[ Page 6327 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Tabling Documents –– 6327

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

On vote 13: minister's office –– 6327

Hon. S.D. Smith

Mr. Sihota

Mr. Cashore

The House met at 10:05 a.m.

Prayers.

MR. JONES: In introducing some students from my constituency, I won't be as effusive as the member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota), who describes students from his high school as being the finest in the universe. But certainly we know from results of recent international competitions in math and science that students from Burnaby North can be described as the best in Canada, the best in the English-speaking world and among the best on this planet.

I would like the members present to join with me in welcoming 45 honours social studies students from Burnaby North Secondary School who are accompanied by their teachers, Mr. Peterson and Ms. Tonn.

MR. PELTON: In the gallery this morning, hon. members, are some old friends of mine, Nick and Mabel Andrews. Nick has been very active for many years in the Shrine and is also a very active Lions member. They are here visiting us from Coquitlam this morning. For many years they lived in Maple Ridge, but unfortunately they had to leave us to move into Coquitlam. I would ask the House to make them welcome here this morning.

Hon. S.D. Smith tabled the report entitled "Access to Justice: The Report of the Justice Reform Committee, 1988."

Orders of the Day

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I would just remind the House before we get down to business that this is Secretaries Week, so I would urge all members of the House to bear that in mind and be kind to their secretaries this week.

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

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
ATTORNEY-GENERAL

On vote 13: minister's office, $254,015.

HON. S.D. SMITH: It is my honour to rise and present the 1989-90 estimates for the Ministry of Attorney-General.

In rising to deal with those estimates I want to begin by acknowledging that during the course of the last number of weeks, British Columbia has, I believe, established — or certainly furthered the establishment of — an important constitutional convention for this province with the appointment of Madam Justice Beverley McLachlin to the Supreme Court of Canada.

That appointment was done, of course, by the cabinet of Canada and announced by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice. It was done after significant consultation with people involved in the judicial process in British Columbia, as well as with the government of British Columbia. The appointment came about after a great deal of discussion through the council-of-ministers process between this government and the government of Canada.

I think that it is important because it provides — as the letters that were exchanged between these two governments and discussions that went on between these two governments would disclose — that British Columbia is a separate region within this country: the Pacific region. It is a region that has many distinct characteristics. It is a region that has a growing population and one that deserves to have recognition in many of the institutions at the centre of this country, not the least of which is the Supreme Court of Canada.

That was recognized many years ago and has been sought after by successive governments of this province. I believe now with the appointment of Madam Justice McLachlin not only does Canada have an outstanding jurist but I think British Columbia has established a convention within our constitutional framework that will stand into eternity.

Together with the Chief Justice of British Columbia, the Hon. Justice Allan MacEachern; Justice of the Court of Appeal of British Columbia, Mr. Justice "Bae" Wallace, and the treasurer of the Law Society of British Columbia, Mr. Paul Beckman, I also had the privilege to attend the swearing-in of Madam Justice McLachlin. At that time I was able to say a few words about Madam Justice McLachlin, which I want to share with this House today. I want to repeat, if I may, with the indulgence of this House, what I said before the Supreme Court of Canada two weeks ago.

In referring to His Lordship the Chief Justice of Canada, I noted that he had presided in that courtroom on the occasion of the retirement of Mr. Justice William McIntyre from that honourable and distinguished court and that in a most deserved tribute to His Lordship and his supportive wife he had commented on the good fortune of the fine province of British Columbia in reclaiming them in retirement. I noted that on behalf of the citizens of this country we were indeed proud to have that honour.

Further, I noted that that day of the swearing-in, April 17, was another proud day for British Columbia but, more importantly, a great and significant day for Canada, because in the expectation that some 30 or so years from that date — April 17 — our province would again play a reclaiming role from the distinguished bench of the Supreme Court, and we were most happy that during all of that interim period Canada would have available the qualities of scholarship and humanity that had led to the meteoric rise of Madam Justice McLachlin within the judicial framework of our country.

Madam Justice McLachlin's career had that day been well and ably outlined by the Lord Chief Justice of Canada. Her background, as we know, is western Canadian. It combines birth and education on the Prairies with a professional career in the other distinct and unique region of the far west of Canada —

[ Page 6328 ]

the Pacific region, British Columbia, a province with the third-largest population of the provinces of Canada.

She had a start in schooling on the Prairies, and the opportunity to mature and bloom in British Columbia. She took the full opportunity to successfully build on those early years of her life. As a practitioner, a professor and a jurist, Madam Justice McLachlin has excelled at all of her undertakings.

Madam Justice McLachlin's scholarship is evidenced in many judicial decisions that she has rendered. She is incisive, practical and contemporary; all of those adjectives were applicable, and I so stated on behalf of this province before the court. She has shown full respect for the jurisprudence of the past coupled with the unique ability to apply that jurisprudence with appropriate clarity to the issues not of yesterday but of today, and often with an appreciation of our society as it will be tomorrow.

I pointed out, Mr. Chairman, that not only had her colleagues on the bench of the Supreme Court of Canada gained a colleague with a fervent love and knowledge of the law — there was no question of that — but they have also gained something indeed much more important than academic excellence: namely, the humanity of the person herself.

[10:15]

Madam Justice McLachlin is a person of considerable patience, understanding, warmth and courtesy, and she carries with her an abiding dedication to fairness. Those were notions that came quickly to mind when I was speaking before that court. I pointed out to the court that to be a good judge, it is no doubt of considerable help to have a reasonable grasp of the law. But the humanity of the body and the soul is surely the pre-emptive characteristic of all, and with that ingredient, I have no doubt that Madam Justice McLachlin comes with an abundance.

That is why I said it was an important and great day for Canada, because with the significance that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has for all Canadians and the interpretation to be put upon it by the Supreme Court of Canada, a respected jurist like Madam Justice McLachlin joining that court will play her part not only in contributing to that interpretation, but more generally in enhancing the fabric of Canadian society.

Mr. Chairman, we in British Columbia have left some great legacies on the Supreme Court of Canada who have come from British Columbia and have served with distinction on that court. Sir Lyman Duff served there for 27 years, 11 of them as the Chief Justice of Canada. Mr. Justice Charles Locke served on that court for 15 years, and Mr. Justice William McIntyre, who has just retired, served for 11 years. I have no doubt that Madam Justice McLachlin, who has the opportunity to serve that court and Canada for 30 years, will make as significant a contribution as those who have gone before her from this great province. It was my distinct honour to be at that swearing-in and to speak on behalf of the people of this province.

In July 1988, the government introduced a major restructuring of the Ministry of the Attorney-General and its programs which was intended to enhance citizens' access to services and programs in all regions of the province. Under the restructuring, the Attorney-General retained responsibility for the administration of justice, including court services, Crown counsel, provision of the judiciary and provision of legal advice to government. The Solicitor-General is responsible for corrections branch and police services as well as motor vehicles branch, horse racing, public gaming and other regulatory agencies that are involved in the business of public safety and protection.

