[ Page 117 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Throne speech debate

Mr. Lovick –– 117

Mr. Huberts –– 119

Mr. D'Arcy –– 122

Mr. Bruce –– 125

The House met at 10 a.m.

Prayers.

MR. CASHORE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the members of the House to join me in welcoming my wife, Sharon, from Coquitlam, who is in the gallery this morning.

MR. HUBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the House to welcome some special friends of mine, and particularly my wife, Dale, who is up in the gallery wearing green — very appropriate today, being of Irish descent — my two sons, Jason and Shaun, and many supporters of mine: Martin Olivier, Lee Mesher, Hank Vissers, Mark Dickinson, Frank Carson, as well as the Hordyks and I see Zeno Delmonte up there and I also see Tito Hoogland there.

MR. BRUCE: Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure this morning to introduce to this House a number of people from Cowichan-Malahat. They are sitting in the east and the west galleries and the members' and the Speaker's galleries.

In particular, Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce the mayor of the city of Duncan, Mayor Mike Coleman; the chief of the Cowichan Indian band, Chief Dennis Alphonse and his wife, Philomena; incidentally, the Cowichan Indian band is the largest Indian band in British Columbia; the economic development officer of the Cowichans, Mr. Wes Modeste; the band manager of the Cowichans, Mrs. Diane Modeste; alderman Barry Budden and his wife Lillian from the village of Lake Cowichan; alderman Inge Clausen from the municipality of North Cowichan; my administrator and his wife, John and Marg Berikoff from North Cowichan; and my municipal clerk, Jim Dias; the chairman of school district 65, Glen Ridgway and his wife Carol; the former mayor of North Cowichan and a former Socred candidate for Cowichan Malahat, Mr. Don Morton; Mitch Drew, the president of the Duncan-Cowichan Chamber of Commerce; Nick Garland, the president of the Cowichan-Malahat constituency association; Joan Dickinson, region No. 1 director of our great party; and my constituency assistant, Pat Davidson. Would you please bid them all a very warm welcome.

Interjections.

MR. CHALMERS: Mr. Speaker, I left the telephone book at home.

I'd like the House to acknowledge a very special person in the gallery today, my wife, Rosalie Chalmers, from Okanagan South.

Orders of the Day

SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
(continued debate)

MR. LOVICK: It seems appropriate, given that rather slow start, that I ought to begin then with some passion. So given, as you know, I interrupted my remarks earlier, let me begin by saying, a la Shakespeare: "Once more unto the breach, dear friends." In this case, however, I think I will suggest that it's not for England's and for Harry's sake but rather for sanity's sake and the People of British Columbia's sake.

When I left off my remarks yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I was making reference to the whole area of transportation and suggesting that it was the key to development not only in my riding but throughout the province. Transportation, as I suggest, is the absolute key to development in my riding. Nanaimo is the approximate centre of the constituency and because of its location serves as a kind of service centre for much of central and northern Vancouver Island. Our lifelines are two: the ferry system and the Island Highway. The latter especially concerns us, and I am distressed to discover that there is no reference to that highway in the throne speech. I'm also concerned about my constituents on Gabriola Island, who are now perceiving in ever-increasing numbers, just because of the fact that we have had continued ferry increases, that perhaps living on the island is no longer possible for them.

Our community in the south of the riding, the town of Ladysmith, is actively engaged in the process of trying to transform itself into a kind of tourist centre. There again

[10:15]

Interjection.

MR. LOVICK: And doing a good job, as somebody points out from across the way. Absolutely true. The point, though, is that transportation for each of these communities is obviously crucial.

Mr. Speaker, I alluded earlier to the fact that our community has fallen on tough times, but I want to emphasize that we are a tough people. Our toughness, happily, is also tempered by some tenderness and by some compassion. Though we have outrageously high unemployment throughout my riding, we are. also wonderfully generous in supporting good causes. In the Variety Club telethon of a few weeks ago, for example, in a single afternoon we managed to raise over $22,000.

I am proud, then, to represent the people of the constituency of Nanaimo. But I am also concerned that the constituency of Nanaimo will not be well served by this throne speech. Do you know, Mr. Speaker, when I taught courses in Canadian studies, I used to emphasize again and again that there is really only one question that one has to pose when examining any political platform or any political program, and that simple question is the Latin one, cui bono — in whose interest? Who gets the advantage? Who benefits? That's the question.

That is the question predictably, then, that I posed when I listened to the throne speech and in my subsequent reading and reading and rereading of that speech. The answer I regretfully come to is that the general public does not benefit much from this throne speech. What is outlined there, Mr. Speaker, rather is a preoccupation with a particular rather than a general interest. The throne speech makes reference again and again and again — and after the first 30 or so times I lost count — to what is euphemistically described as the private sector or the private interest. I say euphemistically described, because I fear that that phrase means something very particular indeed. It does not mean ordinary persons in our society; instead, it seems to mean those already relatively advantaged, those already relatively privileged.

If we look to the private sector, apparently alone to be the engine of growth in this province, then "private sector" must

[ Page 118 ]

necessarily mean those who have surplus income, those who have extra dollars to spend and to invest. The private sector thereby and therefore does not mean that army of disadvantaged. It does not mean those on social assistance. It does not mean those earning the minimum wage. It does not mean the unemployed. Let us have no illusions about that, Mr. Speaker.

When we say we want to let the private sector do the job of getting our economy back on track, apparently alone serving as the engine of growth for the economy, we mean just that the relatively privileged are going to get the encouragement and the assistance. Cui bono, Mr. Speaker? I fear the answer is, demonstrably, the few rather than the many.

The private sector necessarily has an important role to play, Mr. Speaker; I want to emphasize that. My fear, however, is that the private sector, even if it wants to carry out this kind of economic renewal that we all hope and pray for in this province, does not have the wherewithal to do so, primarily because, at least in the communities of Ladysmith and Cassidy and Cedar and Protection Island and Gabriola Island and Nanaimo and Lantzville, the communities of my constituency, the private sector does not have the customers with sufficient dollars to purchase the goods and services that the private sector wants to provide. That is the problem in my constituency. That, I suggest, is a predicament we have throughout this province, and a predicament, moreover, that is not going to be solved by trotting out an economic policy that only talks about government getting out of the way of business. That is the fundamental flaw and failing in the economic argument presented in the throne speech.

The people of this province are looking for bold, new initiatives to get this province on the road to recovery Government, as a number of my colleagues have correctly pointed out, must be a major player in the game. Sadly, the throne speech seems to be ideologically more than rationally averse to the economic participation of government. As a result the throne speech, with all due respect, is not much more than a reiteration of some tired, trite and discredited ideas from the neoconservative grab-bag.

Boosterism and ritual chanting about freeing up enterprise and making the job one of government to get the government off the back and out of the way of the private sector are not a substitute for an industrial strategy. They will not inspire much confidence in that growing army of disadvantaged in the province, who will likely conclude that once again they have been left out of the so-called plan for our economy. That is another very serious problem we must deal with, Mr. Speaker: the perception by growing numbers of people that they have indeed been left out. It is this perception — the idea that government is looking out for the interests of the few rather than the many — that helps to create another problem I would like to briefly refer to now.

