1993 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 35th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
(Hansard)
FRIDAY, APRIL 16, 1993
Morning Sitting
Volume 8, Number 24
[ Page 5223 ]
The House met at 10:01 a.m.
Deputy Clerk: Pursuant to standing orders, the House is advised of the unavoidable absence of the Speaker.
[E. Barnes in the chair.]
Prayers.
L. Reid: I would like to introduce to the House today the newest grandfather in the Liberal caucus. The hon. member for North Vancouver-Seymour is the proud grandfather of a baby girl born yesterday.
D. Lovick: I rise this morning to offer what I will call a tentative introduction. I had a piece of paper identifying the group; it seems to have gone missing. To the best of my knowledge, in the precincts today is a group of students from Woodlands Secondary School in Nanaimo. I would ask my colleagues to please join me in making them welcome, if they are here.
BLOOD SUPPLIES
L. Reid: I rise today to speak on the safety of blood supplies in British Columbia and also in our nation of Canada. According to the Red Cross, thousands of Canadians are becoming their own blood donors, building up a supply of their own blood before surgery in order to guard against the risk of contracting HIV through transfusions. An issue of incredible importance is the safety of blood products for hemophiliacs. In an article dated November 1992, it says that a total of 2,981 patients stored 8,500 units of blood with Red Cross centres across the country in a one-year period. Concerns about the quality of donated blood have been raised, with calls from the Canadian Hemophilia Society for an inquiry into how hemophiliacs, whose blood won't clot, received tainted blood products in the early eighties. Since 1985 the Red Cross has screened all blood donations for antibodies to HIV, the virus believed to be the cause of AIDS. It is possible to get contaminated blood from someone recently infected with HIV, because donations are screened for HIV antibodies but not for the virus itself. This is a tremendous concern, and, again, we have an issue of understanding how critical safe blood products are to hemophiliacs in this country.
Hemophilia is often described as a blood disorder, and hemophiliacs are referred to as "bleeders." That's a bit misleading, because in fact hemophiliacs do not bleed more rapidly than anyone else. The problem lies in stopping the bleeding: the clotting or coagulation process, which is impaired to a greater or lesser extent in hemophiliacs. The issue then becomes how much damage is done before clotting takes place. Bleeding into a joint -- for example, a knee or an ankle -- may lead to a crippling deformation of the affected joint. Bleeding may also lead to the creation of intolerable pressure on the organ, and eventual death.
Hemophilia is an inherited disorder of blood clotting in which there is a deficiency or total lack of a specific blood-clotting factor. In fact, human blood contains 13 different blood-clotting factors. This abnormality generally delays coagulation when bleeding occurs, whether internal or external. In most cases, if adequately treated by an intravenous infusion of a specific blood product obtained from human blood donation and applicable to the type of hemophilia, a normal, stable condition can be achieved.
Approximately one male birth in 5,000 is a hemophiliac. So, hon. Speaker, you can appreciate the critical nature of the problem. There are individuals who require an infusion of a blood product on a daily, weekly and monthly basis. There are concerns today -- and have been for the last number of years -- that the product they must have for their survival is somehow contaminated or tainted and will not lend itself to their best interest. It's an issue for hemophiliacs and their families.
There was an article in November 1992 about a young gentleman who is now 23 and who needed to receive plasma three times a week. You can appreciate how much urgency and apprehension would be involved three times a week, wondering if the product you were going to have injected into your body was safe. U.S. doctors noticed a link between the AIDS virus and hemophiliacs as early as 1982. If that is indeed the case, we've had people wondering about the safety of a product for over ten years. It's a tremendous issue. I quote from the Globe and Mail, again in November 1992: "AIDS Infection Called Horror. More than 1,000 Canadians contracted the AIDS virus from contaminated blood products and transfusions before screening began in November, 1985."
"U.S. Blood Blamed for Cases of AIDS," and again the Red Cross is seeking an inquiry. This article comes from Montreal: "The infection of almost 800 hemophiliacs with the AIDS virus in the early 1980s could have been largely avoided if Canada had produced its own blood concentrates instead of importing them from the United States, the head of the Canadian Red Cross says."
I believe these are issues that must be addressed by this Legislature, because they are issues of public safety. I would submit that these are urgent issues of public safety. Those of us who do not require blood transfusions in the case of disease, trauma or accident are going to be less aware of how urgent this particular case is, but to be a hemophiliac today in Canada causes tremendous concern. It certainly causes concern for people who must seek medical service, and who have absolutely no choice as to the kinds of services that they are going to require on a regular basis.
The article continues: "...Canada still imports more than 40 percent of its blood products, and remains the 'only important industrialized nation without a frac-
[ Page 5224 ]
tionation plant'." Blood plasma is fractionated, or split into components, to produce the 13 specific clotting factors that hemophiliacs need to stay alive. These are significant issues, and I would suggest that we take a look at where we're going as a province, because there are issues that we have not addressed.
M. Lord: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to respond to the Health critic member of the opposition on this very important issue of safety of blood products. First of all, I want to explain to hon. members that I have a great deal of experience in this area. Before being elected in October '91, I had a long and, I believe, successful career as a medical laboratory technologist, and worked for many years in the area of immunohematology -- or blood-banking, as it is more commonly known.
[10:15]
[V. Anderson in the chair.]
From that perspective, I think it is first of all incumbent upon me to warn all hon. members about the ramifications of raising spectres of fear around the safety of blood products in British Columbia. Indeed, in this province we are fortunate to have the British Columbia and Yukon division of the Canadian Red Cross. We have the finest, highest-quality blood transfusion system of any province in Canada or any country in the world.
First of all, the medical and social history of all blood donors is screened very carefully. When the blood products are received from those donors, they are screened very rigidly. There certainly were events that occurred in the early eighties that are under investigation. The federal government has commissioned an investigation under the leadership of Tory MP Dr. Stan Wilbee. That committee has formed a subcommittee on health issues, and they have taken testimonials from hemophiliacs who did contract the HIV virus from tainted blood in the early eighties.
Things have changed since the early eighties. As I say, blood is now screened very rigidly. The impact of people being afraid to receive blood or blood products needs to be recognized by all members of this House. As a hospital worker, I have witnessed first-hand some of the ramifications of that fear. I have seen people who have been in automobile accidents, or who have had a particularly traumatic delivery of a child, refuse to take blood, thereby risking their lives. I have seen people afraid to donate blood, because they're afraid of the needles and of being in the venue where there are blood and blood products. So we all need to be cognizant of these kinds of issues.
Recently the government of Nova Scotia agreed to compensate hemophiliacs who contracted AIDS during the early eighties from tainted blood or blood products. This decision certainly came as a surprise to other provincial Ministries of Health across the country, who had agreed to deal with this issue united, and who had agreed not to act unilaterally. However, the Nova Scotia decision has raised this issue again, and our Minister of Health has committed to take another long look at the previous decision, and she has been quoted as saying: "We would have been better if we could have waited until September, because then we could have discussed it and come up with a position that would have meant no matter where you lived you'd have the same circumstances."
Finally, I think we all agree that culpability is not the issue here, but compassion is. I think that government, representing society, does have a responsibility to take another look at this very difficult issue.
L. Reid: To continue with how we respond to this very pressing issue: there are two reports, and both reports call for an examination, a scrutiny, of process. They both look at the current problems experienced by many hemophiliacs who have contracted the AIDS virus as a direct result of delays in implementation of any type of blood-screening process.
This is an issue of individual rights that needs to addressed. I quote from the Vancouver Sun of today's date, April 16: in Toronto, "Canada's largest children's hospital is urging 1,700 former patients who received blood transfusions in the early 1980s to take tests for the virus linked to AIDS." Again, this is a tremendous issue in terms of where we go from here.
Canada risks a shortage of blood products vital for a broad range of medical treatments if it continues to depend entirely on foreign suppliers. There are two issues: the safety of the product may in fact be linked to whether or not we can produce the clotting products within Canada.
As long as hemophiliacs are infusing products made from blood, the potential for infection from blood-borne viruses is very real. In the 1980s the bloodproduct system was not able to prevent HIV from decimating the hemophiliac community. Could it happen again? Yes, because the flaws in the system have not been corrected. "The Canadian Blood Agency in 1992 seems no more accountable than the Canadian Blood Committee in 1984." Those are the words of David Page, who is the president of the Canadian Hemophilia Society.
Just two days ago, April 14, 1993, the province of Nova Scotia broke with the federal government and the provinces who supported a 1991 agreement not to take action. For me it's a sad day when provinces come together in an attempt to legitimize inaction or inactivity. What an issue to maintain solidarity on! It's time for this government to take some action and to respond very directly to this issue. I'm not committed to believing that we can wait another six months to take action. We need to be responsible for citizens in British Columbia.
AIDS ADVISORY SECRETARIAT
E. Barnes: I am indeed pleased to have a chance to make some remarks on this critical and urgent topic. Before beginning my statement, I would like to comment on the previous speaker and the dilemma that we find ourselves in with respect to tainted products. Those of us who in the past relied with confidence on
[ Page 5225 ]
blood transfusions are now realizing that we're all at risk in one way or another, with the fear of becoming contaminated by the AIDS virus. I can appreciate the urgency with which the member speaks, but I would like to assure her that this government is very aware of the need to try to correct some of the wrongs of the past, especially in the case of hemophiliacs. It's a problem that we here today didn't create but have inherited, and we're trying to address it. I'm sure all members will do their best to see that justice is done with respect to those individuals.
