1994 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 35th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
(Hansard)
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1994
Afternoon Sitting
Volume 14, Number 10
[ Page 10115 ]
The House met at 2:05 p.m.
Prayers.
Hon. G. Clark: I'm delighted today to introduce in the gallery Derrick Corrigan, who's a councillor on Burnaby City Council and, I believe, also on the executive of the Greater Vancouver Regional District. He is well known to many members of the House on all sides. I'd ask the House to make him welcome.
L. Fox: It's extremely pleasant for me today to have the privilege of introducing to the House 25 grade 5 students and 13 parents along with their teacher, Ray Bartsch, from the community of Vanderhoof and W.L. McLeod Elementary School. Would the House please make them welcome.
B. Copping: I'm very pleased to have in the gallery today two dear friends, Ed and Shirley Tempest. Shirley worked for years with me as a nurse in medical services and then retired from BCIT. They are constituents of the member for Langley. Would the House please make them welcome.
L. Hanson: In the gallery today is a good friend of mine, an ex-MLA, an ex-cabinet minister of the Social Credit Party and one of the finer people in British Columbia. Would you please join me in welcoming Cliff Michael from Salmon Arm.
D. Schreck: I believe I see in the gallery our old colleague Art Cowie. I hope that Art is here working on federal-provincial Liberal relations, and that that work goes well. Will the House join me in making him welcome.
F. Randall: I also would like to acknowledge the councillor from Burnaby, Derrick Corrigan. I spent a number of years on Burnaby Council with him, and I must say he is a fine lawyer. A lot of people don't have a lot of high regard for lawyers, but certainly....
Interjections.
F. Randall: I just want to say that he's a fine lawyer.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ABILITY TO CONTINUE IN OFFICE
G. Campbell: The canons of legal ethics of British Columbia state that an officer of the court has a duty not to mislead the courts by stating facts which are untrue. If he does, these same ethical standards say that he is guilty of dishonourable conduct. Can the Attorney General explain his refusal to follow the standards and ethical practices that have been carried out in the courts of British Columbia?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: Not only have I followed those ethics precisely, but the member is entirely wrong. In August of last year I filed a factual -- to my knowledge -- affidavit. The moment I learned -- a week ago Monday -- that there was information I had filed incorrectly, I corrected that by giving the court the correct information.
G. Campbell: The leading text on legal ethics in Canada says that from the earliest times the courts have censured the making of false affidavits with the most severe penalties. Further, it points out that unless an officer of the court is most scrupulous in drawing up affidavits, he "may incur the guilt of moral, if not legal, subornation or perjury." These are not simply rules that you read from a book. They are the ethical standards which have guided our courts in Canada for decades. When will the Attorney General -- who is responsible for our courts in British Columbia -- follow the ethical path and step aside while he is under investigation?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I filed an affidavit in August 1993 which was accurate to the very best of my knowledge. Upon learning in April 1994 that in fact there was material or information that I wasn't aware of, I immediately filed the correct information with the court.
G. Campbell: The Attorney General, I'm sure, understands the importance of filing a false affidavit. While he is under investigation, he must step aside. A veil of shame hangs over the Attorney General's office. Public justice is not served when the Attorney General decides, for personal political reasons, to erode ethical conduct and the ethical standards of our courts.
The Speaker: Question, hon. member.
G. Campbell: My question to the Attorney General is: when will he put the public interest ahead of his personal political interest?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I have put the public interest ahead of my personal interest since I was first elected to this Legislature.
USE OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN CASE INVOLVING ATTORNEY GENERAL
M. de Jong: The Attorney General refuses to properly answer some fundamental questions. Yesterday he chose to hide behind some sort of duty he claimed to have to the special prosecutor. I don't think the minister understands. Mr. Peck is the prosecutor; he is the accused. Could the accused please explain to this House what the nature of the duty is that he believes he owes to the prosecutor, why that duty should come before his duty to properly administer justice in the province and how much longer his ministry is going to remain paralyzed while he attempts, unsuccessfully, to reconcile those two competing duties?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I spend full time each and every day administering the justice system in this province. That is not impaired in any way by the events the member refers to.
Interjection.
Hon. C. Gabelmann: To the question about my own estimates, I would be very happy to resume those this afternoon, but members preferred not to. I'm in the hands of the House. [Applause.]
The Speaker: Order!
The hon. member has a supplementary?
M. de Jong: The Attorney General's ministry appointed a special prosecutor on April 7. It took almost a full week before this House was advised that the province's chief law enforcement officer was under investigation for obstructing justice. Would the accused, the minister whose ministry
[ Page 10116 ]
appointed the special prosecutor, please explain the delay in reporting to this House and the ongoing conspiracy of silence that hangs around his ministry regarding this matter?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: There is no conspiracy of silence, and I reported to the House at the first opportunity.
The Speaker: A final supplementary, hon. member.
M. de Jong: We may have a differing view about what "first opportunity" represents.
The accused minister will know that the public has to have absolute confidence in the investigation that is now being conducted and that it is completely independent. In the past, investigations have involved officials from outside the province -- the province of Alberta in the case of a former Attorney General. My question to the accused minister: why would his ministry appoint as a special prosecutor a man whose firm was paid $134,000 last year for services provided to this government? Why would he not appoint someone who has all the appearances of impartiality and independence?
[2:15]
Hon. C. Gabelmann: Appointments of special prosecutors in matters of this kind are made by the Assistant Deputy Attorney General with no reference whatsoever to the Attorney General.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S MEETING WITH B.C. COALITION FOR ABORTION CLINICS
C. Serwa: My question is to the Attorney General as well. Knowing your party's policy on the abortion issue, and knowing the controversial nature of the abortion issue, could the Attorney General advise this House why he chose to meet last June with representatives of the Everywoman's Health Centre?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: The coalition of abortion clinics wanted to meet with me to ask, among other things, that the province consider policies similar to those that had been adopted in Ontario with respect to blanket provincewide injunctions. I agreed to meet with them, and informed them that we were not considering moving in the direction of the Ontario government.
C. Serwa: A supplementary to the Attorney General. The Attorney General understands that the scales of justice must be balanced, and the Attorney General must be not only beyond reproach but perceived to be beyond reproach. In this particular situation, the minister has met with representatives of the B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics, but has been steadfast in refusing to meet with a right-to-life group for the past four months. What fairness and balance does the Attorney General see in his actions? Is it a lack of judgment, or has partisan politics entered into that decision?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: It is neither. The member for Okanagan West is no doubt referring to correspondence from the Kelowna Right to Life organization. As I understand it, they read accounts in the newspapers about the blanket injunction proposal, and wanted to give me their perspective on that issue, if we were considering such a proposal. I replied that we were not considering such a proposal but that I would leave open the question of meeting with them on another occasion. There was no need to meet with them about that issue, because we were not considering such a proposal.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ABILITY TO CONTINUE IN OFFICE
J. Dalton: Again to the Attorney General. In the notes attached to his affidavit of last Wednesday, April 13, the Attorney General made the following handwritten note: "Investigation of harassers by the AG." Could the Attorney General please tell this House and the people of British Columbia whether he promised he would investigate the harassers, whether he was asked to investigate them, or whether that decision was made at the meeting?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: Concerns were raised by representatives of the three groups present about the enforcement of the injunction. I suggested that if the groups had those concerns, they should refer them to the Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Mr. Ernie Quantz.
The Speaker: Supplementary, hon. member.
J. Dalton: Again to the Attorney General. He also wrote in his own handwriting: "Crown counsel meeting." To add emphasis, these words were circled. Did the Attorney General promise to meet with Crown counsel, was he asked to meet with them, or was that decision made at the meeting last July?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: They asked me questions about the enforcement. I advised them that the proper procedure was to meet with the Assistant Deputy Attorney General responsible for the criminal justice branch. It is my understanding that such a meeting took place later.
The Speaker: Final supplementary, hon. member.
J. Dalton: The action -- or lack of action -- of the Attorney General in this matter is really a betrayal of the public trust. That is exactly why we in the opposition are demanding that he step aside pending the investigation. Will the Attorney General remove the storm cloud that is over his ministry, step aside while the investigation is being conducted and gain back the public trust?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I won't be stepping aside. I agree with the comments the member made last Wednesday and Thursday.
USE OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN CASE INVOLVING ATTORNEY GENERAL
J. Weisgerber: Mr. Speaker, my question is also to the Attorney General. The Attorney General has stood up for most of this week and indicated that he believes he can continue to function behind the shield of a special prosecutor. My question is: what remedy do other members of his staff have when they find themselves in situations similar to the one the Attorney General finds himself in? I would refer him particularly to a case involving James Fowles and an information that was laid in the Colwood County Court, wherein that particular representative of the Attorney General's ministry found himself in a very similar situation.
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I'll take that question on notice.
[ Page 10117 ]
The Speaker: The question is taken on notice, hon. member. Do you have a further question?
CONSULTATION ON CASE INVOLVING ATTORNEY GENERAL
J. Weisgerber: Yes, I have a new question to the Attorney General on the issue that we've been discussing. Will the Attorney General tell us who else he has discussed the details of this sensitive issue with? We're led to believe that the Premier has had an opportunity to examine the circumstances surrounding this case in some detail and that the Premier is satisfied that there has been no wrongdoing. Who else has the Attorney General consulted with in his decision not to resign or step down from his post?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: I sought advice from outside government to make sure that the issues involved were canvassed thoroughly. Those issues were canvassed thoroughly, and the conclusion was made and is being stood by.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S INVOLVEMENT IN GORDON WATSON CASE
J. Weisgerber: Gordon Watson has been, or appears to have been, denied a fair trial because of the lack of proper and correct evidence at that trial. The Attorney General ought to be ashamed of himself and should step down for these reasons alone. Will the Attorney General tell this Legislature what steps he has taken to ensure that his affidavit has not seriously affected the decision that was made in the courts and what steps he's taken to ensure that Mr. Watson receives justice in this situation?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: We all need to be careful, while matters are before the courts, as to what is said in this House. I'm sure all members want to ensure that all those who are before the courts do not have their rights trampled in any way, and that includes through inappropriate comment by any of us in this Legislature. The court has all the facts, and the court will proceed in its own way. I have full confidence in British Columbia's court system.
W. Hurd: A question to the Attorney General. The Attorney General has sworn in an affidavit that nothing discussed related in any way to the contempt proceedings brought against Mr. Watson. However, the proposed agenda lists Gordon Watson as an agenda item. Could the Attorney General explain how something that was not discussed "in any way" found itself on the meeting's agenda?
Hon. C. Gabelmann: As a matter of policy in our ministry, every group that wishes to meet with me is asked to provide us with a list of the issues that they wish to talk about. That doesn't make it an agenda. In fact, the matter that the member refers to was not discussed in any way at that meeting. It would have been absolutely and entirely inappropriate for me -- or, for that matter, for anybody in this House or anybody in this province -- to have talked about matters that were before the courts. No matters that were before the courts were discussed by me at that meeting -- or anywhere else, for that matter.
The Speaker: Hon. members, the bell terminates question period. The hon. member for West Vancouver-Garibaldi?
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, please.
D. Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to table a letter.
The Speaker: Would the hon. member care to state the purpose.
D. Mitchell: Yesterday I tabled in this House a letter to the conflict-of-interest commissioner of this Legislature regarding the status of the Attorney General. Today I'd like to ask leave to table the commissioner's response.
Leave granted.
Hon. G. Clark: I call Committee of Supply.
The House in Committee of Supply B; D. Lovick in the chair.
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF WOMEN'S EQUALITY
On vote 57: minister's office, $358,699.
The Chair: Shall vote 57 pass?
Interjections.
The Chair: I am sure that the minister is anxious to make an opening statement, and then I will recognize, of course, the critic.
Interjections.
The Chair: Friends, let us not confuse a glitch in proceedings with intent.
Hon. P. Priddy: Perhaps we could just wait until staff have come in and others have left.
It is with some pleasure, as always, that I rise in the House to present the estimates of the Ministry of Women's Equality and to talk about the work of the ministry.
Before I begin, I would like to introduce the Women's Equality staff members who are here with me today and who are such an important part of this ministry: Suzanne Veit, who is our deputy minister; Deborah Meyers, who is executive director of financial services and human resources; Dyan Dunsmoor-Farley, assistant deputy minister; and Val Mitchell, assistant deputy minister. These are just some of the important people, among many others in our ministry, who work together to ensure that we meet our commitment to women and ultimately to the people of British Columbia.
As we begin our estimates, it's a good time to reflect on the role of the ministry and our work. Our commitment is to work with individuals, with community organizations, with government ministries and with other levels of government to break down the barriers that women face in their homes, in their workplaces and in their communities. We are working to make a positive difference in the everyday lives of women. We do this in the knowledge that greater fairness for women will result in greater fairness for everyone.
[2:30]
It's always a challenge to translate a vision into a reality, but over the last two and a half years we've built a solid foundation in the Ministry of Women's Equality. We've done this by responding to the needs that people have identified in
[ Page 10118 ]
their own communities throughout this province. We work to be flexible, recognizing that people will reach their goals in different ways in different communities. Our role as government is to provide communities with necessary resources to create local solutions to local needs.
While we strive to be flexible, we also recognize that women and men across this province have many concerns in common. This government has received a clear message that people in British Columbia are concerned about their jobs and about their children's future in a very rapidly changing economy. This concern guides us as we develop new programs and evaluate the strengths in existing ones.
For instance, a significant portion of our ministry's budget helps support a variety of initiatives to create high-quality child care options that are there when families need them and at a cost they can afford. Without reliable child care, parents cannot take advantage of education and training programs or keep jobs to support their families. Child care is not a stand-alone issue. It's an integral part of the economic health and vitality of this province; it's an important investment in our future. It helps families, it helps communities and it helps the economy.
We're investing in communities and in public infrastructure that will help meet the urgent need for child care while creating and maintaining jobs in the short term and tangible economic benefits in the long term. What people have told us as a ministry and as a government is that they want public dollars to be used as efficiently as possible. We work in this ministry to be accountable in the way we approach our work. We've cut waste in the ministry by reducing travel, advertising and other operational costs; we've trimmed those back as far as we can. By doing these things, we have enhanced our ability to deliver quality services to B.C. women and their families.
Ninety-one percent of our budget dollars go directly to B.C. women and their families through funding to communities. These are some of the goals and priorities that guide us in our work on behalf of the women, men and children of British Columbia.