I am sure that members of the Legislature have seen the latest edition of a document called Canadian Legislatures: Comparative Study. There is a report in this document of an extensive opinion survey conducted in October 1986. The report presents some very alarming conclusions: (1) some 54 percent of all respondents to the poll believe that most federal and provincial Members of Parliament are less than honest and sincere; (2) some 60 percent of those aged 18 to 29 do not have faith in the honesty and sincerity of their parliamentary representatives; (3) on a regional basis, confidence in the honesty and sincerity of legislators is lowest in British Columbia: 34 percent. Sixty-six percent of those polled in the province of British Columbia do not have faith in the honesty and sincerity of their politicians. I am horrified and ashamed by that information, Mr. Speaker. Might I suggest that the great task, probably the greatest single task, of this parliament and, for that matter, all parliaments throughout this land is to begin the process of restoring faith in the integrity of the system and its people.

The question here is whether the throne speech does anything to begin that process of restoring faith and whether it does anything to counteract that loss of confidence and that sense that government is really more interested in serving its own interests and the interests of its friends and supporters than it is in the general good. After some reflection, and an examination of the throne speech document, Mr. Speaker, I must conclude that there is not a message there that will inspire the sort of confidence we so desperately require.

Let me give just one example of a policy enunciated in the throne speech — one that I suggest will fairly be perceived as for the few rather than for the many. On page 4 of the throne speech appears the idea for what is called a scholarship credit plan. This plan will allow, and I quote: "grade 8 to 12 students with high academic standing to earn 'credits' towards the cost of their post-secondary education." I hasten to point out and to emphasize, Mr. Speaker, that I am not opposed to scholarships; indeed, I would not have the three university degrees I have if it weren't for scholarships. But I want to draw your attention to a problem with this program. The problem is that the program is so patently, demonstrably, blatantly, biased in favour of the privileged.

Let me explain. It is a very basic, sociological truth — a matter of plain fact, indeed — that in the overwhelming majority of cases individuals from middle- and upper-class families will do considerably better scholastically or academically than will their counterparts from less privileged families. Despite all our efforts for a very long time to provide universally accessible education, the preponderant majority of students do not escape their class of origin. That is not debatable; that's fact. By all means let us reward scholarship; by all means let us do that. But for heaven's sake, let us not continue to design programs that seem to be intended for those who are more than likely already privileged, rather than provide those programs for those who are not.

Certainly that is the conclusion that young people are going to draw from this throne speech. Certainly that's the conclusion that young people who rely on loans to pay for their post-secondary education and for those young people who are struggling to make the grade because they perhaps can't be full-time students are going to draw. I know certainly that is the conclusion that my former students in first and second year university transfer courses would quickly have come to.

To this point in the debate, my comments on the throne speech have been admittedly somewhat critical — negative, to use a buzzword from the right. I am happy to announce, to quote a little Shakespeare again — or to paraphrase at least — that I come not only to bury it but to praise it. I want, then, to congratulate the government on a few of the initiatives it has presented. For example, I welcome the promise of more open and accessible government. I appreciate the recognition that the official opposition is given. I congratulate the government for its belated recognition that we need a coherent and comprehensive science and technology program in this province. I want to say that I certainly hope the budget will fulfil the promise of the throne speech.

[ Page 119 ]

There is work to be done, vitally important work, and the throne speech I think doesn't take on enough of that work. I want to suggest a few things we might do. I have made reference to the fact that people in my constituency are hurting, and I would like to return to that theme for a moment. I do so not to parade our misfortunes but to draw attention to the plight of large numbers of our citizens simply so that government becomes aware of the job it ought to do to give relief to those who need it. A wise man once observed that the measure of a civilized community is the treatment it accords the least blessed in our community. By that yardstick, Mr. Speaker, I think we are found wanting.

I delivered to the offices of cabinet ministers in your government the other day copies of a newsletter produced by members of the disabled community in Nanaimo. I want to refer the members of this House to one page of the document. The headline for the document is: "Don't we in Nanaimo look bad? Just read the statistics." Then we have graphically presented underneath that headline the number of HandyDART vehicles or vehicles for the handicapped within given communities throughout the province, and we discover that communities of roughly one-fifth the size of Nanaimo have that service. We discover that communities of roughly one third the size have two times the service that Nanaimo has, and we discover that cities of comparable size to Nanaimo have roughly four vehicles available for their people. In Nanaimo we have none.

The conclusion to that is a question in boldface, about 48point type, and it says: "What happened? Why? What's Nanaimo going to do about it?" And it says finally: "Help, help, help."

Well, Mr. Speaker, I want to make that same plea here. Help. The throne speech talks about private sector initiatives to assist disabled persons in obtaining employment — good, good! But we need to provide the means to help disabled people get out of their houses and apartments so that they can get to the promised jobs in the first place. I suggest that here is an area where the government can do some real job creation work and can make the disabled communities throughout the province more able to function as they wish to.

[10:30]

Accepting the invitation of the throne speech that this government will — and I am paraphrasing the throne speech here — accept answers and solutions from all, because there is no monopoly on good ideas and constructive proposals, I'll offer here what I think is a good idea. It seems appropriate, given the imminent return of that marvellous man Rick Hansen and his crusade for disabled people.... How about this proposal? Let us provide either incentives or outright grants to every municipality in this province to make their communities accessible to handicapped people. I think that's a good idea, and I think it's within our abilities.

I want to refer this House to another publication today. This one is called "Hunger in Nanaimo." Think about that for a minute, Mr. Speaker. In 1986, in a post-industrial, highly sophisticated technological society, where we have discovered and harnessed technology capable of producing an abundance hitherto undreamed of, we find a booklet called "Hunger in Nanaimo." I also want to inform members that we have in Nanaimo something called the Mayor's Committee on Poverty. Poverty and hunger in the midst of plenty are an abomination and an obscenity. We have them, I submit, only because there is a failure of political will to do something about them.

I am receiving signals that I am now out of time, Mr. Speaker, so with your permission I shall go directly to the end of my remarks and say these few things. That means I'm only going to look at the last bits, in case that was too subtle for some, right?

A very famous first minister once stated: "Give us the tools." I think that's precisely what the people of this province are asking, especially those who are relatively disadvantaged. Let us give them the tools. Let us give them a sense of belonging and participating in this wonderful province with its marvellous opportunities. Let us do that. Because if we fail to do that, if we fail to address their concerns — and I emphasize again that I am talking about the relatively unfortunate, the relatively disadvantaged — then by heaven we deserve the scorn and the hostility that 66 percent of the people of this province now feel towards their elected politicians.

MR. HUBERTS: It is with great pride and honour that I stand before you to make my first address to hon. members of this distinguished assembly. I would like to express my congratulations to you, Mr. Speaker, on your election. I would extend my congratulations to the Deputy Speaker, the first member for Dewdney (Mr. Pelton). The selection of two such fine and experienced people to these very responsible positions will set a positive tone for debate in this assembly.

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

I would also like to congratulate all the members on both sides of the House on their election. A special thanks goes to those members who have been here before and have offered to help those of us who are new learn to conduct ourselves in this assembly.

I would like to personally congratulate Premier Vander Zalm on his election and the excellent job he is doing as Premier of this province. I am proud to be part of Premier Vander Zalm's positive team.

