[ Page 11245 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Private Members' Statements

The at-home support program. Mr. Mowat –– 11245

Ms. Smallwood

Spirit of the north. Mrs. Boone –– 11246

Hon. Mr. Strachan

Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act, 1990 (Bill 34).

Hon. L. Hanson

Introduction and first reading –– 11248

Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture Statutes Amendment Act, 1990

(Bill 71). Hon. L. Hanson –– 11249

Assessment and Property Tax Reform Act (No. 2), 1990 (Bill 78).

Hon. L. Hanson –– 11249

Private Members' Statements

Mining in British Columbia. Mr. Rabbitt –– 11249

Ms. Edwards

Community-based health services. Ms. Cull –– 11251

Mr. Loenen

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Crown Lands estimates.

(Hon. Mr. Parker)

On vote 15: minister's office –– 11253

Mr. Williams

Mr. Blencoe

Health Professions Act (Bill 31). Committee stage. (Hon. J. Jansen) –– 11261

Mr. Perry

Third reading

Community Care Facility Amendment Act, 1990 (Bill 43). Committee stage.

(Hon. J. Jansen) –– 11261

Mr. Perry

Third reading

Health Statutes Amendment Act, 1990 (Bill 61). Committee stage.

(Hon. J. Jansen) –– 11261

Mr. Perry

Third reading

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

THE AT-HOME SUPPORT PROGRAM

MR. MOWAT: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to rise and speak today in the House about a very special program that was introduced by our government in the last session and known as the at-home support program. This program provides assistance for children with severe disabilities.

I wish to acknowledge my former colleague, Mr. Brian Smith, who assisted me in bringing this program into reality. We worked on this program for six years, and I must say it's working out extremely well and meeting our expectations and goals that we worked so hard to achieve for so many of our disabled children in this province.

The at-home program was developed to assist parents in providing care for their severely disabled children and also to help defray the exceptional medical expenses that may occur in caring for these children.

The program was introduced in this Legislature in June 1989; yet barely four months after the introduction, it already had begun to help children with special needs across the province. There are presently 647 children who have been approved for the at home program, and they will receive benefits. It is forecast that by the end of July 1991 this program will be assisting and meeting the needs of well over 1,500 severely disabled children in British Columbia.

Many of our members know these families and the children in their constituencies, and are getting many testimonials on how effective and efficient this program is and what a great asset and assistance it is to the total family. These families are provided not only with respite and nursing-respite services but also with extraordinary medical needs, which can cause a real financial drain on a family.

The Ministries of Social Services and Housing and Health are providing approximately $7 million for the annualized nursing-respite costs. The medical needs costs, which are also estimated to be at $7 million, are being funded by the Provincial Secretary through the Lottery Fund.

Eligibility for the at-home program is based on the child's dependency on others for activities of daily living, such as eating, toiletry, dressing and bathing. This program helps to provide families with the facilities of medical equipment and maintenance, medical supplies, transportation, exceptional therapy costs, 100 percent of their Pharmacare coverage and premiums for each eligible child.

As you can see, Mr. Speaker and hon. members, this provides not only essential services to those families, but also alleviates the heavy financial burden that accompanies the in-home medical care program, which would make it otherwise impossible for some families to be able to afford to care for their children in their homes. This program is also less expensive to the government and the citizens of the province, and it allows us to provide support for these children so they can live at home, rather than admitting them to hospitals and other government-funded institutions.

Not only is it a definite financial benefit to the province, but it also provides an even more crucial aspect of strengthening the independence and integrity of the family unit. The long-term aspect of funding of home care will also prove more beneficial for the adoption and foster-parenting of severely disabled children.

In another aspect of the program, it will be positive to society at large because it will free up hospital beds for future needs.

I wish to stop now, but I will finish after the next person.

MS. SMALLWOOD: I'm very pleased to add my comments to the previous speaker's, because I think this is an important program. But we must recognize that it is only a first step. While it will support families, children and their parents, it does fall short, and we have to keep working to address the real needs of disabled people in this province.

First of all, I'd like to congratulate the parents who fought and worked for this program for so many years. It's important that any government recognize the contribution of the people in the field who have the firsthand expertise and information. One of the unfortunate realities of this program is that while parents and advocacy groups for children and families fought for this program for over two years — that I am aware of, and I suspect much longer — the government had a long series of promises leading up to the final announcement. A cynic might say that it was only upon the embarrassment of the government that they finally came through with the promises they had been making for so many years.

While they recognized and heard the needs of the parents, the government fell short in the consultation with and involvement of those parents in implementing the program. I once again add my voice to those of the parents in a call to have an ongoing process to meet the needs of these families, including parents and children. For any government to operate in isolation is folly.

I'd also like to add to the call for the need to expand the program to deal with young adults and adults living at home. All too often adults with severe disabilities don't see the same support that children do. We need to recognize not only the cost-saving but the humanity of caring for those people at home with people who love them, and who they are familiar with and comfortable with. In their own personal development and their contribution to the community, it is essential that they are part of a home environment and a community setting.

[ Page 11246 ]

The member talked about the cost-saving to government that this program has brought about because of its ability to bring children back to their families, and therefore saving the considerable amount of money spent in institutions. I think that is important, and it's certainly a principle the New Democrats have argued for for many years: the principle of support and basically a perspective on healthy community and well-being. It is also the best view for supporting a healthy society.

Thanks to Ryan Bonson and Heather Van Egdom, I learned a lot about what happens to children when they're in institutions; what happens to families when those children are away from their families for months and sometimes years; how the family breaks down and how the bonding between parents and children breaks down and sometimes completely diminishes; what happens to children when they're in an institution without the stimulus of a family or their siblings; and what happens to children when they don't have the opportunity of getting outside and interacting with other children.

So yes, it's cost-saving, and it's smart economics, but equally as important, we can't forget the human factor. That's why I again want to stress that the people who know best in this situation are not the government bureaucrats or the politicians, but the families themselves.

MR. MOWAT: Mr. Speaker, I'd just like to point out an example. In this type of program, the caregiver will not be constantly changing; it will be a person who is always in the home, who is not only consistent and familiar with the child, but who has a real concern about the physical and mental well-being and the future goals of that child.

This type of caring for severely disabled children is far superior to the older methods of institutionalization. It's certainly better for the child, the mother, the father, the brothers, the sisters and every facet of family life.

[10:15]

Prior to this program, a family that could no longer afford to keep a disabled child at home or that could not cope with the stress and the need for total care for the disabled child would have to place the child into an institution. At such times, it was very difficult on the family. In some cases, if another family would take the child, the health care system would provide for the medical and the medical equipment needs of that child. This was not a very fair program.

The program was changed. It didn't just change in the last two years — as the member who just spoke said. It took many years to develop. It is an excellent program. It's working out extremely well, as the figures and the letters we're getting indicate.

One of the problems is that it has not been widely enough publicized. I ask all hon. members here to ensure this program is explained to people who know of children in homes or institutions who would like to be at home with their families.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I know from my experience in my other work in the rehabilitation field that this program is unique in Canada. It is the best program that we can find in North America.

With modern medical technology becoming so advanced in British Columbia today, there's a vastly increased survival rate for newborn babies with severe disabilities and for young children afflicted with disease and injuries that need constant medical attention. We have now developed the medical technology to add years to the lives of these children. Through this program we will add quality of life to those years.

SPIRIT OF THE NORTH

MRS. BOONE: I first went to Prince George in 1969, and when I did so, I was typical of many who moved north. I'd lived all my life in the lower mainland. Quite frankly, I couldn't understand anyone who didn't want to live there or why anyone would want to live anywhere else.

I moved north because I wanted a new experience. I had no idea where I was going or what to expect. Having never been north of Cache Creek, I was a little worried when I made the turn-off there. I arrived in Prince George with $50 in my pocket and my car — and that was it. I thought I would be in Prince George for one year. I never thought I would be there 20 years later. That's kind of a familiar pattern for most of the people who come north. Most of them do move north — except for those who have lived there all their lives — with the view that they're only going to go for a short experience and for a short length of time. Within a short period of time, they find that they enjoy both the lifestyle and the people, and they make a decision to stay there.

There are still many areas throughout the north — not particularly in Prince George right now, but in areas not very far away — where you will find that the pioneer life still exists. There is no electricity in some places, no running water, no sewer systems and no road access. However, there is also no traffic, no line-ups, no soaring land prices, and people are generally pretty happy and peaceful in many of those places. It was not so long ago that cities such as Prince George and some of the others were remote outposts with very few amenities. I talk to my neighbours and they tell me about when there was no paved road between Prince George and Vancouver. I can remember when there was no paved road or road access between Prince George and McBride or Valemount.

I've seen the birth of two instant towns in the north — Mackenzie and Tumbler Ridge. The people who live in those communities have an excitement about actually starting and building a whole community and watching it grow right from the ground up.

Many who moved to the north did so to get a start. I've mentioned that people go there and think they're only going to be there a year or two — professionals, business people and people working in the forest industry. They find out much to their amazement 17

[ Page 11247 ]

or 30 years later that they're still there and that they have built a style of life that they like.

Northerners know that they need each other. Neighbours don't ignore one another, They remember when they were new. They remember coming into town, moving into a place and knowing no one, and they know that they have to reach out to people because it wasn't so long ago that they were newcomers and needed friends as well.

