1992 Legislative Session: 1st Session, 35th Parliament
HANSARD
(Hansard)
FRIDAY, MARCH 20, 1992
Morning Sitting
Volume 1, Number 5
[ Page 65 ]
The House met at 10:05 a.m.
Prayers.
F. Garden: It gives me great pleasure to recognize somebody in the gallery today that I've known for many years and I'm sure is familiar to people in this Legislature. A little story about this individual is that many years ago he and I fought for a federal nomination. He won. But for the grace of God the roles might have been reversed. I'd like the House to join me in welcoming Ray Skelly and his guests in the gallery.
J. Pullinger: Merci, Madame la présidente. Aujourd'hui, a me fait grand plaisir d'introduire une délégation de Montmagny, Québec. Montmagny est la ville soeur de la ville de Duncan dans ma circonscription électorale.
I would like to introduce a delegation from Momenay, Quebec, which is the sister city of Duncan, in my riding.
Je vous en prie de me joindre en accueillant � la Colombie-Britannique et dans l'assemblée législative le maire, Gilbert Normand; Clément Gaudreau; Yves Veilleux; Réal Gauvin, qui est le MNA; Jacques Beaudet, artiste; le révérend Jacques Simard; Normand Morin; Jean Alain Lemieux; et Jean-Guy Desgagné. Je voudrais que vous les accueillissez avec moi.
D. Jarvis: Members, I would like you to give a warm welcome to two gentlemen from North Vancouver, Mr. Bill Ahearne and Mr. Joe Brown, who are two of the many unemployed Versatile Pacific Shipyard workers that are outside demonstrating about this government's way of handling them. Give them a hand.
J. Pullinger: Désolée, my apologies. I forgot to introduce the mayor of Duncan, Mike Coleman, and the city administrator, Paul Douville.
L. Reid: I would like to ask the House to welcome Lori Lipchuk, who is visiting this morning from the riding of Delta.
Hon. R. Blencoe: I would like the House to welcome my son this morning. He is either in the gallery or in my office. It's spring break. Like many young people, he forgot that he had a project due Monday. He's working diligently, and I hope he's going to be using our library. Would the House please welcome my son today.
F. Jackson: Hon. Speaker, like most members of this House, in my endeavours to come into this chamber I've been supported by someone who is very near and dear to me. I would like to ask members of this House to join me today in welcoming my wife, Nanette.
J. Beattie: I would like to welcome my daughter Carmen Beattie, who is here on her spring break as well. I would like to remind the hon. Member for Okanagan-Boundary that he has a date with her at 10:15 for an interview for a school project.
ABORTION SERVICES
Hon. E. Cull: I would like to make a statement to the House on a matter of urgent and pressing importance regarding British Columbia women's right to choose.
I'm happy to announce today a number of new measures which will improve women's access to contraception and abortion services. These measures include new regulations to ensure regional access to abortion services, funding support for two women's clinics in Vancouver, funding for education and information programs and a task force on contraception and abortion.
Hon. Speaker, in keeping with this government's longstanding commitment to a woman's right to choose, new regulations have been introduced under the Hospital Act and the Hospital Insurance Act to ensure that women in every area of the province are able to choose hospital abortions.
I would also like to tell the House that abortion services in the lower mainland will be enhanced through funding support to clinics that currently provide these services. Everywoman's Health Centre and the Elizabeth Bagshaw Women's Clinic will receive approximately $1 million in funding on a sliding scale as women choose to access their services. I'd like to take this moment just to give credit to those women in these clinics who pioneered these services in very difficult times.
Hon. Speaker, access to abortion is only one aspect of women's reproductive health. Education, counselling and contraception are all important to a woman's health, and in recognition of the immediate need to make women more aware of contraception and abortion services available to them, this government is prepared to provide $300,000 in funding to enhance birth control information and education initiatives.
In addition, we are establishing a task force on access to contraception and abortion, and we will be looking at how the barriers to these services can be removed throughout the province, taking into consideration geographic, economic, cultural and age-related concerns. The task force will be made up of women and men who are familiar with women's health issues and will report to me by the end of August 1992.
Hon. Speaker, starting today in British Columbia, women's choices will be respected -- not judged.
These new initiatives will ensure that women have access to counselling and abortion services no matter where they live. Through the efforts of the task force, barriers to reproductive choice will be identified and, where possible, removed.
L. Reid: Madam Minister, I would commend you on this initiative. I think it is a good start. There are many things we need to do, and the first thing we need to do
[ Page 66 ]
as legislators is be committed to bringing forward these initiatives to debate in the House.
This is a costly initiative. I would hope that in future this is debated. I'm not clear, in terms of your statement, if indeed this is $1 million for each of those centres or $1 million combined. That deserves some debate. That deserves serious consideration. There's a process we need to address as legislators. That has been overlooked this morning. Not to take away from the intent of this -- I think it's well done.
I would hope, during my time in this House, to bring forward a measure that looks at freely elected hospital boards, because it's time. Actually, I would quote from something that was written in 1981 by NDP MLA Dennis Cocke. He told the Legislature that we're going to have to start thinking in terms of electing people at large to hospital boards. That's the direction we want to go in. This is an interesting first step. I would commend you on having taken it this morning. I would prefer consultation in future.
[10:15]
TRANSPORTATION
W. Hartley: Hon. Speaker, the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows constituency is located upriver from New Westminster, east of the Pitt River and on the north shore of the Fraser River. It sits at the base of the Golden Ears mountains. The area has several natural, unique attractions, such as Alouette Lake, the north and south Alouette, the Pitt and Fraser Rivers, the Pitt Meadows dikes and wildlife habitat, Golden Ears Provincial Park and Kanaka Creek Regional Park.
In my first speech to the Legislature next week, I will talk further about the many positive attributes of my constituency and of the people that live there. For now, let me just say that when people have once lived in Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows they seldom desire to live elsewhere. In addition to the quality of life, Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows offer some of the best and most affordable residential property in the lower mainland. Maple Ridge has large tracts of land available for both housing and industry without encroaching on the agricultural land reserve. Thus urban planners, developers and municipal politicians see the area as a natural place for further urban development. The adopted official community development plans reflect that view.
Consequently people have been moving to Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows in great numbers. There has been a phenomenal growth rate of 7 percent per year over the past several years, the highest sustained growth rate in the province. Unfortunately, the residential growth was not accompanied by the economic development needed to provide local jobs. Over 50 percent of the working population of Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows commutes to work each day; they commute into greater Vancouver. At last count, 60,000 cars cross over the Pitt River Bridge each day. We are now at maximum use of that bridge, and at maximum use of the roads that lead up to and away from it, far above their rated capacity. In Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows we are facing traffic gridlock unless immediate steps are taken to relieve the traffic congestion, and in doing so relieve the unacceptable degree of frustration our commuters must face each day.
As the MLA for Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows, my main goal is to increase employment opportunities in my communities to attract additional industry that will provide local jobs. Local employment will give commuters an alternative to the hours of frustration of driving to and fro to work each day. Unfortunately, industry and commerce are reluctant to take advantage of the lower-priced, fully-serviced industrial land east of the Pitt River Bridge. The lack of adequate transportation links to the greater Vancouver region is seen as a real disadvantage to locating companies in Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows. So the problem is twofold: on one hand, commuters are facing near-gridlock traffic; and on the other hand, the local economy is stifled by the lack of access to markets.
Hon. Speaker, I know the hon. Minister of Transportation and Highways is aware of the serious traffic situation in Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows. The minister voluntarily attended a public meeting on transportation in Maple Ridge just three weeks ago. I wish to thank him again for attending that meeting that was organized by the community group Gridlock. The minister delivered the straight goods in regard to the financial situation that we have inherited from the previous administration. I know the minister is working hard towards a solution to our near-gridlock traffic situation.
Hon. Speaker, at that public meeting on transportation a great emphasis was placed on public transit as a necessary and workable solution to our transportation problem. The people of Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows need to hear that there is some action planned to address their priority, that there will be relief in the near future and that steps are being taken for the long-term transportation needs as well.
D. Symons: Hon. Speaker, I too share the concerns of the member for Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows. As a matter of fact, his rather vague outline of what he was going to speak about today -- transportation -- led me to believe that he would be speaking on the very issue he spoke of. The need for expansion of rapid transit in the lower mainland is obvious to us all. We have, as he mentioned, close to gridlock on Highway 1 and the Lougheed Highway.
Hon. Speaker, the people of the Pitt Meadows and Coquitlam areas and those in Richmond -- my riding -- need a fast, convenient and cost-effective rapid transit system. What we have to do, however, is make sure that people understand that rapid transit is not the large expense it appears to be from a superficial glance. People often do not take into account what is spent on the highways that are now the alternative to rapid transit. For instance, huge sums of money were needed for the building of the Cassiar connector. If we can get people out of their cars and into rapid transit, we will not need as much money for highways. Therefore, rapid transit does not have the huge expense often associated with it.
[ Page 67 ]
Long-term regional planning is needed, and it's something that previous governments have not provided. I hope the current government will do that. We need major input for this from regional districts. The meeting sponsored by the district of Maple Ridge and the community group Gridlock is the way to go. I am pleased that the Minister of Transportation attended that meeting. It is too bad that the Minister missed the meeting of the Association of Vancouver Island Municipalities meeting in Campbell River last week. He would have heard there the concerns of those people about the Island Highway.
The problem with rapid transit and highways is not located just in Pitt Meadows and Maple Ridge. The Okanagan is another area of rapid growth, and that area too needs long-term regional transportation planning. Now is the time to set in place plans for a second crossing of Okanagan Lake and the bypass route needed through Kelowna. It would have been better if the property acquisition had been done a decade ago.
We have to be careful that we maintain the infrastructure of our highways. Recent government reports have indicated the need, nay the absolute necessity, of not reducing regular preventive maintenance. I have concerns that the government might be considering cuts in the Transportation and Highways ministry budgets as a means of reducing the deficit. Any reduction in maintenance is not cost-effective. It has been shown over and over again that cuts in maintenance only produce higher costs -- more than that saved from the cuts -- in the future reconstruction necessitated by allowing roads and highways to deteriorate. I hope that this government would not go that route.
Hon. G. Clark: I notice there's a minute or two left in the time allowed for members' statements, to respond to the member for Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows, so I'll take the opportunity to consume the remaining couple of minutes.
I very much appreciate the member's statement in the House. It's clearly a great concern to this government that we provide the kinds of infrastructure required to service growing communities like Maple Ridge. I might say that it's our intent, as government, not to act in a crass, political manner to make decisions, as the previous government did. Rather we will look at an objective strategy to provide transit funding where it's most appropriate.
We will be engaging in a review of this whole question of rapid transit funding to look at areas of priority. Richmond clearly has concerns, and the northeast corner has concerns. We want to make a rational judgment as to where to proceed first. It is absolutely clear to everybody that we need to look again at a commuter rail along the waterfront. We need to look again at routes for rapid transit to both Richmond and the Coquitlam and Maple Ridge area. Decisions were made by the government in the past which we are now revisiting, so that there are no more constraints with respect to SkyTrain technology or whether particular routes are determined politically. We want to take a fresh review of this.
I appreciate the opposition's concerns about the question of rehabilitation budgets for highways. I appreciate that that will be discussed next week. And, of course, you will have a chance to debate the Minister of Highways' estimates.
It is true that the fundamental decisions that clearly have to made by governments are to move in the directions of rapid transit and high-occupancy vehicle lanes, to get people out of cars and into transportation and to provide that kind of infrastructure. It's important that governments not take a very short time-horizon and limit their vision to this year's budget problems and use that as an excuse to cut the kinds of long-term investments we need in our infrastructure to provide efficient rapid transit and bus service to our communities.
I can tell the member that this government is very much aware of the pressing needs of the communities of Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, Coquitlam and the northeast corner, which have clearly been underserviced and underserved by past government decisions in this area. I want you to know that we're very concerned about that. We do have very tough fiscal constraints. We're working within those, because we are committed to living within the means of British Columbians. But even within that, we know that we have to take as much action as is possible to address the kinds of serious concerns that the people of Maple Ridge have. I know that in the election campaign this party very clearly took strong views in that area. I know the members from those communities are actively lobbying and advocating on behalf of their constituents. We hear you. We do have tough fiscal concerns, but we're working to accomplish it.
W. Hartley: In response to the hon. Minister of Finance, I wish to thank him sincerely for his honest and forthright reply to me today. On behalf of my constituents, I wish to thank our government for giving its attention to their transit priority.
I also thank the member for Richmond Centre for his remarks and understanding of the seriousness of the traffic situation in Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows. I'm sure that any member who drives through that constituency is aware of it as well.
Today the hon. Minister of Finance has given me some hope and confidence that the horrendous traffic problems of Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows will be addressed sooner rather than later, before gridlock sets in. I have that confidence because I know our government is making decisions for the future and that people's priorities do come first.
[10:30]
ISLAND HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS
C. Tanner: I would like to address the House this morning on the state of the highway, or what calls itself a highway, on Vancouver Island.
The recent meeting of the Association of Vancouver Island Municipalities in Campbell River was remarkable in one particular aspect: in spite of having the Premier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the
[ Page 68 ]
Attorney General, who represents North Island, address the assembled mayors and aldermen, there was practically no mention of the Island Highway. Unfortunately, the Minister of Highways chose not to attend that meeting.
It was my unfortunate experience to drive the highway to Campbell River last weekend, and I experienced bottlenecks and delays in Parksville, Qualicum, Nanaimo and Campbell River, to name just a few. A trip that should on a reasonable road take approximately three hours today takes four and a half -- with luck. The luck is required to negotiate the dangerous curves, the blind corners, the narrow, twisting roadway and the poor surface.
A study instituted by the municipalities of Vancouver Island unanimously recommended the upgrading of the highway four years ago. A small start has been made south of Duncan, and some small upgrading has been done here and there above and beyond Nanaimo. The mayors, aldermen and members that made up those committees are people of all political stripes. They have all, without exception, pressed this and the previous government to bring this Island Highway to at least the same standard that highways on the mainland enjoy.
Transportation has always proven to be vital in this province for the movement of goods and people. The goods are the products of our forests, mines and mills, both pulp and lumber. The people are the residents of this Island and, perhaps even more importantly, the millions of tourists who enjoy vacations on this Island.
Madam Speaker, do the ministers in this government talk to each other or to themselves? How can the Minister of Highways make decisions in isolation without communication to the Minister of Tourism, the Minister of Energy and the Minister of Forests -- or even perhaps the Minister of Finance? Is this cabinet process in action? Could it be that the government, after five months, has not yet found out how the system works?
This government has found many excuses why it cannot spend money, and it has given this House a wishy-washy plan to look after some social ills, but this province requires the generation of wealth before money can be spent. Tourism on this Island accounts for a billion dollars in revenue. It creates thousands of jobs. How is this government intending to implement the solution of even the simplest problems if it does invest in the infrastructure of this province and in this Island?
Ninety percent of all visitors arrive on Vancouver Island by car, camper or bus. We are experiencing an increasing number of visitors from Europe, especially from Germany, which enjoys some of the best roads in Europe. More of our tourists are expressing an interest in outdoor adventure and recreational activities. More of our tourists are seniors and retired people. Many are members of our own province. Has this government turned its back on the tourist industry? Has this government given up on the movement of goods and services? Has this government surrendered its responsibility to government with complacency and a shrug of the shoulder?
I urge the members across the aisle, both government seats and backbenchers, particularly the 12 members who represent this Island, to stand up and be recognized as supporting a very necessary Island Highway.
Hon. D. Marzari: I am pleased, Madam Speaker, to redress this issue of upgrading the Island Highway and the subsequent benefits for tourism development for all our Island communities. On June 5, 1986, it was Karen Sanford who sat on your side and called for an inland highway to be constructed immediately. In fact, she said: "Once the last cow path has been paved in the last Social Credit riding, is there a chance we Islanders can expect some consideration?"
The NDP has long supported construction of the Island Highway and has made that clear time after time in this House -- not only for tourism but for the safety of the residents of this Island. To hit tourism as the only reason for building the Island Highway perhaps is not appropriate. In fact, tourism would more likely respond to a slow path up the Island. Tourists who want to go to Sooke would then stop in Victoria, go to Duncan and then see the murals in Chemainus and move on to Nanaimo and upwards to Parksville. It is for the safety of the residents of the Island and for their convenience that we must address the Island Highway issue. It will also, of course, impact well for tourists, as tourists can then move through the regions of the Island and travel to Campbell River and farther north with more convenience. That is very important.
You have to understand, though -- and the budget will be spelling this out -- that the government does have fiscal constraints, and we will be measuring those fiscal constraints against the large capital expenditure of the Island Highway over the next few years. We have two ingredients on this side of the House that have not been around for a long while. One is political commitment and political will, and the other is a stable, fine Ministry of Highways headed by a minister who understands the balance between fiscal constraint and capital construction. Hopefully we will not see five Ministers of Highways over 54 months, as we witnessed in the last few years.
More important to the issue of what we do with tourists when they get here is the issue of getting tourists onto the Island in the first place. I would put to the opposition the question of whether or not they consider the highway not in asphalt terms as it travels northward from Victoria but the highway to the south, which is a water highway. This is a highway which in the past has brought over a million tourists a year to the Island; a highway which did not function last year; a highway which this government would very much like to see function in the coming years. I would ask if the opposition would consider the possibility of a ferry service to Seattle and what the opposition might be willing to think about in terms of concessions that might have to be made in order to provide this service. If we're talking about tourism, that is the real highway we must discuss here, because that is where $20 million a year is brought into the south Island tourism econ-
[ Page 69 ]
omy. That is a major generator that the opposition might want to think through.
Once the tourists are here, we know where they can go and what they can do. The existing highway is not bad for tourism; it's bad for the residents of the Island. If we're going to talk about the Island Highway in economic development terms, we must ask what we must do to connect the Island to the south and connect it better to the east.
The Speaker: Hon. members, there perhaps has been confusion on the use of the timing for the private members' statements thus far. We will try to work this out with Hansard and with the buttons so that it does not continue to confuse members.
C. Tanner: Such a pathetic response I can't believe. I'm not sure whether the member opposite wants them to row up the coast or walk up the highway. What nonsense! They talk about fiscal response and fiscal excuses. We don't need quotes from the past; we need answers for the future.
I've listened to the excuses and the no-action words from the members of the government. Let me state quite clearly that the towns, municipalities, villages and cities of this Island need a good, workable and reliable highway. It's the members in this House who represent the other 12 constituencies on this Island who have not got the courage to be counted and who won't talk their own government.
Perhaps they will be in attendance at the next meeting of the Association of Vancouver Island Municipalities to explain their lack of action, their non-fulfilment of campaign promises and the total lack of understanding of the needs of their constituents. I was there, my leader was there and our Highways critic was there, as were three other members of our caucus. Where were the members opposite?
Let me tell you how this government has so quickly gotten the affairs of the province backwards. It's very simple. You should be able to understand. Before you spend, you earn, and before you earn, you invest. Most people understand that; it's probably foreign to people over there. We need an investment now in the Vancouver Island highway system. Please, let's get started on it.
BREAKOPEN LOTTERY TICKETS
K. Jones: Hon. Speaker, I rise today under private members' statements to draw the attention of this Legislature to the serious problems caused by the government's abrupt elimination of the B.C. Lottery Corporation's breakout ticket program, a source of funding to hundreds of charitable needs throughout this province. We are talking about approximately $10 million in potential lost revenues to our communities. With your leave, I will quote from a letter to the attention of the Minister of Government Services, dated March 12, 1992, from the B.C. Paraplegic Association, Vancouver Island South Region. It reads in part:
"As an organization, we embarked on this program, by investing manpower and buying equipment, as a long-term commitment to raising funds to assist persons with physical disabilities living in the southern Vancouver Island area.
"We feel that BCPA and these societies, who now are about to be dumped, have invested a large amount of time, energy and dollars into putting this program on the map. The B.C. Paraplegic Association has provided, at great expense, vending machines and promotions that have encouraged many vendors to come on board, and are responsible to a great extent for making this program the success that it is.
"Changes to the formula of this program would mean cutbacks to BCPA and other organizations who not only supply a significant workforce, but who also utilize a vast volunteer network in the delivery of this service. The net effect would create a void of such services that the ministries would be hard pressed to pick up."
I would also like to quote briefly from a letter from the Mt. Cheam Lions Club of Chilliwack. It reads:
"Various service organizations have purchased machines valued at $5,000 that dispense the breakopen tickets. The majority of organizations also invest a very large amount of time restocking, repairing and monitoring the operation of these machines. Some machines require attention seven days a week. Unlike Lotto 6/49, B.C. 49, Lotto B.C., the Provincial and the Scratch and Win, funds raised by the breakopen tickets generally stay within the community where they are raised" -- and are used to benefit those within the community where they are raised.
"There is generally no lengthy bureaucratic process for a person to go through to obtain funds from these service organizations. Generally, the persons benefiting from this fund-raising activity do not have the expertise nor the financial background to access funds raised through the other lotteries mentioned. In short, the persons benefiting from the breakopen tickets are the 'little people,' people who have fallen through the cracks. Persons who need $250 for a hearing-aid or eyeglasses and fall outside all other normally accepted parameters are able to make representation to the service organizations as best they know how for funding. The service organizations generally pick up the ball and run with it, investigating each situation on its merits, and where no other means are available, they provide the funding from the proceeds of the breakopen tickets."
[10:45]
Many organizations have expressed their concerns to us. Problems with the new guideline requesting greater community good is that some of the examples that follow may well be out of luck: a digital hearing-aid for a child in Chilliwack; orthopedic shoes for a child from the same community; a tilt bed for a disabled person with MS.
In summary to the minister, there is no attempt at embarrassment here today in raising this matter. However, this whole question needs greater involvement by more members of the assembly in seeking a better way for many of our citizens assisted by this form of fund-raising. Lotteries are a form of hidden tax, but in this case the breakopen program has been serving a very useful function that has been working -- and providing a new source of funds otherwise unavailable for those in need.
The government -- and I am the first to acknowledge that the new minister was thrown a tough problem
[ Page 70 ]
here -- has created new guidelines under the moratorium. In future, proof will be required that recipients of funds serve broader community needs rather than individual needs -- thereby possibly overlooking hundreds of individual needy recipients and a major source of funding to meet their special needs.
