[ Page 7819 ]

The House met at 10:05 a.m.

Prayers.

Hon. A. Petter: I'm very pleased to introduce in the gallery today some constituents from my constituency of Saanich South. I have the pleasure of introducing a grade 11 class from Claremont Secondary and their teachers Mr. Filgate and Ms. Lacey, as well as several accompanying adults. I'd like the members of the Legislature to make them all very welcome.

G. Hogg: I don't think I can let this week pass without mentioning and congratulating Canada's new junior A hockey champions, the South Surrey Eagles, who went undefeated, 6 and 0, throughout the championships held this past week in Nanaimo. The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Minister of Labour was quite distressed when they defeated the Nanaimo Clippers. He, in fact, became indebted to me -- a debt which he has yet to pay. I'm sure that all members of the House will join me in congratulating the excellence at the local amateur level and extending, on behalf of this House and this province, our congratulations on their accomplishments in bringing the Canadian championship home to British Columbia and South Surrey.

Orders of the Day

The House in Committee of Supply B; W. Hartley in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ADVANCED EDUCATION,
TRAINING AND TECHNOLOGY
(continued)

R. Masi: In relation to skills and training, this will be the essence of my questions this morning -- the skills development division. I'd like to just begin by saying a few words about the state of unemployment for students in this province. As the minister knows, 55 percent of our students leaving secondary school do not proceed to post-secondary training of any kind, including colleges, universities or any other institutions of training. This number is fairly overwhelming. If we look at the statistics hot off the press from the Ministry of Education, it seems there are 47,556 grade 12 public school students, excluding continuing education, over 3,000 grade 12 students in continuing education and over 3,000 grade 12 students in independent schools, for a total of 54,000-plus students. If we look at this number, and we know that 55 percent in fact do not go on to any sort of post-secondary training, we're talking about 30,000 students a year coming out of the school system.

I believe this presents a major problem in terms of training, skills and unemployment. I guess the reasons for not going on vary. In some cases it's a matter of aptitude. They may lean toward more specific skill training. Perhaps -- and I think we have to face this -- often it's scholastic ability, where they don't see university-style study as attractive. It's very difficult for some students who come out of the high school system. Probably one of the other items is that, in fact, they're not interested in the outcomes that university or college might give them. So we do have a large segment of the high school population coming through that we have to deal with.

Also -- and I believe this -- there are artificial barriers placed by many post-secondary institutions. For example, the very difficult academic math 11 seems to be something that is a major stopper to students moving on into post-secondary training. So my first specific question to the minister is: what are we doing to assist those not going on to post-secondary programs?

Hon. A. Petter: I appreciate the member's question. Obviously the commitment to try to assist in providing employment and opportunities for young people is one that this government has taken extremely seriously and has acted on, on a number of fronts.

I might say that first and foremost I think it is important that we provide avenues and opportunities for young people to go on and gain additional training. As the member's colleague pointed out yesterday, it is becoming increasingly the case within the labour force that, without some additional training, high school education will not provide one the ticket to job opportunities that it did in the past. For that reason, the commitment to freeze tuition, to expand student financial aid, to take away the tuition barrier for adult basic education for students -- who may have left before completing high school, or who may now want to go back and take a particular course to qualify them for a particular skill -- are important commitments to dealing not only with education but with youth unemployment. I won't repeat what I said yesterday, but suffice it to say this province leads the country in terms of its commitments to providing accessible and affordable opportunities for young people to pursue further training -- some in institutes, colleges and universities and some in other types of training and apprenticeship programs.

Beyond that, we have a number of initiatives targeted at youth. In the last two years, more than 21,000 young people have benefited from a wide range of job and training programs as part of what was called the Guarantee for Youth last year; it's called Youth Options this year. That provides a range of program opportunities, including such things as the Student Summer Works program, which has been extensively increased this year. It includes the First Job in Science and Technology program, which I referred to yesterday. It includes other initiatives. I've already alluded to the fact that this year we are looking at the possibility of actually having a new program in which students would be encouraged to undertake community work that is relevant to their studies and gain credits from doing so.

[10:15]

[ Page 7820 ]

So there's a range of education and educational opportunities for people currently in high school or people who may want to go back and take training; access to post-secondary education; opportunities while people are in education to gain a foothold in the workforce through the Youth Options programs or last year's Guarantee for Youth programs; and targeted skills and training initiatives as part of the Youth Works initiative, which of course was reworked as part of B.C. Benefits. These provide a very comprehensive set of programs to deal with what is a very serious concern of this government and a challenge that we face, but one that I think the member can see that we are taking very seriously.

R. Masi: I appreciate the outline of the current programs. As a matter of fact, this member has been a strong supporter of the Youth Works program right from its inception. However, I'd like to get a little more specific and look at the core of the problem.

We have at the present time in British Columbia the secondary school apprenticeship programs -- and I know that we're not talking about apprenticeships today particularly; this is just in general terms. We have about 300 or 400 students involved there. Now, that's not a large number when we think in terms of the numbers of school-leavers in grade 12. Specifically, I would like to hone in on the articulation between secondary schools, colleges and training institutions. I'd like to know the progress that the Ministry of Advanced Education is making at this time. I know that there are some pilot projects in this area, but what specifically are we doing in terms of the large numbers?

Hon. A. Petter: At the Ministry of Advanced Education, while we have an obvious, strong interest in apprenticeship as one of the mechanisms for linking young people and others with the workforce, our involvement works through other agencies, if I can put it that way. The member has referred to the secondary school apprenticeship program. My colleague the Minister of Education has made a major commitment in that regard. I believe it's been increased in this year's budget, but he would be in a better position to answer that. I know that it's an initiative that he helped to pioneer, and it has shown considerable success in terms of providing apprenticeship opportunities -- right from the high school classroom -- that can provide both credits for students going on to technical education and a foothold in a trade.

The other major area in which apprenticeships are delivered, of course, is through ITAC, which is an agency that is funded jointly by this ministry and the Ministry of Labour. The Minister of Labour is -- so we don't do double duty -- probably in a better position to respond directly to questions on the delivery of those programs, but this ministry does provide substantial resources to enable ITAC to do the work that is intended in terms of promoting apprenticeship

I guess the other thing I could reference is that the government itself has been a strong promoter of apprenticeship through initiatives that are sometimes criticized, like the Island Highway project and others, in which we have tried to arrange the work that goes on involving government dollars in a way that provides opportunities for people to gain an apprenticeship, particularly for people who historically have not been welcomed or given positions within trades -- minority groups and others -- and gives them a foothold in apprenticeship. This ministry has a strong interest in apprenticeship. We work with the Ministry of Education, we work together with the Ministry of Labour in terms of providing resources to ITAC, and we have an interest in other initiatives regarding apprenticeship.

R. Masi: I appreciate your answers relative to apprenticeship, though I would like to go further. I see the nub of the problem as the 30,000 students that come out of secondary school who are not going on to any sort of training or post-secondary work at all. I see that there should be further initiatives from the Ministry of Advanced Education, actually, in the secondary schools.

I have some concerns that with the splitting of the ministries, we're losing the arrangement that we previously had with the secondary schools. What I'm essentially talking about here are the programs that are joined by secondary schools and colleges. There are some initiatives, but what I'm asking specifically is: where are they, and how much further are we going in this field? To me, they are a very valuable tool that we can use to cut down on the number of students that in fact do not go on to any post-secondary program.

Hon. A. Petter: Well, I agree with the member on the importance of some of these linkages. In terms of the institutional linkages between the two ministries, the career and technical programs division of the Ministry of Education is another agency that is now servicing both ministries, so we retain those linkages. In my own experience, for example, in my own constituency, Spectrum Community School has a relationship with Camosun College that provides an articulation of programming for students who undertake a career path in terms of technical education. They can go and gain credits towards Camosun and use Camosun courses to gain credits, and the two work together. I think there are similar arrangements worked out in the Fraser Valley between Fraser Valley College and Chilliwack Secondary School.

I will be very frank with the member. As a relatively new minister, this is an issue that is one that I have not had as much time to ponder, other than as a parent and a citizen, as I hope to. However, I appreciate his interest and concern. My personal view is that these kinds of programs and linkages are very beneficial. I know that within a number of high school programs, for example, there are direct linkages now between high school and certain worksites to try to give students on-the-job experience and exposure that they can then use in their education and their career choices. So my personal view is very sympathetic to this.

I'd be very happy to discuss with the member -- not only here but away from the forum of the Legislature -- his ideas and to see what directions he feels we might push in to further these initiatives. I might also say that I know that the Minister of Education has been a strong proponent of these kinds of initiatives, and I'm going to benefit from the relationship that he and I have already established to work together in this vein.

R. Masi: I appreciate the answer. I don't want to beat this to death, but there are, I believe, something like 190,000 people on assistance in British Columbia today. You can correct me if my figures are wrong, but I think that's pretty close to it. And youth unemployment is a major problem, as we know. It's somewhere between 18 and 19 percent. I appreciate the concern the minister has for this situation.

[ Page 7821 ]

Hon. A. Petter: The targets are set on a regional basis, and they're set based on an assessment of a range of information: youth population statistics, youth unemployment rates, youth income assistance rates and the ratio of youth to the total population. All of this information is compiled by the Centre for Education Information Standards and Services. Based on that compiled information and a look at the regional breakdowns, the targets are then established.

R. Masi: I take it that for the new year coming up, the benchmark is raised. Is that correct?

Hon. A. Petter: That's correct.

R. Masi: Also, there's a comment in the report relative to the new reporting system. We went through quite a bit of this last session in terms of the reporting system. Are they now in place and are they functioning?

Hon. A. Petter: We do have a tracking system that does provide tracking on an individual basis in terms of the Youth Works program. In terms of Student Summer Works, the tracking is done through the information that is compiled and fed back to the ministry through the host agencies and those who carry out that program.

R. Masi: Also in the report, it's stated that by September 1997, 53,000-plus clients had been served, with an estimated 26,000-plus employed and a further 7,000 having left income assistance to pursue post-secondary studies. Now, there's a bit of a gap in here; there are about 20,000 not accounted for. I just wonder if we could have a comment on where the 20,000 went.

Hon. A. Petter: Maybe the member could clarify for my benefit, hon. Chair, whether he's talking about Youth Works or Student Summer Works, and what gap he's referring to.

[10:30]

Hon. A. Petter: To the extent that I and staff understand exactly what the question is focusing on, the answer -- as we understand it -- is that it could be that the youth went on to another province, that they returned to part-time work or that they went back home. That may account for the gap the member's referring to.

R. Masi: It would probably be an interesting task to nail them down, but I suggest it would be very difficult to find them out there. But they are out there. This is one of the problems that I referred to earlier: that we do have a number of young people who are on the streets, who really have little or no prospects for the future without some form of training.

The rules and regulations for Youth Works indicate that they must participate to receive financial support. Has there been any change in that in terms of the methodology there? Is that still in effect?

Hon. A. Petter: No, there has been no change. The compliance is still a requirement.