Because of the climate we know that we must help each other, or we don't survive in many cases. If a car breaks down, you stop and help somebody fix it. Not in my case — I'm not much of a fixer — but I would offer to drive somebody someplace. On the Alaska Highway it is actually illegal to not stop when somebody is broken down. If somebody is stuck, you push. If a battery is dead, you get out your jumper cables and help. That's what people do in the north, because we know that we need each other.

We say hello to strangers and welcome visitors to our communities. For years we've had an inferiority complex. People from the coast would look at us in amazement and pity when they found out that we didn't come from the rain belt. We would desperately try to justify why we prefer 20 below to wandering around in puddles, and people never really believed we actually liked that. However, that's starting to change.

People in the north are beginning to demand recognition, and we're beginning to get it. You can see that through the University of Northern B.C. that has come about, where the entire northern part of the province united, and where entire communities bound together in order to convince the government that we needed and deserved a university. That came about from a northern spirit.

The spirit of the north came through loud and strong last weekend with the B.C. Summer Games. Citizens outdid themselves. We had 5,700 volunteers — the most ever. In fact, I was told that they had to stop the volunteers because there were too many people who wanted to get involved in the Summer Games, and we're proud of that. We showed our local talent, and we were proud of the talent we showed there. Everyone I met throughout those areas talked about how well they were treated, how well they were fed, how they made friends, and in many cases how well they partied.

I've noticed a change in the last few years. I've noticed that people are starting to turn down transfers and starting to ask to come up north. In fact, people are initiating transfers from the southern half of the province to our regions because they're tired of the congestion and of spending an hour driving to and from work. They're tired of the lifestyle of standing in lines for movies and to get into restaurants, and they want to have some peace in their lives and a little less formality. It's not unusual in the north to go to a function and find cowboy boots and cowboy hats beside three-piece suits. We don't stand big on formalities in our area.

Each year we watch with amusement when the snow hits the unsuspecting lower mainland. Then we turn around and plow our way through a foot or two of snow and resignedly shovel our driveways after we've been plowed in by a snowplow, probably about 15 minutes before we're due to go out. We shake our heads in amazement when a provincial disaster is declared when the temperature drops to minus 10 in Vancouver. Then we plug in our cars and prepare for minus 30 or minus 40 — not much less than that, actually.

We watch southerners come off planes in loafer shoes — my colleague is not here; I told him to be here — in the middle of a snowstorm and wonder just how they manage to survive and why their mothers ever let them out of their homes. We insulate our homes, winterize our cars and cut firewood. We purchase dozens of mitts, toques and scarves, which will be lost within one week. We play snow golf, go ice fishing and celebrate winter through carnivals. We make the best of what we've got, but we've learned that we must shout loud and clear.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon. member.

It's the Chair's observation that unparliamentary language has always been ruled out of order. But I find it somewhat unparliamentary to make derogatory attacks on the Speaker's constituency when the Speaker is unable to respond. Just let the weight of numbers speak for itself.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: It's nice to hear someone from the lower mainland apologize about where they live, Mr. Speaker, and I'll take your comments with some interest.

This is obviously going to be Prince George Chamber of Commerce day, and we'll put all the politics aside. I would certainly like to add my experience to what the member for Prince George North has said and, as the other Member of the Legislative Assembly for the Prince George area, echo her thoughts and probably add some of my own.

There is no question that there has been a tremendous transformation in the spirit of the community since the mid-sixties, when I moved there, and since 1970, when the member for Prince George North moved there. In those days the town was buoyant, vibrant and growing — as a matter of fact, probably a troubled growth because it was so exuberant, so large and, at moments, out of control. The population of the community essentially trebled from the mid-sixties to the mid-seventies, from 25,000 to close to 75,000. That type of growth always does bring its problems.

One of the first problems it brought was when it began to fall off. That happened in the mid-seventies as growth stabilized. It happened even more so to our community in the mid-eighties when the cyclic downturn in the price of lumber, pulp and paper, our basic commodities, hit our community with as much impact, if not more, as it hit the rest of British Columbia. We're all aware of the impact it had on our community.

[ Page 11248 ]

At that time there was an attitude problem that I think a lot of us found discouraging. It wasn't the best situation to be in. It's something that I as a member tried to fight, but it's a difficult thing to change attitudes when they're down, when you have an economy that isn't what it had been before and when you have circumstances such as layoffs, and people really don't feel good about themselves or their community.

Fortunately, though, things did begin to turn around. As the member for Prince George North points out, there has become a certain sophistication and, without question, a maturity in the population. Those of us who arrived in the mid-sixties to take part in that remarkable growth have matured. In my case, I followed my mother and father there. My mother is now a senior citizen in the area, and I'm about to be one, I guess, in another 15 or 20 years. But it's a town

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: You looked it up. My birthday is on Sunday, as a matter of fact.

We began to see that maturity. Now there's a very good spirit about Prince George.

The member opposite mentioned the Summer Games, and they really were outstanding –– 5,700; 1 think there were 6,000 volunteers at the volunteers' appreciation night.

I also want to put on the record the remarkable volunteer spirit that existed in Prince George during the 1981 Winter Games and the 1986 Festival of the Arts. Really, it was on the basis of that that Prince George was again selected for the Summer Games, because it was seen clearly by those making the decisions that this is a community that can come together as a community, in a very professional and comprehensive way, to put on an excellent show.

There are a few things we have. The member has mentioned the university, and that's something everybody is proud of. There is a community spirit that exists in Prince George that you won't find elsewhere, because we are 500 miles from Vancouver and 500 miles from Edmonton, so we do miss some of the good theatre, opera and culture. Because of missing that, we've had to draw on our own. You will find in Prince George probably the best library on a per capita basis in British Columbia. It's an outstanding building with outstanding features. You will find some very good art and culture. Two internationally acclaimed children's choirs are in Prince George: the Bel Canto Choir and Die Meistersingers. I'm not just saying the best in Canada — internationally acclaimed. They outshine anything else in the province and most other choirs in Canada.

We have a superb theatre and a very good symphony orchestra — many of the things that people know they have in Vancouver but because of time, congestion and traffic just don't get to see. In our community we do get to see it, because it's there.

Interjection.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: You're going to be there on Monday, yes. We'll show you some culture. We have a good piano player, too.

All those types of things make a community grow. Maybe the isolation has been part of it.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

MRS. BOONE: I will apologize to the Speaker if I have offended his community. However, he lives there, and he knows what It's like. It's easy to live in Vancouver, I think.

The spirit of the north is hard to put your finger on. I've been told by people that the farther north you go, the friendlier people get. If you go north from Prince George and get into Whitehorse, people are really super friendly there. I have never been to Whitehorse, but I certainly intend to go there. I think it's because of the remoteness, because people are isolated and because it is a cold area that we find this spirit there.

[10:30]

I'd like to relate an incident that really shows how people bind together and make do with what they've got. My daughter went to a small school, Millar Addition Elementary School, which is a four-room school house. They had no gymnasium or anything like that. They decided to put on a Christmas concert, so they did so in the middle of winter. They decided they were going to do it outside. The custodian built a stage for them, and they had it outside. We watched with horror on that day as the temperature plummeted. By the time of the Christmas concert it was 30 below. Mr. Speaker, that was the quickest Christmas concert you've ever seen in your life. Those little kids out there sang those Christmas carols faster than you've ever heard, and we had no encores. Parents didn't clap forever, either. We came in and had hot chocolate and marshmallows, and we enjoyed our Christmas concert.

Mr. Speaker, it sounds a little strange, but I wouldn't change any of that. It's the challenge of the north that makes us strong, that makes us determined — and my caucus will tell you that I'm certainly determined when it comes to speaking out on behalf of the north — and that gives us the true northern spirit.

Introduction of Bills

MUNICIPALITIES ENABLING
AND VALIDATING ACT, 1990

Hon. L. Hanson presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act, 1990.

HON. L HANSON: Mr. Speaker, Bill 34 contains measures designed to dissolve the South Okanagan Lands Irrigation District and assign all assets and liabilities to the town of Osoyoos and the village of Oliver. The bill also contains measures to allow the district of Invermere to fund a court-assisted settle-

[ Page 11249 ]

ment with a former mayor. The bill validates the city of Fort St. John's development cost charge bylaw No. 748. In addition, the bill ensures that no present or past Islands Trust land use bylaw can be challenged or declared void because of a failure to follow statutory preconditions.

Bill 34 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS, RECREATION
AND CULTURE STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 1990

Hon. L. Hanson presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture Statutes Amendment Act, 1990.

HON. L. HANSON: Mr. Speaker, the bill contains revisions designed to improve municipal powers relating to building plan requirements. The bill also corrects several legislative errors.

Bill 71 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

ASSESSMENT AND PROPERTY TAX
REFORM ACT (No. 2), 1990

Hon. L. Hanson presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Assessment and Property Tax Reform Act (No. 2), 1990.

Bill 78 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Private Members' Statements

MINING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

MR. RABBITT: Today, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to talk about mining, its history and its influence on British Columbia. This is an industry of great importance to all British Columbians and especially to the people that I represent in Yale-Lillooet, a constituency in which I was born, raised and continue to live today.

Since the discovery of gold on the Fraser during the middle of the last century, mining has been a vital part of this province's economy and social fabric. The gold rush of the 1850s brought miners to communities like Granite City, Yale, Bridge River and Lillooet. And today, just as in previous decades, mining continues to be a vital ingredient, contributing to the economic livelihood of many British Columbians and particularly to the people of Yale-Lillooet. In Princeton, for example, over 300 are employed at the Similco operations mining gold, silver and copper. At Logan Lake Highland Valley Copper operates North America's largest open-pit copper mine, employing over 1,200 people and generating revenue of over $400 million per year.

