[ Page 3269 ]

The House met at 10:05 a.m.

Prayers.

I. Chong: Visiting us today is a grade 5 class from Monterey Elementary School, a school in my riding. They are accompanied by a number of parents and Mr. Schurman, their teacher. They are emphasizing government, and I would ask the House to please make them welcome.

V. Anderson: In that Monterey class, I'd like to ask the House to make a special welcome to my granddaughter Devon, who is one of the exciting students in that group, and to her mother Chris, who is also, I think, an exciting person.

Hon. D. Streifel: In the House today is Emma Nemlin. She will be celebrating Mother's Day with her mom Sally Glover. Will the House make them welcome.

Introduction of Bills

MEDICARE PROTECTION
AMENDMENT ACT, 1997

Hon. J. MacPhail: This legislation ensures the protection of medicare services in British Columbia and builds on the Medicare Protection Act. Universal access to medical services is a defining principle of health care in Canada. The amendments to the Medicare Protection Act will protect the rights of British Columbians to equal access to medical services regardless of income or where they live. This government is ensuring that medicare coverage is truly universal and that all British Columbians register with the Medical Services Plan and have the opportunity to receive health care benefits.

We are strengthening provisions that prohibit the extra-billing of patients by physicians. We will ensure that there are no loopholes that would allow even a small minority of practitioners to extra-bill.

The Medical Services Commission has adopted measures dealing with physician supply in British Columbia. These measures have been developed to maintain the number of doctors in the system at an affordable level and to encourage doctors to practise in those areas of the province that can most benefit from their expertise.

We are also streamlining the appeal procedure in regard to orders made by the Medical Services Commission. We are also improving the efficiency of audit activities by the Medical Services Plan, by allowing MSP to look at payments made on behalf of agencies such as ICBC or WCB. And we are strengthening the Medical Services Plan's ability to recover premium payments from people who receive health care benefits but who are consistently not paying the nominal premiums.

Hon. Speaker, British Columbians are already protected by the best medicare legislation in Canada. These amendments demonstrate this government's commitment to ensuring that the principles of medicare are fully realized in our province through the delivery of high-quality health services to persons who need them. I am pleased to be able to table this legislation today and move that this bill be read a first time now.

Bill 21 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

I think we all understand in this House that adequate food and clothing and shelter are the basic prerequisites required to allow a person to live in dignity. When it comes to housing, we know that has a direct impact on physical health when it comes to the quality of housing but also on mental health in ensuring that people feel safe in the knowledge that they have shelter that they can depend on and live in on a continuous basis without interruption.

In areas like the lower mainland and southern Vancouver Island, in particular -- the average house price in my community alone is somewhere in the neighbourhood of a quarter of a million dollars, and the rents in the lower mainland are probably the highest rents in the country -- the term "affordable housing" takes on significant meaning to the thousands of people who have difficulty getting access to adequate housing.

New Westminster is viewed by many as an area of affordable housing, but what this mainly means is market housing. Much of this housing is adequate, but some of it is not. If you speak to tenants' rights activists, they will certainly tell you that there are buildings in New Westminster which aren't appropriately run and don't provide adequate housing at all. We know that of the thousands of people who move to British Columbia every year -- and particularly to greater Vancouver -- many of them end up in New Westminster, because from the north side of the Fraser River, New Westminster is seen as one of the more affordable places to live.

Unfortunately, in New Westminster there are those who say that there is enough affordable housing, that New Westminster has more than its fair share of affordable housing. Those are comments I've actually heard -- passed on to me by some members of our community -- and they are the comments of some members of our own city council. The fact of the matter is that we do not have enough affordable housing in general, and we certainly don't have enough affordable housing in New Westminster. There's clearly a need for affordable housing, and we have an obligation as human beings not to turn our backs on people who require it. In many cases, these are people who are simply low income and don't have the means to afford adequate housing; in many cases, that means single-parent families -- predominantly families headed by women. But it also means people with disabilities and, in particular, mental disabilities.

[ Page 3270 ]

Just a few weeks ago I met with the New Westminster chapter of the B.C. Schizophrenia Society, and I saw the pain that those families go through when it comes to the needs of their loved ones. There are many cases where people who are now adults and who suffer from schizophrenia, for example, must stay at home with their parents, and their parents don't know what's going to happen when they're no longer around to look after their children. So we have an obligation to make sure there's housing for all of these people.

Affordable housing can take many forms. It can be in the form of cooperative housing, and we certainly have a number of co-ops in New Westminster. Unfortunately, there is some indication that the federal government, through CMHC, wants to get out of the area of co-op housing, which is a disappointment to me. We know that in years when certain provincial governments haven't wanted to provide adequate affordable housing, particularly in the form of cooperative housing, we could count on the federal government to step in.

We can also talk about low-cost market housing with organizations like Habitat for Humanity, which work with other partners in the community to make sure that housing is constructed and that people who want to have low-cost market housing put in what's called sweat equity to ensure that they can in fact enter the housing market.

