[ Page 6383 ]

The House met at 10:06 a.m.

Prayers.

G. Brewin: Hon. Speaker, I have two introductions to do today. The first one -- a group of students in the gallery are here from Victoria High School. They are 45 grade 11 summer students, studying government process and law-making. They're led by Mr. Walt Christianson. Would the House please make them all welcome.

The second introduction is on behalf of the Law Clerk. His brother Andrew Izard, his wife Kim and their children Mat and Natasha are here, along with Kim's parents, Jim and Elsie Fowler. They're here from Christchurch, New Zealand. Welcome.

The Speaker: We may even contemplate giving the Clerk a chance to get out of this chamber for a moment.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

STANDING UP
FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

I feel that I as an MLA and all of us have a responsibility to stand up for British Columbia. The B.C. government has that responsibility. I feel that the B.C. government is standing up for and has stood up for British Columbia. It is our duty as elected officials, all of us.

I would like to look back at the past six years that I have been honoured to have been an MLA representing Columbia River-Revelstoke in this parliament and in our great province. When we formed government back in 1991, for instance, there was something that really affected all of our province, especially the interior of British Columbia. That was the countervail and the many years of disputes regarding exports of softwood lumber to the United States. This, in my opinion, was very unfair to our province. Many millions of dollars, because of that countervail, were tied up in bank accounts in one way or other but out of circulation and lost to our province.

What did our government do? We as a government worked with the forest companies, the workers and the communities to bring in Forest Renewal B.C. First of all, Forest Renewal B.C. keeps that money -- instead of in some bank account, tied up to do with the countervail -- right here at home in British Columbia. Forest Renewal B.C. invests that money back into the land base for our future generations. Forest Renewal B.C. is about a long-term investment. Forest Renewal B.C. is about jobs for today, also. Therefore B.C. has to ensure that our forests are not, as some past governments have said, a sunset industry; it is a sunrise industry. We've also set up the jobs and timber accord, which is looking at getting more jobs out of the timber, which is one of our greatest resources that is publicly owned in our province. I feel this is one good example of government standing up for our province in Canada.

Another example of standing up for our province: in B.C., past governments looked at exporting one of our greatest resources in bulk form. That was water. Water is, without a doubt, one of our most important resources, because without water we really have nothing. We as a government in 1992 banned the bulk export of water. That is our resource; that is for those youth up in our galleries here today and for many other people in British Columbia. We are saying now that if you wish to export water, it must be done in a bottled form or with value added to the water before it goes to markets in British Columbia, Canada or offshore. For instance, there's a value-added product in that respect in Revelstoke, where's there's bottled water exported throughout the world. I feel this is a good example of government standing up for British Columbia.

There are other examples of people or governments standing up -- or not standing up -- for British Columbia and Canada. I feel, for instance, the federal government hasn't been standing up for British Columbia. We are the fastest-growing province in our country, yet we have really got the short end of the stick in transfer payments in a big, big way. All that British Columbia wants as a province is our fair share.

For instance, highways: the Trans-Canada Highway -- through my riding and the riding of the hon. member for Shuswap, the Kicking Horse canyon, Three Valley Gap. . . . When the Trans-Canada Highway was built in the early sixties with 50-50 dollars from Ottawa, it wasn't finished. I think we still deserve that.

For instance, Ottawa collects $500 million per year in fuel taxes and sends only very few dollars back to our province. This is not good enough. In the last couple of years we've also witnessed massive cutbacks in transfer payments to health, education and social services. As a government, B.C. has determined that we would do our best to protect education and health care despite those massive cutbacks. Yet at the same time, some elected officials said that the cutbacks weren't big enough. It is not good enough to stand up for British Columbia by saying that. Ottawa shouldn't be lowering the deficit on the backs of British Columbians. This is a poor example of the federal government standing up for our province.

Looking back at our history, there are other examples. The Columbia River Treaty was signed 35 years ago. There were 35 long years of neglect by governments. The Columbia basin area gave its valleys, its forests, some of its best producing areas and vital areas for wildlife for the dams to be built so that there could be lights in this Legislature and lights in other parts of the province -- cheap hydro and hydro for export, at terrible cost to the area where I reside. This government set up the Columbia Basin Trust to go some way to offset the terrible thing that happened and that was negotiated away by the British Columbia government of the day and the federal government.

We have set up 18 members -- people that have to live in the Columbia basin -- to sit on that board. We have also turned over $45 million and $2 million for 17 years -- $34 million on top of the $45 million. Those 18 board members that must reside in the basin are empowered as to how that money is invested. I feel that that is standing up for British Columbia -- standing up for the Kootenays' Columbia basin. I am very proud of the Columbia Basin Trust.

I would at this time ask the member on the other side to reply.

[ Page 6384 ]

G. Abbott: First of all, I'd like to thank the member for Columbia River-Revelstoke for his thoughtful remarks. I certainly agree with many of them. Obviously I don't have the time here to comment on the wide range of issues which he has raised, but I do want to make a few comments about the area of diplomatic disputes. I think these comments would apply whether the dispute was between British Columbia and Alberta, British Columbia and Canada, British Columbia and Washington State or British Columbia and the United States.

I too believe in standing up for B.C. More importantly, I believe that it's the role of government to stand up for all British Columbians. When we do that, we need to be aware that our every action produces a reaction and that our words have consequences.

Diplomacy, like politics, is an art rather than a science. The success or failure of any diplomatic initiative is contingent on a whole range of factors. Foremost among these are: number one, the actions which are undertaken; and number two, the words or rhetoric which are spoken. The purpose of diplomacy in most, if not all, instances will be to achieve a certain desired result. A diplomatic initiative will also aim to achieve that desired result without sustaining losses on any other front.

[10:15]

Additionally, I think that parties in diplomatic disputes must have a very keen sense of their respective strengths and weaknesses. If they don't have that, they may well undertake an initiative which is ill-advised.

I also want to say that in our own case -- in the case of British Columbia and the case of Canada because, of course, we are Canadians as well as British Columbians -- when we have differences with our neighbour to the south, the United States, we need to bear in mind that we have a friendship there that extends back 200 years or more. Because we have such deep and enduring economic, social and political relationships with the United States, we must always be mindful of the fact that there is much to be lost as well as won in any diplomatic dispute.

It is also commonplace in international diplomatic disputes to aim rhetoric of conflict and confrontation as much at public opinion at home as at the parties abroad. But most importantly, it is critical to know when to move from the rhetoric of conflict and confrontation to words of reconciliation and accommodation. Through this delicate balance of carrots and sticks and confrontation and reconciliation, we achieve, hopefully, the results which we desire for the people of British Columbia. This, Mr. Speaker, we owe to all British Columbians.

J. Doyle: I'd like to thank my friend the member for Shuswap for his words. I agree with a lot of the things he said. I would also agree with him that we have great friends and neighbours and long traditions, and many families move back and forth to the south. The United States is a good neighbour, and we're lucky to have a neighbour like that. We don't always agree.

At the present time actually, I've got a family from New York staying at my own home. They were planning to go on the ferry from Prince Rupert up to Alaska. They're looking at other plans, but they're still staying at our house. They know what job I do down here, and I'm looking forward to seeing them tonight.

Hon. Speaker, I feel the present greatest example of standing up for British Columbia is the job our Premier is doing to deal with the rape of our salmon. That is not something that we should be proud of. There has not been an agreement since 1985. The people want to get along. I don't blame our neighbours to the south: I blame the government in Ottawa. Employment from our fisheries is up to 25,000 direct and indirect jobs. Forestry, fisheries and all of those things are what makes this province tick. In the many coastal areas of our province, fisheries are what makes those economies strong and keeps people employed.

Our B.C. Premier has done a great job in trying to get the attention of officials in Ottawa. Some people have said that maybe we should just send a letter to Ottawa. I don't think that's good enough, when we're looking at such a vital, important part of our economy being threatened. To me, and I'm sure to many British Columbians, Ottawa's lack of guts on this issue disturbs me. It really disturbs me that they have not stood up for British Columbia. Why are they not standing up for Canada and B.C.? If anything, in my opinion, they're standing up for our neighbours to the south. That is not their job. I honestly feel that Canadians like John Diefenbaker must be rolling over in their grave -- a nationalistic Canadian like Mr. Diefenbaker -- at the lack of action by our government on the issue of the salmon and the talks.

For instance, I immigrated to Canada in 1967, our centennial year. I became a citizen in 1972. I love this country; I'm a new Canadian. I'm pleased that they let me immigrate into this country. I do my best to contribute back to our great country. My wife is also a new Canadian. I've got two little boys who are very proud to be Canadians, as my wife Judy and I are. We are supposed to be a proud independent nation, and I feel that's the country I immigrated to 1967.

What has happened in the last 30 years, so that the government in Ottawa doesn't stand up for the different parts of our country? We are the number one country in the world. I ask our federal government to get some backbone, to stand up for British Columbia and not to forget that the ministers that are down in Washington, D.C., this week are representing Canada. That's their mandate; that's their job. British Columbia is one of the biggest growing provinces in all of Canada. Please do your job. I'd like to think we'd be standing up for those youth that are in the gallery and the many other people in British Columbia. That's what elected officials are supposed to do.

The Speaker: For our second statement this morning, the member for Port Moody-Burnaby Mountain.

C. Clark: I'm actually seeking leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

C. Clark: I'm pleased to introduce Brent McKenzie, who is a friend of a friend from Toronto, in the gallery today. He's visiting, getting a firsthand tour. He's with one of my oldest friends, Michael McDonald, who's an employee of the Liberal caucus. I ask the House to make them welcome.

[ Page 6385 ]

The Speaker: I'm sure the member's friends will understand very well my error, because seldom is the member for Port Moody-Burnaby Mountain not willing to speak when given an opportunity.

THE CANADIAN SPACE AGENCY

In June of 1996 Dr. Thirsk was a payload specialist on a 16-day mission aboard the space shuttle Columbia. He designed experiments to study the phenomenon of motion sickness, and he carried these out while in space. I was extremely proud to meet this talented individual, who spoke so passionately about the Canadian space program.

I'm taking the opportunity today to talk about this program because of another imminent proud moment for British Columbia. On Thursday, August 7, 1997, another British Columbian will become the sixth Canadian astronaut to venture into space. Mr. Bjarni Tryggvason was chosen in November 1996 to be a payload specialist for the mission STS-85, aboard the space shuttle Discovery. If the legislative schedule allows, I have been invited and hope to see the launch in person.

Like Dr. Thirsk, Mr. Tryggvason also has an impressive history that's rooted in B.C. He completed his high school in Richmond and received a degree in engineering physics from UBC in 1972. He was accepted into the Canadian astronaut program during their first recruitment in 1983.

Mr. Tryggvason's selection for this mission offers him an unusual opportunity for astronauts. He'll have the opportunity to work with experimental space technology which he was instrumental in developing. This is the microgravity vibration isolation mount, or the MIM. It was derived from research conducted by Dr. Tim Salcudean from UBC. This technology reduces interference with sensitive scientific experiments that occurs because of on-board operation of equipment such as fans, pumps, thrusters and the like. Even the movement of astronauts in the shuttle can ruin experiments that rely on microgravity experiments. Mr. Tryggvason has worked with the MIM technology on NASA's KC-135 aircraft -- also lovingly known as the "Vomit Comet," a charming name -- as part of the Canadian Space Agency's microgravity sciences program.

Last year, on April 23, the first MIM unit was launched into space on a Russian space craft that is now aboard the Mir space station. Mr. Tryggvason's mission will take the second MIM unit into space. It will be the first unit to be used in NASA's space shuttle program. This is truly a unique moment for B.C., with a British Columbia astronaut taking British Columbia technology into space to assist the success of international microgravity experiments.

The Canadian astronaut program was formed in 1983, in response to an invitation by the U.S. to fly an astronaut aboard the shuttle. Primarily, Canadian astronauts are scientists whose studies focus on space sciences, life sciences or space technology. Canada will work cooperatively with the U.S., Russia, Japan and the European Space Agency on the development of the world's first international permanently manned space station in orbit. Canada's space agency has an impressive history of contributions to manned space exploration.

In addition to the impressive individuals who have been selected for missions aboard the space shuttles and the Canadarm robotics technology, Canada has also contributed invaluably to other sophisticated technology. I'd just like to mention a couple of them. First, the advanced space vision system was designed and developed by the National Research Council in collaboration with the Canadian Space Agency. This impressive technology provides exact information on the location, orientation and motion of a specified object. It instantly gives a computerized map of the position of an object in relation to the shuttle.

The second development which is truly Canadian, which we can all be proud of, is the IMAX cargo bay camera. The cargo bay camera was created by three Canadian film-makers: Graeme Ferguson, Robert Kerr and Roman Kroiter. I'm sure we've all seen the beautiful pictures from the cargo bay camera which show the dramatic and breathtaking beauty of the Earth below. Some of the camera features are The Dream Is Alive, an IMAX space film featuring the mission and landing of the space shuttle Challenger with Canadian payload specialist Dr. Marc Garneau and footage from another mission by a Canadian astronaut, Dr. Bondar, and it's featured in the film Destiny in Space.

Hon. Speaker, I think we can be very proud of our brave Canadian astronauts who risk their lives to ride into space to further knowledge of space and life sciences. We can be proud of the unique technology which Canadians have developed to enhance the success of experiments in space. We can be very proud of our film technology that has been developed by Canadians and that allows those of us who are destined to be earthbound to experience the beauty and excitement of space exploration. But mostly for today, I ask the members of this chamber and the citizens of this province to be proud of our newest astronaut, the British Columbian Mr. Bjarni Tryggvason.

M. Sihota: I have just a few comments. First of all, certainly I know that all British Columbians were proud to see that the first British Columbian in space was Mr. Thirsk, and in that context certainly there's much to be proud of as British Columbians.

Our contribution, of course, extends beyond just individuals involved in these missions. As the member correctly notes, we've made significant contributions as a province from a technological point of view. In fact, we've got much to offer the world in terms of our contributions in that regard.

In addition to the points that the hon. member made about technologies, there certainly are other technologies that have been developed both in Canada and in British Columbia. The hon. member referred to the Canadarm technology, and that's certainly one. We have developed a remote manipulator system now that augments that type of technology, so that we can sort of reach in and pick up bits and bites or make adjustments on equipment adjacent to the actual space station itself. I think that's a reflection of the expansion of the kind of technology that we've developed here in Canada.

In addition to that, we've had other organizations like Radarsat International and British Columbia companies like 

[ Page 6386 ]

MacDonald Dettwiler. The kind of work these companies do in developing imaging and mapping instruments gives us a better reading on what's happening here on Earth. I think one of the most useful applications of this kind of technology is to try to assist us as a society to deal with the implications of global warming and give us as a society a better read on what's transpiring on this planet. At the end of day, the real purpose as to why we send people up in space is to get a better read on what's happening here on Earth.

[10:30]

For example, in terms of floods and flood patterns as a result of global warming, it is disturbing in the context of British Columbia to see some of the changes that are happening in this region of the world, which we can delineate over time. For example, the exposure -- and I don't see the member for Chilliwack here -- to flooding along the Fraser River, particularly around the Chilliwack area, has increased over the last two decades, and it is largely attributable to factors such as global warming.

Second, through this type of mapping and remote-sensing technology, we have a better understanding of what's happening with our fish resources. Quite frankly, the technology has now advanced to the point where we can say to a fishboat out there: "Move to a certain location in order to catch more fish." Because of the kinds of spectrums that will bounce off the ocean as the data is then analyzed, we are actually at the point now where we can tell them exactly which species of fish are located at different quadrants of the ocean. It's remarkable in terms of how we've been able to better understand the spectrums that bounce back up off the ocean that allow the understanding of the fish out there. That gives a better sense of what's happening. We know, for example, that about two years ago about 1.5 million fish from the Fraser River didn't show up, partially because of global warming variables, and we were able to discern that from the technology that was available to us, which augments these missions that go up there.

In addition to that, it has helped us both on a global and on a provincial basis to become more aware of food production technologies, demands and the like. Because we can better monitor what's happening from space, we can ascertain the level of, for example, wheat or rice that will be produced in a particular year. That then allows those countries, particularly developing countries, to make judgments in terms of surpluses, which they can put into export markets, or shortfalls, which will then help us better understand what is required from other jurisdictions in order to maintain proper food provision balances between one nation and another. That clearly has an economic benefit, because one can always begin to buy wheat and rice at lower prices with that kind of information at hand.

So it's more than simply what we often see on television, which is just an image of people up in space; it's really the fact that that kind of data that they put into place provides us with an ability to make thoughtful judgments in terms of environment, our economy and our food structures here on Earth.

S. Hawkins: I appreciate the member's comments and his recognition of the cooperation between international communities and the work they do together -- and the valuable information they provide when they do work together.

Last week the director of NASA was quoted as saying that the Americans and Russians will never have to compete in space again. Russians and Americans are sharing the risk of being on the Mir space station today. A replacement crew will travel to Mir next month and again will carry Russians and Americans. I think the most optimistic feature of space exploration today is the international cooperation that is being seen and the development of the international space station. Each of the partners will have access to this permanently manned space station through its astronauts.

Over the next five years Canada's astronauts will play a critical role by participating in at least five manned missions, leading to the assembly of the international space station, and Canadian technology will be featured, bridging two space cultures, Russian and American. Nothing highlights more to me the importance of maintaining positive relations with our international friends than the international cooperative space effort. The international space station is a symbol that we can achieve more together than we could ever achieve divided. In that context, we should reject the forces in our societies that seek to divide us from our friends and partners. We should oppose those whose goal is to instigate divisions amongst us for their own shortsighted purposes.

The international community is not the enemy of B.C. The international space station will be proof that we all really can get along. British Columbians like Dr. Robert Thirsk and Mr. Bjarni Tryggvason are exemplary role models. Let us lead the international community by example; let us succeed in being good neighbours and good partners. And today, let's hope that Mr. Bjarni Tryggvason has a successful and safe mission.

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACIES
AND OUR YOUTH

When our government took office in 1991, land use tensions were running high. We introduced a number of measures, including the CORE planning process, the forest land reserve, the Forest Practices Code and the B.C. Treaty Commission, to help bring certainty and stability to land use questions. We also embarked upon a major protected-areas strategy, and in doing so we became one of the few jurisdictions in the world that would act upon the United Nations recommendations to protect 12 percent of our land base. We're almost there. Give us a few more years, and we'll reach that goal. But in doing so, during the last election, we made a commitment loud and clear to in fact carry on with the continued environmental protection and enhancement that is so important for our youth. They are the ones who are going to inherit our future. They're the ones who are going to carry the banner.

[ Page 6387 ]

Just in this past year alone, we've announced $1.2 million in funding to 68 community groups for salmon stream restoration under the urban salmon habitat program. Good news. Good news for our youth, good news for our salmon, good news for the province. Perhaps Ottawa could take note of that type of action. We've also sought a federal ban on sewage dumping in 50 sensitive freshwater lakes and marine water bodies. I hope it's not a surprise to the members opposite that 23 new lower mainland parks have been announced and created, increasing the amount of protected areas within that region to 14 percent. We don't hear any applause or any congratulations from that side of the House. That's shameful. We don't hear comments from that side of the House.

Getting to our environmental legacy. . . . This, at times, is not a friendly place, and we have to encourage speaking on the issues that are important to our constituents -- in particular, our youth. We've implemented, just for the greater Victoria area, a special commission report that recommended adding 5,000 hectares of parkland in the Sooke Hills, which are in the constituency that I represent. That will ensure greater area protection for our drinking water supply, an important thing for the people within the capital regional district. I hope that some of the members opposite take the time in the future to go out there and have a look at that beautiful protected area.

We've also expanded hazardous waste protection programs to ensure that the industry and the government work together and also involve our youth in such programs.

It's important that we also recognize that the legacy we've established and created since 1992 is a total of 246 new parks and protected areas, something we should be proud of and say loud and clear. I would encourage my friends opposite to join in that applause and to get out there and say that this is important for our youth. This is an incredible opportunity for our future.

What role does our youth have to play? A very important role. With our B.C. E-team, our environment team, we've made sure that our young people take an active role. I look to my own riding, Malahat-Juan de Fuca, where we established an E-team program. We had the Juan de Fuca Marine Trail, which employed over 120 youth over a two-year period, to build a legacy for our province, something to enjoy. By the turn of this century it's projected that more than 100,000 visitors each year will enjoy that 47-kilometre trail. It was built with the hard labour, sweat and effort of our young people. They went in there and dug their heels in; they did an incredible job, with opportunities that were never available before. We made sure that displaced forest workers were there to give them guidance in the skills that they needed to learn so that they could go on to other professions. In that program there was an announcement of $10.3 million to fund environmental youth teams, this year alone. The teams are broken down into three components.

I have to get this out, because I had made mention of some of our other initiatives and things that we've done this year where we tie our youth in. Environmental interns: young people will work in structured workplaces with companies to gather the skills and knowledge so that they can go on to their future. There is the Eco Education program to work with the recycling community to encourage us to reduce the volume of products and items that go into our waste stream. The other area which I touched on dealt with the Juan de Fuca Marine Trail. The work crews: six-person teams go out there and gather those skills and knowledge. They are in the field now. They are doing the job to protect our legacy, to enhance our legacy for our future.

I think it's important to note that we are proud of our record. We want to make sure that that record carries on. We can't just rest on our laurels. We have to carry on in the future, because that's important.

C. Clark: On this side we do understand the rules of this House, which are that private members' statements need to be non-partisan. The private members' statements today are an opportunity for members to speak about issues that are important to them, in a non-partisan manner. So in my response to the member, I will respect the rules, and I will make some constructive, non-partisan comments in the spirit of the rules of this House.

Interjection.

C. Clark: I'd be happy to do that.

The Speaker: Members, I think now both sides have had their opportunity to push the envelope, and I would suggest that the member's original statement was indeed a touch provocative and, I think, gratuitous. I appreciate the fact that the member is acknowledging that but is not going to engage in that kind of debate, which will clearly violate the temper of the standing order and the intent of the standing order.

C. Clark: I will keep my comments as non-partisan as I can in response to the member's discussion about a legacy for the environment for youth in British Columbia, because I believe that the most important legacy we can leave for future generations, for youth. . . . I don't think they're our youth. They're young British Columbians. The legacy we can leave those young British Columbians is clean air, clean water, air that's breathable, water that they can swim in and water that they can drink, and parks that they can use and parks that are protected.

[10:45]

I want to see a province where we not only meet those commitments that the government made, apparently so cavalierly, but a province where the government maybe does something like shuts down Burrard Thermal so that we can meet those commitments. And the member for everywhere did say earlier that our failure to meet those commitments on global warming will increase the exposure to flooding in the Chilliwack River. He noted the threats to species from global warming; he noted the impact on the fishery from global warming.

I would like to suggest to the government that the way to ensure that we leave an environmental legacy to the youth of British Columbia is by first ensuring that there's clean air to breathe. The way to do that is to meet the commitments that we made. So I will offer him my commitment to work with 

[ Page 6388 ]

this government when and if it finds the desire to improve air quality in British Columbia. When and if it can revive the commitment to do that, I will stand behind them. I want to offer that commitment sincerely to the hon. member, because of all the things that we can do for clean air, for clean water, for a healthy land base, that is certainly one of them.

I will ask the hon. member, when he responds to my comments -- which I'm sure he will in a thoughtful and non-partisan manner -- to tell us that the government will remain committed to its promise that we will reduce CO2 emissions in British Columbia to 1990 levels by the year 2000. I will ask him to reiterate that commitment, and I will ask him to reassure the members of this House that that commitment still stands, that we will meet it and that it's a promise that they intend to keep.

R. Kasper: I appreciate the comments. I will say this: our government -- this province -- has led Canada in its efforts to reduce the levels. It's our job to encourage the rest of the country to catch up to where we are in British Columbia, and I think that's important because we're Canadians. We want to make sure that we have the highest standards in the world. That's something we have to do collectively.

I appreciate the hon. member's comments related to joining with us, but I find those words hollow.

The Speaker: Member, I am going to cut you off right there, if I may. We know the rules of standing order 25A, and we are now very much in danger of going beyond, and I will not tolerate that. We have functioned rather well in this session without violating the rules of standing order 25A, and we're not going to make standing order 25A an opportunity and excuse for attacking one another. That's where the line will be drawn. I give the member that caution. So please be careful. Please proceed.

R. Kasper: I would never breach those rules in the House.

In closing, I just want to restate our commitment that, hopefully, we will work together and that the commitment is honoured on that side of the House. I think it's important that when there are major announcements dealing with our youth, such as environment youth teams -- for example, in Fort Langley-Aldergrove, a tremendous opportunity for youth, a tremendous opportunity. . . . Again, I'm just touching on and responding to the offer to work together. I would hope that we would hear some applause and some congratulations on those types of announcements in the lower mainland supporting our youth through the environment youth teams.

But I would just like to close on some of the projects that have been announced in the riding that I represent -- and I think it's very important -- such as a partnership formed with the Pacheenaht nation and a company, Sia-o-sun Development Group, which is taking on some interns that are going to go out there and actively promote aboriginal tourism in the Sooke area. It's going to be done through the utilization of the Juan de Fuca Marine Trail to also identify archeological sites and to protect those sites, to ensure that our youth have training and that our aboriginal youth have an opportunity for their future.

I know that when these programs have been announced in the past, the big question is: "What happens with individuals that go and are employed originally with these programs?" Well, the proponent and the owner of Sia-o-sun Development Group was one of the individuals who worked with the original E-team projects dealing with the Juan de Fuca Marine Trail. He has now become an entrepreneur. He is out there working with the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, getting young park wardens trained so that they can carry on with their future. I think that's important for our youth, and I make no apologies for embracing our youth. I think it's important. We should embrace our youth, because they are our future and they are our legacy, as the projects and the parks that we have established over the past six years are a legacy for all British Columbians.

CRIME ON OUR STREETS

Three months ago I wrote an article to all my constituents through the local newspapers. The reason for doing that was because home invasions, break-ins, auto thefts and other property crimes, both minor and major, were becoming an increasing worry and concern to many of my constituents. At the time that I wrote this letter, it was made clear to British Columbians, through the government's offices, that we actually should begin to relax and feel more secure because crime was down in our province. Statistics for crime presented at the time were quoted as being down. Unfortunately, after checking these numbers, I had to come to the conclusion that they were not down but that it was just a matter of a different way of compiling the statistics and the way they were presented to the community.

The rate of crime in British Columbia is very high. It is up in many areas. The recent statistics from two reliable sources have been published, and these are a serious cause for alarm. At the same time, we have not seen the introduction of any positive change that has affected the ongoing crime in the streets in the large jurisdictions in British Columbia.

Crime in the city of Vancouver has expanded at a significant rate, and it is beginning to spill over into many other communities and towns. It should be noted that the property crime rate in Vancouver alone is now 184 percent of the Canadian average. In my own riding, West Vancouver-Garibaldi, home break-ins, thefts of various types and invasions are becoming an unwelcome phenomenon that has struck fear into my constituents. Not a week goes by that the local media throughout my riding -- on the North Shore, in Squamish, in Whistler, in Pemberton -- doesn't have articles and letters that appear about the criminal activity that is invading these areas. It's everywhere. What concerns me today is that I'm wondering where the effective hand of government is to stop this criminal activity and return our communities to the safe havens they once were.

Personal friends of mine -- and, for that matter, the Premier of the province himself -- have recently joined the unfortunate ranks of those who have become victims of crime. For anyone who is thinking that I'm referring to so-called minor crimes, I would remind them that it is a fact that toleration of the so-called minor crimes -- often caused by drug and alcohol offences in the streets -- as well as break-ins, 

[ Page 6389 ]

create an environment of permissiveness that breeds more serious crime.

Most of us have an image of our community that we are proud of, and we think it is the best place to live. We would be foolish, however, to lull ourselves into a false sense of security. We need to protect what we have built up. Protection only comes through action.

It is well known that drug use is at the base of the majority of these criminal activities. Unfortunately, we have seen this activity invade our local scene, with deadly results, more than once in the past year.

We have to ask: where is the leadership that moves to prevent crime? Surely, to take action before a crime takes place is preferable to taking action after the damage has been done. Doesn't it make sense to alter the priorities, to shift more significant portions of the policing expenditures into the area of prevention? The Crown is responsible to take action to protect against and prevent crime. If there are problems with prosecution, sentencing, jail and prevention, we as the lawmakers need to take the required action. If, in fact, current legislation is not adequate, Mr. Speaker, change it. If current legislation is adequate, then what are we waiting for? Why are we not using it?

There are many, many statistics. I will not dwell on many, but I will quote briefly from one recent StatsCan report. In the areas of homicide, robbery, major assaults, break and enter and auto theft in the largest metropolitan area in our province, the city of Vancouver, the crime rate exceeds the national average by up to 200 percent.

The Vancouver Board of Trade recently unveiled its study on property crime. The bottom line of this report is that crime has overrun the commitment to control it. Can we do anything about this, or is it just a hopeless situation about which nothing can be done? Not at all.

It is not crimes that cannot be solved or criminals that cannot be found or any other problems that reflect the fact that crime cannot be figured out. We know full well what is wrong. Criminals are allowed to take advantage of a system with problems -- full jails and a minimization and acceptance of the presence of so-called minor crime. We have not taken a firm stand on the often-studied topics of punishment, rehabilitation, education and crime prevention or on the overall topic of enforcement, and it is time for this to happen.

I believe that there are adequate legislation, rules and regulations all in place. It is enforcement of all these rules and regulations that has fallen behind. It is stated that a lack of available funds is the reason for a lack of enforcement and assessment of the cost of crime. If that's the case, we have to change it. The direct and indirect cost, the short-term and long-term impacts, are larger than the cost of protecting us all in a manner and to the degree required for us to feel a reasonable amount of security. We safeguard our safety in our homes and our businesses. We need to see changes; we need to see action.

We should all acknowledge that what is presently being tried or what has been implemented in recent years is not working in our best interests or protecting us from the ever-increasing threat of crime in our communities. I'm receiving calls and written communications from citizens demanding some enforcement and some results. I hate the word "war," but here I truly believe that we have to start a war against crime in British Columbia. Even though people's opinions are being heard, they have to be acted upon. We need to look at what action has been planned to prevent more crime. We could ask ourselves: do we have a plan that all our citizens can look at? That is the question: is there a plan to fight crime in British Columbia?

The Speaker: Responding to the statement, the Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture.

Hon. J. Pullinger: Actually, I'm not responding to the statement, hon. Speaker. I am asking leave of the House to make an introduction. Nice try.

The Speaker: That's twice this morning I've been embarrassed.

Leave granted.

Hon. J. Pullinger: Hon. Speaker, on your behalf and mine, I would like to welcome to the House today a friend and former trustee of the Nanaimo-Ladysmith school district and the new president of the Francophone Education Authority of British Columbia, Nicole Hennessey. I would ask the members to join with me in affording her a very warm welcome indeed.

The Speaker: I thank the member for Surrey-Whalley for allowing the interruption.

[11:00]

First of all, let me talk about the leadership of our Attorney General. When the issue of home invasion faced our communities, our Attorney General responded quickly. He invested in programs that supported the police team, in dedicating himself to preventing and finding solutions to home invasion. He put dollars on the table. Our Attorney General developed youth programs: the youth anti-racism group, and the youth action team in Vancouver. He organized crime prevention projects: the Nights Alive program, providing positive recreational alternatives for youth; a program called All Together Now, groundbreaking early intervention for elementary school children; a provincewide youth-against-violence contact line; skills-based violence prevention programs; and a special trained police network for youth crime prevention.

On serious crime, for unsolved homicides, the Attorney General provided a unit that had access to advanced police investigation techniques, such as DNA testing and a violent crimes computer analysis system. We also invested in a dental lab that launched Canada's first forensic dentistry lab at UBC. The list of initiatives from this government is long.

While the member indicated that it's important for us to provide resources and support for policing, I think the member also touched on a really important aspect that has to do with crime prevention itself. That's based on the reality that crime is an indicator of the health of our communities. It's a recognition that government alone cannot prevent or solve crime. Indeed, the question of crime prevention and safety in our community belongs to all of us. It's a recognition that providing community policing and bike patrols, making police more visible in our communities, is only part of the answer.

[ Page 6390 ]

The answer is also Block Watch, where communities look after each other, where neighbours understand that by looking out for themselves and for neighbours they can prevent crime, support each other and make communities feel safer all around. It's also an indication that by us all accepting our responsibility in attacking the roots of crime, in breaking down the isolation, in understanding that healthy communities are often the solution to reducing crime, we can go a long way.

Some years ago I had the privilege of meeting with the UBCM, and I'll not forget a meeting that I had with a council member from a northern community. That council member came to me, then as the Minister of Social Services, and talked to me about a family of young children whom he felt did not have the kind of parental supervision that was necessary. I asked him at the time whether the children were actually causing a problem. He said: "No, but they will eventually."

What he was looking for was the big hand of government to come in and solve the problem. Indeed, what he was suggesting was that Social Services come, take those children away and put them in a foster home. What I suggested to him -- if he could not give me evidence that the children were at risk -- was that perhaps as a community, they should look at organizations like Big Brothers or Big Sisters, look at opportunities such as the Boys and Girls Club. Or indeed, if those weren't options for their community, he himself could organize a baseball team to give those young people a positive alternative.

The health of our communities, looking after each other, is the best way to forestall the kind of deterioration in society that brings about a demand for increased policing, more prisons. I think we would all agree that those would be laudable objectives.

T. Nebbeling: Truly I appreciate everything the member opposite said on the subject because, like the member herself, I also believe that the ultimate objective is to get this terrible problem under control by creating healthy communities and being part of the whole healthy-community movement that's happening, not just in British Columbia but throughout the world.

At the same time, I must also state that to achieve that goal of a healthy community where the community members themselves are involved in keeping a good social climate, a good economic climate, that will allow children to grow up in an environment where crime is not a need, an option or even a way out -- as happens so very often today -- I think we have to realize that we have to start exercising action today that will lead indeed to creating that climate. We cannot just say: "Here's the objective: a healthy community that will be responsible for its children and its community members." We have to find the route together. That route is going to be a difficult one, and that route will include an enforcement approach where the police are convinced that they will be backed up when they tackle the crime, a route where we go into the streets -- and again I don't like to use the word "war" -- where we physically and actively pursue the people who will just not be part of our social system as it should be.

Only if we are taking that step of enforcement and are willing to put the funds behind that enforcement, so that it effectively becomes a cleanup period. . . . I believe that at the end of that process we will be able to go with what the member is strongly promoting -- and what I've always supported -- a healthy community with healthy families bringing up healthy youth. But that cannot be done without first doing some healing, and that healing has to be done through strict enforcement of our laws. Only then do I believe that we will achieve our goal of a healthy community without the crime that we see today.

Hon. D. Streifel: This morning we'll be operating in two Houses again. In Committee A, we call Committee of Supply to debate the estimates of the Ministry for Children and Families. In this House, we will call Committee of the Whole to debate Bill 43.

INDUSTRY TRAINING
AND APPRENTICESHIP ACT

On section 1.

L. Reid: I am pleased to respond to this bill in committee this morning. I am seeking some clarification on behalf of a number of individuals who are very interested in the future of this particular commission.

Under definitions in section 1, "compulsory certification occupation" and "compulsory certification trade," could the minister highlight whether or not the occupation designation will be forward-looking in terms of looking at trades that haven't been represented under the previous apprenticeship board? I'm looking to hear about issues surrounding aerospace training, brand-new technologies, knowledge-based industry and whether or not that particular reference will be expansive enough to include knowledge-based industry.

Hon. P. Ramsey: Before we deal with the member's specific question, I want to explain why we have two ministers and two different sets of staff here to deal with committee stage of Bill 43. As I said at second reading, this is a bill that I and the Minister of Labour jointly carry the responsibility for, so we are both going to be dealing with committee stage. For the information of the members, I am responsible for the odd-numbered parts, 1, 3 and 5, and my colleague is responsible for the even-numbered parts, 2 and 4.

Assisting me today is Stella Bailey, the manager of the legislation unit of the governance and legislation branch in the Ministry of Education, Skills and Training.

In response to the member's question, yes. Initially, the occupations that are compulsory certified trades will be the list of 11 that are certified under the apprenticeship branch right now. Cabinet will institute a new regulation under this act rather than under the Apprenticeship Act, which is going to be repealed.

The commission will have the authority. . . . If there are additional trades which should be subject to compulsory certification rules, it will be their responsibility to recommend to the ministers, and then they would go to cabinet for approval. I believe that this does provide the commission with the ability to look broadly at what trades should be subject to compulsory certification. But more importantly, because of the structure of it, it will deal with all the ramifications of doing that, because it has employers, employees and educators running the commission itself. There are clear implications for making a trade subject to compulsory certification, and you want to make sure that you're dealing with those before you do so.

L. Reid: I appreciate the minister's response, and I thank him very much for introducing the staff present today. Welcome.

[ Page 6391 ]

In terms of the general understanding that I believe needs to be in place about what distinguishes a trade from an occupation, I appreciate the minister's comment that the power of this will be in the regulation -- i.e., whether or not any additional trades are added to the existing 11.

What are the criteria for the establishment of someone to be part of an occupation or for a particular type of work to be considered an occupation as opposed to a trade?

Hon. P. Ramsey: They are probably close to interchangeable terms -- almost synonyms. I think trades, obviously compulsory certified trades, are a subset of broader occupations in the province, but are clearly occupations that have a defined set of skills and abilities. There are many current and emerging occupations that might fall under this commission and that the commission might be interested in working on training regimes for. But the short answer to the member's question is that there's no real distinction between those terms, other than a compulsorily certified trade as a particular subset of occupations.

[11:15]

My question -- and perhaps it will just be something that's determined by regulation in the future -- is around the knowledge-based aerospace industry, and I'll give the minister an example. Avcorp Industries in my riding crafted a program in terms of arriving at an immediate remedy for a shortage of qualified individuals to work at this particular company that needed this particular skill set. It was a program short in duration. In terms of where this legislation will now go in terms of certification, are they going to be considered a trade or an occupation? I only ask because I have other knowledge-based industries who wonder if the process for certification is different if it's a trade or it's an occupation. If the minister tells me that they're the same and the process is the same, I will accept that.

Hon. P. Ramsey: I want to make sure that we've got everything clear about how this works, and then I'll respond to the member's particular question. The commission has the authority to designate a trade or an occupation -- they're interchangeable -- as something that will be provided through an apprenticeship program or through some other training program. That's one of its fundamental roles. A subset of that would be these compulsory certified trades, of which there are currently only 11. Making it a compulsory certified trade has clear implications, because employers aren't allowed to employ somebody in that area unless they have a certification under that, so it's quite a restrictive sort of certification.

The group of designated trades is far broader. It currently includes three aerospace trades or occupations, and it may well include more. In my discussions with my colleague and those who put together the proposal for ITAC, there was a clear recognition that apprenticeship was a viable and vibrant way of providing training and education. The whole purpose of this legislation is to expand the number of trades that are being trained for and to make sure that we are responding not just to the traditional trades or occupations but to new and emerging ones.

L. Reid: I appreciate the minister's comment about apprenticeship needing to be new and vibrant. I certainly support that. I think where the disillusionment has come in the past is that apprenticeship programs have been excessively long for the needs of many, many companies. Programs that have tended to last four and five years have not been able to respond quickly to the immediate needs of business. That workforce certainly completed very satisfactory training, no question, but the length of time was just too long, frankly.

So I certainly support the minister's comments about the vibrancy that is required, and I would hope that this occupation designation will also include co-op programs and mentorship -- that those can be folded into this new commission -- because apprenticeship is simply one vehicle in terms of on-the-job training. If indeed this is looking at expanding, under the definition section, to include some other perhaps more useful ways to arrive at a highly skilled workforce, that would please me as well. Could the minister comment on where the film industry currently sits? Is that now sitting as a designated trade or a designated occupation?

Hon. P. Ramsey: We are, in a way, almost doing some second reading debate here vis-�-vis the definition of "designated trade" and "compulsory certification trade" under section 1. Let me just say a couple of things briefly. First, which trades are chosen to be designated is in the hands of the commission. That's why we have it. The length and form the training takes is in the hands of the commission. That's why we have it. The commission employs both workers and employers so that it is responsive to some of the concerns that the member raised.

The point the member makes about apprenticeship not being the only way of training is right. That's why this commission has responsibility for what used to be the apprenticeship training under the Minister of Labour and for entry level trades training, which was the responsibility of the Minister of Education, Skills and Training. Both those programs and that funding will be the responsibility of the commission, so it is bringing the sort of trades training we've had in at least two ways in our education and training systems -- and probably more -- together into this commission and empowering industry and workers themselves to decide how the training is delivered and which ones are designated trades.

L. Reid: This is my final comment on this section. When the minister says very clearly that all of this responsibility is in the hands of the commission, will this come back to employers and students in the system through regulation?

Hon. P. Ramsey: The designation of a trade will be done by bylaw of the commission. They will be responsible for publicizing it. Making a trade subject to compulsory certification is done by order-in-council, by regulation. It will be done, of course, through the regular routes that OICs go through.

Section 1 approved.

On section 2.

R. Masi: In terms of the concept of joint administration, I commented that I had some concerns on this the other night in second reading. I would like to establish here the rationale for this.

It seems to me that in terms of any difficulties that may come up relative to the operation of the commission, this has 

[ Page 6392 ]

to be referred to a decision-making level beyond the commission. Now, I realize that this is not going to come up every month, every year or anything. The commission is an independent body and will probably operate very successfully. But human nature being what it is, concerns do come, and they will have to move to a certain level.

In my experience, dualities and joint operations are not an effective method of administration. I have some concerns here, because ministers change and governments change. It's possible that while the personnel who are in place right now may cooperate well and do well, this may not always be the case.

I have to make the comment that in terms of this section, it seems to me that in the last session in the House there was one minister that looked after Education, Skills and Training and Labour, which fit well at that time. But now, with the change in ministries, I would like to ask: will there be some second thoughts on this organizational structure?

Hon. P. Ramsey: First I'd like to say that the member is right. The difficulty of two ministers jointly responsible didn't exist when the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin was Minister of Education, Skills and Training and Minister of Labour. But it is important that we have this dual or joint responsibility. It sends a clear signal to those who are involved in and concerned about apprenticeship and trades training.

The signal is this. The days past, when we essentially had two systems for trades training -- one called apprenticeship, which was the responsibility of the Ministry of Labour; and one called entry-level trades training, which was the responsibility of the Ministry of Education, Skills and Training -- are over. Some of the small-p political fights and challenges and scrapping between the two systems are over, as well.

The dual responsibility here reflects the new responsibilities of this commission. It says that we intend to keep on bringing this training system together across the piece and not have it over in Labour or over in Education but independently, with responsibility to those who benefit from trades training and apprenticeship -- the employers and the workers -- in a commission that also includes the educators charged with delivering the programs.

It says that this is the commission that has the responsibility and signals just how important it is that this reflects both Labour and Education. We are jointly responsible for it.

So on that level, I think it's very important both that it be present in legislation and that we demonstrate that in the way we're approaching it in the House -- and have, since the introduction of this bill. Now, we recognize that this means that we are going to have to work closely together, and the Minister of Labour and I and our officials are committed to working closely together to ensure that joint administration is a success here.

Just one other note: while formal designation of joint administration in legislation is unusual, the joint responsibility for government programs is really not. For example, I share responsibility for delivery of a B.C. Benefits program called Youth Works with my colleague the Minister of Human Resources, and there are probably dozens of examples across government. So the formal designation in legislation is, admittedly, a bit unusual. I think it's the appropriate thing to do. But the working relationships between ministries and ministers are good, in the development of this act, and I expect them to continue to be good.

Section 2 approved.

On section 3.

L. Reid: The Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission is established as a corporation consisting of the members appointed under section 5. My question is simply around funding in terms of budget. When something is established as a corporation, often it has the ability to garner wealth from other places. If either minister would respond in terms of the financial structure of this new corporation. . . .

[11:30]

L. Reid: I certainly don't mind, as long as the minister is so advised that I will have a number of questions in terms of the ability of this organization to create its own wealth, how they will indeed interface with employers and students in the system and what those costs might be. If that will be responded to, that's fine.

Section 3 approved.

On section 4.

L. Reid: Section 4 mandates the commission, under 4(d), "to increase the proportion of members of underrepresented groups in designated trades and designated occupations." I simply want to know how underrepresented is being defined and certainly who is responsible for providing the stats on whether or not there's growth in those apprenticeships or occupation trade certifications.

Hon. J. Cashore: There are four groups that are traditionally recognized as underrepresented groups: women, persons with disabilities, visible minorities and aboriginal groups. It is recognized that there are emerging issues with regard to youths and displaced workers, and given the way in which ITAC is established, there is the ability within the board to be able to address those emerging issues.

I would also like to acknowledge the presence in the chamber of the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin, whom we named the father of this bill in a somewhat irreverent way the other night. I think he also wants to comment on this section.

M. Sihota: I want to talk for a few minutes about this section of the act, section 4, which I guess in many ways is the heart of the legislation and goes to its very core. In many ways, this section is all about why I'm in politics and, arguably, why most of my colleagues are in politics.

As members of this Legislature and as a tradition in our political party, we have an obligation to speak for the underdog in society. Not everybody goes on to an education in university and college. I see it in my own constituency, where about 90 percent of the kids each year at graduation. . . . You know, when they go up to the stage, they always indicate what they're going to be doing the next year. Sadly, in my view, about 90 percent of them indicate that they're not going on to post-secondary training in the traditional sense of colleges and universities. I have always found that disturbing as I sat there and watched.

When you probe and you talk to them at the grades 8, 9 or 10 level, it's clear that they are thirsting for other oppor-

[ Page 6393 ]

tunities. I think we as a society have failed to provide them with other opportunities, other venues in terms of giving them the skills that are consistent with their aptitudes, their needs and the attributes that they have as human beings.

I think that in Canada generally, and certainly in British Columbia, we have really missed the boat in terms of providing a thoughtful, comprehensive and thorough apprenticeship in the trades and skills development component as part of our ongoing education experience, both for those of the people that I've described and those many, later on in the workplace, who find themselves in need of upgrading their skills in order to maintain their employment. Other jurisdictions -- in Europe, for example -- I think have done better than we have.

It's fair enough for these chaps over here to call me the father of this bill, but I think all of this work started within this government with the current Minister of Employment and Investment when he was Minister of Skills, Training and Labour -- and the current Minister of Education as well -- when we started to look at how we could sort of fill these gaps in the availability of training programs to the young people that require them. This bill, and the mandate that's provided in this section, starts to fill that gap. It gives a real chance to a lot of kids in society who don't often have the chance. It provides them with a way to build upon their skills in a way that we haven't really allowed them in the past, and it challenges business and industry -- as they should -- to play a more proactive role in the design of education and skills development programs. At the end of the day, they know better than most what types of skills are required out in the marketplace and what it's really going to take for young people to make it.

Intuitively, every parent and every child know that their best passport to success is a thorough education. I guess that's why we as a government place such a value and a priority on education in the design of our budget and in the talk about what it is that we are all about as an administration. I don't know how many times the Premier has said: "Health care and education are priorities." But this is why. We realize that this is the passport to success -- a chance for a lot of people who otherwise would not access the college and university systems.

So we have brought forward this legislation to speak to those people, to speak to working-class families in constituencies like mine -- blue-collar families that in the past have built their livelihoods on shipbuilding in Esquimalt. As those opportunities change over time, it's important that we adapt our young people and those in the trades to meet the skills that are in demand now. There is a whole difference between building the Queen of Burnaby and building the catamaran ferries that will be servicing Nanaimo and Vancouver.

As I make my way around the constituency talking to the people that I represent, it pains me as a human being to see people 40, 45, 50 years of age out of work because they have been unable to update their skills. This legislation is for them as much as it is for the grade 12 students who really don't know what they're going to do after a summer of fun.

I say at the outset that this is all about who we are as a political party and the value system that we bring to politics in British Columbia. It goes to the very core of us as New Democrats. It's the glue that binds each and every one of us -- the hope that we think government has to offer. We actually believe on this side of the House that government is a positive instrument, something that can play a positive role in shaping and improving the lives of British Columbians. We don't believe, as they do in some other jurisdictions, that a government is something that just gets in the way, that's an impediment, something that's to be sort of pushed aside so that free enterprise can go on and do their thing. We actually believe that government can play a positive role in improving the quality of life enjoyed by British Columbians, and we try to reflect our value system in that regard -- whether it's the farsighted kind of approaches we've taken around environment or the kind of farsighted approaches that we're taking in this legislation.

This bill is all about speaking to our people, working-class families trying to make it from paycheque to paycheque, going out there paying their mortgages and hoping that they can put aside a little to provide for their children in the future, worrying about what it is that their children are going to be doing tomorrow, when the parents retire, and hoping and praying that they've got the necessary skills. I can tell you, there's a lot of anxiety out there as to whether or not they've got the skills. We've got an obligation as a government to make sure that we do everything in our power to ensure that they get best value for their tax dollars put into education, so as to ensure that they've got those skills and so as to reduce their level of anxiety and give British Columbians some sense of confidence in our education system.

You know, if we do it right -- and I believe that what we've crafted here is something that's right. . . . I actually believe the process that was initiated to get industry, business, academics, instructors and the like together around a table and say: "Look, enough is enough. We can't stick with a system that's existed for maybe the better part of 30 or 40 years; it came from another era." You've got to craft something that's contemporary for today.

I actually believe that we've got it right. If it is right and if the mandate here is right, which I believe it is, then what this means in terms of the long-term prosperity of British Columbia is incredible. It means that we've given people skills to be productive, to be positive about themselves, to be able not only to contribute to society as human beings but to take the knowledge that they've developed and fine-tune it over time so that they can fill market niches in the whole world out there with the skills that we've got to offer. So we go from building catamarans here in British Columbia to being able to provide the expertise to build them all over the world.

This is all about promise. This is all about hope. This is all about values. That's why we on this side of this House are immensely proud of this piece of legislation.

R. Masi: I would just like to comment briefly on the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin's comments. I have to reply by saying that I'm very supportive of the direction of this bill and that our party supported it. I think it's very important that we do, at times, put aside partisan remarks to do something that's good for the country.

I have to say that there is no one on this side of the House, in this party that I represent, that does not consider education as the prime responsibility of legislation and of legislators.

We also understand very clearly that the situation that has existed over the last while in education and training has not been effective. We do a good job in educating a small portion of our students to the highest levels of academic excellence, but there is a great gap out there. There's somewhere in the neighbourhood of 50 percent of our kids who need direction. These are new times, and we support bills like this because these are changing times.

But there's no lack of understanding on this side of the House about somebody who earns a paycheque and has to go 

[ Page 6394 ]

out there and meet the mortgage payments. There's certainly no lack of understanding on this side of the House about kids, the problems they face today and the turmoil they must go through when they're trying to make a choice on what they can do to do well in this world and have the same advantages that I had. My advantage is that I had endless choices, an opportunity that's not there today. So I would like to say that this is not a one-sided approach here. The party I represent has concerns, very much relative to education and the good of kids.

We're somewhere here in section 4. I'm not sure if I interrupted my colleague or not; I think I did, somewhat. We have a duality going over here, too. I would like to. . . . I think it was 4(d). I have concerns about the "under-represented" as well. I hope this does not lead towards absolute quotas. I have a personal aversion to quotas in any form of legislation. So could we have a comment on the direction this is taking relative to quotas?

[11:45]

L. Reid: Again -- to the plethora of respondees on the government benches -- in terms of my original comment on underrepresented groups, I was delighted to hear the minister reference displaced workers in the province. I appreciate that the Premier has taken some responsibility for youth and for youth initiatives, and I commend that.

What continues to concern me. . . . I trust that this approach will remedy some of the great angst and anguish that's out there for individuals today who have worked in an occupation or a trade for sometimes ten, 15 or 20 years, and through no fault of their own, that job no longer exists -- i.e., the mill closes. People still need to pay their mortgages, and there are still tremendous issues around educating their children -- all of those issues.

If indeed it's possible for this section, for the mandate of the commission, to reflect an immediate short-term response to individuals who need upgrading of three, four, five or six months to get them work-ready, to explore taking on a different occupation. . . . I know it's not currently part of the underrepresented group. I appreciate the minister's comment when he said yes, indeed he will look at that. To me that's a very good thing, something that is well supported on this side of the House, because it's about an evolving workforce.

It doesn't really matter to us whether you're 18 or 38. You still have obligations; you still have responsibilities. Oftentimes the anguish is greater if you've been in previous employment for 15 or 20 years and that job ceases to exist, because your responsibilities are often greater at that age. So indeed, if there's some ability for the minister's intent to be included in future regulation or bylaw, that would, frankly, warm my heart. If the minister would comment. . . .

Hon. J. Cashore: Yes, that certainly is the intent. Again, with regard to the point about the quick response, given the changing nature of work and the need to have well-trained people to fulfil those positions, this approach will be 1,000 percent more capable of delivering on a faster response time because it is driven by industry in all of its components -- those who know how to address those issues. Therefore there will be a quick response to those very issues.

L. Reid: I thank the minister for that commitment. The following section is: ". . .to integrate education and training systems to ensure a smooth transition from school to the workplace." The opportunity I had to see the program that was operational in Abbotsford -- which looked at students in grades 10, 11 and 12 acquiring some basically post-secondary skill sets so that they would be work-ready -- delighted me as an educator. Both my colleague from Delta North and I come to this debate as educators; we come to it as school administrators. The ability to marry those two concepts together -- work skills within an educational framework. . . . I understand that people learn functional skills better in those kinds of scenarios. They have an opportunity to implement some of the concepts that they have acquired. We can continue to have that direction in terms of grades 10, 11 and 12.

I would even support and promote coming into the school system when students are a lot younger. I don't think there's any reason for us not to look at grades 8 and 9 students, and frankly, there are students in the elementary grades who have already made a commitment to what their chosen career might be. The research will tell us that most students, by ten years of age, have made some commitment to and have some recognition of what they might like to be doing five or ten years down the road. To expose them to those concepts a lot earlier in their educational lives is a very good thing.

I look at the educational spectrum to include work. I think it is preparation for people to have useful, productive lives. I don't see it as separate and distinct from apprenticeship training or co-op training or mentorship programming. It's the marriage of fine ideas. Could the minister comment on how well this might be received in the school system and how much effort, how much commitment, the ministry is prepared to put in place to ensure that this is a package that does include the K-to-12 system?

Hon. J. Cashore: As we go through the sections, it will emerge that there is a very strong commitment with regard to the resources coming out of both ministries to enable that to happen. All of the points that the hon. member makes are very valid. With regard to the secondary school system, it is encompassed within the mandate, recognizing that a point of transition has to be made.

One of the underlying driving causes behind this approach is the fact that the average age of apprenticed workers is 28. That raises a question of what's happening during those previous ten years. One of the purposes here, in terms of a goal, is to drive that down so that people are acquiring those skills at a much, much earlier age. For instance, to just promote laddering within the system would mean that, for example, for somebody who trains as an electrician, if that individual decides to go on to electrical engineering, then she would be able to have the benefit of those credentials going into that program.

L. Reid: I certainly commend the minister for that, because this is exactly the section that looks at all the potential that all of these different programs will have. We on the opposition benches are pleased to support it.

[ Page 6395 ]

R. Masi: On item (g), there is the question of recognizing credentials. This may come up later in the paper. Has there been any discussion or thought relative to what this credential is in terms of a diploma, a certificate? I have some concern about international recognition.

Hon. J. Cashore: Yes, recognizing the board's role in this, it is likely to be a certificate, in response to that.

Section 4 approved.

On section 5.

L. Reid: This is a very critical section. As the minister indicated, the average age of individuals in Canada seeking an apprenticeship is 28 years. I concur with that. The average age in Europe is 14 years. If this is going to be industry-driven and attract people to this area much sooner in their lives, I welcome that.

My concern around the appointment of these commissioners is that it's my understanding that there are going to be eight labour commissioners, eight business people, four educational training providers and four representatives of government. This House will know that I am also the critic for the workers compensation system, and when their board of directors became polarized around having labour versus business representatives, it became absolutely dysfunctional. This board is weighted heavily in that direction. The potential for not accomplishing a great deal and being mired down is absolutely evident.

I trust that checks and balances will be in place. The individuals that are chosen are absolutely, in my view and in the view of the opposition, critical to the success of this commission. It concerns me that the names of those individuals are not available to us -- that indeed these appointments have not been made. Those very names will determine whether or not this new commission flies, whether or not it's successful, whether or not it addresses what the industry needs to have addressed. I don't wish to see this go the way of the old WCB board of directors. I don't wish to see that board of governors structure replicated here -- not in any way, shape or form. I wish to see individuals who are truly committed to a contemporary, vibrant training program -- whether it be apprenticeship, co-op or mentorship -- and who are truly committed to that exercise.

Could the minister give me some assurances that the selection is uppermost in his mind?

Hon. J. Cashore: That's a very timely and appropriate insight, and one that I believe is thoroughly covered in both the process leading up to this high-tech bill and in the substance. With regard to the comparison, by definition, for want of a better word, there is an element of a conflict orientation in the issues that have to be addressed where there is an element of polarization of issues that come before the WCB -- issues about the position of business, the position of labour. There's almost a defined departure there.

In this case, because of the history of the way this has come about, it's in a totally different context. This context is one of proactive, cooperative opportunity. That is recognized, and it has been implicit and explicit all the way through the development of the minister's committee in drafting the proposals which are fully represented here.

It is in the interests of this board, and of the persons who are present on this board, that that kind of polarization not emerge. I believe that the structure is there, and I believe that the small-p political will is there, to make sure that that kind of problem does not emerge. Obviously they are going to be dealing with issues that are cutting-edge, and sometimes those will be issues that have different viewpoints.

I think this has the potential to be the finest apprenticeship system in North America, perhaps almost approaching some of the standards in Europe that the hon. member referred to. The fact is that they know that this has to work, because they have the opportunity and the stewardship of this to make it work.

L. Reid: Section 5(2) reads: "The minister must consult with the members appointed under subsection (1) (a) before making a recommendation to the Lieutenant Governor in Council with respect to the appointment of the chair." Lee Doney, I believe, is the interim chair today. Will that appointment be sustained?

Hon. J. Cashore: That appointment is until January 1998. As part of the section reads, which the hon. member just read, that will depend on the dynamic of the recommendation to the minister -- defined as these two ministers -- and the recommendation that comes forward.

L. Reid: My final comment on this section is: if for any reason this collection of individuals is not able to make a successful partnership, what is the mechanism in place? Does the minister have options in terms of removing individuals from the board and replacing those same individuals?

Hon. J. Cashore: Hon. Chair, the appointments are at pleasure, which gives some leeway with regard to the issue the member raises. There's a section later on in the bill that also helps to address that.

R. Masi: Looking at the size of the commission, I would like to ask about the rationale for a commission of 25 persons rather than a commission of perhaps 12 or 13.

Hon. J. Cashore: A very good question. It was difficult to keep it down to the number of 24 that we have there. The reason is that when we talked about apprenticeship and the various components of it coming out of the mandates of the two ministries under the previous system, the number of issues -- the spectrum of issues -- is really quite enormous. So when you're talking business, you're talking about people who specialize in a number of different aspects that really do need to have representation so that their wisdom can be brought forward in the work of that board.

Again, this is based on the recommendation of the minister's committee, and we respect that recommendation, because what industry and labour and education are saying to government is: "If you're going to ask us to do a job as an adjunct of government, you're going to have to enable us to have the input into that at the most important decision-making level so that we can do that well."

We have considered that in the context that it's always desirable that we not be too large and unwieldy. But at the same time, in this case, I think they make a very valid point about the spectrum of issues that need to be brought to bear in the kind of decision-making that needs to made there.

[ Page 6396 ]

R. Masi: I notice that the weight of the commission is largely industry and labour, a preponderance from those two areas, with half the size from education and government. Again, could I have a comment on the rationale for that unequal weighting of the components?

Hon. J. Cashore: The minister's committee felt that even though Education and Training has somewhat smaller numbers, they're still seen as equal in terms of the importance of the role of education.

R. Masi: Looking at the number of consecutive years there, it works out to six consecutive years for an appointment. Could I ask: is that a normal span of time? Or is that unusually long?

Hon. J. Cashore: Hon. Chair, it's standard government policy.

J. Dalton: I just have an observation about the selection process. I've had people in the tourism industry -- in fact, very well connected and important people in the tourism industry -- raise criticisms around recommendations that they put forward for the special operating agency in the tourism industry. Quite frankly, they've been disappointed in the way that the Ministry of Small Business, Culture, and whatever else it is, has handled their suggestions. One observation from a CEO. . . . A very well connected CEO in the industry said to me recently that they're very fearful they're going to end up with a board that really doesn't have the experience and the expertise to deal with what the mandate of that agency is supposed to be.

[12:00]

Hon. J. Cashore: I think we need to recognize, first of all, that these are the names that are put forward from the representations of the various components.

We also need to recognize that in those names being put forward by those four partners, they recognized that it would be impossible in board representation to cover each and every interest -- very important interests, as the hon. member has pointed out -- that is out there. There is the capacity within the system for them to have committees that are in an advisory role to the board to enable that the very kind of expertise the hon. member is referring to is obtained.

They have designed a structure that respects the point that the hon. member is making with regard to tourism. The board has a function: to be strategic. In order to do that, it needs input from tourism and from actually a myriad of other very important parts of the B.C. economy.

Section 5 approved.

On section 6.

R. Masi: In section 6(3), the chief executive officer will be authorized by the commission to appoint officers, employees, etc. In terms of the limitation of remuneration there, will this be one of these situations where in fact the ministers would have control on the amount of remuneration? Considering the comments in the past few months about remuneration, severance pay, etc., I think this is an issue where we have to have some limitations imposed. I wonder if we could have a comment on this and on where the final decision would rest.

Hon. J. Cashore: These individuals would be government employees under the Public Service Act. The rules governing government employees will apply to included staff.

R. Masi: In terms, then, of the number of appointments of employees, would that also finally rest with the CEO or with the minister's level?

Hon. J. Cashore: There are 90 full-time employees being transferred to the commission.

Sections 6 and 7 approved.

On section 8.

L. Reid: This is the section I referenced earlier for the minister, and I want to pay particular. . . . If he wants to give a general overview, I would accept that -- if he could perhaps reference specifically 8(2)(d): ". . . any revenues received by the commission in carrying out its mandate under this Act."

Hon. J. Cashore: They're not about to be going out and creating a whole bunch of revenue initiatives. Those would have to be approved. But they have to participate in filing a business plan, and there might be such things as, say, the marketing and sale to other jurisdictions of programs that have a good success rate.

L. Reid: I referenced that section particularly around the issue of displaced workers. I hope and trust that we won't see a scenario evolve where the costs to have people seek out apprenticeship training are prohibitive. Certainly that references section 8(2)(b), "money placed in the special account. . ." and section 8(2)(c), "the fees prescribed." I would hope, given the nature of the people who need immediate training to get back into the work force, that the costs are reasonable and relevant to allow them to do so. I would ask the minister to hopefully confirm that.

Hon. J. Cashore: I couldn't agree more.

Section 8 approved.

On section 9.

R. Masi: Looking at section 9(5), it says: "The commission must, at the times specified by the minister. . . ." I wonder why it doesn't state in there that it should be an annual review or plan.

Hon. J. Cashore: The reason is that it is a standard provision, and it will be annual.

L. Reid: Under section 9, financial administration, my issue is around accountability and measurement. How will it be possible for this group to be accountable to this Legislature? My question to the minister is whether he sees this as a 

[ Page 6397 ]

reasonable entity to have come before the Public Accounts Committee -- whether or not that committee will be able to request that this commission come forward and talk about the expenditure of dollars. I think that that's a very good thing. Certainly it would please this side of the House if the Public Accounts Committee, which is indeed responsible to this Legislature, has that opportunity to call that particular commission -- any new commission that's established.

Hon. J. Cashore: With regard to Public Accounts, the answer is yes.

Sections 9 and 10 approved.

On section 11.

R. Masi: I would like to ask one of the ministers: how many committees, and what function would these advisory committees perform?

Hon. J. Cashore: There are currently 65 trade advisory committees and numerous other committees that come under other categories. The commission will have the responsibility to review those committees and, in a sense, take on the responsibility of answering the member's question; so it's a good question. But the integrity of the board is now brought to bear to address that issue as these transfers are made from the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Education, Skills and Training. They will have the responsibility to address that in the wisest way, using their expertise and dealing with the issues of today and tomorrow.

R. Masi: I understand that individuals appointed to advisory committees would receive remuneration. Again, I'm concerned about runaway costs and limitations on the number of committees and the number of people serving on these committees. I understand that it would be the responsibility of the commission; however, I always feel that commissions can develop large bureaucracies and run up government costs. So would this, again, be an ultimate responsibility of the ministers involved to monitor this situation?

Hon. J. Cashore: It has to function within the constraints of a finite budget. At the present time there are out-of-pocket expenses covered for travel and that sort of thing. It could be that there would be some kind of a system of remuneration for time, but not necessarily so. That is a possibility, but it is not something that is necessarily going to happen.

Sections 11 and 12 approved.

On section 13.

R. Masi: Compulsory certification. In terms of exemptions -- it's clause (6) here, I believe -- what circumstances would in fact come about to allow a person to be granted an exemption?

Hon. P. Ramsey: It's up to the commission to specify the terms and conditions. I think some of the models that currently apply in the apprenticeship system are probably good examples -- for instance, in some circumstances you get exemption from holding a welding certificate if you have another trade. That's the sort of thing that obviously the commission will be looking at.

Sections 13 to 16 inclusive approved.

On section 17.

L. Reid: Section 17 relates to the appeal officer. I'm wondering about the credentials of this appeal officer. Certainly the future livelihood of an individual will be at stake, let alone the financial contribution that an employer may have made to this program or this individual. If someone is going to come in and be given the responsibility of being the appeal officer to adjudicate decisions, I would simply request the level of training and whether or not there's any ongoing evaluation of those particular individuals.

Hon. J. Cashore: The individual would have to be somebody who fulfils the criteria of having a good working knowledge of the rules and issues regarding administrative fairness, a good working knowledge of the current circumstances relating to apprenticeship and training, and be somebody who had a good grounding and track record with regard to being able to meet the requirements for independence and administrative fairness.

Sections 17 to 20 inclusive approved.

On section 21.

L. Reid: Section 21 refers to offences and penalties. I'll make the comment I made earlier in terms of ensuring that this is relevant and reasonable. If indeed there's going to be a financial penalty put in place against someone who offers a program or someone who participates in the program and then withdraws for a variety of reasons. . . . I'm not clear if that's the case, from reading this section. Could the minister kindly elaborate?

Hon. J. Cashore: The penalties are set under the Offence Act. There's a kind of standard requirement: they're coming out of the Offence Act with regard to how this is set, and this only deals with compulsory certifications. That's the only instance where it would be brought to bear.

I agree with the point of the member that there has to be a balance between the purpose of a fine. . . . That balance means that it deals with the issue but that it is not overbearing.

L. Reid: Just for my information, is the penalty financial, or will there be other opportunities to penalize individuals in the system?

Hon. J. Cashore: Yes. Under the Offence Act, the fine could be up to $2,000 or up to six months' imprisonment or both.

L. Reid: Allow me to commit to the record my earlier reservations. If this is about a positive commission that's going to go forward and do some wondrous things for people in the system, if indeed individuals who would engage in activity do so without any malice whatsoever, it seems to me we don't want to be discouraging individuals from taking part or perhaps working in concert with the ministries to craft a program. We don't want there to be significant financial penalty in the offing, so that indeed they would reconsider their options.

This section is very broad. I just want to ensure that it is very narrow when it comes to penalizing anyone who may participate in this commission.

[12:15]

[ Page 6398 ]

L. Reid: I appreciate the minister's comments around public safety. What is the interface between it and the penalty structure already in place on behalf of the workers compensation system? It seems to me that those would apply and perhaps take precedence. If that's not the case, I would appreciate that clarification.

Hon. J. Cashore: This is dealing specifically with the credentialling process with regard to compulsory certification.

R. Masi: I'm looking at clause (4) here: "Section 5 of the Offence Act does not apply to this Act or the regulations." I looked up section 5 of the Offence Act, and it states: "A person who contravenes an enactment by doing an act that it forbids, or omitting to do an act that it requires to be done, commits an offence against the enactment." I ask for clarification on this from a non-legal-background member.

Hon. J. Cashore: This is a fairly standard provision. It sort of protects the interest of the party. For instance, if an appeal is to take 30 days and, say, it takes 31 days or 32 days, within a context of reasonableness that penalty should not be brought to bear in that instance. So it sort of covers off coming down hard with regard to extreme measures when that's not called for.

Sections 21 and 22 approved.

On section 23.

L. Reid: Subsection 23(1) says: "The minister may appoint a committee to review this Act and evaluate how it is functioning." First question: is that in addition to an annual report? Will an annual report be written back to this Legislature?

Hon. J. Cashore: Yes.

L. Reid: With reference to this particular committee, is there a plan in place which would say the current composition will be reflected in this evaluation committee? I'm reading subsection (2), and I just ask for a little bit of clarification. Has the minister a vision of how this evaluation process may unfold?

Hon. J. Cashore: I think those concerns are implicit within this process. It is based on consultation with the four parties that have been appointed to function on the minister's committee.

L. Reid: I appreciate that the commission has now been established, under this act, with 25 bodies. Under this section 23, the minister has an opportunity to appoint an additional committee to evaluate the existing commission. I'm simply interested in the composition of this new committee.

Hon. J. Cashore: Due to the fact that this is a very serious aspect of the administration of this whole process, it would depend on circumstances. For instance, the ministers could decide to appoint a special independent body to do that, or it might be that the issues were such that it did not call for that. There's the opportunity for that kind of flexibility, depending on the need and the circumstances.

R. Masi: I'm a little concerned about the wording of this section here, when it says "the minister" -- again it's back to one -- "may appoint." I'm concerned about the words "may" and "evaluation." The legislation here could be stronger in terms of evaluative processes. Any organization requires evaluation on a regular basis, and I don't know if the minister wants to comment on that or not. Those are just my comments on that situation.

Hon. J. Cashore: There's one element of evaluation that is a part of it, and that's annual reporting. This provides for needs for further issues of evaluation to be dealt with as and when needed. The permissive "may" is very standard language in this kind of a process.

L. Reid: I simply want to make one last comment on this section. I appreciate the minister's comment moments ago regarding the flexibility that he will have or that they will have -- perhaps it will be just the two of them on this committee -- to appoint a new committee structure. My comment for the record is simply that I believe it should reflect the key players, so if any committee goes forward that is indeed larger than a single person, perhaps the educational community can be reflected. I appreciate that it currently has four representatives, but if there's an evaluation in place, it should be from our perspective -- not from the perspective of the official opposition, but from the educators on this side of the House -- that the education components be worked into, if you will, an overall evaluation plan. For me, there's a lot more at stake in terms of addressing the needs of grade 10 students and ensuring that any evaluation looks at children as they evolve into the system and hopefully evolve into useful, productive members of society.

Hon. J. Cashore: Any review would relate back to the mandate, and the ministers would consult with the four component parties. The points being made around education are absolutely correct and right on.

Sections 23 and 24 approved.

On section 25.

R. Masi: It's my suggestion, if I have the agreement of my colleague, that we just bunch the rest up and move through them. Is that possible, hon. Chair?

L. Reid: I'd like to make one final closing comment. This commission has tremendous potential, and I wish the duality of this combined-minister presentation today every possible success. Frankly, the future of this province is at stake in terms of educating and employing young people, displaced workers -- the entire gamut. Congratulations, and we wish you every success.

Hon. P. Ramsey: Just in closing, too, let me again say that we should acknowledge the committee that did the hard work of bringing ITAC and its recommendations forward. Yes, the 

[ Page 6399 ]

Minister of Labour and I are going to be joined at the hip in carrying out our responsibilities under this act, but we have, as many have said in this chamber, a really world-class way of advancing trades and apprenticeship training.

Sections 25 to 37 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

Hon. P. Ramsey: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.

Bill 43, Industry Training and Apprenticeship Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Committee of Supply A, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. P. Ramsey: Hon. Speaker, thanking all members for a very productive week, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Hon. P. Ramsey moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:29 p.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

The committee met at 11:12 a.m.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY FOR
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
(continued)

M. Coell: I don't know how much time we'll have, but what I'd like to try to accomplish this morning are the initial programs that have been brought over from the Ministry of Health: alcohol and drug treatment and addiction services. The first question I have for the minister is: have those services been brought into the ministry at this time, and are they functioning as part of the ministry?

Hon. P. Priddy: Yes, they have. In some parts of the province, they have done more work together than in other parts. But they're all in this ministry, and they are all functioning in the ministry.

M. Coell: There are a variety of programs involved with adult and youth alcohol and drug services. The first ones I would like to talk about are the school-based programs. I believe there have been some cuts in this portion of the ministry regarding staff. I don't know whether they were administrative staff or front-line staff. I am asking for an update on the staff that have been brought over. Are there still as many programs and front-line staff in the schools as there were last year, or have there been cuts?

Hon. P. Priddy: I'm not aware of any direct service changes. There were certainly some changes made in terms of the central operating agency, as there have been with a number of programs. But we're not aware of any changes that affect direct line services.

[11:15]

Hon. P. Priddy: The total budget is $2.41 million. There are 55 schools that are covered, and there are 40 workers.

M. Coell: Could the minister tell me whether there are programs in all 20 regions? If you have 55 schools, are they spread out throughout the province?

Hon. P. Priddy: They are not at this stage, as they have come over to us. In each region of the province. . . . The estimation is that it's probably about 70 percent of the regions.

M. Coell: My understanding is that this program is relatively new -- I think in the last five years. How does the province go about funding a particular school? Does the school, through the school board, approach the province for funding? Or does the province make an assessment of where alcohol and drug programs are probably most needed?

Hon. P. Priddy: In the past -- and I don't think it's significantly different now, except that the people are -- either an individual school or a school district, before it has come over to the ministry, has approached the regional alcohol and drug offices for funding for their particular school. What will now happen is that they will be at the table with the regional operating officers and the others as budgets are prepared. So it will then go to the regional operating officer. As I say, it can come from the district or it can come from an individual school. I think I have one in my district that's fairly active, and it came from the school itself.

M. Coell: Does the minister envision allocating a certain amount of funds per region for alcohol and drug treatment, or relying on schools. . . ? What I'm interested in is that there could be a region that decides this isn't important and that there are other things more important, and then they wouldn't have any alcohol and drug programs. I just want to know whether there's going to be an allocation of money to be used in the regions.

Hon. P. Priddy: I would very much hope that we would not see a scenario where someone decided that it was not a program that they wanted. But the check there would be -- because the budgets are in the regions -- that if a regional operating plan came in to me and to the deputy and did not include alcohol and drug prevention programs in schools, 

[ Page 6400 ]

then it would be sent back, and they would be told to adjust their budget to ensure it's there. We've all had enough conversations about fetal alcohol syndrome to know that it is not acceptable for it not to be in schools.

M. Coell: I would assume, then, that the ministry will have some work. If only 70 percent of the regions have programs now, there's room for programs.

At what level are the workers going into the schools? Are they in elementary schools or just in junior and senior secondary?

Hon. P. Priddy: Primarily it's junior -- for those districts that still have junior secondaries -- and senior secondaries. I am aware that there are a few in elementary schools, but certainly it's primarily secondary, member.

M. Coell: The prevention workers that are hired. . . . I believe the minister said there are 40 of them throughout the province who are available to go into schools. Are they stationed right in the school to work with the school counsellors? I'm just trying to see how they fit into the school system.

Hon. P. Priddy: In some cases it will depend on who the contracting agency is, but the workers spend the largest percentage of their time in the school. They may, however, be attached to a Reconnect program or to a multiservice organization in the community, but their time is spent in the schools.

M. Coell: I would be interested in hearing just a brief overview of the types of programs that they're able to offer students and teachers and whether they deal with families that have children, as well as just education in the school.

Hon. P. Priddy: The range is fairly wide, and I just want to make sure I can provide a range of examples. The workers who are working in the schools work with students who may have been identified as having a problem early on and may be able to do some early intervention. They also work with other students who see an issue in a friend or in a peer and need to know what they can do to help. So they will actually counsel friends of students, as well -- obviously with confidentiality kept in mind. They will do work in the community with families, although there are other agencies that actually will provide more family support than that.

They sponsor activities like dry grad activities. I can think of several high schools that have designed their own anti-alcohol or anti-abuse programs that are specifically for their own school, because it meets their school's needs in a particular way. They work as part of the counselling team in the school, along with the school counsellors, to help to identify both individual students who may be at risk or trends they see developing in the school that maybe need a more systemic response.

M. Coell: Does the minister see them as. . . ? I'm just looking at the numbers -- with 55 schools, 40 workers. . . . We have literally hundreds of schools in British Columbia. Is there a priority? I mean, I realize you don't have unlimited funds here. Is there a priority for schools, and how is that developed at this point?

Hon. P. Priddy: The member is correct. It is a fairly new program; it's three years old. Certainly in some of the circumstances that I'm aware of there are workers. You know, there may be a couple of schools that split one worker so that there is a bit more coverage than that. At this stage there are not any particular criteria for, you know, how this school gets it versus that school.

But now that we have regional operating officers who have to, with their community, develop regional plans. . . . Then, wanting to have it everywhere, of course, they will need to develop some criteria. We have not reached that stage about how you decide: is it a school that has had more issues, or is it a school that has other kinds of trends that we know that may be more likely. . . ?

The other thing, by the way, that the workers do is work with parent groups around doing parent education for parent advisory groups.

M. Coell: I thank the minister for those comments.

I know that evaluating alcohol and drug programs is very difficult and needs to be looked at in the long term. At this point, has the ministry got any evaluation program over the last three years to look at these programs?

Hon. P. Priddy: The member is correct. Those kinds of evaluations are difficult. But this particular program, although fairly new, has had quite an extensive evaluation through UBC, and there is a report available. If the member would like it, we could provide it for him.

M. Coell: That's very encouraging. I'd appreciate getting a copy of that.

Just one last question on the school-based prevention programs. It would appear to me that if you've got trained prevention workers in the schools identifying early-intervention kids, there would be some other problems that might go along with the alcohol and drug abuse. Is there going to be a good mix -- sort of a paper trail -- with other parts of the ministry now? I'm thinking of, probably, family counselling or physical or sexual abuse that might go with it -- those sorts of things.

Hon. P. Priddy: I would not suggest that this is all there yet, by the way. What will happen is that because there are now multidisciplinary teams, you don't have an alcohol and drug worker who is working on their own. They are at a table with people who can provide that kind of linked assistance, because you're right -- it may be linked to issues at home or to abuse. The list is fairly long, as the member knows. The intention is that through that multidisciplinary team, those students can be followed, not only through alcohol and drug programs but through other programs.

M. Coell: Another program that I think is relatively new is the day treatment program. I know when I worked as a social worker they didn't have any day treatment programs for youth in the province. I think that from what I've read about it, it seems like a very good program. I would be interested to know how many of them are situated in the province and what the budget is for that as well.

[11:30]

M. Coell: I was also wondering what the total budget was for that program.

[ Page 6401 ]

Hon. P. Priddy: It's $1.93 million.

M. Coell: Does that cover the day programs for adults as well as for youth, or just youth?

Hon. P. Priddy: I've only given you the one for youth.

M. Coell: How many youth -- how many in an average year would be fine -- have taken part in the program?

Hon. P. Priddy: I'm not sure I can break out only the day treatment. If you look at day treatment plus out-patient services for youth, it's 3,700.

M. Coell: The minister may be able to answer this question quite simply. What I'm looking for is the mesh between the criminal justice system, which is now part of the ministry, and alcohol and drug treatment. I would think that many of the children or youth who would be involved in the day treatment program or even in the out-patient services may have had trouble with the law -- a car accident, drunk driving -- and they may have even killed someone through negligence while impaired. What is the mesh between probation services and services like this? How closely will they work together?

Hon. P. Priddy: Actually, two things happen. Of course, there are treatment programs in youth custody centres, as well. Very often, once a youth leaves the custody centre, the youth probation officer will make a referral to an alcohol and drug program for youth in the community. Now that those youth probation officers are actually with the ministry, it's not a matter of referring to another ministry or another place. Again, that's part of the team that works together, so they will be doing that as part of doing a comprehensive plan for that youth. So the youth probation person and the alcohol and drug people will be at the table doing the plan at the same time.

M. Coell: That's encouraging.

Does the minister have the percentage of. . . ? There are 3,700 youth using this program. How many would be court-ordered youths, and how many would be voluntary?

Hon. P. Priddy: We do know how many are court-ordered. Mr. Markwart would be pleased to get that for you; we just don't have it with us.

M. Coell: I would appreciate having that just for next year's estimates more than anything.

I think the mix that the minister describes of getting the alcohol and drug treatment, probation and youth custody all working on a plan for an individual who has had a series of problems -- obviously with alcohol and drugs and the law -- and dealing with their problems. . . . So I am pleased to hear that this is in place.

The next program I am interested in is out-patient services. In B.C. that has quite a long history back to the early seventies, I believe, when the Alcohol and Drug Commission was in place. They were stand-alone clinics. I would be interested to know how that is going to change within this ministry. Are those stand-alone clinics going to be absorbed into the larger offices, or will they remain stand-alone for the most part?

Hon. P. Priddy: It will partly depend on the needs of the regions and what is already in place. In some places the program is already part of a multiservice, integrated facility or organization, if you will, and I don't see any reason that that would necessarily change. Some may stay as stand-alone, and in some regions where a stand-alone may not be serving well, people may wish to have it more as part of an integrated centre -- that can happen. I think we will see a mix of both, partly depending on what currently exists and partly depending on the need the region identifies.

M. Coell: Along with out-patient services, does the ministry still have any methadone clinics or methadone treatment programs?

Hon. P. Priddy: No, we do not.

M. Coell: Could the minister tell me whether this ministry would be responsible for methadone maintenance programs? I know that if the ministry doesn't have any, then they would have to be done in the private sector. Would that be the Ministry of Health, then?

Hon. P. Priddy: You are correct. The ones that are there are privately owned and would be the responsibility of the Ministry of Health, not us. The only time we would see those individuals is if they were coming, for instance, for additional counselling around a broader range of alcohol and drug counselling; but otherwise, not.

M. Coell: I'd also be interested in knowing the number of alcohol and drug counsellors, or social workers who deal with alcohol and drug problems, that we have in the province, and also the budget for out-patient services.

Hon. P. Priddy: All out-patient services?

M. Coell: Yes.

Hon. P. Priddy: There are over a thousand workers in the province, some direct workers and some contracted workers, providing services. The budget is $23.36 million.

M. Coell: I think that's all I have for out-patient services.

I canvassed supportive recovery services a little bit with the Minister of Human Resources, as well. What we're finding in the province right now is that there are about 1,100 beds for "recovery houses." Some of them are run properly and others, I think the ministry is finding, are not. So there obviously is a need out there for recovery houses. I'd be interested to know what the province is spending on recovery houses, if the minister would elaborate on the recovery houses that are there now and funding for them.

Hon. P. Priddy: You're right, there are a variety of recovery homes out there; often it's the house up the street that puts out their sign. In terms of the programs which the ministry funds and is responsible for, there are 20 centres funded by contract with alcohol and drug centres. These centres are either women-only or men-only. They provide 200 beds for men, 114 beds for women, ten beds for male youth and four beds for female youth. Some of those centres will serve more than one region. The budget is $1.5 million.

M. Coell: I'd be interested in knowing if there is a waiting list to get into them -- there are some crisis beds, I would imagine, in these 300-plus beds -- and what the usage was last year.

[ Page 6402 ]

Hon. P. Priddy: Most of the time, yes, there are working waiting lists. When I say working waiting lists, I mean that people are there for set periods of time. We have had the odd circumstance where in certain facilities, for short periods of time, there have not been. But for the most part, yes, there are.

M. Coell: First off, is there a cost for someone to go into these facilities?

[11:45]

M. Coell: I'll just offer a thought, and then I have a couple of questions.

I would suspect that these are very well run -- that you have professional staff. I haven't seen any in the last number of years, but I would imagine they are well run. On the other hand, at $36 a day. . . . There's a group of what we'd call recovery houses springing up all over the lower mainland. I've had some calls from the minister's riding, as well, and I know there are some in my riding. They're charging $18 a day, and there doesn't seem to be, for the most part, as professional a staff and programming.

I think that's probably showing us there is a desperate need out there, and it's probably showing us that those people don't have the funds to pay $36 a day. They can pay $18, because that's the signing over of their entire income assistance cheque to these facilities. So I think there's a demonstrated need, and I also think there's probably a demonstrated need to professionalize and kind of expand into that area. I just wonder whether the ministry is giving any thought to that.

Hon. P. Priddy: Yes, actually, we are, and a large number of those happen to be, if not in my riding, certainly in the city I represent -- large numbers, actually.

What we're doing with those -- you said 1,100 beds, and I think that's probably correct -- is looking at what we might call letters of agreement, where we would go in and look at the service. Some of those are actually providing high-quality service, and some are not, hon. member. You know that and I know that. So we would look at the standards of training that people have there and the quality of the service provided, sign a letter of agreement, and then they would be able to access the $36 a day.

M. Coell: I'm pleased to hear that, because I can see it's a problem that's growing very rapidly. I think it may also be a case of that being inexpensive housing. If you need housing, and you can guarantee yourself three meals a day and housing on income assistance. . . . That's hard to do, period. So there may be a bunch of other issues there, once you get into it, that you may find are problematic.

Moving along with detox facilities that the province runs and now this ministry runs, I'm interested to know whether we have any detox facilities for families, whether a mom or a dad could take a child into a detox facility with them and whether there are facilities where couples could go, as well.

Hon. P. Priddy: If I might, I just want to add. . . . I'm not trying to delay this one point around your earlier question. We are also working with the Ministry of Human Resources around some of these issues because we know that those are closely related. So we are working with them on that, as well.

On to your question about: are there places that either couples or people would take children for detoxification services? No, there are not.

I mean, it tends to be fairly separate between a detoxification service that is offered. . . . Sometimes at the very end of that, when you start to get into more of the counselling, then you might see more family involvement. A detox program tends to be for people who are at fairly high levels of distress, and when we're looking at places -- and there are not a lot -- where either there is day care or people can take children, it's the treatment part, not the detox part.

M. Coell: I suspect that many of the detox centres that a couple could both go to together, if they were both dependent and wanted to detox together. . . . They would go up to the Pembroke detox here in town as a couple and be admitted. So that would happen.

What I was thinking was that sometimes, if someone is close to making a decision on detox, they would be more likely to go if they knew they had support there. They wouldn't necessarily be part of the detox, but could be. There are some programs in the States that do allow the children and spouses to follow the whole program. But it's not of great consequence to where I want to go on this.

How many detox beds do we have in the province presently?

Hon. P. Priddy: There are 250 detox. . . . There has to be another word we can use; detox has come to. . . . Anyway, for places where people can go for detoxification, 250 beds.

M. Coell: And the total budget for that program?

Hon. P. Priddy: The budget is $9.6 million.

M. Coell: I suspect we still contract out some of these services to private agencies. What's the relationship now between detoxification that takes place in hospitals. . . ? If someone is known to your ministry -- and I'm thinking of either a youth or an adult -- but is detoxified in a hospital and then transferred into an out-patient service or supportive recovery, how is that link made? I guess what I'm looking at is: is the link going to be made between the hospital and your ministry, so that if someone is detoxified in a hospital, they can actually be identified and offered services by your ministry?

Hon. P. Priddy: The numbers are fairly small, because of the acute nature of people who would be in hospital for detoxification purposes -- those are people who are in incredible levels of physical distress, and so it's very intense. But in places where there are detoxification services offered in hospitals, there is an existing link already with alcohol and drug programs. So before that individual leaves the hospital and finishes their hospital treatment, there would be linkages made with Alcohol and Drugs in the community. Actually, regardless of the new ministry, that already happens with the existing alcohol and drug programs.

M. Coell: I think what may be a real benefit is now that linkage could be made with the rest of your ministry, which 

[ Page 6403 ]

may have a whole other range of counselling services. . .that actually caused the problem in the first place. So that's very positive.

Does the ministry have programs that are strictly for polydrug use that are separate from alcohol and drug use? I'm thinking of heroin addiction or cocaine addiction. Do we have any specific programs to deal with those problems?

Hon. P. Priddy: There may be a few out-patient programs that deal, for instance, solely with cocaine. But for the most part, we do not have programs, as you've described them, because we find that when people present, they present with a whole range of substance abuse. It's not only one substance. It's a range of substance abuse, so it's actually a more holistic approach to that. As I say, there may be a few within existing out-patient departments, but we tend to treat with a holistic approach, because often people present a multitude of abuses when they come to us.

M. Coell: With regard to some of the other programs, does the ministry fund in any way Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous or the Salvation Army?

Hon. P. Priddy: We do have a relationship with the Salvation Army, actually with the women's treatment facility in Vancouver. We do not have any kind of funding relationship either with Alcoholics Anonymous or with NA, because their principles say that they do not accept dollars from outside organizations.

M. Coell: I just have one question on the alcohol and drug library. I believe there was a resource library in Vancouver for alcohol and drug services to use. I am under the understanding that it may be closing and that its resources may be shipped around the province.

Hon. P. Priddy: The library has been moved to Victoria. A large part of that library's holdings is with the Ministry of Health, although some of it is with us. We have arrangements with library systems all over the province in order to be able to ship or share those resources.

M. Coell: Was there any job loss with regard to the closure of the library in Vancouver, or were those people transferred over here with the resources?

Hon. P. Priddy: I'm not sure if the member is referring to our ministry's library. If that is the case, there was a reduction of two FTEs in the movement of the library resources to Victoria. Those people both have jobs in other places now.

M. Coell: I'd like to spend a little bit of time talking about some of the other prevention programs that the ministry now has, but my colleague would like to ask some questions, as well, so I'll yield the floor to him.

[12:00]

This government's own survey was done in 1993 and 1996. It verified that there is a problem with gambling addiction in British Columbia, and the number that Angus Reid delivered was that close to 4 percent of the population of B.C. is afflicted with either problem or pathological gambling. There had been an increase between 1993 and 1996, even though expansion of gambling had been substantially frozen over those years as the government considered what to do.

There's a great deal of concern -- consternation, in fact -- throughout the province about the fact that we have this problem. It hasn't been dealt with. There are, as we understand it, no facilities available in British Columbia to deal with gambling addicts, and in spite of that, the government has brought on this expansion of gaming.

I'm looking at a report here from the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. It's written by a PhD and five medical doctors, and it's a recent report. It's entitled "Diagnosis, Neurobiology and Treatment of Pathological Gambling."

One of the points the doctors make is the one that I see in literature from all over North America: the more venues there are for gambling in a jurisdiction, the larger the problem becomes; the larger the percentage of people who are addicted to gambling, who are problem or pathological gamblers. These doctors say that, as well: "Prevalence estimates of probable pathological gambling from state surveys range from 1.2 percent to 3.4 percent with increased rates in states that provide increased opportunity for legal gambling."

By our government's own measurement, we've already got a larger problem than that, yet the betting limits were increased 2,000 percent, and that's happened already. The minister projects revenue increases from these forms of gaming at 1,800 percent. Having had no program in place and having submitted, in government reports in years previous, that the government itself felt at that time that it should be spending $1.6 million per year on the gambling addiction issue. . . . Now the minister says it's going to be $2 million and, as I say, gives it to this minister to deal with.

Interjection.

K. Krueger: The minister says she has big shoulders, and I'll just take a moment to compliment her. In spite of the fact that she has small shoulders, she shoulders a huge burden and, I believe, does it with integrity and a genuine concern for the people in her care.

There are generational effects to gambling addiction, and that comes out loud and clear in the literature from all over North America, as well -- that there is a greater proclivity in the children of gambling addicts to become addicts themselves. These doctors also say that.

Interestingly, they say 14 percent of the female gamblers' fathers and 4 percent of their mothers were also pathological. As such, familial influence may be an important predictor of the development of pathological gambling. So from that point of view, it makes some sense to me that the Minister for Children and Families would have taken responsibility for this.

Certainly youth tend to have a greater proclivity than adults, according to everything I read, to become gambling addicts. In fact, most of the literature suggests about twice the proclivity -- about double the rate -- in youth populations who are exposed to gambling.

[ Page 6404 ]

There are also studies, including recent ones from Alberta, that say that aboriginal people are more likely to become victims than the general population, and aboriginal youth are twice as likely. So, according to the Alberta studies, the proclivity of aboriginal people is double that of the general population. The proclivity of aboriginal youth is four times that of the general population.

These doctors, again, say that pathological gambling among adolescents and young adults has been on the rise: "Prevalence estimates of pathological gambling among high school students are as high as 5.7 percent. Thus early identification and intervention are critical." So there again, we see a rationale for this ministry being involved.

But what has really struck us from the beginning is that this is a whole new set of problems being introduced to British Columbia. A ministry which is already tremendously burdened with huge responsibilities and that is obviously struggling to deal with those responsibilities within a limited budget, having to devote resources to the new program. . . .

Gambling addiction seems to affect poverty-stricken families far out of proportion to the general population, as well. People are no doubt hoping for a quick fix to their many economic problems.

The social problems that flow from gambling addiction do strike at families tremendously. Children are often abandoned by gambling addicts. People have to be charged for leaving their children wandering the parking lots of casinos, and so on. A recent delegation from Saskatchewan told me that since gambling expansion occurred in Saskatchewan, there's been a terrible increase in the rate of child abandonment -- children rooting through garbage for something to eat, child prostitution on the rise -- and they link it directly to gambling expansion. These are horrendous problems.

Thirty-seven percent of the spouses of male pathological gamblers abuse their own children. The addicts themselves commit suicide at a higher rate than any other type of addict known to us. The spouses of male pathological gamblers commit suicide, or attempt to, at triple the rate of the general population. Obviously a suicide in the family of anyone is going to affect the family tremendously. Women who are married to pathological gamblers have eight times the frequency of a whole range of very serious health ailments, many of them stress-related.

This government, which has spoken in its throne speech and ever since and in legislation recently about tobacco being a dangerous and addictive product, and using that as a justification -- which I agree with -- to legally pursue the tobacco industry, is itself introducing a huge expansion of dangerous and addictive products in the form of gambling in British Columbia.

Of course, there's the whole issue of crime and its victims, and the fact that three out of four pathological gamblers turn to crime to try to satisfy their habit. They just won't stop gambling until everything they have is broken and gone. They've run out of all their assets and all their credit and many times have turned to crime and had to be arrested.

It seems as though revenue is the only motivator of this government in taking this dangerous course.

The Chair: Member, could you please take your seat for a moment.

The Chair really has to intervene and remind all members that we're dealing with the Ministry for Children and Families estimates. While I appreciate that the member feels strongly about his views, and he's made these views quite plain to everyone throughout many different estimates, I really need to intervene and suggest that he get on to the estimates of the ministry that we're dealing with.

K. Krueger: That is where I am, and this is by way of preamble. I will wrap it up.

It is this government that chose to put this program in this ministry, and I think it's important. . . .

The Chair: Member, could you take your seat, please. I'm not interested in having a debate with the member. In fact, that's out of order. So could you just go directly to the estimates of the ministry.

K. Krueger: Dr. DeCaria says: "Many of these individuals have lost everything. They've lost their homes, their families and their jobs. Compulsive gambling has devastated their lives." Again, that's a typical summary from medical doctors, from experts, who study these issues of the effects of gambling on families and on children.

As the minister knows, shortly after the Minister of Employment and Investment made his announcement of this massive expansion of gambling, introducing all kinds of new forms of gambling to the province that weren't there before -- which are, of course, immediately being jumped upon by the many providers of these so-called adult entertainments, like this one who writes all the Vancouver and Vancouver Island MLAs trying to sell his bingo equipment and says: "Players can track up to 1,000 bingo. . . ."

The Chair: Member, could you take your seat please. I must insist, member, that we are dealing with the Ministry for Children and Families estimates, and you must direct your questions to those estimates.

K. Krueger: Thank you hon. Chair. That's what I'll do.

As I was saying, I have written to the minister, I have phoned her office, and I have repeatedly asked for a briefing on where the ministry finds itself on this issue of developing programs for gambling addicts. The minister did write me a letter dated July 17, 1997, referring to a letter of April 29, 1997. There have been a number of communications from me between those dates. In any event, the response was: "Further discussions and planning need to take place before a briefing can be provided." Clearly that's not acceptable to me or to the opposition or to the people of British Columbia. I had hoped to have some of those answers in order not to have to put them to the minister in estimates, but I don't.

My first question is: could we have an up-to-the-moment outline of how far the ministry has progressed in bringing on programs to deal with the assessment and treatment of problem gamblers?

Hon. P. Priddy: Thank you, hon. Chair. I am conscious of the time, and I am conscious that you might want to rule me out of order, too. So you should obviously feel absolutely free to do that.

The reason that we were not able to provide you with that briefing, hon. member, is that our permission. . .and our ability for Treasury Board had not passed through; therefore my Premier tends to think that my cabinet should be briefed before others. So that's the reason we were unable to provide that. We can certainly do that for you now.

[ Page 6405 ]

I want to just make a couple of opening points, and then I will describe for you where we are in the development of the program. I think that a couple of things have to be noted. Is gaming addiction a problem? Of course it is. In the same way that every time you open a beer and wine store closer to home, I think that alcohol addiction is a huge problem; and the more accessible we make it, the more it's a problem. But is gaming addiction a problem? Of course it is, and I would not stand here for one minute and suggest that it is not.

I think, though, that there are some things that we have to acknowledge. For instance, if I am correct, the study that you reference on Alberta youth. . . . I say this because we have very little empirically validated Canadian research. Most of it we've either taken from the United States -- particularly from Minnesota, which has a very large gaming program and therefore has done a lot of the research. . . . In the research that was done on youth in Alberta, they actually asked for aboriginal youth who already had gaming problems to be part of that research. If you're going to do that, then you don't have a control group, if you will. What you've got is some fairly skewed data. So we really don't have -- and we really do need, by the way -- some good empirically validated Canadian research. I'm not suggesting that that will say: "Oh gosh, it's not a problem." What I'm saying is that we really need to look at what it looks like here.

In point of fact, the report that just came out -- I think it's Richard Lipsey's report, and I was very pleased to see the comment in it -- said that we need to be investigating and researching in Canada: what the issues are here, what the solutions are here and how big the problem is here. We base a lot of that either on things like Angus Reid polls, which is not what I would call empirically validated research, or what the Angus Reid poll and others call SOGS, the South Oaks gambling screen, which was never intended to be a broad community look at what the issues in gaming are in the broad population. So I just think that there is more work to be done, and sort of picking up individual studies from individual places doesn't always give us the kind of information that we need.

It is actually one of the reasons that our ministry has been working with the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse -- to actually develop a screening tool that works in a better way than the one that's been used. I think that the SOGS one that has been used in Angus Reid -- even they've identified it -- is being used for a purpose for which it was not initially developed. So I think there's a fair bit of our own research that we need to do. None of that is to say that I don't think gaming is a problem. I just want to say that I think we need to have more Canadian research to look at what we need to do here.

So let me move on. I just have to do this. There is a report that came out that I found fascinating, and I'm not sure, hon. member, if you're the one who tabled it or not. It's called "The Social Costs of Gambling and Strategies for Prevention and Treatment," and it says: "In summary, the costs of addiction, including pathological gambling, are staggering, resulting in death, illness and disabilities." It also says: "Gambling offers a variety of significant benefits to a majority of citizens who gamble, and for those who do not." So I sometimes think that when we do studies, we have some cognitive dissonance in terms of the information that's presented in the studies.

In terms of our program and in terms of what we see as profiles here in Canada or in British Columbia -- people who have gambling issues. . . . And I know that the member listed some, as well. Most Canadians -- and you know that, I think -- aged 15 and over gamble. The most frequent form is actually playing a lottery, betting on sports or playing cards, which is about 60 percent of people in the last 12 months. The second most common form -- and this sounds stereotyping, but I'm simply reading from the research -- tends to be more common among lower-income Canadians who are not therefore at the betting tables. . . . But they are actually playing bingo, and higher-income people tend to choose other kinds of gambling activities.

[12:15]

So I think that for me it was very disturbing -- the fact that if you're talking about ten- and 11- and 12-year olds, then the issue of higher betting on tables and so on -- which, you're right, is the other minister's, and I won't get into that -- speaks to me of a different kind of intervention that is needed for youth.

Let me speak, though, for a moment about what the program might look like, because that's the question you have been asking. In the first year of the program, hon. member, because we are indeed in the first year of the program as of about a week or two weeks ago, we will be contracting through community-funded addictions agencies for professional staff to provide prevention and treatment services. We'll be ensuring that prevention and treatment services are also available for high-risk populations -- and we do acknowledge that youth, women, folks from multicultural backgrounds and seniors, for some kinds of gambling, are at higher risk; contracting for a toll-free information and referral line as well as telephone clinical counselling services; providing problem-gambling training for counselling staff, including funding for community-level needs assessment and development of prevention activities; establishing a provincial addictions advisory committee, including stakeholders to advise and work with the ministry; providing information about problem gambling to professionals and the public; and actively participating in a national initiative to establish a Canadian problem gambling assessment tool, which is the one that I referred to earlier.

I know that this may seem like a very odd piece of information -- and I may have, as others have, drawn it out of a piece that's not validated -- but British Columbia is only one of two provinces that has not ever had a gambling addiction program, and for some reason we have the highest recovery rate. I cannot explain that particular piece of information; I found it quite interesting.

K. Krueger: Just for clarification, I'll confirm for the minister that I tabled that document that was referred to. It was written by Dr. Julian Somers, who is in charge of an addiction facility at the University of British Columbia. The doctor compiled a whole variety of studies with their results. He was trying to be entirely balanced. He did talk about the benefits to society and made it clear, I think, that what he meant by that was the short-term revenue that flows to government which it spends on things like health care -- which, of course, has been 

[ Page 6406 ]

the justification that the Minister of Employment and Investment has used all along. So the government has the same dissonance that the report seems to have and that the minister referred to.

There's also the cross-addiction phenomenon that the minister touched on that we have to be concerned about. Many people who are already alcoholics become gambling addicts, and vice versa. Drugs very often become involved, and the whole thing is a witches' brew for jurisdictions in which it gets rolling. That's one of the reasons it amazes me that we're opening the doors to it here.

The minister also talked about the lack of Canadian research. The reason for that is that expansions are recent across Canada. It wasn't that long ago that these activities were strictly illegal in Canada. Again, Dr. Lipsey tried to be very balanced in his approach, but in the end concluded that it really didn't make sense for a jurisdiction to advance into this area because the costs may well significantly outweigh any short-term gains.

Was there any research done by this ministry in advance of the expansion decision and announcement with regard to the likely social costs, the likely effects on children and families or on social effects, in general, in the province?

Hon. P. Priddy: I think the member has probably canvassed this with other ministers who have had the responsibility and who still carry the responsibility of the gambling program. This ministry is, as we know, now 305 days old -- or whatever it is -- so this ministry was not engaged in it.

You know about the B.C. Lottery Corporation research. The one thing I didn't mention earlier, or if I did, it may not have been as clear, was the terms of what the program will look like. I just want to add that there will be a 1-800 counselling telephone line which will provide access to counselling not only for gamblers but for their family members.

K. Krueger: Just to assist the minister with that, the minister is correct. The Ministry of Human Resources hadn't done any studies about the effect that this expansion is likely to have. Neither they nor the ministry of the Attorney General had done any on the likely expansion of crime and cost to society. The Minister of Employment and Investment hadn't done any. The B.C. Lottery Corporation hasn't done any, and it seems to have taken the view that if it really looked into the gambling addiction issue very seriously, the public might take the view that its products were in some way responsible.

At the briefing meetings I've had with the executive of the B.C. Lottery Corporation, it was pretty clear that they've tried to wash their hands of responsibility. The Minister of Women's Equality hadn't done any studies on the potential effect on women. And so it has gone, all the way through estimates this year and last year. The Minister of Health did give me a commitment last August that programs would be developed to assist problem and pathological gamblers, their families and their victims, and nothing came of that. The program this minister has just outlined in its infancy -- one week old -- is all that we have, as I understand it. One minister after another throughout these estimates debates has confirmed that.

That being said, I'm thankful that we are devoting some resources to the problem at last. The province has been enjoying $300 million net a year in gaming revenues until now. It's a travesty that nothing has been spent on the people who hurt as a result. In the program that the minister has begun to outline for us, is there already a divergence into individual programs for youth, for aboriginals and for families who seem to be affected generationally, or is it kind of one global program at this point?

Hon. P. Priddy: I have been reminded of the time by one of my colleagues who has just entered, but. . . .

No, the work that is going on is actually intended to be fairly specific. In each of our regions there will be an FTE allocation, and they will actually be working with fairly program-specific programs: for youth, for aboriginal people, for seniors, for women, for people from some multicultural communities where that is an issue. So this is not intended to be some lump-sum initiative, if you will. We recognize that there are different issues, and when I talk about ten-year-olds and 11-year-olds and read that in the research, then it speaks to a whole other kind of intervention that I don't think we've seen happen virtually anywhere else in North America.

While not able to answer -- and not prepared to try -- for the Ministry of Employment and Investment or other ministries, I think I have also not said: "Go ask somebody else." I have tried to be as open about the information I have and the research I've done -- a lot of it on my own and with my staff -- to provide as much information as I am able to.

Noting that, hon. Chair, unless the member has a short question left, I've been asked to move adjournment. So do you have a short question?

K. Krueger: I'd just as soon start again on Monday and deal with the rest of the issues, if I can.

Hon. P. Priddy: I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 12:26 p.m.

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