I took the opportunity to tour the ministry's offices and facilities shortly after I was named to serve in this office, I met and talked with employees at all levels of the ministry, and I was greatly impressed with the quality of staff and the excellence that is ours in the public service in British Columbia in this particular ministry. I was impressed by staff dedication to their work, to the priorities that have been established by the ministry and to the principles of justice which form the foundations of our society.

The people in the ministry are responsible in large measure for the success of the justice system, a success that has created its own unique problem. The largest single problem in our justice system in B.C. is that it is overburdened. It is overburdened because people are using it with increased frequency, and they use it because they trust the system. It is important for us to reflect upon that notion at all times as we consider our justice system.

I would now like to reflect upon what has been accomplished this past year in this ministry.

First of all, I want to refer to the Justice Reform Committee report which I tabled earlier this morning. An eight-member Justice Reform Committee was appointed in the fall of 1987 to investigate ways of improving British Columbia's justice system. The committee conducted provincewide public hearings. It met with lawyers, judges, private citizens, representatives of the legal community, representatives of service groups who support the legal community, and with others who are interested generally in our justice system. That committee conducted one of the most in-depth reviews of our justice system that has ever been undertaken.

I believe it is appropriate to take a moment to read the names of those distinguished people who, drawing on their extensive legal and civic experience, completed what had to be a very difficult task: producing a report that is both understandable and creative in terms of the solutions it recommends, producing that report in the time it was produced, and producing, as well, a report that was endorsed unanimously by all members of the committee. The members of the committee were: Hon. Ted Hughes, the deputy minister of this ministry, who was the chairman; Mayor Susan Brice of the municipality of Oak Bay; Mr. William Berardino, who is a barrister in the city of Vancouver; Mr. Stewart Fleming, who is a municipal manager from the city of Kelowna; Ms. Barbara Nelson, who is

[ Page 6329 ]

a practitioner in the city of Vancouver; Mr. Glen Parrett, who is a very distinguished practitioner from the city of Prince George; Mr. Richard Peck, who is a well-known practitioner in the city of Vancouver; and Mr. Justice "Bae" Wallace of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, whom I referred to earlier on.

The report had 182 recommendations in their unanimous presentation, "Access to Justice, " which was released to the public on December 1 of last year. Those recommendations are a blueprint for innovative and, I believe, exciting reforms. They will in any event form the basis of leading-edge reforms that will carry British Columbia's justice system into the twenty-first century.

Immediately following release of the report, I embarked on a provincewide tour. I met with members of the bench, the bar, the business community and law-related interest groups, and I held meetings to which the public was invited. Those meetings were surprisingly well attended, from my perspective, because often it is the case when you deal with justice issues that you deal with special interest groups and not members of the broad public, who frequently do not involve themselves with the system unless and until the system has an impact upon them.

I was very pleased to have had an outstanding response in the communities in which I held public hearings all across the province. As well, I want to acknowledge the role that was played by the local media in those communities who made available their resources to the public so that the public could communicate their views on the impact of that report and the ways in which we could provide a system for its implementation. It afforded me the opportunity to receive firsthand reaction to the committee's recommendations, and it enabled me to gain quite invaluable insights into the collective and, may I say, sometimes competing priorities of the judiciary, of the legal profession, of business people, of special interest groups and of members of the general public.

While that process was going on, my staff conducted an internal analysis and costing of the recommendations which formed the basis of my submissions that recently went to cabinet. I intend to speak more about cabinet's decisions, Mr. Chairman, but first let me continue to reflect on some other significant initiatives that were spearheaded within the ministry this past year.

One of the most important initiatives that we are bringing up to speed in the ministry this year relates to the family maintenance enforcement program. As legislators, all of us are charged with making government somewhat relevant and certainly as open as we can to the needs of the people whom we presume to serve: the citizens of our province. As Attorney-General, it is certainly one of my prime responsibilities to initiate reforms that hopefully will make the justice system more accessible to the people of the province and more responsive to their needs. This involves redressing imbalances in the administration of justice for, among others, groups who have special needs.

It is in this context that the family maintenance enforcement program has been developed. It's designed to help literally thousands of single parents and former spouses without children who are unable to enforce support orders by themselves. The legislative foundation is the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act, which was proclaimed, you will recall, last September 1. That act sets a standard that I believe all of us in this chamber can be proud of. It's built on the best aspects of legislation from across Canada which deals with similar problems, and it has been carefully moulded to address the unique needs of British Columbians. It provides a framework for a firm but fair approach to the issue of family maintenance.

The program automatically monitors and enforces court-ordered payments for family maintenance. We launched the program last September 1 with the opening of an office in the municipality of Burnaby. Its provincewide enforcement services started in January with the opening of additional offices in the cities of Victoria and Kamloops. All British Columbians with maintenance orders now have access to a new and, we believe, powerful advocate to help them obtain family support payments.

The program is in its early stages, but there has been somewhat of a strong — indeed, some people say overwhelming — response to it. At the end of the first six months of operation, with the Kamloops and Victoria offices opening for only two months, the program received over 5,000 filing kits and fielded more than 17 000 telephone inquiries. It currently has a backlog of applications due to that substantial response for the program's services, and that backlog is targeted to be cleared up by this fall. To facilitate this top priority, we will open a separate administrative office on June 1 specifically to handle the overwhelming enrolment response.

During the first six months, the program processed about $150,000 in current payments on behalf of more than 900 clients and received in excess of $105,000 in payments for arrears and future payments from people who had been in arrears. In one case a client was so pleased with the service that they rushed into the office and provided flowers for the enforcement officer. I think that's something the member for Esquimalt particularly would like.

[10:30]

MR. WILLIAMS: This is Grace's speech.

HON. S.D. SMITH: The first member for Vancouver East is heckling on this issue. While I suppose many people don't take seriously the business of family maintenance and arrears of family maintenance, it's something we on this side of the House certainly do take seriously. It's an issue that affects women — single women, single mothers — and their children particularly, and it's a serious problem in our society.

Fully 85 percent of court-ordered maintenance for children — for women usually — are not honoured during the first year after they are granted. I'm sad to report that almost invariably the people who don't honour those court orders are men. When they don't honour those court orders, they hurt, in my view, the children they ought to be supporting. I think we have

[ Page 6330 ]

to do what we can to assist people who are put in that position, and particularly the children of our community. This program certainly is a step towards that goal. I think it's one about which we ought not to hear derision, but one we ought to seek ways to enhance, augment and buttress to make it more valuable to the women and children of our society, because it is they it is intended to service, and it is they who need the service.

The program works by providing a notice of attachment on the debtor's wages. In one case, for instance, where there was $3,500 in arrears, a notice of attachment was put on those wages, enabling half of the arrears to be paid off and providing the creditor with a regular monthly support payment of $120. To some members of this House $120 per month may not seem like a whole lot, but to the women and children who rely on that $120, it's a significant amount. If we can, through this program, reach out to people and help them to have a little better life, a more stable and secure life, I think that's something all members will want to support.