While I am on my feet I should introduce one member of staff who wasn't with me yesterday. That's Scott Browning, who's the director of the corporate services branch of the skills development division, who's helping me in this component of the estimates.

R. Masi: There's an interesting section in here in terms of the at-risk minor services. I believe it's call ARMS. It's on behalf of the Ministry for Children and Families, to help at-risk youth aged 15 to 18 to achieve independence. How is that program delivered, and could you give me the implementation steps for that?

Hon. A. Petter: ARMS is a program for minors. Because of the responsibilities of the Ministry for Children and Families, it is a program that was moved to that ministry as part of its responsibility for children.

R. Masi: So it has been transferred. It's now out of this ministry.

Hon. A. Petter: That is correct.

R. Masi: In terms of the workplace-based training -- WBT -- in terms of the reimbursed costs to the employers, what portion of that does the government pay?

Hon. A. Petter: The maximum cost of each placement is $6,500. Incidentally, the member might be interested to know that that cost does result in overall savings in welfare costs, which are closer to $8,400. The amount that is reimbursed directly for the training component is in the range of $3,500 to $4,000.

R. Masi: I'd like to look at the vocational rehabilitation services area for a moment. Does this cover the full range of physical and mental disabilities?

Hon. A. Petter: The information that I have is that the program focuses on those who have physical disabilities. Presumably, if a physical disability stems from some mental disability, there might be some application. But the focus is upon vocational rehabilitation services for those who have physical disabilities.

R. Masi: I see there are 13 skills development centres in the province. I have some concern about the movement here. It indicates that Closer to Home services for people with disabilities make sense. I agree with the comment and the concept; I just wonder how successful this is in terms of moving it closer to home when there are only 13 skills centres. What is the process for expanding out?

Hon. A. Petter: Obviously, what we're trying to do is achieve administrative efficiency while bringing the services closer to home. The centres do provide some direct services, but they also engage contractors in other communities to bring the services into those communities. Hence they have

[ Page 7822 ]

R. Masi: In terms of specialized equipment such as computers, are the needs being met in this area, or are there shortages? What is the state of specialized equipment for these clients?

Hon. A. Petter: Further to the previous question, I'm informed that there are about 60 offices that operate throughout the province to provide some of these services beyond the 13 key centres.

On this question, there is a budget to provide equipment and computers and the like -- I think the term is restorative and technical aids. I imagine that the answer would be that it's never enough. But it does provide substantial resources for the provision of equipment in terms of providing services to these clients.

R. Masi: In terms of the supported education program for entry into post-secondary training institutions, do you have any numbers to indicate the rate of entry into any form of post-secondary institution?

Hon. A. Petter: Our general participation rate is 35 for every 1,000 in the population, but that's general. If the member is talking about just those with disabilities, he should clarify that. We didn't hear that in the question, so I'll give him the general rate.

I would point out that generally the participation rate in British Columbia is moving upwards much more quickly than in other provinces. In fact, other provinces are moving in the other direction. We have come from behind the pack six years ago and are moving up, and we are now certainly close to the top of the pack in terms of our general participation rates. As I say, if the member is interested in a more targeted response, he should indicate that.

R. Masi: In terms of the public service training program, I'd be very interested to know the gender breakdown of clients entering this program.

Hon. A. Petter: Interesting question. I don't have at my disposal, nor do staff, a breakdown of the program by gender. But if it's available, I'd certainly be happy to get it for the member. I'll have staff make a note and provide it to him. I wouldn't mind getting it myself, incidentally.

R. Masi: It would be an interesting bit of information.

In terms of employability assistance for disabled persons, there was a target date of March 31, 1998. Was the agreement signed at that time? Is it in effect?

Hon. A. Petter: If the member is talking about the EAPD agreement, it will be signed tomorrow in Vancouver by myself and Minister Pettigrew. The member is welcome to join us, if he'd like.

R. Masi: Thank you very much. I just may take you up on that -- and good luck.

We have a program called the industrial adjustment services under industry training and adjustment programs. This is a joint program of the federal and provincial ministries. I wonder if you could give me the proportional breakdown of funding from each ministry.

Hon. A. Petter: Unless we have misunderstood the question, the provincial share of the funding comes exclusively from this ministry on a 50-50 cost-sharing basis with the federal government.

R. Masi: There was also a program under industry training and adjustment called the program for older worker adjustment, which I'm very interested in. As an older worker, I'd like to know whether or not I'm going to be adjusted at the end of this session or further on. Unfortunately, though, I see that the program was cancelled. If that's correct information, there's an indication that there will be further pilot projects. I wonder if you could explain the general areas -- not specifics, but the general areas -- that these pilot projects may consist of.

[10:45]

R. Masi: I think it's an area that should be pursued in terms of the baby boomers generally moving into their fifties and perhaps early sixties -- I'm not sure they're that far along yet.

In terms of the Student Summer Works program, it's an interesting initiative. I have some concern about it, and perhaps we can go into that a little later. But the comment in the report is interesting. It says that employers are encouraged to hire post-secondary students who are most affected by job shortages. I would be interested in the minister's comments on why the term "job shortages" is used and if there is a reason for job shortages in this bountiful province.

Hon. A. Petter: First of all, let me go back to the IAS funding. The provincial and federal governments each share 50-50. . . . But to give a complete answer, the total program funding is shared by the private sector, as well, which comes in for a third. Then the province and the federal government each come in for their third, which is a 50-50 apportionment of the public share. I just want to be clear on that.

I wouldn't read too much into this statement beyond the general concern, which the member referenced earlier, that students -- young people -- are generally disadvantaged in the sense of having higher-than-average unemployment rates within the workforce. Those in post-secondary have the additional need to earn money to pay for their education, although, thankfully less so in this province than in other provinces. If you read the whole sentence, what it's really suggesting is that employers are encouraged to hire post-secondary students, because they are affected in terms of both the unacceptably high level of youth unemployment and the fact that they are in need of resources to continue their post-secondary education so as to become better qualified to enter the job market.

[ Page 7823 ]

R. Masi: I suppose it's a difference in perception and maybe philosophy from that side of the House to this side of the House in terms of why there are job shortages in this province. We would suggest that it has something to do with the investment climate in this province, and perhaps that's the baseline of the problem.

In terms of the youth program, there seems to be a focus on the upper level of student or young person rather than perhaps the ones who need the assistance more. I may go on with that in a little while.

To look further on into the report, I was interested in the -- these are long titles; I don't know who makes them up -- Leadership and Management Development Council of British Columbia, LMDCBC. It seems like a pretty positive idea. I would just like an update on that to see where it's going. While we're at it, could you tell me about the makeup of the council: who sits on it or who they represent? Not necessarily the names.

Hon. A. Petter: Again, I'll have to get staff to get that information for me, if that's acceptable to him. We will be happy to provide that information in writing. I can make sure that I have it for this afternoon's session if he wants to revisit it in the House.

Let me just comment, though, on the prefatory remarks that the member made. I don't think it is the case that these programs -- the youth programs, the student programs -- are focused just on a particular strata. In fact, we have a variety of programs that respond to a variety of different needs. I would reference for the member's attention, for example, the fact that we have a Job Start program. As part of Youth Options B.C., it is very much targeted at getting unemployed youth the opportunity to have a first job through wage-sharing assistance for employers to hire unemployed young people. That program is targeted at a different segment of youth. I think you have to look at the full spectrum of programs. If you do, you'll see that we have tried not to pick favourites at all but to target programs in a way that makes sure the program delivers the best possible support to the particular segment of the student population that it addresses.

R. Masi: Well, we could probably go on forever with this position that we're taking here. It does seem to me that Youth Works is focused on a segment that needs more attention, perhaps, than youth programs.

I would like to change gears a little bit at this time and take a look at some of the numbers. I somewhat hesitate to discuss numbers with the former Minister of Finance, but I'll take a try at it anyway. In terms of program management in the skills development area, I see that there is an increase of costs of approximately $1.5 million. I wonder if the minister could give me some information on how many FTEs that involves and perhaps what the average salary may be.

Hon. A. Petter: Again, if I understand the member's question correctly, the answer would be that there are about 35 additional FTEs. Eleven are devoted to some of the new youth programs and the substantial expansion of the youth programs this year, and 24 are involved in comanagement arrangements with the federal government around the labour market development agreement in order to maximize the benefits of that agreement for British Columbia.

While I'm on my feet, I'll just provide a little bit more information on the LMDCBC. The organization is a private sector organization, so the representatives on it are private sector representatives from a broad range of interests. I will, as I say, get more information on that, but that explains why we do not have the information on its representation.

R. Masi: Just to go back to that again, I think that's an excellent initiative. Perhaps employer responsibility and employer education are a valuable tool.

In terms of the program management again and the increase in funding there, it seems to me that that's roughly a $60,000 to $65,000 yearly salary. If I'm wrong there, correct me. Does that take into account any anticipated agreements with the BCGEU?

Hon. A. Petter: No.

[K. Krueger in the chair.]

The Chair: I recognize the member for Okanagan-Boundary. Sorry. I recognize the member for Delta North.

R. Masi: This is quite a surprise, to say the least.

An Hon. Member: We know who we are.

R. Masi: We know who we are -- right.

In terms of the budget summary, I note that there is a decided decrease in the budget for Youth Works and Welfare to Work programs -- on the order of $9.5 million. It's indicated as a 12 percent decrease. I have to make the point that I feel there is a real urgency to what this program does. Having been a strong supporter of Youth Works and Welfare to Work, I question the decrease in funding to such a valuable area. I would like to hear some comments on why there is such a significant decrease in the budget for this area.

Hon. A. Petter: We did canvass this issue a little bit yesterday. Let me first of all say to the member that members of his own caucus may not know who he is, but we do, and we appreciate his input.

In any event, the answer that I gave yesterday, which I'll reiterate briefly today, is that the member should take considerable satisfaction in this decrease. It is an indication of the success of the whole B.C. Benefits initiative, which has resulted in a substantial decrease in the welfare caseload. Because of that decrease in caseload, there has been a commensurate decrease in the demand for some of the skills and training components attached to that initiative. The decrease is not an indication of any lack of resolve or commitment; it is a reflection of the success of the commitment that has been made in the program to date and, therefore, the decrease in demand for these particular training dollars attached to the youth component of the social assistance rolls.

[ Page 7824 ]

[11:00]

R. Masi: I also note, in reference to youth programs, that there's a substantial increase here -- 76.5 percent -- with over $6 million directed to youth programs. I guess we get back to the same argument again and again: that these programs seem to be directed at people who have established a certain level of education or a certain level of competency as opposed to those in Youth Works, who are in fact one step away from the welfare rolls or total unemployment.

Hon. A. Petter: I think the member's looking down the telescope from the wrong end. What we're trying to do is encourage youth, including youth who would otherwise be on social assistance or who have been on social assistance in the Youth Works category, to seek training and educational opportunities. I have no doubt that many of those students are now enrolled in post-secondary education or training education or whatever. It's simply not the case that the Youth Options programs are limited to a strata of students who are in a more benefited position. They're available to high school students.

The Job Start program, for example, is specifically targeted at unemployed youth to give youth a first job quite apart from any educational qualification. Yes, Student Summer Works focuses on students, but even that is a program that embraces high school students, college students, institute students and students at all different levels of attainment -- some of whom, if it weren't for this government's commitment to freeze tuition and broaden the number of placements, would no doubt be on social assistance. The fact that young people are moving up into positions within the educational institutions of this province is part of the solution, not part of the problem. And the fact that as they do so they get support, not just in making that move but in reaching out and getting jobs, is also part of the solution, not part of the problem.

R. Masi: I really question the minister's statements that if it were not for the tuition freeze, the person would be on welfare. I think that most students do acquire student loans, and they make it through that way. I don't want to get into the debate on freezing tuition. Maybe I will, to the extent that I think it's a noble thought, in terms of tuition freezes and the eventual elimination of tuition. However, there are a lot more concerns involved here besides tuition, in terms of access. I believe that the university system itself has to broaden out in terms of accessibility for students. I'm not sure that tuition. . . . Maybe the minister could help me here. . . . I think it's around 20 percent or something of the cost of university programs. I feel that in the long run, you have a number of administrative problems with the elimination of fees that you may not have thought out to any great extent yet. But as I say, it's a noble thought. It's probably not where I stand philosophically, but it's worth examining in the future.

I would like to conclude in terms of asking the minister if in fact Youth Works and associated programs are secure and if they will be continued. I've noticed the downward spiral in the budget for the whole skills training division over the last two years. I believe it's gone down by something like $15 million. I have some concerns about how much attention this government will be paying to this.

Hon. A. Petter: There's so much the member talked about, but I'll resist the temptation to engage in debate other than to say this. At the end of the day, despite our philosophical differences from time to time, I do think the issue of youth unemployment and the strategies we pursue is ultimately a non-partisan issue. I welcome the concerns and input of the member and will continue to welcome that throughout the course of my time as minister in this portfolio. So I look forward to the opportunity to continue the debate and the exploration for solutions on a non-partisan basis. I very much appreciate the member's concern and his experience in this area, as well, which I know is considerable, and I know his concern is heartfelt.

In respect of skills and training, the commitment is absolutely there. This government takes tremendous pride in the B.C. Benefits program we brought about. I won't review all the elements of it, but the family bonus and Youth Works are two that we're particularly proud of and believe are having a positive impact. They are not isolated; they are connected with a range of other initiatives. We can continue to debate those, but let the member rest assured that the commitment to provide good and adequate training, to make training the priority and to give people the opportunity to step up into a job rather than continue on social assistance is a very central commitment of this government and of this ministry.

I'm hopeful that through continued discussions with the federal government -- for example, as to how we proceed forward with the LMDA agreement -- we can considerably strengthen that commitment, by getting a much more integrated system that involves federal and provincial dollars providing the best possible service to clients rather than overlap and gaps, neither of which are productive in terms of meeting these needs. Again, foreshadowing my discussions tomorrow with Minister Pettigrew, the member can be assured that it's an issue I intend to take up with him, because I think we can do better in terms of really addressing the B.C. labour market if we can bring the two systems into a closer working relationship with each other. So the commitment remains; in fact, we want to build on that commitment and will continue to do so.

[ Page 7825 ]

J. Dalton: Thank you, hon. Chair. I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

J. Dalton: I'm pleased to welcome to the House the first half of an 80-member team from Collingwood School. They are grade 5 students from West Vancouver. My daughter Karman started her Collingwood career in grade 5, so I can certainly relate to these children. They are accompanied by several adults and, of course, their teachers. Would the House please make them all welcome.

The Chair: I recognize the member for Shuswap.

G. Abbott: Thank you, hon. chair. People were saying that you were not quick to identify the ridings, but I'm just delighted that in my case it was not only prompt but accurate as well.

I want to ask the minister just a few questions about community colleges and university colleges. In particular, I want to get the minister's thoughts about those colleges that are based on what might be termed a dispersed or decentralized model of education delivery. Is it the minister's view that the decentralized, dispersed model is a particular saving to the province in the delivery of education to those areas?

Hon. A. Petter: Let me see if I can try to disentangle the elements of the member's question and then have him focus in on the ones that I don't answer adequately. The notion of some kind of dispersal of education is, as I understand it, normally associated with the idea of distance education. I'm not sure if that's what the member is talking about. So I won't answer, unless he wants me to, on distance education.

If he's talking about the college system, then I think the view is that the college system has been a very successful vehicle for cost-effectively distributing educational resources closer to communities. It's cost-effective not only from the government's point of view but also from the point of view of those seeking education, who can gain education within those communities. The added element of providing those colleges with the ability to provide their graduates with degrees through degree-granting programs only enhances that and brings that educational opportunity that much closer to home. So the short answer is yes, it is seen as a very cost-effective and laudable model and one that this government certainly supports.

G. Abbott: Just for the minister's clarification, I'm talking about institutions like. . . . The one I know best is Okanagan University College, which has large campuses -- or certainly adequate campuses -- in Kelowna, Penticton, Vernon and Salmon Arm, and smaller ones in other locations as well. Those campuses are certainly very valuable in delivering education close to home for the students and so on. But, as I understand it from the institutions themselves. . . . OUC is certainly not the only one. I gather that on Vancouver Island there are some community colleges or university colleges that have similar arrangements with dispersed or decentralized campuses in different geographic locations. I understand that as a product of that decentralization or dispersal, there are additional costs to operating those institutions, which are very difficult to meet. Where my question was leading, to cut to the chase, is: does the ministry take some special account of the difficulties of providing education on that basis, and are they looking at ways in which to assist those institutions in dealing with the special challenges that come with multiple campuses?

[11:15]

G. Abbott: I understand that in the case of Okanagan University College, what I guess might be called the offset grant is in the neighbourhood of $450,000. I guess $450,000 is probably the level at which they're at in 1998, and presumably that is as high as it's been. I don't know. Over the years I have frequently heard concerns about the adequacy of that level of funding. In the estimation of the administrators and others who have to try to operate those kinds of institutions on that basis, the real cost is in excess of that. Are there some ongoing discussions with the institutions around the province about the level of funding and whether it's adequate?

Hon. A. Petter: Certainly, as is so often the case with education or health care issues, facilities are looking for additional resources. But I'm informed by staff that the added administrative costs associated with multi-campus facilities have not been raised as a burning issue by this college or other colleges. That's not to say they don't have concerns, but in the range of funding concerns and issues we've dealt with, this one has not been raised as one that's been seen by the college system as pressing. So unless the member has different information, it's an issue that is provided for, and colleges seem to be generally satisfied with that provision.

G. Abbott: On a little different note, the minister talked yesterday about the delivery of adult basic education and provided the House with the announcement about the elimination of tuition for that function. One of the questions that I've had in my own mind for a while is about the delivery of adult education. It seems, at least in the communities that I know, that it's done in two ways: either through a community or university college or in some cases through the school district, which will provide the equivalent program either in a storefront operation or elsewhere. Will this sort of dual-delivery model continue for the foreseeable future with ABE programs, as far as the minister knows?

Hon. A. Petter: Yes, the expectation is that the dual-delivery model will continue. But one of the big advantages that will flow from yesterday's announcement -- beyond the obvious advantage to students, who will not have to face the tuition barrier if they decide that the college system is the more appropriate system for them -- is that, by levelling the playing field, it will enable government to work in partnership with those responsible for both arms of that delivery model to better manage and deliver those programs.

The tuition barrier at one end and its absence at the other end of the system have created all sorts of dysfunctions in terms of the incentives for students and the administration of the program. So part of the intention is to try now to work with both the K-to-12 system and the college system on a level

[ Page 7826 ]

G. Abbott: I presume that the dual-delivery model will be in place, to use that old phrase, where numbers warrant. I presume that in some instances we may find -- at least at some points in time -- a situation where the college delivery or the high school alternative delivery will not have the number of students to fully subscribe to the courses and so on. When that situation emerges, what does the minister anticipate that the position of the government will be with respect to the delivery of that?

Hon. A. Petter: I was answering the opposite question all of yesterday: what happens when the number of students goes up and the system can't meet it?

The way the system works right now, schools have been funded according to the number of students that they have. Under the new system, there will be an FTE allocation provided to schools, an FTE allocation provided to colleges. They will be funded insofar as the students fill those positions; if they don't, they won't be funded. If it turns out that certain institutions don't attract sufficient students, then that will become one of the issues that will be managed cooperatively through provincial and regional structures to try to maximize the benefit.

My view is this. What I've been saying, just to tie it in to the other question I've been answering, is that there is a belief that -- because the system has been managed in light of this differential in tuition and students perhaps have been going into institutions for financial reasons rather than others -- now we have a more level playing field. While there may be -- hopefully will be -- an increase in takeup by students who want ABE, there will room within the system to accommodate that because of the opportunity that now exists to better manage the system, and the two will cancel each other out. But to the extent that there's pressure to grow or pressure to contract, that will now be managed by both ministries in conjunction with the colleges and the K-to-12 system at both the provincial and regional levels.

G. Abbott: That leads to my next question. In the operation of a K-to-12 adult basic education program, or a university college or community college ABE program, will the funding, management and direction of that all flow from your ministry? Or will K-to-12 flow from K-to-12 and the Advanced Education ministry take care of the community colleges? Perhaps the minister can explain that.

Hon. A. Petter: The funding for the college side of the equation will come from the Ministry of Advanced Education. The funding for the K-to-12 side will come from the Ministry of Education. But both ministries share a common financial administration division; that was part of the desire to maintain the integration that had been affected by bringing together the ministries. The ministries will be working in a very coordinated way to try to effect the best use of those dollars combined to deliver ABE.

I don't want to speak for the Minister of Education, because he's in a better position to speak for himself on this. But I know, for example, that school boards have been given some indication that he and his ministry will want to work with them to look at performance rates in terms of ABE. I'll be doing the same with respect to colleges. What we want to do is to make sure that students not only enter the programs but that they come out of the programs with the necessary skills. We'll be working on a coordinated basis, establishing criteria, working with the institutions and trying to provide a provincewide ABE model -- the two ministries in conjunction, the two systems in conjunction, to maximize the benefits for British Columbians.

The short answer is that the funding comes out of the two ministries, but there is coordination through the common management division of the ministries.

G. Abbott: The final question I have with respect to this, and indeed my last question. . . . The formula in both cases is going to be the same. Regardless of whether it is directed at university college, school district or high school delivery, the funding formula remains the same. Depending on the number of FTEs required, etc., does the funding stay the same? Or is there some differentiation in funding between the two?

Hon. A. Petter: I just want to clarify for the member that the funding formulas have not historically been the same. The current funding formulas will continue; there's not an intention to meld them. As I understand it, within the Ministry of Education there are some variations in the funding formula that have been undertaken by the Minister of Education in conjunction with the school boards to try to make the formula more responsive to success rates or to try to encourage success rates, and the like. But there isn't an intention to have a common funding formula. Each of the institutions has its own costs and its own needs.

As it turns out, I think the actual funds provided are pretty close to each other, but the formulas are somewhat different, because in one case they're responsive to the college system and in the other to the K-to-12 system. The levelling of the playing field is in terms of the tuition component, which has been taken away.

G. Abbott: Surprisingly, perhaps, the minister's response has provoked another question from me. Given that yesterday we moved away from tuition. . . . The minister rightly points out the differences in the layout of the playing fields in the past -- the colleges having tuition for their ABE programs and, generally speaking, the high schools not. The question that is raised by the minister's response is that the discrepancies or the differences in the old funding formulas appear to be kept in place. I'm wondering how we square that with the fact that one institution had tuitions in the past and the other didn't. How are those things going to be reconciled so we'll know that when the funding comes out of the end of the pipe, it's going to be fair to all concerned?

Hon. A. Petter: The answer is. . . . I apologize for not having added this. The funding formulas stay the same. But in the case of the college funding formula, there will be compensation added, within the formula, to make up for the component that was previously collected through tuition.

J. Weisbeck: I'd like to talk a little bit about libraries. There seems to be a concern all across the province about the quality of the library system. I noted in Maclean's magazine, when they wrote Guide to Canadian Universities '98, that libraries were listed in the "What's Not" column. Two universities were listed there: UNBC and SFU. For UNBC the comment was that there was a shortage of library resources. For SFU it said that there was a shortage of books and periodicals in the

[ Page 7827 ]

[11:30]

Hon. A. Petter: Something that occurs to me: I'm not sure the FTE number is the number used. I'd be interested. . . . If the member is referring to total FTEs within the university college, then obviously that number would include students who are not part of a degree-granting program and would create a false impression.

The library resources that are being provided and have been provided through this ministry to assist colleges to become university colleges are fairly substantial. A total of $2.5 million has been provided to four or five university colleges in 1998-99 to assist in growing their library resources. But obviously that's being done with particular reference to their students, who are going to be part of that degree-granting component of their program.

For the most part, beyond that targeted assistance, it's up to the institutions to make sure they apportion their resources in a way that provides sufficient resources for libraries. I understand that our college system is in the process of achieving national accreditation and is expected to meet the requirements nationally with respect to library resources.

[W. Hartley in the chair.]

I would also point out to the member that the library of today is not just a library of books; it's also the Internet and the resources that are provided through the Internet and other information highway opportunities. This year we have provided $2 million of additional resources to colleges to purchase computer hardware. We have reached software agreements that will save colleges close to $2 million on basic software that will help them, in some cases, to connect up with other institutions and to then use those savings to put into other resources -- could be library resources, could be technology. We have invested a substantial amount in the provincial learning network, which will help to link the colleges with each other, with universities -- with the world, really.

So we are providing some targeted assistance for university colleges -- for all colleges -- in respect of some of these technological library resources. While there's always pressure on library funding to get periodicals and the like, we are doing our best to support institutions. Of course, institutions then have to make their own allocative decisions as to how they use their own dollars to grow their library resources as well.

J. Weisbeck: I think the fact that the cutbacks to funding have had a huge impact on the system. . . . Talking about Internet services, or whatever, to libraries, the big problem in most libraries is that they don't have enough funds. Even though you've said that there's $2 million available for appliances and for technology, it just isn't adequate to keep them current.

I want to read a number of comments here, because we actually surveyed some of the librarians across the province just to get their feelings on what their concerns are. Here's one from the College of New Caledonia: no increase in acquisition budget in 13 years. They have had to cut over 80 journal subscriptions because the cost is so high. The library has been forced to buy fewer and fewer acquisitions, while the college itself is expanding and the college cannot keep up with it.

From University College of the Cariboo: the institution states that they are still growing with their degree programs, but in the last three years they have cut staff using early retirement and have not replaced those staff.

Douglas College: in the last three years they have had one and a half staff positions cut. What they really need is more computer-related staff to assist with the technology.

College of the Rockies: the cutbacks have forced the library to reduce hours and time spent on students.

Selkirk College: their collection of books is dated. The majority of books are more than ten years old. It is difficult for students to relate to them. Only 28.5 percent of the books are current. They do not feel the library is adequate. The problems are getting worse, and there are more new students to deal with, with the same amount of money. He wanted to add that, while most people say that the students could use the Internet, it is not good for substantive information for many topic areas.

Northwest Community College: they are short of books. She does not feel that the funding is adequate. The funding has been frozen for the last seven years.

Northern Lights College: according to the Canadian standards of 1992, a college their size should have 45,000 books; they have 21,000. Also, fewer than 10 percent of their books were published in the 1990s. They have greatly fallen behind in technology as well. They are still using 386s, and the students complain about the lack of technology. With a computer allowance of $12,000 for all eight campuses, she says: "How can we possibly keep up with those sorts of dollars?" The fact is that Northern Lights College covers 400,000 square miles with eight campuses. If students cannot find what they need, where else can they go?

Langara College: they are definitely short of everything, not just books. They need more access to electronic resources. In regard to technology, he does not feel they have enough work stations and believes that this is a serious issue.

Camosun College: the college is always short of books. The funding they receive is low compared to other colleges.

Malaspina needs a lot more books, particularly with degree programs, which are more complicated and require more books. They had layoffs a couple of years ago. They need staff for more technological support, particularly with the increase in technology.

So the list goes on. Probably the one I know better than any is OUC, where they're working on a collection of 185,000 books, and they feel that the minimum they require is 330,000 volumes.

[ Page 7828 ]

J. Dalton: I ask leave to make an introduction, hon. Chair.

Leave granted.

J. Dalton: This will be the sequel to an earlier introduction. The second half of the Collingwood grade 5 gang is here in the gallery. One of the students asked, and I now know the answer. . . . The mace weighs 11 pounds. It's made of B.C. silver and is gold-plated. So there you are; we're right up to date on that. Please welcome all of the Collingwood students.

Hon. A. Petter: I know a few librarians, and I know that if you ask a librarian whether or not they have enough resources, they are incapable of ever saying yes. Nor should they be, because libraries are about knowledge, and a librarian's job is to expand the knowledge base of the library. I'm not surprised that librarians, as strong advocates to expand their particular collections, would make that known. Nor do I want to dismiss those concerns. I do believe that as institutions grow -- because thankfully there have been growing spaces in this province -- and as we ask colleges to take on new challenges -- as we have, for example, and they thankfully become university colleges -- that does put pressure on libraries and on resources.

Having said that, we have, unlike other provinces, maintained and increased funding in recent years. In fact -- I won't go over the numbers again -- they are in marked contrast to what has happened in virtually every other province in this country. This year we are fully funding new FTEs, but we know that those new FTEs will not cost the full allocation. In the Okanagan University College case, $850,000 of new money will be provided for 160 FTEs. Some of that money can go toward helping to expand library resources. We have, in terms of the technology side, provided $2 million to the college system for new computers, and that's on top of the base budget allocations and the allocations they've already made for that within those base budgets. We have committed to linking those colleges through the provincial learning network and providing them with substantial savings which they can reallocate through the software agreement.

I'm not surprised that university and college librarians would say it isn't enough. We've asked colleges, we've challenged colleges, to try to do more -- not with less, but to do more with continued stable funding, and in this year, to do more with more funding. I expect that we will always hear from librarians that we could do better, and I accept that. There will be an opportunity to examine these particular issues of library funding in the context of the funding review that's being undertaken by the ministry in conjunction with the college system, flowing from "Charting a New Course." I'm sure these comments will be brought to the table in that context.

So I very much appreciate the member's comments, and obviously I share the concern that we have adequate library resources. I find it perplexing at times that this member is able to argue for increased resources with such fervour in this House, when I know that in other forums he and other members seem to be more concerned about the fact that the government isn't cutting enough of its expenditures. But there we go. I suppose that if you're in opposition, you have the luxury of seeing things both ways.

J. Weisbeck: Just for the record, the fact is that we have never said in any of our policies that we were going to cut funding to education.

Obviously one of the barriers to education is the cost of books. So when I see and hear about poor and inadequate libraries. . . . You find that most students have to acquire these books or these resource materials themselves, and it creates another barrier to their education. I'm interested, though, in whether or not this ministry will follow the Canadian standard and whether they think that's a legitimate number to aim for.

Hon. A. Petter: The goal is to get national accreditation for our colleges, and to achieve that accreditation the national standard becomes the goal. So that is certainly the objective: to make sure that those institutions can achieve that standard and achieve the accreditation that will flow from achieving that standard.

J. Weisbeck: You commented on the provincial learning network. I think I'll save that for this afternoon for the science and technology people, but I do want to comment on that later on.

I had a letter sent to me from an individual in Kelowna who's running a day care centre, and I want to pass off this message to you. They are running a day care at the north Kelowna campus and are finding that their infant-toddler program is costing them a lot more than what they're bringing in, mainly because the staff-to-child ratio is obviously much larger; it's one to four. So they're losing money, but obviously it's a service that is much needed at OUC; it serves a niche there. I guess I'm asking for a suggestion. They've talked about having fundraisers to try to make up the difference, but is there anywhere in the system that these people could turn to maintain this service?

Hon. A. Petter: As I understand it, the role of this ministry is in relation to providing the dollars for facilities to provide the day care. The institutions may well decide as part of their decision to provide funding within their global budgets for child care, and of course there are other programs within government that provide subsidies to parents with respect to child care. The role of this particular ministry is limited to the facilities side.

[11:45]

We always talk about a degree having value, and I know that OUC has wonderful instruction; you come out of there with a very, very good degree. But I'm really concerned about the way the rest of the world looks on that degree. You know, we live in a highly competitive world. People graduating out

[ Page 7829 ]

Hon. A. Petter: I guess what I'd say is that whenever one takes a new step, there are always going to be those who are a little nervous and want to see how things work out. But by and large, the reception to the university college development has been extremely positive. I invite the member to read the article in last month's Maclean's magazine which talked about how British Columbia is really leading the country and how this particular initiative is part of that.

The goal here is to get national accreditation for these programs. They are, I think, providing an opportunity for people in communities, and I suspect, like in all things, as the experience starts to demonstrate the worth and value of these programs and demonstrate that the degrees offered are as valuable and as reflective of merit as other degrees, some of these initial anxieties will start to fade and people will start to be more comfortable. By and large, the reception to date has been extremely positive from the communities concerned and also nationally, and I think as experience starts to build and people start to see what the results are, we will see that confidence build even further.

J. Weisbeck: I want to just change the line of questioning a bit to private post-secondary. . . . I am interested in the structure. The act states that the commission consists of not more than 15 members appointed by the minister. I was just curious to know how these individuals were selected, what criteria were used and what sort of experience they have with education.

Hon. A. Petter: As I understand it, in general terms, the majority of members are from the industry and were chosen and put forward by the industry, and government then simply appointed them on behalf of the industry. I believe there may have been some members as well that government selected on its own. But the majority of membership is from industry -- from the private education sector -- and put forward by them and appointed on their behalf by government.

J. Weisbeck: The act states that they may be paid by the commission. I'd like to know what is the current situation is -- if they are being paid.

Hon. A. Petter: I believe the commission members get a per diem, which would be a standard-type of per diem within the guidelines of government for such agencies. We can find out the numbers and provide it to the member in writing if he wants. But it's a standard type of per diem for this kind of body.

J. Weisbeck: I understood there was a per diem. I just wanted to know whether there was something over and above the per diem. If he could get that information to me, I'd appreciate it.

There are approximately 1,100 private post-secondary institutions. There's a very small number of institutions that are accredited. I guess the criticism has been that the whole process for accreditation has been very slow. Especially now, when you've got this increased scrutiny of the institutions, I wonder why that is and whether or not there's a plan to speed up the process.

Hon. A. Petter: First of all, on the member's previous question, I think the only thing that members would receive beyond the per diem is travel costs.

With respect to the accreditation process, the member, I'm sure, is aware that government has tried to encourage institutions to achieve accreditation, and there are changes that are going to be taking place in terms of the funding of students to provide additional incentives to institutions to accredit. But accreditation is a pretty rigorous process; it takes some time. It's not the commission that's slowing it down. It is the rigours of the process and the willingness of institutions to come forward and subject themselves to that process that takes time. We want to make sure, obviously, that when accreditation is given, it means something. It is a step that we have taken with some deliberation. In fact, some regard as ambitious the time lines that we have provided. But hopefully they will provide sufficient time for the rigorous assessment to be done and for institutions to prepare themselves for that assessment so they can meet those standards and the public can gain the benefit of accreditation.

J. Weisbeck: I received a letter from a concerned owner of a private post-secondary institute in Kelowna. She claims that there is a lack of consistency when dealing with the same issue. Particularly, it appears there are no guidelines when a school closes down. I just want to know whether or not there are some guidelines that are followed. In this case, I guess, the students were picked up by another institution, but at the same time they picked up the old student loan number. Are there specific guidelines that we follow with the closure of a school?

Hon. A. Petter: In light of the time, I will just give a very brief answer. We can come back and visit this later if the member wishes. In general, the policy -- I'm not sure if it's committed to written guidelines -- is to protect the student's interest. What the commission will do is move very quickly to identify the students who are affected by the closure of an institution and try, based on the individual needs and circumstances of those students, to protect those students' position. If a student has just started a course of study but has paid tuition, for example, the chief objective would be to try to recoup from the bond or deposit that's been paid the amount of that tuition; or, if a student is further along, to relocate that student in an alternative program; or in some cases, where a student has been within a few days of completion, to actually get the accreditation awarded to the student based on the performance to that point. The single overriding objective is the interest of the student -- to protect the student's interest in terms of the objective of the program, if that's possible; or if not, in terms of recouping to the student, I think the goal is 70 percent of the tuition cost, so the student will not suffer.

Having said that very generally, and with the clock in mind, I move that the committee rise, and report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.

Committee B, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

[ Page 7830 ]

Hon. A. Petter moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

The committee met at 10:14 a.m.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS
(continued)

B. Barisoff: When we left off yesterday with the minister, we were talking about the road south of OK Falls to the border, and one particular area was the Vaseux Lake corner. The minister mentioned that it was something that wasn't on the five-year plan. We did indicate, talking to the minister last year, that there was going to be some discussion with ICBC about the fact that this is a corner that has had a lot of major accidents over the last number of years. I wonder whether the minister has any indication that they have consulted with ICBC about doing some cost-sharing arrangements.

[10:15]

I just want to point out that I have with me Blair Redlin, president and CEO of BCTFA; Frank Blasetti, vice-president; John Doyle, director of communications; and Doug Hibbins, senior vice-president.

B. Barisoff: Could I have an indication of the time frame? This is something I had asked last year. It was just the time frame of when I could find that something would be done with ICBC.

Hon. H. Lali: We will undertake to contact the hon. member and have an answer for him from ICBC by the summer.

B. Barisoff: Being the past Highways critic, I would be remiss not to bring up the ongoing McAlpine Bridge issue. I know that the ministry was looking into this. I am just wondering what the status is at the present time.

Hon. H. Lali: I would like to point out to the member that we could canvass this when the ministry staff are here. It is a ministry issue as opposed to a TFA issue.

B. Barisoff: I will bring that issue up next week. I had just thought that, being a bridge going over a major highway, it would be a BCTFA issue. It is, as I've indicated in years past, probably one of the only wooden bridges left on a major highway. On Highway 97 the traffic keeps growing year by year. So it definitely is an issue that should be looked at.

I would like to carry on with Highway 3, which runs through the minister's riding, and the southern Trans-Canada, which runs right through my riding all the way to the Alberta border. My concern, of course, is the condition of Highway 3 all the way through to the Alberta border, particularly from Hope to Christina Lake, which is the area I'm mostly concerned with. I know that yesterday in the big House, the minister indicated that he was spending a lot of time in Peace River North looking at the highways there. I've been getting a lot of calls from my neighbouring riding, which happens to be the minister's riding, so I'm trying to make sure that we look after some of that too. I wonder whether he'd address the issue of Highway 3 that runs from Hope all the way to the Alberta border.

Hon. H. Lali: Highway 3 in my area is known as the Hope-Princeton Highway, even though it extends beyond to the Alberta border. I can't say that I've driven most of it, but I have had a chance to drive significant portions of it. While I was an MLA -- I still am an MLA, but before I became minister -- I had a chance to work with previous Transportation and Highways ministers to make sure that a certain amount of work was done. Certainly between Hope and Princeton upwards of 50 kilometres have been resurfaced. The Whipsaw Creek Bridge, which is actually a few miles outside of Princeton, was finished by 1994.

I did have a chance to travel up in the north to some of the areas where I hadn't gone in my previous life and was able to take a look at some of the issues firsthand. It's a little difficult when you're in session and you have a slim majority and can't get leave to actually travel to parts of the province. The southern interior is a part of the province that I intend to travel to before the end of this year to take a look at some of the highway and bridge issues -- perhaps even the McAlpine Bridge issue as well. I intend to do that.

The other thing that I want to point out to the hon. member. . . . There is the Premier's Summit on Economic Opportunity that is taking place in Kamloops towards the end of the month. The Liberal MLAs in the Thompson-Okanagan area are all invited to attend, and I think they will be attending. I will actually be looking forward to the various Liberal MLAs pointing out issues in their own ridings in terms of the transportation part of the economic summit, and certainly I'm hoping that they will raise those issues so they can get on to whatever recommendations that may come out of the economic summit.

I also want to point out to the hon. member again that once the session is out, I will be making some plans to make sure that I do a drive-through of Highway 3.

B. Barisoff: I must admit that I have the opportunity to drive the Hope-Princeton Highway through the minister's riding on a number of occasions throughout the year. I just think it's quite important that the minister takes the time to look at Highway 3, because that does give exact access to the tourism industry in the south Okanagan and in the Boundary country over to Grand Forks and Christina Lake. Of course, a major concern of mine is that we make sure that we have Highway 3 maintained. I would like to ask the minister if

[ Page 7831 ]

Hon. H. Lali: I want to provide some reassurance to the hon. member. Highway 3 is an important link between the Kootenays and the interior and the coastal communities. It's certainly a priority item in my mind. I have given that sort of direction to my staff. I also want to say that. . . . You know, he talked about tourism. The movement of people and the movement of industrial and agricultural goods is very, very important. That is a main corridor along which quite a bit of economic activity takes place. However, in this year's budget, some realignment work and surface repair work will be undertaken, as well as some areas where there will be safety improvements.

B. Barisoff: I just want to move a little bit farther to the east in the Boundary country. I know that the Ministry of Highways is actually doing some road work in the Midway area. I thank the minister for that, because it was desperately needed; it was a right-angle corner going both ways. I'm just wondering whether there's any indication through BCTFA that any more work is going to be done in that area between Midway and, in particular, Grand Forks. It's an area that needs a lot of work done.

Hon. H. Lali: The particular issue that the hon. member has mentioned is actually a priority item that has come forward from our district and regional staff. There will be work done in the future. As to the details, I can't share that with him at this particular moment. But he will be getting his briefing book soon, which will outline some of the details.

B. Barisoff: I appreciate the fact that those roads are a priority. I did mention earlier -- and I will be bringing it up with the Ministry of Transportation and Highways when they're here -- Highway 33, because of the flow of traffic that is now being generated from, in particular, the Grand Forks-Greenwood-Midway area, heading more towards the Kelowna area. A lot of it is also going into the South Okanagan. From what I understand, the possibility of a casino in the South Okanagan area. . . . That will generate a lot more traffic coming out of that particular area. I would appreciate it if the minister could keep me informed of what's taking place on those major roads.

Probably one last item would be: is there any further upgrading of the highway south of Oliver to the border -- any pullouts or anything of that nature?

Hon. H. Lali: There is some work in Oliver but not south of Oliver in this year's budget.

L. Stephens: I have a couple of quick questions to ask the minister. I'm sure he knows what they are; every year I ask the Ministry of Transportation the same questions. I wanted to touch on the infrastructure program, but I understand that it's being handled through the Ministry of Employment and Investment, so my questions on that issue should be directed there. Is that correct? Thank you, the minister indicates that it is.

The city of Langley has a proposal for a 202nd Street rail overpass, and they've asked for a cost-sharing arrangement with the ministry. As the ministry knows, the expansion of the Roberts Bank terminal has created a lot of rail traffic for us in Langley. We have a number of rail crossings in the city, and we're looking to find a rail overpass of some kind. I know that the ministry is aware, too, that the federal people have been pushing the city quite hard to come up with some kind of an alternative, because many of the cars are now parking on the railroad tracks, coming off Logan Avenue and turning onto 200th Street. It's just a case of waiting for an accident to happen there. I wonder if the minister could tell me what the status of that proposal is at this particular time?

Hon. H. Lali: This issue is part of the municipal road system. We're working with them to come to some sort of solution in the future, and the discussions are ongoing.

[10:30]

Hon. H. Lali: At this particular point, there isn't any more information that is needed. Staff had a meeting on March 26 with the mayor and officials of the city of Langley. What we're trying to do right now is to identify some low-cost solutions.

L. Stephens: Could I ask if the ministry is prepared to move this one along? Is this a priority? Where does it stand in the list of ministry objectives? Is this a priority or is it secondary? Could the minister indicate what the status is?

Hon. H. Lali: I just want to go back and remind the hon. member that it is a municipal road. Our involvement is actually in a minor way, but we are trying to help them in whatever way we possibly can.

L. Stephens: I will make sure that the city knows that the minister and the ministry are doing whatever they can to move this particular proposal along as quickly as possible.

The second issue is the 200th Street interchange for the township of Langley. This one has been ongoing for a number of years, and it's getting worse. The township has agreed to the cost-sharing with the TFA and the phased development for the interchange -- three phases for the interchange. Could the minister indicate when this proposal is likely to start actual work on the first phase?

Hon. H. Lali: In some private hallway conversations with the hon. member, I've indicated that I actually use that particular intersection at least twice a week. When I drive from my constituency to Victoria and then back again, I go along 88th and then the interchange at 200th Street, so I'm quite familiar with that particular area. I also want to say that it's an excellent example of a P3 project where we've got some excellent cooperation from the city -- the mayor and council and the city officials there. Certainly I'm hoping that we can continue in this positive vein in the near future. It is a project which is obviously a high priority of the regional plan and also a high priority for this ministry.

L. Stephens: I want this on the record because we do come and talk about this every single year. We've been getting closer to a resolution here, and my understanding is that we're getting very close to a resolution. I would hope that the minister sees fit to announce whatever he is able to announce

[ Page 7832 ]

Hon. H. Lali: There has been tremendous progress made on this particular issue. There's a cost-sharing agreement we're close to signing with the city of Langley. As soon as a solution is found, an agreement is made. . . . I offered the hon. member -- you know, hallway conversation -- that if and when we are ready for an announcement, I'll gladly take her along with me.

L. Stephens: I thank the minister for that commitment.

G. Abbott: I'd like the minister to refocus now on the Trans-Canada Highway, Chase through to the Alberta border. The issue of upgrading the Trans-Canada Highway through that area has certainly been a long-term one, as long ago as I was a member of the Columbia-Shuswap regional district board, from 1980 on. Certainly every year it became an important issue for the board, and obviously it continues to be an important issue for the board, judging by my correspondence. The regional district, of course, spans that whole section, so it is of ongoing concern both to that board and to the individual municipalities within the Columbia-Shuswap regional district.

I want to say first of all that Highways regional staff have been very good about keeping me up to date on what their plans are for the Trans-Canada Highway. I know they've included me in meetings with the local governments there, and that's appreciated.

The first thing I would appreciate the minister clarifying with respect to the Trans-Canada Highway is what the division is going to be between projects which will be funded by the BCTFA with respect to the Trans-Canada Highway and those that might be funded by the more conventional Ministry of Transportation and Highways funding.

Hon. H. Lali: I just want to point out to the hon. member that the Trans-Canada Highway, Kamloops east to the border, is one of our priority corridors. We have a corridor management plan in place which will be a very, very detailed study -- it won't be just small sections of it. We want to be able to have the entire corridor studied, from Kamloops east to the border. I also want to point out that we are currently four-laning the highway east from Kamloops towards the intersection with Highway 97. We're also completing projects in Salmon Arm, Sicamous and Yoho National Park. That was in my opening speech two days ago.

In terms of the division as to what will be done by MOTH and what will be done by TFA, it won't be anything different from what it is in the rest of the province. I just want to point out that, for instance, if there was a bridge we were looking at, if we were just painting the old bridge or just redecking part of that bridge, it would be considered under rehab; if we were to completely replace that bridge, then it would become a capital project. On a specific span of highway, if we were simply seal-coating or resurfacing a particular stretch of the highway, then it would go under rehab; but if we were adding an extra passing lane, for instance, then that would be under capital.

G. Abbott: I thank the minister for that clarification.

The notion that the area be treated as a continuous corridor and that it is in fact a priority of the ministry to do that is reassuring. Could the minister advise whether the section that was put in place, in the late 1980s, I guess, between Sicamous and Revelstoke. . . ? There's about a 12-kilometre section that's four-laned, with accesses and so on. Is that the prototype of the level of attention that is going to be devoted to this section ultimately?

Hon. H. Lali: If the hon. member's referring to what is sometimes referred to as a Cliff Michael freeway. . . . If it is to that standard, I think the cost would be fairly prohibitive. The idea is to have four lanes so that we can have safe travel at a 90-kilometres-per-hour speed limit.

D. Symons: Just one question to the minister. Rehab was mentioned a moment ago. There's a considerable amount of funding going for rehab through the TFA. Will we be asking those sorts of questions during Highways here or during TFA estimates? I'm assuming they'll be under Highways. Can we have a clarification on where we ask those questions?

Hon. H. Lali: The Highways estimates will actually be a more appropriate place to discuss the details of that.

G. Abbott: Returning to the Trans-Canada Highway and the corridor study that's in place, could the minister -- for the benefit of my constituents and indeed for all of those along that particular corridor -- advise us of where he expects the process to go in the foreseeable future? What are the timeline expectations for the implementation of that corridor study and its recommendations?

Hon. H. Lali: I'll just read from this document: "The work program in 1998 and '99 will evaluate options, prepare recommendations for some short-term improvements and propose the main framework of the overall priorities in investment strategy. The corridor management plan will be completed in 1999-2000."

G. Abbott: As I recall from the documents that were circulated at earlier meetings I attended -- I think they're entitled "Going Places" -- there are a couple of specific long-term concern areas. These aren't concerns just for local government; they're obvious concerns for the province as well. One of the areas that is frequently pointed to as a real problem area for the ministry is Three Valley, between Craigellachie and Revelstoke. Does the ministry have some plans to address, within the foreseeable future, the rather severe problems that sometimes occur at Three Valley?

Hon. H. Lali: On the Three Valley Gap issue, we've already identified some options for that particular issue and are currently evaluating all of them for costs, because they have different costs attached to them and also different environmental impacts. That's what this corridor management plan will actually be doing, so we can finalize some solutions.

G. Abbott: I suspect that the minister's staff, if not the minister, would be very familiar with the problems that have chronically occurred on that particular stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway. It's a tough area technically to address because of the steep banks and avalanches and all that kind of stuff. Over the last 20 years there have been numerous ideas about how to address it, but somehow the dollars are never

[ Page 7833 ]

Hon. H. Lali: I want to assure the member that it is a priority item. That's why we're looking at some more cost-effective solutions, and we're close to identifying what option we will go with. The study, as I mentioned, will be completed by the next fiscal year. Once that happens, then we can proceed with the solution.

[10:45]

The other area -- this is not in my riding; it's in Columbia River-Revelstoke and an ongoing concern for the Columbia-Shuswap regional district -- is the Kicking Horse Pass section of the Trans-Canada Highway. I don't know if the minister would concur, but we've read in newspapers over the past year that this is one of most dangerous sections of highway in the entire country. Having driven it a few times, I'm apt to concur. Does the ministry or the TFA have some plans to proceed with work on the Kicking Horse Pass section to improve it?

Hon. H. Lali: On the issue just raised by the hon. member, we are concentrating in this year's budget, as I have mentioned earlier, on Five Mile Hill and also the Yoho Bridge section of that particular area. The rest of it will have to wait until the corridor management plan has been completed before we identify any particular solutions.

G. Abbott: On a more local issue, the community of Sorrento, between Salmon Arm and Kamloops, is very interested in securing a bypass, I guess as a product of the corridor study and the recommendations from that. Is that something which is included in the current discussions on the corridor plan?

Hon. H. Lali: Yes, it is considered under the present discussions.

G. Abbott: Could the minister advise whether any public consultations will be a part of that in the foreseeable future?

Hon. H. Lali: The process of public consultation is that we identify the options in consultation with communities and first nations people who are in the area. Once we have evaluated all of these options and have something meaningful to put forward to the communities, we will do that and then go back and consult first nations and the communities.

G. Abbott: This is the last issue I want to canvass in these estimates, at least with respect to the TFA. The substantial projects that are underway at the present time west of Sicamous and east of Salmon Arm are funded through the Transportation Financing Authority. Both projects are very much welcomed by the public -- if not during the construction phases, certainly they will be at the conclusion of them. Could the minister advise whether these projects are on target in terms of (a) expectation date for completion and (b) budget considerations?

Hon. H. Lali: Yes, they will be completed on target.

J. van Dongen: I just have a few questions for the minister about high priority issues in my constituency. I don't know if they are Ministry of Highways projects or B.C. Transportation Financing Authority projects, but I'll simply put them to the minister and he can tell me.

The last level crossing on the No. 1 freeway from Hope to Squamish is No. 1 Road in Yarrow just west of the Vedder Canal. It was brought to my attention by the ministry staff sometime in the past year that the Barrowtown bridge had been the subject of review by an engineer and it had a limited life span. I wonder if the minister could comment on what the current plans are for that situation.

Hon. H. Lali: We are actually looking at realigning the highway at that particular place. Preliminary planning work is being done right now, and we may go to design work later this year.

J. van Dongen: Could the minister confirm what the advice is that has been given by engineers to the ministry on the Barrowtown bridge?

Hon. H. Lali: I just want to point out that the bridge in question is actually being kept in safe working condition right now. We do recognize that it is deteriorating. Right now we're looking at planning and design work on that, so that when we do the realignment on the highway it will solve the problem.

J. van Dongen: Thank you to the minister for that. I did attend one meeting with the Highways staff and city of Abbotsford staff. Certainly I think that they were all prepared to work with the minister to try and resolve that situation.

Highway 11 between Mission and the Huntingdon border crossing is, I think, the other very significant traffic or road issue in my constituency. I think there's really two areas of concern there. One is the very high accident rate, particularly on the section between Mission and the city of Abbotsford, and second is the very high level of congestion in the area around the city of Abbotsford. I'm wondering if the minister could give me an update as to what's currently being planned for that section of highway.

Hon. H. Lali: Like many other highways in the province, Highway 11 actually provides a variety of roles that do not necessarily complement one another. I think there's a fair bit of heavy commercial development and regional growth, which actually threaten the functional integrity of the highway system by reducing the mobility along the corridor. However, there is a corridor study in place which will be finished by the end of this year, and consultation with stakeholders is currently going on. Once the study is finished, we will be able to identify some options.

J. van Dongen: I know that in years past, the ministry has acquired a certain amount of property to facilitate expansion of the highway to four lanes. I wonder if we could just confirm: would further property acquisition be required to make that a four-lane highway? Or do we have that all in place right now?

Hon. H. Lali: That's the detailed kind of question that we can't answer right now. We'll have to wait until the corridor study is done.

[ Page 7834 ]

J. van Dongen: If I could just ask the minister: the Cole Road and Bradner Road sani-stations at the rest stops -- would those be part of the Ministry of Highway's responsibility?

[11:00]

J. van Dongen: I would assume that the same would apply to the sign shop in Kamloops? I have some questions about that. Okay, thanks.

On another completely different subject, there's been reports, both in newspapers and government reports, that the developer of the Kamloops on the Lake project at Six Mile Ranch has had discussions with the TFA about possible funding or financing of a road project with respect to that development. Could the minister advise the committee as to the status of those discussions?

Hon. H. Lali: Currently there is no proposal put forward by the developer to the BCTFA, and the TFA has no investment or financial interest in the Six Mile development at this particular point.

J. van Dongen: I would appreciate it if the minister could advise me as to what conditions would apply or what criteria would be necessary for the TFA to consider such an application. Is there a document that sets out criteria for TFA involvement in those sorts of projects? If there is such a document, I would be interested in receiving it.

Hon. H. Lali: In terms of criteria, the province looks at job creation and economic development. We only do it on a commercial basis whereby, if a particular development is going to improve the existing provincial highway system, we can then work out a cost-recovery kind of arrangement.

[E. Walsh in the chair.]

J. van Dongen: If a deal was negotiated in a situation like this that involved public funds, would the details of that deal be available to the public?

Hon. H. Lali: Yes.

J. van Dongen: One last question on this issue: I do have a copy of a letter signed on behalf of Robert Miller, dated December 22, 1997, which indicates some discussions and requests further information from Pagebrook. I wonder if that letter was ever followed up on.

Hon. H. Lali: Currently there is no proposal; there is just an exchange of correspondence between the developer and TFA. I'm just wondering what the member's position is regarding this particular issue. Should the government be putting public money into this proposal or not?

J. van Dongen: Is the minister confirming that there are no negotiations taking place at the present time? Or is there an intent to do so in the future?

Hon. H. Lali: That is correct. There are no negotiations taking place. It's just an exchange of correspondence between the developer and us.

F. Gingell: The member for Delta North has asked me to revisit the issue of the Nordel Way extension, which he discussed yesterday. The municipality of Delta is concerned that at the upcoming meeting of the minister and municipal officials on June 3 you're going to propose a cut-rate solution. I would like to take this opportunity, if I may, to suggest that a solution that deals only with moving traffic through from the current alignment onto 88th Avenue in a more efficient manner is not a solution that is worth doing.

I appreciate that it is half the price, but it doesn't improve the throughput, it has no room for expansion and it doesn't tie into the right road systems for Surrey and further east. It is not a solution that is acceptable to Surrey or to Delta. Really, it's a solution that is considered to be penny-wise and pound-foolish. I know the minister knows that area well; he travels through it. The B.C. Hydro right-of-way is a much better route. It disturbs the community less and allows for sensible future expansion of traffic volumes, which an 88th Avenue solution doesn't.

Hon. H. Lali: The hon. member says we're looking at a cut-rate solution to the problem. Does the member actually want us to spend more money on the project? I think that's what I heard him say. The solution that we are proposing is one-third in price.

Interjections.

Hon. H. Lali: Listen up.

The Chair: Order, members.

Hon. H. Lali: Thank you, hon. Chair, for re-establishing order. The solution that we are proposing is one-third in price, and there are similar performance benefits between the two solutions. There is obviously a difference of $14 million. Now, if the corporation of Delta wants to pay the difference, we'll consider the other option.

F. Gingell: I don't think I'm qualified to get into a discussion relative to the engineering merits. I have sat in on quite a few meetings between engineers in both Surrey and Delta and have attended public meetings about this issue. I hear you making the remark about us wanting to spend more. I don't want you to spend money that is wasted. I think that is the issue. It's an issue of penny-wise, pound-foolish. I think the minister's remarks in that area were uncalled for -- completely uncalled for. All of us are interested in spending the citizens' resources on transportation and highway issues in the most effective way possible and to the greatest good. Let's not pour money down the drain and come up with solutions which may be cheaper but don't solve the problem

[ Page 7835 ]

Dealing with that same issue, but moving from Nordel Way to Highway 17, I'd like to point out, if I may, and get it on the record that this government and governments before you have spent a great deal of money improving access to ferry terminals in West Vancouver for Horseshoe Bay, on the Vancouver Island end of Highway 17 and, of course, with the new highway structure into Duke Point. It may surprise the minister to know that in the past ten years, ferry traffic through the Tsawwassen terminal has increased fourfold. It's gone up by 300 percent.

Deltaport was opened last summer, and we're now beginning to see that a lot of the containers will be moved by truck as well as by train. So there will be substantial additional volumes. I know that the ministry has entered a planning stage relative to this project. Having lived in the area for all the years that I have, I'm always hearing about planning starting but never the project, and it's starting once more. I understand that the port of Vancouver has offered to share in the planning costs, the municipality of Delta has and Transportation and Highways has. I'd like to suggest to the minister that it would be appropriate for B.C. Ferries to also join in this cost-sharing arrangement, because they are a major factor.

Having got to this point -- and recognizing all the issues of the south perimeter road and how an east Ladner bypass may interweave with the south perimeter road, new accesses onto Highway 99, both north and south, and perhaps another crossing in due course -- certainly one wants to ensure that we don't build anything now that won't work into a final plan. Can the minister advise me how high a priority he places on this first stage of the Highway 17 improvement and an east Ladner bypass?

Hon. H. Lali: Just sort of going back to the first part of the hon. member's comments on the Nordel Way interchange situation, we're cognizant of the concerns of the corporation of Delta. We believe that we can work with them to come to a common resolution, because we want to solve the problem. I've been on record a couple of times saying that I travel that particular route all the time, and I recognize what the problem is.

If the member wants, my staff can give the member a briefing on the option that we are proposing. I think that as an accountant -- and I have a lot of respect for the hon. member in his other profession -- he will appreciate the option that we're putting forward after he's had a briefing on this particular issue.

[11:15]

F. Gingell: When the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority was set up, I'm wondering if the TFA took over some accounting systems from Transportation and Highways that are not year 2000-compliant. I understand some of the issues relative to the ministry and the important decision you have to make on June 30 -- which I encourage you not to delay -- relative to coming into CAS, but I'm not aware of whether or not the Transportation Financing Authority is completely year 2000-compliant.

Hon. H. Lali: We actually did not take over any of the MOTH system, so we didn't inherit the year 2000 problem.

F. Gingell: So I take it that all of the accounting systems for the Transportation Financing Authority are year 2000-compliant.

Hon. H. Lali: It's a very small problem, so I don't feel that it will pose any problem once we've dealt with that.

F. Gingell: It's a very small problem if you recognize them all. That's the first issue.

Secondly, perhaps the minister will allow me to ask this question now, although it may be ministry-related. There must be a lot of embedded computer chips in things like traffic signals and other things that may cause a problem relative to the year 2000. I'm wondering if the minister could assure the committee that his ministry is well aware of the issues, that they are being identified and that corrective action is being taken in good time, so that the world doesn't come to a stop on January 1, 2000.

Hon. H. Lali: The answer is yes, and we will actually canvass them in the Highways estimates.

L. Reid: I have a question for the minister from the district of Sicamous regarding the Trans-Canada Highway, and it's about a turning-lane project west of Sicamous, at CPR Hill. I understand it's anticipated to be completed by the end of June 1998. The question relates to the three-lane project and the turning lanes at Solsqua Road, Sadnicki Road and Rauma Road. This correspondence is before the minister, and the mayor, Gordon Mackie, needs an earlier response, because they believe. . . . I'll put some background on the record for the minister: "We have recently been advised by ministry staff that due to increased costs for the three-laning project and a recent review of the project which determined that a longer turning lane was required to accommodate long-length trucks, there was inadequate funding for the Solsqua Road turning lane." That's basically the answer that's been given. They are now unclear as to whether there's consideration for other turning lanes or if the Solsqua Road turning lane has been deferred. If the minister could kindly comment.

Hon. H. Lali: We don't have the detailed information the hon. member requires, but we will get back to her on that.

L. Reid: What I'll do, then, is put the questions on the record for the minister, and if at the earliest opportunity. . . . The district of Sicamous was advised that funding was allocated for three turning lanes on the Trans-Canada Highway within that district and that the work would commence upon completion of the three-laning project. That's the basic background to it. I've listed three roads: Solsqua Road, Sadnicki Road and Rauma Road. So again their question is: in that one

[ Page 7836 ]

"Considering the number of extended-length trucks on the Trans-Canada Highway, which are often unable to stop on short notice, and considering that the district has been advised that the number of commercial transport vehicles could increase substantially over the next few years, the district believes it is imperative that the Solsqua Road turning lane be constructed in 1998.

"At present 1,650 transport trucks pass through Sicamous per day -- estimated at 50,000 per month. Should traffic increase, the potential for an accident increases."

Another matter pertains to the Highway 91-Hamilton interchange project in my riding. Is that something the minister is comfortable in responding to today? The reference is on behalf of my constituent, Mr. Peter Wootton, and it is around road vibrations and structural damage. Significant issues are the structures of townhouses and other neighbours at the Bridgeview Court complex. "The road improvements to Highway 91A, Alex Fraser Highway -- the east-west connector -- road-widening and additional lanes have moved traffic two lanes closer to our property." So when these individuals attended the public hearing process, they basically were told that the actual roadway would be 30 to 40 feet farther away than it now is.

The vibration issues, the noise issues, are causing tremendous concern. "The traffic, especially commercial vehicles, is causing extreme vibrations . . . to our house. During construction we received vibration damage. . . . At that time, November and December '97, the project manager, Mr. Paul Shul, was contacted and he confirmed that the vibrations were only temporary due to uneven pavement and grooving in the road and once the final topcoat was applied, the vibrations were to cease.

This has not been the case. "With construction completed, we are experiencing even greater vibration and damage to the interior and exterior of our house. Along with increased traffic and speed, we are subjected to excessive traffic noise above an acceptable level." In fact, my understanding is that 65 decibels is the max, and they are already at that. That was supposed to be guaranteed until about 2010, and they are already well above the allowable limit. Therefore they are asking for some discussions around extension of the sound barrier to protect their homes from the noise and to restore quality and enjoyment of living in the Hamilton area.

I would ask the minister for some sense of priority on where this sits in the queue and if indeed a decision has been taken.

Hon. H. Lali: On the Sicamous issues that were read into the record, when we have the information we'll get back to the hon. member.

On the second part, the Highway 99 interchange and related issues, the member is aware of some of the improvements that were done in the area. We're continuing to actually monitor how the new facility performs, and then once we determine if there's any corrective action needed, then we'll proceed forthwith.

L. Reid: If the minister would outline the corrective action -- because certainly these folks are not privy today to any corrective action. Their complex is not one of the ones that's behind the berm, and I believe the berm was the only corrective action taken by the Ministry of Transportation and Highways.

Hon. H. Lali: I just want to point out to the hon. member again that we are continuing to assess the situation. Once the corrective actions are identified, we will certainly make the hon. member aware of them. However, if the hon. member is willing to provide the names of some of the constituents, I can instruct staff to meet with them.

L. Reid: The minister responded earlier that corrective action had been taken. If indeed they have not started, that is an interesting comment, because these individuals have been in direct discussion with the Ministry of Transportation and Highways. There is correspondence from these individuals -- again, the last name is Wootton, and the first name is Peter. I am happy to show the correspondence, but in fact you already have it before the ministry staff.

So I believe they have been misled regarding corrective action, because they were told a number of times that once the project was complete, these vibrations and this noise level would decrease and cease. That is obviously not the case. So if there is corrective action anticipated, would the minister outline what that is? It is my understanding today that nothing has happened to improve the quality of life for these constituents.

Hon. H. Lali: I just want to point out to the hon. member. . . . I'm sure she is aware that the facility opened only six months ago. Some mitigation took place in the way of noise berms and walls that were built. As I indicated earlier, once the assessment is completed, I will instruct staff to take the necessary corrective action. I think that should be good enough for the hon. member. I don't know how much clearer I can actually make it.

L. Reid: Again, for the record, the minister is aware that a berm has been constructed, but the complex that I refer to, Bridgeview Court, is in no way near the corrective action that has been taken. Could the minister instruct staff to address that issue specifically?

What I am trying to track down is the impact study around the noise level, because there was an anticipated outlook, if you will, that said the decibel level would not rise above 65, and it is now in the neighbourhood of 85 and 90. Could the minister respond to that, not necessarily today but at a future point, in terms of what the ministry believes is allowable? It seems that that has been exceeded to date.

Hon. H. Lali: We don't have that information with us, but we will supply it at a later time.

R. Neufeld: I have a number of questions. I think I will deal with most of them from my constituency through the Ministry of Transportation and Highways. If I could just confirm that. Other than the Sierra-Desan road and the Nisga'a Highway, would that be proper to deal with. . . ? Great.

The Sierra-Desan road is a project that the TFA has worked on for quite a while. It has been a difficult nut to crack. I wonder if the minister could bring me up to date on exactly where we're at in regards to proposals for the Sierra-Desan road and when we can expect to start doing some work. I was here last year asking the same question, and it was going to start fairly soon after last year. I think it goes on

[ Page 7837 ]

Hon. H. Lali: On the Sierra-Yoyo-Desan road, a request for proposals has been issued. We expect to award a contract by mid-June and start construction shortly thereafter. This is another example of government facilitating road improvements on behalf of users. Financing of the road will be paid back by the application of user fees, which is supported by the majority of industrial users.

R. Neufeld: Can the minister confirm that the amount of dollars that we're looking at for investment is still in the $5 million range? How much is going to be spent on maintenance per year by government, and how much is going to be spent per year on maintenance by the users?

[11:30]

R. Neufeld: So on a yearly basis we can expect $300,000 from government on maintenance, plus that's matched by industry. Is that correct?

Hon. H. Lali: Yes.

R. Neufeld: Okay.

I just want to ask a few questions. The minister said that TFA was in fact organizing this. It was a way of working with industry to upgrade industrial roads for the benefit of the whole province. I appreciate that. I know that industry is supporting it because they have to. I mean, to be honest, the road is in such poor repair -- it's in such terrible repair -- that WCB would shut that road down if they could. In fact, when we think about the amount of revenue that's generated for the province out of that area, it's a disgrace that the road was allowed to get to that condition.

I'd like to know maybe from the minister if he could explain to me the rationale for why -- on a road that generates some $50 million a year for the province in revenue from oil and gas and creates employment every year and investment in the land base -- industry has to pay 100 percent of the cost of upgrading that road. If we look at other projects with the TFA -- and I'm going to use the Mount Washington ski hill for an example -- 50 percent of the upgrade on the Mount Washington ski hill road is paid for by the TFA or the taxpayers. The other 50 percent is supposed to come from increased lift-ticket sales. That's calculated over a period of 20 years. Hopefully, you're going to get it back. I'd like to know the rationale for why you would not match the $5 million that industry is putting up on the Sierra-Desan road with $5 million of money through TFA. Obviously, if you look at the economics of it, you're going to get payback a lot sooner by putting $5 million of TFA money into the Sierra-Desan road than you'll ever get money back on the Mount Washington ski road project.

Hon. H. Lali: I think the member is quite well aware that all the oil and gas roads up there are paid for by the users. We're facilitating this one because of the multiple-use nature of this particular road. In terms of industry having to pick it up, it does not serve any provincial interest, unlike the Mount Washington Road that the hon. member mentioned, which services a provincial park -- Strathcona. That's where the provincial government came into play. I would just like to point out to the hon. member that there are forest roads and mining roads that are paid for by the industries. I'm wondering if the hon. member is now advocating that the province take over construction of those roads, from the public purse.

I also want to point out that up in the northeast of the province, we recently struck the Fair Share deal up there. Residents up in his particular constituency are quite happy about it. I had a chance to go up to the Peace a couple of times. The first time I went up there I had a chance to meet with the North Peace Rural Roads Task Force, which wanted the government to spend $30 million a year over a three-year period in order to look after some of the side roads and the other roads that industrial users and people and tourists all travel on. I went back three weeks later and announced $27 million in the Peace River region. That's pretty comparable to the $30 million a year that the rural roads task force had indicated.

R. Neufeld: It's obvious that the minister is really not up to speed on his ministry yet and on some of the areas he's talking about. So maybe I'll give him quick lesson. The Sierra-Desan road is in Fort Nelson; it's far-removed from Fort St. John. It's about 250 miles away. The first part of the road in there is actually paid for by the Ministry of Transportation and Highways. As for the rest of it, some parts were built by industry; but most of it was built by the province of British Columbia, not by the users.

What I'm asking for. . . . It absolutely amazes me that the minister would stand up here and say that a road that goes out to the Sierra-Desan, that gathers on average $55 million a year for government coffers, is not in the provincial interest. I think that's an example of not really thinking through what you're saying before you stand up. Maybe it's time that you started answering the question.

The question was: why would the province be obligated to pay 50 percent of the cost, which may be recoverable over 20 years, to get access to a ski hill and a park? We can find a park at the end of the Sierra-Desan road, if you want one. There is some protected area up there that was just done in concert with the Northern Rockies, and that's a fact. It's one that you're quite well aware of -- I think you are. So if you want a park at the end of the road, we can set up a park at the end of the road.

This is a road that generates a minimum of $55 million a year, and that's just in land sales and royalties. That's got nothing to do with income taxes for employment. It's got nothing to do with investment and all those kinds of things that go along with it. Why wouldn't the province be willing to cost-share $5 million? If you want to talk about all the other industrial roads around the province. . . . Actually, all the forestry roads -- you are taking them over through FRBC. FRBC is actually doing it in most of the areas. Around Prince George it's a known fact that FRBC is doing most of that industrial road -- replacing those bridges.

If we get back to my original question. . . . The other thing that Fair Share has to do with the regional district, which is in the southern part of my constituency, which happens to encompass Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Hudson Hope, Tumbler Ridge, Chetwynd and all those areas. . . . That's something that's been fought for, for a long time. But that goes back

[ Page 7838 ]

This does not help the Sierra-Desan road -- not one bit. Neither does the $27 million you announced for the constituency of the member for Peace River South and for my constituency. It has nothing to do with the Sierra-Desan road. I'm talking specifically about the Sierra-Desan road, which goes 180 kilometres north of Fort Nelson. It will tie us into the Northwest Territories and create all kinds of wealth for the province. I want to know why we can afford to do this for a ski hill, but when it comes to industrial development. . . . Is it really not in the provincial interest to continue to get $55 million a year in land sales and royalties?

Hon. H. Lali: I think the hon. member is more interested in grandstanding here -- so he can take Hansard and do a little mailer in his riding -- rather than actually trying to do an honest debate up here.

A Voice: Just answer the question.

Hon. H. Lali: I am answering the question. You've had your turn. If you want to debate again, please get up and do so. We'll certainly do that.

I want to again point out to the hon. member, who talked about provincial interest, that the province collects royalties and taxes to the tune of $55 million, and if that's not in the provincial interest. . . . I think the hon. member knows quite clearly that when we were talking about provincial interest, we were saying that it doesn't serve as any kind of a provincial facility. He knows that, and I think that for the purposes of grandstanding, he's trying to. . . . But if that's the definition he wants to put on there, then what about forestry roads and what about mining roads? Is the member all of a sudden saying that we should be spending money on all of these roads as well? Or is he just picking this particular road because it happens to be in his riding and he's trying to do a mailer in his constituency? If we didn't think that the Sierra-Yoyo-Desan road wasn't in the wider definition that he's trying to provide for provincial interest, then we wouldn't have facilitated the process of construction that is in place right now.

He mentions that we're already taking over forestry roads under FRBC. Again, he clearly does not have an understanding of how FRBC works. The roads that he's talking about are roads that are no longer needed and that will be decommissioned so that we can minimize any kind of environmental damage that may take place and replant on those particular areas.

R. Neufeld: First off, I'm going to put on the record that this isn't a mailer. Maybe you do that through your group, but I don't do that. I've never mailed this stuff out. I'm asking because the Sierra-Desan road is in my constituency. I think it's pretty disturbing that we've got a minister who really doesn't want to answer the questions. I started with some straight-up questions. The first thing you did was to try to grandstand and get a little bit smart with me. Well, I can handle it just as well as you can, Mr. Minister. I can stay here for a whole day if you want to. All I want to do is ask some questions and get some good answers from you. I have asked some questions, and again, I want to know. . . .

Hon. H. Lali: Let's continue.

R. Neufeld: Well, let's continue with them. The minister says continue with them. I won't talk. . . .

The Chair: Through the Chair, members.

R. Neufeld: Through the Chair. Don't talk about grandstanding and all the things that you're trying to do. That's probably not the job you should be doing.

On the Mount Washington ski hill. In fact, in your own document you talk about the number of lift tickets that are purchased -- that's what went into determining whether the province would cost-share in it -- the number of visitors to Strathcona Park, which I appreciate; the number of new jobs created at the Mount Washington resort; the value of new construction; and the number of traffic injuries. Well, all of the same criteria apply to the Sierra-Desan road in huge numbers other than lift tickets, but there's no ski hill at the end of the road. It amazes me that we think we can spend that kind of provincial money on a ski hill, but we won't spend it on a road that actually brings in a huge amount of revenue to the province. It's obvious to me that the minister really doesn't care about continuing to bring in revenue to the province.

Noticing the time, I'm going to ask one more question about the Nisga'a Highway and find out just where the TFA is in dealing with the Nisga'a Highway and, if they are dealing with it at all, what the plans are and what process is in place now.

The Chair: And noting the hour, minister.

[11:45]

Interjection.

The Chair: Order.

Hon. H. Lali: The hon. member minimizes that, and he doesn't want to talk about it.

On the Nisga'a issue that he raised, since 1991, MOTH has proceeded to upgrade the Nisga'a Highway to a paved, two-lane, 80-kilometres-per-hour design standard, and 70-kilometres-per-hour in a few tight locations. It is capable of sustaining 100 percent legal loading. In 1991 a 12-kilometre section between Cedar River and Sand Lake was upgraded at a cost of $8 million. Engineering and design work has been completed for a 20-kilometre section between Zolzap Creek and the W.D. McKay Bridge. A further 5-kilometre section was constructed by day labour at a cost of $1.7 million in 1993. In 1995, construction of Gitwinksihlkw Bridge and connecting roads was completed at a cost of $5.2 million. In the short

[ Page 7839 ]

Noting the hour, I would like to say that the committee should rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

The Chair: You heard the question. All those in favour, say aye. Against? Carried.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:48 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Copyright © 1998: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada