[ Page 21 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Oral Questions

Meat-processing plant. Mr. Rose –– 21

Sale of B.C. prefab houses to South Africa. Mr. Barnes –– 22

Unemployment. Mr. Clark –– 23

B.C. Ferries deck structure. Mr. Huberts –– 23

Price of beer. Mr. Lovick –– 23

Throne speech debate

Mr. Skelly –– 23

Hon. Mr. Rogers –– 30

Ms. Edwards –– 32

Mrs. Gran –– 34

Mr. Sihota –– 36

Mr. Dirks –– 38

Mr. Guno –– 41

Mr. Mercier –– 44

Tabling Documents –– 46

The House met at 2 p.m.

HON. MR. VEITCH: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure today to welcome to the Legislature Mr. John Leech, who is the executive director with the Applied Science Technologists and Technicians of British Columbia. John's group of about 5,000 members was granted separate legislation in 1985 to regulate training and practice of technologists and technicians, graduates of the British Columbia Institute of Technology and community colleges. John is also serving as president of the BCIT Alumni Association and put in a term on the board of governors of BCIT. He is joined by Mr. Jim Bennett, who is well known to many members of the House and served as the ministerial assistant to a very distinguished former member of this House, Dr. McGeer. I wish the House to bid them welcome.

MR. SKELLY: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the House to welcome, from the great constituency of Port Alberni, my campaign manager during the last election campaign, Marlene Dietrich, who is here with another campaign worker, Karen Johnston. They are here today to observe the response to the throne speech. With them is another campaign worker over many years, my wife, Alexandra Skelly.

HON. MR. DAVIS: In the gallery this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, we have Mr. and Mrs. Larry Page of West Vancouver and Mr. and Mrs. Art Clemiss of North Vancouver. I'm sure members of the House would like to bid them welcome.

MR. SIHOTA: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the House to join with me in welcoming our new Pages with us today. The Pages are from Shoreline Junior High School in View Royal, which is located in the fine riding of Esquimalt-Port Renfrew.

HON. MR. HAGEN: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure this afternoon to welcome from the great riding of Comox two friends of mine, Mr. and Mrs. Stan Rowe.

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I'd ask the House to welcome a visitor to the House from Alberta, the MLA for Vegreville, Mr. Derek Fox, who happens to be in a huge loyal opposition in Alberta.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, I have a horoscope here:

"If March 10 is your birthday, current cycle highlights cooperative efforts, possible partnership, marriage. There could be an addition to the family; married or single, you could go into business for yourself. You'll have success in dealings with public, especially women."

And with that said I would ask the House to join with me in offering many happy returns to the first member for Vancouver-Point Grey (Ms. Campbell).

MS. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce a friend of mine from Creston who is currently a student at the University of Victoria, Troy Lanigan. Welcome to the House.

HON. MR. MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I would like the House to make welcome two people from my constituency, as well as another guest in the House: first of all, Ivy Ford, a very hard-working member of my constituency association; also, Jim Morrison, who is a resident of the Falkland community. He's accompanied today by his father, Bill Morrison. I would ask the House to make them all welcome.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me to welcome an old friend, a good supporter and hard worker from that great constituency of Kamloops. Would the House please make welcome Mr. Ed Sawatzky.

MR. MOWAT: Mr. Speaker, in the House today we have a former member of the Sergeant-at-Arms' staff who served our House well for so many years, Mr. Bill Roach. I would ask the House to make him welcome.

MR. BARNES: On behalf of the former second member for Vancouver-Point Grey, I would like to ask the House to join me in making welcome all those people who have not yet been made welcome. With that, will we please welcome everybody else in the galleries.

MRS. GRAN: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the House to welcome a very special friend of mine: my husband, John Gran, from Langley.

MR. PETERSON: Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I introduce to this House two very fine ladies who work very hard for the great constituency of Langley as constituency secretaries. Would the House please extend a very warm welcome to Marjorie Allen and Ida Fallowfield.

Oral Questions

MEAT-PROCESSING PLANT

MR. ROSE: As his former Member of Parliament, I have the honour of lobbing the first marshmallow question to the Premier. I would like to ask the Premier: since he returned from his recent vacation in Europe, one of his announcements was made for a $50 million processing plant in the Prince George-Vanderhoof area to be constructed as early as this summer. I wonder if the Premier can give the people of B.C. some more details of this souvenir from Europe and if he can name the company that will undertake this project.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Initial discussions with respect to this meat-processing plant in the Prince George-Vanderhoof area commenced just before our conference with municipal leaders on decentralization, and I had a further meeting and discussed in detail the prospects for this plant with the mayor of Vanderhoof and others attending the conference. Following that meeting, because I was traveling to Europe, it was agreed that I would meet with one of the proponents in Germany, and one of the proponents — the gentleman is resident in Vanderhoof for a good part of the year, although he also has a residence in West Germany — took me to a meat processing plant which is similar to or would be similar to that which is proposed to be established in Prince George.

The name of the plant that I saw in Munster, Germany, was Westfleisch, and it's a model from which the plant in Prince George or Vanderhoof will be copied. The proposal, too, is to provide for a feed mill in Vanderhoof and possibly

[ Page 22 ]

Williams Lake, and the plans are being worked on right now. The gentleman is returning to Canada. I guess perhaps this week is when he was planning to return, so I'm hoping to hear from him almost any day, at which time we'll commence further discussions as to what it is that we perhaps can do immediately to encourage this proceeding forthwith.

It's a facility that will employ a considerable number of people, but it's also very complementary to what's being proposed or worked on for Dawson Creek. It's in keeping, too, with another proposal — potentially, at least — for a tannery in the Quesnel area.

[2:15]

MR. ROSE: I'd just like to respond that the name of the plant, Westfleisch, bristles with imagery.

I would like to ask whether, since the minister claims that this plant will employ 600 workers to process 2,000 head of cattle and 5,000 hogs a week, the Premier is aware that there was recently a shutdown by B.C. Packers of a similar dual-purpose plant that's hogs and cattle and that happened in Winnipeg. One company spokesman said that there was to be awarded this Westfleisch plant substantial government assistance. Would you, as the Premier, be prepared to tell the House, since the minister has said he intends to get the government off the backs of the people, how much this plant is going to cost the people of British Columbia?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: First of all, Mr. Speaker, whatever the proposal put forth, the initial consideration or the immediate consideration is what is the investment by the proponents? In this particular proposal what may be asked, and certainly it hasn't been discussed as yet but what I expect will be asked of us, is that we assist the farmers, because we have to get a number of beef and hogs available fairly quickly. You can't have a plant sitting waiting too long. So we need to perhaps be involved in somehow assisting the farmers of the region. Now we've not discussed that, but I expect that is the approach they might be taking.

What is very attractive, however, about a German company establishing in British Columbia is that not only do they build the facility, and not only do they bring with them a particular expertise, but also they are bringing with them markets. The proposal again is to market the product, a good part of which will be fancy sausages, in the U.S.A. as well as in Germany and other markets they already know to be available to them.

MR. ROSE: As a supplementary, the people of British Columbia would want to be assured that the plant is for real and is not just another headline. Since the minister mentioned it himself, I'd like to ask the minister, since B.C. produces only 60,000 finished cattle per year and the plant, to be economically efficient, will need 100,000, how will this increased production of cattle and hogs be accomplished?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Well, Mr. Speaker, there's no shortage of land and there's no shortage of people in the north country who are well able to raise cattle and hogs once they know or are reasonably assured there's a good market available for the product. So I have every faith and every belief that the people of the north will respond to this new industry and the potential for it and not only provide for themselves an income in establishing a business, but hire a lot of people in the process. So I'm very enthusiastic about that aspect of it.

Now as far as the headlines are concerned, I don't write the headlines but I think this good, positive publicity that we're getting for British Columbia is most encouraging and will obviously lead to others wanting to invest or look at B.C. as a place to invest.

MR. ROSE: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, all of us want B.C. to grow and flourish industrially, in terms of secondary manufacturing of various kinds. One of the markets mentioned was Europe. The Europeans, through the EEC, take special pains to protect their markets. I wonder if the minister has received any assurances from the EEC that they won't just invoke protective tariffs on B.C. products emanating from this plant, to protect their own industries. As I understand it, the world may be waiting for a sunrise, but it's definitely not waiting for another sausage.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Speaker, that's a very good observation. I agree that marketing in the European Economic Community countries could certainly be a problem. That very question was raised during the meetings that I attended in Germany. They provided me with verbal information to indicate that they in fact had already made some approach to the appropriate authorities to ensure that they could in fact market the product in Europe.

SALE OF B.C. PREFAB
HOUSES TO SOUTH AFRICA

MR. BARNES: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier concerning the export of houses to South Africa. Last year the Premier made a rather bizarre suggestion that there was a potential market in South Africa for British Columbia prefabricated houses. Which companies has the Premier contacted with respect to marketing such houses, and to what extent have feasibility studies been conducted in regard to this proposal?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Speaker, I'm still of the opinion that if in fact there's a way that we can assist the people of South Africa by providing them with materials that we have plenty of and which they need for housing, and particularly for housing poor people, because the proposal, as I recall, was for small, relatively inexpensive homes....

I'm still of the opinion that this would be good for all sides and would hopefully go some way to addressing some of the problems that exist in South Africa. So I am not averse to this proposal, as I said then and say again. However, it is something for the private sector. We're not, as a government, in the business of selling or manufacturing houses. This is something that the private sector can pick up on and proceed with, if they wish it, and it's not for us to be involved with.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Speaker, a brief supplementary. Is the minister suggesting that he has consulted with no firms in the province with respect to the possibilities of conducting trade of prefabricated houses? That was a specific question, naming the companies. If so, to what extent have feasibility studies been carried out in terms of economic potential for the province?

[ Page 23 ]

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Speaker, I was not consulted, nor have I consulted with any private firms in the province regarding this. I was sent a letter, perhaps two or three weeks back, indicating that someone was in fact interested in manufacturing these homes. But my response has been: "Pursue it yourself." We're not in that business. This is something for the private sector, and if they wish to pursue it, whether they are here or in Alberta or Quebec or Ontario, that's their business, but not for the government.

UNEMPLOYMENT

MR. CLARK: Mr. Speaker, job creation is being ignored by this government. I would like to ask a question to the Premier about his real priorities when it comes to this issue. Given the fact that over 24 percent of young people between the ages of 15 and 24 are unemployed in this province, it was shocking to note that the throne speech contained nothing at all to deal with this problem. Will the Premier please tell the House now what he has decided to do about this very serious problem?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether I can properly answer this in a question period or whether I should better address it in my response to the Speech from the Throne. I obviously will have the opportunity then to really elaborate on this, and maybe that is what I should do. Rather than get into it now, perhaps I should, if the questioner agrees — I am sure he must — I will defer until we respond to the Speech from the Throne. I will certainly detail much more then as to what we intend to do in order to provide employment opportunity, job opportunity and prosperity in the province.

B.C. FERRIES DECK STRUCTURE

MR. HUBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to address a question to the Minister of Transportation and Highways. In terms of structural comparisons, the vehicle deck on the British vessel Herald of Free Enterprise is similar to the vehicle decks on the British Columbia Ferry Corporation vessels Queen of Prince Rupert and Queen of the North. What steps have we taken or are we taking to prevent a similar accident occurring on our coastal waters?

HON. MR. MICHAEL: Well, Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question. In terms of structural comparison, the vehicle deck on the British vessel the Herald of Free Enterprise is similar to the vehicle decks on the British Columbia Ferry Corporation's vessels the Queen of Prince Rupert and the Queen of the North. Both the Queen of Prince Rupert and the Queen of the North have a closed vehicle deck with sealed watertight doors at both ends. The forward door is covered by an external door that provides wave protection. The sealed watertight doors are in the secure position when the ship leaves the dock. I thank the member again for his question.

PRICE OF BEER

MR. LOVICK: My question is for the Premier of the province and it concerns promises made. We all know that, as Service said, a promise made is a debt unpaid. Specifically my question concerns the price of beer. You'll recall....

Interjections.

MR. LOVICK: Well, champagne tastes notwithstanding, the price of beer is the question. The Premier made a parking lot promise during the election that he would reduce the price of beer. Subsequently, however, the price has gone up. The question then is whether the Premier can inform this House, and those ordinary working people who consume beer, those to whom he made the promise, whether, first, he will indeed reduce the price of beer, and second, by how much?

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Speaker, I don't what the price of beer is today; I'm not a beer drinker, but I've tried to check. Obviously perhaps the questioner isn't either, because I understand it is down somewhat, although only on specific brands. That is what I'm told, but I can't name them.

But, Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased to see that the market definitely is responding. Fortunately some competition is taking place out there, and there are pressures on the prices, and it has in fact created a sufficient downward trend that those who enjoy consuming a bottle of beer are perhaps paying at least, I understand, a fraction less, if they select the right brands, than they did previously. But also, this whole matter will no doubt be looked at by the committee or the ministry looking at the liquor pricing policies and such like, so hopefully we'll be enlightened a little more after that. But in the meantime the market appears to be taking care of things reasonably well, thank you.

Orders of the Day

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
(continued debate)

MR. SPEAKER: The opposition leader. [Applause.]

MR. SKELLY: I wish I had that kind of support when I had some future in this position. [Laughter.] Mr. Speaker, I think that this is going to be the last opportunity I'll have to lead off in the throne speech debate, unless of course I decide to run for leader at the next convention [laughter], but I'm still thinking about that.

In any case, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take this opportunity during the first part of my speech to congratulate you on your election as Speaker, and also to congratulate my friend from Dewdney on his election as Deputy Speaker. All sides of the House, I think, have respect for the member for Dewdney. I think that you'll both do a fine job in this position, and we look forward to working with you to make this Legislature work over the next several years.

[2:30]

I also want to congratulate the mover and the seconder of this resolution, who in making their maiden speeches in the House were very eloquent indeed — not that I agreed with everything they had to say, but then I don't agree with a good percentage of what was in the throne speech as well.

However, Mr. Speaker, I do think that there are some fundamental changes that are apparent in some of the wording of the throne speech, and I'd like to congratulate the Premier to this extent: that he does recognize the value of the opposition in the Legislature. Years and years ago — I don't know how far back, but probably 1066 or something like that — those people who set up this institution in the first place established an institutionalized opposition in the Legislature.

[ Page 24 ]

It was a wise idea on their part, Mr. Speaker, because the fundamental advantage of an institutionalized opposition in the Legislature is that it takes the opposition off the street and brings it into the Legislature, and allows the government to take advantage of the wisdom and the knowledge and the representation that members of the Legislature who are on the opposition side have to offer to the debate in this Legislative Assembly.

We all saw what happened during the last term of government and over the last ten years, when it appeared that the government did not respect the opposition in the Legislature, and in fact at times appeared to have contempt for the views of the opposition.

At that time the opposition removed itself from the Legislature and went back into the streets and became sullen and frustrated, and in fact a very dangerous situation resulted in the province of British Columbia. I am pleased to see that the first minister of the new government has taken cognizance of the problem that developed as a result of that lack of respect for the opposition, and has indicated in the throne speech that he is now more willing to work with the opposition and more willing to take advantage of those mechanisms within the Legislature that help the government members and opposition members sit down together in a problem solving approach to help deal with the problems that face us here in the province of British Columbia today.

When I first came into this Legislative Assembly 14 or 15 years ago, legislative committees were working at that time, Mr. Speaker. We had several committees that traveled around the province; that listened to the people of British Columbia; that heard briefs from all sectors of society: from community groups, from local governments, from industrial groups, from trade unions; from all of those people who want legislators to understand what they have to say; who want legislators to understand what their position is; and who want legislators from all political parties to distil that information down, bring it on the floor of the House, turn it into legislation, and turn it into administrative and government practice that reflects the views of all of the people in British Columbia.