Another area where initiatives are going on in this ministry is in the area of land titles. Land titles is a pretty important facility in the Torrens system that we have. This ministry has a continuing commitment to build a technological platform from which the private sector can inject government technology into business processes, thus creating their own efficiencies.

This objective can be no better illustrated than by what we are now doing in the land title branch, where ongoing technological advances have led to the implementation of a system of remote computer access. A title searcher or registry agent in Prince George now can quickly do a surface search of a land title record in Victoria without ever leaving his desk. Remote access is only one stage in a strategic plan to apply technology to competitive advantage for all British Columbians.

As well, in the area of victims, I think the justice system must reflect a respect for the rights of victims. It must also encompass an awareness of the special needs of victims of crime. These are rights that must be met; they are needs that cannot be ignored. These rights are enshrined in the Victims' Rights and Services Act introduced in the House in 1988. It was one of the first bills in Canada to articulate the rights of victims in the criminal justice process.

A total of 77 victim service programs are now in place in communities throughout British Columbia. Civilian coordinators and volunteers working in coordination with local police officers and Crown counsel ensure that victims of crime receive practical assistance as well as emotional support. The toll-free 1-800-VICTIMS line has helped more than 2,000 victims throughout the province, providing them with information about assistance programs. Fast, easily accessible information is important to all victims of crime.

I want to say that my predecessor put much energy into this initiative. I wish to acknowledge the work of the member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head (Mr. B.R. Smith) with regard to the victims' services that we're beginning to establish in the province today.

One of the most daunting issues for this ministry — and indeed for our society today — is organized crime. Organized gangs have become a persistent and escalating problem for police and parents. The ministry is working to combat the problem on two fronts: prosecutions and public education. We've designated a special team of prosecutors to conduct all gang-related prosecutions, and that has been going on since 1987. It has dealt with the full range of criminal cases from breach of an undertaking to contract murders. Most cases involve weapons and violence-related offences. To date the unit has prosecuted more than 125 offences involving gangs. Some of the most tangible results of these tough but fair prosecutions have been the crippling of such gangs as Los Diablos and Viet Ching.

In addition to that legal action, the ministry has also launched the youth gang public education initiative. This is a series of programs designed to increase awareness among young people and their families of the consequences of gang activity.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sorry, the minister's time has expired under standing orders.

HON. MR. VANT: I find the hon. Attorney-General's detailed description of the very worthwhile activities of his ministry so interesting that I would like to give him the opportunity to continue.

HON. S.D., SMITH: Before furthering the business of the public education program, I should say that the process we have developed for our system of prosecutions with specialists within the Crown counsel shop as well as the police departments has really been an outstanding success.

I recently attended the eleventh annual international conference on gang activities, specifically targeted at Asian gangs. The conference was attended by police forces from a number of countries: England, United States, Hong Kong and, I believe, Germany. The model that is being used in the province of British Columbia is one that has been adopted and patterned in other jurisdictions, and it's really paying dividends. It's one for which we are going to continue to ensure that there are adequate resources.

In addition to that, there is a real responsibility to deal with some of the public-education issues that are involved in what, after all, is very much a cross culture issue. It's one that involves particularly the problems associated with adjusting. When people from other lands — from Latin America, and from other areas of the world — come to this country, or to other countries where the problems arise and where they and their family are striving to get ahead and adjust economically, sometimes the children's inability to adjust themselves and integrate themselves within the framework, the peer acceptance, I guess, of our society, results in them seeking support systems and acceptance and indeed their raison d'être

[ Page 6331 ]

from people who tend to exploit them and use them for illicit activities.

It is also a problem with respect to the Young Offenders Act, because we are seeing evidence that the recruiting system that goes on in part reflects the penalties, or lack of, that are associated with prosecutions under the Young Offenders Act. While we have support for the notions of the Young Offenders Act and indeed think it has done much good, I have had discussions with my counterpart, the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Doug Lewis, with respect to the impact of that act on the activities of youth gangs.

Back to the programs that have been designed to increase awareness among young people and their families about the consequences of gang activity: our programs include a five-language series of newspaper articles, multicultural law camps, and Cantonese radio and video television programs. The Canadian justice system is a powerful system. It has power not only to punish but to protect the innocent as well. We need to teach our youth that the choices they make about crime today will determine their safety and prosperity tomorrow. These initiatives are intended to do just that.

Mr. Chairman, I have invested a fair amount of time in these programs in a personal way, and I can tell you and members of this House that I think the different vehicles for communication that we're experimenting with and using to try to reach these young people are really worthwhile exercises. I relate anecdotally two of them: one is the law-camp process, in which young people — within the city of Vancouver particularly, where it was tried last year — get involved in a highly charged progressive and vital kind of organization that allows them to learn about the system. In some of the countries they come from, as the opposition House Leader would know, the very last person you would ever trust or go to for help would be a police officer. It takes a lot of work to get them to understand that in our society the policeman is someone in whom they ought to properly repose trust and who is there to serve them. To get them to understand those things you have to be innovative, and we developed this law-camp process. I went to be with them and give them their certificates of graduation and so on, and I think it was a most valuable exercise and experience and contributed well, because the graduates of that program then went back into their schools and apparently, our research tells us, participated in law days and participated in the civics kind of exercises that the school districts in the lower mainland are being involved in.

[10:45]

MR. JONES: Leave something for Angus.

HON. S.D. SMITH: The second one that I think the member for Burnaby North would be especially interested in is at the PNE, where we have used the vehicle of live theatre to involve students and the audiences in an understanding of the judicial system. It's a very popular event at the PNE, and the participants benefit greatly from it. I would commend members of this House, at the PNE this year — assuming it's still at the Hastings Street park — to go out to Hastings Street and participate and watch this, because it really is very well done and it serves an extremely useful purpose.

I want, for a few moments, to address the questions of legal aid, which I know are of some concern to many British Columbians; indeed, well they ought to be. During the five years between 1983-84 to 1988-89, the government has increased legal-aid funding by 56 percent. This increase compares to a 33 percent increase in expenditures for the Ministry of the Attorney-General generally, and a 42 percent increase in overall government expenditures during that same period of time. The increase of expenditures in the legal aid area have significantly outstripped the expenditures both of government generally and the ministry particularly.

In 1987-88, the most recent year for which national data is available, British Columbia had the fourth highest per capita legal aid expenditure in the entire nation, exceeded only by the provinces of Manitoba, Quebec and Ontario. We are continuing our commitment to legal aid funding during this fiscal year. A 20 percent increase in the Legal Services Society grant for 1988-89 represents an additional $4 million for a total grant of $25.6 million for this fiscal year. I want to emphasize that this basic grant does not reflect total provincial funding for legal aid. There is more than the $25.6 million. In addition to that, our ministry will pay the society in excess of $500,000 for court-appointed counsel under the Young Offenders Act. Further, we will be paying $640,000 to provide assistance to financially eligible clients in non-urgent paternity and maintenance cases.

