1995 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 35th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
(Hansard)
FRIDAY, JUNE 9, 1995
Morning Sitting
Volume 20, Number 24
[ Page 15293 ]
The House met at 10:03 a.m.
Prayers.
Hon. E. Cull: It's my pleasure to introduce to the House today 25 grade 4 students from Monterey Elementary School, accompanied by their teacher Mr. Barman, and also including my son David Wickstrom. I just want to thank your staff, Mr. Speaker, and you personally for the courtesy you've shown to this class in meeting with them earlier today. Would all members please make them very welcome.
M. de Jong: I'm not certain they're in the gallery yet, but arriving today are a number of grades 2 and 4 students from John MacLure Elementary from the Abbotsford School District in my riding. They are attending with their teachers, Mrs. Maureen Ewert and Marian Rosse. I should say, hon. Speaker, that I had the pleasure of spending an hour in their classroom last week. They're exceptionally informed about what goes on here in Victoria and are now arriving to see it for themselves firsthand, and I hope members will make them welcome.
PARTNERSHIPS FOR WORKPLACE-BASED TRAINING
G. Brewin: This morning I'd like to talk about workplace activities and partnerships in workplace training. An investment in people is perhaps the most long-lasting investment that a government can make. It is an investment that produces the highest return. Earlier this month, Premier Mike Harcourt released this government's plan for keeping B.C. competitive in the twenty-first century, attracting new business and jobs and ensuring a strong economy that works for all British Columbians.
Through Skills Now, part of the investing in our future, the provincial government is focusing on upgrading the skills of workers and providing opportunities for those on income assistance to gain the skills they need to get and keep a job. The Ministry of Skills, Training and Labour has implemented several programs designed to help those on income assistance make the move into the workforce. The counselling assessment and referral program will allow income assistance recipients to be active participants in the development and achievement of training goals they have set through an individual skills plan. Workplace-based training is a program that will provide up to $10,000 to employers for every income assistance recipient they employ and train. The needs of those with disabilities who are on income assistance are being addressed through the vocational rehabilitation services branch of the ministry to enable them to enhance their training and employment opportunities. Partnerships are being established with business training centres and chambers of commerce to assist those on welfare in making the transition from income assistance to job security. Last year 13,000 income assistance recipients participated in training and employability programs; this year we anticipate that a further 42,000 people will benefit from our Skills Now initiative.
This morning I would like to describe a couple of programs that are happening within the Victoria area. This very morning, I was at a breakfast meeting in Victoria, where another Skills Now initiative was officially launched. This particular Skills Now program is providing the Greater Victoria School District with over $700,000 to provide various training programs in local schools. The breakfast was hosted by the entrepreneur program. This program is a fine example of our government working in partnership with the private sector -- in this case, the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce. Its purpose is to enhance educational and real-world experience for students. It was a very stark and a very positive contrast to the kinds of partnerships we have seen in the past, which the Liberals and the Reform Party have tried to talk about. We saw some young people -- as young as ten years old and as old as 18 -- from two schools in the greater Victoria area. They were very excited by the program they were participating in, and they were doing very well at it. It's a very important program in our community.
Another program the chamber of commerce is involved in is called Community Works. In this case, they are going to find jobs and place in these jobs 25 people who are now on income assistance. The long-term goal of the project is, of course, for these 25 people to maintain steady employment. Again, these are real partnerships, enjoined to get people into training and get them employment experience, community contacts and real jobs for their future -- and, indeed, for the future of British Columbia. I have been particularly impressed by the response and imagination of the communities -- not just in Victoria, of course, but across the province -- as they enter into these partnerships with the Skills Now program and the plan initiative.
Here in Victoria there's one that particularly excites me, and I want to share it with you. It has an enormous amount of significance to the people involved. There are two parts to this program. It's officially called the Downtown Women's Project, and it's sponsored by the Greater Victoria Women's Shelter Society. First they were responding to needs. We have needed a women's emergency shelter in Victoria for a long time. Safe places for homeless and at-risk women are very few and far between in this community. It has been determined that more than 250 single women on social assistance are living in the downtown core, one-third of whom are native. Many are alone, have no family, have few friends and are poor. Some have addictions or mental illnesses and have little sense of community or neighbourhood. They are at risk, and they are not comfortable in the male-dominated shelters like Streetlink, Gateway, Swift House or the soup kitchens. How they manage is a wonder to us all.
While shelter is a basic need, it is also very clear how equally important are independence, self-reliance, getting off social assistance, being productive and feeling that sense of confidence that comes from accomplishment. Onto the scene then came a program from Skills Now called Workplace-based Construction Training for Women. The brainchild of Janet Rabinovitch, the downtown project combines these two ideas and these two forces. So as we speak today, 20 women are renovating a former bed-and-breakfast at the corner of Courtney and Blanshard -- and as we drive up Blanshard many of us will see it on the right-hand side -- for a 15-bed, 24-hour emergency and resource centre. These 20 women, all on income assistance, have been through a lot in their early lives; and then in the last four months have been working in a
[ Page 15294 ]
classroom instruction setting, learning math, carpentry, life skills -- and indeed some exercise, for to carry wallboard around is very hard work.