Legislative committees have been the eyes and the ears of the Legislature. They are the opportunity that people have to communicate with members of the Legislature on a nonpartisan basis. So I'm very pleased to see that the Premier has indicated in the throne speech that he is willing now to use those select standing committees of the Legislature to help make this a much more informed place, to help bring members of all political parties together to resolve the problems that we're experiencing here in the province of British Columbia.

I do have one concern, however, Mr. Speaker. That concern is the test that we administered to the Premier and to the government yesterday on throne speech day. We gave the minister an opportunity to test his promise and to test his good faith. That opportunity was an opportunity to receive an amendment to a motion setting up the select standing committees of the House, which would have given this House another opportunity to set up a committee that could deal directly and in a comprehensive way with some of the problems that face us as a Legislature. It's unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, and it's not a good sign, that that gesture on the part of the opposition was rebuffed by the Premier.

Hopefully, sometime within the next few days, before this Legislature proceeds on for very long, this Premier will present to a select standing committee of the House terms of reference that will reflect the concerns that we enunciated and that my colleague from Surrey-Guildford-Whalley enunciated during the debate on that amendment. I think it would be very important if the Premier took into consideration the concerns that we brought to the floor of this House and gave one of the committees of the Legislature an opportunity to take those concerns out, to consult with the public, and to see if we can solve those serious problems that still present themselves in the province of British Columbia. Even after the efforts over the last few years, those problems still present themselves: the problem of unemployment, the problem of poverty, the problem as it affects people in the region, the problem as it specifically affects groups like women, visible minorities and native Indians, and as my colleague from Vancouver East today indicated, especially the 24 percent of people between the ages of 15 and 24 who find themselves out of work through no fault of their own simply because the economy in British Columbia is not growing sufficiently to generate the kinds of jobs that they need and that they are looking for.

I know that the Premier wants to have this throne speech direct itself towards the future, to look towards the future. As a result, we didn't see some of the things that were in previous throne speeches that looked toward the past and reflected on the past. But I think it's often important, Mr. Speaker, to do that kind of reflection.

I was very pleased to see this morning the Provincial Secretary draw our attention to the fact that some of our pioneering members in this Legislature have passed away during the interregnum, between the last Legislature and this. I would particularly — also recognizing the loss of Gordon Gibson — recognize the loss of a member who we consider very important, Ernie Hall. I just want to draw specifically.... I know that the Minister of Economic Development (Hon. Mrs. McCarthy) is aware of this. I want to particularly draw attention to one of Ernie Hall's better known abilities — one of the abilities that is often sorely missing in the Legislature. Ernie Hall was a member of our caucus for many years. He was Provincial Secretary and he was Minister of Tourism. He had a way, when debate was deadlocked in our caucus or in the party, often when it was deadlocked in the Legislature and members were taking very rigid positions on both sides.... Ernie Hall had a technique of poking fun at both sides, loosening people from their positions a little bit and getting them to think about how they might come together, come to some consensus and some conclusion that could be accepted by all sides.

I think that's a talent, an ability and a perceptiveness that Ernie Hall had that's sorely missed in this Legislature. Hopefully out of some of the new talent that's come into the Legislature over the last election, we'll see some of those talents come to the fore and we'll see some of that technique that Ernie used with wit and talent being used on the floor of this Legislature to bring people together to help them reach consensus, and to help us all in this House to come together in agreement on serious issues that face the province.

We seriously regret on this side, and I know on the other side of the House, the loss of our friend and colleague Ernie Hall. I'm very pleased that the Provincial Secretary has drawn the House's attention to that this morning.

We also regret the loss of one of our members, Al Passarell, who was of course a member of both caucuses in this Legislature. It was a very tragic death that Al experienced.

[ Page 25 ]

Public life exerts some difficult demands on people of this province who commit themselves to public life. It involves a lot of travel and separation from your family. It involves travel sometimes under dangerous conditions. I know my colleague from Alberta will know this with respect to Grant Notley, who lost his life in an airplane crash in northern Alberta. But it was a serious loss and a difficult loss for all of us when Al Passarell lost his life in an airplane crash in the north, serving his constituents to the best of his ability.

So I'm very pleased that the Provincial Secretary drew the attention of the Legislature to the loss of those pioneering members. I do hope, as I say, that the Speaker will convey our regrets to their families and that the contributions of those members will be recorded in the history and the journals of this Legislature.

I probably hate to do this, but I want to congratulate the Premier on his election, and his caucus on their election as well. It's no secret that I would have preferred a different outcome and that I would have preferred to have seen the New Democratic Party sitting on the other side of this House. But I'm very proud of the fact that the NDP in the last election achieved the highest number of votes that it's ever achieved in the history of this province. Over 823,000 people voted for the New Democratic Party. That represents roughly 43 percent, Mr. Speaker, of all of the electors of the province of British Columbia. It is a very substantial minority.

When I draw the Premier's attention to the fact that the opposition is a very important institution in the Legislature, I think it's important to know that the opposition in this Legislature represents the wishes and the support of 43 percent of the people of the province of British Columbia. Because they elected us I think it's very important for the Premier and the government to take our views into account, and for the government to take our views into account, and to use those mechanisms that are available to the Legislative Assembly, such as standing committees, to make sure that the wisdom, the views and the intelligence of the members of the opposition and of the 823,000 people they represent are incorporated into the legislation and into the debate that takes place in this assembly. I am pleased, as I said before, that the Premier has indicated he is willing to use those mechanisms that bring the opposition and the government together.

I would like to take this opportunity to introduce some of the fine new members that we have elected on the New Democratic side of the Legislature. I am having a little difficulty as a veteran in the Legislature, Mr. Speaker and fellow members, attaching the faces to the names. I know it is difficult for members on the other side to tell the players without the program, and I would like to introduce some of our members of the Legislature. I hope they can get together with the members from the other side and work on a problem solving basis in the Legislature.

First of all, I'd like to start in northern British Columbia. As the seconder of the throne speech indicated, he doesn't like the Cariboo being pushed around by a bunch of city slickers. We in Alberni feel the same way, and we feel we've been pushed around long enough. We've got several members from northern British Columbia who feel the same way, and I think they'd find common cause with that second member for Cariboo (Mr. Vant) in making sure that the voice of northern and central British Columbia is heard loud and clear in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

Although I can't mention him by name because of the traditions and the rules of this House, I would like to introduce the member for Prince Rupert (Mr. Miller), a member who has been very active in his trade union, active and knowledgeable in the pulp and paper industry in British Columbia. He has worked in a mill that was at one time in the private sector, then went into the public sector, and is now back in the private sector again with some public sector support. It's hard to tell when the private sector isn't the public sector and when the public sector isn't the private sector. This member has been a good, solid, hard-working leader in his trade union and a hard worker in the pulp and paper industry, which generates a good part of the revenue and a good part of the employment in British Columbia. I am very proud of this member.

He has also been elected three times to the city council in Prince Rupert. He has been very active at the local government level, seeking support for programs to help the people of Prince Rupert and the people of northwestern British Columbia. I am very proud to introduce the member for Prince Rupert, who now sits on the opposition side of the Legislature and will in the future — positive thinking — be sitting on the government side of the Legislature as NDP member for Prince Rupert.

[2:45]

Second is another northern member of the Legislature, representing the people of Prince George North — a New Democratic Party member and, I believe, the first woman member to represent a northern constituency in the history of this Legislative Assembly. She is active in community affairs, in health issues, in social services issues, and active as a school trustee in the community of Prince George — active in educational issues. She is the very popular member for Prince George North (Mrs. Boone), a member who is going to be in this Legislature for a long time to come and play an active and important role as an NDP member in this Legislature, both in opposition and in government when the times comes in a very few years.

Atlin has had a chequered history, Mr. Speaker, but this one is a keeper. A member of the Nishga Tribal Council, bilingual, his relatives have lived in this province for many, many years. He's a lawyer. We try to keep the number of lawyers in this House down — for good reason — but this person is a lawyer skilled in constitutional affairs, and I believe his advice and his information and his experiences will be helpful to the government as well as to the opposition in discussing matters related to native land claims. It's a very difficult issue that we all have to deal with here in the Legislature. I think that this member is going to provide valued advice to the Premier and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Relations when it comes time to deal with those issues in first ministers' conferences.

I hope that the minister and the Premier are prepared to go beyond the statements made in the throne speech and start to deal with those issues that native people in this province are concerned about — that is, the issue of aboriginal claims in this province and the settlement of those aboriginal claims — so that we as non-Indians and Indian people in this province can get together as equals and work to the best benefit of all British Columbians, Indians and non-Indians alike.

From eastern British Columbia we have the member for Kootenay (Ms. Edwards), and I am pleased that that member has been actively involved with the communities in her region, with the mining companies and the mining unions, to

[ Page 26 ]

persuade Ottawa and the government of Ontario to begin purchasing coal from the Rocky Mountain area of British Columbia, so that we can expand the market for our thermal coal to get Ontario Hydro and electricity corporations back east to start burning British Columbia thermal coal, low sulphur coal. At the same time, she has been dealing with the problem of acid rain in eastern Canada and dealing with the problem of unemployment in the coal industry and in the mining industry in British Columbia.

I have been very proud of that member from the day of her election. Before she was even down here to get sworn in as a member of the Legislature, she was working on behalf of her constituents. She was back in Ottawa, back in Ontario, trying to persuade those eastern Canadians to buy our coal, metallurgical coal as well as thermal coal, and to have that coal used in those hydroelectric plants and in the metallurgical industry in Ontario, so that we could expand and diversify our markets for our coal and create employment here in British Columbia. She's an excellent member, Mr. Speaker.

Now there's one thing I think this member didn't consider, and I was looking at one of the passages in the throne speech here, where this government plans to use coal to generate hydroelectric power. Now I've heard of people turning water into wine, but my understanding was that hydroelectric power was generated by water, and I'm wondering.... I didn't put this in question period today because we had more important issues to deal with, but I'm wondering what plans the Premier has to turn coal into water in order to generate hydroelectric power. I think the Premier doesn't have the answer to this question, and I think the member for Kootenay has the right approach. Let's try to sell our coal to Ontario instead of trying to turn it into water. What kind of political alchemy is this?

Interjections.

MR. SKELLY: Well, I don't want to see him make water out of anything.

I'd also like to introduce our members from Vancouver, Mr. Speaker. We do have some city slickers, because this party represents every single region of British Columbia. Every single sector of the province, every single social strata and economic strata and occupation is represented in this fine group that we have here in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

I'd like to introduce our new and youthful second member for Vancouver East (Mr. Clark). I understand that when he was elected he was 28 years old. I was 29, and I'm about to retire. This guy has a long future ahead of him.

I'd like to congratulate him also for the very courageous and informed stand he has taken on the issue of West Kootenay Power and Light. I believe it's an absolute shame that this government has not taken a firm stand with respect to the sale of West Kootenay Power and Light to UtiliCorp in the United States.

I think that W.A. C. Bennett today would be turning over in his grave, because that man realized that the one way the government and the people of British Columbia have to control their local economy is to make sure that they have control over the energy resources of this province, and that control resides within the province and preferably within the region where those energy resources are located. That was the principle of the W.A.C. Bennett government; it was a principle of the Dave Barrett government; and I'm ashamed of the fact that this government has not taken a firm stand in making sure, as this member from Vancouver East has requested, that the control and the ownership of West Kootenay Power and Light remain within the province of British Columbia, so that the people in the interior of the province can use that utility as the keystone, as the fundamental basis for their control over the development proposals for the economy in that region. It's unfortunate that the Premier and this government have allowed that utility to slip out of our control and to slip into the hands of a United States utility. I think that the people of the interior and the people of this province are going to pay the price for that error somewhere down the line, and I'm very pleased that our youthful member for Vancouver East has taken a very strong stand on that issue. I'm convinced that you're going to hear more from that member in this Legislature as time goes on, and I'm very proud of that member.

We just made it, Mr. Speaker, in Vancouver-Point Grey like about that; it was very close. But what a bargain! The Legislature is that much further ahead on both sides. I enjoyed all the ideas about digging a tunnel under Georgia Strait, but we want somebody in this Legislature who is concerned about the day-to-day problems that face workers, people in the business community, people in local government — people in every region of the province. This member's experience, Mr. Speaker, is going to serve this Legislature well. A successful business person, a director of the largest community-based financial institution in Canada, a director of a corporation, active in community affairs, has served many terms as an alderman in the city of Vancouver — a breadth of experience that is going to serve this Legislature and the people of this province very well. I'm very proud of the people of Vancouver-Point Grey for electing this member, and I know that when the next election rolls around, what was a landslide this time is going to be a greater landslide next time.

We also have a new member for Vancouver Centre, not without some experience himself in these matters, Mr. Speaker, and I'm sure he's going to find even more experience when we have the opportunity to change chairs in this Legislature. Mayor of Vancouver for three terms, he managed to deal effectively with the Premier in one of those election campaigns. A lawyer. Now somebody said that he was a city-slicker, but I'll tell you, this Mayor of Vancouver traveled throughout the province of British Columbia, worked through people within the Union of B.C. Municipalities, talked and worked and cooperated with communities large and small in every part of the province, in every part of the country, and in fact has been involved in trade delegations around the world helping to sell B.C. Industry, helping to sell B.C. products and services to the people throughout the world and especially in Pacific Rim countries. He has dealt with prime ministers and heads of state, with premiers and cabinets. This is a member with the kind of experience we need in the Legislative Assembly, to take a leadership role in this Legislature, and I am very proud that we now have as a member of the Legislature this new member for Vancouver Centre — not an inexperienced member.

I'm not sure the Premier is too happy about that, but I'm convinced that when the next election rolls around, this Premier is going to make a very effective Leader of the Opposition.

I'd like to talk about the members from Vancouver Island — and we have the odd new member from Vancouver Island

[ Page 27 ]

here. Not that odd, one of my colleagues said. The second member for Nanaimo (Mr. Lovick) is an academic — has taught in a community college. He is an author — has written historical and political books — and is very familiar with the political traditions of British Columbia. He is an activist in Nanaimo, and, I think, will make a terrific member of this Legislature — again, a suitable candidate for government here in the province of British Columbia.

[3:00]

Another lawyer is the member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota). I'll tell you, it's very difficult for anybody to fill the boots of Frank Mitchell. And I'll tell you the reason for that.

Interjection.

MR. SKELLY: No, it's not because he was a cop and had big feet.

I'm convinced that Frank Mitchell was the best constituency representative who has ever appeared in this Legislature. He knew every lot line in the constituency. He knew every subdivision application. When they had difficulty with a trailer court, Frank Mitchell knew where the sewer lines were located. He knew everything about Esquimalt constituency. He was always available on a 24-hour basis to help his constituents with any problem they had, whether with the provincial government or local government. Well, I'll tell you, there's only one person in Esquimalt-Port Renfrew riding we could find to fill the shoes of Frank Mitchell and that's the current member.

He's a lawyer, but don't hold that against him. There are other lawyers in the Legislature. But this is a lawyer who has taken the case, for example, of federal civil servants who were approaching pensionable age and being denied their rights under the Unemployment Insurance Act. This member took their case before the highest tribunals and was able to win cases on behalf of those federal pensioners who were entitled to UIC benefits. He has done hard work on behalf of his constituents in that regard.

He was a very respected alderman in the township of Esquimalt, who was elected many times over, and in fact was one of the more popular aldermen in that community. We are very pleased to bring this member into the Legislature, and I'm convinced that the people of Esquimalt are going to elect him for years and years, both as an opposition member this time around and as a government member next time around.

I also want to talk about those who operate from the suburbs of the city of Vancouver. The member for Surrey Guildford-Whalley (Ms. Smallwood) was the seconder for our motion yesterday to try to persuade the government to set up a committee to look into those comprehensive economic problems being experienced by people in every region of the province. She is a community activist — very active in women's rights issues, very active in environmental and human rights issues in her community, very respected and active in community development issues in Surrey. I'm pleased that the people of Surrey-Guildford-Whalley sent this member to the Legislature. Again, she's going to make a terrific member, both in the opposition and in the government benches next time around.