A further $500,000 has been awarded to enable the Legal Services Society to obtain and vary family maintenance orders and agreements on behalf of financially eligible clients. Most of the telephone and postal services and all the auditing procedures required by the Legal Services Society are paid by the ministry. The estimated cost of those key support services is in the order of $250,000 annually.

The ministry also provides lawyers who, under contract, represent wards of the superintendent of child welfare in cases where criminal charges have been laid. The estimated cost of that service is a further $320,000 annually. In addition to the annual grant of $25.6 million that is awarded to the Legal Services Society, the ministry will spend a further $2.1 million on legal aid services in 1989-90.

In 1984 a legal aid task force submitted a number of recommendations to enhance legal aid services in British Columbia. Our ministry has adopted many of those recommendations, and in fact, in some cases it has exceeded them — for instance, legal aid tariffs. Family law tariff increases provided by the Legal Aid Society with funding from this ministry have already exceeded the 70 percent raise that was recommended by the task force. We even surpassed the 90 percent increase requested by the Legal Services Society itself. Both the criminal and family law tariffs are now comparable to rates that are paid to contract lawyers

[ Page 6332 ]

working for the criminal justice and the legal services branch of the Ministry of the Attorney-General.

In the area of family law coverage, questions concerning families and the custody of children are perhaps some of the most serious legal issues that people will ever face. The ministry has concentrated its efforts towards improvement of the service in the family law area. To facilitate resolution of disputes that involve the custody of children, we have expanded legal aid in the area of family law. The additional level of service is expected to cost close to $1 million on an annual basis. The need for additional family duty counsel is also being examined through a pilot project that we have undertaken in two places in British Columbia: Surrey and Prince Rupert. Results are expected early this year.

Further legal aid services in this area have been strengthened with the establishment of the family maintenance enforcement program. The government will expend fully $7.6 million on family maintenance enforcement services this year. Frequently those moneys are expended on people who otherwise may be seeking assistance or might be eligible for assistance from the Legal Services Society. It can be assumed safely by members in this House that the overwhelming portion of that $7.6 million for the family maintenance enforcement services otherwise would have been a need by the Legal Services Society.

Additionally, we have established a flexible eligibility criteria that now will allow the working poor access to legal aid in urgent custody and access cases We support, in this ministry, the extension of the flexible test to all remaining family law areas currently covered by legal aid as well as to less serious criminal offences. I think the flexible eligibility test that we've undertaken is an important innovation. There's a whole body of people out there who aren't poor enough to be eligible for legal aid, but who are right on the margin and indeed need legal assistance We've broadened the criterion of eligibility so that the people in the legal aid offices who see them and talk to them can exercise discretion, can make a judgment about their needs and the seriousness of the problem. I think it's a valuable thing for the province.

MR. SIHOTA: I want to thank the Attorney-General for his comments. As tradition and practice has it, we'll certainly allow him to continue and not comment until he's had his say, but just out of deference and some respect, I should let the Attorney-General know that I have a committee meeting at 11 o'clock, so I'm going to slip out for a few minutes. Other people from our party will respond to what he has to say; I'll probably reserve my comments until 2 o'clock.

HON. S.D. SMITH: Those improvements to the test of flexibility and what is referred to as less serious criminal offences If you're the accused, I suppose it's moot whether the offence is serious or less serious. Nevertheless, we're pleased, on behalf of members in this House, to be able to provide those additional services to British Columbians — using, of course, the people's money, which they work very hard to earn.

The other improvements that have been achieved include improved resources of alternative funding from the notaries public, which in '89-90 provide a million dollars for legal aid services provincewide. Frequently, lawyers and notaries don't break bread together. I don't know why that has been the case, because notaries are doing extremely well in B.C. today and provide quality "bread," Mr. Opposition House Leader, I can assure you of that. Indeed, I had the pleasure last fall of speaking in Kelowna to the annual meeting of the notaries public, and I want to say publicly to them that their contribution to legal aid in British Columbia, through the investment of their trust funds, is greatly appreciated. As most members in the House would be aware, the notaries do not usually deal in criminal or family law matters; they're more on what those of us who are solicitors would understand to be the commercial side of the law business.

In addition, Mr. Chairman, we provide regularization of funding from the Law Foundation, which will benefit the legal aid services throughout the province by fully $3 million annually.

Funding to a number of different agencies has been provided to help with legal information and education. Over the last two years $390,000 has been provided to fund special projects such as the mediation-arbitration pilot project, a pornography public education project and a youth gang public education project. More could be done in two areas of legal aid: civil legal aid and services to the native community of our province. My ministry will provide leadership in these areas in the near future. We'll be in a position to provide more details about new programs and funding in those areas when we shortly announce a legislative package of reform arising from the Justice Reform Committee's report, "Access to Justice." However, we have already started addressing some of the concerns in these areas to enhance delivery of civil legal aid cases provided by the Legal Services Society.

The ministry approved funds to establish offices in three communities this year. Those offices are in Cranbrook in the great constituency of Kootenay; in Maple Ridge in the great constituency of Dewdney, and from that office they undoubtedly provide assistance to people in Coquitlam-Port Moody; and a third office in Terrace in the constituency of Skeena, which, as the member for Atlin (Mr. Guno) well knows, services people from the Nass Valley and throughout that region. We hope those offices will be fully operational within the next few weeks.

The ministry recognizes the importance of making legal assistance available to the native people of this province, and we will begin a process of active consultation — which will be led personally by the Attorney-General — with native groups throughout the province to determine the best way to meet this need.

[11:00]

Native diversion programs, expanded mediation and counselling services, as well as court sittings on

[ Page 6333 ]

reserves are all being examined. In the meantime the ministry has immediately increased its grant to native court workers and the Native Courtworker and Counselling Association by a further $74,000.

When I travelled the province in relation to the implementation of the "Access to Justice" report, I was once again reminded by the people with whom I met and talked of the absolutely outstanding and invaluable work that is contributed to our justice system by the native courtworker offices around the province.

It is, to me, quite phenomenal the breadth, diversity and the number of issues with which those workers deal every day, and they do it all day every day, I think all of us in the justice system, indeed in this Legislature, owe a debt of gratitude to the work they do. They are not highly paid individuals; usually they have not only felt the need to contribute, but they also have made the commitment to contribute in that way rather than to use their often considerable energy in some other ways. I think we all owe them a fine thank you.

The Ministry of Attorney-General is committed to the provision of adequate legal aid services for the citizens of British Columbia who are in need. We are concerned about legal aid issues. Our record is clear on that issue. We are working to ensure that access to justice is a realizable right of every citizen of British Columbia, regardless of their cultural background, their geographic location or their economic standing. Those are true principles of justice and indeed the foundation of our society.

I have spent a good amount of time detailing for members of this chamber what has been done in legal aid by this government and by citizens who contribute at the margins to provide those legal service programs. I've done it, Mr. Chairman, because I think it's important in this chamber to explode mythology when it develops, and there has developed a certain mythological component in our society. I don't know how or why, but it seems to have developed that we as a society have not been in any way generous with the people's money in terms of legal aid.