But there are obviously needs beyond market housing. We have a need for shelters for those who are homeless, many -- perhaps even most -- of whom obviously have problems when it comes to mental illness. We also need more housing for people with special needs, who need supportive care in the homes in which they live. It's not a burden that should be borne by families alone.

In my view, affordable housing in areas like the lower mainland and southern Vancouver Island requires the involvement of many people. I want to talk about what government can contribute when it comes to new affordable housing. Certainly this government provided financing and subsidies for over 2,000 new affordable housing units between the years of 1993 and 1996, and it provided capital funding for 630 new homes for people who were homeless or at risk of homelessness between 1993 and 1996.

[10:15]

I said I would certainly touch upon New Westminster, and in New Westminster we have a wonderful opportunity. We have the Woodlands site, which is being phased out of use. There continue to be some patients on the Woodlands site, but now, as a community, we have to decide what the fate of that site will be. We certainly, in my view, should be looking at the issue of social housing and affordable housing. We have in this province under this government -- since early in the last term of government -- an affordable housing-first policy. This policy suggests that when we're determining what to do with lands owned by the province -- surplus lands -- we should be looking very carefully at the issue of social housing, of affordable housing, and making it a primary priority for the use of surplus government lands.

When it comes to the Woodlands site, I've already had. . . .

Interjection.

G. Bowbrick: I'm sorry, hon. Speaker; I'll end my comments for now. I'll listen intently to the comments from the hon. member opposite, and then I'll continue to address my remarks to what we might do further in New Westminster.

V. Anderson: I appreciate that the member for New Westminster has brought this topic to our discussion today, because it's one of the most important discussions that affects us in our communities and in our concern for families within our communities.

It's true that it's the lower mainland, and New Westminster, where there are some pressures on housing because of the costs and because of the influx of people. But throughout all of British Columbia, in every community there are similar concerns about non-availability of affordable, accessible and safe housing -- housing that people can be sure of as they move into and are part of communities. The development of community co-ops of a variety of kinds has been extremely helpful. In my own community in South Vancouver, we have about seven or eight -- I lose track; there are so many of them around and about our community -- and they have contributed a great deal to our community life -- not just to the housing of the people themselves but to the community itself. They have enabled families to have security and to have long-term security, and therefore to contribute and become part of the community life.

As the member has mentioned, there is a need for all kinds of affordable housing. Affordability is a sliding scale, if you like, according to your income. One example of the variety is Abbeyfield housing for seniors, where seniors who are lonely are able to move in and share accommodation with each other, have some common cooking facilities and a hostess that cares and works with them.

But the point I would particularly like to make this morning is that apart from money, which is always important, and apart from land -- in our own community of Vancouver, the Vancouver city council has set aside a good deal of land, and a lot of the community's low-end housing is possible simply because of the government land that has been set aside. . . . But land and money themselves will not do it, as we discovered with the Woodward's project in Vancouver. It takes cooperation, it takes planning, it takes preparation, and it takes community and provincial planning in order to make this possible.

One of the things I will say is that when Darlene Marzari was involved in housing and municipal activities as a minister, there was a great deal of community planning going on. But it was not planning just about housing separate from everything else; it was planning about housing as part of planning communities. Because when you plan housing, you have to plan schools, you have to plan shopping centres, you have to plan recreation facilities, and you have to plan the transportation network. There was a time, for instance, when affordable housing for seniors was set out on the edge of communities, on land that nobody could reach. There was no transportation available. Fortunately, we have brought those centres, those housing developments, into the main part of the community so those people are not shunted apart but brought into the downtown.

I say that cooperation is fundamentally important between the provincial and the municipal governments. That's not just cooperation in the area of housing. That has to be cooperation in the area of municipal government, that has 

[ Page 3271 ]

to be cooperation in the area of transportation, and that has to be cooperation in the area of education and health. As long as we separate one element from all of the others, we do disservice to every one of them, and this is what has happened for too long. We have dealt with items separately from each other, and we must deal with them together.

So I encourage the member for New Westminster to raise this not only for his own community but for all the citizens of British Columbia, wherever they live, that there be a cooperative planning process whereby all aspects of community living -- and housing is one of them -- are discussed together. Land in itself will not solve the question; money in itself will not solve the question without the will and the cooperation to work together.

I come back to the illustration of Woodward's. There was land, there were facilities, there was some money, and there was an initial intention to have that project go ahead. But because people left it to somebody else and said they'd given it over to them, they pulled back from the project, whether it was the government or the local community. Because there was not the ongoing, integrated planning, the process fell apart. So I would encourage the minister and the member for New Westminster to say, with respect to Woodward's, that housing is an important part of this, as are all of the other facilities around the community that are part of it as well.