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

Mine operations like this and others throughout so many interior communities form the economic backbone of these areas. Our economic infrastructure depends largely on the presence of a strong, healthy and vibrant mining economy. Provincewide, the mining industry contributes about $4 billion in gross revenues to the economy. Forty thousand people rely directly and indirectly on the mining industry for their jobs. These people and their families know firsthand the importance of mining.

However, there are some people, mostly from the major urban areas, who are losing sight of the importance of industries like mining. They are losing sight of the fact that mining and other natural resource industries such as forestry and fishing convert those natural resources into the creation of wealth and economic growth, and that fuels the economy of British Columbia. The standard of living that this province enjoys depends on the use of our primary natural resources. All members know that British Columbia's economy is becoming more diversified each day. New industries and new economic opportunities are continually being created. Yet we must remember that natural resource industries like mining are still the pillars of our provincial economy. They are the building blocks on which today's technological economy has been built. Terms like value-added economic diversification would quickly become meaningless if it weren't for our primary resource industries.

A mine is created when a commercial ore body is located and then developed. Ore is simply rock that contains enough mineral content to make it commercially viable to extract it from the ground and then process it. You can't add value to minerals that are left in the ground. Yet while mining is an integral component of our province's economy, we all realize that mines have a limited amount of mineral that can be extracted from a specific site. True, as old mines are phased out — mined out — often new ones are brought on stream. But is it important to ensure that before an old mine is phased out, the community interests are protected not only from an economic perspective but from an environmental perspective? The answer is yes.

When it comes to the environment, the mining industry has undertaken some positive initiatives. For example, in terms of land reclamation British Columbia's mining industry is a global leader. The industry uses techniques and establishes trends that experts from around the world have come to study. Currently over 6,000 hectares of mine land have been reclaimed in this province. In reclaiming the land, the objective is to prepare it for the use of wildlife as well as for grazing and forest use. This commitment to reclamation on the part of the mining industry ensures that once a mine closes, the land will be returned to its pre-mine status. This is sustainable

[ Page 11250 ]

development in action. It ensures that there is a balance between the needs of the economy and the environment.

It is essential that all members, especially those in urban areas, realize the importance of mining to our economy in this province. Mining has been an important part of the province's past. It is our responsibility to ensure that it remains an important part of this province's future. With the leadership, initiative and cooperation that has been shown by the government, the industry and the workers, the mining industry will remain an integral part of our healthy mixed and sustainable economy for years to come.

MS. EDWARDS: Well, I certainly have to join the member for Yale-Lillooet in recognizing that the mining industry is an extremely important industry in our province, and recognizing its historical roots and the debt that the people of British Columbia owe to miners. It's interesting to note that almost all the settlement in British Columbia followed miners. They didn't come to look for logs and trees. They didn't come because they wanted to set up farms — although they did that later — they came because the miners were there first and because the miners set it up. The farmers came later. The people carried their presses across the country to go and set up in mining communities. The whole thing was a great adventure, and it was started by the miners.

Interestingly enough, it was the miners who used to talk about how they had to go and search for capital. It's an interesting story, isn't it? They're still searching for capital. But they would look for the capitalists. The news and the headlines in the early days were: "Capitalists Brought to Town by So-and-So. Big Hopes for Next Philadelphia of the North." It was an interesting sociological fact of British Columbia's history that the search for capital began with the miners, that the communities of British Columbia began with the miners and that the wealth of this province still depends largely on the mineral wealth in the ground. It's interesting that because of that, our prospectors are still ranging across British Columbia looking for valuable ore in the ground to see whether we can have more wealth extracted from our rock and geological formations.

It's also interesting also that the government of this province has recently increased the fees for prospectors 500 percent, 1,000 percent and 1,250 percent for the licences, fees and permits that these people want. They are the very basis of the mineral and mining industry, which later create huge companies that set up mines that support the economy of places like the Elk Valley in my riding, and in the Columbia Valley where the Sullivan mine was one of the major operations of Cominco. That is interesting it is likely to dampen the spirit of looking for those ores and of being able to find exactly where the ores are that we will continue to want in our world and continue to develop.

[10:45]

Another interesting thing is that the member for Yale-Lillooet talked about the reclamation record of this province. I too would like to commend many of the mining companies for the reclamation they have done. But I also want to point out a matter of considerable interest, which is that strip-mining in British Columbia has brought a situation where we have people moving huge amounts of earth and rock, and nobody has moved that kind of rock and engineered its movement in such great volumes since the pyramids were built. Isn't that an interesting comparison?

The other interesting thing is that we don't know a lot about it. We have a lot to learn yet when we're moving mountains — literally scooping out the soils with the ores in it, taking off the overburden, taking out the ore, moving it all over somewhere else and reclaiming it. We don't know a lot about it yet. We are probably at the forefront of learning about it in the world, but it is a matter of great ambition and, I hope, great achievement.

I would like to join the member for Yale-Lillooet in commending the miners of the province for the work they've done to create communities and establish part of the economy and wealth. Of course, you have to remember that things happen when you create mines like Kimberley, where you have a whole community affected by the fact that the company is not willing to mine the whole amount of the ore that's there. When we have situations like that, we need to know that we have different legislative approaches. I hope the member for Yale-Lillooet will join me in saying that we need to know that these industries cannot ride roughshod over the rest of the community, that they cannot simply say they're going to shut down a mine because they are bargaining and want to get some more productivity out of the employees, when in fact, other excuses don't hold water at all. That's the only one that has any water.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry, hon. member, your time has expired.

MR. RABBITT: I listened to the comments of the member of the opposition with great interest. I actually expected the local NDP caucus expert on mining, the second member for Boundary-Similkameen (Mr. Barlee), to reply today. I thought it would be appropriate, because he was a mining historian, and because when the NDP were in government, they almost made the mining industry history. It might have been more important if they'd brought in an undertaker to speak on it. I remember what happened between '72 and '75, and the first member for Vancouver East (Mr. Williams) could fill us in on that. We'll let the facts speak for themselves.

Under the NDP, capital investment fell by 45 percent from '72 to '75, hon. member. The number of companies obtaining free mining certificates fell by 900 in '74 and by about 325 in '75. That's well over a 50 percent drop in less than one year. In the same period, the number of free miners fell by over 2,000. Shareholder equity fell by more than half.

Compare that to what's happening today. The mining industry, as I mentioned earlier, contributes

[ Page 11251 ]

over $4 billion to the gross revenue of this province. It pays almost $180 million in taxes to the various levels of government. The industry provides to their employees some of the best wages and benefits anywhere in the world. The industry is doing well.

The government has created economic growth for British Columbia and rural British Columbia. We have established a climate conducive to mining exploration, mining investment, mining expansion and growth throughout the rural part of British Columbia. And never again will we go back to those days of '72 to '75, when we saw the mining industry put in a coffin and the lid nailed down. We know about that, don't we, hon. member?

Have the hon. members here learned from their mistakes? They still want to play Big Brother; they still want to ignore the marketplace. They simply don't understand supply and demand in the open market in the world today. For example, the NDP would establish a Crown exploration agency to govern mineral exploration. The NDP favours the creation of a provincial agency to undertake coordinated marketing of British Columbia minerals. Big Brother again. If the members opposite had their way, they would probably nationalize the industry. We heard the comments about capitalism.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The hon. member's time has expired under standing orders.

COMMUNITY-BASED HEALTH SERVICES

MS. CULL: My topic today is community-based health care. The ability to provide the right health care service to patients at the right place at the right time is the cornerstone of an effective health care system. But the challenge is: how do we do it? Meeting the challenge has become more difficult as medical procedures become more complex, as medical knowledge and ability expand, and as the population demographics change.

Recent studies in British Columbia have shown that the health care system has a need for closer integration and coordination between the institutional sector of our health care system and the community sector. This is related to a number of things, one being the greater emphasis that the medical profession and the public at large are putting on preventive health care; another being the growing demand for community control over health care; and the third being a concern about rising costs, particularly in hospitals.

These factors were the impetus for an experiment in community-based health care which is taking place in my community right now, known as the Victoria Health Project. That’s what I want to talk about this morning.

The Victoria Health Project was announced by your government in the throne speech of March '88, and at that time, the then Minister of Health announced that the project would "result in area hospitals taking increased responsibility for managing all health care resources including acute, rehabilitative, home and long-term care...."

Fortunately that hasn't happened, and a more community-based model has evolved. But later, in the estimates, the minister said: "The move was part of the ministry wide move to decentralize and regionalize" — those are familiar words, aren't they? — "in step with the government's commitment to make government services responsive to local needs."

Well, it appears that despite these fine words, the government at the time really had little idea what it was talking about, but it did have $4 million which it gave to my community. The talented and creative people in my community leapt at the opportunity to do something innovative, even if it didn't fit in with the minister's pronouncements. Now, over two years later, we have 11 subprojects; a public review has just been completed; and professional evaluations are underway. One of these subprojects is in my community: the Oak Bay Wellness Centre.