New Westminster. That's my home town, Mr. Speaker. Derek Fox, the member for Vegreville, Alberta, whom we just introduced in the Legislature, is also from New Westminster. A number of members in this Legislature have come from New Westminster, were born in New Westminster. In fact, there's a plot among the citizens of New Westminster to try to get as many members elected as possible from as many constituencies as possible, so that at some point a vote will be held in the Legislature to move the capital back to New Westminster, where some people feel it belonged in the first place.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not Blencoe.

MR. SKELLY: We're taking a long-term view, the participants in this plot, but I understand that the Minister for Advanced Education and Job Training (Hon. Mr. Hagen) is also one of the plotters. He's from New Westminster as well, although he was a little bit ahead of me in school; he was a year ahead of my brother, who is now a Member of Parliament. But we're working on the idea, Mr. Speaker, of getting the capital back to where it used to be.

The current member for New Westminster (Ms. Hagen), following again in the difficult footsteps of Dennis Cocke and Rae Eddie, has been active in senior citizens' issues over the years, getting aid and assistance and help to senior citizens in her community and as well around the province. She was the chair of the school board in New Westminster through some pretty difficult times, through the tough times of restraint, and in fact was very respected for the work that she did in confrontation, unfortunately, with a provincial government that was constantly attempting to drive down the resources that were allocated to education in this province, at the same time trying to maintain the highest possible quality of education and to represent the needs of the voters who elected her as chair of the school board in New Westminster. I think she is going to be a terrific Member of this Legislature, and with the kind of experience and approach that she's had over the years I think she's going to distinguish herself as a member of the B.C. Legislature. She is going to make things tough for any government that wants to undermine the quality of education or undermine the quality of services that should go to the senior citizens in the province of B.C.

Maillardville-Coquitlam. We have a terrific member for Maillardville-Coquitlam (Mr. Cashore), who has been active in social issues with the United Church of Canada; very active in defending the concerns of the poor, in trying to recognize the plight of the poor and to raise economic and social conditions for people in this province. Our member for Maillardville-Coquitlam represents the kind of strength and compassion and concern that all Members of the Legislature should have, and I hope do have, to be the representatives and spokespeople for the people of the province of British Columbia. I'm very pleased to welcome our member for Maillardville-Coquitlam to this Legislature.

Last but not least, the member for Burnaby North (Mr. Jones), again following in the very difficult footsteps of Eileen Dailly, who without question on either side of the House was the best Minister of Education that this province ever had. The current member for Burnaby North was the chair....

Interjection.

MR. SKELLY: Were you a Minister of Education?

AN HON. MEMBER: She wants to forget.

[ Page 28 ]

AN HON. MEMBER: Don't remind her.

MR. SKELLY: Most of the people in the province want to forget that.

But again, the Member for Burnaby North chaired one of the most progressive school districts in the province, and again through extremely difficult times of restraint imposed on the education system in the province by the former minister, who is sitting across the House from me in the Premier's seat.

I'm pleased, very proud, Mr. Speaker, that we have brought in as a result of the last election a brand-new team of excited, enthusiastic, hard working Members of the Legislature on the opposition side who are prepared to work hard on behalf of their constituents, on behalf of the people of the province, to bring the best possible government that they can bring and the best possible programs that they can bring to the people of the province of British Columbia. I'm very pleased that they represent a broad mix of ethnic, social and occupational backgrounds, and I think that will bode very well for the operation of this Legislature.

One thing I want to say before I finish this round of introductions is that I'm pleased about the number of women we have elected to the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. In the last convention of our political party before we went into the election, Mr. Speaker, I called upon the New Democratic Party constituencies throughout the province to make an effort to field among the candidates at least 50 percent of those candidates as women candidates, and I think our constituencies made a terrific effort to do that. As a result, we have brought some of the finest women candidates into the Legislature. But I want to tell you this, Mr. Speaker, that this party does not intend to rest until women are represented in the corridors of power in the same proportions that they're represented in the population of the province. Only then will we feel we will have accomplished our goal of equality for women in the corridors of power.

I don't intend to respond in any comprehensive way to the throne speech. I'm going to leave that up to this bright field of debate leaders that we've put in place in the Legislative Assembly. But I do want to say some things about the throne speech and to express some concerns. I don't want to be negative, because I know there are some good things in the throne speech, things that we've been looking for for years, that we asked the previous government for for years, and the previous government simply refused to deliver them. I'm very pleased that those kinds of things are in the throne speech. However, we'll be commenting on those again through the debate leaders that we have in the House.

One of the things I'm concerned about is the right-wing rhetoric in this throne speech. I know that the Premier wants to bring us together in this Legislature, and I know that he wants to bring the people of the province together — from all sectors, from all walks of life — to try to deal with and resolve some of the problems we're experiencing in economic terms, in terms of social services and in regional disparities. But you don't bring people together by using the kind of rhetoric that tends to offend some sectors in our society. The suggestion that we're going to be privatizing government services, the suggestion that we want to get the public sector off the back of the private sector — I think that kind of rhetoric, Mr. Speaker, is not conducive to the kind of debate that we want to establish here in the province of British Columbia.

If I have any kind of regret about the throne speech, the major one is that it employed that kind of rhetoric that's reminiscent of the Fraser Institute and of a right-wing view of economics. I think that that's going to make it much more difficult for us to get together and debate on equal terms, and in a very cooperative way. I think what we in the opposition want to do is perhaps to ignore that kind of rhetoric, to get down to the meaning in the throne speech — to the real words in the throne speech — and maybe we can find some common ground there.

I think it was a mistake for this government and for this Premier to advise His Honour to put that kind of rhetoric into the throne speech. The last time we saw that kind of rhetoric was right after the 1983 election, when debate in this House, I think, degenerated to the lowest point that I had seen it in the period of my 14 years' experience. Hopefully we can put rhetoric aside. It makes the government appear very rigid and ideologically hidebound. Hopefully we can put that kind of rhetoric aside and deal with people on both sides of the House who are concerned about the problems that present themselves to us here in the province of British Columbia.

I'm also concerned about good faith. I think the jury is still out on this, Mr. Speaker, in terms of good faith in approaching the opposition and in dealing with the opposition in a cooperative and consultative way. We put forward a resolution in the Legislature yesterday. The reason for that resolution was to test the government's good faith, to see if they were willing to accommodate, to move a little bit towards the opposition's position in terms of establishing committees. We found that our approach was rebuffed. We were a little bit concerned about that.

Hopefully this Premier and this government will get together with the opposition to develop terms of reference for the existing standing committees that we did name, so that we can make sure that the problems that have been identified on both sides of the House are dealt with by those standing committees. I would encourage the Premier to take that suggestion to heart and to approach the opposition when he's considering developing terms of reference for those committees.

[3:15]

It's okay to establish councils, task forces and ministerial inquiries, and it's okay to set up all of these methods such as assigning cabinet ministers to do various tasks and assignments. That's fine. It's okay for the government to do that; in fact, I encourage the government to do that. But we have to remember that the government represents only 49 percent of the electors in the province of British Columbia; that things happen best when all of the representatives in the Legislature are involved in the debate and in the consultative process. I would encourage the Premier, rather than using government task forces, rather than sending ministers around the province — although those things should happen — that he should use those legislative committees much more so that all members of the Legislature can be as well informed as the members of the government.

I am concerned about the statements in the throne speech tying such things as support for single parents and support for families and support for day-care services to the question of abortion. I think that was an unfortunate connection within the throne speech. We know that abortion is a very difficult issue to deal with on the floor of the Legislature. It is an issue that many people hold very strong views on.

[ Page 29 ]

I respect the views of those who believe that abortions should not be allowed. I respect their views. On the other hand, we expect government to respect the views of those people who feel that the choice on abortion should be up to the woman involved. Those two opinions are very difficult to balance. In fact, there is probably no common ground. But I think government has to accept the view of the majority in this case. I am concerned that the government is going to tie daycare, support for single-parent families and those kinds of things to the issue of abortion. I hope that is not the case.

People in British Columbia are looking for an increase in support to single-parent families. They are looking for increased support to people who require day-care services — core funding for day-care centres as well as funding to the people who need to send their children to those day-care centres. I was pleased in my discussion with the Premier prior to the throne speech when he indicated that he was not only going to increase subsidies to parents for daycare but he also intended to provide core funding for day-care centres. I am very pleased that the Premier has indicated that, but I would wish that the Premier would not tie that issue to the issue of abortion. I think those things should be kept completely separate.

People of British Columbia do not want their government to impose the religious views of the Premier or the religious views of the government on all members of British Columbia. They do not want that to happen. Those who believe in freedom of choice on this issue want their views respected in the same way as we respect the views of pro-lifers.

I also have some concerns about the way native Indians were dealt with in the throne speech debate. After what appeared to be an initial change in the government's approach to native Indians, I was sorry to hear that the government is now going back to the approach of the previous government, which is to negotiate economic development programs and child-care services and those kinds of things separately on a group by group basis.

Native Indians in British Columbia have a major concern, and that is that there has never been a legal transfer of title between the native Indians and non-native occupants in this province. They don't want control over the whole province, in spite of the rhetoric that we have heard in political campaigns and in spite of the rhetoric that we've heard throughout the province; native Indians want a solution to the problem of Indian land claims which would allow us all to live in this province together, to share the province, and also recognize that they were the original owners and the original occupants of the province.

In virtually every other country in the world, accommodations have been made through treaty or through other agreements with the native Indian people to make sure that legal transfers have taken place and that Indians and nonIndians can occupy the province on the same basis with respect given to their traditional forms of government and to their right to have their communities sufficiently based in resources so that they can be relatively independent in terms of their own community economies.

I think that this is an area where the government could make substantial moves and could create benefits for all British Columbians, native and non-native alike. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I think that we in the Legislature might benefit from a select standing committee looking at this issue. I don't think that settlement of aboriginal claims in British Columbia is going to be at great cost to the people of the province; in fact, once those claims are settled and native Indian communities are able to establish themselves and their economies and their local self-governments, I think that it is going to be a tremendous boon to the economy of the province.

Indians are going to establish a measure of economic independence. They are going to be able to create employment for themselves and for non-Indians. We are going to be able to settle an outstanding injustice that has plagued this province for years and years. I think the fact that native communities will invest the profits from their operations in their own region means that more jobs are going to be created.

It is well known that more jobs were created from settlement of aboriginal land claims in northern Quebec than were created from the James Bay hydroelectric project. The big job creator, the big economic incentive, is the settlement of aboriginal claims. I think that we should look at this from a very positive point of view. I think it will have positive social and economic benefits for the people of this province, and it will also improve our reputation around the world as a province where justice can be done and justice is available to all of its inhabitants.

I will close by talking about a few environmental concerns. As Mr. Speaker will recall, there was a demonstration on the lawns of the legislative buildings when the Legislature opened on March 9. That concern was around the changes that have been proposed for the boundaries of Strathcona Park. There are many people out there in the province of British Columbia who are concerned about what's happening with our parks, what's happening with our environment in this province. They are serious concerns. I'm pleased to see that the Premier in the throne speech has indicated that they are going to be dealing with the federal government to establish a national park on Moresby Island. But I think it's unfortunate and, again, a demonstration of bad faith that the government changed the boundaries of one of its oldest provincial parks without public consultation. Public consultation was promised by the former Minister of Environment and by the....

Interjection.

MR. SKELLY: Well, he's now the former Minister of Environment too.

Public consultation on the changes to the park boundaries was promised by successive Ministers of Environment, and this government has gone back on that consultation with respect to altering the boundaries of Strathcona Park.

Mr. Speaker, the alteration of those boundaries affects my constituency. My constituents are extremely concerned about what will happen if mining takes place in some of the areas that have currently been removed from the park. We're concerned that the largest waterfall in North America, Della Falls in Alberni constituency, has now been removed from the boundaries of Strathcona Park, and that a mine will be established in that area that could pollute the Bedwell River that flows into an area north of Tofino and may have an impact on the aquaculture and mariculture projects going on in that region and adding to the economy of that area. We're very concerned that boundaries have been altered without public consultation, in violation of a promise made by this government and two of its Ministers of Environment, and we would like to see that decision reversed and the process of public consultation, as promised, taking place.

[ Page 30 ]

Mr. Speaker, I'm looking forward to the participation in this debate by our new members of the Legislature. I think you'll find that our new members are going to be very positive about the role that they're going to play in the Legislature. They want to see the best things happening for the people of British Columbia that can possibly happen. They have seen economic recovery take place in eastern Canada, in Manitoba, in Ontario and Quebec. They are looking for very positive things to happen out of this Legislature, given the statements made by the Premier and the government and given their intention to be positive and upbeat and enthusiastic about what might come out of this Legislative Assembly.

I am concerned about the throne speech; I'm concerned about its rhetoric. I'm concerned about the promises of the Premier; as I say, the jury is still out on those promises. We want to see the Premier live up to his promise to consult in a cooperative way with our caucus. I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that we are prepared to respond in a consultative and cooperative way, in the best interests of all of the citizens of British Columbia.

HON. MR. ROGERS: It's indeed a pleasure for me to take my place in this debate, this being the fourth Parliament I've had the honour to be a member of.

I'd like to start off by saying a few remarks to the member who has just taken his seat, the Leader of the Opposition, and say to you, sir, that you were once my critic in one of the ministries I had — and I think you've changed criticism as we went along the way. I think you have gone through a rather difficult period, and I commend you for the courageous way you have conducted yourself personally during the last year, and I think all members of the House respect that. There are difficult times in this political business. There are some great times, but there are also some very difficult times. You've conducted yourself in an admirable way.

As I said, it's the fourth opportunity I've had — this is the fourth Parliament — and I hate to feel, at my tender age, like one of the veterans, but as I look at the pictures around this hall, I see the very few survivors over the years. There are only a few of us who can genuinely be called recidivist, but perhaps if some of you will listen to my cogent words, you may become recidivist yourself.

There is a great deal that has happened since the House last met in session. Among other things, we hosted the most successful world's fair, I believe, to be held on this continent in history. I think the people that were largely responsible — the Premier of the day, Premier Bennett, who had the courage to stick with it when it looked like it wasn't the right thing to do, Jimmy Pattison, who needs no introduction, and Patrick Reid — all really deserve a special word of thanks, because through our thanks to them we will thank all of the people that worked behind them and made it go. There's no question about it that more people around the world know about British Columbia because of Expo than because of almost anything else. We don't normally talk about things that have just happened, but since the House hasn't been in session and we haven't had a chance to do that, I thought I'd make those comments.

Having said that I've been a member for some time, I am very saddened by the passing of two members: one member who was exclusively on the opposition side of the House and one member who spent some time on both sides of the House.

I knew both members well, I respected both members' opinions. Their opinions were very different, and their styles were indeed extremely different. In both cases their deaths were untimely, and I extend my personal sympathies to the families involved. I think we'll really miss Ernie Hall quite a lot; I think you people genuinely will miss him. He was a sort of senatorial type on the NDP side, if there ever was one. I'm sure Ernie Hall got excited in the privacy of the caucus room, but he reminded me of a fireman rather than a pyromaniac when it came to issues: he wanted the fire to go out and people to focus on the facts rather than anything else.

I must admit Al Passarell's humour was something that took a long time to get used to. It took time to grow onto, as did his stories of hunting and other exploits, but he'll be missed as well, as will his wife Ruth.

In the summer of 1986, the Social Credit Party did something rather remarkable. It's something that doesn't happen in the history of political parties in Canada. Normally, political parties change leaders after they have been defeated at the polls, but Dr. McGeer would always stand up and start off with 1932 and go through that whole process about how many times....

Interjection.

HON. MR. ROGERS: It'll happen, don't worry. Someone else will do it. I'm not going to do it; someone will do it.