I want to talk for a moment about the work over the past year and how that leads us into this coming year and our estimates. Over the past year we've seen changes in some of our policy and program responsibilities. Our funding to community really falls into two categories: one-time-only project grants and ongoing services funding. One-time-only grants would include things like facilities and equipment grants for child care, emergency repair, replacement and relocation for child care, stopping-the-violence grants and women's equality grants. Things that would fall into ongoing services would include stopping-the-violence counselling services, transition house programs, the day care subsidy program, special needs child care, infant and toddler incentives, multicultural services and women's centre operational funding. Some of the programs I have mentioned are new to the ministry and some are enhanced.
In the past several months one task of the ministry has been to work with the staff at the Ministry of Social Services, our own ministry staff, and the provincial association of transition houses for transition house programs to come under the Ministry of Women's Equality. That's almost complete now, and we welcome the opportunity to respond to the needs of B.C. women who experience violence.
Under the leadership of this ministry, we have also been working across government on the consolidation of child care. We work with many ministry partners. We are reviewing all major policies in the government related to child care, and we will develop a consolidation strategy which will result in improved efficiency, accountability and availability of child care in British Columbia.
I know that members will have other questions as we move on, so I have just outlined these programs in quite a general way. But I would like to comment on some of the things that I see as making a positive difference for women and families and give some indication of where we are heading for this coming year. Women and men are concerned about building a healthy economy and a secure future for everyone. For women, a secure future must include being safe from violence and abuse in their homes, workplaces and communities.
This government is committed to eliminating violence against women. In December 1992 the Stopping the Violence initiative of the Ministry of Women's Equality was launched. Through that initiative, a range of programs and services have either been enhanced or created, along with our partner ministries: Attorney General, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education and what is currently Skills, Training and Labour. These services include 71 transition houses and 88 programs related to transition houses -- such as counselling for children who witness abuse, and multicultural outreach -- for a total of 159 programs under the umbrella of transition houses. Many of those are new programs. As well, there are new programs: 79 counselling services for women in more than 100 communities in this province; triple the number of women assault centres, which support women who are victims of violence; 14 new treatment programs for assaultive men; and $2 million in initiatives identified by aboriginal people as fundamental to changing family violence in their communities. It is important to us that the programs and services are responsive to the needs of all B.C. women, particularly women whose voices traditionally have not been heard: aboriginal women, women of colour, immigrant women, women with disabilities, lesbians and older women.
Public awareness, education and training also play important roles in stopping violence against women. Over the past year we have funded a number of education and training programs for youth, communities and service providers who deliver services to women.
This coming year we will continue to build on those accomplishments, with a particular focus on prevention initiatives. There will be four main focuses of concentration for this coming year. First, we will be developing and strengthening initiatives to stop violence before it happens. We must break the cycle of violence in our communities. We will do that in large part by stopping the violence before it happens by promoting non-violent behaviour and by teaching our children non-violent ways to solve problems and resolve conflict. As adults, I think we have an extraordinary opportunity to learn from our children the ways in which we can solve our problems through non-violent responses to conflict.
Secondly, we'll be enhancing our response to violence when it happens, ensuring that legal, medical and social systems are responding effectively to issues relating to violence. We've recently worked with the Ministry of Attorney General to produce a booklet for medical practitioners and other people in the health care professions that assists in their response to violence against women.
A third area is in better support for victims of violence to help them become survivors. We'll do this by ensuring that service providers have the necessary resources to do their jobs, that they're supported and have training. Ultimately, this translates into better support for victims of violence.
[ Page 10119 ]
Finally, we'll be strengthening our advocacy work with women by continuing to promote broad, systemic change. In the long run, women will be safer in our province because the system has changed -- and we will have seen change across the system -- to recognize the importance of promoting and supporting women in areas of safety.
We've also made significant progress in the area of child care, which is where a significant portion of our budget dollars go. Parents will tell any of us who talk with them that finding safe, affordable, accessible child care is the single greatest barrier they face in entering or returning to the paid workforce, or in getting the education and training they need to earn a living to support their families. Meeting the child care needs of British Columbia families is an important goal for this government and can only be achieved by a comprehensive reform, or consolidation and review of policies, of the child care system.
Our child care plan, which was launched almost two years ago now, has provided us with a blueprint to move forward in those areas. Since then we've created or expanded child care programs to maintain and strengthen existing child care spaces and help communities develop new spaces that meet local needs. We've responded to the urgent need -- and I expect that all the members in this House have heard of this need from their own communities -- for infant and toddler care, young parent care and before- and after-school programs. We've made plans and are already beginning the initiative of creating 7,500 more spaces in hospitals, schools, colleges and public buildings throughout our province, through the B.C. 21 child care initiatives.
We've also taken steps to increase training opportunities for early childhood educators. Through the wage supplement initiative, we've begun the process of improving wages in the non-profit sector and are considering options to improve child care wages in the private sector. These measures will ensure that children receive quality care, and ultimately will reduce the pressure on parent fees that make child care hard to afford for many B.C. families.
We've worked on cross-ministry partnerships on issues and policies that affect child care with a view to removing barriers at the municipal level, in the tax system and in licensing regulations. Next year we'll continue to move towards greater consolidation of policies. We'll also be looking to strengthen and expand existing services where possible and make child care more affordable.
Briefly, as I conclude, there are other accomplishments I would highlight. We undertook a comprehensive review of our women's equality grants program to make it more responsive to community needs and easier for women in communities to access the resources they need. We've been able to expand our women's centre operational funding to seven new communities, bringing the total of government-funded women's centres in the last two years -- never before funded in this province -- to 36 women's centres in British Columbia. The House might be interested, by the way, that in deciding to fund these new centres we have focused on expanding those services for women who face additional barriers and women in underserved areas of the province, such as Grand Forks, Ucluelet and the Sunshine Coast.
We do play an important role in helping to make government policy and in making the policies and legislation across government more responsive to women's needs and perspectives. Our policy staff works regularly with the staff of other ministries to analyze policy and legislation and to look at the difference it may make in women's lives. We also provide assistance for staff in other ministries to do that in their own daily work.
We have provided support through our women's equality grants for women's organizations and community organizations to participate in important reviews of policy and legislation, which is not an opportunity that women's organizations in this province have ever had before. We've distributed information to schools, colleges, transition houses and child care centres to ensure that individual women and women's organizations are aware of the work the ministry is undertaking with them and on their behalf.
We've been very active this year with public education activities around Women's History Month, the day of action and remembrance for women in December, and International Women's Day, which is a day of celebration and renewal for all of us throughout the world.
I've given a general overview. I'm very much looking forward to talking about the work of the ministry, to answering questions from the House and to having a chance to celebrate the work the ministry will do this year.
L. Stephens: It's a pleasure for me to participate in the Women's Equality estimates today and to express appreciation to the ministry staff who are here to help us through these estimates today. I thank them for the information they have provided over the last few weeks; we do appreciate it.
The mission statement of the Ministry of Women's Equality notes that the ministry's objective is to make a positive difference in women's lives and to deliver and develop programs which expand choices and promote well-being. Yet over halfway through this government's mandate, women are still victims of violence in their own homes, women still earn far less than men and women continue to lack adequate support services for their family responsibilities. The opposition understands both the complexity of these issues and that progress on issues of equality is not always immediate. But we do believe that women in British Columbia deserve to be provided with the best resources and opportunities available.
[2:45]
We have focused on three primary concerns. The first is in the area of economic equality. The gap between male and female workers is still very large. There must be an intensified effort to promote women's access into higher-paying jobs, and we're going to talk a little about that later on. Women in British Columbia continue to start their own businesses at a much higher rate than men, yet those same women entrepreneurs face enormous economic barriers in obtaining capital from financial institutions. I would be interested to hear what the minister has to say in that regard as we progress. I'll be speaking with the Minister of Finance on some of those issues as well, but I would like to get some clarification from the minister.
The minister spoke about aboriginal issues too. We need more work done. There needs to be more access to resources to enable aboriginal women to develop their own businesses, for the provision of reliable child care services and for social development in their communities. That is not presently the case.
Violence against women shouldn't be tolerated in our communities, and I see very little real progress being made by this government in that area. We feel very strongly that as long as women lack security, both inside and outside of their homes, true equality has not been attained. The present government's lack of leadership regarding the provision of adequate legislative initiatives regarding domestic violence is just not acceptable. The ministry has failed to deal
[ Page 10120 ]
effectively with the ongoing judicial bias against women and the weak enforcement of regulations and judgments that women depend upon. I have spoken with the Attorney General and participated in the estimates that pertained to his particular ministry, and we will be talking along those lines about the linkage between the Women's Equality ministry and the Attorney General ministry. I suggest that ineffectiveness of restraining orders is a clear and definite illustration of the ministry's ineffectiveness. The minister himself has stated that the streets in Victoria are less safe than they were three or four years ago. Leadership must be taken. The atrocity of violence against women must be effectively eliminated.
Family support services is another key issue for the opposition. We have many concerns with the delivery of child care services in this province, the new wage supplement initiatives and the future of such services. We will undoubtedly discuss this issue at length. There's a lot of controversy around it in the province, and we intend to go into that at some length.
We see much irony in the situation where, due to domestic abuse, it is the women and children who must leave their own residence. It is not the instigator of the abuse but the victims who must leave. The opposition would clearly support a focus on keeping mothers and children together in their own homes.
The opposition supports creating gender equity in British Columbia. We see that there has been some progress in attaining equality; there is much yet to be accomplished.
We look forward to discussions regarding the estimates of this ministry. We expect that the issues of equality, violence and family support services will be those areas that we will focus on, with a view to providing answers and, hopefully, some initiatives that the ministry is going to come forward with in the upcoming year to provide women with the resources that they so richly deserve.
My first question to the minister is: why were programs that were different initiatives in Social Services transferred from Social Services to this ministry? Also, why were skills training programs transferred to the ministry, and employment and pay equity programs transferred to the Ministry of Finance? Could the minister explain why those programs were transferred?
Hon. P. Priddy: I would be pleased to comment on that. Since its beginning, this ministry had a responsibility given to it by the Premier to coordinate the government's response to stopping violence against women. We began in the first year by having some new initiatives for counselling programs and supports for women who are victims to enable them to become survivors. The movement of transition houses, which indeed are support for women and their children who are victims of violence in their homes, was an initiative to consolidate that responsibility within the ministry and to allow more coordination for policy development within that area.
The child care issues are in some ways similar. Since the beginning, this ministry has had the responsibility for coordinating the government's response and policy development regarding child care. Moving the day care subsidy and special needs child care to this ministry was the next logical step in the consolidation of child care programs. It's also an opportunity for our ministry to work across government on a very comprehensive review of child care policies. Of course, some of these programs are being done in partnership with other ministries, and undoubtedly some of that will continue.
In terms of the transfer of training from the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour to this ministry, I am unclear as to the member's question. I'm not aware that we have received the responsibility for training from that ministry. However, if they want to transfer some of their programs, we would, of course, be delighted to have them.
L. Stephens: I understand that early childhood education was transferred to the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour. Is that not correct?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm sorry, I thought the member asked about it being transferred into the ministry, not out. The responsibility for early childhood training has always been within what was the Ministry of Advanced Education and what is now the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour. Beginning two years ago, we have given an additional $600,000 to that ministry to provide them with the resources to create more seats for early childhood education. We transferred that money to them so they could continue doing their work. But that has always been their responsibility.
Employment equity and pay equity have both gone to the Ministry of Finance. It seems logical to me that that would happen. It is about employment equity in the public service and pay equity in the public sector, both of which are now responsibilities of the Minister of Finance.
L. Stephens: Is the minister prepared to provide a riding-by-riding profile of service support by the ministry? The intent of this is to identify whether or not there is a difference in service delivery.
Hon. P. Priddy: Yes. Obviously we could not read that out for you here; it would take a significant amount of time, given the significant enhancement over the last two years to communities throughout British Columbia. But we are prepared to provide that. In our enhancement of services, we were very conscious of rural areas, which traditionally may have been neglected, receiving services. In point of fact, in a number of areas, over 50 percent of the financial support has gone to areas outside the lower mainland and Victoria.
L. Stephens: I would like to move on to program services. I thank the ministry for providing a breakdown of those. We'll begin with child care. In the estimates, child care programs to stabilize, support and expand child care are allotted $30 million. Could the minister expand on those programs and on what that money entails?
Hon. P. Priddy: I believe the member is asking for a breakdown of the programs to stabilize, support and expand child care. The programs that would be included under that heading in the estimates are: child care needs assessment and planning program; child care quality enhancement program; child care support program; emergency repair, replacement and relocation program; facilities and equipment program; financial management and administration support services program; infant and toddler incentive program; wage supplement initiative program; B.C. 21 child care expansion program; day care subsidy program; and children-with-special-needs day care program.
L. Stephens: Can you expand on the B.C. 21 initiatives, please?
Hon. P. Priddy: As I believe the member knows, but I will just state again, the B.C. 21 initiative, in general, is the
[ Page 10121 ]
initiative of this government to stimulate and enhance the economy and jobs in this province. This government is very proud of this initiative.
The child care expansion part of B.C. 21 was announced last July. It provides an opportunity to plan and coordinate the expansion of community-based child care programs in provincially funded buildings, which indeed we should be doing. Every time we build a public building -- a school, a hospital, a college -- it is a significant expense to the taxpayer, whose dollars those are, and we ought to be using that building to the very best advantage that we can. That is, in part, the premise for the B.C. 21 child care expansion part.
The child care part is coordinated by our ministry, but the funding is actually provided through BCBC and through social capital ministries such as Skills, Training and Labour, Health and Education. For this three-year strategy, $32.3 million has been identified.
[3:00]
Just to comment on this last year's activity, the Ministry of Education expects that by the end of '93-94 there will be 375 child care spaces at secondary schools for the use of young parents who are completing their education. We know this is a very critical child care program. Another 500 spaces will have been approved at elementary sites. The Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour will have funded 455 campus child care spaces. In this year alone, ten campuses in this province have benefited from this initiative. The Ministry of Health has six initiatives based in hospitals or health units under this development. In total, over three years, it is enabling us to create 7,500 licensed child care spaces in public buildings throughout the province.
L. Stephens: We're going to return a little later to the child care expansion in schools and hospitals. I'd like to talk a bit about the wage supplement initiative for child care workers. In December the ministry announced that it would be implementing this wage supplement for licensed non-profit child care centres. Would the minister explain what alternatives are being considered? The ministry has announced that they have been going around the province conducting consultations with the non-profit.... Would the minister explain what is happening in that regard?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm very pleased to comment on that. Let me begin simply by saying that we know, as a government and as people concerned about child care, that we cannot continue to expand the number of child care spaces without addressing the issue of wages to child care workers. This is the only province in the country -- under previous governments up until this year -- that has never addressed the issue of child care workers' wages. In fact, child care workers or early childhood educators make the lowest wages in the entire human service, social services sector for looking after what we say are our greatest resource. So the issue of wages and wage enhancement for child care workers is a critical one.
The first wage supplement initiative was a $5 million initiative that was introduced for child care workers in non-profit centres. So far, over 800 supplement applications have been processed, and this will allow us to strengthen and maintain approximately 20,000 existing spaces in non-profit child care centres. About 2,800 employees will benefit from this first step.
The second step in the process was a consultation, which we committed to do at the time. When this wage supplement for non-profit sectors was announced, we made a commitment at that time to consult with the for-profit sector, because there are people in that sector as well who are earning low wages. We have consulted with organizations and people in Nanaimo, Terrace, Prince George, Castlegar, Vernon, Vancouver, Victoria, Surrey, Abbotsford and Burnaby -- about 350 people in the private sector -- about how to do this in the private sector.
There are additional issues in a non-profit organization. There's a different issue around accountability -- books and audited statements have to be submitted because of the Society Act -- so we're exploring with the private sector the ways in which those kinds of accountability concerns and issues can be met while still addressing the issue of low wages for people in that sector.
L. Stephens: Could the minister explain -- to give comfort to the for-profit sector of the day care industry in this province -- if they, in fact, will be able to benefit from the same kind of government largesse as the non-profit day care operators are going to enjoy?
Hon. P. Priddy: Let me comment on two things. One is that there have been -- and I'll comment on the wage supplement in a moment -- supports through this ministry for private child care operators. It's not as if there have not been supports before; I think it's important to acknowledge those. We've provided access to child care support programs, information on where training is available, as well as information about toys, child care provision and regulations. There is a registry for parents to access, which includes people in the private sector. They've been able to access services in the Westcoast Child Care Resources Centre, and they've been able to access services through the Ministry of Small Business. Some private child care centres have been able to access the infant-toddler incentive grant, as have all licensed family child care providers, who are private care providers as well. So there has indeed been support for private sector operators so far.
I do want to assure the member that I would refer to a wage enhancement not as largesse but as a critical way of supporting the retention of early child care education workers in both the non-profit and for-profit child care community in this province. I see it as a critical commitment, I guess, and would choose another terminology for it. I would never have asked 350 people to meet in ten places in this province if I had not intended to move forward with that. So our commitment is to do that. With child care operators, we are working out the mechanisms we need to do that and still be accountable for the dollars. We will be making an announcement about it fairly soon.
D. Mitchell: I'd like to follow up on some of the comments made by the member for Langley. I think she's been addressing a really critical area here, relating to the mandate of the ministry. This is the third time the minister has brought spending estimates to the Legislature for her ministry. I know that during the previous reviews we raised questions about the mandate of the ministry. We've talked very openly and candidly about whether in fact we need a Ministry of Women's Equality in British Columbia. I think the minister has made some good efforts to defend the reason and rationale for the ministry. But the member for Langley has made some excellent comments in the early part of this exchange.
From the spending estimates the minister has presented to the House, it's clear that 75 percent of the total budget for her ministry, in terms of ministry operations, is devoted to child care and day care subsidies. One wonders whether it should more appropriately be called the ministry of child
[ Page 10122 ]
care, since 75 percent of the ministry's operations budget is devoted to this crucial area, or whether the Ministry of Women's Equality is simply a symbolic name to capture this. But child care is extremely important.
I want to ask a few more questions about the difference between what the minister has referred to as the non-profit sector and the private day care or child care centres. Can the minister state unequivocally that her ministry equally supports all child care centres in the province, whether they be, as she calls them, non-profit or private child care centres? Do they get equal support from her ministry under things such as the wage incentive program, which she's discussed with the member for Langley, or the other programs? For instance, do the private child care centres also get strong and equal support from her ministry?
Hon. P. Priddy: I want to assure the member for West Vancouver-Garibaldi that we value all child care programs, regardless of the auspices, and we support a quality environment for all children. A number of our programs, as I said earlier, do support the private sector. They include the child care support programs and the infant-toddler incentive grants, which go to family day care providers and some private group centres.
In addition, the day care subsidy program and the special needs day care program can be used by parents in either non-profit or private facilities. I want to share with the member that -- as it relates to the day care subsidy, which is available for parents to make their choice of a public, non-profit or private centre -- this is one of the few provinces in the country that continues to support that concept of parent choice. Most provinces in this country do not, so the private sector in this province has significant support that is not available to them in other provinces.
The wage supplement initiative will be extended to employees in the private sector once we've defined the eligibility criteria and the accountability for public funds. Private operators are not eligible for facilities and equipment grants or emergency repair and relocation grants. I suggest that that is a reasonable decision, because we do have a responsibility to ensure that public funds don't contribute to buying property and a building or to improving privately owned property. But all of those other initiatives are indeed available to people in the private sector as well. All aspects of government funding for child care are being reviewed to ensure that it supports the goals of quality, affordability and accessibility.
D. Mitchell: I would just ask the minister whether or not she could provide some quantitative evidence of the support her ministry provides to non-profit child care centres in British Columbia, compared to the support her ministry provides to private child care centres. As she points out, they're all doing valuable work. The minister made some important comments, I think, when she pointed out that the wage incentives provided by her ministry to workers in child care centres are not largesse -- not at all. In fact, workers in this vital area are not well paid, generally speaking, whether they are in the non-profit or private side.
I would ask the minister to simply comment on the perception in the broader community that this government and this ministry has a bias that is strongly in favour of non-profit centres and against private child care centres. I'd like to know what the source of that bias is -- if, in fact, it exists. Is the government simply opposed to the word private? Does it not agree with that? Certainly workers in child care centres, whether they are in non-profit or private centres, are doing valuable work; I think that needs to be supported. That bias exists whether the government likes it or not.
How are we going to address this? Can the minister quantify the support? She has indicated that private child care centres are not eligible for assistance in the form of facilities and equipment grants. There are other assistance components provided by her ministry that child care centres in the private sector are also not eligible for, yet many of those child care centres are operating in public facilities -- public schools or community halls. So one would raise the question: why wouldn't they be eligible? Can the minister try to address this broad concern in the community about a bias in the ministry which favours one side and not the other?
Hon. P. Priddy: Let me try to address some of the issues the member has raised. I think that the complexity of this province's child care system may be part of what leads to some misunderstanding on many people's part about child care issues. There are a couple of things that are really important to acknowledge as underpinnings or first principles of this. One is that parents have a right to choose the kind of child care they wish for their child. So parents choose whether to have their child in a private centre or in a non-profit centre. Indeed, parents pay 90 percent of the fees for child care centres, so it's not as if the government is paying 50 percent, 80 percent or anything close to what it costs to operate child care in this province.
[3:15]
I think it's important to recognize the important role that subsidies play. For 1994-95, the day care subsidy is $98 million. Of that, 55 percent goes to private child care centres, either family-operated or group-operated child care. That's over half, so less than half goes to non-profit child care. It is important to acknowledge the fact that through the subsidy, private child care centres are supported more than non-profit ones. I don't know where the misconception comes from; I'm sure the member and I could have that discussion at a later time.
If this government were biased against private operators, 55 percent of the subsidy would not go to private operators, as has happened in other provinces; the infant and toddler incentive grant would not be available for private family providers; and private providers would not have access to child care support programs, such as the Ministry of Small Business and some of the other resources that are available to them. So that is not correct.
C. Serwa: I am very pleased to get in on some of the questions, because similar concerns have been expressed in my constituency. A child care centre in Winfield has been under an extreme amount of pressure for a number of years, and a day care facility in Summerland is in the process of being shut down. In small communities, private child care centres are confronted with the rigidity of the regulations. The Ministry of Health has been involved, as well as your ministry, so they face an interministerial challenge.
Another problem faced by private operators is that capital funding is provided to non-profit societies through government. It is not provided on an equivalent basis to private care facilities, yet we are looking at the same challenge and the same need. Whether the challenge is fulfilled through the public or private sector, it has to be a level playing field, and at the present time it certainly is not.
The rigidity of the system precludes small communities from being able to satisfy parents' choices for child care. This all factors into the question that we're discussing. Not only is
[ Page 10123 ]
there a cost factor to private care facilities in small communities like Winfield, which differ from facilities in greater Vancouver or in Kelowna with a large population base, but because of the separate licensing for the various age groups, the rigidity of the system precludes.... At one moment the care centre is within the parameters, and at another point it's outside the parameters. So this is causing a significant problem, especially in the smaller communities.
Hon. P. Priddy: The member has raised two or three issues within his questions. The member and I have had opportunities to be involved in child care initiatives in his riding, and I know that he is very concerned and committed to child care in his area.
Let me speak first to the issue of licensing. From a significant amount of travel in the last two years to small communities throughout British Columbia, I am aware that certain choices are not available in every part of the province. In a community of 185 people, things like group child care will probably never be an option. The way we support private family child care is important, because it will be the only option for many people -- one, quite frankly, that many people wish to choose. But when it comes to the issue of licensing child care centres, or day care centres -- we say child care because, of course, it's more than a day and more than Monday to Friday from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. -- I think we're very clear about that. There have actually been two government reviews looking at the regulations which govern child care centres with the intent of trying to make sure that the regulations are easy to understand -- I suppose computer people would say user-friendly -- and don't put more barriers in people's way than necessary, while nevertheless ensuring that children are safe.
One of the stories that someone tells is that if you invite people to dinner, you can serve dinner in any way you like. If you decide to put a sign outside, invite people for dinner and charge them, you have to have a licence for the way in which you prepare your food. Surely we can do no less than be concerned about rules and safety regulations for people who are providing care to our children. So I believe that indeed we need to have standards and qualifications to ensure that child care facilities are safe.
I have met with the people to whom the member refers. They have raised their issues with me. We have talked about the ways government is looking at ensuring that if there are regulations which truly do not make sense and provide unnecessary barriers, then we need to look at them. But we do need -- and I think they agreed when they were there -- certain safety regulations in place.
I want to say that one of the reasons for the Premier's decision to move those responsibilities to the Ministry of Women's Equality was to give us the opportunity to look across government, move most of those responsibilities -- except for licensing and health -- and have a very active partnership, so that we can consolidate child care and look at ways to make it work best.
The Chair: I'm going to recognize the member for Comox Valley. I understand that she wishes to make an introduction.
M. Lord: I ask leave of the House to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
M. Lord: It's my pleasure today to introduce 28 students from Tsolom Elementary School in my riding, along with their teachers, Ms. Amy Bryden and Ms. Linda Pesklavits. The students are here as part of their social studies program to learn about how government works and what we do in the chambers. I bid the House to make them welcome.
C. Serwa: When I ask these questions, I'm certainly not pointing my finger at the current government or the current minister, because I know of her commitment to the child care program. I have had similar problems with the previous government. One of the realities is that we're dealing with licensing regulations that were apparently written in 1973. They are deemed to be archaic. Is the minister considering looking at drafting...? There was certainly less need for child care facilities in 1973, but as more and more women with preschool children have entered the workforce, there is more need. The consensus out there appears to be that we're working with archaic regulations that ministry staff must abide by, and we're left with something that is less than desirable at the present time.
Hon. P. Priddy: I more than realize that the member was certainly not pointing fingers, because he has been very supportive of the work the ministry has done in child care. The current child care regulations are being reviewed to determine whether changes can be made to remove barriers to expanding child care, while ensuring that the health and safety needs of children are protected. There was, actually, an extensive provincewide consultation. That important work is underway.
C. Serwa: One licensing requirement is that the caregiver have certification in the early childhood education training program. Normally the caregiver works by day. Apparently, Okanagan University College does not accommodate care-givers so that they can attend courses in the evenings, when they are free to do so. This is further complicated by the fact that it's up to the instructors to decide whom they will let in, and a number of people desiring to take the course are not even able to register for it. This is part of the licensing mechanism of the ministry, and perhaps the minister would speak on that.
Hon. P. Priddy: I realize that when people are outside the lower mainland or Victoria, training issues are very difficult. In any travelling or visiting that I've done around the province, people were very clear that training needs to be closer to home, more accessible and during hours when they're able to attend. A recent initiative in the ministry is a five-part training video series, which will be distributed to child care support programs throughout the province. We're also asking the Knowledge Network to air the series in order to reach service providers who don't have access to training or whose community college course was cancelled because there weren't enough people. I think that's the experience someone in the member's riding had. So it's really important to try to get training closer to home and at times when people can take it.
C. Serwa: Does the minister contemplate care facilities in smaller communities that would be licensed for the full spectrum of ages where care is necessary? Going back to that question, there are either two or three groups, and small communities don't have the ability to look after that number. We're separating family members. Parents or working mothers are having to drive to two or three different facilities to pick up their children. Rather than assisting anyone, it seems that we're complicating life for them.
[ Page 10124 ]
Hon. P. Priddy: I do not wish to presume what the eventual regulation review will say, but I think the member has raised a good question. We need to look at that in the context of the uniqueness of small communities and their issues. The fact is that there are different staff-ratio, spacing and equipment requirements for various age ranges. We have to balance that with the fact that there may only be one facility in a small community that can provide those services. I don't wish to prejudge what the regulation review will conclude, but I think trying to balance those two will be important. The member has raised a good point.
C. Serwa: As the lead minister in day care for children, will the minister work and liaise with the Ministry of Health to make sure that their requirements are reasonable and practicable and attainable in smaller communities?
Interjection.
The Chair: Sorry, hon. minister; you were so quick that I didn't get to recognize you. If you want your response on the record, will you let me acknowledge you?
Hon. P. Priddy: Yes. And yes.
D. Mitchell: Before we leave this topic, will the minister commit, in this committee today, to providing a list of all capital grants, assistance and day care subsidies provided to child care centres in British Columbia, broken down by private and non-profit, so that we can see -- as the minister has indicated and has committed to -- that equal support would go to both private child care centres and non-profit day care centres. Would that be possible for her to do?
Hon. P. Priddy: We will do what we can to get that information for the member. It's probably important to acknowledge that child care centres are not necessarily registered by the particular auspices under which they fall, but we'll make every effort to get that for him.
D. Mitchell: Thanks to the minister for that commitment.
I have one other question on this issue. I note that some groups have come forward asking that the new federal government's infrastructure program apply to child care centres and that money available from the federal infrastructure program -- this much-ballyhooed program that we hear so much about; we haven't seen much in British Columbia that's tangible from this program yet.... Some women's groups and other groups have come forward and have argued that some of these funds should be available to child care centres. Can the minister tell us what she has done as Minister of Women's Equality and as the minister responsible for child care in the province to go after some of those federal infrastructure funds for child care centres in British Columbia?
[3:30]
Hon. P. Priddy: Not only are the infrastructure dollars important, but so is the stated campaign promise in the red book of the Liberal government for additional dollars to child care, aside from the infrastructure dollars to which the member refers. To that end, I have done three things: I have written on two occasions to the federal minister; we have put out two or three press releases urging the federal government to make that commitment; and I have spent an hour with Lloyd Axworthy, the federal minister, urging him to make good on the federal government's commitment to child care and also talking about the importance of infrastructure dollars. That visit was as recent as two weeks ago; we will be following up on that.
D. Mitchell: I thank the minister for that. I say good on you: go after those feds with a passion, because we need some of those dollars here in British Columbia, and nothing is more important than child care. So don't stop. And if we can do anything to encourage you, let us know. Good for the minister.
Would the minister be willing to make a commitment, if and when we receive any moneys from the federal infrastructure program for child care in British Columbia, that private child care centres will have equal access to that money along with non-profit child care centres?
Hon. P. Priddy: I appreciate the member's question. I think that will depend, in part, on what the federal guidelines are, but I'll keep the member's comments in mind in that discussion.
C. Serwa: Just following up on my line of questioning, will the minister make a commitment that options will be available for this childhood education course -- other than night school, the Knowledge Network or distance education -- and look at making this accreditation available throughout the province of British Columbia and not just in the high-density urban areas?
Hon. P. Priddy: It's very important to me and to this government that all child care providers have the opportunity to access training. It is under review, and I'm looking at all possible ways, along with the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour, to ensure that training gets to every part of this province for people who need it and will work hard at it.
C. Serwa: While we're on the commitment trail, there's one more that I'd like to get, and it's really an important one. We often see good intentions, but the direction changes, not to facilitate those who really require the care -- or the families, in this particular case -- but to satisfy the needs of the bureaucracy. It makes life very complicated and unrealistic. Will the minister commit, in the course of these estimates, to strive to meet the needs of families and to have that as a dominant reason for looking at the necessity of changing licensing regulations? Meeting the needs of families is very important.
Hon. P. Priddy: I appreciate the member's question. The premise upon which the earlier task force report was commissioned under the previous government -- the hon. member's government -- as well as the goals of this government around child care lends support to parent choice, access to families and families' and children's needs as being some of the key driving principles in the provision of child care, and they will continue to be for this ministry's work in child care. We will take the member's suggestions under consideration, but those are critical and must have first priority.
L. Stephens: Before we leave the wage supplement, I have a number of questions to continue on in that vein. With regard to the supplements to non-profit centres, could the minister explain what discussions she has had with the management of the child care centres with regard to maintaining those salary levels?
[ Page 10125 ]
Hon. P. Priddy: There has been an agreement with managers or child care providers that the low-wage redress being provided this year will be used for wages only; it cannot be used for another purpose. The Community Social Services Employers' Association, which includes representatives from the child care sector, will be working on this in the following years. The Public Sector Employers' Council is responsible for addressing compensation and human resource practices in the broad public sector.
L. Stephens: Could the centres expect to have that salary level maintained, or is it going to be on a year-by-year basis, whether or not they receive those wage supplements? Will this mean increases in fees for child care services in order to maintain those salary levels?
Hon. P. Priddy: There are two things. One is that the dollars have been annualized in the base budget of this ministry. Sorry, I've lost part of that question. The Community Social Services Employers' Association will continue to negotiate that with child care providers, who have representatives in that association. But the goal of the wage enhancement, the low-wage redress, is to address the issue of affordability. If that were simply passed on to families, it would defeat that purpose. That is not the intention of that at all.
L. Stephens: On the ministry's questions-and-answers form sent out to employees and to the private child care sector during consultation on the wage supplement initiatives, the answer to one of the questions is: "The Provincial Child Care Advisory Council recommended that the potential for a conversion strategy be considered for private child care centres, to support the long-term government vision of a non-profit community-based child care system." This particular paragraph has caused a great deal of anxiety in private day care organizations. It looks like there is an attempt to nationalize all private child care employees, and the next step would be to bring them into the union and on to the public payroll -- particularly with the setup in the Public Sector Employers' Council. Could the minister explain whether or not that is where we're headed, to give some comfort to those of us who are concerned about it?
Hon. P. Priddy: There are two things I would comment on. One of them is that when the Task Force on Child Care originally reported, people talked about a long-term vision of community-based child care; for many people that does indeed mean non-profit child care. We have chosen a position where we are concerned about quality child care and parental choice, which is the reason we moved the numerous private child care initiatives that we've already spoken about.
Secondly, I'm not sure if the member is referring to converting for-profit centres to parent boards or not. That option is always available for centres, and we have explored some of that with them.
[G. Brewin in the chair.]
Currently 11 percent of child care workers in this province are unionized. We have not made a differential between whether wage enhancements go to union or non-union workers. We have no intention of doing that, because all workers in this field are important. This is simply an attempt to raise the wages of low-paid workers; there is no other intent beyond that.
L. Stephens: Just to clarify, the paragraph here reads: "...a conversion strategy be considered for private child care centres, to support the long-term government vision of a non-profit community-based child care system." Does this paragraph mean that the government is looking for a long-term state-run child care system in British Columbia?
Hon. P. Priddy: No.
L. Stephens: Still on the issue of wage supplements, I have a number of other questions. When will the distribution of the funds be made, either to the child care workers or the child care facility? When is this going to kick in?
Hon. P. Priddy: The wage supplement initiative, which is intended to go directly to child care providers, has begun in the non-profit sector. After reviewing all of the information from the consultations that have just finished, I expect we will be making an announcement about the private sector fairly soon.
L. Stephens: Does the minister have a breakdown on the total dollars that each individual will receive? Is there an average supplement that each of these workers will receive?
Hon. P. Priddy: There is actually a report-back and monitoring and evaluation form, which does provide us with the exact amount of dollars for each worker.
L. Stephens: I'm not sure that I heard the minister correctly. Did she say that one was coming or that she has one? If she has one, I would like to know what the number is, please.
Hon. P. Priddy: We expect to receive the remaining information from child care employers within the next six weeks. We don't have all of that information at this stage, because the allocation is in process.
L. Stephens: Now I am confused. When I asked the first question, I asked if the distribution of funds had been made, and the minister indicated that they had. Perhaps I misunderstood. My second question was: if that distribution of funds has been made, what is the average amount of money that each worker would receive?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm not sure whether I could perhaps be clearer or if it was a misunderstanding.
The initiative is underway. The letters have gone out to all the employers in the province, and the allocation of those dollars is underway. Some of that has begun, and some of it is yet to be completed, so it is partway in its process. The larger amount in the budget is fixed, but the individual information that the member is requesting will not be complete until the allocation is complete.
[3:45]
L. Stephens: I'm sure the ministry has done some careful planning here, and it is not an ad hoc distribution of funds. I would suspect that the ministry is well aware of how many people and groups are involved. I'm sure the minister must have some idea of what the supplemental wage dollar amount would be to an average individual child care worker.
[ Page 10126 ]
Hon. P. Priddy: I thought the member was asking for information somewhat more specific than that. There will be some variances, as I'm sure the member can understand. But if we're talking about an average, it works out to about $1.60 an hour for an average-wage child care worker, which in this province is lower than any place in the country.
L. Stephens: That's $1.60 per hour more than what they're currently earning. What is the total number of child care workers that will be receiving those funds?
Hon. P. Priddy: Approximately 2,800.
L. Stephens: Could the minister tell me the total number of qualified early childhood educators receiving those funds?
Hon. P. Priddy: The majority of the workers are trained for early childhood.
L. Stephens: The $5 million that has been budgeted.... Is there an extra amount of money that the ministry has allocated to the wage supplement initiative for this year, 1994?
Hon. P. Priddy: Yes, there is.
L. Stephens: Could the minister indicate what that amount is?
Hon. P. Priddy: Five million dollars.
L. Stephens: So there is an extra $5 million on top of the previous $5 million, is that correct?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm sorry, I'm not sure I got all of the member's question. It's actually $15 million. The $5 million last year was six months' funding, so annualized that's $10 million. There's another $5 million on top of that.
L. Stephens: So just to be clear, the total amount of money is $15 million, 1993 and 1994. Thank you.
Could the minister indicate whether or not it's the intention in any way to eliminate private child care services in the province?
Hon. P. Priddy: No, it is not.
L. Stephens: Could the minister also indicate whether or not child care operators will be required to have membership in either the Community Social Services Employers' Association or PSEC, the Public Sector Employers' Council, or both?
Hon. P. Priddy: There are two points to that which I think are helpful to understand. One of them is that there is mandatory membership in the Community Social Services Employers' Association, CSSEA, for organizations that have government contracts over $100,000, but there are no child care providers with contracts over $100,000.
L. Stephens: I'm sure a number of child care operators will be happy to hear that, because a lot of them were worried that membership in that organization would perhaps be required and fees attached.
Some 7,500 new child care spaces were announced some time ago. Could the minister give us a breakdown on how many have been established and how many are yet to be established?
Hon. P. Priddy: We're just finding that information, actually. I think I spoke to that awhile ago. In the first six months of this initiative, about 2,000 of the 7,500 spaces are under development. I'm trying to remember back to the other page, but I think so far this year there are 455 spaces in post-secondary facilities on ten campuses throughout the province; in six hospitals...I'm not sure I have the number of spaces in the hospital and health unit facilities; in the Ministry of Education there are 375 child care spaces at secondary schools, a further 500 for young parent programs and another 500 spaces which have been approved at elementary school sites for group care of school-age children, primarily before and after school. Those are spaces which are underway. We could do the addition as to what that leaves, but those are underway this year -- about 2,000 spaces under development in the first six months of the initiative.
L. Stephens: Could the minister indicate where geographically and in what kind of setting these spaces will be going?
Hon. P. Priddy: I don't have all of the locations here, because they are significant, but I will mention a few of them. We will certainly get that information for the member as well; we would actually be quite delighted to do that.
It is important for me to comment on the fact that in the B.C. 21 initiative -- while everybody is getting their application in as quickly as possible -- applications are not only assessed on the basis of need but also on the basis of ensuring some equitable distribution throughout the province. So it's not only about a first-come, first-served basis -- who writes the grant the fastest -- but it is also about equitable distribution throughout this province, because that is the best use of government dollars.
Some of the ones that come to mind, simply because I've been fortunate enough to be present for them, are young parent programs in Courtenay and Kelowna. I think there is a health unit initiative in Penticton. I'm not sure I can think of others off the top of my head, but we'll certainly get those. They are spread significantly throughout the province. A number of applications are fairly close to completion in the north and in the Kootenays.
L. Stephens: Would the minister indicate how the allocation will be distributed among the centres for the care of children of different age groups? Is there going to be a breakdown that way? Is it more expensive to care for one group of children than it is for another? Will the funding formula depend on the age of the child?
Hon. P. Priddy: It's important to first acknowledge that this is capital money through the B.C. 21 initiative. What we are talking about here are facilities or construction costs. When the initiative was announced, what we did was acknowledge throughout the province -- and this will vary from community to community, and I'll talk a minute about that -- that there are significant.... You could comment, probably quite legitimately, that there is child care need for all ages in all areas throughout the province, but the areas most significantly underserviced are the areas of infant and toddler, because it's very difficult to get child care for very young children; before- and after-school care for those children who are in school full-time but are not of an age that
[ Page 10127 ]
they ought to be on their own, or that families would want them on their own; and for young parent programs, which are those critical programs that keep young moms and dads in school and able to finish their schooling. So there has been some priority in our distribution of the information, encouraging applications in those areas.
Whenever construction dollars are put out from the government, a community assessment is done to look at the child care that's needed most in a community. I don't think that anybody would ever ask a community to prove that child care was necessary, because we know that child care is necessary and that there is a need. But the need will vary in different communities. It may be group care, family care, school-age, infant and toddler, and it may be 24-hour care. In part, the decisions are also based on an assessment of the kind of child care that already exists in the community. The intention of the B.C. 21 initiative is not to take the place of existing child care centres in that community but to supplement and enhance the needs in those communities. Community needs assessments are going on in a number of communities throughout the province. I have a list of about 30 in front of me, and others are underway.
L. Stephens: Could the minister give us a breakdown of the $32.3 million budgeted for the child care expansion program through the B.C. 21 program? What proportion of that money will be through her ministry -- if it is indeed through her ministry?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm not sure I'm clear on the question. Can the member rephrase the question so that I can be as helpful as I can.
L. Stephens: How much of the $32.3 million that's been budgeted is coming from B.C. 21, and how much is coming from the ministry? Is it over the next three years? Is it annualized? What is the breakdown and what is the proportion?
Hon. P. Priddy: Although we are the lead ministry in coordinating that work, all of that $32.3 million is capital construction money that is the responsibility of and would be found in the budgets of other ministries, such as the college campus child care ones that I referenced in the ten college campuses in the province. The amount of that construction money would be found in the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour. Those construction dollars are all in other ministries.
L. Stephens: I would like to know the amount of capital money in the Ministry of Women's Equality.
Hon. P. Priddy: There are no B.C. 21 capital dollars through the Ministry of Women's Equality. We have capital dollars and a capital budget, which is how the first.... A number of spaces were created over the last two years, before B.C. 21, and a number of those were created through a capital budget available through our ministry. But in terms of the B.C. 21 capital dollars, those are all in other ministries: $19.5 million in Education; $10 million in Skills, Training and Labour; and $2.5 million in Health -- over the next three years.
L. Stephens: Would the minister qualify whether the $1.7 million investment for the creation of 1,400 child care spaces that she talked about earlier is in addition to, or included in, the 7,500?
Hon. P. Priddy: That's in addition.
L. Stephens: The number of child care spaces altogether, then, is 8,900. Is that correct?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'll just have people try to find a bit more information. I think it's important that the 7,500 spaces that are spoken of through B.C. 21 are new spaces, in public buildings only, to be created over three years. That was announced last June. Those 7,500 spaces in public buildings -- government buildings, colleges, hospitals, etc. -- will continue on one stream; that work will continue. The work of the ministry in creating child care spaces, such as those in the 24-hour child care program at Vancouver General Hospital, will also continue. I was just looking for those additional....
[4:00]
If we look at the spaces over last year.... Under facilities and equipment, which is our construction money in the Ministry of Women's Equality -- B.C. 21 money aside -- 550 new spaces were created last year, and another 500 spaces are being created this year through capital construction money in this ministry.
L. Stephens: I think I've got it: the difference between the B.C. 21 number and the ministry's number of child care spaces, which is 1,400 -- 550 last year, 500 this year -- is funded from the Ministry of Women's Equality, not out of B.C. 21, and the ministry's $1.7 million comes out of the ministry budget. You have announced 1,400. There were 550 last year, 500 this year. Where are the rest?
Hon. P. Priddy: I wonder if the member could refer me to the place where she's getting the 1,400 figure from, so that I can be as clear as I can.
L. Stephens: It was my understanding that the minister announced last August that there would be $1.7 million for 1,400 new child care spaces.
Hon. P. Priddy: I don't think it's all capital money in the news release the member is referring to. Some of those spaces referred to in there are a result, for instance, of the funding for child care support programs that are stabilizing family child care as well as allowing it to expand. The money referred to is not all construction money.
L. Stephens: I would like the minister to explain and expand a bit upon the support for children with special needs and what programs, funds and initiatives are available in that area.
Hon. P. Priddy: As we know, the child care support for children with special needs, or children who need additional support -- which I think is the terminology that families prefer today -- is one of the most important areas of child care, because it is not only about child care but also early intervention or early stimulation. Indeed, we know that for children who have additional learning needs and need additional support, the investment of dollars in child care at an early age makes a tremendous difference not only to the child and their family but to the economics of the system, since many of those children will require somewhat less support later on.
There was a significant review, with extensive consultation throughout the province, that was undertaken actually by the Ministry of Social Services. The Ministry of Social Services consulted -- I wanted to check the numbers -- with over 1,300 parents, service providers, ministry staff
[ Page 10128 ]
and community members, at almost 60 meetings throughout the province, as the community consultation phase of the special needs care review. They also received letters, briefs, etc., from another 170 individuals and organizations. They released the report in September 1993. There are 24 recommendations, which reflect a very inclusive, integrated vision of care for children who need extra support. That report envisions a slow community-by-community transition to this new inclusive approach. That responsibility, by the way, is still under the Ministry of Social Services, although we now have a responsibility for coordinating that response.
As a ministry, we are certainly very committed to the value of inclusiveness, but we recognize that we have to be very careful to ensure that services are ready and able to provide supports to children. Our ministry is working in very close partnership with Social Services to develop a response to the supported child care report. We have not responded as yet as a government. In doing that, we will be guided by community feedback to the report, which is in progress, and guided by the government's goal of improved consolidation.
The member may be aware, but child care for children requiring additional support -- or for children with special needs, which is how that's been known -- has traditionally been provided in large part by child development centres, such as the one closest to the member's home and mine, the Variety Child Development Centre. There are a number of child development centres in the province. Some children who have special needs, or who require additional support, do receive child care through their regular community child care facilities, but those numbers are smaller. So this really is an attempt to look at what is the very best way to meet the needs of these children and their families, and we are consulting with communities about the report to see what the very best response from this government should be.
L. Stephens: Could the minister expand a bit on the new inclusive direction, and what she means by that?
Hon. P. Priddy: I would be more than happy. I don't have the appropriate portions of the report in front of me. But there certainly has been a significant move -- probably in the last 20 years, but certainly more recently in the last few years in this province and certainly in Canada and around the world -- for children who require additional supports to have an opportunity to learn with peers of their own age who may not require those same kinds of supports. This is with the understanding that if you have a particular special learning need, having an opportunity to be with peers of your own age in a regular child care centre that's close to your home and part of your community -- potentially with your brothers and sisters and the children in your neighbourhood you would play with -- is the very best way for children to learn.
I've worked in the education area for the last 20 years across this country. We've learned from the education system, and in part from the early childhood system as well -- and many people believe quite strongly in inclusiveness in child care centres. We believe children should be able, if they choose, to be in centres that are part of their community, and we have to provide the kind of support they need, whether that's speech, mobility or learning support or whatever that might be. So part of the challenge and the consultation for us at the moment is to find the best way to ensure that children have a chance to learn with other children in their community, but have the supports to do so.
L. Stephens: The minister talked a little and raised the issue of the program we share in our area. I wonder if the minister would commit to the expansion of that early intervention program that, I'm sure the minister knows, is badly needed in the Fraser Valley. There was some discussion on it being expanded to Aldergrove; I wonder if anything has happened on that. Can the minister expand a bit on that particular early intervention program?
Hon. P. Priddy: I may need to seek some clarification on two things from the member. The Variety Child Development Centre is funded under the Ministry of Health, with some support currently from the Ministry of Social Services, so I'm not aware of what discussions there may have been about expansion.
I'm also not clear -- and perhaps the member can help me.... When I think of early intervention in the way the member has referred to it, there is the infant development program, which we talk about as early intervention, and in which I have been part of some significant discussion -- certainly before being part of government. Early intervention programs are very much needed, and very much needed in the Fraser Valley, which has the largest caseload and the smallest resources -- but those from the Fraser Valley have heard us say that before. That program actually comes under the Ministry of Social Services, so I don't know what those discussions are. But I would be pleased to support the member in those initiatives to expand it.
H. De Jong: I have just a couple of questions for the minister. The minister talked about how her ministry determines the need for additional child care facilities. Some of them are built through other ministries, such as Skills, Training and Labour and so on. Could the minister perhaps expand on how she determines the need for such facilities?
Hon. P. Priddy: I would be delighted to respond to that question, and I appreciate the member's interest in that. The coordination of the dollars and the approval of applications is work coordinated by the ministry. But it is very clear to me, this ministry and, I believe, this government that that need is determined by the community -- not by me in Victoria but by people who live, work and raise children in those communities. The need is assessed in the community. Based on the kind of need the community sees, they would then apply for a particular kind of support or resource -- it may be B.C. 21 or another kind of resource from this ministry. But it is definitely based on the community's assessment of need.
H. De Jong: Then I have a further question. In determining that need by those communities, when a report comes in to you from a community for a suggestion of, let's say, a 20- or 40-space child care centre, do you get any information as to how many people advertise in that same community for child care in a private setting?
Hon. P. Priddy: Yes, we do. I mentioned earlier that it is important that child care dollars, whether they be through my ministry's capital or through B.C. 21, are intended to enhance what happens in a community and are by no means to be in competition with what already exists. Significant work is underway in some communities. I just want to refer to that list again, if someone can find it for me.
The assessment looks at another part. If somebody would like dollars for before- and after-school care for X number of
[ Page 10129 ]
children -- and I don't think it would be 40 spaces in that circumstance -- one of the things we look at is what other child care centres there are. We have that information through our child care support programs. There are 31 of them in the province. It has been significantly expanded under this government. We know those, at least in terms of licensed spaces. Licence-not-required is often family care for two or three children. We know that those are there. We look at how many are in that surrounding area and what the vacancy rate might be, which does play into the assessment of need.
I was just looking to see whether there had been a particular needs assessment in the member's riding, but I don't see it. I see the closest is Chilliwack.
[4:15]
H. De Jong: Prior to approving a child care facility.... When people fall into the category where subsidies can be paid because of their level of income, suppose an aunt or a sister, or even a grandmother, in some cases, would be able to help that younger family. Is the same kind of assistance available in those situations as would be if they were to go into what you call a registered child care facility?
Hon. P. Priddy: It does depend on the circumstances. There are circumstances where the subsidy is available to family members or relatives, although not in all cases.
H. De Jong: Can the British Columbia public be assured by the minister that the main purpose is to provide child care through the best avenues? If a family member is willing to provide such a service, can we be assured that funding will not be denied?
Hon. P. Priddy: It does depend on the criteria and the circumstances of the family. That is available to family members in some circumstances, but that's not the case in all circumstances. I don't think I could stand here and say that it would be available in every circumstance. I do believe, as does the ministry, that we work very hard to ensure that parent choice is one of the primary principles of the provision of child care. As much as possible, we try to provide the resources -- where we can -- to do so.
H. De Jong: Could the minister perhaps explain a situation where it would not be available?
Hon. P. Priddy: The subsidy program has just come over to us, and we are just looking at the review that's gone on. The circumstance in which the subsidy would not be available is if the family member being paid that subsidy is residing in the same home.
L. Stephens: I would like to move on to pay equity and talk a little bit about the needs that have to be met in that area. The government and the minister have stated that the government is committed to bringing in pay equity legislation for the broader public sector. Could the minister indicate whether that is still the case and if there is anything in the foreseeable future?
Hon. P. Priddy: That question falls within the mandate of another minister, the Minister of Finance.
L. Stephens: I have a letter from the Minister of Women's Equality that states the government is committed to bringing in pay equity legislation. I'm asking if the minister believes that is indeed the aim of her government.
Hon. P. Priddy: The responsibility for pay equity was moved to the Minister of Finance in September. That is a matter for future policy. I suggest the member may wish to canvass that during the Minister of Finance's estimates.
L. Stephens: Again I ask the minister if she herself, as the Minister of Women's Equality, believes that pay equity legislation in the broader public service is desirable in British Columbia.
The Chair: The hon. minister can discuss that if she wishes.
Hon. P. Priddy: I guess I would say that the issue of addressing low wages for women and men in this province, and primarily for women, is extremely important to this government. It's the reason we've seen the sorts of initiatives in both pay equity and wage parity that we have over the last two years in the public sector, We've seen pay equity for people in the public service, in the area of health care workers and in post-secondary facilities, as well as wage parity, which is addressing the issue of low wages and not just wage discrimination on the basis of gender. I think those are critical issues, as I do the fact that there must be standards under which those dollars are used. That's why I continue to support our government's initiatives to do that.
L. Stephens: Along those same lines -- wage enhancements for low-paid workers in funded agencies -- aside from the wage supplement for child care workers that we've just discussed, are other wage enhancement initiatives currently in place in your ministry?
Hon. P. Priddy: I just want to be sure I am clear and accurate in the kind of answer I provide. The other two services that are now the responsibility of this ministry are women's centres and transition houses. By the way, for contracted human services in general, we've had a coordinated program of increases to provide for fairer wages. While I talk about child care workers being the lowest paid in the human service area, it does not get away from the fact that most human service areas are very low paid, in many cases, because of the lack of valuing the work. So for contracted human services, as I say, we have had a coordinated program of increases to provide for fairer wages, and that includes in the past year initiatives for women's centres and transition houses. That will then become, as with child care workers, the responsibility of the Public Sector Employers' Council, which has a responsibility for addressing the issues of fair wage compensation across the public sector.
L. Stephens: I'm going to follow up on that later. I have another question. One of the other statements was that changes to women's access to unionization is an initiative that the ministry is looking at. Could the minister please expand on that as well?
Hon. P. Priddy: One of the initiatives of this government was the introduction of the Labour Code. One of the things the Labour Code did was ensure that the negotiation of first contracts -- which, in many cases in this province, are in fields of work that are dominated by women -- is easier to do. That alone has the potential to make a difference in economic security for women.
[ Page 10130 ]
L. Stephens: One of the toughest obstacles that women in business face is access to financing and capital. I wonder if the minister would explain or share with us any initiatives in her ministry to help women gain better access to business information and capital.
Hon. P. Priddy: During the first year of this ministry's term, we had the businesswomen's advocate located within this ministry. The businesswomen's advocate has a responsibility and a mandate not only to provide information for women who are in business or who are interested in starting up businesses throughout this province but also provide some informational support to do so. They have provided a series of workshops, as well as support and networks to women throughout this province. The businesswomen's advocate has actually moved to the Ministry of Small Business and is currently under Employment and Investment, in terms of location.
One of the things that I think is important to acknowledge about issues that affect women's lives and government is that while this ministry has some very particular responsibilities, one of the goals is that each ministry look at the areas in which they can -- and should -- very naturally provide support to women. So the businesswomen's advocate is within the Ministry of Employment and Investment, but we provide significant support to the businesswomen's advocate whenever we can. We've shared workshops and provided information, and we continue to work closely with her.
L. Stephens: How is the workforce employment equity profile that began in the public service coming along? Has it been completed? When will it be completed, and will it be available to the public?
Hon. P. Priddy: I do need to make one correction. I didn't mean to move the businesswomen's advocate around more than she needed to be moved. She's actually still with the community and regional development division of the Ministry of Small Business, Tourism, and Culture. If she is watching this, I didn't mean for her to think she was moving somewhere.
In terms of the workplace profile to which the member refers, the profile is complete and the results are being tabulated. I would offer a suggestion to the member that because employment equity is under the Minister of Finance, she could ask that minister about the intentions for its future release.
L. Stephens: I'm pleased that the Minister of Finance's estimates have not arrived. We will indeed be asking questions of the minister on that particular issue.
One of the other areas that impedes women's progress is education and job training. I wonder if the minister could share with us any joint initiatives between her ministry and any other ministries to further women's education and skills training in the province.
Hon. P. Priddy: I am very pleased the member has asked the question. I know she is particularly concerned in that area, as I am. It is indeed a critical issue that has been a significant barrier for many women. I am grateful for her question and her support in that area.
I don't think there's any question that when we look at education and training, we have to look at the barriers it poses not only for women but also for girls or young women. I think we have to be sure to view it from that perspective as we look through ages. We work very closely with the Ministry of Education's gender equity program. Through a variety of initiatives, which I can speak about, it is working very hard to eliminate these barriers. It's encouraging an education system free of gender biases that may, perhaps not consciously, be a barrier for young women in particular kinds of training. We have worked with that ministry to provide a number of workshops for teachers. We work with an interministry committee that looks across government at education and training initiatives to ensure equal access to education programs for both girls and boys.
[4:30]
If I speak only of our own initiatives in the year just past, the grants program in our own ministry approved 32 projects throughout the province for education and employment initiatives for women and provided some additional bursaries of about $14,000 for female students enrolled in non-traditional courses or women's studies programs. Someone made a very interesting comment to me a while ago. We've all used the term "non-traditional" over the years; I think many people here probably still do. Someone said that as long as we keep calling them non-traditional, they will be. So perhaps we should start perceiving all jobs as able to be traditional jobs for women.
So we have worked very closely with the education system on that program. We also have looked at how the Ministry of Employment and Investment and the Ministry of Skills, Labour and Training do their work and whether there are ways within ministries to provide greater opportunities, greater access, and information about the availability of job opportunities to women, as well as to other people who may have been denied that kind of access before.
We're also working with teachers, community groups and other professional organizations around a video production for families, teachers and school administrators about the effects of what may very often be done unconsciously in the school system, which very early on encourages little girls in a particular direction and encourages little boys in a different direction. So we're working on producing that video, which we think will be of use to families and teachers. They've certainly indicated to us that they are interested in doing that with us.
We've also provided a review of work that has gone on across British Columbia, which looks at interesting and innovative projects across the province in math and science -- an area that has traditionally seen fewer young women than young men involved. It looks at innovative projects that have been successful in encouraging greater participation by young women in those subject areas.
L. Stephens: Could the minister expand on some of the initiatives she has just talked about which encourage young girls and women to enter math and science, and whether there are some role-modelling programs or scholarships. What form has that taken?
Hon. P. Priddy: Some of the examples that I know about -- because I've been very interested in this, as well -- are role-modelling and mentoring programs, where young women in high school are matched with a woman in business, a woman in a particular trade, a woman who is currently in an apprenticeship program or a woman in a particular profession. They are, as the member describes, a role model for those young women. But it does more than provide a role model or a mentoring; it also gives that young woman an opportunity to see firsthand what that profession or trade or apprenticeship program might be like. So programs like that occur to me.
[ Page 10131 ]
There have been initiatives around math and science camps, which provide opportunities for young women to be involved in science and math activities during spring break, winter break or summer break. We don't have additional ones here with us. I'm just trying to think of some more on my own. There are a number of wonderful ones, and I'd be delighted to provide some of those to the member. There are some very talented and committed people in our province working in this area. I think their work needs to be acknowledged, and I would be pleased to share it with as many people as I can.
L. Stephens: Single parents have a difficult time accessing education. I think a couple of studies have been done which have indicated that the poverty of single parents is in direct proportion to the level of their education. I wonder if the ministry is working to bring forward some kind of assistance to single parents who are struggling to become self-sufficient and to provide for their families. Is the ministry looking at anything in that regard?
Hon. P. Priddy: I think the member has commented on what there is for women and children -- and certainly for some men as well. The issue of poverty is not exclusively about women and children, but quite frankly, it is very much more about women and children. The issue of poverty has this enormous overlay of access to jobs, to education, to housing, to nutrition, to child care and to simply being able to use the resources of a community. It is a critical issue for women. It's not acceptable, and it is an area that puts many women and children at risk.
One thing the ministry is involved in -- which we mentioned earlier, although in a different context -- is the support of young parent programs. While young parents are welcome to stay in school -- we see young parents in this province at 14, 15, 16, and their numbers are fairly significant -- if they do not have access to child care, they will not be able to stay in school and complete their education, and they will not have the economic resources necessary to raise their children and support themselves. So the support we offer through child care programs for young parents is one of the most critical things we can do for single parents. There are a few young men, but young parents are primarily young moms -- not all of them, but the vast majority are.
We work very closely with the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour. We are looking at a variety of initiatives with them, and there will be announcements in the next little while. We have worked with a number of women's organizations and women to find access for women -- very often single parents -- to apprenticeship programs and other kinds of education, because many of the jobs opening up in this province are in the areas of trades and technology. I hope that we are moving -- and we need to move more -- in differentiating kinds of work. All work is valued. One kind of work or one kind of education is no more valuable than another. A lot of jobs created in this province are in the area of trades and technology. It's important that women have access to the apprenticeship programs that will give them the skills required for some of those jobs, because it will offer them an opportunity to earn a living that will provide them with some economic security. So we are working very closely with Skills, Training and Labour regarding access to apprenticeship programs and other kinds of training. Some of those initiatives will come....
The other comment I would make -- and I thank people for the additional reminder -- is that the income security review being conducted by this government addresses the issue of poverty in the broadest way. It is critical that women's voices, perspectives and considerations be part of that review, and this ministry is ensuring that that happens. We are also being very insistent with the federal government that in their income security review the voices and experiences of women have to be heard and the realities of women's lives who live in poverty have to be considered. The building of the information on which decisions are made has to be actively considered by the federal government in their review as well.
L. Stephens: The minister has discussed the young parent program. I wonder if the ministry has a program to assist those young parents in developing life and parenting skills. There have been a number of unfortunate incidents, and we have seen the very tragic things that can happen in large part because those skills are lacking. I wonder if the ministry is involved with Social Services or another ministry to develop programs to assist young families in developing the skills that are sorely needed.
Hon. P. Priddy: There are several parts to that answer. Life skills programs happen in different ways in different communities, and we work very closely with.... Some young parent programs provide some training in those life skills. In those cases, it is an integral part of the program those young parents get in school, and it is supported in part by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Social Services. In many communities, the Ministry of Health plays a significant role in providing not only life skills programs for the young parent, but also parenting skills. We work very closely with the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Services and the Ministry of Education in supporting and providing resources for those programs -- curriculum material or whatever might be necessary. In each community those happen in a somewhat different way, but regardless of the vehicle for delivering those programs, we work in all those areas with the ministries responsible.
L. Stephens: I wonder if the ministry is involved in supporting women's studies programs at university or college levels and whether or not the ministry is providing grants to promote or publish research materials on women's issues.
Hon. P. Priddy: There are probably three parts to that. One is that we have a research and evaluation branch within our own ministry that works very closely with women's studies programs in colleges and universities in this province, because people working in those faculties have tremendous resources to offer. In our own ministry we work in partnership with those women's studies programs. I would suggest that we are strong advocates in support of those programs with the Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour -- formerly the Ministry of Advanced Education -- because, of course, the funding for those programs is a responsibility of advanced education. We also provide about $13,000 worth of bursaries, which are available to women taking women's studies programs, and we have worked in partnership around workshops and research papers with faculty engaged in women's studies in universities and colleges.
L. Stephens: I wonder if the minister could be more specific on those women's studies programs. What do they include, what do they entail and who is involved in them?
[ Page 10132 ]
Hon. P. Priddy: I want to be clear on the member's question. Women's studies programs are another faculty within universities and colleges, and I think they might be better canvassed under the Skills, Training and Labour ministry's estimates. Certainly those programs have faculties with different perspectives throughout the province. They may focus on regional issues for women in their particular parts of the province. A number of women's studies programs have support in areas of particular kinds of research, such as women with disabilities. Those programs take a number of focuses, depending on their location and faculty. But in terms of the makeup -- the numbers, who is in it and what they do -- that question may be better answered by the Minister of Skills, Training and Labour, whose responsibility that is. I'm sure he'll be very pleased to answer that extensively.
L. Stephens: Perhaps I wasn't making myself clear. I was asking the minister if her ministry funds any grants or programs of women's studies at the college or university level.
Hon. P. Priddy: We certainly don't fund women's studies programs, if that's the question. It's the same as other ministries; they wouldn't fund a particular faculty of a university or college. But we do some specific work where we might, for instance, put some resources into a project along with the faculties. Let me give the member one example. We're currently doing some work with the women's studies program at the University of Victoria -- I believe the university is in the constituency of the hon. Chair, or close, anyway -- around assisting women in sustainable development. So we might be involved in some funding of particular projects like that, which benefit the government and use the resources of people in those faculties, but we do not directly fund those programs.
[4:45]
L. Stephens: That's the kind of thing I was asking about: whether or not the ministry is involved in some form -- funding or whatever -- of furthering women's studies or women's research at the university or college level. The minister mentioned one. Are there any others in progress at one of the other institutions?
Hon. P. Priddy: There aren't any currently underway, although some are under discussion with at least one other university. They have not been announced yet. I expect we may have some confirmation of that in the near future, but there's no announcement about that yet.
Although it's not an ongoing project in the same way that this one is, we have used faculties' resources around some research into women's history, because we have some very fine women historians in this province. The area of women's history is one that we have neglected, to say the least, in our recording of history everywhere. So we have done some work with faculty accumulating information about women's history. It's often around specific events such as that. But as our research and evaluation branch, which is a fairly new branch for us, becomes more active, we expect to be doing more of that work. The women in the universities of this province have tremendous skill. They also have, I think, enormous resources to offer our government, in terms of the work the government does. I also believe that if those resources exist in our province within the universities, we would be foolish to duplicate them within government. It's not only a waste or duplication of dollars but it also ignores the talent available to us.
L. Stephens: The minister mentioned a couple of things that are happening in the policy, planning and evaluation division. Could the minister expand a bit on this particular area and some of the policies or initiatives that have been worked on and may be coming forward?
Hon. P. Priddy: Before I talk about some of the specific initiatives, I want to comment that the work done by the policy, planning and evaluation part of our ministry is extremely important. As I have said, it's clear when looking at the budget that 91 percent of the dollars go directly to women and children in communities in this province. I'm very proud of that. But the work that enables us to do that in a thoughtful, cogent way, which ensures that the expressed needs of communities are best met and that our policies are as flexible and innovative as they can be, is dependent upon the work that our policy, planning and evaluation division does. For me, it is an extraordinarily important part of this ministry.
Let me just offer the member a few examples from '93 to '94. We have been involved in several studies or coordinated work with the federal government on issues around economic equality and on research around balancing -- or harmonizing, as I choose to call it -- work and family. It is critical in our day and age that both moms and dads are able to harmonize their work and families. Also, we've been looking at what I believe are some very innovative arrangements to involve community groups in policy work. Policy work ought not to be done simply within the offices of government; it ought to be done within communities. As I've said before, communities know best what their needs are and often know best what the solutions should be.
We have done some quite innovative work in funding groups to conduct workshops in four provincial locations to prepare women to respond to the report of the employment standards review commissioner. The policy and evaluation branch did a significant amount of work with the Ministry of Social Services and other ministries around the preparation of public information for the International Year of the Family.
We have looked at the development of a gender analysis policy framework, at how we help people in government understand issues that affect women's lives and how that might affect the work other ministries do. We've facilitated community consultation on the family, child and community services White Paper -- again, with the Ministry of Social Services. We've also worked with other women on a paper on sustainable development, which I mentioned earlier.
I just want to comment on some for 1994-95, the upcoming year. We will certainly talk about some of them as the year goes on. The branch is preparing an information package on women and pensions, which will help women safeguard their retirement income through a better understanding of the new legislation that will be tabled in the spring of 1994. We're working on fact sheets that will provide a statistical analysis on many women's issues, and we'll be distributing those -- information about women in the labour market, child care, girls and women in education and training, single-parent women, women entrepreneurs, aboriginal women, women with disabilities and women in sports.
The policy, planning and evaluation division is also working on the video I referred to, looking at how we encourage bias-free education for young girls and young women. As well, that branch has the responsibility of analyzing a number of major issues, including: income security reform; a study of facilities and services available to women offenders, with the Ministry of Attorney General and
[ Page 10133 ]
Simon Fraser University; gender equity in the justice system, with the Ministry of Attorney General; and economic issues, ranging from things such as free trade to guidelines for child care support. There will be significant policy input into other areas we're working on. One is health and women, with the Ministry of Health and Ministry Responsible for Seniors, around the minimum wage; labour force adjustment; family justice reviews; the post-secondary curriculum; social security and income assistance reform; and the implementation of the family, child and community services legislation and family advocacy legislation.
L. Stephens: One other program, where the Ministry of Education is in partnership with Simon Fraser University, is Girls Do Math. I know that was talked about in estimates last year. I wonder if the minister has any idea as to how that particular program is progressing.
Hon. P. Priddy: Actually, I've had an opportunity to talk with people who have been involved in that, and they have been, I understand, pleased with the opportunity to do that. I don't have specific information on that program with me, but I'd be pleased to get that for the member.
W. Hurd: I have a general question with respect to the policy, planning and evaluation vote. Can the minister tell us whether her ministry provides advice and direction to other ministries of government and also to Crown corporations in the province?
Hon. P. Priddy: We would not provide direction to a Crown corporation, but we have provided advice to Crown corporations, particularly in areas such as the collection of information around women in the workplace that will allow those Crown corporations to look at their policies and at ways in which they can encourage women to be part of their workplace. As well, Crown corporations have asked for advice in terms of implementing or initiating child care within Crown corporations, and we've provided advice in those areas as well. We've been asked for advice around stopping violence in the workplace, as we have by many employers in the province. We have provided that advice but certainly not direction.
W. Hurd: I guess my specific question relates to whether the minister has ever been asked for provide advice to B.C. Trade, for example, with respect to standards of conduct in the workplace. The minister will certainly be aware of a recent high-profile case involving the president of B.C. Trade. Can the minister advise us whether her ministry was approached to provide the president of B.C. Trade with any direct advice as to what course of action they should pursue relative to an incident that occurred in the workplace? Would she have had the opportunity to provide any advice to the president of B.C. Trade on that occasion?
C. Serwa: That's a rather scanty issue to bring up at this point.
Hon. P. Priddy: No, we were not approached.
The Chair: The hon. member continues -- in a serious vein, I'm sure.
W. Hurd: We on this side of the House are always serious on matters of taxpayers' money.
I find the answer somewhat troubling. Clearly the president of B.C. Trade had a great deal to say about the reasons....
D. Schreck: Point of order, hon. Chair. It's my understanding from reports in the news media that this matter is subject to appeal. As a result of that appeal process, it would be out of order according to standing orders.
The Chair: I thank the member for North Vancouver-Lonsdale. I would like to suggest to the hon. member for Surrey-White Rock that he be very cautious in his remarks or the line of questioning he is pursuing.
W. Hurd: In response to the member for North Vancouver-Lonsdale, of course he will be aware that the same news media reports indicated that B.C. Trade has decided not to launch an appeal of this particular ruling.
I find the response from the minister rather interesting. I note with interest that Ms. Oksana Exell had pursued the case because she was acting in the best interests of all young professional women in the province. That seemed to be a rather sweeping statement by the president of B.C. Trade. Obviously she felt strongly that the particular issue that was identified in the media was of importance to all professional women working in the public service of the province.
[D. Lovick in the chair.]
I would just ask the minister again whether she feels that this type of issue should come to the attention of her ministry and whether direction should be sought before the president of B.C. Trade launches an action for wrongful dismissal -- at considerable cost to the taxpayers. I would just ask the minister, in looking at the mandate of her ministry down the road, whether she feels that this is the type of advice that her ministry should provide before these workplace issues -- which affect men and women -- are pursued by the president of B.C. Trade. I'm sure that the minister has had the opportunity to review the court ruling and the fact that other activities at B.C. Trade clearly mitigated this particular case. Would the ministry hope to be more involved in these kinds of decisions by the senior executives of Crown corporations, and in particular B.C. Trade?
[5:00]
Hon. P. Priddy: If the member is pursuing the policies of Crown corporations and B.C. Trade, he should do so under estimates of that ministry.
W. Hurd: I can appreciate the minister's response. I understand that this issue affects a Crown corporation that reports to the Premier.
I note a subvote of the ministry: policy, planning and evaluation. I think it's important that I read the responsibility of the ministry into the record. It is: "...review of government-wide policy proposals and their impact on women; advice to ministries in their review and analysis of existing and proposed policies, legislation and programs; and the evaluation of related programs and initiatives." That's a rather sweeping assessment of the role of this ministry in ensuring that workplace issues that affect women are addressed.
I really am somewhat troubled that the minister wouldn't welcome the opportunity to comment on this high-profile case at B.C. Trade, which, as the president has pointed out, has the potential to affect young professional women in a
[ Page 10134 ]
range of government ministries and Crown corporations. When we review the public comments of the president of B.C. Trade, we see her strong conviction that she was pursuing this case through the court system on behalf of professional women in the workplace who might have felt insulted by the events that occurred. I would encourage the minister to at least provide the committee with some assurance that, should these events occur in the future, her ministry would be contacted. As the minister well knows, this action ended up costing taxpayers $150,000.
I'm sure the minister would agree that rather than pursue these cases through the courts, her ministry should be regarded as a sounding board, an instrument that provides advice to executives of Crown corporations like B.C. Trade who might be tempted to pursue an overzealous course of action -- if I can use that term -- and would appreciate advice from the minister. Can she give the committee some assurance that she is cognizant of the difficulties at B.C. Trade and is making a determination to expand the role of her ministry to provide timely advice when it is needed -- before taxpayers' dollars are placed at risk in a court case?
Hon. P. Priddy: I'm having some difficulty -- and I would seek some guidance from the Chair -- about how this question refers to estimates.
The Chair: I thank the minister for her question. I only came into the chamber in the last few minutes, and therefore I haven't seen where this line of questioning came from.
I would just remind members that estimates are dedicated to an examination of the administrative activity of a ministry. The minister is certainly under no obligation to answer questions. It is, however, incumbent on the questioner to try to make the connection with the administrative operation of a particular vote under a given ministry. I simply offer that advice to the member, and then I will listen carefully to what transpires and make a judgment if the question is in order.
W. Hurd: Thank you for that advice, Mr. Chairman.
I tried to listen this afternoon to the minister's comments about the role of the ministry in the life of British Columbians. I certainly detected that the ministry feels strongly about the need to deal with standards and ideas in the private sector of the province. Clearly I'm surprised that we wouldn't see more comment about the need for accountability in the public sector of the province, particularly in Crown corporations.
Perhaps I can ask the minister whether at any time she monitored the activities at B.C. Trade and decided this was an issue her ministry should at least spend some time monitoring -- decided in her own mind whether the issue was sufficient for her ministry staff to study, since it did have broader implications for women in the public sector workplace. Does she feel, as she's told this committee, that it's an issue that's totally beyond her bounds?
In the future would she hope or expect to be consulted by the chief executive of B.C. Trade -- who happens to be, as the minister knows, a female executive? Or is she telling the committee she has no interest in what Crown corporations might do or how they might react in the event of an issue in the workplace that affects men and women -- such as this issue, which Ms. Exell pursued with zeal because she felt she was acting in the interest of all professional women in the province? Can we expect some involvement from the minister in the future?
Hon. P. Priddy: Let me make a couple of comments about the role of this ministry. We are concerned about any workplace; there's no question about that. We're concerned that women are safe in the workplace. We work in our own ministry and throughout government around policies that guide people to ensure that workplaces are safe for all workers. It is a policy development role, certainly not a direction role. We are pleased to work with anyone who wants to seek some advice from us about policy development -- not about the adjudication of individual circumstances. So I've made that response.
But in reviewing the vote description, it is about the initiatives of the ministry and its involvement with other ministries in the government, not about Crown corporations. But we certainly heard the member's comments. As I said, we will provide advice and policy work to any organization -- including the private sector, actually, which has frequently come to us to say: "Can you help us with the pieces of a policy development, to give us some guidance about that?"
W. Hurd: I detected the desire by the minister to be somewhat involved in these kinds of decisions. Could I ask the minister whether she would monitor wrongful dismissal cases within other ministries of government where there might be gender issues involved? This case at B.C. Trade was one where a gender issue was supposedly involved, but I'm sure these kinds of incidents do occur in the public sector. Would the minister want to be apprised of those kinds of gender tensions in the workplace that might result in wrongful dismissal cases?
I'm sure the minister agrees that having these issues played out in the courts at considerable public expense is a less desirable public policy option than having the ministry able to provide timely advice where managers may require it. Is that currently a mandate within the ministry? Is it something the ministry will be looking at pursuing more diligently in the future, or does the minister feel it is not within the purview of the ministry?
Hon. P. Priddy: As it relates to the member's question about circumstances that might occur in other ministries, that is the responsibility of PSERC, not this ministry. From my discussions with PSERC, I know they are very committed to ensuring that the government workplace is free of harassment and is safe. That is their responsibility. They know that we have some expertise in this ministry, and I'm sure they will seek that if they need it.
W. Hurd: I don't have too many more questions to raise on this issue, since the line of questioning is taking us nowhere with respect to ministry accountability.
Interjections.
The Chair: Members, please allow the member for Surrey-White Rock to continue.
W. Hurd: This is a case which held women's issues up to ridicule in British Columbia. I find it very troubling that this kind of case could occur in a Crown corporation and that the minister could suggest that despite the events at B.C. Trade, the Ministry of Women's Equality is not able to provide advice to an executive of a Crown corporation who would pursue such a frivolous case through the courts and cost the taxpayers of the province a considerable amount of money. I hope that in the future the ministry will decide that it needs
[ Page 10135 ]
to be involved in the broader workplace issues in the public sector -- particularly issues such as this. When one reviews the case at B.C. Trade, we see a pattern of malfeasance involving taxpayers' money: a two-week investigation launched by senior officials at B.C. Trade and a frivolous court case. I hope that the minister will take the case under advisement and resolve to provide some of these senior Crown corporation heads with a great deal more advice, as I believe subvote (b) calls for.
C. Serwa: I have one or two more questions with respect to child care. It is appropriate that the Minister of Health is in the chamber at the present time, because part of the responsibility, apparently, is with the Ministry of Health.
The concern is that the Ministry of Health is becoming quite aggressive about closing down child care centres in the South Okanagan health unit, not because of child safety or health reasons, but because of minor infractions or technical infractions of the licensing regulations. Can the minister do something to mitigate this? It is happening in the smaller communities in the Okanagan. Is there a possibility -- either through your ministry or through the Ministry of Health -- that more temperate or rational applications of the current licensing requirements could be emphasized and that some latitude could be allowed until new ones can be drawn up? It appears necessary that something be done at the present time.
Hon. P. Priddy: Without knowing all the circumstances of which the member speaks -- although I have met with some child care facilities in his riding and took note of the concerns they raised with me -- I will say that we will be trying to ensure that the regulation review is finished as quickly as possible. As I said earlier, the first concern is the safety of children. We don't want licensing regulations to get in people's way for reasons that are not necessary and do not have an effect on the safety and health of children. If regulations are providing barriers in that way and are not working for child care facilities and providers in this province, then we need to be looking at those as quickly as possible.
I've heard the member's comments; I've heard the comments from the providers in his riding. We'll be reviewing those as quickly as we can.
C. Serwa: Thank you very much for those remarks.
I have a few questions. I recognize that your ministry is far more complex than one might think it would be, looking at it in a sort of overview. Just shortly after my election in 1986, I was approached by individuals from the Women's Resource Centre in Kelowna. I initiated a group called a women's advisory committee. What was really necessary for me.... There are so many diverse groups of women. We talked a little about the elderly. We can talk about visible minorities, native women, single mothers or wives with children who choose to stay at home. There's a broad spectrum, and there's no one single approach or one answer that satisfies all requirements. Obviously views expressed by radical feminists have to be considered as well. I consider some of the views very radical, and all views sometimes go to that end of the spectrum. There is an incredible challenge.
[5:15]
What mechanism have you developed to ensure that you listen to all concerns in that broad spectrum? What sort of mechanism do you have for drawing a consensus, so that one well-orchestrated group doesn't have a profound influence on your particular ministry -- because it is a very important ministry.
Hon. P. Priddy: I appreciate the member's comment. I would suggest that he is correct: there is no.... When people ask me what women think, I often want to say: "You should go talk to some." There is neither one single unified voice of women nor one single perspective. The member has identified a number of groups of women, and even within those groups we would find unquestionably divergent opinions. The issue of consensus-building indeed becomes a challenge.
One of the things that I think is important is to recognize, first, that there is common ground to be found among women in general and among all groups of women in rural communities, urban communities and cultural communities in this province. There are always areas of common ground where women come together to work, although there may also be areas of difference among those women.
In order to try and address some of those issues, we have done a variety of things. One of them is that we have simply been out in the province talking to those women a lot. I don't think you can decide in Victoria -- in my office or someone else's office -- what the needs or voices are of rural women or women in Kelowna or Prince Rupert, without going into those communities and spending time there. I attempted to do a great deal of that travel this fall in order to hear from those women. Part of it is simply being in communities and hearing from women what they see as needs in those communities. It's bringing women together and saying, as I do, that we value all the voices of women and all the work that women do. Both paid and unpaid work is valuable. When they know their opinions will be valued, women are more able to express them in a safe way.
We have regional coordinators in all areas of the province -- perhaps not as many as we would like. Part of their responsibility is liaison with all women's and community organizations in those areas. They don't liaise only with certain women's or community organizations; their responsibility is to work with all women's organizations in their geographic areas. Besides that kind of community liaison work, when decisions are going on and there are no dollars to travel or to bring women together -- because we are in a scarce resource time, of course -- we can use teleconferencing, conference calls and so on, to ensure that the widest possible variety of women have an opportunity to have their voices heard. We've done that very much in terms of the transfer of programs to this ministry. We've provided resources for women who have had great difficulty having their voices heard before -- for instance, aboriginal women, who have not had a way to have their voices at different tables. We have provided some significant resources -- well, significant for us -- for them to be able to do that.
So we do community liaison, conference calls and consensus-building. We provide resources for women to talk with other women and with us. And by recognizing the importance of differing values and views, we ensure that we are a safe place for everyone to express those views, knowing that they will be respected.
C. Serwa: There are a number of concerns -- some that I have, and that I think we all share as members of this Legislature -- about where we're going as a society. Perhaps we can address some of the philosophical directions that the minister and the ministry are moving in.
What does the ministry do to recognize the role of the wife and mother who chooses to stay at home and raise the children? This is a very important question, because a lot of the sociological problems we're faced with today are basically because parents are parenting children and
[ Page 10136 ]
perhaps haven't been properly parented themselves, and rather than our efforts mitigating the problem, the problem seems to grow in magnitude. All sorts of problems are impacting every aspect of society: our schools; certainly the law and enforcement actions; increasing problems with alcohol and drugs; and the escalation of crimes, such as crimes with violence. Somehow the very foundation of society, which is the family unit, is falling down.
I'm concerned, because I read that in Sweden, which is a social democratic state, they used a bad word for women who stayed at home. Whatever the Swedish word for it was, I am given to understand that the word was "parasites." Women who decided to stay at home and accept the most important responsibility any of us will ever have, which is to raise a family, were called parasites by society, and many of the children were put into day care facilities. The surprising thing -- and statistics bear this out -- is that there were a number of suicides among young children five years old or younger, and slightly older than that, because of the situation. I'm really concerned about society as a whole and where we're going, so perhaps the minister would speak about the role of wife and mother, and what the ministry is doing to aggressively support that role, which I see as a basic building block of society.
Hon. P. Priddy: I want to go back to part of a comment I made a few minutes ago, because I think it's important to restate it. One of the things that is extremely important to say frequently and loudly is that this ministry and this government value all the work that women do. Whether that is paid work or unpaid work, it is all valuable work. It may be different, it may be in different locations, but it is all valuable work. It's all important work, not only for families but also for communities. Having spent a lot of time doing volunteer work, I'm more than aware that if all women who are not doing paid work outside their home but are participating in volunteer work in their communities -- if they have an opportunity to do that, and not all women do -- were to stop doing that, a large part of our community would cease to function. It is extremely important work that we need to value. So part of it -- and I don't mean that to be a small point -- is saying loudly that the work women do is valuable, because I think that throughout history women have not heard that message. There may have been messages telling women that it is only important if you are paid to do your work. That is not true. It is all valuable work.
Having said that, it has not been a significant focus, and I think the member knows that of the ministry. But there are some things that I would comment on, actually. We're involved in a couple of drop-in child care programs. I think it's important also to acknowledge that some parents -- either moms or dads, by the way, because today it's both mothers and dads who may be making that choice -- who choose to parent at home are making sacrifices to do that; some are doing it because they are economically able to do so. It is not an opportunity or choice that everybody has; it's not something that is necessarily available to everybody. I think we ought to be really careful that we don't also suggest to women who aren't doing it, and who cannot make that choice because of economic circumstances, that they have somehow made an incorrect choice.
There are some child care programs sponsored partly by this ministry and partly by Social Services, where moms are able to go to a drop-in program during the day so that they can spend some time with other moms. Or they can leave their child to play with other children while they go to the doctor or the dentist, go shopping or do whatever is really difficult to do if you don't have child care during the day. Any of us who have tried to do some of those activities with a couple of two- and three-year-olds know that that is possibly one of the most difficult challenges we've ever taken on. I always thought Christmas shopping with three children under three was pretty tough, as I watched people do that. So it's simply an opportunity for mothers to find a place to go with their children during the day, where their children could play and they could have some contact with other mothers.
As their children get older, a number of women choose to work part-time outside the home. One of the things that this government has done is make some changes to pension plans in order to benefit part-time workers. The large majority of part-time workers are women. They've tried to harmonize work and family, and they have had very little access to pension plans, because part-time workers don't have that opportunity. Changes to pension plans have benefited part-time workers -- again, mostly women and very often moms -- so that they have that opportunity as their children get older and they are able to harmonize work and family. So we've provided those supports as well.
A number of learning opportunities provided through the grants program of the ministry are available for all women in communities around issues that are important to women -- it could be a whole variety of those -- or through cable television shows that are of interest to women. One of the things that was very apparent to me in my travel around the province this fall was that the only source of information for some of the women I met was television, because the provincial paper didn't come to their particular community. They didn't have a car available to them. Their partners were away for two or three months at a time with the family vehicle. They lived ten miles out of town, so the only opportunity they had to get information that was of interest to them was through cable television. We've been doing some thinking and some work in our own ministry about how to reach more women at home by using vehicles of information that have not traditionally been used to distribute information to them.
As well, I would mention the Stopping the Violence initiative. Whether women are parenting at home, are at home full time or are outside the home part time or full time, they are often at risk of violence. The initiatives we've taken with Stopping the Violence are also of benefit to women who are at home full time.
The Chair: I'm going to take one more question from the member for Okanagan West and then go back to the opposition critic, if I may.
C. Serwa: It hasn't been that my questions were that lengthy; it seems the responses have been lengthy, and I don't see why I should be penalized for that. Nevertheless, I'll abide by your direction.
The reason I asked the question is the reality of economics. I guess my question should have been: is the minister considering doing something that would enable more women to stay at home? And while I recognize role reversal, it's still a relatively modest part of the equation. The cost of living is going up. But this is the simple reality. If you have two or three young children, you're faced not only with the government's costs for subsidizing day care but also with the parent's costs for day care. If you look at the fact that both parents work all day and then come home tired, it's very difficult to prepare good-quality meals inexpensively unless you have enough time to do it and can make things from
[ Page 10137 ]
scratch. Look at all of the incorporated costs and all of the money and all of the taxes, and when the dust settles, the working mother isn't very much better off after she works than before she works. Yet she has virtually no option. Would the minister consider paying the subsidy to the mother who chooses to stay at home rather than to the day care facility? Is there anything wrong with that as a method of encouraging that situation? Somehow we have to do something sociological to create stronger family units.
Hon. P. Priddy: I didn't time the member's question, but I will try not to take any longer than that in my answer. It is only because we are so committed to the ministry's work that we want to spend time giving people information through our answers.
[5:30]
Three things. The first thing is that, along with the Ministry of Finance, we have been involved in a review of the income tax system and we have just completed a review of the income tax with respect to families with children, particularly with respect to family decisions on child care. Because we are concerned about the member's question, we have initiated that. We too are concerned about the effect of the income tax system with respect to the treatment of families with children. We have also talked with the federal government about the need for family support. I realize we are reviewing a variety of different positions. We have talked in general terms with the federal minister, who has this responsibility as well, about some of his initiatives that would also support this, because the federal government has a significant opportunity to influence this. I know that the hon. member knows: the third thing, that all mothers are working mothers. Whether they work inside their homes not for wages or outside their home for wages, they are all working mothers.
L. Stephens: I'd like to move on to violence and transition homes. Before I do, I'd like to ask a few questions about the aboriginal program the minister spoke about earlier. It has come to my attention that a number of aboriginal communities around the province are not happy with the communication and consultation they have been having with the ministry. They say that economic development is one of the issues they are trying to come to grips with as far as the ministry is concerned. Workshops for young mothers, parenting, personal and cultural healing processes, and working effectively towards social development and the impacts this has on aboriginal women and youth are some of the areas in which they would like closer consultation and a working relationship with the ministry.
First of all, what programs is this ministry currently engaged in as far as aboriginal initiatives are concerned? Secondly, what is coming up in '94, and are those issues addressed -- economic development, which is businesses for women; workshops for young mothers in parenting; and social development for women and children?
The Chair: Excuse me. I have a point of order from the member for Okanagan West.
C. Serwa: I consider that the estimates of the Ministry of Women's Equality are very important indeed, and I hear a number of conversations going on in the chamber fairly loudly. I would like to hear what the minister says, so perhaps the Chair would ask the members to minimize their conversations.
The Chair: The member's point is well taken. Indeed, it is so well taken that one conversation is still going on totally oblivious to the member's point of order. I would therefore ask all members to please keep their private conversations as quiet as they are able.
Hon. P. Priddy: Thank you, hon. Chair. I appreciate your comment to people in the House. I expect it's people on this side of the House, and it's only because they are so interested and committed to the work this ministry does that they're intimately familiar with all the details.
I appreciate the member's question about aboriginal women. I have spent some significant amount of time this fall meeting with aboriginal women around the province. Certainly it was not a particular focus of the previous Ministry of Women's Programs to involve aboriginal women. We have worked hard as a government and as a ministry to find ways to do that -- and to do it respectfully.
One of the initiatives on which we've had some comments back about people not being satisfied with process is Stopping the Violence. At that time it was an agreement that they go out in a particular process that many aboriginal women said did not involve them. We have acknowledged that and have revisited with aboriginal women on the very best ways not only to get dollars to aboriginal women to make a difference, but to get a process that would ensure their voices were the dominant voices in helping to make those kinds of decisions.
For the member, I want to reference some of the work currently going on. One place that makes a significant difference for aboriginal women is at the negotiations tables, which are making significant decisions about things that will affect the lives of aboriginal women. We've provided resources for the Aboriginal Women's Council to be present so that they will be able to have a voice at the off-reserve table. Without that, their voices would not have been present. So a working relationship is developing with the Aboriginal Women's Council that we think is very positive.
One of the issues the member raised was economics. I will mention some other projects and ongoing work: work with women in Fort St. James to provide support and to work with them around some pre-employment and job search skills; work with aboriginal women in Chase to identify issues surrounding family violence on reserve and the need for the kinds of services that will be required; work with women in the Campbell River Indian band to organize and present workshops to promote healing; work with women in Bella Coola to conduct a six-month training course, which is just concluding, for eight women who will be trained as counsellors for positions in their own community and who will work with women and children in the areas of healing; work with the Lillooet Tribal Council women, again a life skills pre-employment program; work with aboriginal women in Port Alberni; in Sardis, as I mentioned, the work with the Aboriginal Women's Council; and work with the B.C. Native Women's Society to conduct a provincial needs assessment process to determine the professional and skills requirement of native women who own or plan to start businesses. There is now an aboriginal women's business council, and we're trying to offer some support for them to do that work.
So I think we are taking steps in that direction and working very hard to make sure we do that respectfully. There is more work to be done, and I appreciate the member's interest.
[ Page 10138 ]
L. Stephens: I'm very pleased to hear that the minister is moving forward with the programs that need to be done on behalf of aboriginal women and children around this province. The dialogue and consultation is extremely important. This needs to be done in order to move their issues along. They have a different perspective on a number of the concerns they have within their community.
I'd like to talk a bit about the violence initiative. First, though, I'd like to talk about the family maintenance enforcement program. I know that's not within the Women's Equality ministry; it is under the Attorney General, and I have discussed it with him in his estimates. But it does, of course, impact on women, and for that reason, this minister has a concern and interest as well.
Earlier you talked about consultations with the federal government regarding possible changes to taxation. One of the things I would like to see eliminated in the taxation system is the inclusion of child maintenance payments as taxable income. That is one issue I would like to see the minister vigorously pursue with her own Minister of Finance and with the federal government. I wonder if there has been any movement there. Have there been any discussions along that line with either of those two individuals?
Hon. P. Priddy: I agree with the comments the member has made. I have raised these issues with the Minister of Finance, and I will be raising them in writing. I would comment that some very active women in the community are concerned about that perspective as well. I think it's important that there be some consensus and consultation about that. I have raised it, and I will be doing so in writing.
L. Stephens: I think we talked about family support services a bit earlier. The minister mentioned women's centres. I'm wondering if these centres are in any way connected to the Attorney General's justice centres and some of the programs they deliver. Is the Ministry of Women's Equality involved in any way in these family support centres?
Hon. P. Priddy: There are two parts to the question. One is that the 36 women's centres that have operational funding from the government do not have a formal relationship, certainly, with the family justice projects, although I know they will be seen as a resource for projects in their communities.
In terms of the family justice projects, we have worked very closely with both Social Services and the Attorney General. We have had the opportunity to participate in the establishment of those four family justice centres. We have been at the table with the Attorney General as the work for those centres has moved on. As the pilots for those centres are tested in the next 18 months, the ministry will continue to provide input into the evaluation of the pilots and participate on the family justice reform working group.
L. Stephens: Will the ministry be participating in any way as far as personnel is concerned? Will the ministry initiate any sensitivity training programs for employees of these family justice centres?
Hon. P. Priddy: Certainly the Attorney General's ministry will provide the training for people who will be working in the family justice centres, but I think people know that we have done a significant amount of training. We will participate with the Attorney General in the design of that training, and I think that the ministry's resources will be very useful to the Attorney General's ministry.
L. Stephens: Could the minister expand on the 36 women's centres? I'm not going to ask where they are; perhaps I could get a copy at some other time. We won't take up time going through all 36 of them now.
I wonder if those centres provide enhanced response to violence when it happens, provide support for victims of violence and provide better-trained people, which you talked about earlier. Is that what these women's centres are doing? What programs do they have?
Hon. P. Priddy: I think the member would find some differences in the support that women's centres offer depending on where they are in the province, because they respond to the unique needs of their particular communities. It's important to note that for many women, women's centres are the very first resource or place to go for support or information in their communities. Many of those centres will provide information, support, referral or some informal counselling. Some provide child care or pre-job training. But that's with the core operational funding. Many of those women's centres do indeed have additional contracts with the government and with the ministry to provide counselling for women who are victims of violence. I'm not sure how many, but certainly some child care support programs are attached to women's centres. So part of it would depend on the community in which they're located, but they very much are the core support in the communities for women looking for information and referral and, potentially, counselling and child care support.
[5:45]
L. Stephens: May I assume that these particular centres are run by non-profit societies? These are the ones the minister was referring to earlier as having access to wage supplements as well. Could the minister explain a little more about this particular wage supplement?
Hon. P. Priddy: The arrangement we have with women's centres, because of the operational funding, is a contractual one. The wage enhancement is simply an increase in the contract with those women's centres this year.
L. Stephens: Could the minister indicate the amount of money we're talking about here?
Hon. P. Priddy: The actual operational funding for women's centres was $37,500. The additional dollars this year were $910 per centre.
L. Stephens: Nine hundred and ten dollars per centre. Thank you very much, minister.
One more area. The mandate of the equality grants program is to provide financial assistance to women's equality-seeking groups to develop local solutions. Would the minister explain what is the definition of an equality-seeking group?
Hon. P. Priddy: I appreciate the member's question. The women's equality grants program provides communities with funding to develop local solutions that meet local needs. I think we begin with the assumption that women are equal, and we are talking about the equality of opportunity and access. When we talk about equality-seeking groups, or organizations working for opportunity and access, we would look at the organization's commitment to making a
[ Page 10139 ]
difference in women's lives -- in terms of breaking down barriers that have traditionally prohibited women from gaining equal opportunity or access to education, a change in their economic status, child care, training opportunities, or safe housing and safe communities.
L. Stephens: Would the minister indicate what type of grant applications have been refused by the ministry this year?
Hon. P. Priddy: We usually have significantly more applications than we have dollars. I don't have a list in front of me of the ones that have been refused this year, but we do have a set of criteria. The refusal is generally because there is not enough money or because they have not met the criteria; they may fall more appropriately under the mandate of another ministry.
L. Stephens: How much money would be given out for the grant program in total? I understand that each grant is limited to $15,000. What was the total amount given out last year, and what amount of money are you anticipating to distribute this year?
Hon. P. Priddy: Women's operational funding comes under that whole category, and I don't think that's the information the member was looking for. By the way, just to give some information that the member asked for, 113 out of 283 applications for women's equality grants were approved, for a total financial commitment of $1,035,915 for '93-94.
L. Stephens: What is the scope of the equality projects funded under this $15,000? Could the minister elaborate on some of the uses on which this money is spent?
Hon. P. Priddy: Let me be clear on the member's question. Was it just about the kinds of projects that would be funded through that?
Interjection.
Hon. P. Priddy: I would be delighted, but I will be quick. Some of those would be opportunities for additional training -- short-term training -- for people who may be working in communities. Videos have been produced. One of the excellent ones being talked about and used in the province is called Right From the Start, which was a video produced last year on date violence or acquaintance rape or assault. Cable television shows have been produced that raise awareness on violence against women. There have been educational forums on a variety of issues of interest to women. There have been conferences and workshops that bring people together around issues that are important in women's lives. By the way, we do have a catalogue of those, and I'd be happy to provide the whole catalogue to the member.
L. Stephens: I would like to ask the minister to talk briefly about transition houses. I think the minister knows that we have a fundamental difference of opinion about transition houses. Although they are important and are needed in a certain number, my feeling is that we need to stop the need for transition houses in the first place. We need to look at removing the offender from the home, not the mother and the family. So I'd like to know whether the minister is thinking along those lines and whether she will be bringing forward something to strengthen families in the home as opposed to removing the family from the home and leaving the abuser there.
Hon. P. Priddy: I absolutely agree with the member. We are extraordinarily committed to not having the need for transition houses, and we are committed, as everyone in this House would be, to stopping the violence against women and children. I'm aware of some of the projects in other provinces that the member speaks of. I've read about programs where the assaultive partner is removed from the home and the woman and her children remain in the home.
What I have not seen from those projects is follow-up information that assures me that those women are safe after that fact. I understand that it would be better if women and children could stay in their homes, but we have to find ways in our communities to ensure that they can do that with safety. I haven't seen the follow-up information to those studies to assure me that that has been taken into consideration. I would more than agree with the member that that is the best place for women and their children to be, but we have to ensure that there are community supports to make sure that if they do so, they will be safe and continue to be safe, and that an assaultive partner will not return.
Vote 57 approved.
Vote 58: ministry operations, $203,410,301 -- approved.
Hon. P. Ramsey: I move that the committee rise, report resolutions and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.
Committee of Supply B, having reported resolutions, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. P. Ramsey moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
The House adjourned at 5:56 p.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]