The idea behind the Wellness Centre is to provide community-based services to people to keep them healthy, as opposed to the more traditional health care services that focus on treating illness. The Oak Bay Wellness Centre focuses on the frail elderly. It reaches out to those seniors who might otherwise be unaware of the services available in our community. It offers blood pressure clinics, seminars on nutrition and back care, and it has a very creative outreach program involving apartment managers.

However, the Health Project and the Wellness Centre are now at an important crossroads, because at the end of this fiscal year, in March '91, the funding runs out. Because the Wellness Centre keeps people healthy and in the community and not in hospitals, it's very difficult to determine the success of the program. How do we measure success in a wellness program? Do we look to hospital admissions or doctors' visits or demand for intermediate care? It's very difficult, but if we really believe in wellness promotion as opposed to simply treating the sick, we have to take a long-term view and realize that investing now in wellness and creating healthier lifestyles may not be recognized until many years into the future.

I think the wellness concept has got to be endorsed and expanded, and I'd like to imagine for a few minutes what the Oak Bay Wellness Centre could look like in the future, as a focus for community health for people of all ages in my community. I see it as a place where seniors will continue to go for information about their health care needs, but also where men and women of all ages would be comfortable coming to get information on nutrition, exercise, substance abuse, weight control, stress management, parenting skills, mental health counselling — the list could go on.

The Wellness Centre wouldn't actually have to provide those services directly — not all of them, anyway — because we already have many excellent services in the community, But they're not coordinated, they're under funded and therefore not widely

[ Page 11252 ]

known, so the Wellness Centre could act as a resource and referral centre to the community.

I think in a community like Oak Bay it's particularly important that we look at a seniors' day care centre to complement the very successful Oak Bay Seniors' Activity Centre, which is already there in the community catering to more active seniors.

When it comes to seniors, we really have to look at a continuum of care that starts well before the need for institutional care, reaching out to active seniors and the frail elderly who are still in their homes. I also think that we could take more of the services that seniors receive in doctors' offices, but which could be as effectively provided by nurse practitioners, into something like the Wellness Centre.

I see it as a busy, attractive community resource centre for health care services in my community, serving all generations. But it's not going to happen simply by me wishing for it. It's going to take renewed commitment on the part of your government to recognize the value of wellness centres, and a firm decision to build the wellness centre approach into the health care funding system on a long-term, permanent basis. To be truly successful, we're going to have to find a way to allow greater community direction of priorities.

The question is: as this government increasingly looks to the quick fix and the bottom line in all social services, is it prepared to put its money where its mouth is and provide community-controlled preventive health care services in my community?

MR. LOENEN: It's my pleasure to respond on behalf of the Minister of Health. As you may know, I'm the parliamentary secretary to the minister.

I was very pleased to hear the member speak so positively about the Victoria Health Project. We're proud of many of the services we offer through our health care system, but what we do in terms of the Victoria Health Project we are particularly proud of, because it has drawn the attention of communities across the province, across this country and across the world.

It's been my pleasure to serve on the advisory policy committee of the Victoria Health Project for nearly two years now. It has been a fascinating experience, because it is a pilot project which takes the very best, the most innovative and state of the art of the health care field. It combines it all and looks at new ways in which we can reach out and provide services to people. It has been an unqualified success.

What it aims to do is provide services to people in the communities, in the neighbourhoods and right in the homes where people live. It takes the caregiver to those who need the care. We have seen such projects as the VICARE program, and discharge units, quick response teams, wellness centres and the preventive side.

What the government has done, starting with last year's budget, is make available to hospitals throughout the province seed money under the hospital-community partnership program — seed money by which hospitals can duplicate those very successful programs that were started right here under the auspices of the Victoria Health Project. That has met with a tremendous amount of success. We believe that that is the way to go.

We know that right here in the Capital Regional District some 75 acute-care beds were planned. They were postponed. They were no longer needed, because we keep people out of institutions and we provide the services right in the homes through the homemaker programs, through the in-home nursing-care services, etc.

Earlier this year some $1 million in funding was transferred from the hospitals in the capital region to the community health care programs right here in the community, which shows that it is possible for us to provide a better service, to meet the needs of the people and at the same time do it more economically.

[11:00]

I was pleased to hear the member speak in support of those initiatives. She may also be interested to know that one of the great contributors who has been in from the very start and has made a contribution to the Victoria Health Project is the current mayor of Oak Bay, Susan Brice. I want to acknowledge her personal dedication and commitment to this program. I know that the community can be truly proud of what she has done. I also know that come the next parliament, she will be with us here on the government side to continue the very good programs that were started with the Victoria Health Project.

MS. CULL: The Oak Bay Wellness Centre is certainly a good start at community based services, but it's time to move beyond a pilot project. It was interesting to hear the member talk about the pilot projects and the money that had been allocated. It's time to make this part of our health care system. I think it's time to take the next step and to expand the project to include all generations. The seniors have been the target group, but it's time to include all generations in this service.

It's also time to revisit one of the ideas that was expressed in the throne speech but never acted upon: to provide a one-stop health care centre staffed by physicians and nurse practitioners, so that people have some place in the community to go to for these services.

Finally, it's time to provide greater community control over the priorities of the project. It's very interesting to hear the parliamentary secretary talk about this as if this is some new idea of the Social Credit government. You know, you don't have to look very far to find the model for what I'm talking about. That's in the James Bay Community Project, which is a child of the community-based health care programs of the Barrett NDP government. I think we have to give thanks to Norm Levi and Dennis Cocke for having brought about that program. It's directed by a community board, and it incorporates the goals that I just mentioned.

What makes it successful, I believe, is community control. That's the next step we need for the Victoria Health Project and for the Oak Bay Wellness Centre.

[ Page 11253 ]

Your government has taken a centralized, institutionally controlled health care system to the community level. They're delivering it at the community level, but the control is still with the institutions, and it's still centralized control. Now is the time to decentralize decision-making about the services and to democratize them by putting their control in the hands of the people in the community and locally elected health care boards.

Mr. Speaker, that's the challenge that a New Democrat government is ready to take up. People in my community right now are waiting to hear: where's the money? Is the commitment there for the long term? Is there going to be a long-term approach to wellness in our community? The question is: is this government ready for the challenge?

DEPUTY SPEAKER: That ends private members' statements for this morning.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. De Jong in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF CROWN LANDS

On vote 15: minister's office, $310,312 (continued)

MR. WILLIAMS: On behalf of my colleague the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam (Mr. Cashore), I'd like to raise the question of the Quarry Road property. There was a release on July 18 regarding that. I guess this should be one the minister's familiar with; it was just in the last couple of weeks. Could the minister advise the House what consideration he gave to the 1980 provincial study that recommended that these lands be a class A park?

HON. MR. PARKER: The Quarry Road opportunity was instigated at the initiative of the mayor and council of Coquitlam. We put it forward as they requested. They weren't seeking a park

MR. WILLIAMS: That was a formal request from the municipality for a park. The people in the northeast part of Coquitlam are very upset. As you are probably aware, in the last short while the mayor pulled the public hearing with respect to zoning for this particular use, which is a golf course.

I just make the point that the northeast part of the lower mainland is becoming quite intensely built up around Coquitlam Centre. The NDP government acquired lands for parks space in that subregion. We acquired the Minnekhada ranch on the Pitt River; that's now a significant addition to the Greater Vancouver Regional District parks system. If you look at that in relation to Mount Burke and Buntzen Lake, what we're talking about is a significant park-links possibility at the foot of the northern mountains in the northeast sector.

Buntzen Lake, which is quite attractive, and Belcarra, which is unique, along with Sasamat Lake, Mount Burke and Minnekhada, become almost a continuous greenbelt on the edge of that highly dense, growing part of the urban region. If you are saying that you are mainly operating on the basis of recommendations from the council, so be it. That's unfortunate.

This links to the discussion yesterday around the need in the whole lower mainland for some coordination of the parks system, housing needs and all the rest. The people of Coquitlam, who are rightly concerned about this now, are probably going to think pretty carefully about turfing some members of that council out, because of their feeling that there was a commitment to a park in this region.

I notice the company is called Taisun Enterprises. In terms of our latest check in the companies' registry, it's not registered; but I guess it is. That may just be an administrative problem. Maybe you could advise us who the principals are in respect to this proposal, Mr. Minister. I presume they are considering some of the adjacent lands for integration with the golf course proposal.

On the technical side, I'd like to commend the staff: there is a fairly short fuse in terms of the appraisal. It doesn't go on forever with a wonderful option to purchase at yesterday's price. That's a step ahead in terms of some of these exercises.

Minnekhada really is a significant addition to the regional parks system. If my memory serves me right, we acquired the old Lieutenant-Governor's estate — Hamber's estate — for about $2 million in '74-75. It just makes you reflect on acquisitions. The Ministry of Crown Lands might seriously think about acquisitions rather than just sales. There were some significant achievements in terms of acquisitions during that time-period. As time goes on, the costs really get out of hand. To acquire the Minnekhada ranch for $2 million was really some achievement, just as the Coldstream lands in the Okanagan were at the same time. Maybe the minister can comment further.

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the Quarry Road initiative is at the request of the community. I guess the community doesn't necessarily agree with the member opposite. That's probably why they're not the government.

Taisun Enterprises Corp. was registered in British Columbia in December 1989, so whoever is doing your research is doing a normal, inadequate job. The president is Mr. Tai Yao and the secretary of record is Mr. Sun Yan-yen. If you want to contact their legal representative, contact Mr. John Mao of Lawson Lundell.

This ministry is responsible for acquisition of lands as well as disposition of lands, and it does both tasks quite effectively.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, I guess. The regional district staff of the Greater Vancouver Regional District would like a task force to review this whole

[ Page 11254 ]

area. I don't know if your staff have considered that. But you've presumably made this commitment now, and you're into a contract, and they're out there dealing with the municipality, so we'll see what happens. But a review with the GVRD regional parks people should have occurred, Mr. Minister. That would have been the reasonable approach in the circumstances, given the earlier study.

HON. MR. PARKER: This ministry meets regularly with the GVRD and covers a number of topics. As a matter of fact, when we get through the House today we have a meeting with the GVRD. It's an ongoing communication.

MR. WILLIAMS: Once more, after the horse is out of the barn.

Maybe you can bring me up to date on the UBC golf course, Mr. Minister. That one was leased out.

HON. MR. PARKER: What do you want to know? Green fees?

MR. WILLIAMS: Oh, ask me some questions.

The UBC Endowment Lands golf course was one of the first privatizations of government. Could the minister advise us what the basic agreement was in terms of that lease? That was a public course and, if my memory serves me right, was handled by the Endowment Lands office, which managed the Endowment Lands and the course. That was one of the earlier privatizations. I'm interested in the terms of the lease, the length of the lease and the kinds of arrangements with respect to sale of the lease. I think there probably are some interesting lessons there.

It's quite phenomenal, when you think about it, how golf course values have escalated in recent years. If you travel around a little bit, you get an appreciation of how much the Japanese value these things. I know, from when I was in Hawaii a year or two ago and looking at golf course extensions in Maui and places like that, that the Japanese are prepared to pay $250, 000 to half a million for individual memberships in a golf course. That's an extraordinary amount of money. That clearly is part of the push behind the number of new golf course proposals in the lower mainland.

It is worthwhile for us to look back at some of the decisions that were made with respect to golf courses that were in our hands at an earlier stage, and to look at what we let them go for and what they're probably worth today. There are some basic lessons. I asked that as a general question to the minister yesterday, too. I really think there are some lessons to be learned in reviewing some of the sales you participated in in recent years — not you personally, Mr Minister, but this administration.

[11:15]

The Tilbury Island one is a classic. If your staff wanted to look at what has happened on Tilbury Island and the sale of the land there in the industrial estate that was established again in the seventies.... But you people flogged it off holus-bolus as a lump and as a full amount. It has since been picked up, and a small amount has been sold off; I think half of what was acquired has been sold off. It has been sold off for two or three times what they paid for it. I haven't pulled the numbers together. But Colliers, the big commercial real estate people, have circulated data on that in recent months. It's just one more example of you selling off Crown lands all in a hurry and all in a bundle, and with very significant capital gains and profits to be made by the people who picked them up. So you might write a note in terms of at least responding to that point, since that didn't happen yesterday.

I'd also like to know about McBarge. Way back when this session began I asked you about it, and you took it on notice. I asked you about it again, and you took it on notice again. I asked you again, and you took it on notice. When I asked the question, you and the Minister of Government Management Services (Hon. Mrs. Gran) were both going to get up at the same time and take it on notice. But the Minister of Government Management Services advises us that she's responsible for only a narrow end of the contractual question, and that the bulk of it is with you. So maybe you could advise us of the progress in terms of your negotiations with them.

For the sake of others who are not interested in this minutia, McBarge was established as part of Expo. As I recall it, a 25-year lease was the arrangement with the provincial government. The city of Vancouver, however, didn't like McBarge and wasn't amenable to it staying there beyond the Expo term. So what we have is a company that acquired a 25-year lease from the Crown and clearly is going to be looking for compensation at this stage of the game. Maybe the minister can bring us up to date.

MR. MERCIER: Not necessarily so.

MR. WILLIAMS: Not necessarily so? Oh, we've got another expert there who used to be on the ill-fated Enterprise Corporation, but maybe he could help us. Maybe the minister could comment.

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the University golf course is still a Crown asset. It's not privatized, and the lease is a 30-year lease. It is assignable, but only with the government's approval and the return to the province of 8 percent of gross revenues.

MR. WILLIAMS: What percent?

HON. MR. PARKER: Eight percent.

The question on McBarge. We took that question as notice, and we'll provide a written answer to the House as we said we would.

On the University Endowment Lands, people must remember that it has not been privatized as the member opposite said. It remains a Crown asset, and it is a lease operation.

[ Page 11255 ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would just like to note that questions to the minister — or any minister — should be appropriately addressed through the Chair.

MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'd be glad to do that. The lease was, however, recently assigned again, I think, to offshore owners. Has the ministry followed up the value of the assignment?

HON. MR. PARKER: The operator is UGCC Holding Ltd. The sole proprietor is David Ho, and he lives here.

MR. WILLIAMS: Is it not a matter of interest in terms of the value of the assignment of this asset?

HON. MR. PARKER: Is the question one of general interest? Because sure, everyone's interested. Or is the member eventually going to get around to asking how much the person paid to somebody else? As soon as he's prepared to share with us the inner workings of his own businesses, I am sure we can share the inner workings of other people's businesses.

MR. WILLIAMS: That's all very well, but the reality is that these transactions are a reflection in economic terms of the under pricing of the asset by the Crown. It's as simple as that. When these assets that you lease out are traded to others and a huge capital amount is paid to the person that has the lease, Mr. Minister, that's a reflection of your undercharging for the asset in the first place. There are big lessons there. When you turn over urban real estate for 30 years....

Interjection.

MR. WILLIAMS: Did you say "bull" Mr. Minister? Would you like to get it on the record? Get up right now. Do you want to get up right now?

HON. MR. PARKER: I wasn't speaking.

MR. WILLIAMS: You were speaking.

HON. MR. PARKER: Was I? Are you sure?

MR. WILLIAMS: You damn well know you were.

Anyway, that's the point. The whole business of capitalized values in areas like this is a reflection of undercharging by the Crown. So the numbers are important and they are significant. If we've lost out on this one there's got to be a lesson for the next one. That's what we've been trying to say in terms of most of the transactions that have been undertaken during the Vander Zalm years — undercharging, undercharging, undercharging; future capital losses for the Crown. They're significant numbers and that should....

Wrong. In your simple world, yes.

We know that it's 8 percent of gross revenues, and as those gross revenues increase, that's something.

But clearly the capital number that Mr. Ho was willing to pay is a reflection of the inadequacy of your charges. You can get into some neat arguments around that, but it will give us a measure.

It's pretty clear the minister doesn't want to provide that information, if he has it. I would be interested to know simply if you have it.

HON. MR. PARKER: The member opposite knows that these types of leases are registered and that the transactions are subject to the property tax. Therefore the numbers are available to government. The 8 percent of gross revenue rate of lease is one of the highest charges in Canada, so the returns to the people of British Columbia are very substantial.

If one individual wishes to pay another individual a little bit or a substantial amount for a going concern, that's their business. Regardless, we get our 8 percent of gross revenue, which is a substantial return to the government, and we retain the assets.

MR. WILLIAMS: I'd like to thank the minister for the information he's provided us and the public with respect to annual Crown land sales by region. I think that's important and significant in terms of the public being aware and the Crown providing information that rightly should be public information.

I'd like to review just a few of them to get a little more background on them, if I might. It's a relative handful of them in the lower mainland. Maybe the minister and his staff could just give some additional background in terms of location and background of some of these sales.

I should say at the outset that I have no knowledge of them. These are not particularly leading questions; they're simply questions of fact or general information that I'm interested in.

One is Musqueam Holdings Co. Ltd. in Vancouver. It was a $3 million sale of 3.05 hectares. It is file No. 2403741, I don't know if off the top you have some background on that or not. It's a fairly significant sale. I'm totally unfamiliar with it myself.

I will go down the list. The other is in Langley and it is file 2403878, 30 hectares — $351,000. Another is Pleasantside Developments Ltd., Port Moody, 0.85 hectares — $180,900; Parklane Homes, Port Moody, file 2402831 — $1,568,000. Another one is Hi-Grove Holdings, Clearbrook, file 2402676. Another one is file 2400997, 11.55 hectares, residential sale for $45,000 on the Sunshine Coast. Another is Copper Beach Estates Ltd., Britannia Beach, file 2400164, an industrial sale for $15,800.

Anyway, I guess Hansard is going to have all this. I think that's the bulk of it. There's another one — 1.024 hectares, file 2403764, residential, $201,000, Surrey.

Maybe the minister would be familiar with the $3 million Musqueam Holdings one.

HON. MR. PARKER: That's a substantial request for technical information that we will obtain and return to the member in written form.

[ Page 11256 ]

MR. WILLIAMS: So that we'll get the legal description and that sort of thing, and the background of the sale?

HON. MR. PARKER: Yes, if you want it.

MR. WILLIAMS: Fine, thank you. You're personally not familiar with any of these, Mr. Minister?

HON. MR. PARKER: One or two ring a bell, but it wouldn't behoove the House to go on hearsay. It would be better to bring the technical information as requested by the member.

MR. WILLIAMS: On the McBarge one, I'm a little surprised that it's taking you so long and that now you're still talking about a written submission. Why is that, Mr. Minister?

HON. MR. PARKER: The member asked a question on a particular lease. We'll get him the details.

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Minister, when you're asked a question in question period and you take the question on notice, does that mean you never plan on giving an answer?