He'd go through that great legacy of election victories of the Social Credit Party and defeats of the New Democratic Party. Therefore, following that tradition, the Social Credit Party could hardly go through the process of changing leaders by losing an election, so that wasn't to be the case.

So there really was a very substantial number of people who took a crack at the job of being the leader of the party. But our party, being a very democratic party — and those of you who were at Whistler may have seen it — chose, and in hindsight I think chose very wisely, and in fact history will judge that as having been a very wise choice. What happened was, the party changed leaders without having to lose an election, and that's not something that happens in Canada. It always is the case that the party loses an election, and then the leader retires. I wonder what's going to happen in Ottawa but that's another story.

[3:30]

We managed to do it, and we managed to do it successfully and came out of it as a much stronger party. That's witnessed by the number of members who are here today. In fact, there are more new members here now than at any other time after any other election since the end of the war. I think it's wonderful, because each and every one of you will bring a refreshing new look to this hallowed chamber, and hopefully a more tempered response than we've had in the past.

I guess if I was going to say something to you, those of you who wish to get re-elected might take these small words of advice: that is to say, don't forget who your constituents are, because they're the people you must ask again for the second mandate; take your work very seriously; and, at your own peril, take yourself very seriously. The minute you think you are terribly serious, your constituents will discover that you have become pompous and will dispense with you almost post-haste. We have seen it happen with great regularity at any time that a member arrives here and decides that they have been anointed or put into the Senate or chosen to some

[ Page 33 ]

auspicious group. They are almost instantly dispatched by their constituents, usually with quite a resounding defeat.

There usually is a member who stands and reminds the new members that you have joined the most exclusive club in the province. I am almost reminded of Groucho Marx's remark that he wouldn't want to belong to a club that would have someone like himself as a member. Having said that, this organization is the most wide-open and most watched and most looked-at organization in the province, and your actions and your judgments will be judged accordingly.

Nothing is terribly private around these buildings, and certainly things that are private became public knowledge officially, unofficially.... And in the event that it's a very slow news day, if nothing has happened by 9 o'clock in the morning, generally something is made up.

This fall, we went to the people....

Interjection.

HON. MR. ROGERS: Now come on, it's not my maiden speech. You could heckle me if you want, but I'll get after you.

AN HON. MEMBER: It's too easy.

HON. MR. ROGERS: You know how much fun you are, and some of your best critics aren't even back. But that's all right, there is some new blood back here. Watch it.

We went to the people this fall with a program of new and open government. Having been in both governments, let me tell you that this is genuinely an open government, a government that travels, a government that meets people in their constituencies and a government that, I think, is going to move about and around this province more than anyone else or any other government has ever done before.

The throne speech is incredibly different from throne speeches in the past. There was serious debate some two or three years ago about whether or not the throne speech should be entirely dispensed with, because the throne speech was filled with wonderful platitudes and generalities, to the point that most members had given up taking terribly much interest it, and the Whips were having difficulty finding someone who wanted to go on with something. Well, this throne speech, for the first time, I think, in the time that I have been here, is a genuine, pithy throne speech which is directly to the point and brings forward a whole host of issues that are going to be discussed in this chamber — issues that are policies of the government that will come forward for discussion.

There is one point that I find very good, and that is the board of internal review. To suspect that our entire debate would take place over one vote during the Committee of Supply — of which you have no knowledge, of course, Mr. Speaker — for all the matters that take place in this chamber is totally inappropriate. There are different concerns, and over the years we have addressed those concerns. Members from rural ridings and members from far northern ridings and members from ridings that have different difficulties all have had to make their point. I think that having a board of internal review will be very good.

I welcome a great deal the introduction of television to the House. I think it will be a great advancement for two or three reasons. One of them is that we'll see a better quality of debate; secondly, we may see a better quality of behaviour — that's only questionable; but thirdly, I think the public who are interested in the political process will have an opportunity to watch. Only those people who are normally resident in Victoria and have the opportunity to do so can come down and sit in the galleries, and only a very small fraction of one percent of the public has that opportunity to do so. But there are more people today interested in the political process and what goes on in Victoria than there has ever been in the past, and I think offering it to the cable television networks and those other people and other networks that want to do it will be of great assistance.

I'm also pleased with my particular challenge that I have in terms of native issues, and I will be introducing in the not too distant future some legislation to deal with the self-government of the Sechelt Indian Band. But there are a number of other issues that affect the native community, and the Cabinet Committee on Native Affairs that has been traveling and meeting with native groups and individual bands throughout the province will continue to do so. I think it is a major step and a major departure from policy for this government to make that decision. Some of the things that we have been asked to do are so relatively simple and yet have been such large roadblocks in the past that we'll have a great improvement in what goes on.

I have a little difficulty with the dual member ridings that are now going to become single member ridings, Mr. Speaker, because I have represented a dual member riding in all the times that I have been in this legislature, and I have always enjoyed working with the constituency seatmate that I have. I have twice been the first member for Vancouver South and twice been the second member for Vancouver South. In our particular constituency it has worked very well, but I respect the decision of government to go with single member ridings. There are some great advantages to a dual seat riding, especially in a metropolitan area, but there are also some disadvantages in terms of who is actually responsible. But the government has made that decision and I respect it and I will stay with it.

There are some references in the throne speech to the improvements in funding to those people on social assistance. In view of the fact that the government has found itself in rather difficult financial circumstances, I think it is a very compassionate move to not only increase social welfare spending, but to make specific references to those areas in which we will be increasing that spending.

In dealing with Ottawa, as you may know, Mr. Speaker, there is now a joint committee made up of members of the government of British Columbia and the government in Ottawa to deal with Ottawa/British Columbia issues. It's interesting to point out that the window of communications opportunity between British Columbia and Ottawa is only worse in one place, which is the Yukon. Because by the time we get to the office in the morning, the people in Ottawa are just about to go to lunch; by the time they get back from lunch we have about a half hour opportunity before it's our turn normally to go to lunch; and by the time we get back from lunch there's about a two hour opportunity before they retire for the rest of the day. The people in Ottawa are visited daily by the people in Ontario and Quebec. They're all in the same time zone, they're all in the same, I won't say trough — that's probably not a parliamentary word. It's high time that British Columbia got just its fair share: its fair share of appointments on boards and commissions, its fair share of work, a proportional representation of what's going on.

[ Page 32 ]

The agreement by the Prime Minister and our Premier to set up this committee, of which I have the honour of being the co-chairman, I think is a major step in that direction. We will be meeting in Ottawa later this week on other issues. I will be meeting with Mr. Mazankowski at that time and will go ahead and see what we can do about setting up some meetings as early as possible. I think it bodes well. In the past British Columbia has had a rather obstinate attitude towards Ottawa. I guess Ottawa has been somewhat humbled recently and is more willing to be cooperative with the government of British Columbia and I look forward to working with that cooperation.

There is reference in the throne speech to the new issue of privatization. It has been discussed in many places before. We are not going to necessarily plagiarize other people's work, but I feel it is very important that the scope of examination that the Ministry of Intergovernmental Relations takes be as wide as possible, so that no stone is left unturned and yet nothing is abandoned unnecessarily. I feel that if we have a net benefit outlook on decisions that are made, and if we look in as wide a range as possible, we will be pleasantly surprised by the number of responsibilities that belong in the corporate sector, which we now leave to the corporate sector and abandon as the government.

I'd like to speak briefly to the aspiring first member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Harcourt), who is not in his place at this time but seeks the leadership of the New Democratic Party, and congratulate him. This is the third time that he has sought office as a member of this assembly. He once sought it in a contest in 1975 in the constituency of Vancouver South, he tried again in 1979 in the constituency of Vancouver-Little Mountain, and now he has been what we call third time lucky. I hesitate to use the analogy of the captain of the Titanic, but the barge doesn't get away from the dock too often, and I think it's probably appropriate that it's reflected in the number of people who are challenging him for the nomination. But we've been old and personal friends for a long time, and I wish him well.

Interjection.

HON. MR. ROGERS: I wish him well. You always come up with that wonderful speech about introducing all the new members who will be here next time and they always are here next time, but they're always on the same side of the House. You're going to be pleasantly surprised. In fact, you might find someone who can heckle you more than my member from White Rock. But we'll try to be on our best behaviour.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, there are a lot more members than before in this Legislature. I think that's a good thing. We haven't come close to having as many members as Alberta does, for example, on a per-capita basis, or other jurisdictions, but I think the new representation will be welcomed. The previous House was becoming a little stale, to say the least. We have an enormous lot of time ahead and we have a lot of work to do.

One personal word that I might say to all members is that I described this building once to visiting school children as a bit of a cruise ship that's at anchor. We all get to know each other very, very well, whether we like each other or not. If those of you who have come with a little pent-up animosity on either side of the House can try to vent it in this room and have it pass out of you as you leave through these doors, you will find your time here will pass in a much more pleasant manner than it has in the past.

Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure to have the opportunity to stand here as a government member and speak on this throne speech. We finally have a throne speech with some real meat in it and we have a government with real backbone. I'll have absolutely no difficulty supporting the throne speech, and I have great confidence that the government will do its utmost to carry out all the programs enunciated in that speech.

MS. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to begin by congratulating you on your election and the first member for Dewdney (Mr. Pelton) on his election to the positions of Speaker and Deputy Speaker respectively, and I would like to assure you that the more we see people taking positions where they seem to know what they're doing, the more reassured we new members are. So we wish you well in your appointments. I'd like also to congratulate the first member for Langley (Mrs. Gran), and I hope that she gets along as well as the others, who know where they're going.

Mr. Speaker, it's a great pleasure to rise to speak for the riding of Kootenay, and it's particularly gratifying to be here because I stand in a long line of socialist representation for our area. We've talked a lot about members who have been around a long time. I have two of the masters at it, I think. Tom Uphill represented the Ferme riding for some 40 years and was the longest-sitting legislative member in the British Commonwealth, except for one man who surpassed him by a few months; that man was Winston Churchill. Then Leo Nimsick sat for the Cranbrook side of the riding and then for the riding as it exists today for some 26 years. Both these members set very good examples. I hope to follow them, but I also hope to bring something a little different than they did, and I can also assure you right now that I have no intention of trying to match Mr. Uphill's record for sitting as a member.

I'm also pleased to recognize my immediate predecessor, Terry Segarty, who sat for two terms, and who finished his term as Labour minister.

Kootenay riding faces a future with a rich resource base threatened by some severe market problems. We as residents face some difficult decisions about the use of our land base as we move into a development phase in which our human resources, like our natural resources, may be sorely tested. Not uniquely, Kootenay people face a major lack of jobs. Unemployment hovers above the provincial average — up to 25 percent in the coal-mining Elk Valley. As one response, our communities have mounted a coal lobby to encourage increased Canadian purchases of Canadian coal. With the international market for coal slipping dangerously and the consequent loss of nearly 1,500 direct jobs in the Elk Valley alone, coal-miners, chambers of commerce, municipal politicians and I formed in December a western Canadian delegation to the federal government in Ottawa and to the Ontario government in Queen's Park in Toronto. Put together to maximize the impact of the federal-provincial low sulphur report, our delegation stressed that but also talked about increased sales of metallurgical coal to the Ontario steel industry. We stressed both thermal sales and metallurgical sales.

[3:451 

We said that western Canadian coal is cleaner than the U.S. coal that Ontario now imports. Were Ontario to buy more of our low sulphur coal, as that province moves to meet

[ Page 33 ]

environmental standards geared to reduce acid rain emissions, both western Canadian producers and eastern Canadian consumers would benefit by the creation of tens of thousands of jobs.

Environment, jobs and the national good are all very positive benefits. The problem, of course, is the chronic Canadian problem of distance. However competitive the coal price, and our coal is priced competitively, the cost of hauling coal 2,000 miles can never equal the cost of hauling coal only 500 miles.

We ask the federal government working with the consuming and the producing provinces to directly address that cost imbalance by restoring a coal subvention similar to the one that was lifted in 1959. Our community said that such a subvention would constitute an investment in successful nationhood and investment in people. We believe this national issue must be fairly addressed and soon.

We feel the case we made for the urgency of our situation helped bring the Canadian and provincial governments to further meetings. At the moment Deputy Prime Minister Don Mazankowski is trying to arrange a meeting with the premiers of Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan to discuss ways of increasing domestic coal sales.

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

We have already met with Premier Vander Zalm and told him our situation is urgent and that we are committed to keeping the pressure on to expand the domestic market as a hedge against the vagaries of the absolutely necessary but mercurial market that is the world market. I intend to keep this issue hot and visible until we get some action.

But constituents of Kootenay riding face other resource extraction problems. Chevron Canada Resources Ltd. plans to drill a gas well called Chevron Shell Mansfield C72D in a populated area less than 10 kilometres — that's six miles — from the core of the district of Sparwood, Although the possibility of finding gas at all is very small, as it is with much gas drilling, and the probability of an accidental release of potentially lethal sour gas — that's hydrogen sulphide — is also small, residents are justifiably wary of the project for three major reasons.

The first is that B.C.'s gas drilling regulations are unclear and inadequate as far as the residents can determine. Companies usually follow Alberta's regulations by habit and by conscience, but those regulations have no legal force in British Columbia. The second reason is that Alberta wells and those in British Columbia's northeast exist in flat terrain. Sparwood and Elkford lie in a very narrow mountain trench where air inversions occur up to 70 percent of the time. Dispersion of any escaped gas would be extremely slow, far slower than it would be in open prairie, and in fact there is no way out for the people up the valley because the prevailing winds go up that valley. Sour gas hangs low in the air, and it can be deadly.

The third reason is that even if no blowout occurs, dangerous emissions could cause severe physical symptoms: lethargy, headaches, nosebleeds and that kind of thing in humans as well as in animals. Experts believe that fumes from producing gas wells can create measurable illness. They have said so in the media, and they have also said so in connection with a case near Pincher Creek, Alberta, where an out-of-court settlement awarded $700,000 to the residents near some gas-producing gas wells.

Although our Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (Hon. Mr. Davis) has promised a public hearing before any drilling takes place, residents wonder why they had to mount an intensive letter-writing and public-advocacy campaign in order to get the information that would clearly reveal the health and safety hazards that they face.

In Moyie, another gas well that could produce sour gas is now being drilled within three kilometres of their settlement, and many residents feel ignored and threatened by their lack of information and lack of opportunity, before the drilling began, to have a say about their own safety.

A different but somewhat similar situation exists in Elkford, where the Elkford preservation group has been working for nearly a year to save the Greenhills slope facing their village from mine dumps that Westar Mines says are necessary to the life of the mine and the jobs of more than four hundred people, fewer than fifty of whom live in Elkford.

The point, Mr. Speaker, is that the Sparwood, Moyie and Elkford residents are prepared to participate in the decisions that affect their health, their safety and their way of life. They are demanding that they be informed and involved. They want decentralized decision-making, and they know what kind of issues should be considered regionally, not centrally. I make that demand with them, to restore a level of trust never achieved when decisions are made in bureaucracies remote from the locus of action.

Social problems occur in my riding. There are some severe social problems, including the school services which continue to decline, problems involving troubled youth who need more and better treatment facilities at home. They also involve our seniors, those who are able to still stay in their homes but face serious problems in thinking they will be able to stay there for very much longer because they cannot get adequate support if they stay at home. The alternative, of course, is to move them into crowded intermediate-care facilities.

The education problem has a long history. When we should be offering our young people the best education possible to face the technological age we have now entered, we are instead still cutting back on teacher numbers. Class sizes in our comer of the province are among the highest in British Columbia. Residential landowners cannot alone carry the costs for the level of education these people want and believe they need. And delegations appear regularly before our school boards to say so.

Beyond the school problems, our troubled youth needs help. We still have drug-abusers in British Columbia. Drug abuse continues among many adolescents, but British Columbia offers no treatment specifically designed for adolescents. Young people involved with habit-forming drugs usually fail to respond to adult treatment. They keep their habits until they are adults, or forever, or else they must go to the United States. Now the throne speech has mentioned that there will be some facilities to prevent that kind of thing happening for other things. We want that to happen for adolescent drug-abusers in this province, and citizens in my riding are working to get a facility for adolescent drug abusers. Their goal is practical and achievable, and I support them strongly in their efforts.