G. Bowbrick: I thank the hon. member opposite for his comments. I certainly take note of his concern that I speak for the needs of all people in British Columbia when it comes to housing. However, as this is a private member's statement today, I speak as the member for New Westminster, and I speak for the people in my community who need housing. The people in my community expect no less. That's not to diminish the need anywhere else in the province, but I believe that New Westminster has quite a critical need.

I know there are people in my community who feel there aren't that many people who are willing to speak up in the name of affordable housing for people who are in the greatest need in my community. As I alluded to earlier, unfortunately I have heard comments from at least one person in our municipal government who suggested that there is enough affordable housing in New Westminster. I completely disagree.

I want to go on the record today and say something very clearly to my constituents. I am prepared to take a stand and say that when it comes to the Woodlands site, there is something for government to contribute. Government owns that land, and as an MLA, I will see to it that I do everything in my power to make sure that some of that land goes to affordable housing. I have also made the commitment that some of that housing has to be for people who have needs, particularly when it comes to mental illness. It's not enough to simply make housing affordable for people; there has to be a supportive environment in which people can live in that housing.

I'm afraid there are too many people in our society today who look the other way and, in particular, have the NIMBY syndrome and say, "I don't want those types of people living near me," whether they're poor people or people with special needs when it comes to mental disabilities or mental illness or what have you. In my work as a poverty lawyer in New Westminster, in my previous life to this one, I had firsthand experience with people with mental illnesses who lived on the streets, in effect. That's totally unacceptable to me, and I think it's important that I, as the member for New Westminster, stand up and say that I'm willing to be counted on this one. Too often politicians aren't willing to be counted. They want to pander to one group or another.

I know there are those in New Westminster who may feel that there is already enough "affordable" housing -- and I put that in quotation marks. I say we need more, and I say that we need to stand up for low-income people with special needs who need that housing. I'm proud to do that in the House today and to do that on behalf of my constituents who are least able to speak for themselves.

GRANDPARENTS' RIGHTS

The Canadian Grandparents Rights Association is based on the lower mainland and has membership in Alberta. It's composed entirely of grandparents and members of extended families concerned with maintaining ties to grandchildren. It seems like a reasonable request. It seems like it would be a decent thing for all people to support. We all have discussions in our constituencies around the difficulties facing extended families and single parents, and sometimes the communities are not always there to support them.

This community of grandparents in British Columbia is truly committed to maintaining ties with their grandchildren, for the simple reason that they believe in family. There is no other motive. They are truly convinced that they need to have that contact. They desire that contact with their children's offspring. It's a very good decision on their part, I believe, and it's one I am pleased to stand in support of today.

[10:30]

Very recently in the Vancouver Province, on Sunday, May 4, there was an article entitled "Promise of Help With the Grandkids." Cited in it are a number of individuals who believe that the system can be more responsive, that people can achieve and maintain that contact with their grandchildren. The article is written by Barbara McLintock.

"A top official with the children's ministry is vowing to find better ways of involving grandparents in the lives of children in the ministry's care."

" 'We have a team of social workers whose job is developing homes for children,' Jane Cowell, regional operating officer for the Victoria area, said yesterday. 'Wouldn't it be better if they could work on developing homes within the family rather than on trying to recruit more foster homes?' "

"Cowell noted that the law says extended family members should be given priority, but reluctantly admitted it doesn't always happen. 'We have to find a way to put this into policy and practice,' she said."

[ Page 3272 ]

I'm suggesting that we commit to ensuring that the past policy, which says that the family is the first-line defence except in compelling circumstances, be one, first off, that we accept and recognize as being important, and then put in place some processes that streamline the current scenario.

That is the discussion I want to put on the table today, for the simple reason that I believe it's incredibly valid. I think that where we are in the evolution of society. . . . Families used to stand in, pick up the reins and offer that level of support to their extended family members. In our upbringing, most of us knew of other families who had taken in a niece or a nephew or had looked out for their grandchildren. I have family members who have raised grandchildren. There are ways for us to suggest that that's desirable, and I believe it's the decent way to proceed.

It seems to me that where the system has failed many families is that they are often caught up in very costly court battles because they weren't considered at the outset. That alarms me. Certainly there may be cases where it's not prudent to proceed in that way, but there are a lot more cases where it is prudent, and they're still not considered to be part of the solution.

Certainly the discussion today about Mother's Day coming up. . . . This is the sense of family that I think all of us need to put forward, because I believe it's vitally important. If we have family members who are known to that particular child, whether it be an aunt, an uncle or a grandparent. . . . I do believe this article when it says that families should be the first line of defence.

There need to be ways for the process to be streamlined so the information is readily available and they have those opportunities to put their names forward to be considered without going through the court process. So if there are ways for us to look at mediation or if there are ways for us to look at negotiation. . . .

There are some very, very fine family situations there. They would welcome children and do a very fine job of raising those children, and they are the individuals who spend untold thousands of dollars in the court system for the right to offer that child a home. It doesn't make good sense to me if, as the press has reported lately, we are in dire straits in terms of finding appropriate foster care. Families want to be part of that discussion and want very much to be part of the solution. I welcome that.

