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)
FRIDAY, JUNE 3, 1994
Morning Sitting
Volume 16, Number 2
[ Page 11423 ]
The House met at 10:04 a.m.
Prayers.
A. Warnke: Hon. Speaker, I wish to serve notice that I may wish to reserve the right to raise a matter of privilege at a later time, after I have had an opportunity to examine the Blues.
The Speaker: Thank you for that advice, hon. member. It shall be noted.
SUPPORT FOR SENIORS
G. Brewin: From the Raging Grannies to the Rolling Stones, from Gloria Steinem to George Woodcock, the seniors of today and those who will be our seniors in the next few years are bringing to our communities a sense of commitment and activism. They not only helped build what we have, they know what they built.
Next week is Seniors' Week. June 6 also marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Allied invasion of Europe. For today's seniors, that event was a turning point in our history as a country. The end of the war also brought on their coming of age -- an age that saw a dramatic population boom, a national health care program, unemployment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and a host of other social programs designed to ensure that all Canadians benefited from our economic growth. For the seniors of the next decade and beyond, the women's movement, environmental activism and a global awareness will be among the determinants of their contribution to their communities and will influence the demands they make on governments at all levels.
Who are today's seniors? In 1991 there were 3.2 million Canadians over the age of 65. In B.C. there were 422,000 seniors, representing 13 percent of our population. B.C. has experienced the greatest growth in the number of seniors of all provinces. By the turn of the century nearly 15 percent of B.C.'s population will be over 65, and a quarter of those will be 80 years of age or older. Women represent the majority of all seniors and will continue to do so in the future. In 1991, 93 percent of seniors were living in private households and only 7 percent were in institutions. Nearly 30 percent of seniors live alone. In terms of accommodation, 68 percent of seniors in B.C. own their own homes and 59 percent of them live in single-family detached homes.
Victoria shows a different pattern. Seniors here represent about 18 percent of the city's population, and in two of my neighbourhoods, James Bay and Fairfield, they represent 35 percent and 30 percent respectively. Again, in terms of accommodation, Victoria bucks the trends -- and in some other communities across the province this may be true -- that in fact only 40 percent of seniors own their own homes and 60 percent of them are renters. That has an effect on the built stock in our communities and produces some of the pressures from that sector to make sure that we produce the right policies for that.
The independence experienced by many seniors calls for a different response from our social and health care systems. Closer to Home, the basis of this government's reform of our health care system, has a very real meaning for seniors. Their identity and personal dignity is very much linked to their home. The changing demographics of Canada -- in particular British Columbia, which has recently become a retirement destination for many seniors -- will place special demands on the way we govern ourselves and our communities. These demands will reflect the reality of how and where they live, and will be articulated in ways that reflect their confidence as political participants in their communities. Increasing longevity, coupled with our aging society, will require us to look at the health and social services needed by seniors as well as to find ways to utilize their knowledge and experience. It's not often said anymore that we look at seniors as a homogeneous group, that perhaps they are a drain on resources or that they represent some problem to be solved. What we ignore when we do that is the contribution they have made in the past and, very much, the contribution we can expect in the future.
In my region, the Capital Regional District, a number of programs are available for seniors. In particular, the Ministry of Health, in cooperation with the CRD, has initiated a regional seniors' health promotion committee. In this program, in keeping with the New Directions strategy for health care, seniors themselves provide the direction, as they are the consumers of the variety of health care services and programs. Supported by staff, a group of seniors themselves identify and prioritize the issues that are important to them with regard to health care. In this, they are financially supported by the Ministry of Health.
A number of grants are at work as we speak. A grant was provided to elders from first nations communities to get together through the Native Heritage Centre to share their experiences and assist each other in their daily nutritional, social and spiritual needs. Self-help programs through the James Bay New Horizons group cover a wide range of activities, from exercise programs to pet therapy to health advocacy. Other projects are aimed at reducing the isolation many seniors feel due to family separation, divorce or cultural differences. Divorce Lifeline, Silver Threads Service and the Indo-Canadian Seniors' Association have all benefited from government support and from bringing seniors together. Again, community partnership projects work to benefit many of them.
The Victoria Epilepsy and Parkinson's Centre Society has received funds to help conduct a Parkinson's outreach program. With a grant of over $100,000, the Victoria Volunteer Bureau brings together volunteers and those needing assistance, whether it's sharing a cup of tea and conversation, or more personal health care needs. Fernwood Home Support Services Society is using a special grant to bring seniors together who live alone, or who are caring for a spouse, to prepare meals for their own use. The Victoria Elder Abuse Committee is tackling the very serious problem of violence against seniors, through facilitating counselling and making our communities and seniors' homes safer places.
These are just some of the very direct programs happening in Victoria for seniors. I am very aware of many programs existing in other communities across British Columbia. They are but a small sampling of the kinds of programs supported at all levels by governments in our communities.
In the next 20 years, the baby boom phenomenon will have yet another dramatic effect on our communities. It is predicted by the year 2030 that the number of Canadians over 65 will outnumber those under the age of 15 for the first time. Community resources will be focused not so much on our young people but on our older people.
I see my time is up, hon. Speaker.
[ Page 11424 ]
L. Reid: I am pleased to rise today in debate on the seniors in this province and to respond to the remarks of the hon. member for Victoria-Beacon Hill.
My riding of Richmond East offers some very fine services for seniors. I'll speak particularly of the Minoru Place Seniors' Centre, which has realized the diversity of experience evident in the seniors' population -- the business people and professional people -- and has invited them to become a resource panel for new business people in Richmond.
Typically, young people who are interested in beginning their own businesses may not have access to accountants and the legal community. They can now come to the Minoru Place Seniors' Centre and take advantage of a wealth of expertise in the retired community, which is interested in supporting new entrepreneurs and in ensuring that support systems are in place for people wishing to start new businesses. I think it's a wonderful opportunity to create partnerships. A lot of those individuals are now consulting to new businesses and are spending time in new-business workplaces, and that is very good for both the seniors in our society and the young people wishing to start their own business, who need someone to offer them some support through the process. I think the partnership is the direction in which we should be headed.
I certainly appreciate the remarks of the hon. member regarding the dignity and independence of individuals. I can share with you this morning a range of issues that were discussed by the Seniors' Advisory Council at their most recent meeting. These issues directly impact on where we are headed in ensuring some quality of life for seniors in the province. At their most recent meeting, the agenda items included the effect of New Directions on volunteering and community care. Volunteering is a significant issue for the older population, because oftentimes they spend a great deal of time volunteering, and they enjoy that. Whether or not that continues to be a focal point is a consideration that needs to be addressed.
They talked about hospitalized patients versus patients discharged from hospital, and those receiving social assistance and those who are not. There are a whole range of needs within the seniors' population, and they have some very fine questions about whether or not New Directions is going to be able to deliver a range of service.
[10:15]
Another item from the agenda of the Seniors' Advisory Council meeting is the shortage of community rehabilitation services. The member for Victoria-Beacon Hill talked about the need for independence. If that is a commitment, it must be reflected in the services that individuals can find in their communities to allow them to maintain that independence. They talk about the need for an emergency response team for home-based clients, the need to plan ahead for the needs of patients being discharged to go into their homes and residential centres and the needs of their caregivers. These are the concerns that seniors in this province are dealing with today. These are the items they put on the Seniors' Advisory Council's agenda. They are pertinent issues that indicate to us that they have concerns about where they're headed and also tremendous concern about the needs of their families. I think we have to recognize that.
We have to come to grips with something like the Esquimalt Wellness Centre, where seniors are serving seniors in this province and doing an excellent job. Their future is uncertain; they honestly don't know if they're going to be supported by this government. But if we truly believe that seniors can and should be supporting other seniors, and that that should be built into the overall fabric of what we intend to do in terms of maintaining some quality of life, we're going to have to take another look at that issue. Where we head -- our actions -- will indicate more strongly than words our commitment not only to seniors in this province but also to the human rights of everyone in British Columbia.
Certainly we talk about services for young people, for those of us here today and for seniors in this province. We must look at it as a package, because I don't think it's ever appropriate to separate out any one group in society and suggest that somehow they can be served by a particular service. There are some fabulous examples, again, in my riding in Richmond. We have a residential housing centre that has young moms with babies, and seniors. Those seniors are able to offer some babysitting services or emotional support to young, single moms. Some of those services, those partnerships, are absolutely where we should be headed, because that's a much truer reflection of society as a whole.
I don't think we gain a great deal if we suggest that all the senior services are here and all the child services are there. I think it's appropriate and timely to look at delivering services as a package for people. I can certainly attest to the fact that across this country there are a lot of discussions about social services merging with health, and education merging with social services, because indeed it is a package. I trust we will look at that.
G. Brewin: I very much welcome the remarks from the member for Richmond East. She indeed has much experience herself, and the example she used speaks well of all our communities in British Columbia, and of hers in particular, and of the dynamism that exists within that dynamic. I see that the whole point of New Directions is the very community-based focus -- based on what the community's needs are through an open, democratic process, those needs get on the table and get decided by that community, in that community, for that community and for all the participants in that community. They work very much as a partnership. I think that is the exciting thing in terms of New Directions. Yes, it has a little way to go because there are still start-up difficulties, but that is the basic concept. We're very much looking forward to having everyone in a community at the table to participate and make their needs known. Then the community as a whole will decide how to focus its resources in that basic community. It will be different across the province because each section and each part of the province will have a different focus and a different sense of their priorities, but that's what will happen in Richmond East and that's what will happen in the Capital Regional District.
Let me close by quoting Gloria Steinem from an essay she wrote on "Doing Sixty," in which she reflects on her activism over the last three decades and what she sees ahead:
"More and more, I am beginning to see that life after 50 or 60 is itself another country as different as adolescence is from childhood or the central years of life are from adolescence -- and just as adventurous. At least it would be, if it weren't also a place of poverty for many, especially women over 65, and of disregard for even more. If it's to become a place of dignity and power, it will require a movement that parallels many others -- something pioneers have been telling us for a long time."
These words capture not only the spirit of those who will be seniors in this and the next decade, but also reflect an understanding of seniors today. Seniors are very much needed in their communities. Their demand to be heard and to be in control of their lives cannot, will not and should not be ignored. Just as today's seniors fought and sacrificed for what we have today, so they will continue to fight for an
[ Page 11425 ]
improved quality of life for themselves and for those who follow. It will be a life they define for themselves and control for themselves.
ELECTRONIC VOTING
L. Hanson: Today I rise to speak in favour of two reforms the B.C. Reform Party is proposing to make government more accountable and responsive to people. The subject of my private member's statement is electronic voting. By that I mean electronically voting on each and every issue that comes before this assembly. I want to spend a bit of time talking about how electronic voting might complement the estimates process, and in particular about a new approach to the approval of revenue plans. Surely, if we have learned anything over the past couple of years, it's that British Columbians are demanding greater accountability from their elected representatives. That's the driving force behind B.C. Reform, just as it has been for Reform Canada -- two parties that are independent but that nevertheless share a common commitment to fundamental reforms in government.
Members of my caucus have spoken often and loudly about the need for direct democracy through recall, referenda, fixed election dates, citizen initiatives and free votes in the Legislature. British Columbians not only want their MLAs to listen and act more responsibly, they want them to stand up and be counted by their actions.