HON. MR. PARKER: When I was first elected, I took a look back in the records for 1972-75. Since I was appointed Forests minister, I thought I'd pay attention to how the Forests minister of the day behaved. You never did see answers. As a matter of fact, we never saw many occasions even with questions taken as notice. I thought that was appropriate; the member opposite never saw fit to answer questions, and probably we should reciprocate. But we will bring back answers to these questions, as we said we would. The House is still sitting. We'll submit the responses before the House rises.

[11:30]

MR. WILLIAMS: What you are really saying is that you are carrying on negotiations. Is that the case, Mr. Minister?

HON. MR. PARKER: I personally am not negotiating anything at present on McBarge. A response on the McBarge questions in the House at an earlier date will be brought to the House in a written form.

MR. WILLIAMS: I didn't mean to suggest that the minister was directly negotiating; that would really scare me. But I presume that his staff, who are his responsibility, are carrying out negotiations now.

I didn't hear the response. I guess the answer is yes, negotiations are underway. Clearly, the Crown is not living up to the obligations of the contract. Isn't that the case?

HON. MR. PARKER: Our staff are not negotiating on McBarge at this time.

MR. WILLIAMS: Does that mean it's been turned over to the Attorney-General's office?

HON. MR. PARKER: No.

MR. WILLIAMS: Other matters have been covered by my colleagues. The second member for Victoria has some questions with respect to housing that he might deal with.

MR. BLENCOE: As everyone knows, in the last few years the province has experienced, and continues to experience, considerable housing problems. Obviously, one of the key components of developing a housing strategy is available land. The past and current policy of the provincial government in terms of.... When it is dealing with the sale of Crown lands, it has thus far refused to look at setting aside or considering portions of Crown land for the affordable, non-profit component.

In my own community — for instance, Songhees — a majority of the land is being utilized for condominiums end extremely expensive housing. The point to be made is that land is owned by all British Columbians. I'd like to ask the minister this morning, because this question has come up a number of times.... The former Minister of Housing, who has just come into the House, stated some time ago that the government was working on a Crown land policy whereby certain portions of land, when they were put on the market...would try and facilitate housing for the non-profit, affordable, co-op sector.

Thus far, as far as I know, we haven't seen any policy. The current policy is to sell land at market plus. Of course, many British Columbians are shut out of the kind of housing that has been constructed on their land. I wonder if the government can tell us if they are coming forward with, or have put in place, a policy that would allow the non-profit sector, the affordable housing component, to participate and build housing that would be more in the affordable category.

HON. MR. PARKER: A portion of the Songhees development includes provision for the type of housing the member is inquiring about. Our job is to service the needs of the other ministries, including Social Services and Housing. We move to assist them in their programs to ensure the land base needed to make sure their programs succeed.

MR. BLENCOE: The minister is saying that there is something in place for the Songhees. Maybe the minister could outline exactly what he means by that, and whether that is just a site-specific policy or we have a general policy on Crown lands that are being sold off at the moment — trying to have a universal policy that would ensure that the affordable housing category is used for all Crown lands put on the market.

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the member knows that the use of the lands depends on local

[ Page 11257 ]

zoning. When the Ministry of Social Services and Housing has programs to service, we service them as they request. We do that through the cabinet process. The Social Services and Housing policies are supported by this ministry, which is a service agency. The member knows full well that the type of construction or the type of development on any land rests with the municipal authority through the zoning procedure.

MR. BLENCOE: I gather from the minister that there is no joint initiative from Crown Lands and Housing nor a policy to ensure that a portion of Crown lands is set aside for the non-profit affordable-housing category. This sounds like an ad hoc policy. I would suggest that one of the ways we could deal with the housing crisis is to have an innovative program where, when we're developing Crown land, 20 to 30 percent of that land is set aside — and not just on an ad hoc basis.

I'd ask the minister again: what portion of the Songhees land is being put aside for the affordable housing category?

HON. MR. PARKER: I can't give you a percentage right now, Mr. Chairman. We can probably work out the hectarage here over the next little while. The member knows full well.... He's just bleeding through his hat that there should be a program from Crown Lands. Crown Lands services the Housing ministry, and we service the Parks ministry and Transportation and Highways — all ministries. And at the direction of those ministries, we service the municipalities. In some cases, as he knows full well, on the direction of some MLAs there are Crown grants to those municipalities for things such as parks, libraries and fire halls. What takes place on a piece of ground in a municipality depends on the zoning; it depends on what that municipality is prepared to allow. We support the Housing ministry in its endeavours.

MR. BLENCOE: This is one of the basic reasons why we're having such problems in British Columbia today. Here's a minister who just sits in the background. He is the manager and the custodian of the biggest landholder in the province. If this ministry really got down to it, planned ahead and had some consistent policy, we could really start to resolve the housing crisis in the short and the long term.

We've got the crazy, ludicrous situation with the Expo lands. Because of a lack of policy, a lack of vision and a lack of foresight, we are going to have to buy back at inflated prices.... My colleague has shown what happened with that fiasco. The Crown is going to have to buy back land that we've sold off at a fire-sale price to ensure that British Columbians are affordably housed.

This is the very thing that we consistently ask for: some policy, some planning, some consistency, some connection between the Housing ministry and Crown Lands. This is the biggest landholder in the province of British Columbia, and we have no plan, no policy laid out.

I want to ask the minister: when are you going to get your act together? When are you going to work with the Housing minister? When are we going to see some plans for some affordable housing on Crown land, and not wait and hope and pray that the housing crisis will go away? Can we look forward to a program working with the Housing ministry for a major initiative for affordable housing on Crown land? Or are we going to continue to build condominiums, half-million-dollar housing that most British Columbians can't afford to buy? Yet their land is being used.... Over on Songhees we now have an enclave of high-priced housing that 95 percent of British Columbians cannot afford to purchase.

Can we look forward to some connected policy between you and the Minister of Housing to get a housing program on Crown lands, or are we going to continue avoid the issue, saying that planning and having a policy in this area is something you're opposed to?

HON. MR. PARKER: The member winds on and on, repeating himself. This ministry works with all ministries to make sure that they have the lands they need to carry out their programs.

I told the hon. member that there are lands on the Songhees development that are dedicated to social housing. There's just shy of 20 acres there.

It strikes me as odd. Here we are sitting on the Pacific Rim, and this community sees fit to use a seaport for residential land. It's an expense; it doesn't generate payroll. Most places are interested in having a solid industrial base, but then I guess the industrial base down here is government. It's quite an interesting community.

The member is all wrong, as usual, as is his colleague, about the Expo lands. They were sold on a worldwide tender, not a fire sale. The zoning requirements of that community point out what may take place, and the social housing commitment within the development by the developer is very substantial. The mayor and council of Vancouver will be the first to admit it.

Again they are just laying smoke, because there is no substance with this opposition.

MR. BLENCOE: We've gained national and international attention by what we've done with this government's policies on public land. My colleague and others have documented the giveaways, the fire sales, the lack of policy. I don't have to spell it out. We have land here, here and here in various communities. It seems to make sense that the Housing ministry and the Crown Lands ministry would try and put together some kind of program that would see us deal with the housing crisis in the province of British Columbia.

This government continues to blame local government for your problems. It doesn't sell. You continue to do that. This government just refuses to come up

[ Page 11258 ]

with innovative, concrete proposals and policy for developing housing on Crown land.

Does it make sense that the biggest landholder in the province would work with the Housing ministry and have some joint policy to develop housing? Maybe it doesn't make sense to this government. I guess it just doesn't make sense. But I think it's a scandal and a shame that this government refuses to come up with something.

All sorts of people have suggested ideas on how you could do it. We have some of the best, most talented non-profit affordable housing organizations in this country. They have years of experience. They're prepared to work with the government; they are prepared to work on task forces to develop housing on Crown land. Yet this government says: "Well, we just hope and pray that the private sector will bail us out of our problem." It's not good enough.

[11:45]

The policies thus far that we have seen for Crown land have sold this province short. This land belongs to all of the people of the province of British Columbia. I'd like to ask the minister again: are you developing any ideas for leasing land for the non-profit sector? Is there any concept for long-term leases so the non-profit sector can participate?

HON. MR. PARKER: Those central socialist governments across the pond are trying to drop this sort of thinking, and here they are still espousing it. They're way behind their colleagues. The member would impose his will, if he were government, on any of the communities: "Thou shalt have this housing in this spot." We don't think that's correct. We work in consultation with the communities and the regional districts, and we work in consultation with the other ministries. If Social Services and Housing determine that they need lands to lease or lands to sell, our job is to get it to them in the manner which they need to make their program successful.

MR. BLENCOE: Do you know what the sad part about all this is? This government is so cast in the past, so stuck in the old rhetoric and the old language, that it's prepared to see young British Columbian families and their children not see an innovative housing program that would see British Columbians housed. That's the sad part, Mr. Chairman. For sheer political gain — what they perceive to be political gain — with the old-line politics, they're prepared not to develop a policy.

This government controls and has in its hands so much land that if it could get its act together we could have a dramatic housing program in the province second to none in the country. But they are so steeped in the Fraser Institute, those crazies from the right-wing schools of thought, the Walter Blocks and the Michael Walkers, who continue to dominate this government's thinking.