I'm certainly prepared to work with any minister in this government to see if it's possible to advance this issue. I know there was a committee brought forward. I believe our Attorney General is part of that discussion. What alarms me is that the discussion has been ongoing for many, many years, and we're no closer to any kind of resolution around whether or not each of us is prepared to stand and say: "Yes, grandparents and family members should be the first line of defence except in compelling circumstances."

I believe that. I would like to know that each member of this Legislature believes that and will do a little bit more over the coming weeks in terms of seeing how best to put in place a plan that makes better sense for families. I will not stand here and tell you that I think every single family should have to go to court for the right to offer a family member a home, because this is about providing a home. We've had the Minister for Children and Families. . . . I will continue my comments.

F. Randall: I would like to thank the member for Richmond East for raising this particular matter. I think most may be aware that this organization was founded in 1986 and currently has about 700 members across Canada, with about 500 of them in British Columbia. Nancy Wooldridge is the founder and director, who had her own battle to keep in contact with her grandchild after her son's divorce, and they became the first B.C. grandparents to win a court battle for access. Since then the CGRA has won 87 more cases where grandparents have gained access to their children. In the past ten years grandparents' rights groups have begun to form in Canada, from B.C. to Ontario.

These groups have two purposes: advocacy, or lobbying, and support. Grandparents who lose access to children show signs of bereavement and loss, as if there had been a death. Many suffer serious health problems as a result of losing touch with a grandchild. These grandparent-rights groups provide emotional support for grandparents in this process as well as advice, legal or otherwise, for the individual grandparent situation.

With the exception of Quebec, grandparents in Canada do not have a legislated right of access to children. In the U.S., grandparents have a legislated right, as the "family" definition for this purpose extends to the grandparents. A private member's bill was submitted at the federal level but was unsuccessful with regards to access rights.

Grandparents in the rest of Canada may apply for court-order access, which is given in situations where the judge feels it is in the best interests of the grandchild. Often grandparents provide children with stability and support not only through difficult separation or divorce proceedings but throughout childhood.

It has been found that the person who plays the biggest role in determining a grandparent's access is the custodial parent. Many of these disputes centre around what their wishes are, as they have the right to decide, in most cases, who their child will see.

There have been attempts to change the federal Divorce Act. More recent legislation in British Columbia -- the Child, Family and Community Service Act and also the creation of the Child, Youth and Family Advocacy Act -- still does not give rights to grandparents.

There is a concern that if grandparents are given a legislated right to access, there will be an increase in litigation. However, that doesn't seem likely, as parents would be willing to negotiate out-of-court resolves if it is clear from the start what the grandparents' rights are.

But what are the causes of reduced access to grandparents? There are four main reasons: divorce, death of one or both of the parents, conflict with one or both parents, and adoption by a step-parent. Divorce is the most common cause, and conflict between parents and grandparents is the second most common. Each of these reasons mentioned provides unique circumstances and complicated relationships that must be negotiated. For each reason, grandparents find there are different best ways to restore contact. As mentioned, the role of the custodial parent is very important, as they determine the grandparents' access. Often in the case of divorce, when a father loses access so do the paternal grandparents. This is the most common case of loss of access.

The custodial parent often acts as the family mediator. It has been suggested that any third-party mediators take into more careful consideration the role that the grandparent might play in the life of the grandchildren and include that in the settlements. If this situation is outlined in any formal agreements, it can prevent further disputes.

[ Page 3273 ]

Ironically, in the conflict situation the dispute is almost always between a grandparent and the parent and doesn't involve the child. Unfortunately, it is the grandchild-grandparent relationship that suffers the most. This can be very disturbing for a child who doesn't understand why one of their family relationships has ended. This unfortunate consequence means that the child is used as a pawn and has no way to protect himself or herself.

Regaining access for grandparents can involve many possible solutions. These range from litigation, on one extreme, to just giving it time, on the other. The path chosen towards access is most often determined by the level of encouragement or discouragement given by the custodial parent. Some grandparents find that legal avenues are too extreme.

Hon. Speaker, I'll wrap up and say I appreciate the member raising this issue, and I would hope that there is a solution through mediation to resolve the problems.

L. Reid: I would like to thank most sincerely the member for Burnaby-Edmonds, because I do believe this is an issue where, if we stand together, we can indeed put some solutions in place. Certainly I concluded my earlier remarks by referring to the Minister for Children and Families. She has stood many times in this House and talked about the necessity to keep families together to ensure that children continue to live in their neighbourhoods and have some proximity to their friends. If that is indeed the case, certainly that extends to family members. We should ensure that contact with their grandparents, with their family members, is something that is considered a priority. That is my purpose in raising this issue this morning.