I think we have been responsibly generous in terms of legal aid programs. I want to make it clear that I understand, perhaps as well as anyone in this House, that legal aid is a question of fundamental access to our justice system. It's one that we must recognize, and as much as we have done — and we have done a good deal — in my view there is more still to be done. I will make it a challenge of my own to persuade my colleagues on the treasury benches, the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Couvelier) and my colleagues in the caucus and in this House of the need to ensure that the adequacy of support for people in need is always there in our society as it relates to the justice system.

Our priority in the ministry in 1988-90 will be the implementation of many of the recommendations put forward by the Justice Reform Committee in its report which I tabled earlier: "The Access to Justice" report.

Shortly, I'll bring before this House a legislative package of reform that — without breaching any confidentiality of cabinet — could go even further than that which was envisaged by the committee. Indeed, it will go further.

One of the other responsibilities in an area where we are trying to make improvements this year is with regard to the office of the public trustee. Most people in this chamber would be familiar with the office of the public trustee, because of the nature of the ombudsman role we undertake as MLAs. It's frequently not that familiar to many people around the province until they need its services. The office of public trustee is charged with the responsibility of managing the financial affairs of those who are unable to do so themselves. Clients of the office are some of our most vulnerable citizens — people who, for whatever reason, are less able to look after their own affairs than the rest of us. An in-depth examination has identified service weaknesses within that office. A standard of excellence in service delivery for all British Columbians who require the special assistance and protection of the public trustee will be established this year.

I intend to move towards the provision of quality programs. Some improvements are, in fact, already in place. The budget for '89-90 has been increased from $4.9 million to $6.25 million. Additional full-time staff have been hired to help run the operations of the office. Improvements in responding to telephone inquiries from the public can be expected almost immediately. It's been a big area of concern by members of the public.

Cheque production has been restructured and streamlined. Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the opposition House Leader: it used to take 15 days to issue a cheque from Victoria on average, and sometimes more than that. They are frequently small sums and these people need that money and they need it yesterday. Now it's issued automatically from the public trustee's office in Vancouver within 24 hours. A 24-hour turnaround, a big improvement.

A sophisticated, state-of-the-art computer system was put into place last year, and staff now have direct access to client files and can be more responsive to client inquiries for information.

The Public Trustee Amendment Act, 1989, introduced April 1 by my colleague the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Couvelier) establishes a special account within the general fund of the province. It's a perpetual account in which all revenues and expenditures of the office will be recorded. All revenues, fees and commissions will be used for programs and services of the office. It creates more flexibility for the public trustee to respond quickly to the financial needs of suppliers and clients. It maintains those standards of accountability laid down by the Treasury Board and contained in the Financial Administration Act.

In the very near future, I will unveil a strategy to develop provincewide performance standards and list the services of the private sector and community volunteers to develop public information programs in all

[ Page 6334 ]

regions of the province, reduce overhead costs and provide readily accessible services.

The change that we are seeing in the public trustee service is very important, and I want all members to be aware of it. What we are doing is directing all of the assets of the public trustee service. The income that comes in will be maintained within that framework under certain conditions and guidelines and so on that the auditor-general and the Financial Administration Act and the like would require. The long story short is that the office of trustee is getting greater independence, the service provided will more adequately reflect the income that is received, and they will have greater flexibility to improve service in that office. I think that has been long overdue.

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I want to say a few words about the victims' services, as I did earlier on today. I am pleased with the success of victim assistance programs that were established last year. We think that this is a very human program that provides victims of crime with information and emotional support during their hours, usually, of some great need. In one recent case, volunteer counsellors were able to provide empathetic reassurance and support for a single woman whose home had been broken into by a burglar. Not only had some of her possessions been stolen while others had been vandalized, but the thief had left a trail of blood throughout the home after cutting himself during the forced entry.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry, Attorney, but time has expired.

HON. MR. VANT: I find myself very keenly interested in the Attorney-General's description of the various activities in his ministry. I would certainly like him to continue.

HON. S.D. SMITH: Volunteer counsellors who met with that victim in her home were able to help her deal with the feelings of fear and violation that are often associated with these kinds of events. They were also able to assist her later in making her home safer against possible future attack.

I think it's difficult for people who have not been victimized by crime or trauma of this sort — fire in a home often has the same impact — to understand the real terror that can impress itself upon a person when.... None of us obviously anticipate these things happening when they happen, and it behooves our society, it seems to me, to provide this kind of assistance where we can. It's something that is important to the people who are victims, and it is important to our society to reassure them and to help them get through that period of trauma.

By the end of 1990, we will have close to 100 programs providing justice-related services to the victims of crime throughout the province. At any given time, our programs are actively supporting up to 3,500 victims of crime. This number likely will increase with the advent of new programs and more public awareness of the help that is available. Of course we recognize that, as we implement programs of public education.

I look forward shortly to proclamation of the Victims' Rights and Services Act and the development of regulations for victims' fines surcharge and provincial statutes under which it will be applied. As members of this House know, that is a joint effort between Canada and the provinces. British Columbia is certainly at the forefront of it.

I want to revisit the youth gangs and the information initiatives. The very successful format and content of the youth gang public education initiative will be continued and expanded in 1989-90. The initiative is aimed at both youth and at their families. It provides information and education about the justice system as it relates to the criminal activities of organized gangs and the recruitment of youth into their membership. Multicultural law camps started last year in the lower mainland to educate and inform youths about the law and the justice system in British Columbia will continue to operate during the summer months of this year. The camp roster includes new Canadian children from Asian, Hispanic, Chinese and Vietnamese cultures. The ministry will also continue to expand this educational initiative by making information and education more readily available to a growing number and variety of ethnic minority groups. We will build on the foundations that have already made this program so successful. We will also explore the needs of other multicultural groups, such as new citizens with Hispanic origins, to ensure they are provided with the understanding of our culture and our justice system — that they need to be law-abiding and productive members of our society, and need to be able to provide themselves with an opportunity to become accustomed to our society and to integrate into the mores that are expected of people when they come to this land.

[11:15]

I want to talk about the ministry's capital plan for '89-90. It involves a $16 million budget to fund upgrading, expansion and replacement of court facilities throughout British Columbia. When completed, it will provide 16 new courtrooms and upgrading of a number of existing facilities. The total value of construction, some of which will be completed in future years, is estimated at about $30 million. The goal is to create a better environment for our justice system. It will also provide economic benefit through construction-related jobs and act as a springboard for further townsite development in communities where projects occur. Courthouses are not just buildings into which lawyers, judges and litigants parade every morning to do whatever they do in those buildings. They are very much the heart of many of our communities, and they carry with them a strong symbolic value of what our society stands for. Therefore our communities are entitled to have good facilities. Within the ability of the taxpayers to send us money, we have to work towards providing those services wherever we can.