As for the seniors, the homemaker services in my riding have been reduced. Clients are protesting loudly in our area. With no transit services, often no taxis, usually no mail

[ Page 34 ]

delivery, sometimes some expensive grocery delivery and often no nearby relatives, homemaker services are needed to keep the seniors and the handicapped people in their own homes, where they want to be. Without an adequate level of care, however, they are isolated and at risk. If they can't stay within their own homes, they will have to be in our already crowded intermediate-care facilities. My constituents and I think it makes sense to give enough home care to the nearly self-sufficient and save the intermediate-care beds for those who need a higher level of care.

There are some positive and good things happening in Kootenay riding, Mr. Speaker. Tourism is a developing industry in Kootenay. We have all the requirements, the very best of everything that's needed for a good tourist industry. The same spirit that prods us into social advocacy and protest has brought us a number of exciting plans for development of tourist, heritage and recreational projects that will give Kootenay a considerable economic boost — if they can go ahead.

Fort Steele Historic Park serves our riding and is on the verge of an expansion that will, I hope, enrich its connection with the community and make it serve even better the bridge between residents and visitors. Fort Steele Park, by the way, is sometimes the largest, sometimes the second-largest, tourist visitor draw for any heritage park in western Canada.

The Kootenay Indian area council is promoting a regional eco-museum, an interpretation project which is ready to go. The Hosmer Heritage Society has planned and prepared for three and one-half years. It is ready, at the drop of a dollar, to develop a major mining interpretation and recreational project. Other similar attractions based on the region's heritage are in progress by the Cranbrook Railway Museum and the Sparwood Arts Council. And the city of Cranbrook hopes to soon build a new civic auditorium and also an interpretive forest. Recreational developments are underway. A huge snowmobile trek will travel through Cranbrook and Elkford next winter on its way to the Calgary Olympics, stopping twice in the riding, with more than 1,000 participants and followers. The three Elk Valley communities of Elkford, Sparwood and Fernie will sponsor semi-annual games, beginning this coming summer, much in the spirit of the just completed and very exciting Fernie Winter Games and the 1986 Cranbrook Summer Games, both of which are provincial projects, and both of which sponsored great community feeling. Our Rocky Mountain Visitors Association has the largest promotion budget of any British Columbia area that uses matching provincial funds. It is ready to promote any or all of these projects, if they can go ahead.

We have to take a coordinated look ahead. Our problems and our assets both point to the necessity for some serious planning to deal with our future. Some communities in our area already have an economic plan. Some attempts have already been made to coordinate efforts to overcome the problems and make the most of our assets, but we need to go further in assessing our physical, technical and human resources, and in putting them together as efficiently as we can to save the jobs we have and to create more. I hope that in working together we will make things happen because our communities decide to work together as a region, and because they decide to include all constituents in our planning. I hope to facilitate a regional planning process that will involve volunteers and industry people, business and native people, labour and immigrants, men, women and young people, workers and facilitators, immigrants and professionals. If so many people become involved, we will surely succeed in getting concrete action. The task is not simple. It will not shape itself easily to our benefit. It will frustrate and tire us. But it will also excite and reward us. I look forward, Mr. Speaker, to getting on with the job.

[4:00]

MRS. GRAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and hon. members. I'm proud to stand in this House today as a member of the Legislature and participate in this session. I'm proud to be part of the government team that we have in British Columbia today.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate you on your election, and I congratulate the first member for Dewdney (Mr. Pelton) on becoming Deputy Speaker. I look forward to working with both of you. I also want to congratulate the Premier of this province for obtaining the strong mandate that he did: 47 strong Social Credit seats. The Premier has indeed obtained the trust of all British Columbians. I also congratulate my co-MLA, the second member for Langley (Mr. Peterson). I thank him for his support and hard work during the campaign, and for helping me to represent the constituency of Langley, as we are today.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I congratulate all MLAs on both sides of the House for gaining the confidence of their constituents, and I wish each and every one of you well during this session, especially the new members, like myself. I want to thank all of the constituents of Langley for their support, and I pledge to serve them to the very best of my abilities. I want to thank all of the residents of British Columbia for bringing Social Credit back to power, for wanting a fresh start, to which we are dedicated. And I want to thank Bob McClelland, who represented the constituency of Langley so well for 14 years. I want to thank him for giving me the opportunity to stand here today. I would also like to thank my campaign manager, Ida Fallowfield; my constituency secretary, Marjorie Allen; and all the tireless workers who helped me to be here today. I would like to thank my fellow caucus members for their support and their assistance, and last but not least, I would like to thank my family and friends for their love and support — and in particular, my husband.

A few words about my constituency, Langley. Langley is a vibrant and dynamic community, a place which more and more people choose to call home, an excellent place to live. The boundaries of Langley from east to west are Matsqui and Surrey, and from north to south are the Fraser River and the U.S. border. There are two municipalities within the constituency of Langley and two councils. Langley is a community where rural and urban lifestyles abound and live together in a sort of harmony.

Langley has many attractions within its boundaries. The first attraction is historic Fort Langley, which I am sure all of you have been to and have enjoyed. Fort Langley was the first capital of the Crown colony of our province, and each year on November 19 the provincial cabinet meets at Fort Langley to celebrate Douglas Day, honouring Sir James Douglas. It is my hope that this government will support the community of Fort Langley in becoming a major tourist destination. It is my opinion that Fort Langley has the greatest potential of any community in British Columbia. I encourage community

[ Page 35 ]

leaders in Fort Langley like Bays Blackhall to continue with your hard work.

Also in the constituency of Langley are three major regional district parks: Campbell Valley, Aldergrove Lake and Derby Reach. You can ride, walk, swim and fish in those parks, and it adds to the lifestyle that we enjoy there.

The pride of Langley is Trinity Western University, privately funded and dedicated to excellence. Trinity Western has grown to over 1,100 students who are pursuing various fields of studies, from education to biblical studies. It has been my privilege to support that university for the last ten years, and I intend to continue to do so.

Langley is in the rich Fraser Valley and has a wide economic base. It is a regional, commercial and industrial centre and has a thriving agricultural industry. Langley is horse country. Horse owners provide many jobs in Langley, and right now the horse owners in Langley are asking government to legislate more safety on the roads and more consideration. The number of thoroughbred racehorse breeding farms is growing. A higher than average proportion of show and recreation horses are in the riding, in addition to work horses used on farms. Other agricultural products produced in Langley are poultry, fruit and vegetables and the largest dairy farms in British Columbia. Some of our livestock statistics are: over 21,000 cattle and over 22,000 swine.

An example of small business ingenuity at work is the success of Money's Mushrooms, now worth more than $50 million and with 159 people employed. As government we recognize that the key to job creation is in the development of small business, and this government is working hard to encourage this kind of venture. Governments must stay out of the way of business and allow the private sector to prosper and provide real jobs.

In Langley we have experienced steady and impressive growth in the number of business incorporations — almost a 100 percent increase from 1983 to 1986. The increase in the number of business incorporations in Langley was almost four times the provincial average in 1985. With the amenities that Langley offers, it's not surprising that it has grown so rapidly in the last decade. It is important that we preserve the excellent quality of life that we now enjoy there, with carefully encouraged development and growth.

In 1981, the population of Langley area was 59,804, an increase of 27.7 percent from 1976, almost three times the average gain for the entire lower mainland area. Langley is a family-oriented community. Almost one-third of Langley's population is 14 years and under. It makes it even more imperative that we recognize that jobs must be created for our young people if they are to have a future and if we are to have a future. We must encourage the private sector to provide those jobs, real jobs with a future, a long-lasting future.

Some of Langley's concerns are: making it easier for private enterprise to start up and be successful — and I'm happy to see that that has been addressed in the throne speech; job creation for Langley's youth and reduced unemployment levels in Langley; improved services for residents — day care, education, health, recreation and seniors' programs. An example of what we face in Langley is a new community called Walnut Grove, where people from all over British Columbia are moving quickly. The population will grow from 4,000 to 17,000 within the next five to ten years. Those people must be provided with recreation, water, sewer and all of the soft services and schools that we all have come to appreciate and expect. And that money must come from tax dollars, and industry must create those tax dollars.

Langley district has unique problems, I believe, in this province. Eighty-five percent of Langley district is in the agricultural land freeze, making it very difficult to service many of our communities that have grown in Langley. With money difficult to come by, running sewer lines and water lines across our municipality is going to cost a great deal, and it is my hope that the provincial government will see the need and assist.

I'd like to talk a little bit about my background. I have been an alderman in the district of Langley for the past five years; I resigned a week before the nomination. I have worked on many committees, and one of the committees that I'm proudest of is the transit committee in Langley. On that committee I was chairman, and with the help of Bob McClelland we established the first transit system in Langley, which is still going and expanding, and I'm very proud of that. Also with the help of Bob McClelland, we kept the landfill sites out of Langley, and there were four of them in four beautiful areas of Langley. The entire lower mainland wanted to dump their garbage.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MRS. GRAN: Yes, they did. I spent ten years as executive assistant to Bob McClelland, and it gave me an opportunity to listen and to learn. I know my constituency and I know my constituents, and I plan to serve them well.

Priorities for the future include improved services for seniors and working women. I am more than pleased to see day care in the throne speech. In Langley we have 690 single mothers, and that means that there is a strong need for adequate day-care services. If a mother is to earn a living and have self-respect, she must know that her children are well looked after at home, and I compliment our Premier on recognizing that.

I am pleased to also see in the throne speech that we're going to make government more efficient. I am also pleased to see that we're reviewing the role of government and examining the need for Crown corporations. The appointment of a minister in charge of privatization is an excellent step, and again I commend the Premier.

We must, as government, assist all of our communities to provide improved recreation facilities for our people. We all have more leisure time, and we must have constructive recreation to spend that time on.

I am also happy to see child abuse addressed in the throne speech. In Langley, we have a very strong and active Christian community, and the issue of abortion will not go away. I believe, although it's a federal matter, we must decide as a society: where does life begin? When does life begin?

In the throne speech the government has pledged to be open and accountable. We will see positive things in British Columbia. We will see reduced interference in small business and increased assistance to small business. Reduced red tape will mean more small business starting up.

[4:15]

There is a concern for improving essential services in British Columbia, and that too has been addressed in the throne speech. I am pleased the government wants to involve citizens and has a cooperative approach. We must be concerned about our neighbours, about one another, and I encourage the Minister of Labour and Consumer Services

[ Page 36 ]

(Hon. L. Hanson), in his review of the Labour Code, to bring about more fairness into the workplace for both employees and employers.

And again I say, we must do more for our children. Sexual abuse should not be tolerated by this society. Sexual abuse of anyone should not be tolerated by this society. We need to care about our future and the legacy that we leave for our children. Programs must be sound, and they must help and give hope for the future.

In British Columbia we have a growing population of seniors, and their concerns must be addressed. We must provide recreation for them and alternative lifestyles, housing. I am happy to be part of the Social Credit team, dedicated to an open approach, consultation and a new beginning. I am happy to see a government that deals in a positive manner even with negative items. I am happy to know that the investment climate in British Columbia is going to improve and has already improved. I am very, very happy about the strong leadership of our Premier, his openness and his willingness to talk to people, his open line show, his town hall meetings, his caring, positive ways.

I want to send a positive message to my constituents that they have elected a government that cares and is going to act. I want to express a positive vision for this session. I feel good about it, and I want to work closely with all of you on both sides of the House so that we can all benefit from this session of the Legislature.

MR. SIHOTA: Mr. Speaker, much like the other speakers before me, it is certainly with honour and pride that I stand in this House today to give my first speech. The honour and pride isn't there simply because it's my first speech but because it represents the first occasion upon which I will be speaking on behalf of the people of Esquimalt-Port Renfrew. Secondly, it is the first time that a member of the Indo-Canadian community has spoken as an elected representative in any House in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I was reading the throne speech last night and this morning with some intrigue and I noticed while I was reading it the phrase or the paragraph that appears on page 2 of the throne speech. It says, and I quote: "We have a plan for a new economy — we will make it work." I read with some interest the plan as it was sort of explained in the throne speech, and it occurred to me, after I read the throne speech and analyzed the plan, that first of all the plan is not new, and secondly that the plan is fundamentally, economically flawed.

When I say that it's not new, let me elaborate on that a little bit. First of all the plan, as I understand it, is no different than the plan that the previous Social Credit government, or any other right-wing political government in this province, has been promoting as the salvation of our economic woes. It says, let's vacate the economic field, let's deregulate the world, let's get rid of red tape, let's hand everything over to the private sector and all of our economic problems will be solved. That's foolish. The record shows, Mr. Speaker, that that type of economic philosophy has been a failure. It wasn't too long ago that in this House this government, the Social Credit government, introduced the much forgotten Ministry of Deregulation with the idea of deregulating the world, of eliminating the red tape, and then it quietly disappeared. It disappeared because it didn't work.

It wasn't too long ago in this House, Mr. Speaker, that the government introduced special enterprise zones — another idea consistent with this deregulation, giving the private sector the breaks. Once again, that didn't work. Even the federal government squashed that idea. Then of course there were all these initiatives where we kept sending ministers off to Asia to sort of secure this giant Crown corporation that's going to be coming over to the shores of British Columbia and becoming our economic salvation. We continue to send ministers over there, but there have been no giant multinational corporations coming to British Columbia from southeast Asia, because that type of philosophy just doesn't work.

So today, as the rest of this country recovers from the economic doldrums, B.C. remains in an economic depression. Unemployment hovers somewhere between 14 and 16 percent in the region that I represent and towards 25 and 30 percent in other regions of the province. The typical Social Credit response, when faced with the reality of that unemployment, is to say it's due to the price of coal or the price of lumber in the world. Mr. Speaker, we can't continue to blame our economic woes on the world. It's about time that we took charge of our economic destiny.

The economic plan put forward by this government, as I said earlier, is basically one that says, let's vacate the economic field, let's take a secondary or peripheral role and make way for the private sector, and through a combination of free enterprise and deregulation we'll solve our economic dilemmas. The flaw in that plan, Mr. Speaker, is that it fails to recognize the leadership role that government can play in taking charge and developing our local economics and ensuring jobs and prosperity for the future.

The government, Mr. Speaker, should be and should continue to be a major participant in our economic system. Government has at its disposal an enormous amount of capital, capital which influences the operations and the productivity of the market system. Government decisions and expenditures have a profound impact on, for example, investors in the stock market. We only need to take a look at the stock situation with a company that's active in my riding, Versatile Pacific. In the past week government announcements had a tremendous effect on the value of shares of Versatile Pacific on the stock market. Government actions and expenditures influence how small businesses operate and how families make their expenditures to obtain the commodities that they need.

The challenge for government today is not to return to the nineteenth century laissez-faire economics that's proposed in the throne speech before us now, but to put purchasing power back into the hands of people so they can buy back the very things that they produce. That's the challenge that's before us. The question is, how do you meet that challenge? How do you propose to deal with the resources that government has? How do you propose to take the leadership role that government can play in the marketplace and deal with the fundamental economic problems of the day?

Let me talk about a few things, Mr. Speaker, that were missing from the throne speech that I thought ought to have been there, designed first of all to ensure economic prosperity; secondly, to ensure jobs now, not somewhere in the future when some giant multinational shows up from somewhere else; and thirdly, to pave the way for job development in the years to come.