Just a few weeks ago -- in fact, April 4 -- I had the opportunity of making an announcement on behalf of the Minister of Health to a B.C. AIDS network forum that took place at the Chateau Granville Hotel in the city of Vancouver. Organizations, community groups and people involved in the AIDS struggle met to work on strategies and ways in which they might cooperate in dealing with a problem that affects each and every one of us. Some 29 organizations who receive contracts or sustaining funds in order to address such programs as needle exchanges, educational health advisory and so forth were there, mostly from the Greater Vancouver area and Vancouver Island, but also from the Okanagan, the Kootenays, along the coast and all over the province.
The problem with this whole process of providing resources is the ad hockery that makes it very difficult to make the maximum use of dollars available. The message that I have to bring to the hon. members today, although it was announced on April 4, is that there is now an AIDS Secretariat in place which attempts to improve the means by which decisions are made with respect to allocating dollars to the various organizations that have been providing the services.
There is $2.5 million available under the current health budget. It was recognized that the problem, of course, was that unless there was some systematic way of dealing with these allocations in a fair and equitable way, there were going to be difficulties with members feeling that they were not getting the dollars they required. There is now a process of making recommendations for nominees, primarily from the AIDS community, the scientific, medical and research communities and from the ministry as well.
There are going to be 21 representatives of equal proportion from these primary groups. They're going to have a meagre budget of $80,000, which will only provide for a clerical administrative assistant and a researcher. It is hoped that most of the participants will be from the lower mainland, primarily to cut costs; however, there will be representation from right across the province.
This is a breakthrough in terms of cooperation, of decentralization and of getting the people who are most experienced, who have a hands-on relationship with issues and who are involved directly, to be able to make recommendations to the government. It is as a result of those people's efforts that the ministry is responding to this challenge. I just want to say that the recommendations and allocations, and the review which will be involved in providing AIDS treatment ideas, and studying the process that is taking place on a regular basis and advising on issues related to the quality of care and access to services, are going to be the primary mandate of this committee. We all know this is something that should be taking place, and it is not going to be easy. When the government gets an advisory group involved and gives them that kind of responsibility, there are some people who feel that the government is somehow avoiding direct responsibility for allocating funds and making some of the difficult political decisions. But I don't think that this is really valid in this case, because the government needs to be part of the process with the community, and there has to be trust and confidence in the community's ability to take the responsibility needed to make proper assessments, to do the proper analysis of the benefit that is being received for the dollars expended.
In the last fiscal period the Ministry of Health made available almost $3 million; $2.5 million was allocated for groups that existed in the community, but in some cases there were problems with respect to sufficient funds being made available. This is something that the ministry doesn't like, but until it gets knowledgable input from the community itself, there are going to be disparities and obvious complaints about the process and how decisions are being made.
I think this is an excellent challenge. However, it is only going to be an experimental exercise for two years. On April 4 there was a positive reception to this idea from representatives of the various networks across the province. The key is that all participants will have to put whatever differences may exist between them aside long enough to look at the main objective, which is to try and save lives, and to try and prevent future cases from arising.
[10:30]
This problem of AIDS/HIV is something that most people need basic understanding about. I think there is still the attitude that the problem is not mine; it's someone else's. That is a very dangerous state of mind to be in, because we're finding that people are becoming infected without their knowledge because of the very long incubation period of the virus. It can be in someone's system for five, ten, 15 and even 20 years. It is horrifying to think that you don't know that you are carrying a deadly virus in your system. So I think that we just have to be very aware of our equal responsibilities.
Hon. Speaker, you should have advised me -- my time is up. I just noticed the red light, so I'll take my place.
L. Reid: I'm privileged to respond to this issue, which was brought to the floor by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard, and I am pleased that you were allowed to continue. Your remarks are very critical to our understanding of this issue.
The 21-member secretariat that's to be formed has suggested that it will have key representation and a scientific and research base, so that we can glean a greater understanding of where we need to go in developing a cure for this very dreaded disease, and hopefully some understanding, which I believe will be
[ Page 5226 ]
brought to the table by the community groups that are going to be involved.
The issues before us today are quality of care and access to services. There is no doubt that people who have contracted the AIDS virus have human rights issues that need to be placed on the table at every opportunity. If this secretariat is able to provide that service, if it's able to bring greater understanding and greater awareness of what the issues truly are, it will have my full support. Certainly having the funding decided at a community level makes sense to me. I believe we need to take a look at that. I would applaud the diversity that that committee may be composed of and that there may indeed be decision-makers who bring new ideas and perspectives to the table. I think that is something we need to take a very careful look at.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard looked at this as a two-year pilot project, and the minister suggested that there will be an evaluation. I'd be very interested to learn who will be responsible for performing the evaluation on such a committee.
I would also like to suggest that this committee could be a tribute to Dr. Peter Jepson-Young, because he believed very strongly in the initiatives that this committee will bring to the table. He believed in allowing people to grow and in combatting intolerance through education. I believe very strongly that that is the way for this committee to proceed. Unless we tackle the intolerance head-on, we're not going to make great strides in understanding this disease or in ensuring that all possible community resources are put in place. There are still some people who do not see the urgency or the need for research dollars for a scientific examination of this disease, so that some of the finest scientific minds in British Columbia can go forward and attempt to get a handle on where we are headed with this disease.
I believe Dr. Peter would see the value in the secretariat as a brand-new initiative. He would see how necessary it is for all people, all parties, all British Columbians, all Canadians and all people on this planet to come together because they believe strongly in the need to understand more about this disease. That is where I hope we go.
In terms of the future of the secretariat, I believe it's a partnership. If it brings different decision-makers and perspectives to the table, the official opposition will applaud that. We will look very strongly for progress and new directions which will flow from this very exciting partnership.
E. Barnes: Just to conclude the point I was making before, it is urgent that this committee gets moving right away, because there is an allocation of $2.5 million for the 1993-94 fiscal year. It is hoped that the 21 nominees will have been selected by mid-summer and certainly before the fall. Many people will be involved in this process, and it's going to take quite a bit of time. But we're hoping that we can achieve it as soon as possible.
I would just like to say that the government of British Columbia will continue to address, in consultation with interested parties, specific areas of concern, such as the rights of HIV/AIDS persons; education and prevention for students; housing and social assistance for people with HIV/AIDS; HIV/AIDS and prison inmates, corrections officers and other people working in prisons; HIV/AIDS and the workplace; women and children; and the multicultural language issues needed in addressing HIV/AIDS.
Elements of the government's strategy can be organized into three primary categories: education and prevention, treatment and related issues, and research. The assistant deputy minister's committee on social policy has a continuing interministerial committee to consider and coordinate relevant issues related to HIV/AIDS. The B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS and related viral diseases advises the Minister of Health regarding the technical and scientific aspects of HIV/AIDS. Within the government, the interministry AIDS coordinating committee, representing different ministries concerned with HIV/AIDS, will continue to meet regularly to share information and coordinate programs. The Education ministry's family life education curriculum, which includes instruction on sexuality and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, is taught in grades 7 to 12. Development of curriculum for grades 4 to 6 is underway. The Ministry of Advanced Education, Training and Technology is requesting that HIV/AIDS policies be established and coordinated throughout the college system. Twelve of the 15 colleges in British Columbia already have formal HIV/AIDS policies, and all colleges participate in various public information activities for students and employees. Alcohol and drug programs has contracted Surrey Family Services to manage an intraministry AIDS prevention outreach program. Green Thumb Theatre of Vancouver has directed and produced a play, "Cost of Living," which is about HIV/AIDS as seen by a high school student.
J. Beattie: Hon. Speaker, I ask leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
J. Beattie: There is someone in the chamber today who is very important to me: my son, Cedric Beattie, who is down for the weekend. We're going off to Carmanah Valley. I'd like the House to make him welcome.
[E. Barnes in the chair.]
Hon. T. Perry: I wonder if I too might ask leave of the House to make a brief introduction.
Leave granted.
Hon. T. Perry: In the House with us today are 70 students from the grades 9 to 11 classes at Eric Hamber high school in the Vancouver-Little Mountain riding. I'll be meeting with them in a few minutes. I would ask members to please make them welcome.
[ Page 5227 ]
HATZIC ROCK
D. Streifel: It's my pleasure to rise in the House this morning to speak on Hatzic Rock. I've mentioned Hatzic Rock before in other presentations in the House, and the formal announcement that I participated in a week ago yesterday with the Premier, the Aboriginal Affairs minister and the Minister of Tourism and Culture has been a long time coming. We stress in this instance the culture part of the announcement. But our wait has been very short when compared to the wait of the first peoples of this province and this country to begin telling the story of what the first peoples really mean.
The history of this rock site, as it is called today, in the area of Mission-Kent goes back some 9,000 years and tells the story of a civilized settlement and an industrious people. The Sto:lo people of the Fraser Valley carried on lumbering, fishing and trading. They were spiritual gatherers and a well-organized community. A house site has been excavated -- what we would today call the basement of a home. The first one excavated is 5,000 years old, and it predates Stonehenge and the pyramids of Egypt. It's an absolute marvel. It rewrites the history of the first peoples of this province and the perception that we've had of gatherers and hunters in that area. In fact, it was a civilized, structured, committed society.
