driving on Takala Road and wanting to proceed either north or south on the highway had very limited vision to the left because of a high bluff and a curve. Going to the south, of course, it was fairly simple as long as you got a good head of speed up before you hit the highway, because it is two-lane traffic, but if people coming southerly on the Trans-Canada Highway were coming around that curve pretty fast, you didn't have much time to get out of the way before they were upon you. So it is a bad situation. But once again the greatest concern is for those who are traveling northerly on the highway and wanting to turn left onto Takala Road. There is more room there now for a widening of the highway to provide for a left-turn lane, because a considerable amount of rock-cutting has been done. I understand the rock-cutting wasn't done to improve that situation so much as it was because the rock was required somewhere else, but it served two purposes. But again, a left turn lane would certainly make it much safer for vehicles to travel north and then turn to the west to enter Takala Road.

Then getting into Nanaimo, which has provided the minister with a lot of problems in recent years and also given him some relief — and he has commented upon this on previous occasions — in that the city council doesn't seem to be able to get its act together or hasn't for quite a number of years. They have made decisions and been very good at making decisions, but very soon after a decision is made, the council changes its position and reverses its decision and comes up with a new answer to the problem, and they just keep changing. The minister responded to me once in the Legislature by saying that until the city council makes up its mind he is quite prepared to sit there and not do anything about the problems in Nanaimo, because why step in and solve somebody else's problems and incur the displeasure of certain people? But I think they are coming closer, and I sent a copy of the chamber of commerce newsletter to the minister because it does list the various points on which there has been some measure of agreement. I wonder whether the minister can comment on the report of the transportation committee of the Nanaimo Chamber of Commerce with respect to the points listed on this letter. It is a letter that I dated May, 1986.

The first point was the upgrading and completion of Stewart Avenue to Highway I standards from Cypress Street north to Brechin Road. It is of Highway I standards as far north as Cypress Street, but from there on it's a two-lane road. So there certainly is the need to proceed with the widening of that highway right to Brechin Road, which is the beginning of the B.C. Ferries entrance.

The second point they make is the upgrading of sections of Highway 1 from Esplanade through to Woodhouse Street, and Highway 19 from Stewart Avenue north to St. George Street. I know the minister is familiar with all of these problems; he's heard a lot about them over the years from myself, the chamber of commerce and the city.

The third point is the bypass, which the minister talked about earlier today when he said that perhaps the worst part of

[ Page 8577 ]

the Island Highway is that portion of it going through the city of Nanaimo. He also talked about the difficulty of acquiring property. I would just suggest, Mr. Chairman — and I'm sure the minister would agree — that in recent years there hasn't been a better time to acquire property, ever hopeful that the economy may improve. If the economy does improve, it's going to be that much more expensive to acquire the property that's needed. So I would urge some haste in arriving at a decision as to the exact location of the bypass, and some haste in acquiring the property before prices do move up.

Then the Bowen Road upgrading and four-laning, which has been proceeding at an orderly pace. That's the way these things should happen. I don't think we should be rushing to complete jobs. There have been highway projects in the province where we've been in a fantastic hurry to get everything done; working overtime, working holidays, everything. But I think the Bowen Road job is coming along well. It's being four-laned. I hope it will continue and that eventually we'll have it done totally. Then the additional river crossing with a northwest sector road.

There's just one other thing that isn't on there, which I've mentioned previously and which I think the minister has never commented on. I believe one of the worst situations in Nanaimo, perhaps anywhere in the province, has to be the intersection — it's not one intersection; it's two and it may even be four — where Brechin Road meets Estevan Road meets the Island Highway meets Departure Bay Road. There are four roads coming into.... If they met all at one point it wouldn't be so bad, Mr. Chairman; but they don't. They meet two at a time or three at a time; they never all come to one point. If you sort of dropped a bomb there and had to build it all over again, and relocated the roads so that everything met at one point, it would solve a lot of the problems. There are two traffic lights on the Island Highway within one hundred yards of each other.

I don't know the answer. Perhaps the minister hasn't responded in the past because he doesn't know the answer either, or perhaps it's just too doggone expensive to do anything about. I don't know of another situation in the province where those problems exist all in one small area, in one acre of land. I'd appreciate the minister's comments.

HON. A. FRASER: Before I answer the specifics, yes, we sure have lots of problems in Nanaimo — a bottleneck in Nanaimo — a lot of them not easy to resolve.

The member brought up the transportation committee of the chamber of commerce. The item one, upgrading completion of Stewart Avenue to Highway I standards from Cypress Street north to Brechin Road: it says here in brackets that it's the responsibility of the province, with the city paying a minor share for draining, lighting and sidewalks. I'm happy to tell you, Mr. Member, that the design is near completion and we're buying right-of-way now; so that project is on the way. You're quite correct in your observation that it's a good time to buy real estate, what with the market. They're actually purchasing right-of-way now.

The next item is upgrading of sections of Highway I from Esplanade through to Woodhouse, and Highway 19 from Stewart Avenue north to St. George Street. Yes, I assume that that is a provincial responsibility, and no commitments have been made there at all.

[4:00]

Item 3, the future bypass, which has become a provincial responsibility; that's correct. The bypass is under design at the present time. The other part — on the Chambers.... The note I have on the northwest sector road, including the additional river crossing. Is that those are city streets and they're eligible on their transportation plan for revenue-sharing money, which comes out of Municipal Affairs.

You brought up the pedestrian underpass at Transfer Beach near Ladysmith. This is included in the proposed design for four-laning. The left-turn lane request for the south end of Diamond Bridge. The answer I have on that is that it's too close to the structure to get the width for another lane. The left-turn lane request for Takala Road in Oyster Bay. We'll have to look into this because the people don't want to commit there — they'll have to look into it. The last item you brought up was Brechin and Estevan — Highway 19, Departure Bay. The note I have on that is that we redesigned this several years ago with a consultant and the city. Changes were made at that time. That's the best we can do for now. That is quite an intersection.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I have a number of concerns that I wish to bring to the minister's attention. Before I do, I'd just like to take this opportunity to congratulate our new deputy minister, Mr. Johnson, on his recent promotion. I might add that I've already had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Johnson a number of times, and I've found him most fair to deal with and very open to concerns, at least in the north Okanagan. I find it's a very worthwhile working relationship between the MLA's office and the Ministry of Highways. I just wanted to make that point because I feel that it is of real value to have open communications regardless of what side of the House a member may be sitting on, and I recognize his value and experience in that area.

[Mr. Ree in the chair.]

I'd also like to present to the minister the fact of our new district manager, Mr. Popoff, who was recently appointed and has been proving to be, I think, a very competent and able administrator. He seems to be responding well to local concerns, and I thought I should bring that to your attention.

A number of local issues. The one I want to address first is one that is of immediate and pressing concern. If the minister could refer to the May 15 edition of The British Columbia Gazette, on page 713 — "Establishing the Right-of-Way for East Vernon Road, Okanagan North Electoral District" — notice is given for the expropriation of property, as is explained in detail in that publication. As I mentioned, this publication came out on May 15, so notice for expropriation has been given. However, nothing seems to have been done with this particular problem. The owner of the property, Mr. George Penno, has apparently put up fencing and installed irrigation pipes right up to the pavement along the portion of property in question.

The reason I bring this to the minister's attention and suggest that it is of immediate concern is that this property is right next to an elementary school. The children are being forced to walk right along the roadway because there is virtually no shoulder whatsoever at this point. The principal of the school has tried to deal with the individual, Mr. Penno, and apparently — it's my understanding — was accosted at gunpoint. As well, individuals in the fire department have been treated in a similar manner on other occasions. A commissioner has apparently been hired to walk the children,

[ Page 8578 ]

because the corridor is so narrow and the traffic problem.... The kids are having to come right out on the road. It's a really dangerous situation, and it has gone on for far too long. We can be thankful that there haven't been any serious accidents.

The lawyer for Mr. Penno, Mr. Einfeld, has apparently refused to answer the requests from the Highways department in terms of the expropriation and, I might add, is presently spraying both pesticides and his irrigation water right on to the roadway because the pipes are coming up apparently right onto the road.