For example, Mr. Speaker, there's no mention of all in the throne speech about the municipal infrastructure program that my colleagues, and in particular the former Mayor of Vancouver, have been pressing for to be established at both

[ Page 37 ]

the federal and provincial levels. Now we need that, and we need that in the riding of Esquimalt-Port Renfrew. We have a problem in Esquimalt-Port Renfrew in an area known as Bilston Creek. Each year Bilston Creek floods. As a consequence of the enormous flooding problems at Bilston Creek, the Capital Regional District has placed a moratorium on development there. What we need in the province is an ongoing municipal works program that can begin to solve flooding problems like Bilston Creek, so that we can create jobs now, today — cleaning out places like Bilston Creek so the creek flows properly and adjoining lands don't flood; and jobs tomorrow, because if we eliminate that flooding, we'll be able to lift the moratorium on development and allow for some sensitive development along Bilston Creek.

In Sooke in my riding, Mr. Speaker, we have a problem with clean water. The waterworks infrastructure that feeds into Sooke right now is so dilapidated and so poor that the people of Sooke do not get clean water year-round. What we need is a municipal infrastructure program that creates jobs now, today — to develop an appropriate waterworks system for the people of Sooke. I notice that the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mrs. Johnston) is applauding that one. I would anticipate that in the weeks to come we will have some funding put forward for an appropriate water system in Sooke.

In the Western Community in my riding we have a lot of problems with septic tanks. We don't have appropriate sewage disposal and treatment facilities in the communities of Langford, Colwood, Metchosin and, until recently, View Royal. We need a municipal infrastructure program now to create jobs for sewage treatment facilities in those regions of my riding. So jobs now, first of all, through the municipal infrastructure program.

Secondly, there is no mention at all in the throne speech of increased expenditure on transportation and highways. I note that the minister isn't here now, although I must say I'll be meeting with him later on this week to talk about that. We have a highway in my riding that is supposed to be the corridor between Victoria and Sooke. It is a treacherous wagon trail. In the last 18 months it has witnessed nine deaths. It is not a safe passageway for the residents of Sooke, nor does it do anything for the potential for tourism in that region of my riding.

What I'm saying, Mr. Speaker, is that we need now, today, a highways and transportation program to create jobs now to open up communities like Sooke to the tourism opportunities that exist there and further down the road to Port Renfrew. There is no paved road past China Beach to Port Renfrew. Nor is there a paved roadway from Port Renfrew in my riding to Mesachie Lake near Lake Cowichan in the riding of Cowichan-Malahat. If we were to have an appropriate roadway built today, not only would we create jobs in Sooke and Port Renfrew, and also in my neighbouring riding of Cowichan-Malahat, but at the same time we would provide a loop route for tourists to go through Sooke on their way to Port Renfrew and another way around the Island. If that were to happen, there would be enormous tourist potential for places like Port Renfrew, which is the gateway to the best botanical facilities in the area, to the Pacific Rim and to all the trails in the region. We need to promote the tourism potential of Sooke, the fishing opportunities for sports fishermen in that area, and we need to open up that community. We need an appropriate transportation system that would create jobs now and pave the way for development in the future.

What causes me the most amount of concern, Mr. Speaker, is that there is no mention whatsoever in this throne speech of the jobs in our shipyards and in our shipbuilding industry. I happen to live in and come from the municipality of Esquimalt. A few weeks ago, and up until about a week and a half ago, there was a lot of attention given to the Polar 8 contract. Of course, we saw the Premier in front of all the TV cameras saying: "Yes, we have to have this contract. We need it to revive our shipbuilding industry." But there's absolutely nothing in the throne speech that talks about a long-term strategy to inject some vitality into our shipbuilding industry. What we need in the shipbuilding industry is work today to cover the 18-month interim period between now and the time the Polar 8 project goes to construction.

Secondly, we need to make sure we don't have the same problem we had this time around. In other words, we need to begin to plan in the long run for work after the Polar 8 contract, so that once that project is completed there are other shipbuilding projects on design, so we don't face the situation that we have now. Today there are only 200 people employed in the shipyard in Esquimalt. At its height there were 1,400. What we need is a comprehensive strategy for Esquimalt and other areas in this province that are the bases of the shipbuilding industry. What we need, first of all, is interim work. Secondly, what we need to establish is a permanent lobby in Ottawa to go after those federal contracts when they come up. Of course, now that the Polar 8 announcement has been made, you don't see the Premier saying that any more, because the political sex appeal of the issue is gone.

[4:301 

We need a new generation of B.C. ferries, or at least a consideration towards that. We need to market our SeaBus — the wonderful SeaBus that we've got in downtown Vancouver, which, of course, is a credit to the former NDP government, designed in B.C. and marketed elsewhere in the world, so that we can construct those Seabuses here in British Columbia and provide them to people elsewhere.

We need to begin to look at the possibility of negotiating within our trade contracts a provision that says that if you want to buy some of that coal or some of that lumber or any of our other commodities, then a percentage of those goods has to be shipped on our ships built here in Canada, built in places like Esquimalt.

But sadly, there is no mention of a municipal infrastructure, no mention of an appropriate roadways work, no mention of an appropriate program for shipbuilding, and no mention of young people. Both myself and the member for Vancouver East are two of the youngest members in this House. Young people are facing an unemployment level of about 24 percent. Government can play a leadership role in providing jobs for young people, not during the summer but for the more important period from graduation to their first job, to bridge that gap. But no mention of that; totally oblivious to the needs of young people.

The point I am trying to make here, Mr. Speaker, is that there is a challenge before government to play a leadership role in economic development, to be an active and vigorous and positive participant in the marketplace, not to take a secondary or peripheral role and stand by and wait for this

[ Page 38 ]

economic miracle from the private sector or from deregulation and red tape. We need action now; we need it from the government. We need that leadership.

We have heard enough about this whole issue of creating the right climate or bringing about the right atmosphere for investment. We have been hearing that for eight or ten years, and the unemployment level remains precisely where it is right now. The economic policy, the philosophy that appears in the throne speech, is flawed. It is flawed in the way that I have announced already, and I encourage and urge the government to take a look at its economic policies and begin to take economic leadership in the marketplace.

I want to deviate for a moment and take a little bit about some other things that the throne speech omitted. I want to refer to two in particular, because it seems to me that there are a fair number of holes in this throne speech.

First of all, as I made my way through the throne speech I noticed that there is no mention at all about seniors, nothing. And yet in southern Vancouver Island we have a very large population of seniors, and a lot of them have retired in the areas of Esquimalt, Langford and Sooke, which of course are in my riding.

These people produced the wealth of this country. They helped build this country. Many would still like to work today. Now they are not being hired, but they would like to work. What we need is an economic strategy designed for their needs as well. But others would simply like to be secure in their retirement, and, of course, they are sitting now on fixed incomes which are being eroded very quickly.

These people produced the wealth of this country and they deserve to share in that wealth. What does the throne speech say about them? What does the throne speech say about user fees in hospitals? What does the throne speech say about the cost of prescriptions? What does the throne speech say about the cost of housing for seniors? I'll tell you what it says. Nothing. It is silent, and that is a grave error on the part of the government, and it lets down the seniors of this province who worked so hard to create the wealth in this province.

Secondly, I talked earlier on a little bit about my own ethnic origin and I was aghast to see that the throne speech makes no reference at all to the ethnic communities of this province or the multicultural heritage of this province. Now the history of ethnic communities in British Columbia has been one of a struggle, a struggle to come, to settle, to be accepted and then to produce the wealth of this country.

My own ethnic community has been a part of that struggle. In 1907 regrettably this Legislature passed the famous — or infamous, I should probably say — Natal Act which denied people of Asian and Oriental persuasion the opportunity to engage in professional activities, to sit on juries or to own land in certain parts of Vancouver. We had in 1914 the infamous Komagata Maru incident which disallowed British subjects from India the opportunity to come in and settle in Canada.

During the 1940s people of my ethnic community and Asians and Orientals alike fought for and had considerable difficulty in obtaining citizenship in this country or obtaining the right to vote. The New Democratic Party and its predecessor, the CCF, was at the side of those ethnic communities at that time as they fought for basic human rights, for basic equality and basic social justice. The NDP and the CCF provided the support when it was not particularly politically popular to do so, and I am proud to be here today representing that party, Mr. Speaker.

But I must ask: what has changed? What does the throne speech offer our ethnic communities? Nothing. Again it is tragically silent. There is no mention of improving a human rights code that was gutted by this very government. There is no mention of having a minister in charge of multiculturalism, as is the case in a lot of other provinces in this country. There is no mention of an ongoing program for race relations within our education system and within our schools.

It's interesting that during the election campaign the Premier was seen on the TV cameras visiting every Sikh temple he could get into, wearing his little headband and so on. Well, where is the commitment now, today, for our multicultural communities? Political opportunism, that's what was happening during the election campaign, and nothing is being delivered to the ethnic communities of this province. So on analysis, the throne speech that we have heard will be remembered not so much for what it says but for what it forgot to say — for the fact that it forgot the seniors of this province, for the fact that it forgot the young people of this province, for the fact that it forgot the ethnic communities of this province.

Secondly, it will be remembered for setting in place an economic philosophy that from the very beginning is flawed and doomed to failure. It's early in the government's mandate, and the government can reverse its economic direction. It can set out to play a leadership role in economic development rather than playing the secondary or peripheral role that I talked about earlier on. The people of this province are looking to us. They trust us; they're counting on us; they're looking for some leadership. I urge the government to begin to show that leadership. Thank you.

MR. DIRKS: Mr. Speaker, I would beg the leave of this House to allow me to introduce two individuals who have played a very important role in my life. I refer to one who helped guide my early development — although he was at some times unappreciated — my older brother, honouring me with his presence from Saskatchewan. The second person is my partner, lover and friend for the past 25 years, my wife Loma Dirks.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to congratulate you on your election to the post of Speaker of this House. Congratulations are also extended to the Deputy Speaker on his election. I would also offer congratulations to all the members of this House for their success in the recent election and especially to those members who, like myself, are new members. I look forward to working with all the members of this House. As an MLA for the great constituency of Nelson Creston and as a member of the Social Credit government and the Premier's team, it gives me great pleasure to rise and speak on the throne speech. I am indeed excited to have the opportunity to participate in the dawning of a fresh, new, positive era in British Columbia and, I might add, a new era in Nelson-Creston.

For 14 years, our great constituency was considered by many to be beyond hope — not only geographically but psychologically as well — in every sense of the word, including politically. It gives me a great deal of pleasure to tell you today that while we are still geographically beyond Hope in the southeast sector of this great province, we are no longer beyond psychological hope nor political hope. I am sure as this government progresses with its business we will not be beyond hope economically either.

[ Page 39 ]

Forgive me if I speak softly, for we in Nelson-Creston have kept the secret of our scenic beauty, the tremendous potential in natural resources and quality and serenity of life. We are not accustomed to standing and bragging loudly about how we live in a most beautiful sector of this great province, but just as we last year with a band of hardy volunteers dedicated to good Social Credit government and willing to work long and hard hours were able to wrest that constituency from the hands of the opposition and thus enter into a new phase of politics, we are now entering into a new era of economic hope and an era of willingness to share our beautiful spot with the rest of this world. Indeed, we wish to welcome industry, investment and people.

Our area, Mr. Speaker, is rich in history and culture. The pioneers who tamed our area had a vision of what could occur and a gigantic will to undertake the mammoth job with the technology then at hand. They undertook the diking and reclamation of land in the Creston Valley, to create the great Creston Flats, an agricultural oasis and one of the mainstays of Creston's economy. The rivers and trails were conquered to found the mining camps that became the bustling centres of Riondel, Silverton, New Denver, Ainsworth, Kaslo, Salmo, Ymir and even Nelson. These remain. But some, like Gold Hill, Circle City and Spencer City, remain today only as memories. Remnants of others, such as Cooper Creek, Retallack and Whitewater, are still visible.

Some of these mining shows are still actively being explored. Last year some $16 million was spent in our area on exploration. Some mines, such as the Silvana mine at Sandon, are still active and an important economic generator for Silverton and New Denver. The mine now has proven reserves that should ensure continued mining and milling for the next several years. Just west of these holdings, Northair has recently encountered some very interesting formations, and now is embarking on phase one feasibility studies for possible production and mill development.

[4:45]

Renewed interest on work done on the old Abbot and Wagner claims is creating economic benefit in the north Lardeau; the old Nugget mine in Salmo is again being explored; the reopening of Kokanee Glacier Park for further exploration of established claims.... All of these, Mr. Speaker, indicate a renewed interest and an active year for mineral exploration. These operations and the exploration activity preceding development are important factors in our economy. Too often, I believe, we concentrate our efforts on the large companies and large operations, to the detriment of the small prospector and mine operator. We must seek new ways of encouraging the small independents in exploration and mining, and I am pleased to see this type of thrust expressed in the throne speech.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, a proposed reorganization of the regional office of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources threatened to close the mines office in Nelson. This was an office which historically has served the prospector and miner of the West Kootenay. We petitioned the minister, and in keeping with this government's commitment to better serve the people, the mines office has remained open. Thank you, Mr. Minister. I hope, with the increased activity in our area, the minister will find it expedient to restore the Nelson mines office to its once-great status.

Some very aggressive and futuristic-minded people settled our area. The early electrification of Nelson resulted in the city-owned electrical utility, still in existence today.

Nelson was the home of the first civic centre to be built in the Dirty Thirties. I'm proud to say that centre is still operating today, some 50 years later.

As the wealth of the mining camps flowed into Nelson and Nelson became the regional seat of government for that area, buildings of brick and stone arose that are in existence today and that allowed Nelson to become the first city in western Canada to be designated as a heritage site and a restoration project for Heritage Canada. This revitalization was an ambitious program, undertaken by the provincial government, the city of Nelson, the downtown merchants and Heritage Canada.

Nelson was also the site of one of the first vocational schools in this province. Then, cooperating with other communities, it helped to form Selkirk College, the second community college to be developed in our good province.

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of our heritage; we are proud of the strengths of our people. But Nelson-Creston is an economically diverse area. Industries such as forestry, agriculture, tourism, manufacturing and, most recently, even film-making all play an important role in the area's economy.

Due to the economic diversity of my riding, I will be eagerly working to foster future economic growth in all sectors of the economy; in order to accomplish this, I will always keep an open door for all individuals. I will listen to and work with local government officials, labour and management representatives, small business owners, and other concerned citizens of my riding. I believe the interests of all British Columbians can best be served through the process of consulting and cooperating with all sectors of society. In this regard, Mr. Speaker, I was delighted when I was asked to join the Minister of Labour (Hon. L. Hanson) and his parliamentary secretary in their tour throughout this province to hear submissions in regard to the Labour Code. This exercise, which started in Nelson, the heritage capital of British Columbia, was truly evidence of our Premier's promise of a consultative and open government. This process of taking government to the people is true communication, and I am proud to be a part of such a process.

I am sure that these hearings brought a new awareness to all people of this province of the need to seek labour peace, and will result in greater labour stability and economic wellbeing for all. We can no longer afford massive work stoppages like the one we encountered last year in the forest industry.

Forestry has played and continues to play a very vital role in the economy of our area. The contract loggers of Nakusp and Salmo, the independent mills of the Lardeau, the larger mills of Slocan and Creston, all form the economic backbones of their communities. They have survived the downturn of the early eighties and the uncertainty about countervailing duties, and are now looking for a period of stability and, indeed, modest expansion. But in order to ensure their future, I would encourage our government to continue and expand its work in the area of silviculture and intensive forest management. It is imperative that we make sure there will be an adequate supply of timber, not only for our generation but for future generations as well. The economy of my area and, indeed, the economy of this province depends on it. As the MLA for Nelson-Creston I will be working hard to develop further a strong seedling-nursery industry and intensive forest management for my riding.

I would be remiss, Mr. Speaker, if I failed to congratulate the Ministry of Forests and Lands for their attempts through

[ Page 40 ]

reorganization to make that ministry more responsive to the people. The goal of taking the decision-making process out into the field is, I believe, one that is very desirable. This move will enable that ministry to respond in a timely and meaningful manner to the needs of those constituents involved in the forest industry.