It is one thing to introduce free votes in the Legislature, which the parties seem to reject, but it's quite another to be held accountable for each and every vote taken in this assembly. All members know that the only time votes are individually recorded in Hansard is when a formal decision has been called for, usually by an opposition member. That happens rarely -- far too rarely for our constituents to determine how many of us have voted on the vast majority of issues that come before this House.
The B.C. Reform Party would like to change that. In this day and age, there is absolutely no reason on earth why our constituents shouldn't know how each of us voted on every section of every bill that is passed in this chamber. All of our votes on each and every spending estimate should be recorded by name. As I will argue in a moment, we should also be personally accountable for revenue estimates on a line-by-line basis.
All it would take is a very simple, computerized electronic voting system that would instantly register every member's vote on a screen. Formal divisions could still be called by the ringing of division bells, as they are now, to alert all members of a particularly vital vote. In any event, with free votes, so-called confidence votes would be few and far between. Not only would this allow viewers watching the debates on TV to see how their MLAs voted on a given issue, but all votes would be recorded in Hansard. In this way, all MLAs would be accountable to their constituents for their personal voting record. The electorate would know which votes we were here for and how we voted on every matter, which is impossible to determine presently. In this sense, we would all have a personal voting history that could not be fudged, waffled or ignored.
In concert with free votes, we would be far more directly accountable for our actions as legislators, without the veil of anonymity that has made brave souls of cowards. And by that, I don't mean to offend any member of any party in this House. Indeed, all of us have, at one time or another, succumbed to the party Whip in the comfort of relative anonymity. Under our proposal, each MLA would be truly forced to declare themselves as a free agent on each vote, because every vote would be recorded for all to see.
It would not cost a lot, nor would it take much time to implement. The cost of installing electronic voting in this chamber would be a tiny fraction of the amount budgeted this year for the computerized hardware that we are replacing in the buildings. What it really takes is political will, which brings me to my next suggestion.
As things stand, members of the Legislature only get to debate and vote on spending estimates in any detail. Sure, we get to vote on legislated tax changes, but revenue estimates should be approved with the same degree of scrutiny that we now give to expenditures, if not more. Revenues projected in the budget should be debated and voted upon on a line-by-line basis. The government should not be able to simply pull revenue numbers out of a hat, as this one likes to do. It should have to defend its revenue measures one vote at a time and seek this assembly's approval, just as it does for spending forecasts. If we also had electronic voting, all members would be personally accountable for every dime of taxpayers' money spent and collected.
That's the kind of fiscal discipline that we should be voluntarily imposing upon ourselves. That's the type of parliamentary reform that my party is all about. I look forward to hearing the government's response to our suggestions, because I am an eternal optimist. As a matter of fact, if there was a mechanism to do it, I would love to record every member's vote on these ideas. But I will reserve my judgment until my concluding response.
D. Schreck: Preston Manning, leader of the national Reform Party, scored a major blow for hypocrisy when it was revealed -- after he criticized members of our federal Parliament for various types of perks and privileges -- that he was receiving $31,000 for a clothing allowance which had received special tax treatment. In essence, he was receiving a perk at taxpayers' expense. It is that form of hypocrisy that makes voters cynical and turns them off of the political system. The members of the provincial Reform Party are showing just how close that party is to that same form of doubletalk that we see through the national Reform Party and Preston Manning, for what we hear in this member's statement are calls for greater accountability of individual members.
In November 1991 I do not recall a member of this Legislature being elected as a member for the provincial Reform Party. Many of my constituents feel that as much as I may feel that I personally contribute, first and foremost they voted for the party that I represent. They tell me that were I ever to change parties, I have a moral obligation to resign my seat and stand in a by-election for those new principles that I now espouse. If the provincial Reform Party is serious about accountability, they have it in their own hands to immediately be accountable to their own constituents by standing aside and allowing their constituents to determine whether they support the provincial Reform Party, which was not the party they voted for but is the party that is represented in this House today.
[10:30]
The members of that provincial Reform Party take another step. As Preston Manning does in the federal Parliament, they turn and point to every other member of this House and say: "You are hypocrites; you are not accountable to the voters because you are not implementing our cute little electronic scheme." The voters have to understand that the name of every individual member can be recorded at any time in this House by simply having any
[ Page 11426 ]
one of 75 MLAs stand up and say division. That's all it takes to have a recorded vote.
What would that hon. member of the Reform Party, elected through the Social Credit Party, have us do? He would have that identifying vote lost in a table of thousands of minutiae, for that hon. member is saying that it would be preferable to provide, throughout 5,000 or 6,000 pages of Hansard, the detailed recording of votes. Did I hear him say that he wants line-by-line items in the budget debates, in the estimates, in greater detail than are currently reported? Yes, I did.
If I hear him correctly, if that member wanted to vote against the renewal of the forest industry, instead of having that item stand out as one of the special occasions on which a recorded vote is taken, that member's vote would be hidden along with maybe 10,000 or 20,000 or 30,000 lines of minutiae. You wouldn't see the forest for the trees, as it were. It would be as if one took the telephone book and hid a key element somewhere in it, in tiny print, and said: "Here, Mr. and Ms. Voter. I'm accountable to you, because if you stay up all night long, you might go through this and find out what I did."
I say that what we are seeing through the Reform Party of British Columbia, as articulated in this member's statement, is the same type of response that we are seeing from that federal Reform Party. Far from accountability, what we are seeing is an attempt to hide from the voter, an attempt to tell the voter one thing and to do another.
I say that accountability begins here, today. No one voted for the provincial Reform Party. Let them vote for the provincial Reform Party next month. Those members can make that possible.
The Speaker: The hon. member for Okanagan-Vernon concludes.
L. Hanson: I find it very interesting to hear the remarks of the member for North Vancouver-Lonsdale. I would suggest that the member should go and speak to his leader and suggest that we go to the polls right now. The record of this government -- a poll -- was published in the newspaper today, and it shows that the people of British Columbia are very concerned about the kind of government they have and the performance of these people. This, coming from a member who -- according to the records of the last two sessions -- participated in 8 percent of the votes that were held in the House, is absolutely ludicrous.
Reform has said many times and will continue to say that MLAs should be more accountable to their constituents. Look at governments in different parts of the world that have electronic voting for that purpose. Let me name a few for you: Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Greece, India, Italy, the U.S. House of Representatives, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics -- although that may have changed with the uproar there -- Argentina, Belgium and Brazil.
The lack of accountability of MLAs to their constituents is what has caused the cynicism in politics today. What we are suggesting is simply a method of making every one of us more accountable to those constituents.
S. O'Neill: I seek leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
S. O'Neill: It gives me great pleasure to introduce to the House a very old-time friend, Corliss Olson, who is pursuing postgraduate studies at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. She is joined by her friend Michelle Brown, who is also a student there and is from Melbourne, Australia. Will the House please make them welcome.
COMMUNITY REACTION TO LAND CLAIMS NEGOTIATIONS
H. Giesbrecht: I want to talk this morning about what is happening in my riding around land claims negotiations. The province's first set of negotiations is with the Nisga'a of the Nass Valley, just 90 kilometres north of Terrace. While the area is not in my riding, the Nass Valley is part of Terrace's economic area. That's why it's an issue of interest to most and of concern to some.
Resolving the land question is a complex issue made much more difficult by the misinformation and fear that are being spread in the population at large, based largely on an assumption that settling land claims is a zero-sum game -- that if one group is a winner, some other group is a loser.
Treaty settlements are not like that. We all have much to gain, and we also have an opportunity to address an injustice which has been left unresolved for more than 100 years. Sadly, some of this fear is fuelled by community leaders. The Reform MP for Skeena, Mike Scott, like most white Canadian legislators for the last century, thinks he knows better than aboriginal people what is best for them. He argued in the House of Commons recently that before he will support a settlement, aboriginal people should have the opportunity to decide whether they want "money and land turned over to themselves as individuals or to band leaders." The ratification vote process apparently means nothing to Mr. Scott, and his understanding of the first nations' inclusive systems of governance and decision-making, which served them well for thousands of years before the European settlers arrived, is appallingly lacking.
I sense both a desire of the public to settle the issue and a misguided notion that it can somehow be done by making first nations the losers again. That is not justice. Some advocate the simple solution of repealing the Indian Act. They want to turn back the clock for first nations, though not for themselves. But if the Indian Act were repealed by itself, first nations would have grounds to demand their land back as well.
Then there are letters to the editor which claim that negotiating land claims is the wrong thing to do. One writer claimed that aboriginal people were on welfare, and it was Canadians generally who paid for their medical bills, education, and land claims negotiations -- in his words, "just to name a few." This writer either did not know, or perhaps has forgotten, that the Indian Act legislated this injustice as a means of purporting to compensate aboriginal peoples for their lands. However, the first nations were not asked whether they wanted the Indian Act, and the message is loud and clear that they do not -- that it was imposed on them from Ottawa.
The same letter-writer went on to say that negotiating land claims meant that if you are a logger or a person depending on these resources for a livelihood, you're going to be in big trouble when they are taken away. But the best way to place access to resources at risk is to allow land claims to be settled through the courts, with their tendency to winner-take-all verdicts. What we need is certainty, and a negotiated solution provides that. Perhaps the writer would like to return to the Liberal legislation of 1927, which banned, on pain of imprisonment, any Indian or any Indian nation from pursuing their claims through the courts.
[ Page 11427 ]
I think we have to acknowledge the enormous patience and ongoing goodwill of the first nations toward the rest of us. I wonder how I would react if foreigners I did not know showed up literally out of the blue, built settlements on my land without my permission, and then proceeded to help themselves to resources and gained untold wealth for several generations, but never shared any of that wealth. I wonder how I would have felt if I'd been forced onto small reserves of 20 acres per family while a European settler could pre-empt 320 acres. I wonder if I would have survived if I had had to live in poverty fending off foreign diseases and isolated from the mainstream of the developing economy. And I wonder if I or my family could have had the strength of character to survive and be committed to a peaceful resolution of these issues for over a hundred years when denied access to the courts for redress for half of that time, and when the political system not only ignored me but denied me the right to vote in B.C. until 1948 and federally until 1961.
Governments over the years have been unspeakably offensive to aboriginal people, as any honest research shows. The time has come to work at putting that right. We cannot take continued goodwill for granted, and it would be wrong to assume that it would last forever. The reason this issue is so difficult to resolve now is that it has been neglected for so long. Just imagine how difficult it would be to solve if we waited another 50 years. As a native leader said some time ago: "I'm not trying to negotiate my way out of Canada; I'm trying to negotiate my way in."
When he was Minister of Native Affairs, the Leader of the Third Party joined the province to the Nisga'a negotiations in 1990. Personally, I give him credit for that. One of the features of the agreement governing the negotiations is a confidentiality clause, which has strictly limited the amount of information that can be made public. This confidentiality clause is being used to undermine confidence in the treaty-making process. Even so, this government has involved many third-party advisory groups, and even signed a protocol agreement with the Union of B.C. Municipalities. The Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs continues to look for ways to provide information to third-party interest groups and the general public.
I have no doubt that the confidentiality clause was considered necessary at the time to facilitate constructive, productive negotiations. But since the Leader of the Third Party has indicated that he regrets signing the confidentiality clause, perhaps he would follow through on that and take steps to enlighten his party friends and supporters about the process his government committed the province to, and on the need for negotiations to be conducted in a normal and rational way. Individual political agendas have no place where justice is concerned.
No one has said that the process of reaching treaty settlements with the first nations of this province would be easy. All three parties are expected to negotiate in the best interests of their constituencies.
A. Warnke: I want to thank the member for Skeena for his remarks this morning. Perhaps I will have the opportunity to talk to his constituents on Monday about some of those very issues. Indeed, I have done so in the past two years as well. As a matter of fact, less than two weeks ago I met a member of the aboriginal community who travelled to Victoria, and I had a very lengthy discussion with him. That person was from Terrace, in the member's riding. What I was most struck with in my discussion with this individual was the optimism among the aboriginal community these days about where they should go as the aboriginal community in Canada. I would also reiterate the comment made by the member, as this particular individual also said it: "We want to be part of Canada; we want to be in Canada, not out." I explored that specifically with that individual. I came away with the firm impression that what the aboriginal community wants is not a negotiation whereby they become an exclusively sovereign country. That's where some of the problems lie -- the concept of sovereignty.
Sovereignty to the non-aboriginal community may mean one thing; the concept of sovereignty means something entirely different to the aboriginal community. Strangely enough, once we understand the different definitions of such concepts, we might actually agree on how close we are together -- aboriginals and non-aboriginals -- in finally reaching a resolution.
I'm very impressed as well with the Nisga'a, the people of the Nass Valley. I believe the person I was talking to was from the Nisga'a. They want to be a part of Canada. The main thing to emphasize is that by being a part of Canada and British Columbia, it is in a context that is not going to jeopardize the interests of the non-aboriginal community. I am quite aware as well that some of the people in Terrace are very concerned about land claims settlements and the possible implications for communities such as theirs, as well as for others throughout northern and eastern British Columbia and indeed the entire province. The fact is that the aboriginal community emphasizes over and over again that land claims settlements will not be at the expense of the private property of people who are not aboriginal. That's extremely important.
[10:45]
The difficulty, of course, is: where do we go from here? It's interesting that no one wants the Indian Act, yet it will be a most difficult accomplishment to repeal it. I'm encouraged by the fact that the federal government has made it very clear that it is moving in a direction to repeal the Indian Act and do away with the Department of Indian Affairs, because the federal government has recognized the extreme problems that have faced the aboriginal community as a result of the existence of that department. I'm optimistic that if we maintain good, sensible heads -- and I believe that it's extremely important to educate, communicate and get the message out -- the possibility of a resolution will not be at the expense of aboriginal or non-aboriginal communities. It won't be at the expense of British Columbians or Canadians. I'm very optimistic that, in the last analysis, when we do get a resolution -- and it may take time -- we will get one that is satisfactory to everyone involved and that provides a sensible course for us to take in this country.
B. Copping: I ask leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
B. Copping: I'm very pleased to introduce a group of grade 6 and 7 students from Burquitlam Elementary School who are in the gallery today. They are accompanied by several adults and their teacher, Mr. Robertson. He is very ambitious about bringing a group over every year. Would the House please make them welcome.
B. Jones: I ask leave to make an introduction, Mr. Speaker.
Leave granted.
B. Jones: It gives me great pleasure to introduce today somebody who has served this province well, both as a
[ Page 11428 ]
member of this chamber and as member of the federal chamber. Bob Skelly represented the Alberni riding, under whatever name, for some 16 years. In 1984 he had bestowed upon him the tremendous burden of leadership in this province. He was elected to lead this party and led it into the 1986 election. I would ask all members to make Bob Skelly welcome today.
The Speaker: The hon. member for Skeena concludes.
H. Giesbrecht: I'd like to thank the member for Richmond-Steveston for his remarks and for the support that I've heard him express on a number of occasions for settlement of land claims. I look forward to standing with him in this House when the first negotiated claims are settled and the report is tabled.
We should keep in mind that when two parties sit down to negotiate, the inherent principle is that each has as much to gain as the other. I'm proud to be part of a government that has followed through with the first steps to fair and thoughtful resolution of treaty issues: such things as the Treaty Negotiation Advisory Committee, the cost-sharing arrangement with the federal government, and the Treaty Commission and interim measures agreements. Fairness above all has to remain the cornerstone of the settlement process. Settlements should recognize the rights, privileges and obligations of all citizens. Private property is not on the table, and this government will not enter into agreements that place undue financial burden on the taxpayers of British Columbia.
Out of this treaty process, we need to build a new and honourable relationship based on respect for the inherent rights of aboriginal people, a relationship that will remove barriers to first nations' self-reliance and self-determination, allowing aboriginal and non-aboriginal people to move beyond conflict and confrontation and work towards common goals. This is a relationship that will lead to certainty.
It is ironic that aboriginal peoples are engaging in treaty negotiations at all. They occupied these lands first. They were taken -- one could say, stolen -- from them, and now they are willing to sit with us and negotiate a win-win solution for all, in a sense, to legalize that theft. The real irony is that this willingness is viewed as threatening to far too many non-aboriginal people. Fearmongering and misinformation campaigns have no place in this process and can be very damaging to it. We either progress in negotiations, or the courts will settle the issues for us. The courts have shown in recent times that they will not deny justice for too long.
H. De Jong: Before I start my private member's statement, I would like to ask for leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
H. De Jong: I'm pleased to introduce to the House this morning nine students, accompanied by Mr. Blair McHenry. It's the graduating class of the Cornerstone Christian School of Abbotsford, and they will be sharing their accumulation of knowledge in a special way this week in worship and relaxation here on the Island. I would also like to ask the House to welcome my wife, sitting up in the gallery as well, who has been faithful to me for 40 years and certainly shaped my life in many ways. I'd like to ask the House to give them all a hearty welcome.
RAISING EARTHWORMS -- COMMERCIAL OR FARMING ENTERPRISE?
H. De Jong: The title for my statement this morning is: Raising Earthworms -- Commercial or Farming Enterprise? When we think of these little wigglers, I suppose we could also think about how government and opposition members wiggle through the massive legislation here in the House. Here in the House we try to prepare the soil for British Columbians to flourish on, and the worms do the same thing in a very natural way.
Over the years, there's been quite a diversification of farming. A lot of that had to do with the price of land, land parcel sizes and many other considerations. We have seen a real change in the agricultural community toward high-density crops and high-density poultry and livestock operations, all with somewhat different requirements than farming used to have. In most municipal bylaws, the acreages and setbacks are all laid down as to how they can operate in an effective way, so there is no hindrance to the neighbours but also to allow farmers to do what they want to do on their land. High-density livestock operations are often considered on the basis of land base, so that the waste product also can be utilized in an effective way.
This new venture I'm going to speak about this morning is raising earthworms. This type of operation has been started by Frank and Betty Zalot on Townshipline Road in Abbotsford. They are retired for a specific purpose. The farmer is no longer physically capable of continuing their dairy operation, yet they feel very much inclined to continue some type of operation. They have rented their 40 acres of land to one of the neighbours. They now wish to start this earthworm operation in the barns on the property.
A big question, in the statutes of British Columbia, is whether earthworm farming can be considered a farming enterprise. Earthworm farming, at this point in time, is not considered a farming enterprise. Hence these people are faced with an extremely high taxation potential on their buildings, because they are considered a commercial enterprise.
When I make some comparisons of farm operations and what is allowed under the land commission act as to how they can operate and ought to be taxed, there is a vast difference in how one or the other is approached, particularly in terms of earthworm farming. When I look at mushroom growing, even though it's a direct food product, the facilities and the property required are much the same. When I look at hatching egg production -- which is not an egg used for human consumption; it's to propagate the next generation of chickens, pullets or whatever you may want to call them -- the worm operation is exactly that.
When I was visiting the Earth Day celebrations in Abbotsford this spring, the Zalots had a good presentation there. They had information provided for them from various places, including information from the Composting Council of Canada, which has all kinds of information on this entrepreneurial aspect. There was workshop and training information from Sir Sandford Fleming College in Ontario, because every type of farming takes training. This being a new venture, I think we ought to take our hats off for people who are involved in a certain college to provide the training and the knowledge to young farmers -- as well as older ones -- to take on this challenge.
[11:00]
It was not by choice that the Zalots had to take on a new challenge; it was because of necessity. They did not have the avails to retire. They needed an additional period of farming so that they could make a living. Simply renting out the land
[ Page 11429 ]
to the neighbours, with all the other costs that go along with maintaining a farm and farm buildings, does not give that return to the farmer. Hence they have chosen this new route of making a living. Yet there seems to be an obstacle -- and I will deal with that under the response -- that is in many cases allowed under the agricultural land use policies of the land commission. Yet the Minister of Finance, through whose operations the assessment process is regulated, is not in tune with that.
S. Hammell: In some circles they would say: "As the worm turns." The member for Abbotsford comes at this topic from quite a different perspective than an elementary school teacher from Surrey. As a schoolteacher, my concern with any subject matter has always been as a conduit to a skill -- to reading, writing or arithmetic -- and I can imagine worms as a wonderful subject to excite the curiosity of children when they are still innocently enthusiastic about learning. Arithmetic brings to mind the inchworm and angleworm, possibly measured by the tapeworm. To do reports, writing needs information. For example, did you know that there are generally two types of worms: the red wiggler and the dew worm, or night crawler?
The red wiggler is raised for composting. Recycling is a wonderful topic for kids. Red wigglers are about four inches long, and you need hundreds of them for composting. Enthusiasts keep them in a bucket or a box under the sink, which is obviously why they are raised commercially, as the member for Abbotsford said. Luckily, the red wigglers multiply quickly, and they are also hardy and live well at room temperature. More important, they easily outperform other worms in changing organic material into castings, which are rich in vitamin B and coveted by the home gardener.
The night crawler, or dew worm, is huge and shy. They are raised and sold for fishing. They grow to be six to ten inches long, and they can be as round as your thumb. But they need to be kept cool. They are often caught when they surface on golf courses at night after the dew has settled. All worms like it dark and damp. Kids love information like that, and love writing reports about what they know. They also love experimenting with food and feeding their pets. Evidently, night crawlers like shredded newspaper mixed with grain, while red wigglers are more into garbage -- obviously, as they are used in composts. Juice pulp is a favourite and so are banana skins, and evidently a big pot of porridge warms them in the winter. But they shun citrus peels, garlic and onions. I can see the kids in a classroom, because they are fascinated by all creatures.
As all of us know, there is a song about worms from our childhood. It goes something like: "Nobody likes me, everybody hates me; I'm going home to eat some worms." That's a bit of a rough rap for the worm, as they are 60 percent protein and most of the rest is water -- which does bring me to the end of my response. I do want to recommend a book that has delighted kids for years. It's called How to Eat Fried Worms, by Thomas Rockwell. Let me describe it. By way of a bet, Billy, the main character, gets into the uncomfortable position of having to eat 15 worms. The worms are readily supplied by his opponent, and Billy has a free choice of condiments, from peanut butter to horseradish. With his wavering courage, bolstered by the moral support of his family and friends, Bill munches away courageously. I'd like to quote a passage:
"The huge night crawler sprawled limply in the centre of the platter, brown and steaming. 'Boiled,' said Tom. 'We boiled it.' Billy stormed about the barn, kicking barrels and posts, arguing: 'A night crawler isn't a worm! If it was a worm, it would be called a worm. A night crawler's a night crawler.' Finally Joe ran off to get his father's dictionary." -- Obviously, you can see a fair amount of learning going on -- "'Night crawler: earthworm; a large earthworm found on the soil's surface at night...'."