We also acknowledge and applaud the work of the auditor general's staff in identifying the illegal procedure and calling for correction of the violation of the Lottery Corporation Act. I also recognize that the minister took action when she was made aware of the problem by the Attorney General. However, we in the opposition also feel that the government acted too swiftly in this matter, and perhaps with very little consultation with the groups and individuals that would be affected. Given the numbers of charities inconvenienced by this move, we are suggesting some authority be given to a select standing committee of this House to immediately review concerns and provide non-partisan advice to the government on how best to proceed following this recent cancellation of the breakopen program.
Hon. Speaker, I would like to suggest that consideration be given to a process that would flow 100 percent of the 12 percent charitable portion of this lottery back to the community group licensees whose support makes this lottery possible. This could be done by flowing the funds through the lottery commission and back to the community groups via the ministry grants program.
Hon. L. Boone: I must preface my remarks here by saying that this was not an easy decision, and it's not one that my ministry or the staff took lightly. It was one that we sweated over a great deal in trying to come up with a solution that we thought was equitable to the people of B.C.
I appreciate being given this opportunity to explain again the government's position on this matter. It is important to many community groups. You're right: there are very worthwhile groups out there that have been affected by this. The program directing some of the proceeds from the breakopen tickets from the Lottery Corporation to community groups began in 1988. Approximately 750 groups were involved, and they shared approximately $9 million in the 1991-92 fiscal year. This program was not like any other lottery program in that the dollars were directed from the Lottery Corporation rather than through the government lottery fund.
This year the auditor general pointed out that the corporation had no authority to do this, and we acted, as you know, to put a moratorium on that. We looked at the matter in depth to try to figure out any alternative way to fund this. It just did not seem an appropriate way to do it. Too many things were wrong with the program to allow us to do that.
First of all, the amount of money that was being made by the community group was determined not by any determined need, or by the cost of specific projects, but on the success of that particular group in selling tickets or in getting a pub or a bar to sell tickets for them.
Secondly, the community group got involved not by meeting objective criteria set out by government but by getting themselves signed up with a ticket-seller -- which, as I said earlier, was a bar or a pub for the most part. In other words, access to the government-controlled resource was not equal to all worthy groups across the province. This was a key thing that turned me regarding what we had to do. For every group that was able to establish an arrangement with a ticket vendor, there were many that did not. When I met with my hon. critic earlier to express concerns around the moratorium, he expressed to me a number of organizations that would like to get in on this whole business as well. So for any one out there receiving dollars, there were a number that were not receiving dollars, and that's a concern.
Thirdly, the funds were being used by many groups to cover ongoing operational costs, not specific projects. How could the government justify funding some areas and not others?
There were just too many things wrong with this whole program, and it couldn't be fixed. Since accessibility and accountability must be the cornerstone of lottery funding, our only responsible option was to discontinue the program. That left us with the problem of how to deal with the groups that had come to count on the money. We cannot expect the community groups to be happy. I know they're not. I know they're very unhappy with me in particular, and I accept that. But we feel that our responsibility to bridge that gap has been met. We are providing them with six months' compensation providing they meet the criteria established with regard to the Lottery Corporation there. We are making arrangements so that they are not stuck with the machines that they have purchased; many of them have spent a lot of dollars and are very concerned about the fact that they may be stuck with these albatrosses. The Lottery Corporation is working with the individual groups and with the bars and what have you to make sure that the machines are taken off the hands of those organizations so that they are not held accountable for leases.
It is unfortunate. As I said, it is not something that I dealt with easily. It is not something that I took great relish in doing, but given the problems with this program, it was not one that I felt we could fix easily. We had to take the moves to end the program. We feel we have dealt with the organizations fairly in providing them with six months' income. I think it's worth noting that those groups knew that their contract with any given pub or bar could have been terminated on six months' notice. That is why we have taken the six-month payout ability there.
I welcome any advice from any colleague as to how we can improve the lotteries, and we will be putting forth some new programs and some ideas to get information back from communities as to how the moneys can best be spent for community benefits.
K. Jones: Hon. Speaker, I'm very interested in the response we received to this, certainly a caring response, but still one that's very much involved with the process. We have to deal with the individuals. I would
[ Page 71 ]
like to address another group that has indicated a concern. It is from the Leader of the Opposition's constituency, Powell River-Sunshine Coast.
The Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Sunshine Coast chapter has written: "In these times of economic hardship, this money has become an integral part of our cystic fibrosis fund-raising budget, and now that the researchers are on the brink of finding a control or cure for this terminal children's disease, we feel the loss of our funding from this program is even more devastating." In addition to worrying about the loss of income, they are terribly concerned about the possibility of being stuck with an investment in equipment acquired -- in their case, $4,900 -- which, as you've indicated, the Lottery Corporation is going to buy back from them. I believe that's what you were saying?
Hon. L. Boone: They are making individual arrangements.
K. Jones: Making individual arrangements.
I would like to ask the minister what the Lottery Corporation will be doing with all these machines that they've bought back. Are they going into the business themselves in competition with the charitable organizations that are trying to raise funds?
My closing thought and question for the minister is with respect to moving the charities out of the process. How else can this policy change be viewed, other than as a massive tax grab for the general treasury? Unless the minister is prepared to guarantee to these community groups that they will get 100 percent of the 12.5 percent due to them for their efforts under the former program in the form of an automatic pass-through from your grants division, this is how your new policy will continue to be seen by others: as a grab for additional general revenues money away from the charitable organizations that dearly need it and directly serve the individual needs of our communities.
FORESTRY
F. Jackson: I rise today to talk about the forest industry and how it relates to my constituency, Kamloops-North Thompson. The forest industry is of central importance to the economy of British Columbia. There are very few constituencies in this province which do not rely directly on the forest industry for the base of their economy. It was quite interesting listening to some of the responses to the Speech from the Throne when the members were describing their constituencies. I found it quite hard to imagine a constituency without a forest: most of us touch somewhere on the forest.
In Kamloops-North Thompson there are eight milling operations supported by an infrastructure of loggers, truck drivers, businesses supplying material and equipment for the forest industry, and Forests ministry staff. The loss of forest wealth and the jobs that go with it must be turned around, but it must be done through forest practices which are sensitive to the protection of forest environments and responsible logging. The importance of this industry makes it imperative that we ensure a healthy and productive future for British Columbia's forests.
At one time the users of the forest resource believed there were enough trees to last an eternity. This belief fostered an attitude that endured for decades, which can be summed up in one sentence: cut them down, cut them up, let's make a buck. This type of thinking is coming to an end. Faced with declining stocks of existing timber, forest-dependent communities are recognizing the need for sustainable use and responsible management of their forests.
There is no doubt in my mind that the forest industry will continue to be of the utmost importance to this province in the future. The throne speech noted the government's commitment to devote a portion of provincial revenue to address some of the problems facing resource-dependent communities. The throne speech also stated and restated the New Democratic government's will to foster economic conditions throughout the province which will help to create stability in local and regional economies. With these commitments, I feel a little bit more confident about the future for the constituents of Kamloops-North Thompson.
The loss of forest growth and jobs which has occurred over the past years cannot continue. Value-added industries and markets for British Columbia's value-added products must be pursued. Secondary manufacturing would help to diversify local forest economies and create jobs. The throne speech noted our forests are and will remain crucial to the livelihood of people throughout this province. The economic and ecological sustainability of the forest resource for future generations must be addressed, not only in Kamloops-North Thompson but across the province.
[11:00]
Secondary manufacturing, value-added products: these things are important. But what is most important at this time is that all members of this House must support the Forests minister in his effort to stop our neighbours south of the border when they try to set the forest policy for British Columbia.
W. Hurd: I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Kamloops-North Thompson for his inaugural remarks to this House, and in particular his willingness to talk of a forestry issue, given the level of public controversy with this resource and the kind of economic dislocation we're seeing in small-town British Columbia. It's refreshing to see a member of the NDP caucus who isn't in cabinet respond to one of these issues.
I too am well familiar with the hon. member's riding of Kamloops-North Thompson. I had the occasion many times to drive north from Kamloops through Barriere, Heffley Creek, Clearwater and Vavenby. I don't know whether the hon. member is aware of it or not, but some of those mills in his riding are having to haul logs from the Alberta border merely to keep their operations going.
I'm well familiar with many of the public issues that have arisen in this riding regarding forestry and forest management, and like many issues throughout small-
[ Page 72 ]
town British Columbia, they come at a time when the people in these towns and places are fearing for their future. They see their log costs soaring; they see government taxes on the resource escalating on an annual basis; they see the impact of the memorandum of understanding to which I referred in this House yesterday and the effect of the 14.4 percent tariff. They start looking at the economics of these operations, and they begin to really fear for the future of their mills and their towns.
I believe if we accomplish nothing else in the Legislature during this first session, it will be to come forward with some sort of constructive forest management policies which will ease the threat of economic dislocation in these towns and the fear these people have for their economic future.
I referred in the House yesterday to the 14.4 percent tariff on softwood lumber. At that time I didn't have the opportunity to adequately address the impact that this tariff will have on towns like those in the hon. member's riding of Kamloops-North Thompson. One effect will be to rob the industry of the capital that it needs to modernize its mills, buy new equipment and invest in worker training and productivity -- in other words, to invest in the kind of human resources and equipment that will allow their mills to be competitive. That will be the effect of this tariff on the people and towns of British Columbia.
The government believed that the 15 percent memorandum of understanding built into our forests changes in 1988 would somehow insulate us from any tariff barriers imposed by the United States in the latest round of protectionist action by our major trading partner. They were wrong. We've seen a further 14.4 percent imposition, which, as I indicated to this House yesterday, has reduced the competitive ability of this industry by 29.9 percent in three years.
I don't know whether the government appreciates the dynamics of free market economics, but I can tell you there are not too many industries in this province that could sustain that type of increase in their basic costs and remain competitive. Certainly not the forest industry.
As I stated, the issues and community concerns are becoming intense. In fact, an example of that controversy was prevalent this morning in the news clippings. I am somewhat surprised that in addressing the forestry issue the hon. member for Kamloops-North Thompson didn't take a hard look at the Times-Colonist. I quote: "150 Logging Jobs Lost; 200 Youbou Millworkers Face Layoff."
I note with interest that some of his colleagues, including the hon. Minister of Forests and other MLAs from the government side of the House and the Island, are attending a public meeting on the issue this weekend in the Cowichan Valley. That represents another 350 layoffs in an industry that has seen one round of layoffs after another, almost from the time that this government took office on October 17. This particular layoff really disturbs me, because it comes as a result of cut reductions announced by this government mere weeks after it was sworn into office. There's a cause-and-effect relationship here. Three hundred and fifty jobs gone. How many more while we wait for a positive and constructive forest policy from this government?
An Hon. Member: You prefer overcutting, do you?
W. Hurd: I prefer responsible forest management.
F. Jackson: I am indeed thankful for the interest in my constituency shown by the member for Surrey-White Rock. I would like to extend the invitation to him the next time he's in my constituency to phone in advance. I will try and arrange something a little bit entertaining for him -- and maybe some business in the forest industry as well.
I've spent quite a lot of time in the last few months travelling around my constituency in pickup trucks -- once in a helicopter, which was a pleasure -- and various other means of transportation. This has helped me to understand the problems in my constituency.
I will not answer the criticism of the Forests minister, because I'm quite sure he is capable of doing that himself. However, I would like once again to thank the member for Surrey-White Rock for at least being on my side on one thing: that we do need to have the situation turned around.
INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE
ELIMINATION OF RACISM
Hon. A. Hagen: Before I begin my ministerial statement, I understand that members opposite have some concern about the length of notice with respect to this statement -- which I'm sure we will all endorse. I want to express my concern for their feelings on that and advise them that if they felt they had not had adequate notice, I'm sorry. They've had, I believe, about half an hour, as the statement came in to me. I do apologize if there are concerns about the notice they received.
Tomorrow, March 21, 1992, is International Day for the Elimination of Racism. The fact that such a day is being observed saddens me, since it means that as a society we have often failed to recognize the richness that people of different heritages bring to our communities. However, I believe that in recognizing our failings and our aspirations, we can work for a more just and tolerant society.
I think we all see a need for people in every community in our province to work together to address hate and intolerance. Over the next weekend the community events which will take place include an antiracism ribbon campaign sponsored by the Kamloops Multicultural Society, the Youth Against Racism forum sponsored by the Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Greater Vancouver, and the Surrey-Delta community issues forum, which encourages positive views of the cultural diversity of our society.
There are many ways in which we as a society can work to combat racism and intolerance. This morning I want to speak briefly on the important role education
[ Page 73 ]
plays in shaping our attitudes. Our schools should be one of the first and best places for discussions about racism to occur. It's important for all children to have opportunities to grow in understanding the cultures and the peoples who call British Columbia home and to show respect for others regardless of the race, colour or creed of those persons.
The new primary program in our schools is one example of ways our education system can become more welcoming and accepting of all children. The careful selection of learning materials so they are free from racism and racial stereotypes is another. It is, I believe, the desire of all the people of this province to create an environment in our schools which will allow for open discussions that promote racial understanding, tolerance, respect and justice. To this end, my ministry, which is the Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human Rights -- implicit in that, for race relations and tolerance -- is working with educators and the broad multicultural community to encourage this discussion and to encourage a standard where we can say we are a province that has eliminated racism and intolerance in our land.
V. Anderson: Thank you, hon. Minister, for raising this very important issue and for recognizing this significant day. Hopefully we can recognize this every day, because it is a very significant issue in our province at this time.
I appreciate very much the focus that is given in the school system, yet I'm not sure this is even the primary place that this focus needs to be given -- although of course it should be there. It is my experience in dealing with youngsters, and also having what might be called a visually recognized daughter who is of another ethnic origin than the other members of her family, that the children of our communities who are living with each other in a multicultural community are growing up with a very strong understanding of each other. The kind of racial misunderstanding which we have as adults is quite different than the racial understanding that our children have. I would suggest that we need to put a major focus on the education and reeducation of the adults of our community so that they do not transfer to the children their attitudes and biases.
I would suggest that we need to focus on the activities that go on in community centres, in community programming for adults, where there is an opportunity for adults of a community to come together and understand each other's background and history. I also believe out of my experience that there is a very important approach we must undertake in our western-oriented society to help ourselves, and particularly all of the professionals who work on our behalf, understand that our method of thinking is drastically different in almost every way to the method of thinking of other people we meet from around the world. Until we understand the differences in those methods of thinking, we will not come to understand each other.
I was interested in a community network meeting which we have each month, where professionals from each of the community agencies come together to discuss community concerns. When we come to the area of ethnic, racial or multicultural understanding, that, more than anything else we discuss, causes the temperature in the room to rise drastically, because they are in an area to which their training does not equip them to relate. In fact, the training which they have been receiving to this date does the exact opposite in multicultural interrelation understanding.
I would encourage for our social workers and the legal profession what is already being done with our educators -- the provision of opportunities to learn again what must be done. Our response to the concern about racism is to get a positive approach to this so that the adults of our community can be reoriented, if you like, and be as wise, as accepting and as understanding as the children of our community.
[11:15]
In this case, it is the children who lead the way. We need to learn from them. As well as supporting them in their new understandings, out of their own experience, we must put some effort and focus on the adults of our community, the professionals of our community and the opportunities in communities for people to get together. One illustration that I would suggest we might encourage is English-as-a-second-language conversation groups, which is simply the people of the community coming together to talk with each other and to discover who they are together.
Hon. M. Harcourt: Hon. Speaker, I first of all would like to congratulate you on your successful election. If all of our elections could be unanimous as yours was, it would make it less interesting, but certainly more unanimous that we represent all the people in our ridings. But you have gained the confidence of the 75 MLAs who are here, and I can say that from the openhanded and fair manner with which you have helped us through this first week in the Legislature with all of us learning new roles, we have been well served by you.
And indeed, hon. Speaker, you have not only shown the evenhanded and fair way with which you have handled the Legislature in its first week, but you have also shown your flexibility by providing a chair that can accommodate both you and the Deputy Speaker, the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard, with its ability to be adjusted.
The other welcome that I would like to bring is to the 48 new members who have joined the Legislature. I congratulate you all on being successful in your ridings and gaining the confidence of the voters of British Columbia. I welcome you to this magnificent Legislature, which is indeed one of the most attractive -- if not the most attractive -- Legislatures for us to parlementer, for us to speak about the different views our people have in the pluralistic and multicultural democracy that we have the honour of being part of. So I congratulate you all, and I hope you find it stimulating, you find it useful and you can serve your constituents well as we proceed through this term of government.
[ Page 74 ]
I'd also like to welcome back the 27 MLAs who were successful in being re-elected, albeit in new constituencies. It's good to see you back, although I do notice that the third party has shrunk a lot faster than I thought it would. I see none of them here today, but let's hope that's just because of very pressing matters in their ridings, rather than other changes that are happening.
I also would like you to know how honoured I am by being given the privilege of representing the new riding of Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, which I'm sure a number of you know is in the heart of Vancouver. It represents the very interesting neighbourhoods of the downtown east side, of Chinatown, Oppenheimer Park, Strathcona, Grandview-Woodlands and Mount Pleasant. It is a riding that shows the multicultural nature of British Columbia at its best, and it is indeed an honour to represent such a diverse and talented group of citizens, living in these fine neighbourhoods that make up Vancouver-Mount Pleasant.
As their representative the challenge I face is to represent people from a variety of cultures. Some are working people and successful business people. A number with disabilities are on fixed incomes, there are single parents trying to raise children on their own, and some are facing serious social challenges and are on the streets. We're going to have to address that. We have a number of inner-city schools that are overcrowded. There are a number of very serious challenges that I am looking forward to being able to address in government. I say that not just as the MLA from Vancouver-Mount Pleasant but as the Premier. These are issues that affect a number of communities throughout this magnificent province of ours. So in those two capacities, I am looking forward to dealing with the challenges.
I am pleased to rise in support of the throne speech. On October 17 the people of British Columbia delivered a mandate for change. This throne speech makes a clear departure from those of the past. The throne speech defines some new priorities in British Columbia that put people first and set high standards of ethical conduct and accountability for all elected officials. The throne speech sets out an agenda to manage better, spend smarter and build on our strengths as a province. I believe it represents both the government and the changes that B.C. needs now to be more open in the management of our resources and to balance all of our interests towards a prosperous future.
But, hon. Speaker, the throne speech commences to do only what British Columbians can afford. Our government is now working to confront the fiscal reality with which we were presented by the cold, hard light of the independent financial review, and to do it openly and responsibly. In keeping with our commitment to open government, Finance officials provided members of the opposition, the third party, the media and the people of British Columbia with full briefings on our financial situation as soon as we were in government and over the last few months. This government will tell British Columbians the truth about the government's bank accounts. We're only going to keep one set of books, not many, and I can assure you that we are committed to working down the deficit and getting the people of British Columbia out of the red and into the black.
But having faced those very serious challenges and the financial mess, we have already begun, within the financial limitations imposed upon us, to take action on the priorities that are important to British Columbians. In the first five months we have already started to take initiatives on those priorities. We have brought in programs to feed up to 50,000 hungry schoolchildren, to fund 28 women's centres throughout British Columbia and to introduce opportunities for working people and people with middle incomes to invest in British Columbia businesses with the Working Opportunity Fund. We have brought in measures to assist the tree-fruit industry and the tree-fruit growers to be viable into the long future. We have restored free collective bargaining, and we have finally addressed the issue of sitting down and negotiating fair settlements with the aboriginal people of British Columbia.
Hon. Speaker, our first budget next week will reveal the tough choices we made. We made those tough choices in trying to accomplish what British Columbians have told us they want done: getting our spending priorities right, cutting out waste, making sure that we bring spending under control and bringing about fair taxes.
I want to assure British Columbians that while we've been making those tough choices, protecting services for people in education, health and social services has been a top priority for us. This government is going to protect those services, even with reduced assistance from the federal government in Ottawa. The Conservative government's financial policies have exacerbated the number of people who are unemployed and on welfare in British Columbia. As a matter of fact, the high dollar and high interest rates have cost 15,000 British Columbians their jobs. In the last year the high dollar and high interest rates have cost this province $500 million in forgone revenues.
This has posed a very serious challenge for us to be able to help British Columbians the way we would like to. As a result, even without a significant increase in welfare rates, we have still had to deal with significant increases in costs. As I said, though, we'll deal with the inherited fiscal problem. We're going to deal with it through a balance of reduced growth in spending and higher revenues. I campaigned on a pledge of fair taxes, and the throne speech renews that commitment. This government will address our fiscal imbalance by more fairly distributing the tax burden. I can say that we have been frustrated over the last few months with the federal government because we've had some difficulty in dealing with them regarding the changes that we wanted to see accomplished. So federal intransigence has forced us to reassess options and consider other measures to reduce the imbalance in taxes.
Frankly, what we we're going to be able to do as government is not all that I wanted or all that I anticipated. But the financial facts are crystal-clear. We can't ignore the numbers or stick our head in the sand and pretend that they'll get better on their own. The financial mess that we've inherited means that we'll have to proceed more slowly than any of us wanted to.
[ Page 75 ]
When the budget comes down, some people will be disappointed at the caution with which we have had no choice but to proceed. But that's to be expected when you're trying, as a new government, to deal with years of pent-up expectations and the very real recession that many areas of this province are facing.
The actions we're taking to help build on the opportunities of B.C.'s strong trading economy are there already. We believe that British Columbians have the right tools to see us through these tough economic times. We're a great trading province with the skills of other great trading areas of the world like Hong Kong, Singapore and Germany. We have talented, skilled and entrepreneurial citizens -- over three million, which will grow to over six million citizens over the next 30 years as people come from the rest of Canada to enjoy British Columbia. As you can see today, we have a climate in most areas of the province that's the envy of anybody who lives elsewhere in Canada.
I am proud of the actions that this government has taken over the last five months to aggressively pursue trade opportunities or to address some of the trade unfairness and other issues that we have to deal with internationally. We have promoted good labour relations, which is in everyone's economic interest. We have attempted to bring people together to make common cause rather than fight with each other, as we saw far too often in the past. I will be calling an economic summit in the near future to bring British Columbians together again to look at how we can create more jobs and more enterprises that will be able to create more wealth, so that we can have the resources we need in British Columbia to improve services to our citizens and to deal with the very real social justice issues that are important to New Democrats. They're in our values. The reason we are here is to address the inequality that something can be done about. But we have to create the wealth and get our spending in order, to be able to have the resources to do that.
[11:30]
We have focused very extensively, hon. Speaker, on the fact that British Columbians want to get back to work and stay working. They want to see more enterprises and a stronger, more sustainable economy. That is why I had the distinct honour of announcing a few weeks ago the Commission on Resources and Environment, headed by our ex-ombudsperson Stephen Owen, a person of great integrity who is going to be of tremendous assistance to British Columbians in working out a unique land use plan for the whole province that will finally have British Columbians making intelligent accommodations. They probably won't satisfy the small number of extremists on either side of that issue, but they will satisfy the vast majority of British Columbians. We have brought in tough new pulp mill regulations, and we have continued to invest in people. We will be investing in education with new schools. We will be dealing with the hot lunch program to make sure our children have the nourishment to be able to learn properly. We will be dealing with high-growth school districts, as our Minister of Education has already made very clear. In our Health budget you will see a shift to community-based, preventive programs that most British Columbians know are long overdue. Our social services, as our Minister of Social Services has made very clear, are going to be maintained. We're not going to abandon British Columbians, even with the terrible capping of CAP and the cutbacks that we have faced from the federal government.
Hon. Speaker, we were honest and upfront with British Columbians during the election. We said we weren't promising miracles, but we can and we will do better with better management of our forests, our health care system and our finances.
Let me close by saying that as this government pursues its mandate, we will take action on our priorities, as we stated in our throne speech, and we will deliver on our commitments to the people of British Columbia. We're going to move towards what I believe all of us in this Legislature desire for British Columbians: a prosperous and sustainable future for our families.
J. Tyabji: I would like to start by saying that I feel a great deal of honour in being here as a Member of the Legislative Assembly. I feel very privileged to be taking part in this legislative process. On October 17 the people of B.C. opted for a quiet revolution. It was bloodless, but it was very effective, and it represented a dramatic change in the kind of government that we can offer the public. There were high expectations following the election, and they've left us with the opportunity to overcome the very deep-seated cynicism that most people in B.C. feel today as a result of some very poor judgments that have been made in the past by previous governments. We can overcome this cynicism with vision and long-term planning, and a vision for the future that takes into account some of the problems that we're facing throughout the province, in both the municipal and the regional areas. Decisions must be made in the best interests of the people of B.C., and the decisions that come out of this Legislature should be made on a non-partisan basis with judgments that are made without regard to special interest groups.
My riding of Okanagan East is a very beautiful riding, as many of you may be aware. I think of it as an island of relative prosperity in an otherwise somewhat bleak economic landscape. We're facing tremendous international, federal and provincial pressures on our economy. Like many interior ridings, there are some areas of great concern in Okanagan East. Three critical areas that I would like to speak to today are the education, the economy and, of course, the environment. With regard to education, we have some problems, and all these problems are interrelated. One problem is a very high illiteracy rate, which also translates into some of the problems that we're having with the economy; the economy and environment are interrelated.
One other problem we have in our riding is a very low level of post-secondary educational opportunities. We're facing increased tuition costs. The students aren't having access to the education that they need in order to participate as effective members of the economy. As the environment critic, the economy is of great concern to
[ Page 76 ]
me. Without a strong economy, it's very hard to make the tough environmental decisions we have to make.
We have some concerns regarding small business. We need tax reform. We need to free up the small businesses to be much more effective as small businesses. We need to promote them, and we need to encourage people to support the small businesses in their community.
Agriculture plays a very large role in Okanagan East. We have to promote the agricultural industry. We have to safeguard the agricultural industry against some of the foreseeable obstacles that are coming up internationally -- for example, the GATT talks, the possible loss of our marketing boards and, of course, what looks like the inevitability of a continental free trade deal, which would take into account Mexico. That has a lot of environmental implications as well. Some of the latest studies coming out in CBC documentaries say that some Mexican fruit is so heavily contaminated by lead, because of the air pollution, that it could be a health hazard. These are things that we have to take into account when we safeguard our own agricultural industry. We must maintain a viable agricultural industry so that we don't end up without the ability to produce food that is not only safe for us but has the economic and environmental spinoffs that are necessary for the people of B.C.
The third area of great concern in my riding -- which translates into provincewide concerns -- is with regard to the environment. There are so many aspects to the environmental concerns that face us. The first one I'd like to talk about is with regard to our atmosphere. Obviously we are provincial legislators, so it may seem like these problems are beyond our scope. However, as individuals and as legislators we all participate in contributing to the degradation of the atmosphere. It is our opportunity to introduce regulations and legislation so that we don't continue to degrade the atmosphere.
There are two areas regarding the atmosphere that I would say are of the greatest concern. Air quality is a provincewide problem. In Okanagan East we have had tremendous problems recently with smoke in our air and a degradation of air quality, to the point that I would even venture to suggest that it could translate into potential problems with the quality of life, which may impact our small businesses with regard to tourism. The other problem that we all face as global citizens is, of course, ozone depletion. These are things that we can effectively legislate against at a provincial level, with regard to continued degradation and opting out of participating in that.
The other area that I think is of great concern is water quality and water quantity. In addition to atmospheric problems, we have water problems. A round-table report came out recently that had some excellent recommendations with regard to water quality guidelines. I'd like to see some of these regulations brought forth for debate in the House, so that we can implement the ones that can be implemented right away so we don't have a negative economic impact downstream -- no pun intended.
The third area I'd like to discuss with regard to the environment is land. We have to have a sustainable resource strategy that takes land use into account. I would commend the Premier for the appointment of Stephen Owen. I would say that it is unfortunate that we've all waited this long to recognize the fact that a land use strategy is long overdue. We look forward to the recommendations from Stephen Owen for debate in the House, so we can all participate in developing a comprehensive land use strategy for sustainable resource development.
The other area with regard to land and the environment is waste management. Waste management is a problem that faces all of us, and I think we as legislators should set examples with regard to what we do in the House with our waste. First of all, we should make sure that we reduce the amount of waste that we bring into the House. We should try to opt out of extra packaging, we should make sure that we recycle things and we shouldn't be using large pieces of paper for small notes and then tossing them out -- things like that. If we as individuals choose to act responsibly and provide ourselves as role models for the people of B.C., we can then legislate with credibility. I think that one of the problems -- and the cynicism that the people of B.C. have -- is that we lose credibility if we legislate something that we ourselves are not participating in.
Coming from an area where agriculture is key, I would like to see more emphasis on things like composting. For a number of years my husband and I have composted, and it has resulted in some very wonderful flowers and produce on our property. It's very frustrating to see the same kinds of things, which I see as a resource and having economic value, going into a landfill where they then become an economic burden. We have to reverse the way we look at the way we do things. When we are doing something that doesn't make sense, we should reverse it. We should look at composting as a resource rather than as an economic burden in our landfills.
The last area I'd like to talk about with regard to the environment is food. Most of us don't think of food as something that has environmental impact. However, the ways we produce and offer food.... Obviously, all of us have to rely on food in order to be here, so this is something we can very easily make amendments to, as I say, to be role models, have more credibility and reduce the cost to the taxpayers by more effectively dealing with our food. I'm talking about alternative methods of production of food and better methods of packaging that take into account the downstream impact for us as legislators and as participants in the taxpaying system.
That's an economic strategy that takes into account the environmental ways we can save and actually generate money, reduce the cost to the taxpayer, have a better environment, and reduce the eventual cost downstream by not having to clean things up.
I'd like to end my statements here by commending the government on the cancer clinic and by pointing out that it was my leader who said that the cancer clinic should go to Kelowna, which is where I'm based. I
[ Page 77 ]
commended him on it then, and I'd like to commend our Health minister for making the right decision.
I would also like to commend our Agriculture minister, who has made some very fine decisions with regard to fruit-growers, who are key participants in my riding. I recognize his commitment to them. I'll continue to monitor the things that he's doing, in the event that some of them aren't as nice. Even though that's not my portfolio, since I have these people in my constituency, I'd like to recognize that his commitment is there. It's very encouraging.
However, I'd like to end my statements in the traditional manner, by moving an amendment. It is with great regret that I move that the motion be amended by adding the following:
"...but this assembly regrets that after five months of inaction, the government has failed to address the pressing need to deal with the deteriorating provincial economy, and in particular the increasing vulnerability of resource-dependent communities in British Columbia; and furthermore, regrets that the Speech from the Throne provides only a reiteration of empty election promises rather than a sorely needed vision of hope and optimism for the future of our province and our country."
[11:45]
On the amendment.
D. Streifel: Before I begin, I would like to congratulate the previous speaker, the hon. member for Okanagan East, on the recent birth of her child.
Hon. Speaker, it is a great honour after all my years of social and community activism to be here in this House and, through my words, actions and presence, to represent the women and men of the Mission-Kent constituency. The voters of Mission-Kent took the advice of my Liberal opponent at one of our many all-candidates' meetings. He said, if I may paraphrase: "Don't vote for me, as I'm not sure of the issues. Vote for Dennis."
I would like to begin by thanking my constituents for bestowing upon me their trust. In this regard, I would like to give them my assurance that I will provide them with open and accessible representation. By doing this, that trust will be fulfilled.
I would like to congratulate the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker on their elections to these most distinguished positions. I know, through my initial dealings with your office, hon. Speaker, that you will provide this House with the same impartial leadership you have shown and provided thus far to all members.
In preparing for this presentation, I obtained from the Legislative Library a copy of the first speech of the longest-serving member of this Legislature, the current member for Vancouver-Burrard. He is a role model not only for me but for all members of this House. He stated in his initial presentation to this House, during the thirtieth parliament, that he was here on serious business. I too am here on serious business.
As a new member of this House, I am aware of the many challenges that have accompanied my October mandate. People in Mission-Kent have high expectations of our government, and the challenges of meeting those expectations will be both difficult and rewarding. Addressing these challenges will require hard work and strong leadership.
On this point, we in British Columbia are fortunate enough to have as our Premier a leader who is as honest and hard-working as the people who elected him. I would like to extend my congratulations and best wishes to the Premier not only for the office he holds but also for the open, honest leadership he provides. His commitment to restore the people's faith in our democratic institutions is measured not only in his words, hon. Speaker, but most importantly in his actions.
Another individual who serves as a source of inspiration to me is one of my constituents, Mr. George Lock. Mr. Lock is a longtime activist and member in my riding. Mr. Lock was a candidate for the CCF during the late 1940s. While he was never able to take a place as a member of this House, he worked tirelessly to help build a better British Columbia and in many ways helped lay the foundation for the good fortune I enjoyed during the last election. For that I want to extend my deepest thanks. I would like to point out that Mr. Lock and I were nominated in the same community hall in Dewdney.
I would like to also thank the women and men on my campaign team, who worked endless hours to ensure that I would be their representative in this Legislature.
November 5, 1991, marked the first time in history that the people's House was open to them. In the spirit of openness and accessibility, on that same day I opened my constituency office in Mission-Kent -- an office that is accessible to working people. As well as being open regular office hours during the week, it is open nine to five on Saturdays. In doing this, I believe I am able to hear from a broader cross-section of my constituents. Besides, the people who elected me often have to work around my schedule; it seems only fair that I work around theirs too.
I want to offer my sincerest best wishes to each and every member of this Legislature. I know some of us in this chamber will disagree on many political issues, and it is this debate that makes our democratic institution sacred. We may also differ on ideology. However, I know we will not differ on our dedication and conviction to provide the people of our respective constituencies with the best representation possible. All of us are here to make a positive contribution to the future of this great province, and I can only wish success for each member as they work towards fulfilling the promise that British Columbia is.
We cannot accept lightly the privilege of representing the people of this province. It is a sacred honour that must not be sacrificed for the sake of power or posterity. We must not forget that the powers of privilege and who governs are ultimately decided by the people in areas like Mission-Kent.
I am deeply honoured to accept the duties of Deputy Chair, as bestowed upon me by this House. Hon. Speaker, this position I hold is a privilege, and that is something I will never forget.
[ Page 78 ]
The government that was elected on October 17 was elected with a mandate for change. Change is not just the change of the governing party but the change of how a party governs. I believe this throne speech respects the ideals and commitments to British Columbians that I've outlined above. The priorities addressed in this throne speech are honourable, and I agree wholeheartedly with them. I regret to say that this province has been subject to some neglect from the previous administration. However, I am confident that through the priorities that have been established, this government is well on the way to getting British Columbia back on track.
We must take control of the financial legacy that has been left us. Not addressing the need to control our deficit would not be serving the best interests of those who elected us. For that reason, I am proud of the leadership the Premier has shown in his decision to bring the deficit under control. It will not be easy; our government will have to make some hard choices. The benefits, however, of fiscal responsibility far outweigh the economic costs of a deficit that is out of control. With increased globalization, a healthy economy is essential to preserving both our way of life and our standard of living, while at the same time ensuring our children do not have a second mortgage on their futures. By controlling the deficit, we are sending out a positive message to investors around the world, and when British Columbia prospers, hon. Speaker, we all prosper.
The social safety net priorities set out in this throne speech are indicative of the people-oriented policies of this government. We are here only because the people of this province have asked us to stand in this House and represent their ideas and concerns. Our government acknowledges this and, as such, has set certain goals that encompass the priorities of the people of British Columbia.
We have already begun the process of consulting with British Columbians on the social issues that face us. In this regard, I refer to the community panel that is collecting constituents' views across British Columbia on existing child protection legislation. Protecting our children and supporting our families is a top priority of many British Columbians, and I am proud of the fact that our government is collecting the people's views on how we may meet those objectives more effectively.
Clearly, ours is a government of consultation, not confrontation. We have solicited and will continue to solicit the people's views on important issues, such as the very serious question of the constitution and the restructuring of our labour laws, old-growth forest strategy and land use. This is the type of government that British Columbians elected on October 17 -- a government that is capable of collecting, building on and delivering a consensus.
As the father of two daughters, I cannot tell you how pleased I was that the throne speech addressed the question of equality. For many years we as a society have lagged in our efforts to ensure that basic equality existed between women and men. I am proud to say, hon. Speaker, that our government has taken some significant steps toward creating a truly equal environment in this province. For the first time in British Columbia history, we have a minister responsible for women's equality and, as I walk down the corridors of this Legislature, I can see firsthand the positive effects of this change, as no longer is the House dominated by men.
Our government is committed to pay equity legislation that will help bridge the financial gap for working women in British Columbia. I am confident that through the efforts of people like the hon. Minister of Women's Equality, women in this province can look forward to a more fair, equitable future -- my daughters included.
For the residents of Mission-Kent, few issues are as consistently troublesome as those associated with the area's transportation needs. For my caucus colleagues who have never had the pleasure of attending one of our many enthusiastic meetings to discuss future departmental initiatives, let me just say: you haven't lived. While no one can be certain what options will finally be accepted, I can say with absolute certainty that the voice of the residents of my riding will be heard.
As well, I am very pleased to see, at this early date, some of my environmental concerns already being addressed. It is clear that British Columbians understand that the environment is seriously overtaxed. The quality of the air we breathe, the water we drink and the land we walk on will be a constant priority for me. And I am very much looking forward to contributing to environmental initiatives like the development of a new environmental assessment act, amending the Waste Management Act, and the public consultation process that will flow from the creation of a comprehensive clean-air strategy for our province.
Farmers in my constituency, as in other jurisdictions in Canada, are in danger of losing their livelihood and being removed from the economic mosaic of British Columbia as a result of the possible repealing of article 11 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. It becomes incumbent on all of us in this House, all of us assembled here, to follow the lead of the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and join him in doing all we can to preserve our agricultural community and that subsequent contribution to the economy of British Columbia.
[E. Barnes in the chair.]
The forest industry is in serious jeopardy in the constituency of Mission-Kent with the implementation of the 15 percent softwood tariff by our American neighbours. With friends like these, who needs enemies? So much for a better world under free trade. There is also a threat to our shake and shingle industry with the possible outlawing by the state of California of the use of cedar shakes and shingles in new home construction. This is serious business.
But the entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well in Mission-Kent as small and home-based businesses continue to flourish despite the economic recession. I know this government is committed to working with all sectors of the economy, whether it be forestry, fishing,
[ Page 79 ]
agriculture or tourism, to ensure that we have a prosperous future.
I've spoken at length about some of the problems and concerns in my constituency. I have also spoken of the bright future for Mission-Kent under the able stewardship of the Premier and the executive council. As is the tradition with first speeches in this Legislature, hon. Speaker, I would like to tell you something about my constituency. But before I do, I want to take a moment to thank two of my caucus colleagues for helping bring the message about providing honest, open and accessible government right to the meeting halls in my riding during the past several weeks. Both the Minister of Transportation and Highways and the Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks met with residents of Mission-Kent to discuss highways and environmental concerns associated with the Albion stump-dump fire. While opinions at the meeting could not be described as unanimous, a great deal of very productive work was done, and I believe that both ministers involved and the people of Mission-Kent now have a clearer picture of what is possible as we grapple with these difficult issues. I look forward to many more such sessions. That is accessible government.
Mission-Kent is a new constituency. It was formerly a dual-member constituency known mostly as Dewdney. Most of this area was represented by two members for whom, despite their partisanship, I still hold a great deal of respect. Austin Pelton and Norm Jacobsen were the members and both served this province the same way they served their constituencies -- with hard work and dedication. The latter was my opponent in the recent election campaign, and while I often disagreed with him on politics, I could never disagree with his principles or convictions. And for his service, the former areas of Dewdney are a better place. A large portion of this constituency was at one time represented in his rookie year by the first NDP Premier in British Columbia, Dave Barrett.
This constituency of Mission-Kent begins at 240th Street in Maple Ridge with the peaceful hobby farms of Albion, Whonnock and Ruskin, with the longest network of community-supported horse trails in Canada. Beyond Ruskin is Silverdale, a community to be envied for the spirit and cooperation demonstrated to secure their own fire hall. At the west entrance to Mission stands a Sikh temple, an acknowledgement of the long and honourable role those of the Sikh religion have played in developing this community.
[12:00]
The first peoples of this nation are also the first peoples of my constituency. Their uniqueness is recognizable through endeavours such as the one-of-a-kind native justice institute, the annual pow-wow days in Mission and the exciting war canoe races at Seabird Island. Their spiritual and residential history is evident by the presence of the Hatzic Rock. This site has been a spiritual gathering-place of the Sto:Lo nation people for some 9,000 years.
Some of the richest farmland in the Fraser Valley can be found just east of Mission on Nicomen Island. This farmland extends into the municipality of Kent, whose renown for corn is highlighted each year by the town's crowning of a corn king.
Beyond the farmland is Harrison Hot Springs, a quaint little village nestled on the shores of Harrison Lake and a first-class tourist destination for people from around the world. As a matter of fact, Harrison Lake, with its shores and islands, is a retreat much enjoyed by a diverse cross-section of people, as demonstrated last year when prisoners from Kent Mountain maximum security prison travelled by helicopter for a short stay on one of Harrison Lake's islands.
The village of Harrison is home to the Harrison Festival of the Arts, as well as the annual world sand-sculpting championships. Also located in this area is perhaps the best family skiing in southwestern British Columbia at Hemlock Valley. Mission-Kent has a lot to offer, but there is even more. Located in the heart of my constituency is some of the most rugged wilderness terrain in the province. Without question, these are not only electoral boundaries, but lines of diversity -- and diversity is what makes Mission-Kent unique.
Hon. Speaker, I have not yet in this address recognized how important to me was and is the support and patience of my family during the long pre-election period, the subsequent turmoil of the election and the transition to government. I am sure all of us here expected major changes in our lives. I am not sure our families realized the magnitude of the change in their lives. My wife Linda, and our daughters Marlise and Kirsten, are not used to nor comfortable with the scrutiny of the public eye. Yet I hear no complaints -- only support, patience and love. This above all else enables me to be here. For that, Linda, Marlise and Kirsten, I love you. Thank you.
I recognize that like the official opposition, I too am new. I want to say in all sincerity that I look forward to working with all members of this House on the challenges facing British Columbia. In so doing, it is my hope that we live up to the trust and responsibility placed in us by our constituents.
D. Jarvis: Hon. Speaker, I'm really pleased to be here with you today. I've followed your career over several occupations, and I've admired you for many years. The rest of the members of the House -- all of you here -- I would like to give you my greetings. I'm especially pleased to be here with my 16 colleagues of the new Liberal Party.
I am from North Vancouver-Seymour, and we are a unique riding, with both major rural and urban features, which actually make us a microcosm of this province. There is an old saying in this province that goes: "As goes North Vancouver-Seymour, so goes the province." That is why we are so deeply concerned with the direction in which both this riding and the province are heading. North Vancouver-Seymour is bordered on the north by a great watershed and on the south by Burrard Inlet. On the east is Indian Arm, and on the west is the Capilano area.
Hon. members, I wish to relate to you some of the features of this riding which will directly affect this government's spending and how this province should react to the government's proposals. The eastern border
[ Page 80 ]
of Indian Arm is fed by many rivers and streams that flow down the great watersheds between the Seymour area and the Coquitlam watersheds. This water flows into Burrard Inlet, which is a very busy, pristine waterway of commerce and recreation. I say pristine, but it's actually rotten to the core. I'll explain that in a later statement.
The citizens of Deep Cove and the surrounding areas of Indian Arm are rightly concerned that this problem of pollution is not being addressed. It is the responsibility of this government, as it was of the previous governments, to protect this community and its natural beauty. It is time for the preservation of pure water, clean air and the uncontaminated sea bottom. In 1989 the federal government, along with the Greater Vancouver Regional District, put forward a study which stated that approximately 7 percent of the bottom fish and crustaceans in the Indian Arm and the outflow areas of it were contaminated with cancerous lesions. It is now 1992. Nothing has been done about this contamination. We do not see any provisions in this government's agenda to tackle this specific problem, which is in the urban area. This will affect all the people in the lower mainland.
We are also concerned with the foreshore area of Burrard Inlet, one of the last remaining tidal wetland areas in the lower mainland. This area is known as the Maplewood flats. It is the home of over 200 species of wildlife, and it is on the verge of being destroyed. It is a marvellous place. If you can imagine, in the middle of a great residential community, we have a wetland area surrounded by sawmills, shipyards and chemical plants. We know the vision of this government of a sustainable future is based on where we stand today. However, what is this government's position relative to the ecological problems of the urban areas? These urban areas are the ones that have had the greatest attack by our forefathers and industry. Attention today is often focused on the ecological problems of the remote areas, but we must not forget our urban areas.
Now we can all appreciate the great forest expanses of the north, the interior and Vancouver Island, which are considered originals, and they should be left so. But the program of this government on environment should also be to protect what is not yet endangered.