It's time that British Columbian land be used for all British Columbians. All we're asking for is a policy and a program that would see this land used for affordable housing so that all British Columbians could benefit from their land. Yet this government and this minister use the old thirties and forties clichés that have gone out, that are finished. Quite frankly, this is the reason why British Columbians are fed up with this government. They are prepared to stay with that old rhetoric, that old defence, and see young British Columbians on the streets and families living in motels under totally unacceptable circumstances, because they can't move themselves to develop some affordable housing programs using the land that belongs to all British Columbians.

It's a shame. It's an absolute scandal what has happened with our land. This minister over there smiles and says: "Well, maybe we'll try to make some Brownie points at the expense of families in the province of British Columbia." People are fed up with that kind of language and that kind of defence. It's time we had a dynamic housing program where one ministry talks to another ministry and develops programs that British Columbians can be proud of in the housing category.

HON. MR. PARKER: The bleating of the member opposite is not the sort of thing you can leave unanswered. If things were as he says, we wouldn't have the influx of more than 60,000 people per year into British Columbia. We'd have a situation like we saw under their regime, where the outflow was substantial. No wonder there were vacancies. The reason we don't have vacancies is that people are flocking to British Columbia because we have the healthiest economy in the western world.

And who are the socialists of the world turning to for help? Who are they meeting internationally asking for help? It's the free enterprise nations. It's because those free enterprise nations recognize the value of the individual and individual initiative. What are the socialist nations doing today to try to cure their ills? They're turning to individual initiative.

I think we have the right recipe. If we didn't, we wouldn't be in the position that we're in today with such a strong economy. This province pays four cents for every 35 cents that the federal government pays in debt. This is the healthiest economy in Canada and probably one of the healthiest in the western world — and thank God we are, because that means that we can extend a hand to those where the socialist experiments have failed.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the second member for Victoria, I'd just like to state that we are allowing a fair amount of leniency in the debate; however, repetition does not lead to effectiveness of the debate. I'd just like to remind all members of the House of this matter.

MR. BLENCOE: There is the kind of statement and ideological positioning that British Columbians are so tired of. They are so tired of that rhetoric. They are so tired of that game-playing and the political postur-

[ Page 11259 ]

ing, using the thirties and forties rhetoric that does not solve problems in the province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. member. We are debating vote 15. I would like you to stay with the contents of vote 15.

MR. BLENCOE: The solutions for our problems in so many areas — in particular, housing — is what we're doing on this side: a program that uses the talents of the private and public sectors. This government relies totally on the private sector for everything. If the private sector is not doing it, then they say: "We'll abandon it." Most creative governments and jurisdictions rely on the talents of both sectors. We on this side of the House are working with both sectors to resolve the housing crisis. That's why we have suggested, and are working out with the private sector, a starter-home program. Young British Columbians, looking for their first home, can be helped by the talents and the initiatives of both the private and the public sectors. We refuse to get caught in the old fights and the old rhetoric. That no longer fits British Columbia. In housing, this government continues to use the old language and the old ways, and they clearly aren't working.

What is this government doing? How is this government using Crown land for starter homes for those young British Columbians who want a start and a reasonably priced home? We're working it out. We've suggested what can be done. There are ways to do it. Crown land is a key component of doing that, yet what we get back is the thirties and forties and ideological positioning and posturing that hasn't served this province well.

We want solutions. We want talent from both the public and the private sector. We don't want to play that silly game the minister wants to play — the old Fraser Institute ultra-right-wing language that continues to fester problems in British Columbia. We want to abandon that kind of language, and we want to work with the private sector, using the talents of the private and the public sectors.

What is the minister doing with the Minister of Housing (Hon. J. Jansen) to develop a starter-home program for young British Columbians using our Crown land — land that we all own? What's he doing for those buyers who want to buy their first home? Tell us what you are doing in that area.

HON. MR. PARKER: We are working closely, as always, with the Minister of Housing and his program — which you will probably see announced in the not-too-distant future.

MR. BLENCOE: How many starter homes have you started in the last year with the Minister of Housing?

Once again, we have shown this government has no vision for the future. It has no sense of what can be done with Crown land, working with the Ministry of Housing. It has no sense of what's needed. It has no long-range planning to resolve our problems. We say the talent exists in both the private and the public sectors to resolve these issues. We don't want to play that game of the language we have heard from the minister today — that old language that doesn't serve us well.

We have prepared and tabled our programs, and we're working with the private sector. When there is a cleansing in the province, and this government is out on the street where it deserves to be, then the people of British Columbia will be served well, they'll get housing they can afford and they'll get programs that are innovative and visionary. We'll clean house in British Columbia, but we won't get caught up in the Walter Blocks and the Michael Walkers and all that crazy language we continue to hear from this government. The people will have a government that listens and is prepared to use the resources that belong to the people of British Columbia to serve all British Columbians — not the friends of government and insiders, but all British Columbians — and to build housing that they can be proud of.

[Mr. Pelton in the chair.]

MR. WILLIAMS: I don't think I can top that.

I'm intrigued by the minister's statements. He didn't understand using seaports for residential land. I guess the minister meant Songhees over here. Is that it? That's obviously it, isn't it? You look across the harbour in Victoria, and you can't understand why it would be used for housing. It's that kind of profound capability that's part of the problem having you at the helm. How could anybody look at...? It was a derelict industrial slum managed by the Ministry of Lands. You liked it that way, Mr. Minister? That's it. You liked the derelict industrial slum. That made sense to your forester ideologue mind. The link between forestry and you is there purely in ideology, I'm afraid — as the member for Victoria says, yesterday's narrow, ultra-right-wing views that don't make any sense in today's world.

Clearly there's a need for some management; there's a clear need for management capability. The irony is that you people in the Social Credit cabinet bring so little to the table. As a result, you're kind of surrogates for a community that doesn't even need surrogates. It's quite amazing. The void — you and your void — has to be picked up by the civil service. The whole question of policy formulation is somewhere in between. There are no demands on the part of you people in cabinet in terms of any creative policy formulation. It just isn't there. You happen to be a forester who comes down from Terrace. Your understanding of the lower mainland housing problem is simply zip; it's zip minus.

There's a link between income, housing prices and the availability of housing. You don't seem to understand that link. Do you know what the average house price is in the lower mainland? It's about a quarter of a million dollars. Do you know what the average income is in the lower mainland? It's probably in the $30,000 to $40,000 range. That's the whole household

[ Page 11260 ]

income, at that. The norm is three times the annual income in terms of the capital cost of a house that people can afford. That ends up meaning that most people can't afford a house.

You happen to be the person responsible for public lands. The pattern in managing those is grossly inadequate. Earlier I raised the one in Maple Ridge — Fence-It Corp., Mr. Iyar. It sold for $650,000 or something like that, and it's 90 acres. That's the price of three houses in Maple Ridge these days: three houses — 90 acres. You sell it before the roads go in and before the zoning. Your staff can reach back in their files and justify the sale in terms of the traditional, bureaucratic form.

But the point is that you sold it before it was zoned. Nobody in the private sector would do that. You sell a piece of land. You depress the price when it's not zoned. You sell it before the road goes in that your colleagues are going to be building shortly. That depresses the price. No wonder you sell 90 acres and five acres of buildings for $650,000.

[12:00]

There's really a need for some kind of initiative at the ministerial level. The staff are doing their work in the traditional way, but it begs the question. That was unzoned land. Since then, I think it has gone through council in Maple Ridge, and it has been rezoned for industrial use. The rezoning automatically creates new value. So what was sold for $600,000 is probably worth $1.2 million with the industrial zoning. When you put the road in, it could be worth $5 million, and on we go. That doesn't make a lot of sense in terms of policy, but that's what you've done.

MR. BLENCOE: I don't think the light is switched on.

MR. WILLIAMS: Well, that really is a problem.

In that particular community at least, where there are still remaining Crown lands and where you're still selling them, I would hope that you would make some commitment to public hearings and to meeting with the mayor and the town council regarding those lands before you sell any more. It's a simple request and a reasonable idea. Can we at least have the commitment that there will be no more sales of those northern lands in Maple Ridge before there are meetings with the community?

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the sale of the land at Maple Ridge was done in consultation with local authority. The raw land was tendered, and the value will be added as enterprise makes things happen on that piece of raw land and as the servicing takes place.

The member alludes to highway construction through the property. The highway location is not final; it can go in a number of different locations. That's not established as yet. In the meantime, it was determined by government that the land would be offered for public sale. It was appraised by a private sector appraiser, and an upset price was put on it. It sold for more than that. The costs of servicing and developing that land lie in the private sector, and they will capitalize on it, as does every other developer, including the member who has been asking the questions. So the procedures have been fair, equitable and public.

MR. WILLIAMS: And what about the community, Mr. Minister? I wanted some commitment in terms of consultation with the community and working on a community plan before you sell any more land there. That's the commitment I'm looking for.

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I don't know how many times we have to tell this man, but the staff of this ministry meets regularly with the mayor and council, other elected officials and the staff of those municipalities. It has taken place, it is taking place and it will take place. We don't impose upon them, we work with them in their planning process and their objectives. That's why, for example, the Quarry Road property was offered.

MR. WILLIAMS: In the particular case of Fence-It Corp., the municipality was interested in the site for a municipal works yard. In this particular situation, we had a five-acre.... The old Pacific Vocational Institute buildings were sold with the 90 acres for the $650,000 — five acres of buildings. Adjacent to the five acres of buildings and the 90 acres of land was a diesel engine repair facility that was added to the old vocational institute. It was a new facility that probably cost a couple of million dollars to build. That facility alone, which was virtually new, would have housed the municipal works facility for Maple Ridge.