Over the last couple of years we've had a process in place that's been participated in by Friends of Hatzic Rock, by government, by the community at large and, more importantly, by the Sto:lo people of the lower Fraser Valley. It's important to recognize that when the B.C. government acquired the 7.25 hectares that encompass the rock, as it's called, and the archaeological dig site just a few kilometres east of Mission, the process for the acquisition of the site was somewhat complicated. We structured a land swap. We took Crown land -- land that is held by the people of British Columbia -- and swapped it for a piece of land that was held privately. This is probably what led to a little delay, so to speak. It took two years to accomplish this process. We're very proud that during this process there was complete cooperation from the developer, Mr. Harry Utzig of Calgary. He participated openly, because, in his own words, he felt that the stories of the first peoples of this country haven't been told often enough. When the archaeological findings were first uncovered on his development site, he voluntarily pulled back his equipment, permitted archaeologists from UBC and SFU to come in and structure a dig, and welcomed the participation of the first peoples. In fact, their own resident archaeologist, Gordon Mohs, had spent a year or so on the site excavating the basement and uncovering thousands and thousands of artifacts.
The province is offering this site the fullest possible protection through the acquisition. The rock's great cultural and spiritual values are now intact, and the potential of the site is now in the hands of the people of British Columbia. For those for whom it has a special value, the Sto:lo, the community and the B.C. Heritage Trust will be entrusted to work together to determine the future of this site.
I think it's very important that we recognize that we'll be going forward together as a community and as a province in developing this site with full cooperation from the first peoples. The story must be told of what "first peoples of this country" actually means. We think back on heritage areas and ancestry. My wife traces her ancestry back to the Mayflower pilgrims, and that's pretty impressive. It doesn't anywhere near impress 9,000 years of continuous habitation on what I suppose was at the time fairly prime beachfront property.
I'd like to read a little bit about this site from an introduction that was written to specifically address the site at a fundraiser we had some two summers ago in Mission, where artists from all across British Columbia donated works in order to fully support the site and what they'd done. It was on Thanksgiving Day in 1990 when Gordon Mohs noticed the bulldozers working at the site. He was concerned that the rock, the site and the archaeological dig would be threatened, and they acted very swiftly to preserve and work toward bringing forward the story of the Sto:lo, the first people of the Fraser Valley.
The discovery of thousands of artifacts and imported stones indicates that the peoples who lived there traded, as we trade with our neighbours to the south and to the east. Lumbering tools were discovered. The home that was built there some 5,000 years ago was a cedar-plank home. The lumbering tools that were in place indicate that there was a consistent, ongoing sharing of the forests and the resources with all those around.
When we've included this site in the B.C. Heritage Trust, it will more fully tell the story of the settlement of British Columbia -- the history of 9,000 years of continuous habitation on this same site. I have to repeat it often, because it absolutely boggles my mind that 9,000 years ago there was a structured society living within our community that we so prize today. We have included, for all the peoples of the world to witness and enjoy, this most welcome site.
The Hatzic Rock site has had international recognition and was featured on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. It's been in Equinox magazine, and I believe it's a featured site in the new Time-Life publications.
Hon. Speaker, I see the red light has come on. I will pleased to stand at the end and carry on.
[10:45]
J. Weisgerber: It's a pleasure for me to stand and acknowledge the successful acquisition of Hatzic Rock and the site surrounding it. It's an important site. It is certainly well worth preserving; it's essential that it be preserved. I want to commend the government for concluding the negotiations for the transfer. They have gone on for some time now. They were in fact started by the previous administration, but it was the support of the people like the Friends of Hatzic Rock, the Sto:lo people particularly and the cooperation of the developer who owned the property, all working together, that made it possible to preserve this site.
There are other sites around British Columbia. We should recognize that there will be a need in the future
[ Page 5228 ]
to identify and preserve sites such as the middens, that provide an enormous historical reference and accumulation of evidence of development and societal activities. These are really critical. In our society, we take a lot of pride in preserving historical buildings, and that's important. But most of the buildings that we are preserving in Canada are 100 or 150 years old; occasionally, they are 400 or 500 years old. I applaud the people who make the effort to preserve those buildings, but there are historical sites, aboriginal sites, that are much older, more complex and more historically significant to British Columbia and to Canada. Western Canada, particularly the coastal societies, has a tremendous history, and any time that we have an opportunity to preserve the evidence of those societies, we should do so. It's a really important undertaking, and it's one that I again commend the government for getting involved in.
I want to take this opportunity to recognize the contributions made by John Savage, who was Minister of Native Affairs at the time negotiations were started, and by Norm Jacobsen, the MLA for Dewdney at that time, who was also involved, because they did start a process. The government has concluded it. I dug a press release out of my files that was issued on August 30, 1991, by the two people I just mentioned. At that time they were providing a small contribution to the Sto:lo people to help work on the preservation of the site.
It's not important who did it or when it was done. The important thing is that it was accomplished and that we should continue to work to preserve things like Hatzic Rock. I want to conclude by saying that I support this activity and future activities because they are essential to the pride that we have in our history and in the long history of British Columbia, which goes much further back than the settlement of this province by non-aboriginal people.
V. Anderson: In the minute left, I would just like to say that we would concur -- very much so, because I live and have my office at a midden, which likewise recognizes the Musqueam people and their long heritage. It's the same as the Sto:lo people. We appreciate that this recognition is coming forward in ever larger opportunities.
D. Streifel: I'm going to resist the temptation to go into detail about who, how and why these site negotiations first began, because I believe that would sully what we've done here British Columbia for all the peoples of the world. I thank the two speakers who just preceded me for their support of the first peoples, the community and the province in this most welcome endeavour.
At this time I must thank some specific individuals: Linnea Battel, from the Friends of Hatzic Rock, for her unceasing patience and her dedication to this process; Sto:lo Nation Canada and Sto:lo Tribal Council Chief Cat Pennier -- Cat, thank you very much for your patience, which has just been marvellous; Gordon Mohs, one of the most gentle individuals I've ever met in my life -- he spends his time bringing forward the story of the first peoples of this province.... I don't have enough time to thank every individual. But we do know that these individuals will be participating with us, the ministries, the government and the community in the future of this site, and that the Ministry of Culture and the B.C. Heritage Trust will now work with Sto:lo people, local groups and other interested parties, including the local MLA and the Member of Parliament, to develop a process which can lead to a long-term plan for the site.
Plans are underway for the B.C. Heritage Trust to meet with representatives of the Sto:lo and Friends of Hatzic Rock Society to begin the planning process. Development options for the site will be determined by local community members, working closely with the government. The key to this is that there's local community involvement, and the first peoples of this province will be right on the front lines directing and educating the rest of the world on what the true meaning of first peoples of this country really is.
Hon. M. Sihota: Hon. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply.
The House in Committee of Supply; D. Streifel in the chair.
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND
MINISTRY RESPONSIBLE FOR MULTICULTURALISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS
On vote 25: minister's office, $410,000.
Hon. G. Clark: I'm delighted to participate in these estimates debate. The Ministry of Education spends roughly $3.3 billion. To put it in the scheme of things, we spent $6 billion on health care, roughly $3 billion on education and $1 billion on post-secondary education, so it consumes an enormous amount of taxpayer money. Therefore it's of great interest to the Minister of Finance -- as well, I know, to all members of the House.
I might say that when you look at some of the comments from members across the way, deep cuts in education spending would be a requirement. They claim we need significant cuts in government spending. You can't have deep cuts in government spending without deep cuts in education and health care. That's simply a fact; every member who looks at the books knows that. We on this side of the House have said that we clearly need to cut spending, and we have done that. But we want to maintain enough spending -- even if it's challenging -- to protect the basic health and education system of this province, which is among the best in the country.
On the education side, we increased spending by about 3 percent for the school system. We have slightly less than a 3 percent population growth. These are challenging budgets, but they clearly -- and I'm very proud to say it -- are the highest of any province in Canada. We have managed to protect the education system from the deep slashing which the members of
[ Page 5229 ]
the Liberal and the Social Credit Parties have consistently portrayed in the House.
As we continue to keep control of spending and move forward in the recovery, I look forward to improvements in our education system. I know the government is committed to that. I hope members in the opposition will see the error of their ways, and see that deep cuts to education spending are not the foundation upon which you build a strong and vibrant economy or society. I'm very proud to be part of a government that has, financially and in every other way, maintained a solid commitment to education financing and reform. I applaud the Minister of Education for the tremendous job she's doing in protecting, enhancing and improving the quality of education for our young people, so that we can lay the foundations for strong economic growth in the years to come.
Hon. A. Hagen: It's always a great welcome for me to have the Minister of Finance, with whom I have worked very closely in developing the Education budget, provide the House with a broad perspective as we begin our formal estimates debate. I'm honoured to introduce the '93-94 budget for the Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human Rights.
I think the priority we place on this part of our work is reflected by the fact that for the second year we are bringing the Education estimates forward first. I think that says that the government is proud of our work in this area and that we want to have the debate take place early so that our partners in education may get on with their work in the 75 school districts in the province, which represent so many people who labour for our children.
The details of the budget will indeed show our government's strong commitment to the education of our students through the settlement services necessary for our new citizens and immigrants: pursuing the investment opportunities that immigration creates, dealing with cultural and racism issues which diversity can sometimes bring, and ensuring the appropriate response to citizens' concerns regarding their treatment, as we pursue human rights for all our citizens.