I would also be remiss if I failed to thank those individuals and groups in my constituency who have worked over the past number of years, through numerous meetings with Forests and Environment personnel, to try to plan effective and yet efficient logging of watershed areas. This consultative and cooperative endeavour has, I believe, resulted in logging plans which can be implemented and yet protect water-user rights. Both the public organizations and Forests and Environment personnel are to be congratulated on their efforts in protection of our water resources.

Another important economic generator, especially to Creston and area, is our agricultural sector. This is very diverse: tree-fruits, cattle and feed crops, a budding equestrian industry and now the recent successful introduction of a seed-potato industry in the Creston Valley. Together they play a very important role in the economy of Creston and deserve careful attention. Working in partnership with the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries (Hon. Mr. Savage), I am confident that agriculture and agriculture-related opportunities can and will be further developed in our area.

Mr. Speaker, my area has recently been very prominent in energy news with the proposed sale of West Kootenay Power and Light to UtiliCorp of Missouri. This has, temporarily at least, relegated two other energy-related issues to a back burner. However, I believe these are both within the purview of this government to deal with, and the solution would be of great direct benefit to the people of my constituency. I refer to local taxation of B.C. Hydro facilities and increasing the water licence to the city of Nelson. While it is recognized that taxation of B.C. Hydro properties in the Regional District of Central Kootenay and the Peace region may result in an increased operating expense for B.C. Hydro in the magnitude of 1 percent, the direct benefit of taxation of B.C. Hydro properties to our seven hospitals alone would be phenomenal. In the matter of increasing the water licence to the city of Nelson, the city of Nelson secured necessary water licences from the comptroller of water rights to divert and use 1,428 cubic feet per second of water from the Kootenay River for the purpose of generating electric power back in 1905. In spite of upgrading this city's generating facility, making it second only to the Canal plant in efficiency on the Kootenay River, and in spite of numerous attempts to have the licence increased, the original 1,428 cubic feet per second still remains. An increase of 714 cubic feet per second of water, water that is available, would allow that plant to operate to its potential and add close to $0.5 million annually to that utility's profit, a profit which in turn is turned into general revenue for the city of Nelson.

I intend to work closely with the minister responsible to seek solutions to these outstanding problems. Our regional district and our municipalities, with the shrinking industrial tax base, increased liability insurance premiums and the greater demand for community services, are facing some very serious financial problems. Although I am pleased to state that most municipalities have entered into the Partners in Enterprise program, and economic development commissions are actively pursuing industrial and commercial opportunities, many of my communities will require assistance to build the infrastructures necessary to attract commercial expansion.

I intend to pursue solutions to these problems with the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Hon. Mrs. Johnston). I am confident that solutions can and will be found, especially in light of recent moves by our government to decentralize decision-making and broaden the powers of municipal governments. The local governments can count on my support as they seek to develop in this direction.

Earlier I related how we in Nelson-Creston have kept the beauty of our area a secret from the rest of the world. With the change from steam locomotives to first- and then second-generation diesel locomotives, and the abandonment of some rail lines in our area, once a hub of rail traffic, we now face further cutbacks in railroad personnel and further rail-line abandonment. The Rogers Pass and then the Skyway link between Creston and Salmo and the recent linking of Salmo, with Castlegar have virtually moved over 70 percent of our constituency into a middle land somewhere between Highway 3 and Highway 1. These two factors, the changing emphasis in railroad importance and the major changes in highway construction, have moved our constituency out of the mainstream and helped us keep the secret of our scenic beauty and great potential — but just as a new political era has dawned in our riding and new awareness of the need to move back into the mainstream of this great province's economy is dawning. We want to develop our potential, but we need to improve north-south corridors that now exist and we need to open areas by creating a new north-south corridor. The development of access roads will do more for the economic viability and sure economic growth of our area than any other single factor.

[5:00]

For the famous Slocan Bluffs, that five-kilometre stretch of one-lane highway not even visited by the sure-footed mountain goat, we have two choices of action. We can apply to the Minister of Energy for special dispensation for power consumption so that it can be floodlit to give the frightened traveler a full view of his precipitous path. Then with the cooperation of the Minister of Highways and the Minister of Tourism we could erect large signs at either end of the bluffs welcoming the tourist to the "heritage miles": highway roads the way they used to be before the advent of good Social Credit government. This, of course, would not address the matter of safety, except that one could see by night as well as by day how treacherous the road really is. Nor would it address the problem of increased heavy traffic of logging or concentrate and wood-chip trucks.

No, Mr. Speaker, on second thought that choice is not an alternative that we can consider. The only choice possible is to undertake at the earliest possible date a program to widen that one-lane stretch into a safe highway of two-lane width. My constituency deserves no less than an adequate, safe highway, a highway that will encourage tourism to venture through the area rather than frighten the tourist away. I intend to pursue this matter and the matter of improved highways throughout my constituency.

In order to ensure future economic expansion, it is paramount that our highway system continue to be upgraded and new highways be built to those areas which now lack major access routes. Moreover, working in cooperation with federal officials and the Minister of Tourism, I am confident that our government will ensure that all the airports in our riding will

[ Page 41 ]

be continually upgraded to meet the needs of the communities they serve. The positive economic benefits that result from improved airport facilities demand that we upgrade all airport facilities in my riding.

Interjection.

MR. DIRKS: We will get his help as well. It is inexcusable that the Castlegar airport, an airport which serves some 70,000 or 80,000 people, is still in this day and age restricted to daytime flights only. We cannot expect tourists or economic development when our major airport is so restricted. By improved access both by road and by air, positive economic spinoffs will result.

Our area will not only benefit from an increased population, but also from increased tourism. The tourism potential of our area is unbelievable. I am encouraged by the further development of Ainsworth Hot Springs currently being undertaken. This has become an important tourist generator and destination spot. However, the potential of other hot spring areas such as Nakusp and others continue to be undeveloped. Rebuilding of the old Halcyon Hot Springs, once a thriving sanatorium hotel, remains a dream rather than reality.

Kootenay Lake, which once boasted the most important inland sport fishery, remains virtually undeveloped, lacking basic tourist facilities such as boat launches, safe harbours and marinas. Our sport fishing industry needs to be restored. I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, that new and innovative ideas are being worked on by the Ministry of Environment to replenish these fish stocks. These efforts, however, have to be continued and expanded to the southern reaches of Kootenay Lake.

The Kaslo Bay park development, much needed to accommodate a fledgling tourist industry in Kaslo, must move from plans to reality. Another facility, the McDonald Creek Park on Arrow Lakes just south of Nakusp, must move ahead to the status of facilities promised some years ago. We have potential truly beyond belief The beautiful Valhalla wilderness park, created in 1983 as a class A park, remains not only a wilderness but also an inaccessible wilderness, a park accessible only by the hardy and healthy that can endure a strenuous backpacking experience. Road access to the edge of the park is necessary if that park is to be of economic benefit to the villages of Slocan, Silverton and New Denver. The Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area, a vast sanctuary for a wide variety of birds and animals, is under-utilized in terms of tourist usage. As the MLA for the area, I will continue to seek ways of achieving the potential of these tremendous assets.

Our greatest potential, however, Mr. Speaker, is the people themselves. We have over the years, due to our rich heritage, cultural diversity and scenic beauty, developed a rich mosaic of artists and craftspeople in every field of endeavour. This, I believe, was a key factor in Nelson being chosen as the location for the filming of two major motion pictures. With its historic charm, beautiful scenery and friendly, hard-working people, our area has proven to be very attractive to the makers of motion pictures. Every effort will be made to ensure that our area continues to be considered for future film-making.

Improving access by ground and air to and through our area will undoubtedly help us achieve the potential we possess and allow us to partake in the further economic development of this great province.

Mr. Speaker, Nelson-Creston wants to be part of the team fuelling our province's recovery. I am certain that as we see this House deliberate and the elements of the throne speech become reality, our area will achieve some of the goals I have outlined. I am certain that my constituents will cooperate to the fullest with this government in reaching for the economic development of our great province.

I am honoured, Mr. Speaker, that the constituents, although by the slimmest of majorities, chose me to represent them and their well-being in this House. I will endeavour to uphold their wishes and desires and not betray the trust they have placed in me. I look forward to working with this government and all MLAs to ensure the continued good government already displayed by our Premier and his cabinet. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your indulgence.

HON. B. R. SMITH: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

HON. B.R. SMITH: I take great pleasure in introducing a former member of this House, Mr. Frank Calder, who was first elected in 1949 to the Legislature and was re-elected eight times — once unsuccessfully during that period — came back again and served here.... I am thinking of the excellent remarks of the new member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota). When Mr. Calder was elected, he was the first native Indian to sit in a parliament in Canada. When he was called to the executive council in 1972, he was the first native Indian to be made a member of an executive council in Canada. It is fitting of this man that he would come down here to hear the maiden speech of his successor-in-title — I think that's the correct term — the new member for Atlin (Mr. Guno). He came here to hear him and, partisan differences meaning not very much to this man, he came here as a good Canadian and as a Nishga. I would ask the House to recognize the "Little Chief."

MR. GUNO: Before I begin, I'd like to ask you to share with me a welcome to a very special visitor from Atlin, a great supporter of mine — my mother.

I am honoured and privileged to rise as a member of this Legislature and as representative of the riding of Arlin. I am very pleased to hear that we have the "Little Chief," Frank Calder, present in the galleries today. Through the years when Mr. Calder was representing Atlin, I followed the proceedings of this House with a great deal of interest — not always with comprehension, Mr. Speaker, but there it is.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the people of Atlin for their support and confidence which they expressed in me in the last election, and I want to pledge to all the people in that riding that I will endeavour to represent them with the best of my ability. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your appointment as Speaker, and I would like also to extend such congratulations to the first member for Dewdney (Mr. Pelton), who was appointed as Deputy Speaker.

I want to pay tribute to my immediate predecessor, the late Al Passarell, who, as you know, died along with four other colleagues in a plane crash just shortly before the election was called last fall. Mr. Passarell, who was elected twice as a New Democrat representing Atlin but who joined the Social Credit government in the latter part of his last term, represented the riding in his own particular style. He focused

[ Page 42 ]

attention on many of the problems that we faced in the Atlin riding and which we continue to face today. It was with shock and distress that we heard Mr. Passarell had passed away so early in his life, and I think that it reinforced in all of us the risks that we sometimes take in pursuit of our public responsibilities.

I hadn't realized that Mr. Calder would be here, but I also would like to extend a tribute to Mr. Calder, who, as the Attorney-General has pointed out, represented this riding for some 26 years and did it with distinction and dedication, and was the first native representative to be elected to a legislative assembly, not only in British Columbia but, as I understand, in all the British Commonwealth.

Mr. Speaker, given the penchant of my last two predecessors for crossing the floor, I feel compelled to say from the outset that I am only going to follow my hon. friends to this side of the House, and that the only time I'm going to cross the floor is when I join my colleagues when we cross the floor to form the next government after the next election.

In the last few months, Mr. Speaker, since the election, I've gotten to know my colleagues in the NDP caucus, and I must say that I look forward to working with these bright, dedicated and creative individuals in ensuring that ordinary British Columbians are given a fair shake in this province.

I want to address two general issues that I think are of importance and which I believe were ignored in the throne speech yesterday. I think my colleagues have covered them, but I just need to highlight them. First is the need to develop a long-term economic strategy in this province, a process that would require all British Columbia to reassess our values, our aspirations, and where we are going into the next century. Second, and I think almost as important and vital a question, is integrity in government. I think that the resolution of these two issues is essential before we begin the hard work of rebuilding this province.

Mr. Speaker, I detected in the throne speech that there is no sense of direction with regard to a comprehensive economic planning from the government. I listened to the throne speech with a great deal of interest, and I must say with some anticipation, but I was disappointed that the throne speech gives ordinary British Columbians very little to look forward to. The throne speech did not address the vital need for this government to provide genuine leadership, some sense of direction and vision under which all British Columbians can unite. It is my belief, Mr. Speaker, that the people of this province expect more from this government. The people expect a clear plan of action on how this government plans to extricate this province from the economic mire that we find ourselves in today. For the sake of the thousands who are out of jobs in British Columbia today, there is a particular urgency to work out, both by government and opposition, an approach that will address the goals that I referred to — the direction. Someone said that if you don't know where you're going you will end up somewhere else, and I think that we as British Columbians are tired of ending up somewhere else.

[5:15]

Now that process of working out those goals I believe should include all segments of our society. I certainly look forward to the establishment of more effective select standing committees, which would provide an effective forum in working out these strategies. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, once we have reached such a consensus, we need to present or to come up with a plan of action on how we are to attain these goals.

Again, Mr. Speaker, a process of working those out should include the broadest representation of the total population.

I think, Mr. Speaker, along with that, once we have decided where we're going, we have to accept the fact that we take risks once we reach those very hard decisions; and finally I think that along with that we must have alternatives. We live in an unpredictable world today, and we need flexibility in our economic planning so that we can adapt to the inevitable changes that we face.

The second general issue that I want to address, Mr. Speaker, is that without question today politics and politicians are viewed with a great deal of skepticism by our citizens. I think it's in the interest of both the government and the opposition, indeed for all of British Columbia, to see to it that full public confidence and faith is restored in our political institutions. I would suggest and hope that this government will consider in the very near future legislation on conflict of interest rules — legislation that is enforceable, that creates an independent process and is clear and involves all members on both sides of the House. Nothing could paralyze the ability of any government to do its job more if the people have no confidence in its integrity.

Mr. Speaker, never in the history of this Legislature have there been so many new members. I think that there lies an opportunity for us today to forge a new working relationship, one that is more constructive and of course less confrontational.

I want to briefly comment on the throne speech, which primarily relies on the market force to be the sole vehicle for economic and social change, and that the first job of this government would be to get government off the backs of private interests. Mr. Speaker, you will excuse me for being somewhat skeptical about the government's intention to rely totally on the market forces to deal with the complex problems that we face today. Certainly the people in the Nass Valley have had certain experiences in dealing with this kind of laissez-faire type of policy. You will recall the problem they had with Amax, a company which, with the full cooperation of both levels of government, without the knowledge of the people directly affected, were given wide discretion to dump mine tailings at the jeopardy of the people who lived there.

In terms of the devastation of the forest resources in the lower part of the Nass, the fact that over 60 percent of it remains un-rehabilitated would indicate that the Nishga have some legitimate concerns about the ability of the private sector to guarantee minimal protection with regard to the economic stability of the local area, as well as guaranteeing that that resource continue for future generations.

I think, Mr. Speaker, that the throne speech indicates it's business as usual. It is to provide a select few, a privileged few, access to our resources, and often at a subsidized rate, often at a low interest rate, often at low infrastructure costs, often with large tax concessions, and often with virtually no guarantee that the development is in the interest of all British Columbia and to improve the local economy.

Like the rest of British Columbia, Mr. Speaker, Atlin faces many problems today. Unemployment is the number one issue. The latest statistic shows unemployment to be 15.3 percent in British Columbia, and for the young people the figure is higher, the latest figure being 24 percent. This is unacceptable. But consider this, that in Atlin and some communities, and often most of them are native, it is closer to 90 percent. That is shameful and, I think, totally unjustified.

[ Page 43 ]

I believe that privatization is not the issue; it's the povertization of this province that is really the issue. For the lucky few who do have jobs in certain parts of the riding, they still face much uncertainty because of the boom-or-bust type of economy there.

I congratulate the Premier for recognizing the need to diversify the economy in B.C. That kind of economic approach applies also to the economy of Atlin. It is gratifying, Mr. Speaker, to see the local people, like Stewart, like the Nass, who are recognizing the need to develop a more reasonable approach to economic planning. But I think the government has a role in terms of providing some basic infrastructure, essential ingredients for economic development in northwestern British Columbia. For example, in spite of the region's potential for a northward extension of the B. C. Hydro transmission grid, the area still does not have adequate power supply. It is urgent then that this government recognize the particular needs of the north, so that a broader range of economic possibilities can be made available to the local people.