So Billy eats it. I mention this because, as a teacher, when all is said and done, the best worm I know of is the child who has learned to be a bookworm.
H. De Jong: It's interesting that the member opposite has referred to how children's curiosity has a special way with worms. Surely children are curious about many types of farming. The prime example of that is the miniature farm that Dairyland has provided on the PNE grounds for years. I would suggest that the miniature farmyard is probably one of the biggest attractions at the PNE. That's how important farming is and how curious children are about various types of animals.
The real problem is that these people will not be successful unless the Minister of Finance can see fit to say that earthworms are a farming commodity. If I make a comparison between the Land Commission and municipal rules and regulations and what the government is doing here, they do not compare. If the operations of every fruit grower and farmer who sells products produced on their farm at the farm gate are not classified as commercial in terms of taxation, why should the earthworm farmer be different? The earthworm farmer is fully in tune, being in the reproductive business of making something available for the horticulture industry and many other uses -- such as egg production, some types of bird breeders, fish hatcheries, zoos, aquariums, frog farms and laboratories .
Worms are widely used, not only in agricultural pursuits but for the benefit of agriculture in total. If we are going to talk about the promotion of organic fertilizers and organic ways of farming, then surely the worm has a very important place. That type of farming should be recognized as a farm operation, not as a commercial operation. After all, all products -- and it doesn't matter on what type of farm they are produced -- finally end up on the commercial market.
The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes private members' statements for the moment.
Hon. J. MacPhail: I call Committee of Supply.
The House in Committee of Supply B; G. Brewin in the chair.
The Chair: I recognize the hon. member for Surrey-Cloverdale on what matter?
K. Jones: I ask leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
K. Jones: Visiting with us today is a group of approximately 25 grade 4 students from Serpentine Heights Elementary School in my riding of Surrey-Cloverdale. Their teachers, Ms. Joan Lough and Ms. Joanne Sieb, and several parents are escorting them on this day in Victoria. They're not presently in the House, but they will be touring the premises later today. I would ask the House to extend a warm welcome to them and wish them an eventful day in beautiful Victoria.
[ Page 11430 ]
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES AND
MINISTRY RESPONSIBLE FOR SPORTS AND COMMONWEALTH GAMES
(continued)
On vote 39: minister's office, $350,717 (continued).
K. Jones: The minister has a copy of the proposed agenda for today, but I would like to make one change and add an item. I'd like to ask the minister a question with regard to Enquiry B.C. It's just a matter of the hours of service. I noticed in the past contract that in the hours of service for Enquiry B.C., there would be two staff members on from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. from Monday to Friday and from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Could the minister tell us whether those hours are still in effect under the new contract?
Hon. R. Blencoe: We believe they are the same, but we obviously don't have the detailed contract with us this morning, because we didn't think we were covering that issue. We will determine that exactly, but I'm pretty sure they are the same hours. I will get the details and get back to you.
K. Jones: Last weekend I had the opportunity of responding to a call to my office looking for some information. In attempting to give them some guidance, we attempted to reach Enquiry B.C. about mid-afternoon on Saturday -- and the week before, we tried at just after 5 o'clock on the Friday -- in order to get some information from them. In both cases we were unable to get anyone to answer. All we got was a recording saying to call during regular business hours. This doesn't seem to be very helpful, in that a lot of people wish to know how to get in touch with government or need some emergency lines. The case we had was an attempt by Customs to try and get in touch with the welfare fraud investigation team. I was attempting to help them, but I was not able to provide them with any additional assistance in that I wasn't able to find anybody available at the time. I have discussed that with the Minister of Social Services, and she assured me that she will look into rectifying that situation.
Is the minister now indicating that he has the hours of service?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Yes, indeed. Staff weren't ready and didn't have all the information, but luckily we have managed to find it. I can share with the member that the hours of operation are 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday to Friday inclusive, and Saturdays from nine to five. The office will be closed in observance of holidays, like Good Friday, Easter Monday, Victoria Day, Canada Day, B.C. Day, Labour Day, Thanksgiving Day -- i.e., all traditional holidays.
[11:15]
I should let you know, hon. member, in the report I have here -- which looks like a further report to the one I gave you -- that during peak hours, from 9:30 to 3:30 daily -- we track how we deal with inquiries, and 85 percent of calls were answered within 20 seconds. Studies show that during peak times, 20 seconds is the average response in terms of getting the phone and getting to people.
K. Jones: Thank you, minister, for clarifying that. But it does indicate that during a considerable part of the evening hours, when people are at home -- particularly those people who, like many people in my riding, have to commute from their jobs during the day and don't get home until six or 6:30 in the evening -- there is no way to obtain government numbers or access to the government in the off-hours. Not only is there no access through Enquiry B.C., there is limited access to government emergency lines and no way for people to be aware of them. We're concerned that perhaps it was a mistake to change the hours of service from what they used to be, from until 10 o'clock to until 7 o'clock. Could the minister address that?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The information we have, after a number of years of study, shows that the current hours of availability are those times that availability is required. Indeed, we can let you know that we are averaging 115 calls on Saturdays, but on Tuesdays.... I can give you an example. On Tuesday, April 5, we had 3,559 calls, compared to a Saturday average of 115. We are adjusting.
One of our issues, which doesn't seem to be a concern of the opposition, is that we look to efficiencies that save the taxpayer money and get a good return for our dollars. That may not be a concern of the Liberal Party, but it certainly is of ours.
K. Jones: This side of the House is certainly interested in cost savings for taxpayers, but we're also interested in having services available to people who have a need at the time that it is important to them. Perhaps there may be some way of accommodating this -- provisioning one person, since it's a contracted arrangement, on an on-call basis -- that would be able to deal with it. I'm sure they're probably dealing with other calls as well as the government calls, so it shouldn't be too much extra charge for that slower time, as the minister has indicated. But at least there should be somebody available, during reasonable times when the public is up and around, for them to be able to determine phone numbers -- and perhaps ideally, to get in touch with a human being who can actually assist them with their particular problem.
We have to recognize that not everybody is able to get to a telephone during their working day or while they're commuting. I'm sure that if you've checked your usage, you'd find a lot of government people and government offices are using those services to pass people from one ministry or one department to another -- mainly because, the government bureaucracy being such a megapolis, it's hard for any one person in an office to know which is the right person or department to get in touch with. As a result, a lot of the inquiries get referred to Enquiry B.C.
I'm sure that those in business also utilize it during the day. But there are just the ordinary working folk who want to have access to their government. That means they have to have access to Enquiry B.C., to find out who to get in touch with and maybe get the information they're seeking -- in the off-hours, not the business hours. I hope and presume that the minister will take that under advisement and try to address the need for additional services for people throughout the province -- not necessarily those in the lower mainland or lower Vancouver Island who have daytime access.
I'd like now to go into the area of gaming. I'd like the minister to give us an idea of.... What is the makeup of this committee that is currently looking into gaming policy?
Hon. R. Blencoe: First, it's not a committee; we've called it a gaming policy project. Cabinet instructed me to review all gaming legislation on behalf of the government. By the way, I covered this last Friday, hon. members, so I'm not going to go into detail on what we're doing. It's already covered in Hansard.
[ Page 11431 ]
Ann Ehrcke, to my right, is the director of the project. Ann has put together a core staff of five. They are working diligently toward a fall deadline, if we can keep to it, to come up with some new approaches in terms of regulation -- and of course, maybe some expansions, but that is not determined. Their mandate is to work with me and the ministry and to report to cabinet on the current state of gaming: its history and significance, the implications of what's happened in the last few years, the feedback we get from the multitude of stakeholders and the public in general. Of course, they are also to take a look at the provincial regulatory framework, and obviously -- it's not new to anybody -- to look at the ideas for expansion that have been suggested, all the way from casinos to VLTs to megabingos to more electronic bingo. I think I explained that last time. The major component of the work of the project is consultation and discussions with first nations. I said last week that the mandate of the report done by the member for Mission-Kent and the member for Comox Valley was not to meet or discuss the issues of gaming with first nations. There are five staff. It is working hard. It reports to me. Whatever we come up with, if there are any significant expansions -- again I'd be careful with "if"; I emphasize "if" -- then obviously we will look at how we put those in front of the public for some further input, and then cabinet will make some decisions.
K. Jones: Are all four staff from your ministry?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Yes. The director, seconded from the Attorney General, is a lawyer in the Attorney General's ministry; Nancy Carter is from Aboriginal Affairs; Mark MacKinnon and Kathy Chopik are from Government Services, and there are also two support staff from Government Services.
Interjection.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Sorry, was I mumbling? Kathy Chopik is from Government Services.
K. Jones: Unfortunately, the acoustics in this House aren't the greatest when the minister allows his voice to drop. We don't hear him very well on this side. I wonder if he could say the third name as well, as I wasn't able to pick that up.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Kathy Chopik is also in the Ministry of Government Services, plus two support staff who work with the staff I outlined.
K. Jones: Based on the secondment of two people and two from your own staff, what qualifications are these people bringing to this committee, and why were they individually chosen for this job?
Hon. R. Blencoe: They are highly qualified, skilled public servants who have served the province well.
K. Jones: I have absolutely no question of their ability as civil servants. I'm asking you what qualified them to be the decision-makers on the question of gaming policy, and how do they represent the province in compiling that policy?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The project staff bring knowledge, skills and ability to the task. They have served the public and this province well, and they continue to do so.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us, then, what they will be doing?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, I refer you to Hansard of last Friday; I gave you a detailed answer on that question.
K. Jones: I'm afraid that wasn't exactly the detail I am asking for at this time, hon. minister. I am asking you to tell us how these people would be developing gaming policy. Would it be from their knowledge? How are they going to go about gaining the knowledge? Where is the information that they're going to work on coming from? What expertise does each of these people bring to help in making that decision? I presume there's one person from Aboriginal Affairs because you want some input from the aboriginal side of gaming, but I have no assurances that that's the reason. Could you tell us whether that's the case?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, the staff who are working on this project are no different from any other public servants working for government that are asked to do a job. They have analytical and policy skills, and they look at the information before them. They do not set policy. They do the research and prepare recommendations for policy development, and they are doing that now in a very skilled and technical way.
K. Jones: I don't question their ability to analyze and do their clerical functions. Is that what they're doing? The impression I get is that they're just compiling information that is provided from some other source. What sources are the committee using to provide a decision-making recommendation for cabinet?
[11:30]
Hon. R. Blencoe: For the first time in the history of this province we have a group of public servants who have been mandated under my authority and that of government to do solid research and empirical analysis, and to take a look at the evidence of what's happened in the past, at the experiences in this and other jurisdictions, and at models for policy review from other areas. They are also mandated to consult with those who are suggesting expansions, for instance, and to look at the social and financial implications of expansions. Hon. member, in some respects they are doing what a research department should be doing. They are very skilled at it; they have lots of years of service. They will provide that background for cabinet to make decisions -- hopefully in the near future.
K. Jones: Is the group of five public servants mandated to undertake studies on behalf of the government or the ministry?
Hon. R. Blencoe: If required, obviously they would be. I discuss and they work.... There's an interministry committee, of course, because gaming covers a number of ministries, particularly the Aboriginal Affairs ministry, this ministry, the Attorney General ministry -- the Attorney General is responsible for the Racing Commission -- and the Finance ministry, which has the Lottery Corporation.