Instead, the community now is spending more than a $1 million for a new works yard. That doesn't make any sense. If you people had really been in gear, you would have worked it out with the municipality and saved the taxpayers money. That building would be the municipal works yard now, and Mr. Iyar wouldn't be down picking up money In South Africa to pick up his fire-sale project.

HON. MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the member is wrong again. The municipality did not approach the ministry until after it was a done deal, so his information is wrong.

MR. WILLIAMS: Oh, the minister doesn't know anything. That's the dilemma we have in dealing.... There was an ongoing consultation with the municipality. Your staff did not do their homework, I'm sorry to say. The municipality said, "You've got to look at the gravel question in here," because your staff wanted to sell more than the 90 acres. As a result of that initial consultation, you avoided a total disaster and came up with a 50 percent disaster. The super-valuable gravel land, which your people were not acute enough to deal with in the first place, was cut out of the sale. It was only through consultation with the municipality that it happened. When the municipality indicated their interest in the site, they were told it was too late.

[ Page 11261 ]

It's because you don't do a real planning process and because your mandate is just to flog land that we've got the problem. It requires some management — management, management, management — which you people are totally incapable of. That's why you got demoted from Forests, which is as important as it is. Now you've been put in this junior ministry, and that's being flubbed in a grand way as well. The next step is out the door.

Vote 15 approved.

Vote 16: ministry operations, $37,646,688 — approved.

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

The House resumed; Mr. Pelton in the chair,

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

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Speaker, I call committee on Bill 31.

HEALTH PROFESSIONS ACT

The House in committee on Bill 31; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

On section 1.

MR. PERRY: Mr. Chairman, I made all of my comments about this bill during second reading.

Sections 1 to 57 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

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

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

Bill 31, Health Professions Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I call committee on Bill 43.

COMMUNITY CARE FACILITY
AMENDMENT ACT, 1990

The House in committee on Bill 43; Mr. Vant in the chair.

On section 1.

MR. PERRY: May I ask the minister whether the ministry is planning to hire additional inspectors to ensure the standards of facilities provided for under section 1? How does it plans to accomplish the goal of this section?

HON. J. JANSEN: Mr. Chairman, we have hired quite a number of additional positions for the community health side, and we are creating a new position which will deal specifically with inspection of these types of facilities.

Sections 1 to 13 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

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

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Pelton in the chair,

Bill 43, Community Care Facility Amendment Act, 1990, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

[12:15]

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Speaker, I call committee on Bill 61.

HEALTH STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 1990

The House in committee on Bill 61; Mr. Vant in the chair.

Sections 1 to 3 inclusive approved.

On section 4.

MR. PERRY: I'd like to ask the minister whether he has contemplated regulations to prescribe the names and boundaries of the dental electoral districts — for example, whether he will be distinguishing between Upper and Lower Bicuspid, where the present district of Nakusp will reside in the regulations; whether Upper and Lower Molar will be represented; and whether the District of Central Orthodontia, which has been variously attributed by National Geographic, the Times of London atlas, the New York Times atlas and that of the Central Intelligence Agency to different countries, let alone different mouths.... Has he contemplated how his officials are going to deal with the regulatory aspects of this section?

HON. J. JANSEN: No, Mr. Chairman. We have not yet extracted that, nor do we intend to implant those types of electoral districts as a reference.

[ Page 11262 ]

MR. PERRY: This is a typical example of Social Credit incompetence. Although I hesitate to suggest that it reflects badly on his ministerial officials, I would have expected, because of the lengthy period that this bill stood before the House, a somewhat ampler response — but I'll let it pass. The opposition will support this section regardless of our concerns.

Sections 4 to 30 inclusive approved.

On section 31.

MR. PERRY: I have more serious concerns about section 31, which I'll raise briefly. Again, I acknowledge the courtesy of the minister and assistance of his officials in discussing this issue with me, and also Mr Clements of the Attorney-General ministry.

This section, in effect, purports to formally recognize a status which has existed for a hundred years or more for a group of lay practitioners who provide comfort and care to members of the Christian Science faith who eschew conventional medical treatment. What concerns me is that the act formally proposes to convey the title "nurse," even though qualified by the terms "Christian Science nurse" and even though the act is carefully structured to ensure that only the title "Christian Science nurse" shall be used.

My concern is really for the public safety. I have no problems with the right of the competent adult to choose not to be treated by conventional medical or nursing treatment; that is clearly a human right which all of us respect. What concerns me more is the protection for the adult who becomes incompetent in the technical sense, or who develops acute illness which would normally require the attention of a nurse or a physician and who may find him or herself in circumstances where such a patient is attended only by a "Christian Science nurse" under the terms of this act.

I've not been able to satisfy myself that any professional obligation such as those which normally accrue to nurses and physicians resides under any established body of ethics with Christian Science nurses. I will give two or three examples of my concern. I don't know to what extent this will become a practical problem in British Columbia, but I'd like to raise the issue for the record and to register my concern that this may inadvertently set an unfortunate precedent.

Imagine a patient in a Christian Science health facility attended at the patient's own choice by a Christian Science nurse under the terms of this act. Imagine that the patient develops reactivated tuberculosis, which is a direct threat to the health of other patients in the facility and to the community at large. Normally, professional obligation, through codes of ethics and professional practice, on a nurse under the terms of the Nurses (Registered) Act or the Nurses (Psychiatric) Act would require that, for example, a patient with a fever and a productive cough, or a patient coughing blood, should automatically be referred to medical attention.

I've not been able to satisfy myself by consultation with the ministry staff, with the representative of the Attorney-General ministry or with the Registered Nurses' Association of B.C. that any such professional obligation clearly resides in the practice of Christian Science nurses. In fact, quite the contrary might be the case: the competent patient in such a situation might be expected to remain unattended by conventional nursing or medical practice. Therefore theoretically the potential arises to violate the public health act and to violate public health and safety.

Another example would be recent episodes of epidemic: often fatal diarrhea caused by the organism E.coli, a particular strain of which is a relatively common epidemic in nursing homes. There was an episode a few years ago in London, Ontario, in which a large number of patients died as a result of an epidemic possibly caused in the first instance by food, but later spread from patient to patient. I'm not sure what security exists in Christian Science health facilities to ensure that patients in a situation like that would be protected.

A third practical example is a patient who has resided in a Christian Science facility and derived great comfort and solace from the care of these practitioners, and who develops an acute illness which may be very painful or even life-threatening, such as a ruptured appendix or similar abdominal crisis. What assurance is there in the code of ethics of the Christian Science practitioner — now to be called a Christian Science nurse — that such a patient will be attended in a way that will relieve their pain and serve their best interests within the constraints of their conscience?

I have raised these questions with the ministry. My concern is that the act confers a legal status where for historical reasons one might sympathize with the practitioner, but where for good public interest reasons it may be a dangerous precedent. I'd like to hear the minister's response. Having said that, I will neither support nor oppose this section.

HON. J. JANSEN: The member has valid concerns. But he should be aware that the situation he talks about existed prior to this legislation for quite a number of years — much before our coming into this world. It was in place up until 1988, before the act was changed, which inadvertently left out of the act the recognition of the Christian Science nurse as a nurse. This is acknowledged by the RNABC.

I should point out, as he's also aware, that in cases of reportable communicable diseases, there is a statutory obligation to report. But also there is a distinction here that should be made between a practitioner and a Christian Science nurse. They are not the same people. The Christian Science nurse is there to assist and is not a practitioner in the primary sense.

I should also indicate that wayside houses in Victoria, for example, are government-licensed, nonmedical facilities, licensed under the Hospital Act, and they present personal-care beds.

It's hard, really, to respond to some of these situations and speculate on what the outfall would

[ Page 11263 ]

be, except to say that we really haven't changed any procedures. All we're doing is simply incorporating a commitment that was made some time ago and living up to that commitment now.

MR. PERRY: One other brief question. What would, in effect, protect the patient and the public from the situation in which, in a Christian Science facility, that patient or individual is isolated from the rest of society, where a communicable disease has a reasonable chance of being detected? Of course, people with active tuberculosis often go months before they're detected even in general society, but at least there is the potential for contact with a traditional health professional who has the obligation to respond professionally to the symptoms and signs of the illness. What guarantees society and the individual in that facility the same potential access to that service?

It strikes me that they're in an anomalous situation — of their own choosing, naturally — in which they are isolated from all of those services by the very nature of their confinement in the facility. I emphasize again that I don't question the right of individuals to choose that for themselves. The important issues are their protection should circumstances change their mind and the protection of the broader society. Maybe the minister or his staff can contemplate measures or take this as notice for the need to examine measures which could address those issues.

HON. J. JANSEN: I should indicate, first of all, that patients going into these facilities do so of their own volition. The facilities that they go into are licensed, as I indicated before, under the Community Care Facility Act as well as the Hospital Act. So they are inspected on a regular basis. There isn't a sense of isolation. Also, I would point out that where there is a concern, an indication or a reasonable suggestion that a communicable disease exists, there is a statutory obligation to report it, regardless of who the person is. So I think those three elements do meet some of the concerns that the hon. member has indicated.

[12:30]

Sections 31 to 42 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

HON. J. JANSEN: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

Bill 61, Health Statutes Amendment Act, 1990, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. Mr. Richmond moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:32 p.m.