My hon. colleague opposite indicated the main reasons that families find themselves in this dilemma. And certainly the issue in the press the last number of days around foster care is. . . . Even with children who are high-risk, where it's found desirable, if you will, that they be placed in foster care, parents would still like the opportunity to visit, to maintain contact, to see them on a regular basis. I certainly support that contention.

Again, in the Times Colonist of Friday, May 2, there's an article entitled "We Could Help, Grandparents Say." Grandparents say that they are an untapped resource for child protection. The families know they are currently underutilized and are simply saying that they're ready to assist. They're making, I think, a very fine overture, saying to government: "Please include us in the discussion." I too support that.

If I might just make one or two closing remarks. In changes that were proposed by Grandparents Raising Grandchildren, they talk about redefining family. We are currently in the process of heading into a new century. Perhaps we need to look at a new definition of family to include grandparents, step-grandparents and other extended-family members. That is something, I think, that many of us believe happens naturally. But in the instances where there is family disruption, we have to put in place, I believe, a plan that allows for that contact to be maintained. So perhaps if we could include grandparents as family under current policy, I too would commit with these individuals from the Ministry for Children and Families that I believe that families should be the first consideration at a time of family disruption. I think that's a good place for the ministry to start. And certainly, when we talk about where we are as legislators, I think we want to talk more often in this House, more often in this chamber, about what we believe constitutes a family. I think we all probably have different definitions of that, but for me it's about building communities, it's about building neighbourhoods, it's about ensuring that everyone has a safe and secure place to be.

The reason I'm very committed to this particular topic is that I think families perhaps do need assistance at times, and if there are ways for us to put in place a mediation process, a negotiation process, I would welcome that. So I would hope that all members will continue to advance this issue in their ridings.

TRAINING AND JOBS

No longer can any of us expect to be in the same job for our whole worklife; change is everywhere. The only expectation for anyone in the job market is that one probably will have a number of opportunities to develop all one's skills and talents. None of this change and none of the adaptation to this change is at all easy.

The vision of our government is the provision of practical applied training relevant to those who need it, relevant to the work world and that speaks to who we are as a community. In my daily contact with the people in Victoria-Beacon Hill, I am ever and increasingly impressed by what is available for job training, by the response that people who need the job training have to that training and by what a difference it makes to their lives.

We have created a multitude of very successful programs that are aimed at providing training opportunities for British Columbia men and women of all ages and in all walks of life. For our children and teens, the K-to-12 program offers enormous numbers of opportunities, not just to work on academic subjects like math and physics but also to provide opportunities for practical and applied relevance.

Career preparation and work experience is built right into the curriculum. Youth business and entrepreneurship training, in partnership with the Victoria Chamber of Commerce and the Victoria school district, is just one example of these new kinds of programs. For our young people in post-secondary education and institutions, now there is a focus -- as well as the pure academics -- on relevant practical programs that again provide students with real work experience and networking opportunities through related co-op work opportunities.

Here in greater Victoria, Camosun College and the University of Victoria currently provide opportunities in a downtown campus that they each have for upgrading and for new training in new directions. This is provided where many of them work and live. Our Premier's Guarantee for Youth provides access to jobs, affordable tuition, available spaces, Student Summer Works and First Jobs in Science and Technology.

Also, expanded apprenticeship programs provide opportunities and job experience in many different areas, including such traditional areas as the Island Highway development and in new, exciting areas of film production and film animation. Industrial adjustment strategies are around, are developing daily and are crucial for many of our communities in this province. I think particularly of FRBC, as it provides counselling services, training opportunities and new work for displaced workers from the forest industry.

[ Page 3274 ]

Access-to-training programs for all income assistance recipients make work more attractive than welfare. Examples of these include Youth Works, career planning, the Welfare to Work employability programs and workplace-based training programs such as Destinations. Destinations has placed some 336 recipients, over half of whom are women, in small and medium-sized businesses. It has an 86 percent success rate, which I think by anybody's standards is pretty significant. I've had the opportunity to meet one of the graduates of Destinations, a delightful young man with Down's syndrome, who is so excited to have successfully completed his studies and secured employment at a local White Spot restaurant. He is very excited by that, and that gets me very excited about these kinds of programs and the kinds of things they can do for our young people.

[10:45]

An example of this is the Victoria Street Community Association and its many ventures -- most notably, a new project called the Bent Nail project which was started by, is run by, and employs income assistance recipients in a business that recycles building materials. Access to these and other training programs is being made easier and easier for British Columbians.

Next week in our community, two training assessment, counselling and referral centres will be officially opened, one in Saanich and one in downtown Victoria. These are, hon. Speaker, just a few of the many programs across British Columbia which are helping to train people for jobs in our ever-changing economy. Thousands of women and men are making better lives for themselves and their families because of our government's commitment to giving resources to training programs. Many of these thousands of people who have benefited live right here in Victoria.