Now Mr. Penno apparently is aware of the gazetting. He's been made aware of the legality of the situation. He's been advised to move. He's simply and totally ignoring the situation. In fact, he's throwing up every roadblock that there is, and my concern is that nothing has been done. It seems that the ministry is procrastinating on this. They have published the information on expropriation and can use section 17 of the Highway Act to initiate action. I would like to ask the minister at this time whether he intends to take immediate action.

I might add that the fencing that comes right up to the roadway is five-strand barbed wire fencing. The clearance has been reduced to 19 feet of clearance, single lane traffic with warning signs put up by district Highways because of the danger. I think the situation is totally unacceptable, and without any prejudice in the matter I feet that the danger is significant enough to the young children who are in the school there that something has to be done immediately. I'd like the minister's response at this point.

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, to the member for Okanagan North, yes, our ministry has a problem. To bring you up to date, this is what we've done about it. As you have said, I think, Mr. Penno has put up fences at the edge of the pavement. We have recently been in touch with Mr. Penno's lawyer and advised him that the fence is in trespass and Mr. Penno could be responsible. Penno's lawyer has told us his client will remove the fence. We propose to give him some time to remove the fence before we take further action, and I would think that I agree with the report from the senior people on that in view of the fact that we're probably greeted with guns. So we're trying to get it settled, in other words, in a reasonable fashion. You mentioned that guns were used before, but the reason I mention that is that will be the reason for our apparent slowness in moving.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Mr. Chairman, it seems rather absurd that that type of situation does exist, but I've been advised that that information is accurate, although I can't attest to it firsthand. I'm pleased to see that you have been in touch with the lawyer. However, it's my understanding that even since that information has been conveyed to Mr. Penno he's attempting to forestall the proceedings by a number of mechanisms. The minister has said that he will give a reasonable amount of time for action to be taken. What would the minister consider to be a reasonable amount of time, because three weeks have elapsed and the minister is quite free to institute section 17 at this time.

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, to the member, the deputy tells me it's only about ten days ago that the lawyer agreed to have his client take it out. I would guess a reasonable length of time would be another two weeks to actually get it done.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I thank the minister for his response. I would hope that the minister recognizes full well the seriousness of the nature of the immediate danger to those children who have to use that particular section of roadway. I would ask that he remain committed to resolving this in the quickest manner possible.

Moving on to another area of concern, as the minister is fully aware, the Poison Park bridge, an overpass which actually spans the railway lines that come through Vernon, has been an issue of longstanding concern. The minister has been in receipt of previous correspondence from my office regarding the danger to traffic. I might add that there's a particular danger to motorcycle traffic because of the surface, or rather the lack of surface, of the bridge. I myself as a motorcycle enthusiast can attest to the danger of that bridge personally. I might add that I went over the bridge just the other day and the surface is completely worn off. They're down to the bare wood and the spikes sticking through. It's really in bad shape again.

I don't need to go on. The minister is fully aware of that. He's also aware that he's given a commitment that it will be upgraded. At this point, I guess, I'd like to ask the minister what the status of the bridge is, in terms of the design. What is the status in terms of calling for tenders for work to be done? What is the status with regard to the negotiations taking place presently with the railway?

HON. A. FRASER: I just want to say one more thing regarding Mr. Penno and his property. I'm further advised by staff that the RCMP have been notified, and we've asked for their help for the safety of those people until we can clear this up.

Dealing with the Poison Park bridge, we intend to call tenders on the bridge. I am not specific on that, but it won't be very long from now. I might say, for the benefit of the committee and the member, that I intend to be in the good city of Vernon on June 13, and maybe I'll have something to say about it then.

[4:15]

MR. MacWILLIAM: Well, in response to the minister's comment about being in Vernon on June 13, I'm pleased that he's taking the opportunity to visit the North Okanagan. I would assume it's for some reason, perhaps for opening a highway or a section of a highway. I will certainly, if the minister can convey that to me, make every attempt to make sure that the local representative is also there to attend the ceremonies.

With regard to another issue which the minister is presently in negotiation with, that's the 32nd Street extension, which would extend Highway 97 through the main drag, if you like, of the city of Vernon, extending the four-lane section of Highway 97 through Vernon, eliminating some of the dangerous right-angle comers that presently exist and finally swinging back onto the highway north of town. I wonder if the minister can advise as to the present status of the design for the 32nd Street extension, and whether he can advise when the commencement of work would be proceeding.

HON. A. FRASER: The Vernon 32nd Street extension is what we're discussing here. This project involves extending 32nd Street northerly as route 97 from 43rd for three kilometres to meet the present route 97 at the south end of Swan

[ Page 8579 ]

Lake. This will eliminate the jog in route 97 on 43rd Street and allow the 27th Street section of route 97 to revert to more local service as a major street.

Preliminary planning is not complete. Foundation soils will be a major problem on this section. Application is before the Land Commission for approval of part of the route that is in ALR. I'm advised just as of today or yesterday that the Land Commission has approved the application to take it out, so we're moving along. I would not anticipate construction starting shortly, but we're getting close. Hopefully it'll be in the 1987 program. But we're doing the administrative work. The deputy tells me we have a consultant working on the design now, getting ready for a tender call.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Was the minister mentioning the funding for 1987? Is he saying that there is no funding for that in the present fiscal year?

HON. A. FRASER: The most we will be doing regarding physical work is test fills and that. But we will be doing that in '86 and then be ready to go with the main job in '87.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Just moving back to the previous question involving Polson Park bridge, could the minister advise if there is funding budgeted for that in the '86 fiscal year?

HON. A. FRASER: To answer that, I'm not sure. I will have to check back. There might be the funding in the budget to make a start on it, put it that way. I think that is the case, but I am not sure. But not for completion.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Thank you to the minister for those responses.

Another issue of concern to the people along the Arrow Lakes is an issue that I had brought to the minister's attention back in the late fall sometime and that was brought to the minister's attention through direct correspondence. I am in receipt of a copy directed to the minister on February 17 from a Mrs. Annette Devlin, who is the secretary of the Fauquier community club. It outlines the concerns that the community has regarding the present Bailey bridge, a single-lane temporary bridge structure spanning Stony Creek about 12 kilometres north of Fauquier, between Fauquier and Burton. I have been along that road a number of times, and I can attest to the fact that that bridge is not safe. It is single-lane traffic, and the way that the traffic approaches that bridge causes some real concerns, especially if you don't know the road.

I might add that students are bused back and forth along that road twice a day. I think a number of buses go along the road, as well as a considerable amount of local traffic between the communities of Edgewood, Fauquier, Burton and the main community of Nakusp.

I have been informed previously by the district manager in discussions by telephone that there have been engineering studies and design studies done on the bridge. Those studies have been completed. Basically, the only thing needed at this point is funding for the actual construction of the bridge. In checking with Mr. Kazakoff, district manager in New Denver, they have still not received any funding, and it is only just a few hours ago that we contacted them. So the district manager is unaware of any funding. I know that I addressed this issue earlier with the minister, and he indicated that funding would be forthcoming.

I would suggest that in the light of a banner tourism year, which Expo 86 is intended to promote, we should be making every attempt to facilitate the flow of our tourism traffic, particularly in the interior areas. This is a serious problem; during the summer months the heavier traffic along the Arrow Lakes is causing some considerable concern. I wonder if the minister could advise whether or not there has been any funding established for the construction of this bridge in 1986.

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, the answer is no, there is no funding, no provision for a new bridge at this location. I just want to allay the fears of the member and the people, though, the Bailey bridge there is quite safe. The only thing I guess that is not safe about it is that it is single lane. A little bit of the history: I understand the main bridge was washed out a few years ago and replaced with a Bailey, but we do not have any funds this year to replace the Bailey with a permanent structure.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Can the minister advise how long the temporary bridge has been in place?