Another essential ingredient for the growth of the riding of Atlin is for this government to undertake a comprehensive upgrading of the highway system, which has been left neglected for too long. In the Nass, for instance, there is an opportunity to turn around the dismal economic future of the people there by government committing funds to pave the rest of the Nass Valley, which has had to endure an inadequate road system for the last 25 years!

The government should also consider the plight of the village of Kincolith and begin a dialogue with the federal government to consider the possibility of a joint sharing of extending the road to that community, so that we can begin planning for a more stable and diversified economic future.

With regard to Highway 37, it presents so much opportunity in terms of drawing tourists from Alaska and people from the south. It is the most direct route from Alaska to Canada — to British Columbia — and it is also one of the most incredibly beautiful parts of British Columbia. I would invite all British Columbians to consider visiting this part of the province during the summer.

Today, Highway 37 — or a substantial portion of that highway — requires significant upgrading in order for the area to attain its full potential and to provide more economic opportunities for the people who live there.

I want to turn briefly to the mining situation in Atlin. It remains unstable, with some exceptions. It faces continuing problems as a result of the international market conditions, as well as the introduction of substitutional metals. But it is vital that this government reveal how it plans to deal with the complex problems that the mining industry faces today. I will comment further on that as the debate leader on mining when the government reveals in further detail just how it plans to deal with the recommendations that were presented by the task force.

In terms of the one mining company in Atlin, the one in Cassiar, which is the largest employer in the riding and so has incredible economic significance, it faces continuing problems in terms of energy costs. The power is presently provided by a diesel generating plant which consumes volumes of fuel each year, adding to the production costs and therefore causing some competitive loss for the company. I would hope that this government would begin a dialogue with the local officials of the company and the union involved in seeking ways to minimize this power cost, so that vital jobs are protected.

In terms of health care the situation remains the same in Atlin. It is inadequate, uncertain and expensive. The government should consider extending to northerners medical coverage that would provide people who travel to the south to receive specialized treatment not available in the north the necessary funds to cover those costs. As an alternative, the government should look at some other possibilities, at having a broader range of health services provided on a rotational basis so that northerners can enjoy an acceptable level of quality health services.

In terms of education, Mr. Speaker, I detect very little urgency demonstrated by the government in the throne speech in meeting the mounting problems that our educational system faces today in British Columbia. If the problems are critical in the lower mainland, they are desperate in Atlin, where the costs are higher and the people face much lower-quality educational opportunities. The costs are, as I said, higher, and obtaining qualified teachers is sometimes difficult. More and more people are reaching deep into their pockets for scarce resources to send their children to other parts of British Columbia in order for them to receive a broader range of educational opportunities.

In Good Hope Lake, for instance, because of the restraint in funding, people have had to suffer the agony of sending their small children of preschool and kindergarten age at 7 o'clock in the morning on a 40-mile trip every day, Monday through Friday, coming back at 4:30 in the afternoon. I think that these people deserve better. I share with my colleagues the fundamental recognition that every child deserves equal access to quality education.

Finally, I want to make a few brief comments relating to the Indian land question, which is of considerable importance to a large segment of the people of Atlin and, indeed, of all British Columbia. It is a long-standing question that is casting an ever-deepening shadow on the economic and political landscape of British Columbia. Lord Dufferin, addressing an assembly of leading politicians, landowners and businessmen in Victoria in 1876, said this to them: "Before we touch an acre, we must make a treaty with the chiefs representing the bands that we are dealing with, and not until then do we consider that we are entitled with a single acre." Mr. Speaker, 110 years and millions of acres later, this matter still remains unresolved. It has often been described as one of the oldest human rights questions in Canada today, and I am disappointed that the throne speech made fairly vague references to this pressing problem and at no time ever mentioned the need to negotiate land claims to resolve the matter. To put it in another perspective, sometimes the whole issue of land claims is put in frightening proportion to frighten people away from the need to deal with this in a responsible manner.

[5:301 

From my understanding of land claims as a Nishga — the people who brought this to the highest court in Canada in 1968 — I believe that it is not just a matter of land transfer and compensation. It is a matter of reasserting a sense of dignity as a people. It is their continuing fight to say that we as the aboriginal people have a history. We have lived here since time immemorial. We had our own government and governmental institutions. We have our cultures, our languages. Of course, we had our laws and we have our customs and traditions. In short, the aboriginal people in British Columbia

[ Page 44 ]

are trying to establish the fact that they have a legitimate place here in British Columbia.

Recent polls have shown that the native people have the support of the majority of British Columbians who want the government to deal with this matter now. I think it is trite to say that there are really three alternatives open to us: confrontation, litigation and negotiation. The policy of this government in the last few years has been to force confrontation in Lyell Island, to force litigation in Meares Island and the Gitksan case. The recent statements by the Premier do indicate hope that this government will pick the third alternative, which is negotiation, and reach an honourable and just settlement, and conclude land claims agreements for all the outstanding claims in British Columbia.

As the cleanup hitter I can, I guess, pick my time and quit anytime. I want to conclude, Mr. Speaker, by uttering a few words in Nishga in this chamber. I don't know if my predecessor, Frank Calder, ever had the opportunity to do it, but I think it's appropriate for me, as the second aboriginal representative to be elected in this House. These are guiding principles that are often said before a council of chiefs sit down to discuss the affairs of their people. I think they're appropriate, and the message is universal. The first one says: " Soam hl wil sim." It means: be diligent. "Hog wil wil sim." Be patient. "Sim git wil sim." Deliberate, knowing that you have a serious task at hand.

MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, members of this House, ladies and gentlemen, it is with extreme pride and thankfulness that I assume my seat in this House, a historical setting and the centre of democracy for our beautiful and beloved province of British Columbia. The pride results from achieving a goal that I did not think possible when I first entered politics over 20 years ago and lost resoundingly in my first attempt to win the Burnaby-Edmonds constituency. The pride results from being one of 69 democratically elected representatives of the people who have been charged with representing them, managing their affairs and protecting their rights. The pride results from being a part of a government team that has tremendous talent, an abundance of enthusiasm and the potential to be among the very best governments to have served our province.

Following tradition, I congratulate the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and the Deputy Chairman on their election to their respective positions. Among the more interesting things I have recently learned is the historical significance and importance of their roles in this House. I also congratulate the other 68 members elected to this Legislature and equally charged with the responsibility to govern and serve our electorate. I congratulate the Premier for having led our party to victory and the formation of this government. I further congratulate the Premier for the positive and forward-looking programs contained in the throne speech.

Mr. Speaker, earlier I also said I assume my seat with thankfulness. There are so many things to be thankful for and so many people to thank. If there is one special thing I have learned in my travels to various parts of this world, it is to be thankful that I was born, raised and lived in the province of British Columbia. It is possible we are rained on regularly just to remind us that nothing is meant to be perfect.

My sincere thanks to those who worked on my election campaign. Campaign workers are a very special breed and most important to our democratic process. They toil long and hard for that intangible reward, self-satisfaction. My thanks to my constituents who voted, and particularly to those who voted for me. Special thanks also go to my family, in particular my mother and stepfather, who have supported all my efforts. Once elected, there is a greater opportunity to achieve for all electors if one is elected as part of the government team; the burden is also greater, but I thank the people of British Columbia for electing the Social Credit majority to carry that burden.

It is appropriate to recognize the service of those who served before us as members of this Legislature. On behalf of elected members, residents of the Burnaby-Edmonds constituency and the people of the province of British Columbia, I extend recognition and thanks to the former MLA for Burnaby-Edmonds, Rosemary Brown. In deciding not to again seek office, Rosemary has left her trademark of tenacious speech-making, energy and enthusiasm for her causes, and dedicated service to the people of the constituency, the province and our country.

Let me take a few minutes to talk about the Burnaby Edmonds constituency. It is one of three ridings in Burnaby, a municipality adjacent to and located east of Vancouver, bounded on the north by majestic Burrard Inlet, the south by the mighty Fraser River, and the east by New Westminster and Coquitlam. It occupies the southeastern portion of Burnaby. Historically the area was virgin forest with some small agricultural holdings. In 1900 Mr. and Mrs. Henry Valentine Edmonds arrived and acquired extensive land holdings in the area. One Dugald Campbell Patterson, an 1890s homesteader in Burnaby who became a building contractor and land speculator, developed the land and assigned the Edmonds name to the main road. Edmonds became the name of the post office and the community village itself.

The change from virgin forest to no forest at all was sudden, due to the logging practices of the day and the demand for homestead land. Small farms were developed, including a dairy which existed on MacPherson Avenue when I was a Vancouver Sun newspaper carrier in that area in the early 1950s. The surviving agricultural lands include the truck farms and market gardens on the peat lands located in the Big Bend area along the Fraser River in the south of the riding.

Development surged ahead in the 1950s and resulted in the transition to a fully developed urban community containing light and heavy industrial plants, modest commercial centres and a variety of residential buildings ranging from small and large single-family homes to highrise apartments. The free market system, coupled with a comprehensive municipal plan developed in the late fifties, has resulted in a well balanced community where housing, working, health, social, recreational and other needs are well met.

The economic base has in a relatively short 80 years shifted from logging, heavy industry and agriculture to light industry, service and commercial endeavours. The resultant impact on the workforce is typical in that the shift has been from labour-intensive — particularly unskilled labour — to skilled labour, clerical and technical work. Having lived in the area for over 35 years, it is natural for me to know the pulse of its activities and concerns. We have concerns that are typically urban, and from my travels throughout this province, concerns that are sometimes not fully appreciated by those living in less urban communities. For example, there is a tendency for new arrivals to our country to settle in urban areas because of the infrastructure of services available, the variety of work available and the ability of larger

[ Page 45 ]

communities to absorb newcomers. This tendency creates problems which on a scale of magnitude are more difficult to resolve in our urban communities than elsewhere in the province.

A specific example of a problem for the federal government to consider when they review immigration policy is the impact on our provincial and local education budget of teaching English as a second language to newly arrived students. In Burnaby there are approximately 17,000 students, of which approximately 1,800 are considered as learning-disabled. However I am advised that approximately 800 of the 1,800 are newly arrived students to whom English is a second language. They cannot proceed with other subjects until they are proficient in English. It can be argued that the cost of this program burdens our ability to cope with the program for other learning-disabled students and other education programs.

My stepfather Vlastimil Sevcik arrived some years ago from Czechoslovakia and was an immigrant to Canada, and I welcome immigration to this great country. Nevertheless I draw the federal government's attention to the demands placed on our system if there is not a well-planned program for dealing with the overall problems associated with immigration.

Mr. Speaker, a second concern, which is often more extensive in an urban setting, is housing and care for the elderly. Many excellent housing units for seniors have been constructed in Burnaby-Edmonds, with considerable support from this and former Social Credit governments.

It is interesting that during my political service in the area I noted that over 50 percent of the seniors resident in provincial government-assisted accommodation have come to my riding from elsewhere in British Columbia and other parts of Canada. The Burnaby-Edmonds riding probably ranks as the seniors' capital of the province. When I ask for support for the construction of even more housing and medical facilities for elderly citizens, please remember: (1) we are all getting older; (2) the demographic facts indicate there is a shift that will result in the elderly forming a greater proportion of our population than now; (3) my riding has an excellent infrastructure to service seniors, including SkyTrain; and (4) the numbers indicate that your relatives will probably move from the far-flung comers of this country to live in the seniors' centres we build in our riding.

[5:45]

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

With respect to recreation, I and our government programs will be promoting the many facilities we have, and the development of more facilities, nature reserves and preserves, particularly in the area known as the Central Valley Sports Complex adjoining Burnaby Lake, the largest lake in the lower mainland.

I am advised, Mr. Speaker, that it is traditional, so I wish now to take a few minutes to provide some personal background which may help my fellow members understand my future actions on the issues important to this House. While it is not known at large, I think it is interesting that my grandfather, James A. Fraser, a carpenter, arrived in Burnaby from Scotland just prior to the First World War. After serving with the Canadian army in Europe, very important to our family tree, he returned to live on East 5th Avenue in the east end of Vancouver with his English bride Kathleen, later moving to

Burnaby. They had five children, including my mother Kathleen. My grandfather, Henri Mercier, and his wife Ida, also important to our family tree, arrived in 1912 from Hull, Quebec, to open a plumbing business on Hastings Street in North Burnaby. They had eight children, including my father Lionel.

I was born in Vancouver in 1939 and did not immediately embark on a political career. There have been, however, a number of politicians whose roots are in the east side of Vancouver. My childhood home on 5th Avenue in the east end of Vancouver was one block or less from the childhood home of former Premier David Barrett, the former leader of the provincial New Democratic Party. What a coincidence that Mr. Barrett and I were elected to serve this House, he for the NDP, I for Social Credit. I can't remember exactly when I went right.

After five enjoyable, youthful years living in Copper Mountain, a mining camp a few miles from Princeton, my schooling in the Burnaby school system was completed with graduation in 1957 from Burnaby South High School. On completion of first-year arts at the University of B.C., I articled as an accounting student and qualified as a chartered accountant in 1965. To the service of our province as a member of this Legislative Assembly, I bring experience as owner and operator of businesses active in oil and gas exploration and production in other provinces and the United States, real estate, manufacture of neon signs and investments. In addition I bring my political experience, which includes service as alderman, then mayor, of the municipality of Burnaby — population approximately 145,000 — and service as a member or director of many committees, commissions and boards, including director of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and its hospital board. Our family experience as labourers and trades people provides me, I believe, with an appreciation of the history of, and the feelings and goals of, workers in our province, those who are union members and those who are not.

Mr. Speaker, I have a belief that we are all obligated, to the extent of our ability, to serve at various times and for various purposes other than our personal needs. I have a deep interest in the future of our world, our country and our province for the sake of all of our children, not the least my own children, Justin, Suzanne and Jacqueline.

Finally, I believe that having a modest upbringing in no way limits one's ability to serve in government. My energies will be directed to doing the best job I can for the people of British Columbia in the following areas of interest.

To get to the heart of what lies ahead, it is important to look back for a perspective. British Columbia had a record, in common with other parts of the world, of unprecedented growth and advancement since World War II, interrupted by periodic bouts of recession. The same cyclical pattern will likely continue in the future. The important thing regarding progress is to know where you are in the cycle and plan accordingly. Our Premier has indicated in the throne speech his plans to do just that.

There was a need for the government to adopt policies during the past few years to cope with the loss of provincial revenues, which resulted from the collapse of certain segments of the world economy, which in turn had a severe negative impact on important sectors of our provincial economy. The public will seldom give credit to those who implement policies that appear tough or restrictive. On the other hand, there are many thoughtful people in this province who

[ Page 46 ]

recognize that the basic financial integrity has been preserved, ready to take advantage of the next upward cycle. And our government will do that.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial programs for services to people can be funded only to the extent that the provincial coffers can afford it. The burden for filling those coffers rests on the productive sector of our province and the continuing efforts to market our goods at a profit in the world marketplace. And the throne speech addresses that goal.

Periodic deficits are an acceptable part of public financing to maintain services to the public in the short term, but it should be recognized — and it is recognized by this government — that excessive use of deficit financing, should that financial thinking be thoughtlessly applied, unfairly burdens future generations with the cost of services enjoyed today. Having said that, it is clear this government has provided and will continue to provide the support structure to assist the productive sector to do what it does best: create the wealth to fund the service-to-people programs.

It is difficult for those who have not visited other countries in the world to establish a benchmark for the level of quality of our health, social services, education and other public services. From my travel experience to a number of countries, our government services are tops.

I've been advised that this is probably an appropriate time to move adjournment of debate until the next sitting of the House.

Motion approved.

Hon. Mr. Strachan tabled the annual report of the Ministry of Environment for the fiscal year 1985-86.

Hon. Mr. Strachan moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 5:54 p.m.