Let me tell you a little bit about Mary. Actually, some of you will have seen Mary. She is one of the stars of the current Skills Now TV series. She's the one in the carpenter's apron. She is a real person. She has two children, is on income assistance and is now acquiring a marketable skill as a construction worker as a result of this program. But she's also got an entirely fresh outlook on life. She's learned -- and struggled to learn -- a new skill. She's doing well, she feels good, and she looks good -- for you can't have missed that sense of sparkle and energy that comes through in that TV ad. She's not necessarily set for life, but what a break she's had, and what an experience she has had!
We as decision-makers benefit from Mary's experience. Where we listen to her needs, we respond and develop programs; she participates, she learns. She's off on her journey with some real tools, and then we listen to yet another Elizabeth or Joan or Mary.
The Speaker: Hon. member, your time has expired.
The member for Richmond East responds.
L. Reid: I'm pleased to enter into this debate with the member for Victoria-Beacon Hill. I truly believe that this is about people; it's whether or not we can preserve and enhance programs in our system that look at and respect personal dignity and esteem.
Certainly politics, whether or not government acts as a catalyst for that type of programming, has to be considered in terms of defining the role of government. I can assure this member that government is not the economic driver. It certainly can act as the catalyst, but it is small business that we must honour in this exercise. The research is clear: typically it is small business that acts as the greatest employer for new hires, new people coming into the system.
The member talked about partnerships and alliances, and I stand strongly in support of those. Indeed, the minister and I were in debate yesterday evening on a program which has basically been merged very, very recently with Avcorp Industries, which is a firm in my riding. They are looking at working with government, business, the community and students to form a useful partnership, a meaningful partnership. It's not about just moving students through these programs; it is about ensuring that it results in some kind of reasonable employment once the program has concluded and, hopefully, some meaningful permanent employment as we move through the system.
As Liberals, we believe that the focus must be on the student. We firmly believe that we need to ensure that students have a range of choices open to them. No matter what program they choose, they will be supported. It's very, very important, we believe, to recognize that students have to choose programs that are meaningful for them. We truly understand that any job of the future will demand excellence in communication and technological skills. That is important, and that will need to permeate every single program that government puts in place and, hopefully, continues to align very, very carefully with business.
There is currently a mismatch, as this member knows, between the skills set borne or shared by a number of individuals and employer expectation. If there are ways to merge those issues more closely together, certainly we welcome that. Again, the minister and I in debate yesterday evening talked about evaluation. It has to be more for the student than just completion of the program; it has to result in something meaningful for them. I trust that the result will be meaningful employment.
What we are asking for, as Liberals, is some kind of accountability around new programs. We believe that government is granted an incredible privilege of expending other people's dollars -- of expending the taxpayers' dollars -- and must report out in a meaningful way on that type of expenditure.
[10:15]
I think there are some good things happening. I think we need more information around what happens next. All across this country, no matter if it's British Columbia or Newfoundland, and in many countries around the world, the current thinking is to look at expanding programs so that the choice is there.
We have to look at the 80 percent of students today who currently do not seek formal post-secondary education. We need to ensure that we look at 100 percent of those individuals who are interested in post-secondary training or a placement of some description. I come back again to the point about choice, because it is fundamental to this exercise that students have the ability to make some choices, and it is fundamental to respect what it is that's important to them. I think we are on the right track and that there are some good things happening, but it has to be evaluated and measured. There needs to be some reporting out in terms of where we wish to go.
I'm a strong supporter of the public school system. I have been a teacher and a school administrator, and I truly support access to public education. This is not about diminishing that in any way. This is about adding some choices for students who are currently in the system. As Liberals, we fundamentally support choice, so we are looking at revamping the system to the extent that it needs to be expanded. It needs to provide more choices today. I don't take issue with that, and I frankly believe that my hon. colleague from Victoria-Beacon Hill will find some common ground around my remarks this morning, because it is an apolitical issue, if you will.
Health care and education in this province need to be there and need to be ongoing, and they need to be supported by all parties. I will make the statement that I don't believe anybody comes to public life to tear any of those things down. Regardless of the party, we believe that you need those systems in place and that we must respect the systems we have in place. That is the crux of today's debate. It is important that we see ourselves in partnership and see some formal alliances forming. We certainly have that expectation of government and of small business. We ask them to come together and build something, and I trust that together we can build something truly fine in British Columbia.
G. Brewin: I thank very much my hon. colleague from Richmond for her remarks. I am delighted with the sense that I get from her that we will, in fact, be working together to build the partnerships that need to be built, but I fear some dark clouds on the horizon. They seem to be looming large,
[ Page 15295 ]
and closer and closer, and we may see and hear some of them at noon today.
There are several longstanding community organizations in my community that have been doing local training to provide that opportunity for young people and folks coming back into the workforce in order that they get the kind of training they need to move into the business sector or whatever sector they choose for this work.