I'm thinking of one very particular project that has been close to my heart and is not far from this assembly -- and I think I've talked about it before. It's the Sandy Merriman house, which is a women's emergency shelter that opened in early 1996. The building itself is a former bed-and-breakfast; it is a heritage building. A few years ago, through the inspiration of one Jannit Rabinovitch, the house was purchased, a group of women were gathered together -- women who had previously been involved in street activity in Victoria -- training programs were set up, they worked on the reconstruction of the house and now, indeed, one of their number is working as a staff member in that house.

This is the kind of coming together of many parts of government and of business in this community to provide opportunities to develop new skills, to respond to and work with new challenges and to focus on developing a new direction for people's lives. These women have benefited enormously from this. I thank you and look forward to the response from Delta North.

R. Masi: It's no secret that we have a problem relative to jobs and access to work. We look at the latest statistics, and we see that B.C.'s unemployment rate has steadily increased since January. Statistics Canada has reported that the jobless rate was then 8 percent; the jobless rate in April was 9.3 percent.

I believe that any discussion -- any discussion in terms of job skills training and apprenticeship -- should and must relate directly back to the school system and how we regard the whole field of trades and technical training vis-�-vis academic studies. While educators and the educational system do a fine job in preparing students who are bound for universities or the technological institutes, we must ask the question: how do we serve those students -- about 40 percent of our students -- who cannot meet the stringent entrance requirements to a university, a college or an institute of technology? In my opinion, the answer is very clear: we do not serve them very well.

The system insists on requiring that the majority of students in British Columbia take courses that have no relevance to their lives or to their aspirations -- which is most important -- all in the name of academic standards. Obviously standards are important in education; there's no doubt about that. But unrealistic, unattainable objectives simply add to the frustrations of many of our students, especially those who wish a more directed program specifically related to a skill, a trade or a definite career path. As a result, the school system has a much lower rate of grade 12 completions than is necessary. This has a subsequent effect on skills training and job opportunities. I believe if we are to have an impact on skills development and job opportunities, it is time for a major philosophic shift in our education system that would place skills, technical and technological training on an equal footing in terms of social acceptance and prestige with the academic programs.

The need for skilled tradespeople in British Columbia has never been greater, and yet the youth unemployment rate has never been higher. We must face the reality that there can be only so many so-called professionals in our society. The problem is that despite the reality of the workplace, despite the changes brought about by technological advances and environmental necessities -- which in turn have brought about different and diffuse requirements in the workforce -- parents and the public generally still cling to the idea that somehow a skills-based education is a second-class education. They may have some grounds for their argument, given the present state and the status of technical programs in our schools. Therefore it is essential for political leaders and educational leaders to pay more than lip service toward the establishment of technical and technological programs at the secondary level that are fully integrated with the community colleges' trades and apprenticeship programs.

As well, it should not be beyond the realm of possibilities that we have freestanding secondary-level technical schools established which offer the latest in technological advances. While programs such as Youth Works, Welfare to Work and many other programs that are put forward with the best of intentions are commendable in their intent, they are simply band-aid solutions which do not address the fundamental and essential challenges of rapid change brought about by the technological revolution and the information age. We have to focus on our schools -- begin at the beginning -- to make a marked improvement in our job situation.

G. Brewin: I was interested in the remarks from my colleague from Delta North and appreciate that his particular background in the education system has offered us that experience and those observations for us in the House and in the broader community.

But I want to remind him of several things. One is that we have announced -- and he somehow seems to ignore this -- 

[ Page 3275 ]

that there are a number of significant initiatives in the development of technical skills and skills training that have happened in that last number of years in British Columbia. I think that has come about most significantly because we have to provide not just one kind of job training or another kind of job training -- or that there is one scheme that will fit everybody. . . . But, in fact, we must be developing job training programs for all walks of life, for all age groups, that are relevant to their needs and to the needs in the broader community.

I am certainly very proud of the kinds of initiatives that have come out of this government in the last while, particularly as we saw the changes happening from other levels of government. As they said: "We're not going to participate in training anymore, and we're going to require that the provinces do that." I for one welcome that, because I think that is the way we are indeed going to be able to provide relevant job training for our whole community as the change happens and everyone is pitched out, kind of, into the cold world out there -- that there is training for all the talents that all our communities have.

I heartily agree with my colleague from Delta North on the issue of skilled trades and the development of more programs to encourage young people -- but not just young people. I think, as training changes, as our needs change in our community and people's jobs change, that this is the kind of training -- plumbing, carpentry, a whole gamut of technical training that's now available, and high-tech training that's particularly available in our community of greater Victoria. . . . Our young people and people of all ages can benefit from that, can enjoy that. And those kinds of programs must be made available to them.

I find it of passing interest that it seems to me it wasn't that long ago in an election campaign recently when one political party -- I'm sure it has no relevance to the political party opposite us -- somehow managed to leave out of their election campaign program any reference to post-secondary training or skills training funding commitments. I thought this was passing strange. I'm sure that was an oversight, and they really didn't mean that, but somehow that's kind of how it appeared.

But I think what we are doing here. . . .

Interjection.

G. Brewin: "A big typo," says my colleague.

By acknowledging that life-long learning is part of what we have to do and provide, we as a government and as a community must respond to that. I say we are doing that. I'm very proud of the government and our whole community for setting those kinds of programs in place.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND TRADE

My topic is human rights and trade, and the reason I chose that was something that happened last month. We heard that after six years of co-sponsoring a United Nations resolution condemning human rights abuses in China, Canada is now withdrawing its support. Canada's Foreign Affairs minister, Lloyd Axworthy, insisted that Canada remains very concerned about human rights in China, but since some of the other traditional sponsors have backed away from sponsorship, he says the resolution no longer has the same clout. He suggested that Canada will pursue human rights abuses in China by pursuing bilateral measures. I have concerns that these bilateral measures will not be effective. Canada and Canadian businesses are intent on expanding business relations with China, and it would seem that sales take precedence over human rights.

This soft-pedalling of criticism over human rights is not restricted to China. In our relations with other countries where trade is involved, the situation is similar. Whether it be Pakistan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Turkey or a host of other nations, it's the same.

Why should I and each and every other caring person be concerned? Jampa Cheojor, a 16-year-old Tibetan child, has been in prison since February 1994 for putting up illegal posters protesting the Chinese occupation of Tibet. He has not used or advocated violence. Many novices in monasteries and nunneries between the ages of 11 and 18 have been detained while peacefully demonstrating. Released juvenile detainees have told of being whipped, kicked, beaten, tortured with electric shocks, sexually abused, forced to perform hard labour and subjected to malnutrition. Many have died in prison, while others, weakened by their ordeal, die within a short time after their release -- this after China has signed the UN convention on the rights of the child. Is it little wonder that I have concern that a bilateral, low-key approach on a human rights will be effective? Have we so soon forgotten the Tiananmen Square massacre?

If the treatment of dissidents in China is bad, it is far worse in Indonesia. In 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor, and 200,000 people, almost one-third of East Timor's population, are now dead. When Indonesia invaded East Timor, the United Nations twice ordered a withdrawal. That order stands unfulfilled. Canada has refused to support the call for the withdrawal of Indonesian troops and the right of the East Timorese to self-determination. The only punitive action Canada has ever taken against Indonesia was to suspend new aid projects following the 1991 Dili massacre. Canada's attitude has been business as usual, and even that suspension was lifted in 1994.

Bella Galhos, who defected in 1995, tells of her experience. She was only two when Indonesian soldiers first entered her home. Her brothers, six and four years old, were crying from hunger and fear. The soldiers came in complaining of the noise and killed the boys in front of her mother. Her aunt, who was living with them and who had just given birth a week earlier, was raped to death in front of her. In her final moments, she witnessed the soldiers butchering her husband and two children.

Bella says that 80 percent of East Timorese women have been subjected to compulsory family planning. "They came to the school," she says, "closed the door and just injected us." Together with this methodical elimination of East Timorese by violence and birth control, Suharto has moved at least 150,000 Indonesians into Timorese territory.

[11:00]

[ Page 3276 ]

A little more than a year ago, a Canadian trade mission to Southeast Asia -- including, I might add, business and government members from British Columbia -- signed $2.7 billion in new business deals in Indonesia. Since the awarding of the Nobel peace prize last October to two human rights activists, more attention is focused on the abuses in Indonesia.

Two months ago one of the prize winners -- José Ramos Horta -- was in Vancouver on a speaking tour. He tells of atrocities similar to those told by Bella Galhos -- 70 teenagers taken from East Timor to Indonesia by one of President Suharto's relatives on the promise of jobs. There were no jobs. They held a peaceful demonstration. They were arrested and tortured; one boy's feet were nailed to the floor. Last month Mr. Horta showed pictures to the United Nations, taken from a secret video, showing a man nailed by the wrist to his prison plank, men in uniform torturing inmates with sticks, chair legs and electric shocks, and two youths tied to a tree and being hit with a shovel.

I want to remind you that Indonesia joined the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1991. Amnesty International refers to the Indonesian government as "cynical frauds" who hold human rights seminars, while arbitrary arrests, torture, ill-treatment, show trials and extrajudicial executions are standard operating procedure. It was only a few years ago that Canada joined in trade sanctions against human rights abuses in South Africa. In B.C. we were boycotting South African wines. Now we promote trade delegations to countries with even worse abuses.

I. Waddell: I rise to respond to the member for Richmond Centre. I'd like to congratulate the member for a speech and a topic that reached right out of this Legislature to the international scene, yet concerns British Columbia. I also want to congratulate him for being specific. He gives a little warning about some of the graphic descriptions, and they were graphic. But he was specific, and that makes it really hit home and makes it real.

My riding has got a large percentage of Asian-Canadians -- people from Southeast Asia and from south Asia. Many people -- especially in parts of Southeast Asia -- came here to get away from difficulties. They came here to a good environment and to human rights that are respected in Canada and British Columbia.