As I begin, I would like to draw the attention of members and people in the gallery to the fine examples of students' art in the corridors of our Legislature. For the first time, we have a students' art centre, and that is an opportunity for us to see, on a rotating basis, a demonstration of the creativity and wonder that is part of children's art. I must say, too, that I enjoy a rotating exhibit in my office. I invite you, in your tour, to come in anytime to see some of the work that students provide and that is noted by everyone who visits my office.
Without question, the budget for this year has been drafted with great thought. Let me put it into some context for all of us. Migration to our province is high. In 1991 almost 30,000 new Canadians arrived in British Columbia, and over 80,000 new British Columbians arrived from elsewhere in Canada. These trends have an obvious and dramatic effect on our student populations. Enrolment is higher than ever in the province. We have 550,000 students enrolled in the public schools and 46,000 in various independent schools, and an additional 21,000 students are registered in correspondence schools, adult education programs and home schooling.
[11:00]
As well, over 100 languages are spoken in the homes of our students in British Columbia, ranging from the old aboriginal languages to languages that many of us are just beginning to know exist within our human family. Over 40,000 students receive English-as-an-additional-language services -- almost three times as many as five years ago. Over 50,000 students receive special education services -- again, a significant increase over recent years.
Changing family conditions, as well, are affecting the nature of our student body, as we have more and more single-parent families, families with low incomes, or situations of abuse or neglect. The age of our students is increasing. First of all, I know that all of you will be pleased to note that more and more youth are choosing to stay in school. They're often working part-time and going to school part-time. In addition, as I noted earlier, many adults are using our schools as community centres to bring their education to a graduation level. Without question, these trends represent challenges for my ministry, for all those working in the field and for government.
I want to deal now with the Education portion of my portfolio. I want to say first that we are educating our young people to be active citizens and full participants in their communities. As well, as all our members know, ensuring a successful economy, the creation of new jobs and our position in a global marketplace hinges on having skilled, trained, well-educated citizens. This is challenging for all of us, not just for those who work in our schools. We often say -- and it's something we need to reinforce -- that it takes a whole community to educate a child, including, of course, the children's families.
For the good of each and every student who attends our schools and for the good of our province we must all support British Columbia's education system. Conflicts in our system trouble us all, but I want to repeat: we must all support our education system for the potential of every child who is a student in our system and for the well-being of our province as a whole.
Every young person benefits from a good education, but society benefits as well. Education increases the stability and strength of our workforce and our economy. Through education and training we provide the essential tools to create jobs and improve opportunities in our diverse regions. For that reason I want to emphasize how important it is for us to deal with all our young people in every region of the province as we plan our education services for them. Every student deserves and has a right to opportunity. That's the reason that special education programs are a particular priority of our education system and of this government, and that's why additional efforts are being made to support adult learners as they attempt to meet the new challenges of a vastly changing society.
Another critical aspect of schooling is what students learn, especially the basic skills they acquire and the
[ Page 5230 ]
level of achievement they reach. I believe, and I believe I'm supported by all of you, that each and every learner needs to achieve certain basic skills and demonstrate certain minimum standards of achievement. But how do we define those in these days of rapidly changing needs in a rapidly changing society and economy?
I find it helpful to go back to thinking about accomplishments in what the public often calls the basics. Everybody needs to be able to read thoughtfully, to understand language as they read it and hear it in so many ways in their daily lives. They need, too, to be able to express themselves in writing, because this is a knowledge-based society and the ability to communicate by putting down one's thoughts and ideas in words is very important. We also know that the basic skills of arithmetic and math provide the underpinnings for much of the technical and work-related knowledge that people need to have, in addition to being a tool for everyday living. We're also looking for accomplishments in what are sometimes called the new basics: to communicate effectively by using the basics of reading and writing, to analyze and use information, to utilize technology and to work cooperatively as part of a team. It's clear that both of these aspects of schooling concern and interest parents, employers and taxpayers generally.
The rapid pace at which the world's knowledge is advancing, the complicated, challenging and competitive world in which we find ourselves and the magnitude of change that we each experience daily mean that those old basics, although still essential, are no longer adequate. The skills that will be required for the rest of the twentieth century and for the twenty-first century are new, challenging and fluid and changing, just as our world is changing. To provide for these new learning skills, every learner must have a curriculum that I believe must be offered in a structured environment, where discipline and rigour exist.
It's in this environment that our teachers work daily -- thinking of the social context, the changes that are occurring and the new challenges that they face as professionals. These highly trained and skilled professionals have the task of helping our students to process information, acquire a diversity of critical and basic skills and develop an attitude and approach to life that will enable them to be constructive and productive citizens. As supporters of our children, they must do this while helping every student with their social and physical maturing process. I believe that it's probably the most difficult and challenging task that any professional group, in the many workplaces in our society, faces. These highly skilled and professional people are renewing their commitment and ability to work with our children on a daily basis.
When I say this next sentence, I want you to know that I do so not only from a personal perspective but also from observations that have been made to me by people from many jurisdictions. British Columbia is fortunate to be blessed with some of the best educators in the world. I want members to know that I have had that affirmed for me by people who have travelled the world, who have worked, studied and taught in other jurisdictions and who have come to that perspective because of their knowledge and experience. I came to that perspective because of a personal experience as well, having visited classrooms in many parts of the province, and I came to it with an increased respect for the many talented individuals who are trusted with our most valuable human resource: our children.
I want to take just a moment in my comments today to celebrate an event that was very important for me, and it occurred in my own riding of New Westminster yesterday. We opened the newest school in our city, and it replaced the oldest school, Herbert Spencer Elementary School, which was built 81 years ago in the heartland of a heritage part of our community. We had two wonderful celebrations yesterday: one with the children and one with the whole community in the evening -- hours of just being together in that community school.
I had the distinct pleasure of visiting classrooms that were empty of children but full of children's work. It was a different experience from the usual one. As I visited each classroom and talked to the teachers and some of the parents and children who were in their classrooms, the thing that struck me so strongly was the level of the work that those children of nine, ten and 11 were doing. Their classrooms, in which they'd been for just a few weeks, were full of their individual, creative and challenging accomplishments, guided by their teachers. I saw everything from a wonderful video production that emulated an advertisement -- a wonderful teaching tool about graves which promoted a cemetery and used some of the communication skills and strategies as part of understanding how to do promotion with humour and a great deal of dramatic skill -- to excellent examples of science displays where the language the children used, the issues they dealt with and the conclusions they came to were as accomplished as would have been seen at secondary school levels a few years ago. That was a passive experience of those children's work, but it was an interesting way to reflectively observe the fine achievement that is going on in our classrooms. I'm delighted to be able to highlight that in my own community.
I've seen teachers all over the province working in new and creative ways to educate our children. They are responding, the children are responding and the parents are responding to the changes and the challenges that are exciting the children.
Last night I talked to a lot of parents, and I always ask: "How's your child doing?" I heard them talking to the teachers about how their children were doing. Again that sense of the achievement of their children, the confidence the children have and the high level of competence they're achieving was evident to me.
I want to note, as we all recognize, that teachers can no longer work in isolation from their communities; many others need to be involved. Parents are playing an increasingly vital role in children's education. They're the children's first teachers, and later they complement and support the work of teachers through at-home assistance. We know how critical parents are to fostering a love of learning and a sense of support and security for their children.
[ Page 5231 ]
The tremendous interest of our parents is evident in the increased number of parent and district advisory committees in the province at the local and provincial level, and their involvement in all aspects of school activities. That's very significant and very important for their children and for education generally. But it's not just the parents. The community, too, is playing an increasingly active role in supporting education. Community-based organizations are increasingly involved in supporting schools.
[11:15]
I always like to look at examples in my own district because I know them well. A local electrician has spent hours of work with some young people in the shops in our secondary school, helping them to build pretty sophisticated hovercraft vehicles. They then take these into the community along with the group of youngsters who are working on CounterAttack and zero tolerance of use of drugs and alcohol. The hovercraft draw people to their exhibits to see the technical work that's going on. At the same time these young people are modelling good, constructive behaviour and sending out a message about responsible citizenship. That marriage of volunteer technical work and social message is a very powerful metaphor for the changes that are occurring as communities are involved in collaborative efforts.
Business and labour are aware of the new, emerging skills they require of employees, and they offer a significant resource in terms of skills to teach our youth. It's interesting to note that the employability skills that have been published in pamphlets widely circulated by the Conference Board of Canada are the skills that form the basis and cornerstone of what is being taught in schools. I'd like to repeat those new basics again: communications, critical thinking, problem-solving and the ability to work in cooperative environments.
We share the vision, and we share the perspective of what needs to be a part of our school environments and our children's learning. At the provincial and national levels, provincial and national organizations are playing new and expanded roles in education. I might just note that the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, for example, provides speakers for our schools -- role models and mentors for our young people.
The budget that's proposed and that we will be discussing during this estimate period reflects some of these interests, challenges and trends. Funding to be directed to schools for '93-94 will rise to $3.58 billion, including $3.4 billion in operating grants to school districts. Among many other initiatives, this is what is included in that $3.4 billion: funding for enrolment growth, estimated to be about 2.5 percent; support for education change in school districts; help to meet the demands of inner-city schools; support for teen parent programs which ensure that our young women are mostly able to continue with their schooling and have support in caring for their small children; the school meals program; increased support for special-needs children; and the costs to support school construction. In addition, the funding helps to relieve overcrowding in our rapidly growing school districts.