The major initiatives in the land titles office will continue this year. We are going to make it easier for

[ Page 6335 ]

investors to do business in British Columbia. Improvements will also have the potential to help homebuyers by reducing the amount of time that their lawyers and their notaries have to spend completing conveyancing documents. The main focus is use of computer technology to overcome barriers of distance and of time. British Columbia is leading the technological revolution in Canada as it pertains to land transfer activities. Remote computer access enables a registry or a title search agent in Prince Rupert to undertake surface land transfer activities with the same ease as his or her counterpart in Kamloops, Nelson, Victoria, New Westminster or Vancouver. The advantage will be extended this year to every citizen who has access to a computer and who has a business need for land title information.

This year's $500,000 computerization program, which is part of a three-year technological development strategy, will provide for upgrading of equipment and streamlining of the database. This advanced technology will provide the springboard for increased economic activity in the province. Business people throughout the world will be able to invest in British Columbia with an ease and speed unavailable in many other business centres.

We will also simplify the standard form for a mortgage, making it easier for people to understand and faster for lawyers, notaries and financial institutions to process in the land titles branch. We will do that by putting the guts of the mortgage on one page and the boilerplate as an addendum, so you will be able to lift out the basics of the mortgage by a one-shot computer transaction.

The legal system should work in unison with the needs of the society it serves without creating any unnecessary encumbrances. Streamlining internal systems in the land titles branch and developing the leading-edge technology in this area are just two examples of how we're striving to provide better service to British Columbians.

In the area of criminal justice, while all British Columbians reap the benefits of a responsive, well-directed justice system, additional funding planned for Crown counsel offices this year will specifically target the needs of victims and witnesses. All too often, victims as well as witnesses feel very uncomfortable with the justice system, a system that was purportedly developed for their use and for their protection. The justice system can be a foreign environment to them, seemingly filled with needless complexity and charged with confrontation. It need not be that way; it must not be that way, if we are to secure citizens and necessary support for the justice process. To pave the way for that support, we intend to increase staffing levels of Crown counsel offices. Witnesses will be interviewed more quickly. Additionally, we will increase staff levels attached to special prosecutions, such as cases involving child sexual abuse, commercial crime and environmental protection. These types of crimes and quasi-crimes have increased in volume as well as complexity over the last number of years.

The member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew (Mr. Sihota) is not here, but I want to say that as critic for this portfolio he has been extended the opportunity to work cooperatively with me where he considers it appropriate. The day after my swearing-in, I spent a considerable amount of time in my office with the member sharing with him my views about the challenges that were then before the system and giving him assurances that he could avail himself of my office and our support for the supply of facts about matters of concern to him. As well, I had the pleasure of hosting the member for Esquimalt-Port Renfrew for a light breakfast and a full briefing by myself and the Deputy Attorney-General prior to the release of the Justice Reform Committee report. In addition, I invited that member to submit his nominations for the designation of Queen's Counsel, and was pleased to provide for his participation beside me at a public meeting of interested persons convened to discuss court facilities in the Western Communities and greater Victoria.

In conclusion, I want to repeat that in British Columbia we have a good justice system. It is a system whose essential problem is one of being overburdened. That is bad news because it is an overburdening; it is good news because people use it. The reason it is overburdened is that people want to use it, and the reason they want to use it is that they trust it.

Our challenge in the Ministry of Attorney-General in the next few years is to build upon that solid foundation of trust in the justice system, to ensure that we enhance its accessibility, that we do whatever we can to make the system more understandable, that we try to make it more efficient without compromising its essential purpose and that we do whatever we can to make it less costly for all citizens of our province.

I also want to say that as a matter of my own habits and practice.... I came out of the solicitor's side of the business of law; therefore I am inclined to seek resolution of disputes other than through litigation. That is a phenomenon that you will see impressed upon this ministry more and more. Obviously there are times when one is sued and one has to respond, or where it is in the public interest to use the litigation process. But that is my inclination, and I think, as you have seen over the last number of months, there have been situations where we have been disinclined to pursue certain matters on appeal and thereby to in fact change the course of our public policy.

Just before I close, I want to say that close to my community, in the Chilcotin region of our province, there is a very serious problem, one of both perception and.... I have undertaken with members of the communities in that area to participate directly and personally in seeking latitude for its resolution.

Mr. Chairman, if I may now, I would like to introduce the staff members who are present in the chamber or available to us today as we undertake a review of estimates. On my immediate left is the Hon. Ted Hughes, Deputy Attorney-General; Krysia Strawczynski, on my right, is the Assistant Deputy Attorney-General for financial administration; Ian Smith, who is sitting behind me, is our ministry's director of finance. In the members' gallery are Bob Ed-

[ Page 6336 ]

wards, Assistant Deputy Attorney-General for legal services to government; Tony Sheridan, Assistant Deputy Attorney-General for court services; and Mr. Bill Stewart, the Assistant Deputy Attorney-General in the criminal justice branch.

MR. CASHORE: I would like to thank the Attorney-General for his comments this morning. I thought that it was a very well canvassed representation of his ministry. I would also like to thank him for introducing the staff people who are present in the House today. I believe this is a courtesy to these people as well as to other members of the House, and I appreciate that very much.

My comments and questions have to do with the area of environmental law, and it is a situation that is a crossover between the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Attorney-General. The problem that I think we mutually want to address as we look at this issue is a problem that cannot be addressed entirely within the Ministry of Environment or within the Ministry of Attorney-General, but certainly is an issue that I know the Attorney-General is concerned about and that is going to require effort on behalf of all of us to address in a creative way.

I apologize to the Attorney-General. While he was speaking earlier, I sent some documents over to him. I assumed that when my colleague stood up, the Attorney-General had concluded his remarks. I was wondering if he just might look at those. They consist of printouts from the Ministry of Environment of "Counts and Averages of Statutes, by Statute and Section of Statute"; they are a provincial summary of fines under the Waste Management Act. I commented on these documents during the statement period on Friday. I might point out that at that time the Minister of Environment (Hon. Mr. Strachan) indicated I was giving misinformation. The information I was referring to was from these government documents. I don't think there was any substantial dispute with regard to anything contained in these documents.

The first point I want to make is that under the Waste Management Act, over a period of three years, the total amount of fines was $105,400. If you look at the column labelled "G" for guilty, it would indicate that over those three years 145 fines were levied. That works out to an average of $35,133 a year in fines, or an average of 48 fines a year.

One extraordinary fine occurred at a pulp mill in Prince George in the fiscal year just concluded, 1988-89. That totalled $65,000 levied over a period of three days. If we removed that one unusual fine from those totals, the total amount of fines over three years would be $40,400.

[11:30]

There were some indications in the fines levied over those three years that there was a progression taking place, even though, in my opinion, the amount of fines levied was shockingly low in view of the environmental concerns within this province. In 1986-87 the total fines were $13,350, in 1987-88 they were $18,650, and in 1988-89 they were $73,400. Again, if you removed that $65,000 fine, that third year was actually a decline to $8,400.

There are some points I would like to make in raising this issue with the Attorney-General. I think that any analysis of these government documents shows that we really do have a very serious problem here, and it's a problem of enforcement.

We also know that within the budget there has been reference to certain measures taking place. One has been more money available through the Ministry of Environment for waste management, but I would point out that at the present time there are 197 fulltime employees in waste management. I would also point out that that number is exclusive of the conservation officers, who have a major role in gathering evidence.

I think, admittedly, a large part of the problem is in the infrastructure that is not in the Attorney-General's ministry, and that is an infrastructure to put evidence together to bring to a Crown prosecutor so that at that point it becomes work that is done within the Attorney-General's ministry. I would assume here that within the Crown prosecutor's office there is an issue with regard to information being brought forward that enables the Crown prosecutor to be able to put forward a case that is going to result in sending a clear message to polluters that in British Columbia we're very serious about offences against the environment.

I think there must be frustration within that office to realize that what we've been administering has been a mosquito bite in terms of the total amount of deterrent effect. Granted, many of these fines are in the form of tickets, which would be something like a traffic ticket where if the offender pays the ticket there is no court action.

I know that the topic has come up about having an environmental prosecutor. I certainly do not suggest in any way that we look at having members of the judiciary specializing in environmental issues, because I think they need to have a broad range of issues they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis. But I would be interested in what can be done within the Attorney-General's office to at least beef up that part of the system so that we can start having some significant cases being dealt with in such a way that the polluters.... I think it's pretty well known in the mind of the body politic that there are a lot of polluters in this province getting away with some enormous offences against the environment. If we were to compare this, for instance, to traffic offences and the importance of there being a deterrent, we would see that it simply isn't working.

The issue of law reform has been raised, and everybody agrees that law reform is important in the areas of raising minimum and maximum penalties and making the pollution laws more serious — making them firmer, with stricter standards. But again, even if we do that, unless we deal with the issue of enforcement, it will really be a paper tiger. If we don't have some way of addressing the enforcement issue, even with the laws presently on the books and the fines that presently exist.... There may be some

[ Page 6337 ]

political sense in talking about larger fines. I think we have to talk about them, but I don't think there's ever been a maximum fine levied in British Columbia. That $65,000 fine over three days is an aberration; it certainly isn't the norm. If you remove that $65,000 fine, you're looking at an average of somewhere between $100 and $150 per fine.

The minister stated in his opening remarks that British Columbia is a unique region. One of the reasons we agree with that is our environment — the beauty of this province, Because of our mutual belief in sustainable development, we have a tremendous responsibility in the stewardship of that environment.

During the Attorney-General's opening remarks he talked about having special prosecutors for youth gangs. Again, I think the environment is another issue where we could certainly ask him to take a look at that possibility. When he was talking, another thought came to me. I wondered if at some point we're going to have to talk about environmental legal aid. Perhaps that's for future discussion.

I apologize for having to leave the chamber to go to a meeting, but I will be reading the Attorney-General's comments in the Blues.

HON. S.D. SMITH: I'm sorry that my scintillating, invigorating and bold presentation in this House today is seemingly driving everyone from the chamber. Mercifully, we have Hansard.

The member raises a whole host of issues, some of which I can deal with; some of which — as he recognized — I can't, because of the crossover with the Ministry of Environment. Let me try, if I may, to respond to the range of matters that he has raised. In our system in British Columbia, Crown counsel makes the decision about whether or not to prosecute. It's not the policing authority that makes that decision. However, the policing authority provides Crown counsel with information and circumstances which they endeavour to put before the court as evidence.

That's an important thing for us to know, not only in matters relating to criminal law but also in areas of quasi-criminal offences — as they are known: environmental issues, liquor offences, securities issues and the like. There is an important need for Crown counsel and the policing agencies to work together.

The second thing I want to say is with regard to the range of penalties, which the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam was concerned about. Of course, the penalties in no small part are determined by the person hearing the case - the judge. Submissions are made about sentencing, but at the end of the day, it is for the judge to make a determination.

[Mr. Rabbitt in the chair.]

The member for Maillardville-Coquitlam will find that the Minister of Environment (Hon. Mr. Strachan) will be apprising this House of the conclusion of initiatives that he has now undertaken and is completing with respect to the level of penalties and the maximum penalties associated with matters under his jurisdiction. One of the ever-present problems in the whole area of prosecuting those kinds of offences is that, while procedurally they are within the realm of criminal law and therefore are called quasi-criminal offences, in fact, as a matter of result, often they are more on the civil side. It's a matter of the pollution impact on individuals and values of land. The member was alluding to the point where the penalties are too little: it becomes almost a licence to pollute rather than a penalty for a wrong done.

One of the ways we may well be able to address that problem — and I would hope when the member reads my response to him in Hansard he might give some thought to it — is that it may be that there should be some provision in our legislation recognizing the civil dimension, if you like, of this area. While it is prosecuted criminally and according to the rules of evidence and so on normally associated with the criminal process, it may be that we have to have some process, when there is a successful prosecution, for recovering the cost of gathering the evidence together and proceeding through the courts. That may be something that the members want to reflect upon. He is quite right: there is sometimes little relationship between the level of the penalty and what it costs the state to get there. We've got to find ways to do that. But we've got to be careful about how far up we run the penalty, because by running the penalty up too high you might open up a defence that you are ultra vires of provincial jurisdiction and that indeed you are walking in the realm of criminal law. You have to exercise some caution in that regard.

The member raised as well the question of the relationship between the Ministry of Environment and the Attorney-General's ministry. It is important to note that we are convening a number of working groups between those two ministries to expedite and make more effective and efficient the movement of circumstances and information through the system so that you get evidence before the courts that would be helpful. In addition, we have appointed an executive Crown counsel in charge of environmental prosecutions. That appointment was made last January 24. That individual is working with a number of Crown counsel from around the province who have developed specialization in that area.

I think those two initiatives, which the member asked for and which have already been done, will go some distance in addressing the concerns he had. We are examining and reviewing the range of sentences that apply to a wide variety of offences to determine their adequacy, and are working very closely, as I said at the outset, with the Ministry of Environment. I think you'll see — I hope we'll see — some movement in that regard legislatively, but I ought to leave that to the Minister of Environment.

The executive Crown counsel in charge of environmental prosecutions is also undertaking to ensure that there is an appropriate educational program for prosecutors to assist as well in the education of investigators, to make certain that investigations for environmental matters and prosecutions are more effective. Again, I would remind the member for Maillard-

[ Page 6338 ]

ville-Coquitlam (Mr. Cashore) of what I said at the outset, when he was still in the chamber: in British Columbia, unlike other jurisdictions, the Crown relies on the information and circumstances brought to it by investigative agencies. The Crown makes a decision about whether to prosecute, and properly that is the case. But the need therefore to work with investigative agencies is ever present, always maintaining the independence of each of those agencies.