If studies are required after consultation with the elected officials, that will happen. One of the gaps is that no considerable research has been done in this province, and we're trying to fill that gap. Useful information has been developed in other jurisdictions. Quite frankly, the bottom line for us really is to take note and take stock of what others have done and of the mistakes they've made.
[ Page 11432 ]
Again I say to you and to the citizens of this province: it's cautious and it's carefully thought out by talented, well-experienced public servants, who have a wide range of experience in a number of areas. For the first time, a government is taking this issue on in a very serious way to resolve some issues out there.
K. Jones: I'm not sure if I heard the minister correctly. Did the minister indicate that an interministry committee is also advising or bringing input to this committee?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Yes, as I said, the current gaming in British Columbia has a number of jurisdictional components which reside in a number of other ministries. Consequently, staff in those ministries are working on a committee that gives advice to these public servants who are working on the gaming project under my ministry. Obviously, they have to relate with the other ministries in terms of work and their experiences, etc.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us who sits on that interministry committee and who they represent?
Hon. R. Blencoe: They are public servants, hon. member.
K. Jones: Could the minister give us either their names or their titles, so we have some idea of what status they have in their ministries?
Hon. R. Blencoe: They're policy analysts in those various ministries.
K. Jones: Does that mean that, as policy analysts, they are speaking on behalf of their ministry -- that they have the full authority to speak and make commitments on behalf of their ministry?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Like the public service, hon. member, if you know how it works -- and it seems you may not -- they work on behalf of their ministry, develop policy options and make those recommendations to their elected officials, which obviously are the various ministers involved. We're heavily connected to this project, and that's how it works. I think you know that, hon. member -- at least, I hope you know that.
K. Jones: Yes, I am familiar with the procedural process of the ministries. What I'm trying to determine is: do these policy analysts within their ministries develop a policy in regard to their position on gaming, then take that to their ministry for approval, and then, having got approval, bring that to the project committee as input? Or are they just putting forward their thoughts to the project committee, and are they all being mulled around like in a great huge think tank?
Hon. R. Blencoe: We use the people who are advising us from various ministries; they have experience in critical areas. We use their experience to.... They feed into the project their experience and analysis of various issues we want to look at.
Hon. member, to some degree I take some exception with your insinuating that public servants would be trying to develop policy. Public servants know they work on policy and make recommendations. The elected officials are the ones who determine that. I think this line of questioning is somewhat insulting to those public servants.
K. Jones: I'm sorry that the minister feels insulted with the straightforward questions we are asking as to who's developing the policy in regard to this issue. We're attempting to find out how British Columbia's direction in gambling is being developed. There seems to be such a secret process going on. With the very great difficulty I'm having trying to extract a few minor details from the minister, I suspect there is a secret agenda involved in this. Perhaps the minister could tell us who is on the committees that are advising, and how these committees are giving their direction. Does it have the authorization of that ministry when it comes to the project committee? Is this a preliminary discussion with people from the various policy groups getting together and compiling a large think tank of people to try and bring up a direction? Which is it, hon. minister? Are the ministries themselves putting forward their position on gambling in British Columbia, or is a think tank of people developing the recommendations to you, the minister?
Hon. R. Blencoe: No.
Interjection.
K. Jones: I would repeat the question of my colleague: no what? What do you mean by no? You haven't answered the question.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, if you could remember what your question was, you would know what no was for. You asked me if the staff were developing policy; I said no. You know that cabinet completes and enunciates policy, and that's how it works in our system.
K. Jones: I realize that the final decision is cabinet's, but the development of the policy is what we're asking about. Maybe I could make it point-blank to the minister. Are the policy analysts who are assisting in the development of this policy on gambling going to their minister and getting confirmation of a policy direction on behalf of their ministry before they come to the project committee?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, when you are developing policy in such a critical area as gaming -- which is of concern to the people -- they said they want a cautious, careful, intelligent, well-researched analysis of the issues. When that is completed -- which they are in the process of doing -- and they let us know what some of the options and implications are, as elected officials in this cabinet we can then make some decisions. They are doing the work for us so that we can make those informed decisions, unlike some others in the past who made uninformed decisions.
K. Jones: Fortunately I'm not responsible for those in the past political process. I will leave that to those who are the remainders of the Social Credit Party, because we in the Liberal Party have absolutely no responsibility for the actions taken by them.
In the development of your policy before it becomes a recommendation to cabinet.... I would like to find out whether the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs bring to this project their position on gaming, one that speaks for that ministry.
Hon. R. Blencoe: The ministry staff don't bring positions; they bring knowledge, experience and informed knowledge based on research and analysis, which we've asked them to
[ Page 11433 ]
do. That's how it works, hon. member. It may be alien to some, but that's how we are carrying out this project.
K. Jones: The minister has had meetings with various interest groups with regard to gaming, particularly representatives of aboriginal people. I believe he has had meetings with other interest groups in the area of casinos and hotels. Could the minister tell us how he is bringing that type of information to this project?
Hon. R. Blencoe: One of the duties of an elected official, particularly those who are going to be recommending policy to government, is to listen -- and thus far, I am listening. Those organizations that have been to see me -- and many others will probably request it.... I listen to their positions and viewpoints. As they know, we are in what I think is an intelligence process in terms of gathering information. I listen to their suggestions and views on expansion, for instance, or the views from charitable organizations on protection of or indemnification for their current resources. I listen to views on a regulatory framework and how it could be managed better. When the other components of the project have finished their work and we put it together, obviously it will give me a sense of perspective and allow me to give some direction in terms of having listened extensively to those who are impacted by these issues.
K. Jones: It's interesting and very welcome to learn that the minister is listening to people. Does the minister sit on this committee?
Hon. R. Blencoe: For the third time, hon. member, it's not a committee. I've told you that. I sit on cabinet. Staff work in my ministry and report to me. At the end of the day, I obviously participate with cabinet on policy for the people of British Columbia.
K. Jones: The minister sits on cabinet. Yes, he's the head of the ministry. The minister hears representations from various organizations, people and sources. By what means does that information get to the project committee?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The staff on the project go to meetings. They discuss issues over telephones. They get input from various ministry staff who have experience, particularly in Aboriginal Affairs. My colleague the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has talented and experienced people who have views on how to deal with issues revolving around first nations. My staff go to that ministry often, listen and take their advice; it becomes part of the policy development and options for cabinet.
K. Jones: The minister seems to skate around all of the questions asked, rather than answering the question that's put to him. He's being encouraged to maintain that position by other members of the cabinet. That's certainly a very questionable process for members of cabinet to be recommending. This is supposed to be an opportunity for the public to learn something from the minister about what he's doing and how he's doing it. That's what estimates are about. It's not you dealing with me as a member of the opposition; it's you dealing with the people of British Columbia. That is who you're responding to and laughing at. I hope you realize that.
[11:45]
The Chair: Excuse me, hon. members. You're supposed to make your remarks through the Chair.
K. Jones: I'm sorry, hon. Chair. The minister needs to remember just who is represented by the official opposition: it's the people throughout British Columbia. When he laughs at us, he mocks the people of British Columbia.
I ask, once again, for a forthright response on the process you are utilizing. Say a representative of the aboriginal peoples comes and meets with you. Is it worth their while coming to you so that you are informed when, at the same time, a committee, a project, a group of people from your staff are busy developing policy? You say that you're listening. Are you transmitting what you receive from that representation to the committee? Are you providing continuous input into the committee's direction?
Hon. R. Blencoe: All things put before me and before staff in terms of the consultation process, which is currently underway with key stakeholders.... Stay tuned for further announcements on further consultations. All things that are put before us, either written or spoken, are factored in as part of our intelligent, rational, cautious approach to this issue, hon. member. I don't know what else I can say about this issue. If you have some questions that are useful, I'd be very pleased to answer them.
K. Jones: The minister could be forthright with the people of British Columbia about developing a policy that, at the present time, appears to be a private policy-development process, without proper and open input from British Columbians.
The official opposition, the Liberal Party, has put forward a proposal and a motion that calls for an independent judicial inquiry, which will provide for public hearings throughout the province and a six-month deadline to make sure the job gets done. The official opposition feels that all aspects of the gaming policy should be looked at, starting from the very beginning: the question of whether or not gambling should be in the province. That's one thing the people of British Columbia have never been asked and have never had the opportunity to express their views on.
The people of British Columbia, with their various interests, also need to know what the direction of the government will be with regard to aboriginals and the economic development uses of gambling -- if that's going to be approved and under what basis that is going to occur. They have to know about for-profit gambling, such as the waterfront casino project, which was put forward by VLC. The latest one, announced today, calls for another casino investment at the former site of the B.C. Pavilion at Expo. It sounds like we just may have a proliferation of casinos around our waterfront in Vancouver pretty soon.
Somebody must be out there encouraging them. It must be the position of this government, being secretly let out to the people, to put these multimillion-dollar projects forward. There has to be some direction being given; otherwise, they wouldn't even be thinking about them.
We have to look at the impact of gaming on the fundraising methods of charities, which are presently using casinos and bingos as their means of raising funds. Also, there is the impact on horse racing and how gaming will draw away from the revenues that keep the horse-racing industry operating -- the 7,000 or 8,000 people that are affected by that very active and vigorous industry throughout British Columbia.
A very serious look has to be taken at how compulsive gambling is going to be dealt with and what is being done at the present time. It appears that absolutely nothing has been done in the past with regard to compulsive gambling in the
[ Page 11434 ]
province, even though there is some indication that numbers of people are so afflicted. I am surprised that the minister and previous ministers with this responsibility have not taken some action to address the social and economic impacts on the individual who is a compulsive gambler, or the families, employers and neighbours who are affected by the fact that that person has to have money in order to gamble and meet their addiction; or even on those persons not addicted but who spend more than their families can afford. These factors need to be addressed. The minister could be taking direction on some of these factors and implementing some action with regard to the social impacts of gambling in the province.
As has been noted previously, a lot of people are involved in gambling in British Columbia. They are involved in lotteries, bingos, casinos, pull tabs, meat draws and other types of draws. There is a whole raft of illegal gaming machines -- grey machines, as they're referred to. There are possibly 1,000 of them, and those aren't being addressed by this government. The Lottery Corporation has identified a serious problem that they are trying to control, and no direction or guidance is being given to them. The ministry has provided no policy or regulation to control these aspects. Could the minister tell us exactly how he, through this committee or through direction outside this committee, is going to make the changes that are needed now; not waiting until September or next year when he can come forward with some policy?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The member raises some good issues. They are all issues that we are looking at in a thoughtful and rational way. They are all issues that have to be resolved in terms of policy. Policy is not developed overnight. Maybe you have already made up your mind in terms of policy issues -- i.e., you have developed policy between the cab door and the curb. This government refuses to do that; these issues are too important. That's why we are taking our time cautiously, and doing it properly and intelligently. In the fullness of time you will see the results of that, and I think the people will be extremely pleased with how we have dealt with these issues.
K. Jones: As the minister has said "in the fullness of time," could he indicate to us what he has as a deadline for the fullness of time?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, in your earlier statement you said it was the fall, and now you're asking for the deadline. Hon. member, you may want to check your questions. I think we have covered this issue quite significantly.
S. O'Neill: I request permission to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
S. O'Neill: We have with us in the House today a number of grade 8 students from Concordia, Washington. Will the House please make them welcome, and welcome them to Victoria.
The Chair: Welcome to our visitors.
K. Jones: I'd like to finish off the gaming policy area by asking the minister what he has planned as the next step after this project committee reports.
Hon. R. Blencoe: There will cabinet decisions, implementation of cabinet decisions, and there may very well be legislation next year.
[F. Garden in the chair.]
Interjection.
K. Jones: Perhaps the government Whip would like to sit in his appropriate seat so that if he wishes to speak he could do so. He shouldn't be making his statements standing behind the minister.
The Chair: Pardon me, hon. member, were you raising a point of order, or were you pausing for a bit? I didn't quite hear it.
K. Jones: I was just noting that the government Whip was making statements about voting in favour of something while he is not in a position to make those statements.
The Chair: Your point is well taken. Members, if you're going to make comments, do it from your seat, please.
K. Jones: I'd like to now move on to the central statistics area and thank the staff involved with the gaming policy committee for giving their assistance to the minister during these questions.
The Chair: Hon. member, I'm just giving the minister a chance to respond. I think they're making some changes on this side. Are you going to respond, hon. minister?
Hon. R. Blencoe: I didn't hear any questions. We've covered central stats already. If there's anything new, I'd be pleased to try to answer it.
The Chair: The Chair is just getting himself oriented here, so bear with me.
K. Jones: We'll just let the staff come in. With regard to central stats, I'd like to ask the minister about the method by which the statistics are gathered, and to what extent.... What reliability are these stats based on?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Perhaps you could tell us exactly what you're referring to. Are you talking to general statistics? I'm not sure, hon. member, what the basis of your question is.
[12:00]
K. Jones: I'd like to find out from the minister how the central stats in his ministry are acquired, and what validity those stats have.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, it is a very efficient ministry. It utilizes existing surveys, which are obviously in other jurisdictions, particularly Statistics Canada. We do our own surveys, of course. In particular, we extensively access the administration records of the government of British Columbia, and of course, we have agreements for sharing information with StatsCan. That's generally where our information comes from.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us, then, by what means this information is distributed? Is it exclusively for the use of the government, or is it for the general public?
[ Page 11435 ]
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, I already gave you that information. We have statistical inquiries, and up to February 28 of this year, there were 18,000. Last year we had 31 publications and releases -- monthly, quarterly and annually. Generally, that's the sort of thing we do.
K. Jones: Could the minister repeat his last little mumble? I couldn't hear it.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Generally, hon. member, information is available to the general public through general inquiries over the telephone or by coming in, in person; and we do release publications on the work that has been done by central stats.
K. Jones: How often are these publications put out to the public, and how are they made available to the public?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Those who are in need of the stats, and there are obviously many -- educational institutions,universities and businesses -- know of our services. There is a user inquiry service. There are monthly, quarterly and annual reports. I have a substantial list of the types of reports available through B.C. stats. Rather than read them out to you, I'd be very pleased to provide you with the information. It's public information. There are many stats and reports: Labour Force Surveys; Earnings and Employment Trends; Business Formations and Failures; tourist room revenues; British Columbia Origin Exports, a monthly report; Consumer Price Index; Current Statistics; Migration Highlights, a quarterly; and Immigration Highlights, a quarterly. You name it, hon. member, and we've probably got it.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us if there is a charge to the public for this statistical information, or is it made available on demand?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Yes, hon. member, there are charges applied to the various products we provide.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us the range that these products are sold for? Is it based on the size of the information or on the particular usage of that information by other people? Are they sold to the public at a reasonable price, or are they primarily intended for, say, special interest groups, businesses or other governments?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Currently, the charges we apply are to cover our costs, so it isn't a for-profit operation. We see it as a service to the public, to institutions or to the province of British Columbia. Prices can range from.... Let me give you an example. We have a publication called Current Statistics. That publication is available monthly, and we charge $50 a year. Obviously, there are 12 publications for $50. British Columbia Major Projects Inventory is released quarterly; for that we charge $32 a year. I should also tell you, hon. member, that the costs obviously depend on the kind of technical reports, the amount of work that's gone into it and staff time, etc. We also have Quarterly Regional Statistics, for which we charge $100 a year. We also provide diskettes in terms of our work; they are more money. We charge $250 a year for diskettes of the British Columbia Manufacturers' Directory. I'm not sure if they get a diskette a month or if it's an.... It's an annual directory and a substantial document from what I can see here.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us whether there is any duplication between federal and provincial statistics-gathering and statistics-dissemination operations?
Hon. R. Blencoe: That's the reason why we work with StatsCan and the various pieces of legislation in the Statistics Act. We work extremely well, and we try to avoid -- indeed, we do avoid -- duplication. That's why we share information and make sure one or the other isn't duplicating the work. I presume that StatsCan can utilize in the same way the information that we develop. It's a very cooperative framework, I gather.
K. Jones: That has given sufficient canvass to the area of central statistics and the statistical department of Government Services.
Just one moment, my colleague for Saanich North and the Islands has one question to ask.
C. Tanner: Could the minister tell us whether his department is the only source of statistics within government? Or does the Ministry of Finance, for example, gather statistics?
Hon. R. Blencoe: There is a sort of collegial arrangement, and those who are in the statistics business.... We are the central statistics branch, but at times ministries do some of their own surveys. We have an arrangement with staff in those ministries to share with us what they are going to do when they are working on that kind of stuff. Before they start, we say: "Hang on. We've already done a lot of that work." Or, if we haven't, we will give them advice on how to do it, and then we would utilize their work for our central stats and dissemination to the public. There are people within government, obviously, who are specialists in this kind of information collection, dissemination and the works. They know each other and work together in developing the information.
C. Tanner: The last time we met, I believe we were informed that there were 22 employees in this department. Somewhere in that....
Hon. R. Blencoe: There are 28.
C. Tanner: It seems to me -- it's an instinctive feeling rather than any factual information that I have -- that 28 employees couldn't possibly gather all the statistics required by all the departments of government, with the exception, for example, of Forests and Finance. They require specific statistical information. Generally speaking, wouldn't it be true to say that this department is the basis for all the statistical information that is required by the government?
Hon. R. Blencoe: There is no question it is the key body acquiring statistical information, doing studies and dealing with inquiries, but there are specialized needs within certain ministries. You're right, there's only so much that 28 employees can do. They do a tremendous job. As you know, it's an information world out there, and the public wants information, as do institutions and other organizations. That's the reason that when the Ministry of Finance, for instance, wants to develop some information or get some statistical analysis, they would check to see whether we have it or whether we could do it. If not, they'd probably proceed with their own fact-gathering, with advice from us because this branch clearly has years of experience.
[ Page 11436 ]
The reason we work with Statistics Canada is pretty obvious. I think that's the biggest statistics branch in the country, and they do an incredible amount of work. Quite frankly, one of the reasons we can keep this department at the level it is -- although I'm sure the staff could make a case for some expansion -- is that we utilize the resources of Statistics Canada. This allows us to keep this department at a level that I think is efficient and does a good job for the people of British Columbia.
C. Tanner: I'm pleased to hear that we're also making use of Statistics Canada because I recently saw a program where Statistics Canada was commended as probably the leading statistical gatherer of facts in the world, let alone in Canada. I believe they do have a very high reputation, and I'm pleased to hear that we're using them. As far as this department is concerned, though -- it's an important department of government, obviously, because all departments need facts before they can make decisions -- it concerns me a little that other than those specialized things, like forestry or finance, there is a perception in the other departments that your department is the one that gathers statistics, and that they do, in fact, come to you first. Could you give us the assurance that you remind the other departments of government from time to time that you're the statistics-gathering information area and they should check with you first? In fact, you should remind them from time to time.
Hon. R. Blencoe: There's a fairly good working relationship between all the ministries and our central stats branch, but I think your perception is correct to some degree. There is a sense that this is the central headquarters, and in many areas it is. We have good working arrangements in terms of other ministries, but I'm told by staff that we are improving in that area, that there is room for improvement, and we're looking at better coordination of our efforts to ensure we're all on the same track in getting the best information possible.
K. Jones: I'd like to go on to the Commonwealth Games as our next subject. I'd like to start with a topic that came up in the last few weeks as a result of a death at the Commonwealth Place pool. Who is responsible for the Commonwealth Place pool, and at what time would jurisdiction transfer?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The staff can give me the details on some of it. For instance, the province is not managing and running it. My understanding is that the municipality of Saanich is the operator and the manager. As we all know, the pool was built with the Commonwealth Games in mind, so the Commonwealth Games Society has first claim for the Commonwealth Games period. It will be used, obviously, just for the Commonwealth Games from August 18 to August 28. But as you know, hon. member -- and I'm going to be very careful here -- there is currently an inquest into some of the issues you have raised. My understanding is that clearly the municipality is managing that facility, and I think that has been coming out in the various reports.
[12:15]
K. Jones: With regard to the liability responsibilities coming out of the Commonwealth Games operations -- either the facilities or the activities -- could the minister tell us what responsibility the provincial government carries, having partially funded the Commonwealth Games Society?
Hon. R. Blencoe: I think it's clear that this is not.... We are a funding agency; we gave approximately $12 million, I think, in capital for the construction of the facility. Actually, because of the various funding formulae, in the end we were the major contributor to that facility. But we are not involved in the operation or management, so the answer is simply that we don't have responsibility. The inquest is carrying on, and I won't say any more about that.
K. Jones: Is the minister a member of the board of the Commonwealth Games Society?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Yes, I am a member of the board of directors, but in name only. I don't attend; I have appointed someone on a full-time basis to work there and at the Games on my behalf.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us why he does not attend the board meetings, why he has appointed someone on his behalf and who that person is?
Hon. R. Blencoe: When I first took over this portfolio I made the decision that yes, under the arrangements laid out by the former government the minister has a position on the board, but the minister also has to make decisions sometimes that are different from the society's perspective or viewpoint. I decided that wearing too many hats would create problems, so I have not participated on the board. I have appointed the executive director of the sports and Commonwealth Games branch, Dr. Lee Southern, to sit there for me and represent the provincial interest. I do not attend the meetings, basically because I often have to make decisions that may not reflect the society's wishes. I have to make them in the interests of the government of the province of British Columbia.
K. Jones: Is the executive director of the sports and Commonwealth Games branch a government civil servant? Is Dr. Lee Southern indemnified from liability in his position as a director?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Obviously, as a public servant, he fully understands that he has the government's support in his work as a public servant.
K. Jones: Just to clarify that, does the minister mean that Dr. Southern has no liability responsibility in his position as a director of the Commonwealth Games Society?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Dr. Lee Southern represents this minister of the government of the province of British Columbia.
K. Jones: I've been told by other board members that they have a liability as members of the board. I want to find out who, on behalf of the province and representing the province on that board, is being held liable.
Hon. R. Blencoe: The board of directors is challenged with bringing the Games in on time and on budget. There will be no deficit. They are given that, and that's their responsibility. I've made no bones about that. They understand that. It's a challenge they took on. Most of them were accepted by the former government. They recognize that when you volunteer, I suppose, you volunteer recognizing that you're taking on a challenge. So be it. The
[ Page 11437 ]
government of British Columbia expects the board to deliver the Games on time and on budget.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us, then, whether he is liable on behalf of the province as the appointed person to that board? Or is Dr. Southern being given the responsibility of being liable?