I would like to sincerely thank the people of Saanich and the Islands for giving me the opportunity and the honour of representing them in the Legislative Assembly as the second member for Saanich and the Islands. I intend to serve them to the very best of my ability.

Mr. Speaker, I offer my congratulations to the first member for Saanich and the Islands (Hon. Mr. Couvelier) on his election to the House and on his appointment as Minister of Finance and Corporate Relations. I am sure that by working together, we can give our constituents the kind of quality representation they deserve.

I must thank the former member of Saanich and the Islands, the hon. Hugh Curtis, for his hard work and accomplishments from 1972 to 1986. He not only met the needs of his constituents, but served the government in the capacity of Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Provincial Secretary and Minister of Government Services and, finally, as Minister of Finance. I am sure that his fine example as a member of the Social Credit government made it easier for myself to be elected.

A very special word of thanks goes to my tireless campaign workers who supported me from the start and whose efforts have made it possible for me to be here today, and to my wife and family for supporting me and for the sacrifice they have made in time and energy. I could not have done it without them.

[ Page 120 ]

My priorities while in office will be to serve my constituency and my province to the best of my ability and to stay open and honest.

Mr. Speaker, it is with a great sense of pride that I tell you about the beauty and the diversity of Saanich and the Islands. It is truly God's masterpiece, with picturesque islands, secluded beaches to explore, numerous navigable waterways, extensive forest and fertile valleys. It also offers exciting urban areas such as Sidney and busy Brentwood and areas of greater Victoria such as the Mount Doug area, the Blenkinsop Valley and the Gorge.

The beauty of the constituency results in a wonderful diversity of people from all over the globe and Canada adopting Saanich and the Islands as their home. Many people such as the world-famous artist Robert Bateman are choosing to live in our fine constituency. All kinds of people, including retired people, professionals, artists, consultants, surgeons and hobby farmers are choosing the quality of lifestyle available to them in Saanich and the Islands. They come here for the natural beauty, the diversity of people, the recreational opportunities and the top-quality health, education and retirement which are available services.

Mr. Speaker, I too was one of those people who chose to live in Saanich and the Islands. My wife and I are very happy to be raising our children in an area of such great versatility. I feel that I should tell you a little bit about myself and my commitment to the Judeo-Christian ethic, the historical background and backbone of our nation. I grew up in a small town in southwestern Ontario called Strathroy. In my early years, my father operated a small contracting business, but on my tenth birthday he decided to try farming. It was to be a mixture of crops, livestock, hard work and tears. They were financially difficult years, but we learned the valuable lessons of getting along without the extras that most families take for granted, and we learned to be thankful for even the simple things in life. And today I am still thankful, thankful for being one of only a few to experience the wonder and the thrill of being able to sit in this House, thankful for the opportunity to serve the people of British Columbia and, more specifically, the people of Saanich and the Islands, and thankful for the privilege of living in Canada and especially in this majestic province of British Columbia.

Of course, when I talk about thankfulness, at the root of everything I am thankful to God. I was raised in a committed Christian home. The principles of faith which I learned at the time were reinforced during my university years. At the Ontario Veterinary College, during my study of physiology, I saw how delicate and finely balanced life really is, and I was convinced anew that an intelligent, loving creator existed. And so I also committed my life to that same God and Jesus Christ that my parents served. It is therefore natural for me to want to serve God by serving his people, all the people, by ensuring freedom — and I want to stress "freedom" — of choice, freedom of speech and freedom for true democracy.

Yet too often people fear a man or a woman in politics who is committed to God. Why? Because they are afraid that the politician will impose his religious beliefs on everyone else. I understand those fears, and I wish to put some of them to rest. I do not wish to use politics as a platform for my religion. As noted author and former politician Charles Colson stated:

"It is important to make clear the distinction between the responsibilities of a Christian as private citizen and a Christian as office-holder. The private citizen is obliged to evangelize or Christianize his society, but the Christian serving in government while maintaining his first allegiance to God has a different public responsibility. It is not to take dominion; it is to preserve even-handed justice, to protect religious liberty and responsible freedom of all citizens."

It is precisely those principles which I will strive to uphold during my term in the Legislature.

I would like to share with you a few of my hopes and dreams for the future. I'd like to be part of improving the quality of life in B.C. for all, those who can speak for themselves and those who are as yet unable to speak. Therefore I support the Premier in his view on abortion. I would like to be a part of making British Columbia an even better place to live, and I have chosen to do that by joining Premier Vander Zalm's government. I believe this government will give the leadership that will provide a better future for our children, the type of leadership that our children can identify with and the type which will encourage them to live with a purpose. It is my aim to be positive about life and my dream to give hope to all, especially our young people.

I recognize and am thankful for the quality of life in Saanich and the Islands, and I will strive to improve even that.

Mr. Speaker, a top-quality education is essential to the future of our people and our province as a whole. That is why I was particularly pleased to see the strong emphasis on education in the Speech from the Throne. As a parent, I welcome the proposal for a tax-deductible savings plan. I also feel that a scholarship credit plan will motivate our children to excel in their first 12 years of school and better prepare them for post-secondary education.

The children in Saanich and the Islands are fortunate indeed to have such an excellent public school education available to them. The quality of education being provided is demonstrated by the fact that students at Claremont have consistently scored above the B.C. average in all but one subject. I would like to thank the dedicated, caring school teachers of British Columbia, because they make our quality education system possible.

The teachers of Saanich and the Islands have particularly impressed me with their commitment, devotion and dedication. The fact that our constituency has the first futuristic classroom in Canada speaks for itself. This is a classroom with the latest in computers, telecommunications and technological possibilities.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that people should have the right to choose the type of education they prefer, including the right to send their children to the school of their choice. In some cases this means choosing a private or an independent school. I am very pleased that the throne speech recognizes the role of independent schools as an alternative for some children. Our constituency offers some fine independent schools such as the Tsartlip School and Little Raven School, administered by the Saanich Indian School Board, and Pacific Christian School, St. Andrew's Secondary School and St. Margaret's School.

[10:45]

I see the creation of a royal commission on education as a positive step towards ensuring that we have the best possible education system available for our children.

I am also pleased at the high quality of post-secondary education available to the people of Saanich and the Islands. The University of Victoria, on whose board I have had the

[ Page 121 ]

privilege to serve, and Camosun College, are both top quality post-secondary institutions. There are numerous other privately operated business, secretarial, technical and trade schools which are producing skilled people, ready to enter the workforce. The government should be commended for asking our post-secondary institutions to play a hands-on role in economic development of this province. I am pleased that post-secondary funding will be re-examined to ensure that our institutions have the tools to do the job. With private sector, government and both private and public post-secondary instititutions cooperating, we can work together to build the economic future of this province.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that high tech can play an important role in Saanich and the Islands, and in the province as a whole. I am very pleased to point out that many high-tech industries have already chosen our constituency as their home. They came here because we offered a skilled workforce, a good place to live and an excellent transportation system, including an international airport and world-class ferry system.

High-tech industry tends to be clean industry and is therefore particularly welcome in our constituency. The people who choose to live in Saanich and the Islands place a very strong emphasis on a clean environment.

The variety of products being produced in our constituency is really quite astonishing, Mr. Speaker. The products include microfilm, microfiche, computer hardware and software, low-rise elevators, satellite receiver systems, sophisticated real-time robotic devices, oceanographic instruments, underwater research inspection vehicles, custom machine parts and Zodiac search and rescue vehicles. Yet I would not want to give the impression that we have only high-tech firms in Saanich and the Islands. We have very successful firms producing many types of products, including furniture, clothing, pre-cast concrete products, sails and cultured marble products. The variety of manufacturing firms and the variety of products being produced demonstrate that we have a vibrant and a growing private sector.

Mr. Speaker, there are also many cottage industries in my constituency, particularly on our islands, creating innovative products and numerous jobs. I was very pleased to hear that the government has plans for a program which will provide marketing and management skill support and thus help cottage industries at the local level. Small- and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of our economy. I believe that the private sector is best equipped to lead the way in economic development in this province.

I am very pleased to hear that a privately run venture capital fund will be established to finance private sector expansion. I trust that this fund will be available to any business, from one or two employees to 20 or more. I am a firm believer that business should be looking to the private sector rather than relying on the government and taxpayers of British Columbia. Cooperation and consultation are the key to good government and a better future for British Columbia.

I would like to commend the government for its decision to establish an economic development council, composed of representatives from business and labour. I am also pleased the government will be working with the private sector and other governments to seek out new markets in Canada and around the world. A stable labour climate is essential, Mr. Speaker, if our province is going to compete successfully for sales and investments in international markets. This is especially important if we are to expand our markets in the Pacific Rim. I am very pleased that our government is going to take quick action to introduce a new Labour Code which will help to bring long-term stability in labour relations. A stable labour climate is a must for the workers and their families. It is good for business, it is good for the province, and it is good for all of us.

Our province has much to share in terms of knowledge, expertise and products. I am pleased that our government will be coordinating the marketing educational services on an international basis, particularly in the Pacific Rim.

Mr. Speaker, as a doctor of veterinary medicine I have a good understanding of another very important part of life in Saanich and the Islands: the agricultural industry. My constituency has a rich agricultural history. A wide variety of crops can be produced year-round in the mild climate. We are known for our ground crops: potatoes, flowers, tree fruits and berries. The agricultural research station located on the Saanich Peninsula deserves a special mention. They are constantly evaluating our agricultural methods and plant stocks to ensure that we are producing the best and most costeffective product possible. Agricultural research is largely responsible for new species such as the kiwi fruit now being produced commercially in my constituency. I was very pleased that the government intends to encourage growth in agriculture, aquaculture and our food and beverage industries by helping them capitalize on domestic and foreign market opportunities. I would also suggest that we encourage the private sector to get involved in food processing and in developing new markets for our fresh products.

The great variety of crops which can be produced and the variety and quality of livestock raised in our constituency is evident each September at the Saanichton fair. I would like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that the Saanichton fair is the oldest agricultural fair west of Manitoba. It is a community event which young and old alike can enjoy. There are numerous other events which take place throughout the constituency; the Sidney days which take place every July I are fun for the entire family; the Gulf Island artisans are world renowned, and it is well worth a trip to Ganges and Salt Spring Island arts and crafts fairs held in July and August. There are hundreds of professional and amateur artists living in Saanich and the Islands. Many shows are held throughout the year in halls, shopping centres and private galleries. The Saanich Peninsula Arts and Crafts Society has over 300 members and holds very many successful shows.

Mr. Speaker, tourism is very important to Saanich and the Islands. Greater Victoria tourism statistics are 2.2 million visitors each year; $400 million in local spending; 25,000 jobs are dependent in whole or in part on tourism. Top quality arts and crafts are therefore only one of the things our constituency has to offer visitors.

The Butchart Gardens are a must to see for visitors to Vancouver Island. The Saanich Historical Artifacts Society offers an interesting display of equipment used by our ancestors. The Victoria Flying Club and other interested people in the community have been working towards the building of an aviation museum, and I support their plan.

I have already referred to the physical beauty of the constituency, and it is definitely one of the reasons people come to visit. Visitors can walk along secluded beaches, swim, scuba-dive, windsurf, go sailing, go fishing, hike in our forests, play golf, browse through our streets, or take part in almost any other activity they enjoy. I support the government's plan to promote tourism, particularly in the Pacific

[ Page 122 ]

Northwest, California and the Pacific Rim. We should capitalize on the world recognition B.C. is enjoying as a result of Expo 86, and we encourage the world to come back and enjoy a little more of British Columbia's hospitality. It is the very special people of this province who are responsible for the warm, caring, positive attitude which draws tourists back to this province.

Our people are our richest resource, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank our senior citizens for building this province. In 1985, 13.5 percent of the total population of Saanich and the Islands was age 65 and over compared to the provincial average of 10.9. Many people are choosing to move to our community because of the excellent facilities we offer. One of the reasons seniors choose to live in Saanich is because there is top quality, affordable senior housing available. There are also excellent support services available for those seniors who need help to stay in their own homes.

There are many other projects being planned. I was very pleased with the announcement this January by the Minister of Social Services and Housing (Hon. Mr. Richmond) giving approval for housing to be built by the Cordova Bay Seniors Lodge Society, the Bertha 0. Clarke Society, the Pacifica Housing Advisory Association, and the St. Andrew's Abbeyfield Housing Society.

There are excellent health care facilities available for everyone, including our senior citizens. I am pleased that the Speech from the Throne reaffirmed our government's maintaining world class levels of service, while ensuring that British Columbians get the best value for their dollar. I also welcome the announcement that a rehabilitation centre for victims of brain injuries will be established on Vancouver Island. I was also pleased to see that the government will be increasing welfare rates for those most in need, particularly families and single parents. I strongly support our government's pledge to assist single parents and welfare recipients to help them develop their skills and talents in order to become self-supporting.

Mr. Speaker, on the provincial scene we as a government recognize that there is a lot to be done. The economy is showing signs of improvement, however. Construction in this region is running at a greater rate than at any time in recent years, and the recently established positive economic environment is working. Carrying on with this new spirit, we must stay vigilant to ensure greater prosperity and job creation.

Sitting here today on both sides of this House, we represent the largest influx of new MLAs and on average one of the youngest groups of new MLAs to sit in any provincial House in Canada for many years, if not in history. I believe that fact is in itself reflective of the new mood of British Columbia, a mood of renewal and new creativity, as we struggle with the many great problems and challenges facing our province and our people. It is an opportunity that we must not allow to pass. Those of us who are new to this assembly can work together and learn from our more experienced colleagues as we face our greatest single responsibility: preparing British Columbia for a future which may be very different from its past, but just as rewarding and just as exciting.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am proud of the fact that consultation and cooperation will not just be a buzzword in this government. Premier Vander Zalm has set the tone by consulting with the federal government to get a fair share from Ottawa, by opening the door for discussion with local governments, by listening to labour and business, by listening to the experts in education; and, yes, by inviting the opposition to be an integral part of our committee system. Our government has promised an open and accessible style of government that responds to the needs of all the people. This is a government that cares for all people — young and old, weak and strong — and this government will give equal opportunity to all, special privileges to none.

I pledge to the people of Saanich and the Islands that I too will remain accessible and diligent in my duties. By working together, we can turn our energy, talents and ideas into a constructive foundation for the future. I pray that God will bless us as we work towards that goal.

[11:00]

MR. D'ARCY: Mr. Speaker, it's a delight to see you in the chair and back in the House as well. First of all I want to wish a very happy St. Paddy's Day to everyone, especially thinking of those of us, such as in my family, whose ancestors did indeed hail from the Emerald Isle; although when I read news from that part of the world, I'm very happy that they emigrated to Canada at some point in the past.

I want to say that I certainly have enjoyed a number of the speeches from the new members in this House, particularly the last one. I feel that his speech demonstrates very clearly that that kind of new member in this House on the government side is truly representative and did a very good job of representing the views of his party, and I'm sure all members across the way are very proud of him and wish they had many more exactly like him in this chamber.

I also want to compliment the second member for Nanaimo (Mr. Lovick) on his remarks this morning, and also the government House Leader (Hon. Mr. Strachan) and the Chair, who did not call him to order for running a few minutes overtime. I think that shows an approach of tolerance to members in this House, and I hope it's a practice which continues. I don't want to see any member abuse the rules of the House, but certainly a little flexibility is in order from time to time.

I saw some good things and some bad things in the throne speech. One of the general areas, though, that I want to be critical of the government in is that the present Premier and, indeed, most of his cabinet have been in office now for seven months. There were a lot of expectations; there still are a lot of expectations as to the current government, because we all have known and realized that there are some significant economic and social problems in British Columbia. I would suggest the social problems are no doubt as a result of the continuing major recession in B.C.

But it's been business — or lack of business, if you like as usual for the last seven months, and the public in British Columbia, and particularly in my area, are waiting for some action as opposed to mere good intentions. I give the government all the credit in the world for good intentions, but we are looking for some action. We don't expect and demand results immediately, because we know governments do not have a magic wand, but we are expecting some action rather than simply a continuation of the Social Credit policies of the last 11 years which have got this very rich province into so much economic trouble.

Before I proceed I would like to make a short tribute to some of the individual ministers and ministries, and I guess I have to temper all of my remarks with a sort of good guy, bad guy routine here. I would like to recognize the fact that the

[ Page 123 ]

Minister of Tourism, Recreation and Culture (Hon. Mr. Reid) has been of great help to me personally and has taken quite a bit of interest in the constituency. I also want to recognize the Provincial Secretary (Hon. Mr. Witch) and his staff, and also individuals in the Ministries of Health and Education and in the Attorney-General's ministry as well.

In my constituency we have had some positive things happen over the year since I last spoke in the throne debate. One of them, interestingly enough, is that we have had a new liquor store built. Now that has taken six years for the government to build a new liquor store; that's one of the few things that the government makes money at, and it took six years. So you can understand why people in my part of the province look a little askance at government and the time it takes to do things.

But we do have some major problems, and I think we share some of these difficulties with other parts of the province. One of the most severe areas of shortage is the lack of long-term care beds. I see the Health minister (Hon. Mr. Dueck) is in the House, and I hope he is listening. I hope he is listening to himself and the other 68 MLAs here, because I think this is a problem which is endemic in British Columbia and is a very expensive problem. We have large numbers of people, numbering in the thousands — perhaps in the tens of thousands throughout this province — who have been assessed and defined, not by themselves or by their doctors but by the government's own long-term care assessors, as being eligible for long-term care, but who are either not in the system at all because there is no room or are in very expensive acute-care beds.

It is a problem which the provincial government, and hopefully the federal government in consultation, will seek to address. In my constituency in Rossland, in Trail, in Castlegar, in the Beaver Valley, there are substantial waiting-lists for long-term care. We also have a substantial shortage of beds in our intermediate-care facilities, which, I would like to point out to the House, I think are some of the best in the province of British Columbia.

Another major area of difficulty — and I know there has been some discussion and some hint of it, but it is a real problem in my riding and it is especially acute in the non-urban parts of my particular riding in the Kootenays — is the problem of poor freshwater systems, both in quantity and in quality. We did at one time have a water assistance program in British Columbia under Municipal Affairs. That was scrapped as a part of the economic restraint program which the Social Credit government brought in in the early 1980s. I want to serve notice now that that is one of the major problems in my part of the province and, I suspect, a major problem throughout the province of British Columbia. If we cannot provide our citizens with the opportunity to have fresh water — an adequate supply both in quantity and quality — we are rapidly going to join those major parts of the world where that is one of the most significant problems in terms of quality of life. There's no excuse for it in a province as rich as British Columbia.

I want to compliment, just briefly, the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia. We've been fighting for years to retain our claims centre in Trail. I don't know whether this indicates that ICBC has had a change of plan or change of mind on this, or whether they're simply being nice to us before they leave town, but I have to comment that in the annual report of the Insurance Corporation of B.C. three of the fourteen bridge photographs are from my constituency, including the cover. That's a very nice tourist promotion, ICBC tells us that the reason they want to leave town is that people in my constituency don't have accidents the way they anticipated that they would a few years ago. I say you could perhaps reflect that in some lower insurance rates. But that has not been forthcoming for my constituency, even though ICBC claims that my constituents are, relatively speaking, safe drivers.

One of the parts of the throne speech which I was disappointed in was the comments on education. It's not that I do not consider Mr. Sullivan a capable person. I've had some dealings with him and found him very capable. My concern about the remarks on education in the speech delivered by the Lieutenant-Governor was that in my lifetime experience, as well as in my experience as a member of this House, it has been my most unscientific observation that governments use royal commissions — governments in both Ottawa and Victoria — as a way of obfuscation, as a way of delay, as a way of avoiding making any decisions. Hand it to a royal commission. They'll take a couple of years to come down with a report — at great public expense, I might point out — and probably tell us the obvious that everyone knew all along anyway. But in the meantime the government can use the royal commission as a sort of legislative sub judice, saying: "We can't deal with that problem. We have a royal commission." I believe the difficulties of education in this province, both in the K to 12 and in post-secondary, have been studied to death. I think it's quite obvious where the real shortfalls and bottlenecks are. I would much rather have seen the government take some action. Indeed, that's what my constituents want. They want action. They don't need any more studies.

I am constantly lobbied by parents and occasionally by the students themselves — who aren't old enough to vote yet but wish they were — who talk about how thinly stretched the system is. The theme that comes through time and time again is that it's not a major problem to have more students in a class. It makes things difficult, but that's not a major problem. The difficulty is that there are more students in every class who have learning problems, and of those there are more students who have severe learning problems. We all can agree with main-strearning all of the children in a community, and not institutionalizing those who have difficulties, or throwing them out. And by the way, some of those people with learning difficulties and special needs are on the brilliant side, Mr. Speaker. But the government and school boards have quite correctly made a decision to mainstream, and this has put tremendous strain on the ability of the system to deliver adequate programs to those students in the system whom I shall describe as reasonably normal. That is the major shortfall in the system in my riding, and I am convinced that that's around the province as well. The government doesn't need to study that. Any parent can tell them that. Any student can tell them that. I would say any teacher can tell them that, but I don't think the government's interested in talking to teachers, so I won't make that suggestion.

It's unfortunate that the Highways minister is not in the House here, although I'm sure he would know what I'm going to say. We found it absolutely delightful last summer and fall, Mr. Speaker. We were visited three times by what turned out to be the Social Credit candidate in Richmond, and he was successful in the election in becoming first MLA for Richmond. He was always coming to my constituency and

[ Page 124 ]

making all sorts of wonderful promises — which we delighted in, and I cheered as much as anybody. In fact, I said during October that we should have elections every month of every year. All of a sudden we had the government listening to things and paying attention to topics that had been raised constantly by myself and other municipal leaders and industrial leaders and suddenly noticing and paying attention. We thought that was just wonderful. We should have these elections all the time.

However, there are a couple of these major promises that we're still waiting for delivery on. These were going to be instant. It didn't matter how the election turned out at the local level; these things were going to happen. But for ten years now the government has been planning to complete the reconstruction of Highway 22. Highway 22 runs from Trail to Castlegar. It is about 20 miles long. The first 19 miles, the northern 19 miles, are first-class 1980s highway. The busiest part, though, the last mile, is a highway which — if you can call it a highway — dates from the 1920s. It wasn't even built by the Ministry of Highways — or whatever it was then. It was in fact built as an industrial road. It is still very much an industrial road. I think we've got it down to five railway crossings now.

Mr. Speaker, this particular piece of highway has been promised so many times that we are getting tired of waiting. It is a very important part of the modernization....

Interjection.

MR. D'ARCY: Yes, perhaps irreverently, my good friend from Prince George across the way is, I think, indicating that he wouldn't want to ruin a good promise by doing something about it. Well, I want to ruin the promise, Mr. Speaker. I want to ruin the promise and see the Minister of Transportation and Highways (Hon. Mr. Michael) and the Premier do something about the promise that was made on several occasions to a number of people last summer and fall.

We also have another visual highway problem which is going to lead into the next section of my remarks here, and that is the corrosion of the Victoria Street bridge. It corrodes, Mr. Speaker, in part because it hasn't been painted for ten years, but mainly because of its proximity to what is known locally as the lead stack.

That leads me into my next series of remarks. Some of the members here may not know this — in fact, I get rather tired of disabusing the press of this and even some of the members in my own caucus — but they don't mine anything in Trail. Do you hear that? They don't mine anything in Trail.

The Rossland mines, to all intents and purposes, closed in 1919, although there has been some sporadic activity now and again since then. But the zinc part of the smelting and refining complex in Trail — and it is the largest in the world, and hopefully it is going to remain that way — is the most modem in the world and the cleanest in the world. When we get the lead modernization finished, it will be the most modem and the cleanest in the world. Those operations are not there because it is a good place to build a lead-zinc smelter, and they are not there because it is close to markets, which it isn't, or close to any mines. They are there for exactly the same reason that Alcan has an aluminum smelter in Kitimat: proximity to the low-cost hydroelectric power.

[11:15]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy at the modernization which is going on there — not just for the flagship products lead and zinc but also because it has a profound impact on the cost of producing precious metals, silver and gold — refining precious metals, that is. You don't produce them; they're in the ground anyway, somewhere in the world. But also it is very important to all of us there to see the growth of specialty product production out of the Trail operations. Minor operations, true — only 10 or 15 — maybe 40 to 50 jobs, but each one gives a diversity to the operations and allows this largest complex in the world to not perhaps be so vulnerable to fluctuating world commodity prices as we have been in the past. But most important, I have to make my constant plea that the government not tax those operations out of existence..

Mr. Speaker, in our other resource industries — and I'd like to use the analogy of the forest industry — the Crown charges for the wood. It charges for the wood on a sliding scale, a scale which varies with the use that the wood is going to be put to in the manufacturing process; that scale also varies based on international commodity prices — in other words, the selling price of the product. It goes up or down.

The key economic input — the key raw material input into that largest smelting and refining operation in the world — is electricity. The government has taxed and does tax today that electricity at 16 times the rate that they did before the recession, and there is no allowance for low commodity prices — none whatsoever. It's a fixed.... I call it a front-end tax, much like a frontage tax that a municipality levies on property. It has no variation. It has made it extremely difficult for that operation to survive and indeed for the mines that supply it in British Columbia and in the northwestern part of the States to survive as well. A healthy industry will provide a lot more revenue to government than an industry which does not exist, and if that industry didn't exist, the government would not get its electricity tax or indeed any other taxes from that operation.

The people of B.C. and their government need a lot more people working. We need a lot more people working in this province. This fiscal year, which we are coming to the end of in a few weeks, will probably be the first year in B.C. history where welfare spending will exceed education spending. You have to think about that, Mr. Speaker. I know they don't like to call it welfare or even income assistance. We like to call it social services now. But the real cost of social service delivery, as we all know, is income assistance. We're spending more on — hopefully — preventing people from starving to death in the streets than we are on educating people to be productive citizens and to contribute to the economy, which is what they want to do.

Nobody wants to be on welfare. They want to contribute to the economy; they want to have the opportunity to work, to go into business. And this province is spending more on social services and welfare than it is on education. If the welfare rates were adequate, the difference would be even more pronounced.

Mr. Speaker, I see the Energy minister (Hon. Mr. Davis) is in the House, and I want to talk briefly about an economic initiative in my constituency which I would like him and his government to think about. I wrote to the minister shortly after he was sworn in congratulating him on that and pointing out to him that the most cost-effective additional electrical energy that could be developed in British Columbia was a completion of the Columbia River projects — specifically, machining the Keenleyside Dam and, if demand was there, construction of a dam at Murphy Creek. These are still more cost-effective than additional generating capacity on the

[ Page 125 ]

Peace, more cost-effective than any additional thermal-generating capacity anywhere in the province.

Just for a very quick history lesson, the Keenleyside Dam has 14 million acre-feet of stored water above it; some are stored for winter use above it in its reservoir and in the Mica reservoir. The Murphy site has about 25 million acre-feet of upstream storage, not only on the Columbia but in Lakes Koocanusa and Duncan and in Kootenay Lake itself.

I think we all know that this storage in Canada, and to some degree in the States, has been and is of tremendous benefit to the U.S. northwest and the many projects on the Columbia River south of the border, south of the 49th. We have two similar opportunities in Canada to take advantage of this tremendous amount of stored water, as well as the basic natural winter flow, and we're not doing it. As I say, one of these dams is already in place — you just need to build a powerhouse — and another one could be built. I know maybe these projects aren't quite as trendy and quite as spectacular, but if a corporation was concerned about the bottom line and doing the best for the people of B.C., the most cost-effective electrical energy increments, those would be the two projects that would be done first, before any others; and I know the Energy minister knows that.

So what I'm making a plea here for, Mr. Speaker, is that the government make decisions on behalf of the people of B.C. based on sound business principles rather than on politics. Of course, we don't really know whether or not there is a need for additional electrical generation in British Columbia; certainly there isn't as far as domestic markets go. But whether it can be justified in terms of price and quantity which can be sold for export, again, is a subject of conjecture. But if indeed that is the case, I hope the government acts in a way which is most cost-effective, with the borrowed money that will be put into these projects. As we all know, Hydro has never paid back a nickel of its money borrowed for any project, even going back over 20 years; they simply meet the interest, and when a bond issue comes due they simply issue another bond issue. It's like going to the Toronto Dominion to pay off your mortgage at the Bank of Montreal.

Mr. Speaker, one of the areas which we were very disappointed in recently was a decision by the environment ministry not to proceed with fishery mitigation on the Lower Arrow Lake. This is something that was a legal commitment put in the original water licence for the construction of the Keenleyside Dam back in the early 1960s. It is a project which, on the lower lake at least, government and B.C. Hydro have never moved on, and I think you will recall, Mr. Speaker, when you were minister that a mitigation project finally was about to get off the ground. Recently that project has been scrapped. Well, it's been postponed indefinitely, to use the official words, but we all know that indefinite postponement basically means it goes down into the microfilm part of the B.C. provincial library.

Some of the other members who have spoken in this debate have talked about the importance of tourism. Well, Mr. Speaker, a major tourism draw in the West Kootenay is, or has been in the past, the marvelously large fish, and the quantity of the fish, in both Kootenay and Arrow Lake. Mr. Speaker, there is not only a moral commitment to all the people in B.C. and especially the people of the West Kootenay, but I suggest there is also a legal commitment based on the clear wording of that conditional water licence issued by the comptroller of water rights to B.C. Hydro back in the early sixties, a legal obligation which is still yet, in 1987, to be acted on by either the Ministry of Environment or B.C. Hydro. There has been mitigation on the upper lake — give credit where it is due — and there has been mitigation on Kootenay Lake and on the reservoirs above Revelstoke, but not on the Lower Arrow Lake, and 24 years is a long time.

[11:30]

Mr. Speaker, I think my time, particularly in this debate, is moving along. I still have some hopes that the fond rhetoric put out by the Lieutenant-Governor in the Speech from the Throne will be fleshed out and we will see some real action on the major economic problems in British Columbia. The speeches that I have been hearing I think have been extremely well put together on this side of the House. The speeches from the other side of the House basically have simply restated the fact that they think the province is in good shape and going to get better. Well, we know the province is not in good shape. It should be, because we have the best people in the world and the best resources in the world. I want to see some action on the part of the government, and I look forward to that action. The people of my constituency and the people of this province are getting somewhat disillusioned with waiting.

MR. BRUCE: Before I actually get into my remarks with regard to the throne speech, I think it would be appropriate to mention a man who spent many years in this House. He was the Clerk of the Legislature: a little, wispy, white-haired gentleman called Ned DeBeck, whom I affectionately used to call "Grandpa" DeBeck. In fact, many times I can remember coming down here to the House, sitting in the gallery and watching Grandpa — as I said, I affectionately called him that — in the middle chair there, listening to the proceedings of this House, diligently recording everything that was being said and all the while being able to chew Juicy Fruit gum.

He was quite an individual, and I often had the opportunity to speak with him at his home in Oak Bay, and we used to argue vehemently about the politics of British Columbia and about what should be happening and what wasn't happening and how all things could be put together and put right if only they would allow Grandpa DeBeck and myself to run the affairs of this province.

Grandpa died in 1975 at the age of 91, still in office here working in the House. Although he is not here today, I can feel his spirit and his love for parliament very evident today throughout the buildings and the Legislature here in Victoria.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the member that I have been able to take over from in Cowichan-Malahat, Mrs. Barbara Wallace. Barbara served the constituency of Cowichan-Malahat faithfully for many, many years, diligently working on behalf of the constituents on their individual concerns and on behalf of the community of Cowichan Malahat. I'd certainly like to pass on my sincere appreciation for the job that she has done to the members of this House here today.

It's both a proud and humble moment for me to stand in this House and give my maiden speech as a representative for Cowichan-Malahat. It's actually almost a little bit of history that's occurring here today, and I would just like to share with you the history of Cowichan-Malahat, that being the political history. In 1903, a chap called Parker Williams, a socialist, was elected to the Legislature. He was returned in 1907, again in 1909, 1912 and 1916.

[ Page 126 ]

Then in the year of 1920, a chap called Sam Guthrie, another socialist, was elected to the House to represent that area. A funny thing happened in 1924 and 1928. A Conservative by the name of Cyril Davie was sent from Cowichan-Malahat to represent our area, and in 1933 Mr. Hugh Savage sat as an independent. But from 1933, apart from a three-year hiatus during the coalition government, to today, 1987 — that being September 1986 — Cowichan-Malahat, for more than 50 years, was represented by the CCF and the NDP. Today I'm proud to stand before you as the first member ever to be elected as a Social Credit member for Cowichan-Malahat.

Mr. Speaker, I offer my congratulations to you and the Deputy Speaker on being selected to represent the impartial proceedings of this House, and I know that both of you will do an admirable job.

This morning, as I mentioned earlier in my introductions, there are a few people here who have journeyed such a long way from Cowichan-Malahat to take part in this historical moment in the Legislature: supporters; people who have worked with me diligently over the years, both in my municipal campaigns and the provincial campaigns. It is those people today that I say thank you to on behalf of all members in this House, because it's important that each and every one of us has the participation of the people in our communities during, after and before elections. These people indeed represent what democracy is all about. I only can say to each and every one of you as you sit in this House here today how pleased and how proud I am to represent you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask leave of the House to make a few introductions, if I may.

Leave granted.

MR. BRUCE: You're such a sporting group.

No matter what one does, the single most important thing that one can have around him is family. I am doubly lucky in that I have a very strong and close family unit.

I would like to introduce to the House my mother-in-law, Mrs. Tryntje Visscher; my mother and father, Madge and Pres Bruce; my sister Bev, my brother Roger — unfortunately my other brother Garry and my other sister Virginia couldn't make it here today — and my own family: Sheri, Tanya, Ryan and Tyler and my wife Anneke. Mr. Speaker, you will be happy to note that my dog Woodstock is at home guarding the house.

We hear a number of things about government and the private sector, and whether or not the private sector in working with government can actually make things happen. Indeed it can. I would like to share with you a little example of what has happened in Cowichan-Malahat in respect to government, the private sector and the community working together, working to make things better for their own livelihood, for their own economy in that community and just generally for their own standard of living.

There is a little town called Chemainus, which I am sure some of you have heard about — the little town that did. Chemainus is a town that was supposed to have died. When the mill closed down, we were supposed to have seen nothing but a ghost town. We were supposed to have seen people move away from that community, and with that, the commerce and industry and trade that was part of that community would have disappeared.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

But because the people in that community decided that they would shape their destiny in their own way, that town is alive and well and healthy today. We took advantage of a very successful program, one that many communities have gotten involved with: the downtown revitalization program. In working with that, we were able to bring all aspects of our community together not only to make it a nice and attractive place for people to shop and to live in but in the final result to develop a strong and vibrant tourist industry — and strong and vibrant it is. Today, at the end of Expo 1986, that little community had a tremendous influx of visitors. Four years ago we would have been lucky to see five or ten visitors a year come to that town. Last year alone we saw over 300,000 people come to our community of Chemainus. We've seen 40 new businesses open their doors since that day when all and sundry said we would have nothing but a ghost town — 40 businesses which represent the backbone of the economy of this country. In the last four months, keeping in mind how small and tightly knit this little community is, we have seen more than $1 million worth of new building construction taking place in what I like to tell the world is a classic Canadian ghost town breathing and alive.

I think it's interesting to note that when we went through our opening ceremonies of our first revitalization, when we cut the log on the main street to open this town and to tell the world that we were here and we were alive, the gentleman responsible for the introduction of the downtown revitalization program, the then Minister of Municipal Affairs, and the one who grabbed the other half of the saw and so ably cut that log in half with me, is our present Premier, Mr. Bill Vander Zalm.

Cowichan-Malahat, the city of Duncan and the village of Lake Cowichan have all taken advantage of the downtown revitalization program. It's a program that this government can be proud of. It's an example of the private sector, government and the community working together to improve the lot within those communities and develop good, solid, wholesome jobs.

Mr. Speaker, it's not enough that we simply talk about the revitalization program in itself. There are other components that have occurred over the years put together by this government and which we can build on. The Ministry of Tourism's extremely successful program called Partners in Tourism — again, a question of marrying the private sector with government and the community — promotes the communities, which we are all part of, to promote those businesses and interests which want to work with the communities to provide a stable and healthy economy. Another fine example of that program was the Spirit of Chemainus, a 90-foot tall ship, which we had constructed in Chemainus with the help of the S.A.L.T.S. Sail and Life Training Society. We used that as our promotional vehicle for this little town to tell the world what people can do if they want to work together, if they want to be positive in their attitude and if they want to go out and get it rather than waiting for somebody else to give it to them. We were able to put six corporations from Vancouver Island and ten other communities all together to make the Spirit of Chemainus truly the Vancouver Island flagship, the ambassadorial ship to tell the world that was coming to Expo that they'd best come to Vancouver Island and visit each and every one of our communities. And they did. It was first rate.

[ Page 127 ]

Cowichan Lake, the area itself, has got tremendous potential. During these next years I feel confident that we can build in the Cowichan Lake area and in the village of Lake Cowichan much of that same sense that's developing throughout the rest of Cowichan-Malahat. The village itself, the council and the school board are extremely interested in looking at other ways of redeveloping and redefining the role of local government, understanding that that tax base can sometimes be diminishing, and understanding the fact that we have to change and apply ourselves differently in the utilization of our local governments.

[11:45]

They're undertaking a review, perhaps an expansion of boundaries, perhaps an amalgamation of services. The point is, again, that it's not a community sitting back waiting for big government, for a big industry to come and solve their problems; it's the people themselves who are taking it upon themselves to try to improve their lot and their community. I feel confident that the village of Lake Cowichan and the community of Cowichan Lake has tremendous potential and it will be developed and it will be delivered.

The city of Duncan, another aggressive town, has moved into a program called the City of Totems — Duncan, the City of Totems — lining the streets with totem poles and working on an overall encompassing program in which people will come from around the world to stop and to say hello. The Cowichan Indian band, as I mentioned to you earlier, Mr. Speaker, the largest Indian band in British Columbia, is aggressively developing a native heritage centre. Surely if there are those who do not want to participate, I feel confident that the Cowichans would love to have the full support of this government and of this House in making a statement of the native Indian culture and of our heritage in the community of Cowichan-Malahat.

We have already started dealing with those things that are the most important: the economic development of a community; jobs for the people; the self-respect of the people; the education of the people. To that end we were able to marry the new Malaspina College campus with our Cowichan Indian band and this heritage village, and again I feel assured in standing here and saying to you today that in the not-too distant future you'll be able to journey to Cowichan-Malahat and see a first-class facility highlighting the native Indian culture of this great province of British Columbia.

As much as we talk, and as often as we do, about the need for diversification within our economy, and as important as that may be, let us never forget and let this House never forget that the most important pillar in the economy of British Columbia, and indeed in Canada, is the forestry sector. It has been, it is today and it always will be. I am pleased to see in the throne speech the reference to the fact that there is such untapped potential for growth in the forestry sector. You know and I know, Mr. Speaker, that the potential of the forestry sector is phenomenal, and I am pleased to see the government is recognizing that. Never before have we had such an opportunity to move ahead. Never before have we had such an opportunity to use the forestry sector as a vehicle for putting incredible numbers of people back to work, to maintain and improve the stability of the communities throughout British Columbia and to provide a stable economy for us all to enjoy in the province. We are a world leader in forestry, regardless of what those people may say. We are a world leader in new technology in the development of the milling industry. We have nothing to hang our heads about when it comes to talking about the forestry sector. We have lots to stand up proudly and talk about and to develop.

The forestry sector is critical to our future. I'm pleased to see there has been a strong commitment made in the throne speech with respect to this industry. I'm happy to see the word "reforestation." But it's also important to note.... So many of us don't understand or differentiate between reforestation and silviculture. The jobs today in the forestry sector are within the silviculture applications. They're within the brushing and weeding, the spacing and thinning. Mr. Speaker, it's not much different than growing your own garden patch: the fact that you plant the seeds and after those seeds come up you have to brush them and weed them, you have to fertilize them, space them and thin them. If you do it properly, you'll end up with a good, strong, healthy carrot patch.

Although that may be a somewhat simplified explanation of what good forestry is all about, it is indeed the principle, and it is through those means that we can ensure that we have a strong and healthy forest crop in the province of British Columbia. It is through those means that we can ensure the development of new markets throughout the Pacific Rim. It is through those means that we can develop a strong and healthy environment within the province's forests and within our environment of this country of Canada. We must identify, in a greater sense than we have, with the forestry sector and what it means to our livelihood.

Mr. Speaker, education is extremely important. To one that has four children in the public school system, it hardly needs to be said that I am deeply interested in and concerned with what is going to occur and what has occurred in our education within the province of B.C. I believe that we are at a crossroads at which our groups are willing and interested in working together for the betterment of our public education system. We, must shed the mediocrity which is creeping within our society. We must again start to encourage in a stronger way the deep sense of achievement of purpose and to give our educators the tools, of which one is the ability of some discipline within our system, to restore confidence in the public education system in the minds of the community throughout B.C. I am glad to see mentioned in the throne speech a number of references, the least of which we talk about is the real pillar, the real aspect which will give us the renewed growth in our economy, that being in education.

Mr. Speaker, as an individual I've had the good fortune to travel throughout the world, to hitchhike throughout much of North Africa and the Middle East. I have seen much in respect to misery of peoples living in very difficult times. When you come home and see the grandeur and the wonder of this province and of this country, it makes you thankful that you live in Canada and that you live in British Columbia.

But we must remember, even those of us sitting here in the House today, as fortunate as we are, that there are those within our society who are not as fortunate. They are the little people. We as legislators in this House must never forget the little people and the responsibility that we have to ensure their livelihood and good fortune in the province of B.C. and to give them the opportunity that so many of us have enjoyed. I believe that with the leadership we have in this government, Mr. Speaker, with our Premier and his ability to communicate and to enjoy the people of British Columbia, and their warmth and feeling as they identify with him, that we indeed can make a difference.

[ Page 128 ]

It has been said many times that it's not just good enough to go out and look at things and think about them; you have to do something about them. I believe that our Premier is that type of individual. Mr. Speaker, it was said by a wiser man than I many, many years ago and perhaps it is words that we should all heed: "Some men see things as they are and ask why; I see things as they could be and say why not." Thank you.

Mr. Bruce moved adjournment of the debate.

Hon. Mr. Strachan moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:56.