I would point out that the northern boundary of my riding has an ancient forest twice the size of the Walbran and the Carmanah Valleys together. The back door of Seymour also has two spawning rivers, which is part of the great Seymour watershed, and this should be preserved. Water, our most valuable resource, flows out of the Seymour to supply half of the lower mainland's many thousands of people. As a community, we do not take this provision of water lightly, and any interruption will be to the detriment of the population as a whole. In this watershed we have the Seymour demonstration forests, wherein lie the headwaters of Lynn Creek and Seymour River, and this particular area is a typical coastal forest, made up of ancient and new growth. It has Sitka spruce, red cedar, Douglas fir, western hemlock and even the notable yew, which all members will recall has just recently been discovered to contain cancer-fighting properties. In fact, we even have the world-renowned spotted owl.
My riding is named after our major mountain, the Seymour, which is also a provincial park and has top recreation areas for skiing and hiking. We must protect these areas for our future generations, just as much as the wilderness areas that are surrounding us.
I have said the riding of North Vancouver-Seymour is a microcosm of the province of B.C. Like a lot of the rest of the province, our riding was originally inhabited by the aboriginal peoples. The first people to occupy our riding were the Burrard band of the Coast Salish nation. By the way, their native tongue is that of the Squamish dialect. They are a very industrious group of citizens who are known far and wide. They are presently, for example, developing housing projects in the Seymour area. One of their past chiefs was the famous Dan George, who was known and loved throughout this continent. We have lived harmoniously with the first-nations people for many years, and the majority of the citizens of our riding believe that aboriginal rights and self-determination of the Coast Salish should be resolved. I am pleased, therefore, with the proposed legislation indicated in the Speech from the Throne. Our party is committed to working with the government to solve the problems of our aboriginal peoples.
I might add that I am no stranger to these shores, nor is my family. My daughter, Catherine, was born on these shores and so was my son, Dan Jr. I was born here, my father was born here, my grandfather was born here and my great-grandfather came here when he was a young boy.
On our foreshores are the homes of some of B.C.'s oldest shipyards, which have had a remarkable history of shipbuilding in this province. They are presently constructing the hulls for the new superferries. The shipbuilding and repair sector has faced major setbacks in the last few years, and this has had a major impact on the people and the economy of the North Shore. We must work to improve and resolve this maritime industry in B.C., particularly on the North Shore. Where will the government ferries go if they keep smashing up, as they have been doing in the last five months? Seriously, we cannot simply allow workers with 20 to 30 years' experience in this industry to be shunted aside. It is this government's responsibility to assist them in every way they can. We note that the Speech from the Throne has a section "Putting People First," and I would suggest that this should also apply to the now redundant workers of our shipbuilding industry.
There is a delegation out in front of the parliament buildings right now. They're waiting to hear from the Premier, and the Premier -- if he will remember -- said: "Rest assured. I will not let this issue die, nor will I forget you." We are across the waters from the greatest trading bloc in this world. We are on the edge of the Pacific Rim. We have thousands of miles of coastline. Yet our shipbuilding and repair industry appears to be a diminishing asset. This is where we can create jobs and invest in our future. We have the expertise and the manpower. We should act now.
[ Page 81 ]
Hon. Speaker, North Vancouver-Seymour is one of the fastest-growing communities of the lower mainland, and our growth is ever in need of a demanding education system. The equity that we have in this province is the education of our children. Seymour presently has 16 elementary schools and three high schools. If this province is to flourish, we must spend our money on the best education system that we can provide. Our School District 44 is a leader in the educational field, and we have excellent students and educators. This is borne out in the remarkable results of the provincial standards tests. I am pleased to see that this government has taken the initiative to reduce the number of portable classrooms. Parents and teachers alike will be pleased to note the change; as a matter of fact, they'll be ecstatic.
One of our district's innovations was the pioneering in 1970 of the community schools program. We are committed to life-long learning. Community schools differ from regular schools, as they use non-teaching instructors for a wide range of after-school programs. They serve the academic and recreational needs of the youth and adults of this community. This was, as I said, a North Shore innovation, which we are about to lose because of lack of funding by the government. Schools cannot exist without finances, and this is a responsibility of government. If this government cannot give this riding what we require to educate our people, I would ask why they don't just give us the authority to raise funds for education in our schools. Let us be responsible for the cost of education. We call on this government to invest in its future. We need a quality education system, which we know is expensive. However, let us control our needs -- or give us what we require. As I have said, our equity is in our children.
Our other great educational institution in North Vancouver-Seymour since 1968 has been our premier institution, Capilano College, a great contributor to this province's educational system and one of the most successful colleges and college programs in British Columbia. This is an important academic institution and has the largest full-time enrolment of any college in British Columbia. Only 42 percent of the students, however, are from the North Shore, so you can see that it services the needs of all the lower mainland communities. It also has the largest turnaway every year, with over 800 applicants sent away due to the lack of funds and facilities. We need -- and this province needs -- a cooperative government to give full support to this institution.
This college, in one way, is unique. They know the value of the Pacific Rim potential, and accordingly, they now have a successful postgraduate diploma course for Asia-Pacific management -- a joint venture in education bringing employers together with prospective management trainees and training Canadians and British Columbians who are considering international careers.
[12:15]
This college has been accountable both educationally and fiscally, and it is innovative to the needs of our community. To continue to serve and meet these demands of the community, this college requires this government to give back the governing role to the college if they are to continue to provide accessible and quality education.
Before I conclude my remarks, I cannot forget to remind this assembly of several politicians I feel have contributed in a great way to North Vancouver-Seymour, to this province and to Canada. Mr. Barrie Clark, a longtime resident and politician from the North Shore, has contributed greatly to this province as a former member of this assembly and also when he was the provincial rentalsman.
In addition, I would like to mention my old friend, Senator Ray Perreault, who was a leader of our party. Over the years this gentleman has dedicated his time and efforts to the welfare of the citizens of this province and of our country -- a true politician and a true British Columbian.
I should point out that Seymour also encompasses several districts, in the sense that North Vancouver district, which is part of Seymour, is represented by the Hon. Murray Dykeman. We also have North Vancouver city represented by the Hon. Jack Loucks.
Finally, hon. Speaker, I would like to say just a few words about the late Jack Davis, one of our most respected politicians. He was the former MLA for North Vancouver-Seymour and my predecessor. He contributed greatly to this province, and he will be remembered for many years.
Mr. Speaker, I'm going to conclude my remarks today by wishing you a successful future. With a little bit of decorum and respect for each other, we shall, I hope, create a new respect for politicians and the political process in this House. It is up to us to make this province of B.C. one where people want to visit and where citizens would like to live.
M. Lord: Hon. Speaker, may I begin today by congratulating the Speaker on her unanimous election to what must be a very difficult and demanding office. I want to join with the other members in this assembly in voicing my complete confidence in her abilities.
I also want to congratulate you, the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard, on your election to the duty of Deputy Speaker. You bring to your new duties knowledge won by 20 years as a member of this assembly and also your unfailing wit and humour.
Hon. Speaker, I am very proud to speak today in this spot long held by my friend and mentor, the former member for what was then called the Comox constituency, Karen Sanford. During her years in this chamber, whether in opposition or in office, her dedication to the people of our riding never faltered. I hope to be led by her example.
I also want to pay tribute to the person who held this seat from 1986 to 1991. All partisanship aside, Stan Hagen worked hard to bring benefits to the riding, and he succeeded in that work. Both of my predecessors rendered good service to the people of the Comox Valley, and their accomplishments merit our praise. But I think that all of us within these walls -- indeed all of us in public life -- should constantly bear in mind that rendering good service is what we are paid for.
[ Page 82 ]
I recognize, hon. Speaker, that it may be unseemly for a novice member to say this to those who were here before me -- some perhaps long before me -- but I think the painful lessons of the past few years should not be forgotten. This chamber does not belong to us; it belongs to the people of British Columbia. The power we exercise is not our power; it is the people's. The money we spend is not ours; it is theirs. We are no one's masters; rather we are the servants of those who sent us here. No matter what I may accomplish in this place, however long I may be here, I hope it will always be said that I was a good servant to the people of the Comox Valley.
I represent one of the first regions of British Columbia to be permanently settled by Europeans. There were farmers, fishers, loggers and miners in the Comox Valley as far back as our province's earliest days. Ever since those days, my constituents have been concerned about the issues of transportation. We live, after all, on an island, and we are some distance from the main population centres of British Columbia. We are connected to the world by a highway, ferry and railway -- all of which need attention.
The importance of the Island Highway to the people of Vancouver Island has been discussed at length in the House today, but people of the Comox Valley are well aware of the disarray in which the last administration left the finances of British Columbia. They are well aware that the funds that could have paid for the upgrading and construction of the new Island Highway were squandered by a government that fell into chaos. They are prepared to wait -- though they have waited many years already -- for a good, safe, environmentally designed highway north of Parksville. They only ask that they be made to wait no longer than necessary. When the government can once more afford to extend the transportation infrastructure of British Columbia, the Comox Valley would like to know that they are high on the priority list.
The direct ferry service to the Comox Valley from the mainland at Powell River is much appreciated by my constituents. Even more, they appreciate this government's commitment to retain the overnight ferry berth at Little River, where it belongs and where the ferry workers of the Comox Valley fought very hard to keep it.
The other ferry service, however, remains an irritant. Last summer's two-hour sailing schedule between Nanaimo and Horseshoe Bay caused hardship and inconvenience for many residents of the North Island. Again, the people of the Comox Valley recognize the constraints under which the Ferry Corporation must operate because of the previous administration's rampages through the public treasury. But they wish to remind this government that to the people who live on islands, ferries are absolutely necessary.
I've come to the third transportation link between the Comox Valley and the rest of the world: the Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway. If there is a more poorly run or a more relentlessly underachieving rail line in the world, it must truly be a wonder. The E&N is a constant source of dismay to Island residents, from Victoria to Courtenay. Its schedule bears not the remotest relationship to their needs. The Budd car operated by Via Rail is a travesty of the kind of service that could be offered to residents and tourists alike. It is, in every aspect, simply not good enough.
I have made it a personal priority to press for a full revival of the E&N. A decent passenger service would ease congestion on the overstressed Island Highway. A decent freight service would relieve congestion and would be a stimulus to economic development all along the route. A tourist-oriented, steam-powered train on the E&N line would be a year-round boon and a world-class drawing card to the hospitality industry of Vancouver Island. If, as I believe, the technology exists to power trains by natural gas, the E&N could also render a net environmental gain by moving people and goods that are now moved on the highway by gasoline and diesel engines.
This government has committed itself to transforming the E&N from a missed opportunity into a fully functioning railway. I can assure the government that in fulfilling that commitment, they will have the gratitude and the wholehearted support of the people of the Comox Valley.
I can also assure this government that the people throughout my riding are applauding the measures outlined in the throne speech to improve the lot of women and children in British Columbia. Two weeks ago I had the very pleasant task of informing the staff and volunteers of the Comox Valley Women's Resource Centre that they could now apply for core funding under the program announced by the Premier and the Minister of Women's Equality. Hon Speaker, that news was gladly received. The women of that centre have worked very hard and against great difficulties to help women and children escape from the cycle of violent abuse. Now a government that cares about ordinary people, a government with a heart, has lent a hand to those tireless volunteers and has said to those victims of physical and emotional abuse: "You are not alone. There will be help here when you need it."