Hon. R. Blencoe: It's really an irrelevant question. There is no liability issue. We are delivering the Games on time and on budget. As the minister responsible and representing a government that of the public bodies -- with the federal government -- is a major supplier of financial resources.... We obviously have responsibilities in that area. That's why we are watching it very carefully. We have full staff, audits, financial people, Peat Marwick doing their analysis, etc., to make sure the Games are on time and on budget. We fully expect that to be met.
K. Jones: The Commonwealth Games Society, I believe, is a registered society. Is that correct, hon. minister?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Correct. It is under the Society Act.
K. Jones: Under the Society Act, I believe that all directors of societies are liable for any responsibilities that come as a result of any actions whatsoever on behalf of that society. Could the minister confirm this?
Hon. R. Blencoe: All the directors recognize their responsibilities.
K. Jones: Does Dr. Southern recognize his responsibilities in taking that role as board member?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Dr. Southern recognizes that he is representing the government of British Columbia. He represents our interests, and does it well.
K. Jones: The minister didn't answer the question; he skirted around it. The question is: does Dr. Southern recognize the liabilities that he has as a board member of the Commonwealth Games Society?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The member of the board to which you refer is Dr. Lee Southern, who has now joined me on my right. He is the executive director of sport in the province, and works within my ministry. He is a public servant. There are no liability questions. Like all the other members of the board he knows his responsibilities, and he works on behalf of the people of British Columbia. We as a government know our responsibilities, and so do the board of directors, to ensure there are no liabilities, that the Games are on time and on budget. And I can report to you they are, hon. member. Fundraising is virtually completed, the money is all there, we are on time and the facilities are just about completed. It's a remarkable achievement.
I hope the Liberal Party, rather than being critical of the millions of people who are going to watch or come.... British Columbians can be proud of the second-largest sporting event after the Olympics. I know their leader is very pleased with what is going on, and hopefully the rest of the Liberal Party will endorse what is being done. Incredible efforts have been put out by this board and the thousands of volunteers and people who are responsible. As minister responsible, it's one of the biggest challenges I have faced -- to ensure that these Games are delivered properly, that we are all proud as Canadians and British Columbians, and that we are doing it....
When the world turns on their televisions on August 18 and the Queen receives the baton, all the questions that are trying to find ways to disturb what is an incredible event will all be forgotten, because the world will be watching, and they will know that they are seeing a remarkable event here in Victoria, British Columbia. Indeed, South Africa will be back -- a remarkable achievement. And we're very proud of our achievement. The games are on time and they're on budget, well-audited and well-financed.
K. Jones: It's with great pleasure that I also have been out supporting and promoting the Commonwealth Games in Victoria, and I'm very happy to do so. But I also have a responsibility to the people of British Columbia and to the people of Victoria, Oak Bay, Saanich, Colwood and adjoining areas, who have contacted us and expressed a concern about certain aspects of the finances of the Commonwealth Games. You can give all the assurances you want, hon. minister. I hope that they're correct; I really do hope that all of those assurances are correct.
But the people of British Columbia also want to know: what if...? They want to know how it is going to be dealt with. They do not want another Montreal Olympics situation with a lot of extra expenses afterwards. They've already got an additional $800 added to their taxes in the Victoria area.
It's these additional factors that we wish to have addressed, hon. minister. In a situation where a board takes on responsibilities, where the funding is largely a federal-provincial responsibility, and where the people on that board were appointed by the federal, provincial and local governments.... What we're asking is: how can you hold those people responsible if there is some additional cost or liability due to some accident occurring or some major disaster that could come? You can't predict all of these, hon. minister. I know everybody working in the committee is hopeful that it will never occur. But the people want to know: what if it does occur? I'm asking you about the whole question of liability. Will the government take responsibility for any overruns and extra costs of the Commonwealth Games, even though you said no more money on overruns in the agreements you signed both federally and provincially? If there are additional liabilities, are you going to stick the board members, who you appointed to that board, with the cost, or are you actually going to spread that cost among the people of British Columbia and Canada?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, I wish your party could be positive about what's happening here. The Games are on time; they're on budget. Peat Marwick is the auditor and is a well-respected firm. They are in there; they do their quarterly and annual reports. They're about to report out. I understand that the society is preparing for a public reporting of where they're at and what's happening. The fundraising is virtually complete.
I want to assure you that the directors know their responsibilities, and they're proud of the work they're doing. They're proud of the millions of people who are going to be watching us on television. They're proud of the athletic endeavour that will be here, the tourism benefits and the jobs that have been created here, and the visibility we have achieved in terms of putting on one of the most remarkable sporting events in the world.
[12:30]
I want you to know that Canadians and British Columbians will have a successful Games on time and on budget. I give every assurance that there will be a
[ Page 11438 ]
full reporting of all the information that has been asked for and talked about. There is full reporting, and instead of being doom and gloom and predicting what-ifs, instead of the Liberal Party being so negative, let's join and be prepared to welcome the world. The world is coming here, and we're going to have a great summer in British Columbia. Hon. member, I just hope your party will be more positive in the future.
K. Jones: The statements the minister just made are totally misplaced. There has been no negativism from the Liberal Party. There has been nothing but support for the whole program, the Games. All we're doing is asking for accountability, and the people of British Columbia want accountability. They are fed up with the hiding of the finances of these Games. When public money is expended to the extent that it in these Commonwealth Games, there is no reason that the public should not have full access to and full disclosure of all the expenditures. There is no reason for any of it to be hidden. For the minister to claim that we are being negative is a total smokescreen, an attempt to try to divert from his responsibilities.
Now that we have Dr. Southern with us, I would like to go back to the question I asked originally: could the minister tell us at what point the responsibility for various venue facilities transfers from the Commonwealth Games to the local communities?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, I have discussed this with you publicly and privately, and you know that in terms of the contracts, it's a difficult issue. You are aware that third-party information and information regarding other companies that are successful or releasing good business plans, etc., is extremely difficult, and indeed is not advised. That issue has been before the freedom-of-information commissioner.
But I want to say, hon. member, that we are on time and on budget -- and maybe I can ask you a question. Tell me what specific information you require, other than detailed contracts that are private information and cannot be released in terms of the bidding process. Tell me what you don't have, and we'll ensure.... We have already said that the information will be provided, as is done by the Financial Information Act. At the end of the project, in December, there will be a full accounting. Peat Marwick is in there now. We are on time and on budget. The key to the Games is that we are ready, there are no mistakes, the facilities are built and the world leaders will be here to see what we can do in British Columbia -- instead of the negative Liberal Party, always complaining about this wonderful experience that British Columbians are going to have in August. We're on time, hon. member. We're on budget. We have auditors: Peat Marwick are there; we have our own auditors. There will be full information, hon. member. People are proud of what we're doing here. Get on board, hon. member, and join the 400-500 million people who will turn on their televisions on August 18 to see the great Commonwealth Games here in Victoria.
K. Jones: The minister sounds like he's trying to hide facts when he talks about cake and circuses. He's talking like the previous government, which would promote and run a special event to hide the real facts of what was going on in the economy of British Columbia. I really feel that his pompousness at this point is nothing but something from Louis XVI's time, when they had all those great balls and circuses to try to fool the people that they weren't starving.
Hon. R. Blencoe: You oppose the Games?
K. Jones: I certainly am not opposing the Games, but I want to see the Games accountable. The minister has not answered the question with regard to when the responsibility for and ownership of a facility are transferred to the local community. Let's take one facility, so you don't get confused with the question. Let's talk about the pool at Commonwealth Place. When does its ownership transfer to the municipality of Saanich?
Hon. R. Blencoe: As I answered earlier, the pool is currently under the municipality of Saanich, but there are contractual arrangements with the Commonwealth Games Society. Obviously, from August 18 to August 28, the Commonwealth Games Society has preferential use -- in other words, exclusive use -- for the Games and for millions of people to watch British Columbia and Victoria in the swimming.
K. Jones: Is the minister stating, then, that the municipality of Saanich has full responsibility for any of the activities and whatever goes on at the Commonwealth Games pool? Has the ownership of the facility been transferred to the municipality of Saanich, or is that still in the hands of the Commonwealth Games Society and will there be no actual transfer of the ownership title until after the Games?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The municipality of Saanich has always owned the facility. The society has a contractual arrangement for the use of the pool during the key period. I hope, hon. member, you'll be more positive when the world will watch here in Victoria, British Columbia, the finest set of Games ever held in the Commonwealth.
The Chair: Before I recognize the member, I may be wrong, but I think I've heard the minister give the answer three times, hon. member.
K. Jones: If you've heard the answer to the question, could you please let me know what it is? I'm still looking for it. The question is really a question of answering the question, and that's the question of who takes responsibility for that facility. For instance, if a liability comes as a result of the death that occurred in that pool, is that liability going to go to the Commonwealth Games, or is it going to go to the municipality of Saanich?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, I'm not going to touch the inquest issue.
I was saying, and I will put on the record, that the municipalities are the owners, managers and operators of the facility. They always have been. We, the federal government and the municipalities provided construction funds. The contract arrangement with the society -- which I'm saying, I think, for the sixth time -- is for the period of the 18th to the 28th. They have preferential and obviously exclusive use of the facility for the Games.
K. Jones: Could the minister tell us if there is going to be a beer garden adjoining the lawn-bowling facilities at the velodrome site?
Hon. R. Blencoe: I don't have specific details, but I know there will be refreshments of various sorts at all venues.
[ Page 11439 ]
Whether there is a beer garden there, I have no idea. I will try to find out for you.
K. Jones: The minister is probably aware that there is an official wine sponsor for the Commonwealth Games. Could the minister tell us if there is an official beer sponsor of the Commonwealth Games, and is it an Australian company?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Unless Labatt has suddenly shifted its corporate responsibility, Labatt is the beer supplier and sponsor.
K. Jones: Okay, very good. Could the minister tell us whether Labatt is providing the beer for the beer garden gratis to the Commonwealth Games as a fundraiser, or whether it is meant as a billed item and only the profits would be to the Games?
Hon. R. Blencoe: Labatt, as you know, is the official supplier or beer sponsor. We have a wine sponsor or supplier and a beer sponsor. We have Calona Wines for wine, Labatt for the beer -- the suds -- and Corby Distilleries for the hard liquor.
All opportunities were given to all British Columbia and Canadian suppliers to participate. These companies won the day. Labatt's sponsorship, I recall, is worth $1.2 million or in that area -- a million dollars. It's in cash and in kind, to some degree. Labatt has on occasion.... For instance, at the volunteer recognition bit out at Sidney -- last summer, I think -- when we recognized the thousands of volunteers, I believe they did supply refreshment to the volunteers.
In terms of the beer garden to which you refer, hon. member, I'm not even sure there is a beer garden, so I can't answer the question. But Labatt is the official supplier of beer. There's a contractual arrangement; I don't have the details of that contract. They have been brought on, and it's been very successful -- a great Canadian company, hon. member.
K. Jones: Could the minister also -- since he's on to the beverages -- tell us who the official sponsor of the bottled water supply is?
Hon. R. Blencoe: The member made considerable issue with that, but as usual got his facts wrong because he or his research department was not aware of the situation. I will reiterate it for the public so they can know the full story.
The Commonwealth Games Society put out a request; they let it be known that they obviously wanted bottled water for the athletes -- because athletes need a particular type of water; that's my understanding -- and for those who are going to be at venues and wish to drink water. It was well known to all British Columbia and Canadian companies that that supplier contract was available. All opportunities were open to all Canadian or British Columbia companies to participate and bid -- and what the hon. member failed to tell the people of this province when he went public on this issue is that no one did bid. The only company that would participate was Evian Waters of France Inc. If they didn't come to the table to say they wanted to participate, how could we draw upon a Canadian or British Columbia supplier? He failed to supply the public with that information, and quite frankly, he has provided a great disservice to the public of this province in terms of not sharing the correct information.
Evian came to the table with $200,000 in cash and in service, and as a result, we -- the taxpayers of this province -- are saving thousands of dollars where otherwise we would have had to buy that information. That was part of the deal. If British Columbians don't want to play, they complain to you; but if they don't put a bid in.... I don't know, maybe the Liberals have a solution to that. Maybe now the hon. member can confirm to the public the disservice he did to the people of this province by delivering incorrect information.
[12:45]
K. Jones: I have to assure the public and the minister that we gave absolutely correct information. People who would have been potential bidders have told us that they had absolutely no knowledge of the opportunity to bid on it, and therefore they were not able to get together. There was no attempt to follow the Purchasing Commission guidelines, which the Commonwealth Games Society claims they utilize in their purchasing process when determining how to let contracts and to make sure British Columbia producers and suppliers are making the primary tenders on these various bids the government is paying good money for. They should have the best opportunities for such worldwide advertising and for taking advantage of selling their product. It's very important, hon. minister, that there be an open public tendering process that everyone is aware of. That means contacting, if necessary, the various local organizations. They are well known. You can pick up a telephone directory or go to the local corner store to find out who supplies bottled water in British Columbia. It wouldn't have been very hard to do that. They did not have an opportunity, hon. minister. It was literally a situation of a very large foreign national company buying the advertising space for this world advertising program, utilizing Victoria's Commonwealth Games, to the disadvantage of British Columbia producers.
The Chair: Was that a question or a statement?
K. Jones: That was a statement, hon. Chair.
The Chair: Do you have a question that you're going to add on to the end of it?
K. Jones: Yes. With regard to B.C. wines. What is the foreign content of the wines that are going to be provided as the official wines of the Commonwealth Games?
Hon. R. Blencoe: While staff are finding the answer to that very interesting question, I want to let it be known again that not only was the member wrong in terms of what happened with regard to Evian Waters, but he is also clearly wrong this morning in terms of the tender process. You're wrong, wrong, wrong, and you should share the correct information with the citizens. Let me tell you about the tendering process, hon. member. Hopefully you will apologize and correct....
The Chair: Minister, through the Chair.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Through the Chair, the tendering process was a detailed written policy based on the guidelines of the B.C. Purchasing Commission. It was approved by Mr. Ted Hughes, who reviewed it; by Mr. Gerry Berger, who was the previous chair of procurement for the entire federal government; and by the provincial government. Two key management secondments from the Purchasing Commission and BCBC were involved and looked at the process. Hon. member, it's well known that the system works well. You should report the real facts, rather than distorting what is really happening.
[ Page 11440 ]
K. Jones: What the minister said is that the water in B.C. is not good enough. The people who supply the best water in the world are not good enough for the Commonwealth Games, and we're going to go with a foreign water supply that tastes horrible. This is the image the Commonwealth Games in Victoria are going to put in the minds of those people who taste that water, which they are going to take back throughout the world. Instead of getting that lovely, refreshing, very clear, clean water that British Columbia produces, they're getting that stale type of water that comes out of Evian.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Let me just tell you how it works. If you don't buy a lottery ticket, you don't stand a chance of winning the lottery. If you don't bid for a contract, you don't stand a chance of getting the contract. It's simple, hon. member. I've tried to explain it to you. No company from British Columbia or Canada bid on the contract.
Ninety-seven percent of all our expenditure contracts have gone to Canadians and British Columbians. Out of $81 million in expenditure contracts, the society and the government have awarded in excess of $78 million to companies in Canada and British Columbia. It's a fantastic, phenomenal rate of achievement. And of that $3 million in contracts that have gone outside British Columbia or Canada, nearly 30 percent have Canadian or British Columbia content.
You should tell the people of British Columbia what really happened, hon. member. Stop telling -- no, I won't say it. Stop distorting the truth. People expect more from their opposition. It's time the Liberal Party was brought to terms. You're not telling what it is really happening. Ninety-seven percent of the contracts went to British Columbians and Canadians. Evian Water.... We didn't have a bidder. If you don't buy a ticket, if you don't sign on for a contract, how can you expect to win, hon. member? Tell the truth, hon. member, about what's happening with the Commonwealth Games Society.
K. Jones: The minister, I think, was very close to impugning my integrity by accusing me of lying, hon. Chair, and I won't accept that. I think the minister was totally off base, and I wish to have him apologize for that.
The Chair: Minister, a little instruction. I didn't hear this impugnment, but I am sure the minister had no intention of doing that in his remarks. I'm sure the minister would certainly be prepared to indicate that, if he wished.
Hon. R. Blencoe: I'm trying to point out the fact that I'm saying to the opposition that I would like them to give the correct information. Of course, I do not intend any suggestion of impugning the member's character.
K. Jones: I accept the apology.
The question of policy with regard to purchasing is one the minister is not that familiar with, as we found previously. He was not aware of the general management operating policies with regard to the Purchasing Commission. Therefore I can understand why he would not be familiar with the fact that there is a section called "Vendor Marketing and Information -- Market Discovery," which states:
"Enhancing the opportunities for B.C. suppliers by providing information on product and service needs of all B.C. public bodies. This includes participating in corporate trade shows, services provided from the British Columbia Enterprise Centre and published material."
Secondly, on "Regional Supplier Development":
"Working directly with local and regional public bodies, suppliers and business associations to identify and implement new opportunities to supply goods and services to the B.C. public sector."
The people in the water industry had no direct contact, and no attempt was made for them to be coordinated in order to become the supplier of bottled water. I think it's shameful that we should allow the substandard water supply from Evian in relation to the high-quality water supply in British Columbia.
Interjection.
K. Jones: In comparison, it is substandard.
There is good-quality water here in British Columbia. Anything we have had brought in with regard to this particular product certainly doesn't meet the standards we have in British Columbia as far as the great quality of our product is concerned. If the minister and the Commonwealth Games had utilized what they claimed they were utilizing -- the policies of the Purchasing Commission -- as their guideline, then there would not have been this problem, and we would have had a great advertising opportunity for the water industry in British Columbia.
That also goes for the tenting industry in British Columbia, the suppliers of the best tents in the whole world. Yet they couldn't get a contract with the Commonwealth Games. That goes for grandstands that could have been supplied by a Canadian rather than an American producer. Although the minister and the Commonwealth Games Society claim that 95 percent of the contracts went to British Columbia or Canadian suppliers, some major ones stick out like a sore thumb. Hon. minister, I wonder why those ever occurred. Where was the minister when those decisions were being made?
The Chair: I'd caution both the minister and the member that we're getting close to the hour of adjournment. Please keep it brief.
Hon. R. Blencoe: Hon. member, when you are running a major operation with millions of dollars of contracts, and 96 percent of them are Canadian or British Columbia, I think that's a remarkable occurrence. The hon. member should be aware that one of the contractors, who I believe came to you complaining that they weren't successful, complained about an American firm getting a tent contract. Hon. member, you complained vociferously that that American firm shouldn't have got the contract. When I reminded you and let you know that the British Columbia company -- a great company -- got a huge contract in the United States for the World Cup, then I asked you: should that be cancelled? You had no answer, hon. member. You can't play both ends. Sometimes these things happen. Sometimes the British Columbia or Canadian contractors can't do the supply; sometimes the costs, the fabric or the specifications aren't right.
Again, hon. member, I think it's time you and your party started to tell exactly what is happening on so many issues in this province. There is an example where you went to bat for a Canadian tent manufacturer, and then we discovered it had got a huge contract south of the line. You never said they should cancel that.
K. Jones: I'm glad the minister brought that issue up. I did answer his statement in response to me questioning about that. I told him that it was as a result of that contract that a lower-bid opportunity was actually given to the Commonwealth Games -- lower than the American supplier,
[ Page 11441 ]
who had the advantage of only having to pay one-sixth of the GST and no tariff for his product coming into Canada. That cost the Commonwealth Games $40,000 extra, I believe, because the Commonwealth Games ultimately had to pay that. The whole contract could have been provided at less than the cost that actually appears today as a result of the decision to go to the American firm rather than the Canadian supplier. The Canadian supplier is fully capable and ready to supply all of the tenting required for the Commonwealth Games. I think the Commonwealth Games Society's decision must have been a mistake.
Since the minister was not able to give us the definitive figures for the wine, I would like to indicate my understanding that the red wine has over 60 percent of its content coming from Chile, and the white wine has 40 percent or more coming from Australia. Unfortunately, these are not the cottage wines that British Columbia is so famous for, which are 100 percent pure wines and are given a recognized quality standard. But these are the ones provided by the major supplier of wine from British Columbia. Certainly it is recognized that there may not be a large stock of these high-quality, 100 percent wines that are made here in British Columbia. But there certainly should have been a showcase for them in the Commonwealth Games, even if it was a joint presentation between the major suppliers who blend their wines and the cottage wineries of British Columbia. Those outstanding quality wines should have been showcased in this world opportunity to advertise their product. I would therefore urge the minister to prevail upon the Commonwealth Games Society to reconsider its official recognition of one supplier and bring examples of the other products of British Columbia into their venues, so there is a true indication of quality British Columbia wines.
I'd also like to ask the minister why he stood on the back burner and continued to allow the Commonwealth Games to withhold direct financial funding knowledge from British Columbians. Hiding behind the skirts of the Society Act, stating that only after the fact will the people know what the actual costs are, claiming that everything's fine and rosy and on time and within budget is a sham. It's not giving the public the opportunity to see the true facts. If there is nothing to hide, there should be nothing to prevent opening the books and letting the public and the press look at them. What is there to hide, hon. minister? Why should there be any limitation on disclosing major expenditures of taxpayers' money when there is such an opportunity...?
The Chair: Could you wind your question down, hon. member? We're getting past the hour of adjournment. I want to give you all the latitude in the world, but it's taking time.
K. Jones: I will just ask the minister to please respond to that question. Is there something to be hidden with regard to the finances of the Commonwealth Games?
The Chair: The minister briefly replies.
[1:00]
Hon. R. Blencoe: Very briefly, hon. Chair.
I covered that extensively. There is nothing to hide, hon. member. Only in this opposition's mind is there something to hide. There is full accountability. Peat Marwick are the auditors. They report quarterly. All information is available. All information on the expenditures, with details, will be available according to the Financial Information Act and other reporting mechanisms. I can assure you, hon. member, that the Games are on time, and they are on budget. That's the key criterion, and I report that today.
Seeing the time, I move we rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The House resumed; the Speaker in the Chair.
Committee of Supply B, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's been a long week, and I trust that we'll all leave here in suitable spirit and enjoy our weekend.
Hon. J. MacPhail moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
The House adjourned at 1:02 p.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]