HON. A. FRASER: In this business, Mr. Chairman, they say there's nothing more permanent than when they talk about temporary items.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I guess I have to go to bat for the residents of that area, who really feel they've been short-changed in terms of their Highways budget allocation. It seems to be a reasonable request that this bridge, which is temporary, which is single-lane, which is dangerous, I would suggest.... The bridge itself may be safe, but the approaches to the bridge and the highway conditions sometimes experienced in that area cause some real problems. There have been many near misses in that area as a direct result of the bridge. I have to emphasize to the minister that with the millions of dollars expended on highways projects throughout B.C. In the past few years, I'm not prepared to accept that. I'm not criticizing those projects, but with the millions of dollars expended, surely enough money could have been allocated for the construction of a fairly minor bridge to facilitate the smooth flow of traffic. I would suggest to the minister that the people in that area will not be willing to accept that situation, and I feel you should reconsider it. It's an area that is often, I think, overlooked in terms of highway priorities. Highway 6 along the Arrow Lakes is not the best piece of road. It's often had problems with slumping and sliding and what not. I think the minister should pay a little more attention to this particular piece of road.

With regard to the Coquihalla Highway, I must admit to the minister that I've driven the highway twice now back and forth to my community, and I'm very impressed with the engineering. It saved me a considerable amount of time, both going up and coming back down. I was quite surprised at the time it did cut off. But a few concerns with regard to phase 3. Last year the minister said two proposals were being considered for the Merritt to Peachland route. I'd like to ask the minister what the present status is of these proposals; whether a final decision has been made. I'd also like to ask the minister what the present status is of the west side corridor which swings north from Peachland up to Vernon. You mentioned last year that the corridor would be identified by September 1985, so I hope that decision has been made.

[ Page 8580 ]

With respect to that, a question comes to my mind. which I guess just comes down to a simple rationale, the politics of road-building aside altogether. When I traveled north on the Coquihalla, I took the opportunity to travel from Merritt through the Douglas Lakes plateau, which is a gravel road that exits out onto Highway 97 around the Falkland-Westwold area. I really wonder why the west side corridor, rather than coming up the west side of Okanagan Lake...instead of being there, why wasn't it considered to come directly from Merritt, to come out where it presently exits at the junction of Highway 97A and Highway 97 in the north arm of Okanagan Lake? It comes right over the Douglas Lakes area. It's fairly gentle terrain. I guess I'm asking in terms of my own interest in it whether there was any consideration of a route going through there. In terms of effecting a smooth flow of traffic it would provide another route, separate from the Peachland to Merritt route, that would facilitate a smooth flow of traffic.

Perhaps the minister can comment on those.

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. A. FRASER: I just want to go back to the Bailey bridge. Maybe this is where we agree or disagree, but quite frankly, Mr. Member, in your riding our priority is, I guess, where the heavy traffic is. I think you'll have to agree that we have spent or are spending $18 million minimum from Vernon south on Highway 97. As I understood it, the community wanted that rebuilt road to get access to, as an example, Kelowna airport. To help relieve the Okanagan Valley generally we did a lot of work on the north end, and that work was done on the south end. In an area like that the original contract is completed at $11 million to $12 million; the second contract is under construction. I'm referring to heading south from Vernon on 97.

That's really how our engineers arrive at priorities — where the traffic density is. I guess money can be found to fix it all, but.... One of the reasons is that the engineers don't feel there's anything unsafe about the Bailey bridge. Your riding is not the only one; we've got a lot of Bailey bridges in place throughout the province, and they are safe, except drivers don't want to slow down for single lane bridges, and that presents some hazard.

[4:30]

Coquihalla phase 3: I'm not so sure I've got all the answers here you want, but on Coquihalla phase 3, as I said this morning, we have not only designed but let the first contract out, Peachland going west. What I'm not sure of is that all the route is laid out from there to Merritt. In any case, it's being worked on, and we haven't come to a position where we can say that the contracts will be called and the phase 3 will be completed. I hope we can arrive at that and certainly before the end of the summer be able to say that we've laid out the route finally, that we are ready to call contracts and get on with the rest of the tender business and so on, and also be able to say when that phase 3 would be complete from Peachland to Merritt.

Regarding the west side road, staff advise me the corridor study has revealed extensive environmental and physical problems and it's still being studied. That's the status of the west side route.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I don't want to go back, but because the minister had gone back and responded to a previous question, just to clarify with regard to the Bailey bridge, I gave the assessment that the bridge was dangerous, or perhaps not the bridge itself but the approach. That's not the concern of a single individual; there are many individuals in that community who have related that concern to me. I don't think it's a matter of slowing down so much, Mr. Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, but rather the particular approach to the bridge; and I think you have to be there to see it, because it is sort of obstructed. You don't realize that you're coming up to it until you are there. For a tourist who is not familiar with the highway, driving that road if they're tired at night, there could be some real problems.

Yes, I realize that the pot's not unlimited. There is a limit to what we can expend on a yearly basis. I just have to re-emphasize that the people along the Arrow Lakes feel neglected enough in terms of the economy of that area and always getting the tail end of the cat, if you like, and they have addressed what the communities there really do feel is a concern that should be looked at. I would like to impress that upon the minister. If at all possible, could he review that and consider their concerns for the upgrading of that particular section?

I want to go back to what the minister was saying about the west side corridor which swings north from Kelowna up along the west side of Okanagan Lake and exits just north of Vernon at the O'Keefe Ranch. It seems to me that the simple logic of the matter, now that we have made the decision to four-lane Highway 97 right from Vernon down through Kelowna and provide a four-lane access all the way up the east side of the lake, is that it is a little redundant to also provide a four-lane access up the west side of the lake which is running only a few miles apart from and parallel to the east side access.

I guess I'm just questioning more, and I'm taking politics right aside on this. I know roads are very political in British Columbia, but just in looking at it.... I don't know if the minister can see the map, but we're swinging all the way south down from Merritt to Kelowna and then all the way back up north. Now, if that west side connector, or corridor if you like, could be swung directly from Merritt across to Vernon, we'd be eliminating quite a few miles in terms of accommodating traffic flow. It would be going over the Douglas Lakes area and exiting at the north end of Okanagan Lake.

It seems to me that that makes more sense than dualtracking two four-lane highways, one on either side of the lake. It seems a more rational approach. I wonder if the minister has any comments on that. It's a suggestion I make for the minister's consideration.

HON. A. FRASER: The comment I have, and the policy that's been adopted — that is, to build from Peachland to Merritt — is that we're trying to focus on the centre of population in the Okanagan, not just on the north end. I think we pretty well hit that.

MR. MacWILLIAM: I don't want to extend the debate unnecessarily, but I wasn't actually referring to that section. You could still leave that section in there and take the west-side corridor and move it directly over, so you have two forks coming out, rather than going down and then all the way back up. You're saving quite a bit of mileage in terms of direct access to the north end of Okanagan Lake — directly from Merritt to the north end. Leave the Peachland connector in.

[ Page 8581 ]

Consideration: what you're doing now is double-tracking two four-lane highways, one up the east side and one up the west side. I guess I'm just wondering if that's a judicious expenditure of taxpayers' money. Now that we've made the decision to four-lane the east side of Okanagan Lake, and it's already in progress.... The minister has confirmed that. Rather than double-tracking that, the consideration is that perhaps we could go straight across instead of up the west side.

Okay, moving on to another area: a portion of the Yellowhead Highway from the CN junction in Kamloops to north of Heffley Creek, which is a section of the Yellowhead Highway about 17 kilometres in length. Anyone going north from Kamloops or coming from the north has to use this piece of road. The locals apparently refer to it as the "goat trail." It's a two-lane road which is very narrow. It has no shoulders. The information we've received is that it's substandard. There is lots of traffic — lots of commercial traffic, I might add. The commercial traffic, the truckers, claim that it's one of the most dangerous sections of road that can be found from Edmonton to Vancouver.

Apparently the ministry has just been patching the road and not doing any major reconstruction in that area. I wonder if the ministry has any plans for a major upgrading of this section of the road, in light of the comments made by the commercial truckers that it is a dangerous section of highway.

HON. A. FRASER: I hear about that section of road every day. From a lot of people, I don't think it's as bad as its made out to be, but the story behind it is that we spent millions living up to promises the former NDP government made in that area....

Interjection.

HON. A. FRASER: The member for Vancouver East.... You would be aware of your promises in Kamloops when you were government, Mr. Member.

We finally lived up to the former government's promises. I'm talking about four-laning from Kamloops and building a new $10 million Halston bridge. You're talking about Highway 5 immediately beyond that. The reason we're stalled is we had acquired the land from the Kamloops Indian band to go ahead. They came to us and said: "We don't like what you're going to do, and we want to relocate the highway you're contemplating, because it's going to interfere with our agricultural operation." They have a large one. That's where we're at at the present time in trying to do something with that section of road. We want to satisfy the Indian band that it won't have the greatest impact on their agricultural operation. We have actually acquired the right-of-way, but what they're really saying is: "We'd like you to move it." That's what we're trying to get settled.

I might say that the condition that's caused that is that we have a large urban growth in the area, compounded with commercial traffic. Yes, the road has to be upgraded, relocated, four-laned, and it will be. But until we get the ground to build it on, I can't give anything definitive at this time.

MR. MacWILLIAM: Mr. Chairman, I guess this example is sort of like the Bailey bridge example, where the ministry does seem to have unlimited resources in terms of the major projects, yet small local projects which are of considerable concern because of the safety element — two of them that we've identified here, although in separate areas entirely — go wanting, while the major projects such as the Coquihalla and the four-laning of 97 take priority. I guess what I'm saying to the minister is that attention has to be paid to the needs of the local communities that have addressed very specific problems to the ministry in terms of safety considerations.

One of the last items that I want to bring up for the minister was brought to my attention by a local blasting contractor in the north Okanagan area. He was quite upset. He came to see me around about March, and I promised I'd bring up this issue on his behalf. He came to see me because he's very upset that local firms can't seem to get work on the major government jobs for highway construction. His complaint is that the highway projects are all tendered out to the large general contractors and then the general contractors import a lot of their own subcontractors, I guess a lot of times from the Vancouver area, and it leaves the local contractors out in the cold.

About four years ago, as I've been led to understand, money was apparently allocated to regional Highways managers in order for them to hire local contractors. The question that this particular individual was asking was: why can't the district Highways personnel supervise future jobs and subcontract to local firms so that we an maximize the amount of local hiring, rather than simply contracting the whole job out to one overall or general contractor and then letting them hire their own friends in the business, often not local firms. The local firms are being left out, and I think this is something that has to be considered when you're doing highway construction projects. Local hiring needs have to be accommodated.

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, the member raises an ongoing issue we have every day in the ministry, and that is: who gets the work and who doesn't? Generally speaking there are two programs in the ministry. Large jobs and small go to tender call and go to the low bidder. Then in the case of a fair-sized job, the contractor can subcontract — as an example, a blasting contract. When they do that, they have to have the permission of our chief engineer. We have to know who it is, and so on and so forth. That way they can hire local firms, but unfortunately they don't do that sometimes, and they bring them from the lower mainland and they bring them right into the area where a local firm is there sitting and out of work. It is an embarrassment to the government.

[4:45]

The other program we have is what we call day labour, where our own people supervise and rent the individual piece of equipment, whether loaders, graders, dump trucks and blasting equipment — all that sort of stuff — and all that work goes to local people. We have an equipment list, and they're called out on the basis of where they stand on our hiring list. That is in constant argument every day when we are calling people out, because in some district offices — I don't know about Vernon — we have 200 dump trucks on the list from number I to 200, and we call 20 out to work and the other 180 come in and say, "How come I wasn't called? I'm in the first 20, " and the argument is on. But generally that is by far the best program we have to get the work to the local people, and the money stays locally.

In other words, we're doing a balancing act. We're trying to keep it so everybody can live and work — the large contractor as well as the small one- or two-truck operator or

[ Page 8582 ]

bulldozer operator. We have had funds, thanks to the treasury branch, so the last couple of years there's been a fair amount of work throughout the province — I'm talking for both — not as much as a lot of them would like, but that's how it's all done. It's all done by our good management people and works out fairly successfully.

MR. MacWILLIAM: In terms of the ministry tendering out the major contracts to the general contractors, it seems reasonable that there could easily be a rider in that tender that would require the general contractor to hire local firms. Would it not be possible to build that into the contracting? I am not saying hire local firms exclusively, but at least they should be given a fair shot to be able to compete on that job.

But I really think what is happening is that many of these large general contractors, often Vancouver-based contractors, are hiring the people that they have worked with, for example, in the Vancouver area. As a result, as we have mentioned before, the local firms go in need of work, and they are left out in the cold. Can't you build something into the contract itself?

HON. A. FRASER: Mr. Chairman, we have looked at all these angles. I will give you an example. We have different types of paving contractors. I know of two or three that have all their own equipment: 25 dump trucks, the hot-mix plant and so on. By the way, they have a union contract as well. If they are a low bidder, we can't very well say to them, "Hey, you've got to hire 50 percent local," because he bid on the basis that he will use his equipment.

We also have hot-mix contractors, particularly on the paving side, who don't have their own trucks, and we tell them that we want them to hire in the local area where they are working. They accommodate us very well. But where the contractor has got all his own, and he owns it, it is a different story. He can then say, we feel, to us: "That wasn't the terms of the bidding, and I've got my own trucks, and I've always had them, and that is what I am going to use."

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to say a few words about the two highway approaches to the North Shore, the Cassiar connector, the Trans-Canada Highway, and north over the Second Narrows Bridge, which I am told will cost of the order of $100 million to complete. That is the big one. It has urgency in the sense that there have been many accidents along that relatively short route. The lights should be eliminated. It should be possible to get through that section of Vancouver East with relative ease. From the North Shore point of view, it is increasingly the most important point of egress or exit for the majority of the population in North Vancouver city and district.

I would like the minister to say a few words about the present state of negotiation with the city of Vancouver and others, agreement hopefully, the nature of the new connector, when construction may begin and when it could be completed.

As important in some ways but much less expensive is the approach route through Stanley Park to the First Narrows bridge. While I realize that widening the causeway connecting Georgia Street and the bridge itself would not increase the capacity of that stretch of highway to any significant degree, it would certainly improve that stretch of highway from the safety point of view.

Mr. Chairman, the roadway through Stanley Park was built initially as a two-lane road to a two-lane bridge. Subsequently three lanes were painted both on the bridge and on that approach through Stanley Park. The original pavement is still there. There has been no black topping of the original concrete. It is badly broken up in places. But the worst aspect is the narrowness and the lack of drainage. I would think that for a cost of the order of $1 million it would be possible to remove one of the sidewalks, the sidewalk which is forever covered by spray from the traffic during any rainy periods, the sidewalk on the right-hand side as one drives north to the Lions Gate Bridge. Remove that sidewalk. Widen the roadway six or eight feet, put in proper drainage on that side and repave the entire stretch of road. There is an awful lot of blacktop being laid around the province. Simply laying blacktop on that stretch would do something for it. But to improve the drainage and at the same time widen that stretch of road by a few feet would make it much safer and much easier on vehicles and on the drivers. I think relative to any other stretch of road in the province it would be dollars well spent, perhaps the best dollars spent by the ministry.

I realize that the parks board in Vancouver has some say in that area, but I would have thought that within the right-of-way and including those two sidewalks it would be possible, by simply removing one of them, to have a strip of highway that is closer to modem-day standards, less of a hazard and much more conducive to safe travel than the present situation, which I think really is a disgrace. I realize that several levels of government are involved, and so on, but this is an intermunicipal stretch of highway and I would have thought that within the present right-of-way it would be possible to put in a half-decent stretch of highway.

HON. A. FRASER: Dealing with Cassiar Street, that's a very major project, as you know. Previous governments built the freeway and stopped it at Cassiar. We've been talking about it ever since, to complete the freeway to the bridge. My information is now that our ministry and the city of Vancouver have agreed on a basic design. They're now finalizing details. The depressed design the city has suggested makes relocation of underground utilities very difficult and expensive. That's the note I have. But I don't think we're getting too far away from the time when we have to start spending some big gobs of money on that section.

The other very busy road to the First Narrows through Stanley Park is a different story. The concrete on that road is worn out. I think you're going to see it go to gravel.

MR. LAUK: Before you do anything about it.

HON. A. FRASER: No. The city of Vancouver won't let us do anything with it. They don't want any pansies or daffodils or dandelions disturbed, and we have a hard time building roads without disturbing at least the odd dandelion. It's very difficult to resurface without tearing it up. The blocks of concrete on that roadway now are settling, and they're settling unevenly, so the next thing is they start to break and we get down to gravel. Then we'll have to use dust repellent to keep the dust down. I imagine that's what will happen when we'll finally get approval to go ahead and fix it the way we want to. And, the basic problem....

Interjections.

[ Page 8583 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I hear the hon. Minister of Lands, Parks and Housing (Hon. Mr. Kempf), but I can't see him in his seat.

HON. A. FRASER: From an engineering standpoint the basic problem is that we've got to get down underneath, fix the drainage and then build up from there. We haven't got that permission from the city of Vancouver at the present time.

MR. BLENCOE: I have a couple of items I wish to bring to the attention of the minister. First I want to compliment the minister for hanging in this afternoon with his voice,

The first item, which has been canvassed in the House today already but is one that I think I have to bring to the attention in terms of Victoria, is the lack of automobile testing in the province of British Columbia and in particular in the urban area of Victoria. I took the opportunity to talk to the inspector in charge of the traffic division of the city of Victoria, Inspector Hardy, who states quite categorically that they are finding far more defective vehicles on the road in the greater Victoria area. Indeed, it is of deep concern to them that traffic safety and automobile safety is being compromised. I know this has been brought up before, but he indicated that he really would, on behalf of the Victoria police department, very much like to see motor vehicle inspection returned to greater Victoria. And of course we would endorse motor vehicle inspection across the province of British Columbia. But in terms of my riding, the police department is on record as deeply concerned about the worsening effects of no testing, and would like to see the province bring back motor vehicle testing for this region. I certainly have seen, and others have brought to my attention, the effects of no motor vehicle testing here. There is no question that we are compromising traffic safety on the streets, and it is something the government cannot turn aside. They cannot give the usual answers they have given or try to dig themselves out through political answers. It is a matter of safety. Inspector Hardy has gone on record and quite categorically stated we need it back.

[5:00]

Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of other things which I have brought to the attention of the minister. One is a safety issue involving children on the McKenzie Avenue extension in Saanich. It has been brought to my attention by parents in the area. I have asked the minister to consider a pedestrian crossing at McKenzie Avenue and Burnside Road West. The minister has so far refused to address that issue of a pedestrian crosswalk. There are many parents' organizations in the area who are deeply concerned about their children going every day to school or some sort of institution that involves children, and the minister thus far has refused to build an overpass in that area. My understanding is that Saanich council has indicated it is prepared to contribute financially to such an overpass. I have not heard the opinion of the MLA for that area, who is sitting across the way right now, on what he feels about that overpass, but there is no question that the community and the neighbourhood.... .

AN HON. MEMBER: He's never there.

MR. BLENCOE: He's never there.

...are in favor and would like to see that overpass. I would like to hear the minister, if he could respond to that issue.

Mr. Chairman, one other issue, again a matter of safety, that has been brought to my attention a number of times — and I don't know if it totally involves this minister — is that there are more people riding bicycles in our community, and more people who are whilst riding those bicycles listening to their stereo cassette recorders. Motorists have brought to my attention many times that they have tried to warn a person riding a bicycle who is so tuned in to what they are listening to on their stereo recorder that they are really quite a danger on the streets. I am wondering if the government in its wisdom is considering some measures to warn bicyclists who are a threat not only to themselves but also to other people on the street. We may indeed need to look at some legislation in that area. There are more and more of them on the streets, and I know that I personally have noticed them. They just don't see automobiles coming. They don't hear the horn. They don't hear anything. I would like the minister to respond to that.

The fourth and last item is the whole question of the E&N Railway, which is certainly close to the hearts of Vancouver Islanders and Victorians and is something we believe should be expanded and enhanced. We believe there is a role for the provincial government to play in enhancing that little railway. It is the bicentennial of the E&N this summer, and we would like to know if the minister or this government has any ideas or thoughts about improving or developing a serious partnership with those who operate the E&N. There are all sorts of improvements that could be made to enhance the ridership, particularly in the tourist area — summertime tourism, wintertime in terms of skiers. The minister knows of the proposals that have been made in that area. There's no question that schedules could be improved. Food service could improve. We need better-integrated transportation planning around the E&N. There is a commuter-use strategy that could be developed for the E&N. Freight could be....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. member. I don't believe the E&N falls within the mandate of the minister's administrative functions. The Chair would also observe that the member's first item, should it be brought up again in this committee, could be considered tedious repetition under section 43, having been brought up many times in this minister's estimates. Would the member continue — but the Chair would consider the E&N not within the minister's administrative functions.

MR. BLENCOE: In terms of your comment about tedious repetition on testing stations, Mr. Chairman, perhaps it's the only way we might get through to this government that we need to return to testing stations in the province of British Columbia. British Columbians want to see them back, and if it takes being tedious and repetitious to bring them back, so be it — we will repeat the message.

You're right about the E&N, Mr. Chairman, but it is a transportation issue, and I know the minister has some thoughts on it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It also falls within standing order 43, hon. member — irrelevance and repetition in debate — in that if it's not within the minister's estimates it would be irrelevant debate. The member seems to be close on both items I and 4.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I know we've been in this House for a number of months, but some of these issues

[ Page 8584 ]

are indeed important, and the E&N is important to Vancouver Island. I know the minister thinks it's important. However, I will leave it there, and perhaps the minister will respond to some of the issues I have canvassed this afternoon.

MR. LAUK: He wasn't even listening.

MR. BLENCOE: Sure he was.

HON. A. FRASER: I'm always happy to hear from the MLA for Victoria. But quite frankly, this morning we canvassed motor vehicle inspections quite thoroughly. And to make it absolutely clear, we're not bringing back motor vehicle inspections for cars. We already have for commercial vehicles of all types.

You said that some inspector of the Victoria police.... I don't know whether he was the traffic superintendent or what, but I'd like to give you a message you can take to him. Tell him to carry out the law that now exists. The law is there. If a vehicle is mechanically unfit, it's up to him and his police to enforce that law. I would prefer that they enforce that law rather than be out on the Pat Bay Highway in a snowstorm at 6:30 in the morning picking up people going to work — in other words, readjust their traffic detail and get on to some of the more urgent issues, if that is what is taking place.

The McKenzie Avenue and Burnside overpass doesn't, in the opinion of our ministry.... The warrant that we require doesn't justify an overpass, but we have already put in an advance warning at that traffic signal. I might say that the MLA for the area is concerned about it, but we have actually taken some action. We're not going to an overpass, because it doesn't warrant it as much as — and I appreciate this — some of the local people feel it does.

Regarding bicycles, there are no regulations in Canada on that sort of thing, and we aren't anticipating any. I understand that Manitoba had some kind of a regulation that caused such a goof-up that they had to get rid of it. We're not looking at it at all.

Last but not least, the E&N Railway is of course under federal jurisdiction, but each time they threatened to eliminate it, the government of B.C., through our ministry, has fought to keep the service, like a lot of Vancouver Island MLAs have done. Right now I would just observe that I understand they've got more business than they can handle, and they should give credit to Expo for that.

MR. BLENCOE: Mr. Chairman, I wasn't going to respond, but I do have to respond to the minister's political rhetoric about the police officers carrying out the law as it's written. The minister is right, sure. There's the law there; we know that. But first, should police officers be taken up with that kind of activity when there are so many other more serious offences going on? The other thing, of course — and the minister is well aware of it — is that many of the faults or the problems with automobiles can't be seen by the eye, and a police officer, when he stops an automobile, can't see.... The minister may state that they can enforce the law, but it takes an inspection by qualified people to find these kinds of problems with automobiles. So the minister's weak defence doesn't stand up.

We still need proper testing in the province of British Columbia, Mr. Chairman, and I think we've got to bring it back. I'd like to thank my colleagues here for their great support this afternoon.

MR. WILLIAMS: I'm sure the overpass is moving along, but I just wonder if the minister could advise us what projections he has in terms of volumes for the third phase of the Coquihalla or the extension of the Coquihalla route to Peachland and Kelowna. Are there projections available in terms of expected volumes on that route between Merritt and Peachland?

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

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

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

HON. MR. GARDOM: Committee on Bill 5, Mr. Chairman.

HEALTH IMPROVEMENT APPROPRIATION ACT

The House in committee on Bill 5; Mr. Ree in the chair.

On section 1.

MR. STUPICH: Mr. Chairman, I made this point several times in debate, and the minister never commented, but as I read this, it's the Minister of Health who decides when, where and how this money will be spent on his own or her own.

[5:15]

HON. MR. CURTIS: Section 1 is the appropriation section. I hear the member interject "subsection (f)." The Minister of Health in practice would obviously deal with the Minister of Finance — at least. As I read section 1(f), the member is correct. But certainly the practice has been and would be in this instance that a Treasury Board process, which is very much in place, would apply here as well.

Sections 1 and 2 approved.

Title approved.

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

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Strachan in the chair.

Bill 5, Health Improvement Appropriation Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

HON. MR. GARDOM: Committee on Bill 4, Mr. Speaker.

EDUCATION EXCELLENCE APPROPRIATION ACT

The House in committee on Bill 4; Mr. Ree in the chair.

[ Page 8585 ]

On section 1.

MR. STUPICH: This time I'd refer the minister to subsection (g). It's the same thing as in the previous bill, but in this instance the decision as to how the money is to be spent — when, where and in what amounts — is to be made by the Minister of Education or the Minister of Post-Secondary Education. There's apparently no decision at this point in time as to how it's to be shared between the two ministries. Is it just first come, first serve — whichever one makes a grab first gets it? Or will there be pistols at dawn between the two of them? How will the decision be made?

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, with respect to section 1(g), no, it won't be pistols at dawn, and it won't be whoever turns up first. Quite clearly it is the government's intention that the excellence appropriation dollars be allocated between the Minister of Education for K to 12 and the Minister of Post-Secondary Education for community colleges, institutes and universities. Indeed, I think there will be healthy competition within both sections of the education constituency. That is certainly what the government is encouraging. Quite clearly the intent of the act is to cover all aspects of education. Not only the Minister of Education and the Minister of Post-Secondary Education, but other members of the executive council will also certainly want to see that there is a reasonable split between the two sections, if you will.

MR. STUPICH: All kidding aside, pure pork-barrel politics will make the decisions.

My concern, I suppose, is that it's the first time I can recall seeing a situation in which such sums of money are going to be spent at the decision of a cabinet minister. In every other instance, it would seem to me, it's at least the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council. Actually, it should be the Legislature, but under the present administration we've abandoned that. The cabinet has the authority to spend the money, and the Minister of Finance has the authority to borrow, I think, an extra half billion — that authority was given to him some six months ago. I'm just surprised that we've now come to the point where it's not the Legislature anymore, and it's not the cabinet. The legislation, it now says, is up to a minister, in this case two ministers. That is a departure, I am sure.

MR. WILLIAMS: Well, it is more and more the way we see everything being handled in this province, allowing the government or individual ministers to be totally arbitrary in terms of determining how huge amounts of funds are allocated. It allows them to give preference to their party favourites or regions. It is little more than the lottery game in terms of another $100 million. We have $100 million now in terms of the lotteries corporation that is expended in a totally political way with no criteria whatsoever. Now that basic idea is being expanded into Health and here in Education.

It is entirely at the discretion of a minister in terms of spending hundreds of millions dollars plus. We have seen it just now in Health. Now we see it in Education. No, we have a decentralized system of education in this province. We have school boards and the like. Far better that they should be given allocated funds and then make some decisions themselves. These are elected people who can make decent judgment. They shouldn't have to come begging, groveling to government and arguing that their particular program is better than somebody else's program. That's what they have to do under these funds.

It gives you that kind of additional political control that you people always seem to like in controlling duly-elected people at other levels. We are all the losers for this exercise. We are all the losers for that kind of exercise. We've got secondary or post-university education at among the lowest level in the country. You have them begging cap in hand for some of these dollars along with people who want help in a kindergarten or English as a second language in my community or others.

It just shouldn't be that way. It simply shouldn't be that way; there should be funds allocated on a clear basis. It shouldn't be on this kind of basis, where a minister can dole out, on a political basis, huge amounts of money. There is a need for greater judgment, greater clarity and a real definition in terms of how funds are to be allocated in an area like education. That doesn't happen under this statute at all. It's a pork-barrel, not for just one year. It's for a good half a dozen years, and that clearly is an indication of how bankrupt this administration is in terms of developing decent new ideas to meet fundamental challenges in education.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Speaking to section 1, I have some news for the second member for Vancouver East. The majority of school boards in the province of British Columbia don't agree with him. He may not know that....

Interjection.

HON. MR. CURTIS: And another interjection. The member can take his place. Let's have a good debate this afternoon.

The last information I had was that at least 68 school districts — and I caution the committee, Mr. Chairman — have already made submissions, have shown interest in this program, and indeed it may be a higher number than that now. Curiously enough, just today.... With a straight face, you're out of touch with what is happening out there in school districts from north to south and east to west in this province, Mr. Member for Nanaimo (Mr. Stupich). What did the member...?

MR. STUPICH: Is this your campaign speech?

HON. MR. CURTIS: No, this is committee on a bill, Mr. Member. What did the member say, Mr. Chairman — the second member for Vancouver East (Mr. Williams)? He said: "Cap in hand, begging, groveling." They're not doing that. They are submitting good, innovative, excellent ideas for education in the province of British Columbia.

I happened earlier today to read....

Interjection.

HON. MR. CURTIS: The member speaks against Expo again; well, we're used to that from that side. He speaks against Expo; that's fine. I heard him; he said "Expo." I don't want to deviate from the committee's study here, notwithstanding the member for Nanaimo's dislike for Expo.

Let me just say that earlier today by chance, Mr. Chairman, I saw a copy of a letter from School District 64, Gulf

[ Page 8586 ]

Islands, and they didn't say: "We come...." This is addressed to the Minister of Education (Hon. Mr. Hewitt), with a copy to the MLA. Curiously enough, if you listen to the second member for Vancouver East, the letter did not say: "We come cap in hand, groveling, begging for approval of what we want to do." They said, and I paraphrase slightly: "We are delighted with the opportunity to offer these initiatives in education for the students of the Gulf Islands School District" — District 64. Mr. Member, you are so far out of touch. You don't understand what's happening out there. You're locked in the past, so far back that I really feel sorry for you, Mr. Second Member for Vancouver East.

MRS. DAILLY: Mr. Chairman, we're not locked in the past. In fact, we're the party which has been looking to the future and been very concerned about what's happening to education in this province.

To reply to the minister directly in this debate, of course the school boards have been applying to the Minister of Finance. Of course the school boards have been applying. What choice do they have?

Now when the minister says "with enthusiasm," that's a complete subjective judgment on his part. I'm sure when they come in to get it, they're not going to come in with long, sullen faces. They're decent kind of people. But I can tell you, if they had their choice between having to come before the Minister of Education to get this money and being able to handle the money in their own districts from the beginning, I can tell you what they would do, and the president of the BCSTA has stated that. I don't think there's one school board in the province, if they had been given the choice, that would not have said: "Give us the budget as we should have it to meet our own needs."

Now back to the political side of this bill, which is primarily what it is, it's interesting that since the new Minister of Post-Secondary Education was appointed, there has been a flurry of news releases almost every day. In it he's announcing: "Hon. Russ G. Fraser, Minister of Post-Secondary Education, is pleased to announce...." We know exactly what it's going to say, over and over again. This time the approval of $575,000 for Northern Lights. That's only one of about — I don't know — 20 that that minister has already sent out.

Now my question to the Minister of Finance is: we see almost $80 million has been spent through all these kinds of announcements in the last few months. Will the minister tell me where that money has come from? Is that money that has come from this bill that we're debating? Where has that $80 million come from?

[Mr. Strachan in the chair.]

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, I submit that this is an appropriation section of a finance bill. The specifics were outlined and debated in the budget and budget debate, Mr. Chairman. Where is the money coming from? Obviously the money is coming from consolidated revenue, but I don't believe I can answer the member's question in committee debate. It might have been more appropriate in second reading. It's an appropriation section, Mr. Chairman.

[5:30]

MR. STUPICH: When the minister was speaking previously, I think he misheard me. I'm sure he misheard me, is what I wanted to say. When everybody says "I'm sure" about something, you know that they have an element of doubt in what they're saying.

I think he did mishear me, and he said something or other about Expo. I said nothing about Expo. What I said was that one of the innovative programs for which school boards have been asking for money is to purchase textbooks. Because money was taken — misappropriated — from the textbook vote and then replaced in part. Mr. Chairman, that is described by the minister as an innovative program that the school boards have enthusiastically endorsed. There has been no enthusiasm. They're told, look, if you want to get any of this money to try to maintain some minimum standard of education within your school district and to reduce the increase in taxes you're going to have to levy locally, then you have to justify it in the terms of the legislation in the program before us. You have to try to make it fit the intent of this bill, the political direction of this bill, if you want to get any of the money to replace those funds which have been cut back in order to provide some money in the first place.

The hon. member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly) asked where the money is coming from. We're dealing with some $80 million that has already been announced by ministers, and there has been no vote approving it. This bill is the one that provides for the money for each of three years. We haven't passed the bill yet, but the money has been spent. So I think the member for Burnaby North was asking a very legitimate question. The minister knows full well and is falling back on the budget debate to say: "Well, it was approved generally then." Mr. Chairman, if that were the answer, why are we bothering with estimates at all? We approved the budget. Was that the whole thing? Does that mean we can't talk about anything from that point on? There is the budget and there is the bill. If there was no need to provide for the money in the appropriation section of Bill 4, then why do we have Bill 4 before us at all, if in approving the budget we approved everything that's talked about in the budget?

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, I rise only to apologize to the committee and the member. I thought he said Expo, and I'm glad he clarified. I did not deliberately mishear him. I wondered why he was saying Expo.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Speaker, here are a number of announcements, all made on May 12 by the Minister of Post-Secondary Education. We're talking here.... This is a slush fund. There's no question about that. The money — and I have gone through it three or four times — was taken from the regular budgets. It was tunnelled off into this special slush fund. Son of entrepreneurship — the $12 million of last year. The same thing happened in Health. The same thing is happening in Forestry.

Here's one: May 12. This is the first one.

AN HON. MEMBER: What year?

MR. ROSE: This year. "Post-Secondary Education Minister Russell G. Fraser today announced the allocation of $155,000 to North Island College from the fund for excellence." Congratulations.

[ Page 8587 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just one moment. There's a small offence here. A member's name should not be mentioned. I understand....

MR. ROSE: I was just quoting the press release.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That still makes it out of order. You cannot by one mechanism do something that you couldn't do ordinarily, and the minister must be referred to by the portfolio or his riding.

MR. LAUK: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, it is long-standing parliamentary practice that a member must quote accurately from a document. A member cannot quote accurately without stating what the document says. With the greatest conceivable respect, it is clear in Beauchesne. I know that as the session grinds on and on and on, Mr. Chairman has forgotten his Beauchesne and his Sir Erskine. It becomes a distant memory. But in fact you must quote from a document accurately, and that may include the names of people who are members of the House.

MR. CHAIRMAN: With the greatest respect to the second member for Vancouver Centre, his point of order is incorrect. As I said earlier, you cannot use the name of a member in debate; it is unparliamentary. You cannot use the device of a press release or a newspaper story or whatever to say or do something that is unparliamentary.

In terms of quoting correctly, the member is quite correct; but we just cannot mention the member's name. Simply referring to the Minister of Post-Secondary Education is appropriate.

MR. ROSE: I don't see how I can quote from a document without reading the document. I just find it totally.... To me, it shows a lack of respect for the person who wrote the document. After all, it went into the newspaper for the very purpose of this propaganda — you know, partners in propaganda. Here's May 12. I'll follow your ruling, Mr. Chairman [applause] — to the enthusiasm of Thumper the Rabbit over there. "Post-Secondary Education Minister" — who shall be and remain nameless — "announced an allocation for North Island College: $155,000." That's one of them. Usually it says, like this one: "Post-Secondary Education Minister" — eh-eh-eh — "and MLA" — bleep-bleep-bleep — "from North Peace River today announced jointly an allocation of $130,000 for Northern Lights College." Now there was no local MLA mentioned in this one for North Island. You know why? Because the member from North Island — and I wouldn't want to use his name and offend the Chairman — is not a government member. So he gets no announcement.

HON. MR. CURTIS: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. We are on section 1 of this bill. Are we debating press releases or the appropriation? The member has indicated that a school district in North Island has received some money, or has been announced as having received some money. I don't think that the nature or the style of the press release associated with that is relevant to section 1.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister makes a good point. The committee, if we review the Journals, will find out there was quite a bit of latitude allowed during second reading of this bill, which is where the political debate and the debate on principle takes place. However, we are reminded that in committee stage of the bill we must be strictly relevant to the clause or section before us. This is an appropriation clause and that really is all we can discuss.

MR. ROSE: And this is an appropriation, with all due respect. I'm not going to let that Finance minister, as he does, try every time I get up to speak on one of his bills to muzzle me with some phony point of order. We're talking here of a multimillion dollar slush fund. That's what we're talking about. On May 12 we have 19 press releases, all featuring the Minister of Post-Secondary Education (Hon. R. Fraser) and a gaggle of Socred MLAs, depending upon where the college happened to be located.

Number three: " Post-secondary minister of education" — blank — "and MLA from Atlin" — blank — "today jointly announced an allocation of $136,000 to Northwest College from the fund for excellence in education."

AN HON. MEMBER: Relevance.

MR. ROSE: Number four: "Premier" — blank — "post-secondary minister" — blank — "announced an allocation of $391,000 for Okanagan College from the fund for excellence."

Oh, dear, look what happened. This is number five, isn't it? Yes. "Post-secondary education minister Russell G. Fraser today announced...."

MR. CHAIRMAN: Uh-uh.

MR. ROSE: Oh, I withdraw, I withdraw.

Interjections.

MR. ROSE: Well, look, I don't think of him as a complete blank, so that's why occasionally I use his name even though we do draw a blank from time to time — most of the time — from him.

"...today announced an allocation of $42,000 to Pacific Marine Training Institute from the fund for excellence." Where is the Pacific...? Where is it? What happened? There was no MLA along with that announcement. I thought it perhaps might have been in Nanaimo or someplace like that.

But here we have the Open Learning Institute — another announcement by the minister. These are all on the same day. This outfit uses more paper.... You're worse than the beavers. You chop down more trees for paper than a whole sort of colony of beavers.

Interjections.

MR. ROSE: I'm not finished with this yet. I've done the Open Learning Institute; no MLA was there because I suppose there was no MLA available.

Selkirk College — another one. Now whose riding is Selkirk College in? How come that one was ignored?

Oh, here we've got another one. Here we are again on May 12: " Post-secondary education minister" — blank — "and MLA" — blank — "from Vancouver South today jointly announced the allocation of $1 million to Vancouver Community College from the fund for excellence."

[ Page 8588 ]

Is this press release number nine? The minister looks like he's getting ready to spring to his feet again. He's on the balls of his feet. He'll probably get up with another phony press release. Oh, here we've got one.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order! Now the minister made the point....

MR. ROSE: I'm sorry, I withdraw.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The minister made the point earlier that this is a finance bill in the charge of the Minister of Finance. Discussion of another ministry is most inappropriate, and discussion of the style of press releases is also inappropriate. Further, the member is reminded of standing order 43, where we cannot indulge in tedious or repetitious argument. I will commend that to the member.

HON. MR. GARDOM: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, also to assist you, I refer you to standing order 40(3): no irrelevant member shall be in debate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, you've misunderstood that one. It's quite clever, but it's: "No member shall be irrelevant in debate."

HON. MR. GARDOM: You could well understand how I misunderstood.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. Thank you.

Now the operative clause here is "appropriation from consolidated revenue," and really that is the scope to which we can debate the section we are currently studying.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, all I'm attempting to demonstrate, whether or not you think I am tedious and repetitious.... I seem to have a lot of people listening, for somebody who's tedious and repetitious. As a matter of fact, this place is the soul of tedium, the very centre of it — the capital of tedium.

MR. CHAIRMAN: To the section, please.

MR. ROSE: Here we have New Caledonia. Guess who's mentioned in the press release.

MR. CHAIRMAN: This is a good one, but no, the Minister of Finance on a point of order.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, I stand as the Minister of Finance. I have not issued press releases which the member is quoting. My name has not been used in them. This is section 1, an appropriation section of a bill with respect to excellence in education, post-secondary and....

Interjection.

HON. MR. CURTIS: It's wonderful. I'm sorry that I have to rise on a point of order, but press releases are not covered in section 1.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister is absolutely right. The Chair has advised the member that as we're getting to press release number ten, we're obviously becoming repetitious. If the member would speak to the appropriation out of consolidated revenue, section 1.

MR. ROSE: Mr. Chairman, could I, with all.... Your Honour, with undue.... With overwhelming respect — not just undue but overwhelming respect — the appropriation section deals with provincial funding for boards of school trustees. I was speaking of that: institutions under the College and Institute Act, and I am sure that some of my remarks would cover, at least peripherally, some of those institutions — BCIT and the universities, under improving the quality of education instruction and research, modernizing educational facilities and equipment. Now if you would like me to go into the details of these press releases — and I think that with all due respect to the Minister of Finance, who certainly knows so much about Beauchesne that he could probably rewrite him, or Erskine May or any of those wizards....

[5:45]

I don't want to bore the Chair. I don't want to drive the Chair crazy, but the point is made that there are 19 or 20 press releases involving millions of dollars here that are used just as a slush fund to get the name of the minister, who shall remain nameless, get his name in lights along with the local MLA, provided the local MLA is a government member.

AN HON. MEMBER: Or an approved government member.

MR. ROSE: Well, perhaps. But we see everybody. We see the member for Surrey — there he is over there — on Kwantlen College. He got his name in lights. One from Chilliwack, from Fraser Valley College, the member from Chilliwack. Oh, here's one: here is the member for Kootenay (Hon. Mr. Segarty), the Minister of Labour, and the former minister that used to be in charge of patronage in the Provincial Secretary; he got one for East Kootenay College. These are almost like getting valentines. There are so many of these. Emily Carr College. My gosh, who's this? Vancouver area MLAs. I can't use his name, but his initials are D.M., and his partner, G. McBlank, announced that one. Oh, here is one for Maillardville-Coquitlam; that's for Douglas College. I wasn't mentioned in this. This is my area too, you know. I wasn't mentioned in that announcement. No, I was ignored.

Here is the one that I am going to close with. I won't mention any names. I won't be tedious. I won't even be repetitious. The capital funding allocation will allow Camosun College to upgrade its roofing. That's excellence in roofing.

Interjections.

MR. ROSE: Senator Foghorn from Surrey is claiming now, Mr. Chairman....

Interjections.

MR. ROSE: I don't know why they always pick on me.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The committee will come to order.

MR. ROSE: The fund of $32,000 goes to Camosun mentioning the current Oak Bay MLA — to upgrade the

[ Page 8589 ]

roofing, and you're complaining that the money has been frittered away on teachers or something like that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, your time has expired.

MR. LAUK: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member is just starting his remarks. The only thing is, I'd like to correct the hon. member for Coquitlam-Moody on one point of the English language. When we're referring to a group of Socred MLAs, it's not a gaggle of MLAs, it's a drove of MLAs.

MR. ROSE: I think I've said enough tonight. I don't know why, when I get up, I tend to provoke some of the others. I think there were some rather unsavoury outbursts from the other side. I'm quite gentle. Most of the time I just get up here and pelt them with marshmallows. Nevertheless, I think this is a very serious matter. This doesn't equal the record. Out of the $12 million for the college funds last year, they got 42 press releases. I don't think they're even keeping up to their record for last year here, but it's early. They've got $600 million to go.

I want to say something serious about this excellence bit. If you're really interested in excellence, you let the people at the local level make the decisions about the spending. You let your duly elected school boards do it. And your college boards, even though they are appointed, loyal members, or at least supporters, of the governing party. You let them do it.

HON. MR. CURTIS: Mr. Chairman, a point of order. This is an appropriation section. It's not a question of what should have been....

AN HON. MEMBER: We are appropriating.

HON. MR. CURTIS: With respect, I hold the member in high regard, Mr. Chairman, but we are not discussing what should happen in terms of school districts, the Ministry of Education or Post-Secondary Education. We are discussing appropriation, section 1.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Right. Appropriation, consolidated revenue fund, section 1.

MR. ROSE: You leave me virtually speechless. The operative word is "virtually."

HON. MR. CURTIS: Never totally.

MR. ROSE: Never totally.

I understand about educational spending and how it's done, and I understand what the appropriation section of it means. But I can't sit down without leaving the minister an expression of my complete disillusionment with this kind of behaviour with these special funds. If you want to look at what one state did in terms of their GNP improvement because they invested in education, I refer you to Time magazine of May. This is about Texas, and their support for education and what kind of growth they've had, instead of poor-mouthing teachers and bad-mouthing trustees and trying to cheat and squeeze money....

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, that's getting quite irrelevant, hon. member.

MR. ROSE: I withdraw "cheat."

MR. CHAIRMAN: The remark is irrelevant to the section, A lot of latitude has been allowed, but the last debate was totally irrelevant. Continue on section 1.

MR. ROSE: I agree that I did stray a little bit, but it really was to try and make the point. Since I'm a new member to this House I'm entitled to some.... I'm not suffering from old-timer's disease, but I would just....

Interjections.

MR. ROSE: Old-timer's. That's what I said, yes. Anyway I don't see how we can support this even in committee. We tried to do what needed to be done, to take these funds during our amendment and see that they went to the boards. We lost. But I think that the House needed to know what these funds are really for. I tried to make the point. I found it very difficult, because every time I mentioned slush funds people got angry and started shouting at me, and I'm not used to it, and I'm on the verge of tears. [Applause.]

Sections 1 and 2 approved.

Title approved.

HON. MR. CURTIS: When you're through with your call, Mr. Chairman.... Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee rise and report Bill 4 complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

MR. LAUK: On a point of order, during applause, where the Chairman cannot be heard calling a section.... We have no debate on the rest of the bill, but the point is that that's a very dangerous thing, I say with respect but with a warning, for the Chairman to do. The committee's business is very serious, and to shuffle it through under applause like that is not proper.

Interjections.

MR. LAUK: We believe it's section 2, and I just happened to see his lips moving and the minister rise, and that's not a proper thing to do in committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I heard many ayes, hon. member, and it appeared to be quite audible to me.

[ Page 8590 ]

AN HON. MEMBER: And the title?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, and the title. It was very audible to me, and the motion has been made.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Bill 4, Education Excellence Appropriation Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed on division.

Hon. Mr. Ritchie tabled the 1986 annual report of the B.C. Buildings Corporation.

Hon. Mr. Gardom moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 5:55 p.m.