There is help in the throne speech -- real help at last. I look forward to the legislation that will end discrimination on the basis of age, family status and sexual orientation.
[The Speaker in the chair.]
I look forward to the measures to ensure improved access for women in British Columbia to abortion services. No longer will we have one degree of service for the poor and another for the wealthy; one degree of access for women who live in big cities and another for women in small towns.
I look forward to seeing British Columbia's schoolchildren move out of portables and into permanent classrooms. I look forward to seeing the constant warfare over education funding replaced by a system that is fair to all, and I look forward to seeing more of our brightest students overcome the financial barriers that have blocked their entry into post-secondary schooling.
I look forward to the measures proposed in the throne speech to create a sustainable balance between
[ Page 83 ]
the environment and the economy in British Columbia. Coming from a riding where the people make their living out of tourism, forestry and fishing, I can tell you that it's time that balance was found. For too long the environment and the economy have been set against each other; for too long partisans or special interest groups -- some of them with spikes to hammer into standing timber, some of them with corporate expense accounts -- have made our forests a battleground for their private wars. But now British Columbia has a government that means to do the right thing by the public forests, a government unbeholden to one side or another, a government prepared to act for the good of all.
[12:30]
I, along with the people of the Comox Valley, look forward to reviewing the findings of Stephen Owen's commission into the use of forest lands. I also look forward to the public examination of our province's environmental laws, and to debating in this assembly the government's proposal to strengthen and update the relevant acts. I look forward to that debate because, although I am new to this place and it is early in the term of this assembly, I have a sense that the members gathered here from all parties are ready to give British Columbia the best set of environmental laws of any jurisdiction in this continent.
Hon. Speaker, I look forward to all of the debates, and I look forward to seeing the mandate of this government fulfilled, with balanced, fair and open government established for once and for all in this province.
I have been talking about looking forward, as one naturally does at the beginning of any great venture. I know it does not do well to dwell too much on the past, but I believe some things must be said. British Columbians have suffered greatly over the past few years. The damage cannot be counted only in the audits of public accounts or in the number of criminal charges laid. Damage has been done not just to parties and individuals but to the public's confidence in the very institutions of government. There is only one way to make good again the harm that has been done, and that is to show the people of British Columbia that we are worthy of their trust. We must prove to the people that despite the partisan nature of our parliamentary system, we prize some things above electability and above a few extra points in the public opinion polls. We must show the public that we honour the institution of parliament itself -- the traditions and the standards for which women and men in this country, for centuries, have struggled, made sacrifices and have died. After the past few years, the institution does indeed stand in need of some repair. I hope that together the members of this assembly can rebuild and renew the people's faith in the government of their province and their elected representatives.
I believe we can. I believe that, beyond the issues of the day, this is what we've been sent here to do. And I believe that restoring the public's faith in the honour and integrity of their public servants would ultimately be the most lasting contribution that any of us could make toward the future of British Columbia.
F. Gingell: I am honoured today to rise in the Legislature of British Columbia to make my first speech. The voters of Delta South have given me the opportunity to be here. At the same time, they have given me the responsibility to present their views, to enunciate their concerns and to contribute, in their name, to good government in this province.
By my accent you can tell that I am a Canadian by choice. I am looking forward to a day next month, April 29, when I will celebrate the fortieth anniversary of my arrival here. I grew up in a village north of London, which was then in the constituency of Woodford. It was held during my years by Sir Winston Churchill. My interest in politics goes back to the day that I met the young lady who would become my wife. I met her at a political meeting in the village. I have to say that it was a meeting of the Young Conservatives.
Interjection.
F. Gingell: Well, we all have to start somewhere. I believe it was Winston Churchill who said that if a person is not a socialist at the age of 21, they have no heart; and if they're not a conservative at 30, they have no brain.
Interjection.
F. Gingell: I believe that he got his directions mixed up, and I also think that the Premier -- who I am sorry is not here -- might concur.
While I'm on the subject of the past, I'm grateful to be the second Liberal MLA to be voted into service by the citizens of Delta. The first was John Oliver, who was elected in the seat of Westminster-Delta in 1900 and served in this Legislature as Premier from 1918 to 1927. In those days politicians were allowed to hold more than one riding. "Honest John" Oliver resigned his Delta riding in 1924 and continued to represent Victoria until his death in August 1927. Delta has waited a long time for another Liberal representative -- 67 years. That seems to me to be a reasonable period of time for other political parties to wait for a change of political colour again.
Delta South is a diverse area. It can be described as suburban, with enough farmlands, wetlands and shoreline to be an important ecological resource. Delta South includes the communities of Ladner, Tsawwassen, Beach Grove, Boundary Bay, east Delta and the western end of Panorama Ridge, and more than 20,000 acres of farmland. There is the rapidly growing Tilbury Island industrial park, a cement plant, sawmills and other industries on the south shore of the Fraser, Burns Bog and Westham Island, with its internationally recognized Reifel Migratory Bird Sanctuary. George Reifel gifted the sanctuary to the B.C. Water Fowl Society in the early 1970s. He wanted the land to be maintained in perpetuity. Some members may not know that George Reifel passed away early this month. I extend my condolences to his family, salute his service to his community, and add my gratitude to that of all British Columbians for his priceless gift to our environment and the protection of wildlife.
[ Page 84 ]
Delta South is also the home of the Tsawwassen Indian band, a growing band located on 400 acres straddling the ferry causeway, an economically progressive band who have developments that are a credit to our community. They are led by Chief Tony Jacobs, who is now also chairman of the Coast Salish nation. They are a culturally significant band and are trustees of a major archaeological site, which they are preserving and carefully developing to be an important educational resource.
There are more than 40,000 people in Delta South. The quality and protection of the environment is important to them. Delta was the first municipality in the province to offer class 1 curbside recycling. That was introduced in 1988. That program came out of volunteer efforts of citizens who formed the Delta Recycling Society in 1984, and had in fact begun their work back in 1979. Today that society serves as a model for communities around the province. Ninety percent of the people of Delta South now participate in this recycling program.
May I remind the members of this Legislature that in 1989 the people of Tsawwassen paid for their own referendum on a development proposal. That proposal was subsequently turned down, following the longest public hearing in Canadian history. That citizens' vote brought international attention. These are people of conviction. They are dedicated and active, and I am challenged to address their needs in this House.
Much has been said but little done by the previous administration in two crucial areas. The first is recognition of the unique character and importance of Boundary Bay in the Pacific flyway of migratory birds. In 1970 a UNESCO convention on wetlands decided to identify important wetlands around the world. Canada is a signatory to that international agreement. Simply stated, Canada agreed to designate important wetland areas.
For the past 11 years the transfer of the Boundary Bay wetlands outside the dike that rings the bay has been bureaucratically tied up in this Legislature. I understand the first step is a section 101 transfer of this area from the Ministry of Lands to the Ministry of Environment -- surely not a difficult task now that these two ministries have been joined. The next step is the designation of Boundary Bay as a wildlife management area under the Wildlife Act. This is not a threatening proposal. It is simply a matter of protecting the water and the foreshore of the bay so that any use of it will have to take wildlife into account. It brings international recognition and enhances scientific knowledge. It is not, as a previous government official tried to intimate, a plot by the United Nations to take over B.C. land. It is shameful we have not acted sooner to protect our living natural heritage.
I understand the Premier introduced, in the thirty-fourth parliament, a private member's bill to establish the Boundary Bay wildlife management area. I can assure him of my support if he reintroduces the bill in this parliament, or I shall look for his should I get the matter on the table first.
The second crucial area is the disposition of garbage and the protection of Burns Bog. The previous administration encouraged the Greater Vancouver Regional District to seek and implement a program of recycling and recovery at our landfill site. Nothing was done. We continue to desecrate the bog, inefficiently and ineffectively disposing of our garbage. The garbage comes not only from Delta but from the ridings of 15 other members of this assembly. I urge them to urge this administration to revive this initiative. There are logical, economic solutions. Let's get on with it.
Our community faces the challenge of the competing demands of urban development and agriculture. Delta is one of the most important agricultural areas in the province. Due to favourable climate conditions, the area is among those with the greatest number of sunshine hours in British Columbia -- as you probably all know -- productive soils, flat topography which allows for mechanization and effective drainage and irrigation, and proximity to markets. The area is capable of producing a wide range of crops.
This description comes from The Delta Agricultural Study, due to be presented and discussed in open meeting on March 25. I commend this report to the government. It highlights the problems faced by Delta farmers. If we are serious about retaining agricultural use of our farmlands and allowing farmers to make a living competing only with other farmers, rather than with residential tract developers, then we need to act now.
Another major concern of the people of Delta South is traffic. Highways 10 and 17 are barely capable of handling the traffic generated by our communities, let alone the enormous traffic loads created by both cross-border shopping and ferries. Since the Mid-Island Express was inaugurated in May 1990, there has been a steady increase in traffic along Highway 17. One superferry is under construction, and commitment has been given to building the second. The provincial government and B.C. Ferries must work with our municipal government to find acceptable solutions to traffic congestion before additional loads are inflicted on our already overloaded infrastructure.
[12:45]
I was a candidate -- unsuccessful, as you can see -- in the 1988 federal election. The reasons I ran were my concern for Canada -- which I did not believe deserved a second term of a Mulroney Tory government -- and the issue of the U.S.-Canada trade agreement. I am a Liberal, therefore I am all for freer trade, but it was madness to inflict it on an unprepared Canada. We did not even have free trade between provinces. We still don't. How could Canadian companies or branch plants, used to protective barriers, suddenly compete against companies organized to serve a market ten times larger? The concerns I expressed then about lost jobs and closed plants turned out to be true. Now we have to face the world the way it is. We have no magic wand to wave to change our businesses and manufacturers into highly competitive, world-class operations. The government cannot legislate that, but they can create an environment that will allow business to grow and flourish. I did not hear anything in the throne speech that will help stem the flow of businesses to Whatcom County. It concerns me that what I did hear
[ Page 85 ]
could turn the flow into a stampede. You still have time, Mr. Minister of Finance; the budget is not yet delivered. First we must downsize government; that's the number one important step. And secondly, we must downsize taxes. That requires new solutions and new ways of doing things. We can no longer afford to vacillate, delay and do nothing.
As you know, until recent redistribution, Delta was a two-seat constituency. In redistribution, the riding was divided into Delta North and Delta South. I congratulate my friend and colleague Norm Lortie on his election to this House as the member for Delta North. We have known each other for many years, and I'm sure we will continue to work together for the good of our community as we have in the past.
And, as is custom, it gives me pleasure to recognize the contributions and commitment of my predecessor, John Savage. He worked hard for his constituents, undertook responsibilities as Minister of Agriculture, and invested a great deal of energy in this House. I know that I can count on his counsel in matters agricultural, even though I can't count on his vote.
And finally, I wish to pay tribute to my wife, my family and the many people -- friends and strangers -- who supported me in my campaign. I wish to assure them, as well as the people who voted for John Savage and Brent Kennedy, and even the people who didn't vote at all, that I will work for their interests and for preserving the unique character of Delta South.
Hon. T. Perry moved adjournment of the debate.
Motion approved.
Hon. G. Clark moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
The House adjourned at 12:49 p.m.
[ Return to Legislative Assembly Home Page ]
Copyright © 1992, 2001: Queen's Printer, Victoria, B.C., Canada