Grants to independent schools will continue, although support for certain currently partially funded schools, the group 3 schools, will be eliminated because of the insufficient accountability required of those schools in our legislation.
What kinds of commitment does this $3.58 billion represent? The budget represents a 3 percent increase in operating grants in this very difficult period of revenue generation for the province. I'd like to compare this with recent grant announcements in other western provinces: zero percent in Alberta; a 2 percent decline in Manitoba; a 4 percent reduction in Saskatchewan -- and I could go on to other jurisdictions further east.
I am especially pleased today to announce a substantial capital construction budget of $561 million. It is good news for our children and for the regions of the province. This budget will enable us to continue to address serious overcrowding in many districts, brought about by the unprecedented enrolment increases that I spoke about a moment ago and by underfunding through much of the 1980s, conditions which led to the very extensive use of portables.
With this $561 million we will achieve the following: nearly 24,000 new spaces will be created, and over 11,000 students will be moved out of portables and into permanent classrooms a year earlier than anticipated. That, colleagues and members of the Legislature, is a matter of great satisfaction to me. In the first year that I was minister we had more portables at the end of the year rather than fewer, and we need to reverse that trend.
In the two Education budgets I have introduced since we took office as government, our government has provided more than $1.1 billion for school construction. I want to emphasize that this investment not only provides better learning environments for students -- and oh, what a wonderfully better learning environment it is for them -- but also provides jobs directly in the affected communities and benefits those communities in many ways.
Our government is very aware that all public spending must be done prudently and wisely to protect the interests of taxpayers, and with a school construction budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars, we must be particularly prudent. That's why we are undertaking a major initiative this year to ensure that our schools are planned and developed in the most cost-effective way. With the number of students and with the number of buildings we are working on, that's a very important task.
I want to highlight today some other initiatives we are taking around the planning of school construction in cooperation with municipalities. We will be introducing legislation this spring to encourage school boards and municipalities to work together to improve planning for our schools and for the communities in which they are located. The second part of this initiative is that my ministry and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs will be consulting with stakeholders early this summer on how to best put aside land for schools in new developments. Government then hopes to introduce legislation in the spring of 1994 to implement changes as a result of these consultations. Finally, our government is working to develop guidelines to ensure that off-site develop-
[ Page 5232 ]
ment costs charged to school boards for municipal facilities, such as roads and sewers, are appropriate.
Overall, these initiatives recognize that schools are more than places to get a good education. They are extremely valuable community assets used by a wide variety of community groups to provide not only the 9-to-5 services to children but a whole range of programs and opportunities for the community. I hope we will have further initiatives to announce throughout the year which will indicate ways we are cooperating in making these community investments for community programs. Again I emphasize how important these school construction activities are in providing benefits for the economy in the jobs that they directly create.
Our budget for education this year represents a commitment to continued improvement to the fairness and equity of funding distribution. It includes resources to respond to the recommendations of the recent education funding review, and to continue to review and improve the processes used to distribute funds to meet the needs of B.C. students in our diverse regions.
What does all this equal? It equals a commitment to improving education by building on the good elements of the system; a substantial allocation of resources to support that commitment; a desire to continue in cooperation with all citizens in meeting the challenges of a changing world; and a continuing recognition of the diversity of our children, who are our province's greatest resource -- a resource that is, like our province, changing each year.
What are some of the changes we have made to education since our mandate began in the fall of 1991? We've responded to changing societal needs and expectations of schools by supporting needed programs for teen parents, hungry children and children with physical or emotional disabilities. Schools are increasingly the active centres of our children's lives. That's one of the reasons our inner-city schools project is such an important initiative in this budget year. As well, we are beginning a project this year to review and renew the role of secondary schools as community centres of learning. I know many communities will be very actively involved in supporting that project. As a government we have a strong commitment to the critical and formative years of early childhood, the early years at school and the years through adolescence to graduation, when most students are at risk of dropping out. This year we will be continuing special initiatives to address students who still leave school before graduating.
In my very extensive travels throughout the province in the past year, I found support for the new primary program based on the longstanding practice of primary teachers on which the program is built. We will continue to develop this program with an ongoing review of and response to the needs of both teachers and parents. Teachers are reporting that students are reading more in the primary years, the new method of sharing assessment and reporting a student's performance is becoming better understood, and parents' involvement and interest in their children's education continues to grow.
The Chair: With regrets, hon. minister, your time has expired.
J. Dalton: I will be responding to the minister's remarks, but I'm more than happy to accede to her if she wishes to continue.
Hon. A. Hagen: I thank my hon. critic. I realize that I have quite a number of comments, and I appreciate the opportunity to complete them as a background for our discussion.
I was noting the primary program as my original time ended. I want to take just a moment to speak about our continuing plan changes for grades 4 to 10. As was the case with our primary program, the public will be informed of and involved with these changes. They are still very much being developed in our schools, and at the same time, they are worked on within a broader consultation process. In grades 11 and 12, the years that we call the graduation years, alliances between schools, business and the community are increasing.
I want to particularly note the increase in career-related experience for our students. As we all know, many of our students do not necessarily go on to post-secondary training or education, and their career focus is something that is important in those graduation years. Of the province's 75 school districts, 68 currently offer career preparation programs, and participation is increasing very significantly. One out of every four grade 11 and 12 students are now involved with a wide variety of career options offered. Most importantly, we're finding that the students are commenting very favourably about what they see as the benefits of these programs.
Our commitment to improving and making appropriate changes in our education system remains a high priority for government. It's incremental change, not radical reform. It is change based on a respect for proven traditional approaches. This year we will look particularly at standards of performance by students. For instance, students' mathematics and problem-solving skills will be tested later this year in a program which, for the first time, will involve all the provinces and territories, and students' reading and writing skills will be assessed in the 1993-94 school year with a provincial assessment.
[11:30]
One of the biggest challenges that we all face in education is the need to increase public support of and confidence in education. To retain more interest of young adults in schooling, we need to encourage them to stay in school; but we need to do that by making the kinds of changes that provide them with the relevance and educational opportunities necessary to prepare them for their place as citizens and as workers in the next century and in our current decade.
I want to now turn to the multicultural and immigration programs of the ministry and note that these programs include almost $6 million for the current year. That's a 26 percent increase in support since last year. Multicultural programs are designed to promote cross-cultural understanding and positive race relations, to
[ Page 5233 ]
work to eliminate discrimination and resolve culturally-based conflicts, and to assist institutions and communities to change in order to meet the needs of the province's diverse cultural makeup.
An important element of these programs is community involvement and extensive partnerships with non-profit organizations. An excellent example is our work in preserving heritage languages. Last year my ministry assisted 13,000 students to receive language instruction in a diversity of languages, ranging from Arabic to Ukrainian. The only significance of those is that it takes us at least from the beginning to the end of the alphabet. I'm not sure if there's anything beyond Ukrainian; I'll have to look.
We're all too aware of the incidents of racism that occur within our society, sometimes resulting in violence in communities but, more important, producing environments of hate and offence to many of our citizens. This government and, I believe, all members have as an objective a society to which all citizens belong and where diversity is understood and appreciated as an essential characteristic of historic and contemporary Canada.
Let me just outline some of the initiatives within our multicultural programs. A very active and committed Advisory Council on Multiculturalism, representing the regions of the province, has been providing excellent advice to the minister, ministry and government on policy and legislation. Enhanced multiculturalism services, such as guides to help newcomers access services available to them, will be published for the first time in four languages other than English. Other ministries, such as Health and Attorney General, are receiving assistance in developing programs related to multiculturalism. There are continued efforts to improve community organization involvement, and I want particularly to commend the work that's going on with our municipal governments, who are cooperating locally with their multicultural organizations. We provide support and advice for those very helpful developments. A final initiative is introduction of legislation to strengthen our government's ability to counteract racism.
An important initiative I want especially to emphasize is the development of an education curriculum to inform students about cultural issues and the implications of racist attitudes. Again I want to commend the work that's going on in a number of districts in providing lighthouse programs of that nature. The identification and elimination of racist content in curriculum and resource materials will be continued specifically during '93 and '94. We will be reviewing our social studies program in that year, and I have asked our ministry to particularly look at sensitivity to the diversity of our population and the history that represents those young people.
Immigration policy and business immigration are a part of our ministry's mandate. They include settlement services for new residents and efforts to attract immigrant and foreign investment to British Columbia -- important elements in the cultural, social and economic diversification of the province. We all know that immigration creates significant benefits and opportunities for British Columbia, and it does indeed create challenges, exemplified by the demand for English-as-an-additional-language programs and other forms of settlement and integration services. The ministry funds agencies that provide direct settlement services in communities, and we especially emphasize programs that target youth, women, families and people with specialized needs. I'm very pleased that we have increased the support to those programs this year.
Our ministry also markets British Columbia as an attractive place to invest and do business, and that agenda is shared by other ministers and ministries. Programs assist the successful establishment of new businesses and ensure that activities remain in line with our provincial economic priorities.
The objectives of our immigration programs this year reflected in this budget include continuation of immigrant settlement grants; increased support for those activities; continued negotiation of immigration agreements with the federal government, which will clarify the roles of federal and provincial governments and ensure that policies and programs reflect the needs of our fast-growing province; partnerships with and support for our immigrant-serving agencies; and continued support for the business immigration programs because of the substantial economic benefits they bring to our province.