[11:45]

In summary, then, of what the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam raised, on January 24, 1989, we created and appointed an executive Crown counsel in charge of environmental prosecutions throughout the province. That individual, Mr. Peter Ewert, is working on a number of programs to educate prosecutors and work with them and with investigators to improve the way in which we're able to put information to the courts as evidence. Together with the Ministry of Environment, we're looking at ways to improve our techniques. As well, we're working with them through our legislative drafting program, reviewing the penalty provisions of some of our legislation. And as I said, because of the crossover between the civil and the criminal aspects of these kinds of hybrid statutory offences, we may very well find some utility in examining ways in which we might recover the actual costs of prosecuting, where there is a successful prosecution,

MR. SIHOTA: I am going to make some general comments with respect to what the Attorney-General had to say in his opening comments in introducing estimates today. I again apologize for the fact that I had to go to a committee meeting and was not able to hear the totality of the Attorney-General's comments But I heard enough to want to make a couple of comments and to indicate to the House exactly where we intend to go in this session of estimates.

To begin, I want to very quickly touch on the matter of environmental law and serve notice to the Attorney-General that I will be raising this matter in some depth during the course of debate on his estimates. I will make the case that his ministry is doing very little, and will cite to the Attorney-General a whole series of examples that reinforce that reality. We'll get to that a little bit later on.

I want to deal with all the comments the Attorney-General made, starting with the comments he made about the appointment of Beverley McLachlin to the Supreme Court of Canada. Certainly we on this side of the House join in that celebration. Ms. McLachlin is certainly a star in the judiciary in British Columbia and obviously now in Canada. She has served this province well in her capacity in the Supreme Court. I am sure she will continue to serve this nation well in her new capacity as a Supreme Court judge serving out of Ottawa. We look forward to her pronouncements on the Charter of Rights. In the decision that dealt with the constitutionality of electoral boundaries, she has indicated to all of us — if one reads that decision — that she will bring a level of thoughtfulness and candour to the matter of Charter of Rights litigation.

At the same time, I must say I was a little surprised with the Attorney-General's comments with respect to the Americanization of our courts as a consequence of Madam Justice McLachlin's decision. In my view — and we will be pointing this out more during the course of debate of the estimates — there are a number of inconsistencies in what the Attorney-General said with respect to Madam Justice McLachlin's decision and comments he has made in other arenas with respect to Charter of Rights litigation.

I don't have the decision here, but I would invite the Attorney-General to read with care pages 18 to 25 of that decision. During the course of her reasoning, Madam Justice McLachlin went out of her way to compare British and Canadian jurisprudence and political history with American political history and jurisprudence. On page 22 of that decision, she came to the conclusion that — and I quote from memory — "democracy has different roots in Canada." She then went on to talk about, if I may paraphrase her, how the Americans rebelled against the British tradition and hence its jurisprudence and political history, and how Canadians, on the other hand, chose to embrace the British tradition.

She asked herself on page 25 of that decision whether or not the rigid interpretation of the Bill of Rights made by the Americans with respect to voting rights ought to apply in Canada. Madam Justice McLachlin said no and, during the course of very careful reasoning over those seven pages, drew what I think is an important distinction between our courts and American courts. Our courts do not want to end up with the type of rigidity that has come to be the hallmark of American civil rights jurisprudence. They do not want to bring about the types of decision that cause all of us to take a second look and wonder whether the courts are in touch with mainstream political thinking in this country. Hence she went out of her way in her decision to reflect that concern on the part of the court and to indicate that she believes that Canadian courts ought not to go in that direction. Given those views, and given her appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada, one would imagine that we would not see an Americanization of the courts. In fact, the courts have willingly expressed their desire not to go in that direction.

I would suggest that the Attorney-General's comments with respect to the Americanization of our courts flowing from Madam Justice McLachlin's decision have more to do with the sting he feels from that decision and the way in which it now bars the government from doing what it has been accustomed to; namely, manipulating electoral boundaries. There is obviously a sting felt on the part of government when it recognizes that it cannot do what it used to do with the Eckardt commission, the McAdam report and examples such as Gracie's Finger.

I cheer the decision of Madam Justice McLachlin with respect to the Charter of Rights and how it applies to voting rights. At the same time, I take issue

[ Page 6339 ]

with the Attorney-General that it represents an Americanization of our courts. I find it passing strange that the Attorney-General on the one hand would be concerned about Americanization of our courts, but on the other hand, would be supportive of introducing greater rights to our courts through the provision of right to property. There is indeed a contradiction between his comments that flow from the McLachlin decision and, prior to that, his comments as they relate to property rights. I look forward to philosophically debating that issue, as well as the Charter, with the Attorney-General during the course of estimates.

Turning away from the Attorney-General's comments with respect to Madam Justice McLachlin and reflecting on his subsequent comments with respect to visiting the offices and the components of the ministry, I want to make a couple of comments.

First of all, it is my belief that the ministry is generally well administered and runs relatively efficiently, given the size of the budget the ministry has. For that, I give credit to both the current Attorney-General and his predecessor, my friend from Oak Bay-Gordon Head (Mr. B.R. Smith) ; and of course, particularly to Mr. Hughes, who has day-to-day responsibility for making sure that the ministry functions within the parameters of its budget, and that we get the best value out of the expenditures we make.

I think staff are working under some very difficult situations and are accommodating some very inordinate demands to the best of their abilities. That certainly has been the feeling I get as I tour around this province talking to staff within the ministry.

Having said that, there is no doubt that the system is overburdened, and there are inordinate demands placed on that overburdened system. There are a number of solutions in front of us to reduce the level of stress on those employees, and more importantly in my view, to deal with the matters of access to justice. When I talk about access to justice, I first want to congratulate Mr. Hughes for the splendid work he has done in his report. I have some differences, which we will talk about later on during the course of estimates, in terms of what I think ought to be implemented and what appears to be the direction of the Attorney-General.

Indeed, as a consequence of that report, there will be many questions flowing from this end of the House as to the government's intentions in implementing the provisions of that report. I think there are a number of them that need to be addressed, particularly the matter of merger which, I am pleased to say, we have already filed a private member's bill on. I look forward to the Attorney-General following our leadership in that regard.

In addition, I will be making some comments during the course of our debate on the Hughes commission report with respect to pretrial case management. I have read with care the comments that have been made by the Law Society of British Columbia with respect to the special rules on the ability of judges to have input on case management discovery, certificates of readiness, disclosure of documents and court filing fees.

I must say I find, particularly with respect to some of the suggestions that the Law Society rejected in terms of the judges' ability to monitor and control the progress of cases, that my bias is towards what the Hughes commission has said in its report as opposed to what the Law Society has said. I think there can and ought to be a greater role on the part of the courts to push cases along. I do not buy the argument that it ought simply to be left as a matter between counsel and client. In any event, there will be some commentary on that during the course of my remarks.

Mr. Chairman, I notice that it is the noon hour, and I am just getting into the opening of my comments with respect to the Attorney-General's ministry. I would like, therefore, to continue later on when we rise after question period to deal with this.

For the interim, I will move that we rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, now that I note the Speaker is here.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

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

Hon. Mr. Veitch moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:58 a.m.