I don't know; something has gone a little awry here. The Coastal Community Services Society, which has been doing work in this committee for years, and Bridges employability projects and Work Streams are three strong groups doing a lot of very, very effective work, but somehow they're going to have trouble surviving. It seems that some money and funding that would help them survive and support the community by doing what it wants to do.... They don't have any more money; their money is running out. Where is their money coming from? The federal government. I would hope and trust that my colleague -- and I respect and endorse her enthusiasm, energy, drive and commitment -- will join us in saying to the federal government: "You can't do this. You have to be responsible and involved in this process, and these groups on the ground are doing that job. Let's support them in doing it."
As I close, I want to quote from some of the women in the project I mentioned earlier, who were participants in this. One said: "I feel very lucky and grateful to be part of this project, as it is a lot more than just banging nails and math." Another said:
"I am thrilled, happy, proud and excited. Instructors make you feel okay; they don't make you feel inferior. I am not alone in feeling afraid and anxious. I feel like a new woman with a purpose in her life. I liked getting up in the morning and knowing that I had somewhere to go, something to do, and I am learning, and I'm on a good track. I know I made the right decision, and I can't wait to get started in the project. I can't wait to get moving into the next work that I'm doing."
I think this testimony, the image that we saw on television of Mary succeeding, and the knowledge in our hearts that this works confirm for me that investing in people is a wise and productive use of our tax dollars.
The Speaker: Just before recognizing the next private member's statement, I would remind members that the purpose of private member's statements is to bring forward information and issues of concern. This should be done on a non-partisan basis as much as possible in order to distinguish the statements from normal debate. You should not be encouraged to use inflammatory or confrontational issues that would change the purpose of private members' statements.
EXPLORATION
D. Jarvis: I rise to make a private member's statement on exploration, Mr. Speaker, and it will probably be a prime example of a non-political statement.
One may think that I'm going to be talking about searching out new rivers and mountains, and that would be partially right. However, in this instance I am referring specifically to the mining industry. As you know, Mr. Speaker, British Columbia was originally founded on a resource exploration basis. Today we are still a resource-based province, regardless of what some people feel. The fact that this province's economy is based on resources makes mining and mineral exploration important factors.
My personal thoughts are that there are several areas over the years where governments have failed to stimulate the economy or have enacted legislation which has, in fact, deterred investment in mineral exploration in British Columbia. I base my comments on the belief that without a strong and aggressive mineral exploration industry in British Columbia, the mining industry will become a fifth-rate economic activity.
At the present time, the mining industry in this province is considered the number two resource activity. Worker for worker, acre for acre of land utilized, mining is the best dollar-for-dollar resource producer in this province, far outstripping forestry and agriculture on a proportional basis. From the discovery to the production of a mineral deposit, the average lead time can run up to eight to ten years, and this is always based on the premise that the prices of metals are high enough to give an adequate return to the investment and that exploration funds are available.
To produce an operable mine requires patience and a great deal of perseverance by industry and investors alike. In addition, government policies must allow a degree of certainty in order for mining to continue. During difficult economic times, the mining industry itself and governments alike tend to create cutbacks in exploration as their first cost-saving measures. Accordingly, the future prosperity and recovery of this industry is always impaired in that instance. Major companies that cut exploration staff from their programs adversely affect recovery. They also waste years and years of valuable exploration data, as well as exploration professionals who are forced to seek employment in other areas of Canada and, in fact, in other countries when they are laid off.
Many people simply do not realize the extent to which exploration must go to produce a successful mine, for example. Mineral discovery or exploration is a tenuous business and, as I have said, requires patience and perseverance. A deposit that is discovered has to be tested. The odds of the deposit having a high enough mineral content to become a productive mine are 3,000 to 1. To that, with the economic ratio of viability, the odds actually go up to 10,000 to 1. We must bear in mind that certain areas of British Columbia are less favourable than others for economically locating coal and mineral deposits.
So exploration is a prime aspect of the mining industry. When mineral prices increase and new exploration techniques develop, new geological data always emerge. Interest in previous discoveries, kindled with a take-another-look attitude, and much of the potential mineral resources of this province would be written off today without new exploration.
Most of our current discoveries have been made by independent prospectors. They have been aided by the Geological Survey of Canada and the provincial geological surveys department. They have developed geological maps of this province, indicating favourable areas for the prospectors. The funding of these two agencies of government has been repaid over and over and over again, through the benefits derived by the discoveries made through exploration based on their information.
Mineral exploration in this province has been decreasing over the last decade, unfortunately. Although recently the
[ Page 15296 ]
investment in exploration has levelled off to a certain degree, it actually showed a slight increase this year, fortunately. Most of this increase can be attributed to exploration work on older projects. But very little can be credited to the independent grass-roots prosector. This grass-roots exploration is what is needed to discover new deposits -- to increase exploration activity in British Columbia.
It is the job of government to encourage such basic exploration, to bring confidence to a system that has flourished in the past and that can again flourish in the future. It's up to government to ensure the security of tenure, to simplify the regulatory regime and to provide sufficient funding for geological surveys.
This attitude will attract venture capital for exploration, as there needs to be confidence that exploration conducted will not be precluded from development. It is obvious that the resource industry of mining cannot continue to be a viable economic resource contributor to this province without a dedicated and aggressive program of exploration.
I note that I still have a little bit of time, Mr. Speaker, so I would say that education of the public, government, agencies and elected officials is needed to increase awareness of the importance of minerals in our daily lives and that mining is an essential industry. Young people should be encouraged to enter this industry. They must be made aware that there are environmental achievements along with worldwide technical discoveries that will come from this industry and have come from this industry in British Columbia in the past and have been exported throughout the world. This all starts from exploration -- a prospector out there looking for that elusive mineral that will one day become an ore body and develop into an economical mine.
E. Conroy: I'm very pleased to respond to the hon. member's comments and have the opportunity to set the record straight on our government's strong commitment to mining and exploration in British Columbia. The member's statement, happily, permits me to extend by several minutes my own discussion of this government's support of a competitive mining industry for the province and the people of British Columbia.
To be competitive, our mining industry must not only be profitable but also be sustainable. We are committed to working cooperatively and collaboratively with the mining industry in order to ensure its long-term prosperity for both mining companies and workers. A good example of this commitment comes from my own riding, Rossland-Trail, where this government was able to work with Cominco to develop two agreements which have saved 2,600 jobs in Trail and Kimberley, with the potential to create hundreds more. I will talk at greater length about these agreements in my statement later this morning.
For now, however, I would like to highlight several important initiatives undertaken by this government to promote exploration and foster a healthy mining industry. The member may want to recall that through Explore B.C., the exploration and mining industry received $2.5 million this year from our government for programs to stimulate mineral exploration in B.C. In addition, in the budgetary process last year our government provided a total of $100 million in key programs and tax measures -- a clear demonstration of our commitment to revitalizing and maintaining a healthy mining industry.
[10:30]
This commitment is equally evident in our government's establishment of the B.C. Advisory Council on Mining. On June 2, the advisory council presented its vision of the mining industry, a vision of a socially, economically and environmentally sustainable, accountable and prosperous mining industry in British Columbia underpinned by political and community support. This corresponds to our government's vision, a commitment which we have demonstrated in our policy decisions and programs.
But I wonder if the people of B.C. should not be asking a question about the very different vision held by the party of the member opposite. Let's try mining the truth for a change. The member opposite, in particular, is notorious for his enthusiasm to "mine the hell out of the Tatshenshini." So that leads me to ask: just what parks would the member and the Liberal Party mine? Does their vision of getting rid of entire ministries involve the slashing of the Ministry of Environment and rolling it into a ministry of resources? Now that his party's policy conference has been cancelled, just when will the people of B.C. learn where those members opposite stand on these critical issues?
This is coming from a party that doesn't even have a policy on the Clayoquot decision yet, and from an opposition that has learned its mining from watching old movies on the Klondike. It's the mentality that wants to get out there with hydraulic hoses and blow away the gravel because "there's gold in them thar hills." I challenge the member opposite to come up with his party's policies and to tell us exactly what they would do. The Klondike mentality of the opposition has no place in the future of B.C. I challenge the member opposite to tell the people of B.C. here and now what will you and your party do.
D. Jarvis: I thank the member for Columbia River-Revelstoke for his comments. Before I get into the remainder of my speech, Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention two facts. First, we certainly have heard some comments that are non-partisan by the member, and I say that facetiously. Second, I believe those non-partisan comments probably were a result of the fact that the members in the gallery had fallen asleep.
Nevertheless, exploration is an integral part of the mining industry of the province, regardless of what party or what society you belong to. Without exploration, you will see severe peaks and valleys in the revenues of this province if mining isn't continued. Millions of dollars which could be generated by this vital industry will be funnelled off into other jurisdictions if we do not entertain a good exploration policy.
Revenue must be obtained in order to maintain our core services of education, health and social services, and revenue must be obtained through an economic activity. To try and tax our way to prosperity will only end up in disaster. We live in the best of all worlds in British Columbia. We have a growing super-information highway and technology backed by resources. This has been going on for over 200 years in this province. We know that mining resource extraction is not always bad. It is an essential part of our society; as such, it needs to be performed in a consistent and responsible manner. The economic and social value that mining brings to this province can be measured in billions of dollars annually. As it is the number two resource industry, we still have significant potential to expand, and this will increase employment and
[ Page 15297 ]
generate higher levels of economic growth and social prosperity in this province. We know that mining resource extraction, as I said, is not always bad. People seem to jump on the bandwagon through the environmental wing and feel that it is a bad industry, but it's not bad industry. We have had it in this province since well before Confederation.
To conclude, I want to say that exploration for minerals is a fundamental necessity for the continued growth of this country. I urge all the governments to respect and assist this industry, which has served this province, as I said before, since before Confederation.
The Speaker: The member for Richmond-Steveston rises on what matter?
A. Warnke: Hon. Speaker, just before we resume the private members' statements this morning, I am just wondering if you could again caution members as to the nature of the private members' statements and that they are indeed intended to be private in nature. I'm sure the government members will have plenty of opportunity, of course, to examine and criticize official opposition policies, but the nature of the discussions this morning are clearly intended to be.... This is not the proper forum for conducting partisan statements.
The Speaker: Thank you, hon. member. I'm sure all hon. members will appreciate the importance of the statement by the member, and I would ask members to apprise themselves of the appropriate standing orders with respect to guidelines for private members' statements.
FOSTERING A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR A STRONG MINING INDUSTRY
E. Conroy: I rise in the House today to talk about how government can work with industry to ensure that B.C. has a profitable, sustainable and competitive mining industry. Governments across Canada are dealing with a dramatic transformation of the world economy, and these changes clearly impact on our mining industry. The reality today is that as capital has gained freer reign -- able to move around the globe at will -- the sovereignty of governments of all political stripes has been reduced.
The question becomes: what is the role of government in this global economy, and how does it affect our mining industry? Our government believes its role is to ensure that we build a strong foundation for jobs and protect the interests of working people. A changing global economy means that we have to be competitive. The issue for government is how we choose to compete and with whom. It's in answering this question that the difference between governments of different political stripes becomes clear.
There are some governments and would-be governments that suggest that in order to succeed in the global economy, B.C. should compete only with the least developed countries. According to this vision, they thus argue that we can't afford our labour laws and provide security to working people. They say that we can't afford decent minimum wage, we can't afford environmental standards, we certainly can't afford to protect our wilderness and we can't afford to protect medicare. The irony is that the things this vision says we can't afford are the very advantages that give B.C. our new competitive edge, attract investors and create jobs.
Our government rejects this approach of what you could call a race to the bottom. Instead, we choose to compete among the world's best economies by investing in our strengths and increasing productivity and efficiency, ensuring good family-supporting jobs. We are committed to working in partnership with business, labour and others so that B.C. can match the efforts of the highly skilled, highly productive and high-growth economies of western Europe and Japan.
We know that B.C.'s competitive advantages are found in our people, in our infrastructure and in our natural resources, including our richness in minerals. We know that business comes to us because of our skilled labour and also because of our resource wealth. The government has a real role to ensure that the resources are sustained and renewed so that they can serve future generations as well as our own. A healthy, sustainable mining industry can definitely benefit B.C.
In a meeting of all Energy ministers across Canada last year, there was a solid agreement that in order to survive and prosper, the Canadian mining industry must achieve environmentally responsible mining explorations, developments and operations. Our government wants to help industry to meet these goals; we want our mining industry to compete with developed economies.
I want to highlight some of the initiatives this government has taken to help foster this competitive mining industry. As I mentioned briefly, through Explore B.C. our government has provided $2.5 million in exploration to the mining industry to stimulate the exploration in this province. The way the Explore B.C. program works is that it provides up to one-third of the eligible exploration costs to all mining companies, exploration companies and individual, in order to encourage increased exploration in B.C.
There are three programs currently available to industry. The grass-roots mineral incentive program is a new component of this year that provides grants to cover eligible exploration expenses for reconnaissance-style exploration. The other two programs are the mineral exploration incentive program and the accelerated mining exploration program. The mineral exploration program provides grants to cover exploration expenses on properties that have been identified as having economic potential. The accelerated mining program provides assistance in operating mines to increase their ore reserves and extend mine life. Last year, $3.5 million was distributed to the mining industry under Explore B.C., and exploration investments rebounded from less than $70 million to $100 million.
In addition to Explore B.C., the government is working with industry through prospectors' assistance, tax incentives, mineral development incentives and industrial mineral promotion. It is clear that through such programs, our government is helping the mining industry remain competitive in a global economy. In my own constituency of Rossland-Trail, we of course have a solid example of government-industry collaboration and the kinds of benefits this partnership has for communities and workers.
I am referring to the agreements with Cominco Ltd., which have protected the jobs of 26,000 Cominco employees in the Kootenays. The first agreement involved Cominco constructing a new $145 million state-of-the-art smelter in Trail and a $25 million expansion to the company's zinc production. The second agreement provided for the province to acquire rights to install new power generation facilities at two
[ Page 15298 ]
Cominco dams, Brilliant and Waneta, at a cost of $51.85 million. This is a good deal for the province, because it allows the province to use Cominco's two dams to develop new environmentally sound, competitively priced hydroelectric supplies. This energy will be of benefit to all British Columbians.
Together, these agreements save thousands of direct and indirect jobs. They will eliminate a major environmental problem facing Trail, significantly improve air and water quality in the region and promote substantial investment in future jobs. This serves as an excellent model for the kind of approach this government believes it should take to compete in the global economy. We choose to work in partnership with industry, labour and local communities and to invest in our strengths, our people, our infrastructure and our natural resources. Others may want to take B.C. back to the days of conflict and division, but we want to move B.C. forward, building cooperation, resolving resource issues and strengthening our natural resource base.
D. Jarvis: I listened to the remarks of the member for Columbia River-Revelstoke, and I can appreciate his concern as to the mining industry and the development of resources in this province. It's very interesting.
I would remind the gentleman that Cominco, for example, which he is saying is doing so well, has to have ore to survive. Therefore exploration is a necessary ingredient of this province and this government to continue supplying ore for companies like Cominco to exist. In order to do so, the mining companies and the exploration people need the basic essence of their industry, which is the certainty that they can explore and mine wherever the minerals are. It's not like the forest industry, where you can see the trees, and you cut them or you don't cut them. In mining, you don't know where the ore is, and no matter how good your geological surveys are, there is always the uncertainty that there may be ore down there. The most productive mines in this country were found by a prospector wandering the hills on his own and then discovering ore by accident. Eskay Creek, the biggest gold mine that's going on at the moment, was exactly that.
I wanted to reply to a statement that was made about me earlier this morning, and that was that I am in favour of mining the hell out of parks. That is always the statement I hear from different individuals. They take my speeches out of context. I've always said that I'm not adverse to mining in parks, provided that it can be done in a responsible manner. I would remind the members of this House that mining has been going on, and it has a record of very little disturbance of the land base. At this moment, the land base disturbed by mining amounts to approximately 31,000 hectares in this province. If you added the Coquihalla and the Coquihalla connector together, you would have 23,650 hectares of land that are disturbed, and they're disturbed forever. Mining has a reclamation system built into it, and that has been done by this government and past governments. Mining is improving, but you have to remember that you have to get revenue out of there if you want to continue with your core services of education, health and social services.
The other thing I would mention to some of the members is that an example of recovery and mining in parks is found in the 350-hectare Strathcona Park on Vancouver Island. The copper mine there opened up that park with roads and everything for exploration, picnicking, hiking and camping. That would never have been opened if the mine hadn't been there. This mine represents 0.05 percent of the whole park, and it's producing jobs in that area -- not in this member's area, but in the area of the member from Courtenay, who yelled at me a little while ago.
[10:45]
Interjection.
D. Jarvis: Never mind whether they're popular or not, member for Burnaby -- it's still jobs. If we don't have jobs in this country, where are we going to go? Jobs are the essence of everything. You survive by them, and you feed your family with them. If that's not your interest in government -- to provide jobs for the people of British Columbia -- then you should resign. I'm trying to stay away from making this a political statement, but sometimes I do get upset.
The last thing I would say is that there are two glorious park areas in the lower mainland. One of them is Queen Elizabeth Park, and the other is Butchart Gardens. At one time, both of them were mines.
The Speaker: The member for Rossland-Trail concludes.
E. Conroy: I would first like to say that I'm very pleased to be moved up the geographical map, in that I am the member for Rossland-Trail, not Columbia River-Revelstoke.
I asked for policy statements, but I heard none. I'm not attempting in any way, shape or form to be partisan, but it certainly would be nice in a discussion such as we're having here today if I was able to hear some form of policy from the opposition. Can I take it to mean that the opposition is in favour of mining in parks? It seems as though I can take that.
The hon. member talked about Cominco and the fact that Cominco needed ore to keep it going. I would like to remind the hon. member that part of the disbursements made by this government to the mining industry in the last year was moneys that came forward to Cominco to attempt to find the other half of the Sullivan mine, which has sustained the operations of Cominco and Trail for a number of decades now. There is a commitment by this government, insofar as Cominco is concerned, to do everything we possibly can to find the other half of that ore body. If we ever found it, it certainly would be a terrific thing for this province. There's no doubt about that.
Mining is recognized as a very important part of our economy, but some of the things I've heard from the opposition are somewhat disturbing. In my attempt to keep this non-partisan, I will just remind the opposition that we are on the move with our parks in terms of the economic remuneration they bring to this province. I believe that we are now close to having tourism as the number one industry in British Columbia. I would like to remind the opposition that everything does return economic value to this province, and the old mentalities that we have grown up with and lived with over the past number of decades have to be looked at, renewed and changed. I hope the member and his party opposite have the fortitude and wisdom to do that.
[ Page 15299 ]
The Speaker: For the final private member's statement of the morning, I recognize the hon. member for Richmond East.
CARE OF THE FRAGILE ELDERLY
L. Reid: There are many British Columbians today who are faced with securing appropriate care for loved ones. Liberalism is about choice, and we need to ensure that a range of choices exists when people require care.
I want to speak specifically today of care of the fragile elderly. This is a population characterized by advancing age, but it is also coupled with some type of medical overlay -- some medical condition or conditions that render the person highly susceptible to a variety of illnesses. There are new approaches we must explore, and when we talk about care of the fragile elderly, I think we need to recognize that the demographic imperative has changed.
We tend to have individuals in care situations today where the time spent on patients is limited. The staff are often untrained -- not to separate out patient care providers, but to look at the whole range of medical providers when we are talking about care of the fragile elderly, because the amount of training is limited in all respects and limited within all care provider groups. I will make the case very strongly this morning that this is the most challenging group in health care. Providing appropriate care for the fragile elderly is a very challenging task.
We need to make a strong commitment to health care professionals for ongoing education, and I come back to that point because I believe it is absolutely critical to whether we achieve success around this particular group in society. I very much want us to continue a very firm stand on licensing around standards of care, because we will not otherwise keep up with the changing needs of clients. This is an area that requires tremendous research commitment. If we are going to find out the best ways to treat patients who are elderly and make some kind of commitment to their ongoing care, we have to define and continually refine ongoing practice and best practice. We haven't tended to focus on this particular group. I will make the case that we need to very, very strongly, because it's only fair and decent that we look at this population and ensure that what we have in place makes sense.
We're hoping that with some new, innovative drug therapies and treatment methodologies we can at least delay entry of the fragile elderly into care homes. The bottom line is that people are much happier in their own homes, but the care has to be appropriate. When I talk of drug therapies, there are a number of therapies today that will enhance the quality of life, and that is the purpose of today's discussion. Perhaps it's not always going to be about a cure, in terms of treating the elderly. Sometimes it is about delaying the entry of these individuals into an extended-care placement or some kind of acute care hospital. We want very much, as Liberals, to ensure that these patients have a better quality of life as they age.
The impact of dementia and Alzheimer's on families is enormous. Unless we provide a range of service and of choice, we will not have done our best for these families. These are family issues which cause families tremendous stress. Alzheimer's disease becomes much more frequent as people get older. At the present time, it is estimated that over 30,000 people in British Columbia and over 250,000 people in Canada have some form of dementia. Of these, it is estimated that 64 percent have Alzheimer's disease. Over 30,000 other people will also be affected -- and that comes back to my contention about families. Whether it's siblings, relatives, neighbours, grandchildren, nurses, physicians, all of those people are impacted dramatically by attempting to provide care for someone who suffers from Alzheimer's disease. It's a huge issue.
We often tend to look at the Alzheimer's population as if somehow they're a homogeneous population; they are not. The needs of each patient differ with the stage of illness, both medical and psychiatric. Vast sums of money are spent on non-medical programs, which have little scientific validity but are viewed as a good thing because they are anti-medical. I am making the case today that we must see this as a package. There will be times when acute care is required, and there will be times when community care is required. Liberals are standing very, very strongly for the range of choice that must be in place if, indeed, we're going to provide any type of quality of life for the elderly and, further to that, the fragile elderly in our communities.
There are significant issues around people. It's important for Liberals to ensure that families are supported and the family structure is preserved. We want very much for people to believe that acute care and respite care services will be available and that families will be supported, as they look at having someone with Alzheimer's or dementia who is a fragile elderly citizen, and at attempting to create a support system or framework for that individual, so that we can share the pressures and responsibility for that type of care.
So again I make the case that this is a family issue. This is an issue that all of us will share in at some point in our lives. Whether it's a loved one, a neighbour or a friend, we will have some responsibility. I will make the contention that each of us will be touched by the demands that this type of population places upon our health care system. Again, I will make the case that this is a very challenging -- if not the most challenging -- group in health care. We need to form some useful partnerships around how best to address these needs.
M. Lord: It's a pleasure for me to rise today, as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, to respond to the comments from my colleague from Richmond East. I want to begin by saying I completely support her call for providing a continuum of care for some of the people most vulnerable in our society, the fragile elderly.
I want to begin by reassuring all British Columbians that this government is completely committed to providing that continuum of care for seniors and those affected by various dementias. I want to talk about some of the provincially funded programs that we have established across this province to provide that continuum of care, not just for those affected but for their caregivers as well.
In British Columbia we continue down that road to enhancing services, to a time when we will be able to provide that continuum and that choice in level of care. We can look to communities across this province for examples of how the B.C. government's financial support is helping government and non-government agencies to provide that care. Included in our recently announced Closer to Home project -- $42 million to provide funding for projects which look at cost-effective, responsive, community-based care -- were many
[ Page 15300 ]
programs providing care to those with Alzheimer's and other dementias.
The Caregivers' Association of B.C. has been provided with $250,000 to develop programs across this province to provide support, help and information to families and caregivers caring for this group of clients. We have established community geriatric mental health teams. These teams are another way that our ministry is enhancing support at the community level for seniors with dementias. In addition, this year the Ministry of Health is providing $1.3 million to community organizations that provide in-home support for seniors with mental health problems.
To ensure that these people do have some choice in their level of care, we have enhanced the area of home support services and have increased that support by over $14 million this year. Since this government was elected, $45 million of new money has gone into home support services -- an increase of 32 percent. We have targeted that funding to those who need community-based care the most. In addition, the minister has recently announced programs for seniors' caregivers, aimed at providing provincewide education programs for caregivers of seniors with mental health problems. The projects include more than 100 workshops, mentor programs, updated information materials and a series of conferences across this province.
I believe that we have a right to be proud of the way the British Columbia government is providing services to the fragile elderly in this province. I'm excited by the positive and creative way that most British Columbians are working together to preserve, protect and enhance these services in a medicare system that we are all very proud of.
[11:00]
L. Reid: I thank my colleague from the Comox Valley for her comments. I believe there is a bigger issue that we need to address, and in response to the minister's comments I will make the case that there are seniors today who are being denied access to service. The system is not yet seamless. We still have a fragmented approach to a number of services, and a number of new initiatives of this government have only denied service to the fragile elderly and to Alzheimer's and dementia patients in this province.
One of the most important areas to look at is whether patients have speedy access to acute care service when they need it, and today that is simply not the case. Without that service being in place, planned interventions are delayed, which often results in very costly crisis-driven emergency intervention. I want very much for us to move away from the notion that we can't have a planned approach to care for the fragile elderly in our communities.
Again, I will make a strong commitment today to health care professionals that the training and education will be in place for them. When we have individuals who are making commitments to spend time with the elderly, that must be meaningful time; they must be well trained. Again, an ongoing commitment to research.... We don't know enough about these areas to ensure that we are providing the best practice. We need to carry on and move with that.
It's also time for a discussion about a B.C. centre for geriatrics -- an ongoing commitment similar to British Columbia's Women's Hospital and the B.C. Children's Hospital. This population needs to be valued, and I believe we need to make a very, very strong commitment. B.C. Children's Hospital and British Columbia's Women's Hospital have outstanding programs, all deserving of ongoing commitment and support. I would make the case very strongly that this is not about additional dollars in the system. Frankly, it will probably not require any additional cost; it really only requires a realignment of current programs and expenditures. Indeed, it would bring care for the elderly in this province in line with the calibre of excellence of something like the B.C. Cancer Agency and B.C. Mental Health Society -- programs that have a provincial focus; programs this government will take responsibility for and ensure that there's some consistent delivery of across this province. That is what the B.C. Liberal Party stands for: consistency and excellence in health care delivery. No population is more deserving of that commitment than the elderly in our population, our communities and our families.
I would hope that we can form some useful partnerships and alliances so that that level of care is indeed in place and is something that is well understood. Right now it's difficult for individuals in our communities to access services, because sometimes they're simply not aware that they exist. Ongoing communication is the goal, but commitment to our seniors population will be achieved.
The Speaker: Hon. members, that concludes private members' statements for the moment.
The hon. member for North Vancouver-Seymour rises on a matter?
D. Jarvis: I have a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I want to make a statement about rules that you have continually put forward with regard to private members' statements here. You said that we are not to be using biased, partisan or political statements or attacks. In every one of the four private members' statements today -- from the member for Columbia River-Revelstoke on two occasions, the member Victoria-Beacon Hill on one occasion and the member for Comox Valley on the fourth occasion -- partisan, political and biased statements were made. We endeavour to respond and make statements that aren't politically biased. If what we are receiving from the government side of the House continues, you can expect us to be reciprocal on that.
The Speaker: On the same point of order, the hon. Government House Leader.
Hon. G. Clark: Hon. Speaker, it's truly regrettable that politics would intrude on this chamber. I guess my view is that the question of public policy is, in fact, a political matter. That's what we're here to do, and it's quite appropriate to have political discussion. I think the obvious question with respect to demeanour in terms of being partisan is where there's a grey area. I say on behalf of the government members that if it will help the members of the opposition, we'll discuss in our caucus to try to confine our remarks to political issues, public policy debates and issues of the day, and our government and our party's position on those matters, and try to refrain from taking pejorative shots at the opposition, however warranted.
[ Page 15301 ]
The Speaker: I want to thank the hon. members for their submissions.
I think the point of order is certainly well taken. The Chair certainly appreciates the opportunity to once again revisit guidelines respecting the matter of private members' statements and will endeavour, along with the Government House Leader, who has promised to look at the matter, to try as best as possible to live within public policy matters. I think it is also an opportunity for the Chair to review this matter and bring back a fresh copy of current guidelines for all members, and I shall endeavour to do that prior to next Friday.
A. Hagen: I ask leave to make an introduction, Mr. Speaker.
Leave granted.
A. Hagen: Visiting in the precincts today will be a group of grades 6 and 7 students, 60 in all, from John Robson Elementary School in New Westminster, accompanied by Mr. Speckman, their teacher. Regrettably, they'll be here a little too late to see the House in operation, but I know that we welcome the initiative of the teacher and the community in having the students come to our Legislature. I'd like at this time to welcome them and wish them a very enjoyable visit in Victoria, and I know all members will share in that welcome.
The Speaker: The hon. member for Malahat-Juan de Fuca rises on a matter.
R. Kasper: I would ask leave to make a formal request of you in your capacity as the Speaker.
Leave granted.
R. Kasper: The matter deals with an annual event, the Aid to Cuba campaign, which will be kicking off tomorrow morning at Mile Zero on the Trans-Canada Highway. Citizens from greater Victoria and Vancouver Island will be travelling across the country to gather aid and items for the people of Cuba. This organization, over the years, has garnered support from all political parties across the country, and I would ask you, hon. Speaker, if the assembly would so wish, to send a letter of support to the organization in their endeavours.
The Speaker: Hon. members have heard the request, and if it is the wish of the House, then the Speaker would certainly be willing to comply. Is this the wish of the House? I hear no nays.
Hon. G. Clark: An unprecedented show of solidarity, Mr. Speaker.
I move, by leave, seconded by the member for Richmond-Steveston, that Robert Vaive be and is hereby appointed Clerk Assistant of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. Just to speak briefly to it, on behalf of all members, I wish Mr. Vaive well. There's self-interest in this regard, I think, that we wish him well. We know he has been here for some time, and I'm very pleased to introduce on behalf of the House, supported by the opposition, the confirmation, if you will, of Mr. Vaive as Clerk Assistant of the Legislative Assembly.
Leave granted.
Motion approved.
Hon. G. Clark: A nice way to end the week, and with that, I move this House do now adjourn.
Motion approved.
The House adjourned at 11:09 a.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]