I think members will be interested in the statistics for 1991 that I'm going to offer -- the latest ones for which we have the fullest information. In that year alone almost 300 entrepreneurs met conditions for arrival, invested more than $45 million in British Columbia and created 1,100 full-time jobs. The second class of business immigrants arriving in the province that year represented a potential $2 billion worth of economic development. It's accurately estimated that the initial investment of these immigrants will sustain more than 10,000 B.C. jobs.
Finally, let me speak of the B.C. Council of Human Rights, which ensures compliance with the Human Rights Act, deals with complaints and provides education that is an increasingly important role in preventing discrimination. The range of issues in complaints received by the council is broad, and it includes discrimination in publications, employment, purchase of properties and other areas. In the past years the number of complaints that citizens are making about violation of their rights has increased substantially -- by 50 percent in 1991-92 -- providing a major challenge for the council. Prior to this year a substantial backlog of cases existed, but I'm pleased to inform you that in 1992-93 the council expanded its Vancouver office, increased its staff size and streamlined procedures to address the volume of complaints. The backlog has now been eliminated.
Our objectives for the next year include building on the significant improvements the council has made in its response to claimants and complaints and reviewing human rights procedures and legislation to ensure that our current act is responsive to the concerns of citizens. Over $2.3 million is included for the operations and programs of the council.
[ Page 5234 ]
I want to take a moment to speak of the ministry and its operations. Again this year, the operation costs of the ministry have been reduced with all available resources being used for direct services for British Columbians. Consistent with this government's objective of cutting the cost of government, my ministry has reduced the number of senior executive positions from 16 to seven -- by a little better than half. A small increase in the overall size of the ministry has been proposed to accommodate the needs of the B.C. Human Rights Council and the integration of the education technology programs now coming directly into the ministry. I note that this program, which was formerly fully supported by the ministry, existed as a private but fully funded service.
Let me close with one of the most important parts of my comments. This ministry exists only through the partnerships and cooperation we have with many people who work in the field, whether in education in support of our diverse population, the settlement of new citizens or in the pursuit of our goal for human rights.
I want to express most sincerely and strongly my appreciation to the many people, organizations and agencies that work to make these programs all that they are and who also work in their own right in support of our citizens. In the education community this is reflected in the dedication and commitment of the province's 32,000 teachers. I've outlined the complicated challenges these professionals face daily. Again, they truly have a difficult job; they deserve our respect and, just as importantly, our support as the community works with them in their important task.
As never before, the support staff in our schools are an integral part of the learning environment. More than 16,000 employees support our teachers, administrators and young people with services ranging from the front-line people in the office through to the many people who help children in the classrooms to the people who travel the thousands and thousands of miles that our school buses run each year getting children to school. These staff are part of the collaborative group that supports learning.
Principals and vice-principals have provided leadership in school management and community relations. The trustees association, as a key group representing the co-governors of education, has provided open communications on a range of important issues. The Teachers' Federation, representing the teachers of the province, has provided similar advice and counsel and played a very active role raising important issues facing the teaching profession, some of which I have mentioned today. Secretary-treasurers manage the complexities of budgeting and accounting for expenditures. Their staff, of course, help to deal with the tremendous growth in many districts, activities that are extremely important. Finally, the B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils has assumed an extremely important and balancing role in giving parents and their communities an organized voice in the province regarding education issues. They are at our tables.
All of these groups, and those in other sectors -- business, community agencies, non-profit groups, those working with immigration settlement, cultural activities, promoting a positive climate for our province -- are working together in a time of great social and economic change. In many ways it is an experiment consistent with our nation's history as a growing and vibrant country.
Finally, represented here by my staff, my personal thanks to the people in our ministry. They are people of tremendous dedication, skill and commitment. I'd like to take this opportunity to introduce the two who will be supporting me through the estimates: my deputy minister Valerie Mitchell, and assistant deputy minister of finance and administration Doug Hibbins. I look forward to the opportunity during estimates debate to discuss in detail the work of our ministry.
[11:45]
J. Dalton: I thank the minister for her extensive overview and remarks about the education aspect of her ministry, and of course the human rights and multiculturalism aspect as well. I'm pleased that she introduced her two officials to the committee. We certainly welcome them. We value their input. I would like to thank one of the two officials for the excellent overview that was given to both myself and the third party critic recently; they did a very good job of making a complicated funding formula less complicated and certainly more understandable. I can assure the minister that this will be helpful when we get into some detailed discussion later on in the estimates on the funding provisions, the education funding review panel, which of course is a very important component of what we'll be dealing with in these estimates.
Before I make some remarks of a general nature in response to and in addition to what the minister shared with this committee today, I just want to take the opportunity to get in the Liberal Party response to the Finance minister's remarks this morning, because the Finance minister did lead off these estimates. If I may just say this, he made some unfair comments about the Liberal Party allegedly calling for a reduction in education and health spending. I can assure this committee that is not the case. Those remarks were misconstrued. The Liberal Party is calling for a thorough evaluation of government spending at all levels, and I think it is a bit unfair for the Minister of Finance to suggest that we are going to take the knife and start slashing the Ministries of Education and Health -- and I suppose he would add Social Services to that list. That is certainly incorrect, and I just wish that to go on the record.
Let's get into education, which is my particular interest as the opposition critic. I was interested when the minister pointed out to the committee that these are the first ministry estimates, the same as last year. I've had a couple of people ask me in the last two or three days: "Why are you up first again?" And I said: "Well, I don't know. I guess we're the most important or popular or whatever." Last year, when we met in the first estimates, the rather controversial topic of budget constraints was one that many of us in opposition remarked upon and put questions to the minister. Of course, this year there are still budget constraints, and I
[ Page 5235 ]
would suggest there always will be. Education is a government endeavour that always cries out for money, and rightly so. The government and the opposition side both have to search for ways to realistically and effectively spend the available dollars.
But added to the component of budget constraints this year is the complicating factor of labour disputes. We might as well be quite frank in our remarks as we start these estimates. It is well documented that this has not been a happy year in the labour relations field as far as education is concerned. Through the line of questioning that the members in the opposition develop, we will try to ascertain from the minister why there is such an unhappy climate this year in education. I'm sure the government members, as well as the opposition, would agree that labour disruptions, without question -- whether they be for the most justified reasons or for no good reasons at all -- are anything but helpful to such an important process as the delivery of education.
In fact, if I can make a more personal remark -- one that I certainly will be getting into more detail on in the next week or the one following -- unfortunately, in my own school district of North Vancouver, the teachers have already served strike notice. I have three children, who I hope will not be directly affected by the prospect of that notice developing one step further, but I must say I am not encouraged. I suppose I could even allude to the fact that the Minister of Education herself had a strike in her school district of New Westminster this year. I'm not suggesting that in any critical tone as such; I am pointing out that there is a reality. When we deal with the estimates and with the budget -- and admittedly, this government, as any other, has got fiscal problems, but running deficits and things are certainly not the answer to those fiscal problems, but that's a separate issue -- we have to ask ourselves: "Why is it? What has gone wrong? Is the funding formula off the rails? Are labour relations off the rails?" Something has gone wrong somewhere, I would suggest, and I'm hoping we'll be able to ascertain and make some sense of why that is so.
[E. Barnes in the chair.]
There are a few key items that the opposition intends to canvass, and we'll be getting into some of that detail as we proceed. I anticipate that we'll have full participation from the Liberal caucus, and I would presume that the third party will be more than happy to jump into the discussion. I would like to make some general comments to the committee about what I consider to be some excellent initiatives in the education planning and process, and perhaps I am going to be a bit charitable this morning in my remarks, even though I did make some critical comments just a moment ago about labour disputes. But that's a reality, as I say.
What are some of these initiatives and things that I think we should all encourage, pick up the theme of and carry forward? The Royal Commission on Education -- even though it's five years old now -- certainly developed many concepts which we have to ensure are taken forward and properly funded and supported. Coming out of that commission -- even though it does raise some controversy itself, and I can assure this committee that we will have to raise some of these controversial aspects -- is the Year 2000. How will we be educating our young people now and in the future as we head towards that very year 2000?
There is no question that Year 2000 is a controversial topic. Even though it's not directly related, I have with me an insert from yesterday's Globe and Mail. It certainly has some bearing on Year 2000, and we'll probably get into this in more detail later. The insert deals with some of the unsettling feeling in the public about where our curriculum and program development is headed. It is based on a Toronto experience, so it doesn't necessarily directly translate to British Columbia, but I believe it does. The headline reads: "Faith in Schools Being Put to the Test." That's a headline that we see consistently these days.
That can be a positive thing, hon. members. It doesn't have to be construed as a negative thing, but I think.... I have a file on Year 2000 that increases by the day. It's a file that contains opinion articles; education articles, such as the Globe and Mail I've just referred to; letters to editors; and many documents of that nature. They all raise what I think are valid concerns about Year 2000, but not necessarily what I might call knee-jerk reactions that you quite often get on any controversial topic. That does happen, and I'm hoping we can sort through the rather non-useful critical discussion of such a program and look at it from a realistic perspective.
I've already commented -- and we will certainly bring it up in more detail -- on the education funding review panel, which is a very important exercise of this government. It reported at the end of last year and has many interesting recommendations in it, some of which I'm hoping we will see initiated in some form. I will be making some comments and asking questions about the Faris report. It doesn't necessarily have a direct bearing on the Education ministry, because it is also advanced education. The Faris report has some interesting recommendations and there has been some interesting reaction to it, which I intend to comment on later.
There is report on a minority language task force, and I certainly think we should have some examination of that. We're all awaiting the Korbin report with some anticipation, because some of the issues that we felt should have been dealt with in the education funding review panel were deflected into Korbin. Now we are waiting to see the particular outcome of that.
The minister made a very important observation, and now I can make a particular response to her remarks. She made observations about community involvement, community participation in the planning process of education and even in the delivery program, even though, of course, our educators are the front-line deliverers. But all of us -- me as a parent, people we all know who are trustees, taxpayers, and you name it -- are all involved, or should be, in the development and delivery process of education. I certainly encourage everyone to get involved in that process. I know the minister does, because she continually makes these observations, and I'm certainly more than happy to endorse them.
[ Page 5236 ]
But I wanted to put this to the minister: how does she perceive another very important issue which is related to this -- the question of local autonomy of school districts and parents' groups and others, who should be and are participants in the process, as opposed to provincial stewardship of the education system itself?
I'm now referring back to last year's first day of estimates -- April 9, 1992, on page 626 of Hansard. The minister made this observation:
"Improvements in education only occur if a government meets its full responsibility as the chief steward of the system. There are two aspects to this. One is ensuring that our actions contribute to a climate of stability and predictability in education, and the other is ensuring that the changes we propose are widely vetted and enjoy broad support as they are developed."
I will give the opportunity now for the minister to respond. I'm not suggesting it, but is there not some potential conflict between trying to endorse and support community and local involvement in the education process, and how does that tie in with the provincial stewardship, which is the direct responsibility of the minister and the ministry officials? I will take my seat and await the response.
Hon. A. Hagen: Just before I respond to the specific comment, let me comment on the constructive nature of the opposition critic's introduction of his approach to the estimates. I think it does provide us with an opportunity in this House, in an agenda that probably is a very collaborative one in terms of our goals, to talk about some very important topics. I look forward to the discussion on a number of the issues that he has indicated he and his caucus colleagues would like to pursue.
[12:00]
We have a century and a quarter of history in respect to government stewardship of education in cooperation with the school districts of the province. It's probably the longest-standing and most consistent history of ways in which the communities of British Columbia work with a provincial government. I want to put it in that historic perspective because I think it's a very important perspective for us to recognize.
I think the modern perspective, and one that we in this government fully recognize, is that communities are the places where social, economic and cultural activity occur, and stewardship would be impossible if we were to work in some sort of a hierarchical way where there was in fact an imposition from on high of what was going to work and be good for communities. That's one of the reasons, for instance, that our curriculum is structured in the way in which it is. Eighty percent of the curriculum content comes out of a provincial mandate around goals and the framework, with resources available for teachers. We can certainly provide you with that kind of framework for all of the areas of study: language arts, social studies, math, languages, the sciences, technological education and physical education. At the local level, there is also a discretion of 20 percent of the curriculum which may come out of the need of that local community. In many ways communities share their resources in that curriculum as well. Often those local choices have a lot in common from district to district, because the districts do share and work collaboratively. There's work going on, I know, in the Okanagan in that respect.
Just to look at it from the perspective of curriculum itself, the way in which we deal with that involves the local board, the local schools and the communities in which it is necessary. If I visit the Queen Charlottes, there's going to be a different kind of educational activity there -- because it's a resource community and a community that has a lot of aboriginal people -- than in the downtown east side of Vancouver; and that's as it should be.
But the other part of your question is around the developmental nature of programs and change. It's probably one of the biggest challenges we face as a society today, because we're looking at a future that all of us are perhaps finding difficult to define in the ways that we might have defined it when I was a child, or when you were a child, or even when our own children were going to school. The very nature of work, the very nature of society, is changing. When we talk about stewardship and sharing responsibility for that development, it clearly means that we need to talk and work together, in trying to cast that vision.
Stewardship at this stage is a much less tidy picture than it was 20 or 50 years ago, because of the changes that are occurring in society. But there is no question that our citizens are telling us that they want to be involved in the decisions that affect them and their children. We have established structures -- I'd be happy to elaborate on those if you wish -- to provide for that kind of input at provincial tables, and they are being replicated at local tables.
Let me just give you an example if I may, hon. member. We have what we call an education change committee which has on it representatives from education and from parents, and is empowered to involve people from other sectors of the province: aboriginal people, multicultural people, business people. I'm finding that that committee is being replicated at the district level, involving communities, because they recognize the importance of having those same kinds of discussions at those tables. That then brings a local perspective into the provincial perspective.
I believe that it's out of that kind of discussion and dialogue with focus groups -- that involvement -- that we will develop the kinds of programs that are going to work for our children. Those cooperative, regional, local and provincial initiatives are essential. They are a part of stewardship. To me, stewardship is very much listening, ensuring that we have broad consultation, and working incrementally towards good and effective improvements in the education system of our province.
J. Dalton: I thank the minister for her response on stewardship. It's certainly helpful to me and, I'm sure, to the other members to have some appreciation, at least in a general way, of how the minister perceives her role, as the minister responsible for the system itself, and how that role filters down to the local level.
[ Page 5237 ]
Let me just make one observation. We will get into this in more detail as we go through the list of topics that we intend to canvass through the estimates. I guess I always come back to things that I'm most experienced with, and there's no fault in that. I think again of my own school district in North Vancouver. Over the years we have had the happy experience in North Vancouver, through good community involvement and input.... We've perhaps not always had the best cooperation from the ministry, given that funding is always a difficulty. Until last year when circumstances changed because of budget constraints.... North Vancouver was in the happy position of being able to mount two very excellent flagship programs in this province.
One is the outdoor school, which I've had the personal opportunity of visiting twice. If anyone has not had an opportunity to see that operation, if government members are ever passing through the Squamish area to go up to Whistler to ski, they might like to stop in at the North Vancouver Outdoor School. It's an excellent school. It has been there for 20 years. Last year the North Vancouver Outdoor School was under a great deal of budgetary pressure. As the parent of two children who went to the outdoor school this spring, I'm now a user who pays. I don't mind paying that money, but I'm wondering where it is going to stop.
That's one example of where the bleeding has started in a local program initiative. I think it is eventually going to be threatened if we don't all sit down and seriously ask ourselves how we can realistically allow such programs to continue. The community supports them. The community initiated that program, and now we in the community -- and I'm one example -- are prepared to dig into our own wallets to allow it to continue. But there's obviously a lack of commitment or something wrong with the funding itself, whereby such programs are not allowed to continue with only community and provincial involvement and not because of the parents of children who happen to be there.
The other program out of North Vancouver which is also well-noted is the band and strings program. Maybe I'm going to be accused of being too self-serving or beating my own drum. I also had to dig into my other pocket, which is becoming empty, to pay for my eldest child, my son, who is in the band and strings program in North Vancouver. So I got a triple whammy this year. Not only are my school taxes going up -- and of course all other taxes, thanks to the government, and not just this government -- but I have also become a user who pays. I'm willing to do that, and I have done that. I guess I can be thankful that I got a tax receipt for part of the fees that I had to pay.
The point I'm making is that we have to come up with some method whereby local initiatives and programming, things of that nature, can be funded by the community at large or by the province -- whatever method we may choose. But I don't like to see local users being forced into such things. Eventually the local user is going to say that this is just another form of tax, and they're going to give up. I would hate to see the day when the North Vancouver Outdoor School and the band and strings program are abandoned because of people saying they would like to support it further but there's no opportunity to do so out of personal income and contributions. That's the point I am drawing to the minister's attention.
There's an overall responsibility of the ministry to ensure that not only the 80 percent of the provincial programs that the minister referred to, which are set by the ministry and, of course, are consistent from one district to another, but also the other 20 percent, the discretionary ones, which I more than encourage.... I want to have some assurance that there can be some re-examination of the funding process so that such programs are not going to be threatened.
I have just one closing comment to the minister on this. Last year there was a great deal of consternation in many districts, and members on both sides will remember this from our debate in last year's estimates. I'm pointing out two particular examples of ongoing problems we haven't resolved. We're still in a process, and we're searching for answers. I'm hoping the minister might be able -- if she cares to respond right now in a brief way, because we'll get into the education funding review process itself -- to allay my fears by telling me that I'm not going to be a user-payer forever and that there's light at the end of the tunnel to resolve this very complex problem, which I feel has a solution.
Hon. A. Hagen: Every community has specific programs that have developed in the community. As I noted earlier, the intention of our funding is to allow those choices to be made. I'm well aware of the programs in North Vancouver that are highly valued by their citizens.
It might be of interest to know that North Vancouver is not the only district that operates an outdoor program. I have had firsthand experience in various parts of the province with programs that are similar in intent, and I think they are excellent programs which the school boards have chosen to continue. Often they have community support, payment by students for some of the costs and support from the district. So it's impossible for me to comment on the choice the North Vancouver board made in that particular program.
Many models exist. Very often this is one of the ways in which the community is involved and some entreprenuerism comes into our school districts. They have a facility or a program, and they market it to other school districts or groups who may want to use it.
I come back to the stewardship task which is to provide the resources -- close to $89 million this year in North Vancouver -- for the intellectual development of children through the curriculum that is authorized and required by the province, with latitude for districts to make choices. But in this day and age -- whether it's an inner-city school in Vancouver, a North Vancouver school or a school in the northeast or northwest of British Columbia where there is a great outdoors and excellent outdoor programs offered -- those programs are part of local initiatives. There are choices within the funding that is available, and communities then work to achieve their vision of what will support their children's learning. I'm delighted that the outdoor school in Vancouver, which is an excellent program, has found
[ Page 5238 ]
some new ways to manage and to be there for the children.
I think most people feel that the support citizens provide for that in a district that probably has more wealth than some other communities is one of the ways in which the community responds to the broad wishes of that community.
[12:15]
Children in inner-city schools in Vancouver, whose families are not nearly as blessed as most of the children in North Vancouver, are able to participate in outdoor activities with a combination of school district support and community support. That's what we're talking about when we talk about the community being involved. Our schools of the future, because they need to enrich the activities of children, are more and more going to have that mix of what comes with the core and support programs that all taxpayers support, and then what comes out of the community itself, providing resources and initiatives that meet their particular goals for their children. As I've said, I'm very pleased that the outdoor school in North Vancouver continues to be a resource not only for the children in your district, member, but also for other children who come to it on a user-pay basis.
J. Dalton: I thank the minister for her response. It doesn't necessarily give me, as a personal user-payer, the total assurance that I might like or that we should all be searching for as to how in the future.... I'm getting away from my own school district. It's perceived as being a wealthy one. Well, I'm not a wealthy person, I can assure the minister. We're all struggling, and happily, at least, they didn't tax away my property -- not completely. I'm sure the government will find other schemes to do that in the future.
That's really not the issue I was trying to address, and we'll come back and revisit this later. I agree with the minister's comments about the inner schools of Vancouver. I'm more than happy to see that they have initiative, too, and they don't necessarily have to attend at the North Vancouver outdoor school, which is available for rent.... Maybe I can get a commercial in here. It is available for any group to rent. That is an enterprise endeavour, and it does show some local initiative. But certainly I and all the members of this caucus applaud any community initiative to ensure that education is the most effective, not just in the community but on a provincewide basis. It all does come down to the bottom line, which is obviously money -- whether it comes out of my left pocket, which is the user-pay pocket, or whether it comes out of my right pocket, which is the taxpayer pocket.
Interjection.
J. Dalton: Oh Really? Is it the other way around? The Minister of Labour tells me that I've got my pockets confused. My pockets are empty, so maybe it doesn't really matter which pocket I speak of.
I would like to carry on with the remarks I was going to make in this introductory session. There are many issues in education. There are always issues in education that are of paramount importance to us as legislators, to taxpayers, to parents, to students and to just citizens in general. The minister has quite rightly commented on some of those, and perhaps in passing, as I go through my comments, I will make some response to what the minister has said.
The question of funding is obviously always of concern, and we'll be getting to that in more detail as we look at the funding review process. I have every confidence that some of the members in the Liberal caucus, and probably as well members in the third party caucus, will be raising local concerns which are related to this. Some districts are more duly and directly affected than others.
As I've already commented on earlier, labour relations is obviously a burning issue and will probably be a lead item, so to speak, as we get into the estimates in more detail next week. If I could just repeat a comment I made earlier, it's unfortunate that we have so many school districts going through a rather unpleasant exercise of strikes, lockouts, work slowdowns, etc. I'm hoping we can find solutions to these. They're not going to be forthcoming in the next week or so, but we all have to be searching for some better process because, quite frankly -- I've said this both publicly and privately, and I say it to the teacher in my own school district and to the administrators, and I'll say it to anybody who wants to listen -- the current labour relations situation in the school districts, which is not yet settled, is unsatisfactory, period. That's all I will say at this time about that.
Curriculum development and direction -- I made some passing remarks earlier about the Year 2000 -- is a very controversial topic. It's one that has to concern all of us, whether we're directly involved in the process of critiquing or delivering education or as parents of students in the system. But when I see the critical comments and articles surrounding the Year 2000 and the development process of that program, it disturbs me. I certainly endorse in a general sense the remarks of the minister about community involvement, but it is very difficult to have true and effective community development when so many of the people in that community are unsettled by the process of education itself and where it is headed. That's one we'll have to address. It's unfortunate that this is the case, but we don't duck our heads and say: "Oh well, don't worry about the critics. It will sail over everybody's heads and we'll carry on with things." There are some serious questions being raised which we will sit down and hopefully address in a meaningful way.
Another issue I would comment upon briefly is escalating costs. Obviously the costs of education delivery, as with all levels of government, are very important. Those again will come out of our examination of some of the recommendations and out of the funding review process and some of the issues that I'm sure members will raise about district concerns.
The minister commented on the growing districts, which of course will always be a problem. As you experience rapid growth in a district like Surrey or the Central Okanagan, naturally it has an impact on the operating and capital costs of such districts. I don't
[ Page 5239 ]
think the funding formula really takes into account the whole picture of how those districts should be adequately funded to take care of predictable growth increases. If I take the example of Surrey -- some of our members from that area will be commenting later -- Surrey is still being picked upon, if that's fair, because as probably the fastest-growing district in the province, it is still experiencing many fiscal and financial difficulties. In addition, Surrey is going through a work-to-rule process; they haven't resolved their contract yet. You cannot allow these types of issues to simmer away on the back burner, because eventually they're going to move to the front burner and turn into a full-blown strike, lockout or whatever the case may be.
There are a couple of other issues, and then I have one more question for the minister that will come out of this. Youth problems are not necessarily directly related to the delivery of education, but all members will recognize that youth in their communities do face problems. I point this out because I believe that the school system, if we get into effective use of things such as community use of schools, which is on our list to cover later, can effectively -- and also cost-effectively, which will make the government members happy -- be a useful vehicle to address youth problems.
The other issue I want to raise this morning with the committee is the question of access. The minister also made some comment about access to education. The point I'm going to make is that there have been studies such as the Faris report which deal with lifelong learning and the adult learner. There are aspects of Year 2000 that we'll probably discuss in more detail later, but the question of access that I wish the minister to comment on is the bridging from the K-to-12 system -- the system for which she has a direct responsibility -- to the post-secondary system, because it's my fear, when I read a report like Faris and some of the response to it, that there are the older learners in the K-to-12 system who may slip through the cracks or who may have dropped out. The dropout aspect is one we have to look at later in more detail. Can the minister assure us that her ministry is properly addressing the question of access to education and is allowing those who may have left the system temporarily to come back into that system without being treated as too old or disenfranchised because they chose to leave the system? That is the point I would like to raise right now with regard to access.
Hon. A. Hagen: I'm delighted to answer that question. I don't think any province in Canada has such extensive access for adult learners as British Columbia; and again, it's a regional access. There are lighthouse districts all across this province that take advantage of the fact that the Education ministry provides resources for adult learners to complete their graduation requirements. They are provided in a variety of ways -- and I'll be brief, because we may want to get into this a little more.
It may be that adult students literally attend classes with the traditional age cohort of students. It may be that the school is open from nine in the morning until nine at night with an adult learning centre, which is true in my district and other districts. Adult learners can come in at any time that fits with their work environment or family needs and literally learn in the modern way, if you like -- the way we talk about when we talk about changes, where people self-direct their learning depending on their circumstances. In some districts it may be an adult learning centre which is a collaborative effort between the college system and the school system, where the student may be registered in either the school district or the college, depending on the program that student has designed. It may be through correspondence courses, where we have district correspondence centres that allow the learners a more regional and local access to that resource. It may be through the Open Learning Agency, which provides courses available to adult learners.
When we talk about the Faris report, hon. member, you should know that report was commissioned by my ministry, in fact, to provide us with a good, basic review that would enable us to talk about our adult learners. Yes, they do need an opportunity to bring their education up to the graduation level. They do need our high schools to be places where training and upgrading can occur. Again I want to celebrate my own district, where not only do we provide adult basic education, but youth at risk, women in bridging programs and multicultural populations needing English-as-an-additional-language training have opportunities to go to school.
This particular area is one where the developmental work -- again, supported by this ministry and this government -- is taking place in the regions. The programs are devised in the regions to be appropriate to the economic needs of the regions, appropriate to the cohort of adult learners. We provide dollars, the community provides resources and buildings, and the cooperation and collaboration there is outstanding.
[12:30]
The Faris report has been out for consultation for quite a period of time. I think the consultation period officially ended yesterday. There has been an interministerial group and an external advisory group working on what has been a tremendous response. What we tapped with that report was a wellspring of interest in adult learning, and that report has served as a beacon to draw the vision, views and information about what's going on around the province into a government-wide discussion.
As we look ahead to the Premier's conference in June -- a summit on skills development and our development of lifelong-learning policy -- I'm really looking forward to the very significant input we've had from literally hundreds of British Columbians as they have said: "Adult learning is as important as kids' learning." Our financial resources, facilities and community work is the way in which that's going to be developed. This is the way in which our education system is going to work in the future. Our kids are helped by those adults too, because their learning, self-direction, peer support and modelling is a powerful incentive for our young people as well.
[C. Serwa in the chair.]
[ Page 5240 ]
Hon. M. Sihota: On cue from the Opposition House Leader, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The House resumed; E. Barnes in the chair.
The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. M. Sihota: I would like to advise all members that the House will sit on Wednesday at 2 o'clock. The next sitting, of course, will be as regularly scheduled on Monday at 2 o'clock. With that said, I move adjournment.
Motion approved.
The House adjourned at 12:32 p.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]