He raised the issue: do sales take precedence over human rights? That's the key question. My answer is: no, they don't take precedence. I agree with the hon. member.

The second question that could be raised has been raised once by Tommy Koh, who was the former Singapore Ambassador to the UN. Are there different standards in Asia on human rights than perhaps we have in this part of the world -- the European viewpoint, if you like? He said there were; I don't think there are. I think there are universal standards of human rights. So the answer to that question is no, too. Canada was one of the signatories to the UN Declaration of Human Rights when it originally came in after the Second World War.

We all share this planet environmentally; we understand that. But we have to understand that we also share this planet in a human rights way. I'm proud to be a member of Amnesty International, as, I think, some other members of the House are members. Amnesty International says that any time a person is tortured, we're tortured and that any time a child is exploited, we're exploited. I think people are starting to realize that in the world.

Trade union leaders are usually the first to go, then journalists and politicians. Look at Burma, for example, and look at East Timor and Tibet, as the hon. member mentioned. These are the areas and these are the people on the front lines who put their very necks on the line. We don't see much of that in Canada. We don't have that kind of level of intolerance. Perhaps the Surrey school board may be an exception, but generally we have good human rights in Canada.

What can we do about it? The hon. member raised that issue. Yes, we can talk to the Team Canada mission. I was there with a delegation that went to Egypt once, and we told President Mubarek. . . . We raised the issue of journalists being in jail, and it was quite striking when it was done. So what can be done?

We can do other things. We can talk about the issue of Hong Kong, where political rights and rights of association need to continue after the takeover by China on July 1. British Columbia is a friend of China. We have trade people in Hong Kong; we have trade people in China; we have trade missions across the Pacific. We can say that as a friend of China and as a friend of Indonesia we want you to respect human rights in certain areas. We can say to Mr. Tung Chee-hwa -- who's also a businessman in Vancouver but who will be administering Hong Kong after July 1 -- that as a friend of China, please respect the rights of association, the rights of free speech and the rights of assembly there.

There's lots that we can do, and I'm glad that the member has raised this. We'll raise it with Team Canada, and we'll raise it in our trade delegations. We can raise it through our labour representatives. Ken Georgetti has spoken up about Third World exploitation of cheap labour. We can raise it continually. There are things we can do; I think we've got to do them. I congratulate the member for raising this human rights issue, which is a universal issue for all of us on this planet.

D. Symons: I thank very much the member for Vancouver-Fraserview, because I think that on this issue all people on both sides of the House can agree with much of what both of us are saying. He's touched on some of the topics that I want to conclude with.

It's not only ethnic minorities in resource-rich areas such as East Timor that are being persecuted; those protecting the environment, human rights workers and union workers are also targeted. Following a police raid on the Indonesian Democratic Party headquarters last July, more that 100 peaceful political human rights and labour activists were jailed. Dita Sari, leader of the Indonesian workers' struggle, remains in detention and faces charges under an anti-subversion law which carries a death penalty -- that's for organizing workers. There is also Marsinah, who led a successful job action and then headed up a bargaining unit that won significant wage improvements. Five days later she was found dead. She'd been beaten, and her vagina had obviously been violently penetrated by some large object.

These are awful tales of the denial of basic human rights. What are we as a country, as a province or as individuals doing? What has the British Columbia government said on behalf of all of us about these abuses? Not much. What is the B.C. Federation of Labour doing to support their brothers and sisters under oppressive regimes? Not enough. What are we as citizens doing to boycott products produced in countries that use child labour, prison labour or sweatshops to make the products imported to our stores? Not nearly enough.

Under the new order in Indonesia, wages are kept low to attract multinationals. Workers average a dollar a day, and children as young as 13 work ten-hour days. 

[ Page 3277 ]

Products like Nike are produced in Indonesia and Vietnam. A young woman in a Nike factory had some of her fingers crushed in a machine. The compensation that worker received -- total -- for the loss of her fingers was $25. Because of her injury she is no longer employable.

While we seek trade relations with developing nations, we must also at the same time insist on some degree of human rights and working conditions before we do business. Countries attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Vancouver this November must be told that Canada and British Columbia will not do business with countries or companies that do not meet the UN resolution on human rights and the convention on the rights of the child.

G. Brewin: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

G. Brewin: Unfortunately, I think the group has just left -- from Bothell, Washington, United States, a group of 36 grade 6 students with their teacher Ms. S. Moe. The school is called Crystal Springs. If you see them around in the corridors, say hello, but in here we shall welcome them.

Hon. D. Streifel: Well, it is Friday. After last night, with all the fun that was had by a number of our members, I wish them a weekend of just as much fun in their home ridings doing what we do best -- being politicians. With that, I move that this House do now adjourn.

Hon. D. Streifel moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:11 a.m.

Copyright © 1997: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada