2000 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 36th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes
only.
The printed version remains the official version.
(Hansard)
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, 2000
Afternoon Sitting
Volume 20, Number 18
[ Page 16873 ]
The House met at 2:10 p.m.
Prayers.
L. Reid: We have two representatives in the gallery today for the Circle of Hope Coalition Society: Mr. Jim Leyden and Mr. Bill Blair. I would ask this House to please make them very welcome.
G. Campbell: Hon. Speaker, I am sorry to inform the House today that King Wong passed away this morning of cancer. King Wong was a community leader in Vancouver who was a leader of the Chinese business association, actively led the Chinatown revitalization project, was a man who contributed enormously to his community -- the Chinese community in British Columbia -- founded the Chinese Entrepreneurs Association of British Columbia and was the citizen who continually reached out to all others to bring them together. I can recall one event that King Wong was the leading light on. It was one that the Premier and I first met at, when we had a major celebration in Chinatown. I know that the Premier will join me, and I hope the House will, in sending his family our condolences, because it's a real loss to all of us and to the community at large.
Hon. U. Dosanjh: Hon. Speaker, I join the Leader of the Opposition in asking you, on our collective behalf, to send a letter to King Wong's family. I have known King Wong for some time. I in fact didn't know that he was not well; this comes to me as a complete shock. He has been an asset to the greater Vancouver community in more ways than one, and I just want to say how lucky we have been to have had a citizen like him serving the people of British Columbia. He was a great businessman with a great deal of community spirit in his heart, and we will all miss him. I wish his family well.
The Speaker: Thank you, Premier and Leader of the Official Opposition. I will certainly do that on behalf of the assembly.
S. Orcherton: Joining us in the gallery today are two really tremendous people who work and live in the greater Victoria area. Indeed, they work for the city of Victoria. They spend a tremendous amount of time representing the interests of the people who work for the city and make the streets safe and the parks nice for us. They are the president of Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 388, Ms. Susan Jansen, and the president of Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 50, Mr. John Burrows. I'd ask the House to make these tremendous people very, very welcome.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I just had a check in the gallery today and am delighted to see three people from my constituency office: Sharoo Modha, Doug Ottenbreit and our new social work practicum student for the summer, Leslie Griffin. Would the House please make all three of them welcome.
C. Hansen: There are several people in the gallery today representing continuing-care facilities on Vancouver Island. I will introduce a few, and I know some of my colleagues will introduce others: first of all, Mr. Mike Holland, a lawyer from Courtenay who has donated thousands of hours to the cause of the Glacier View Lodge; Mr. Ken Whiteman of the Alberni-Clayoquot Continuing Care Society; Gerry Konig, also from that society in Port Alberni; and Mr. Marty Tapp, who is also representing the Glacier View Lodge.
[1415]
Hon. J. Pullinger: I'm delighted to welcome to the House and ask all my colleagues to help me welcome to the House the newest member of my office team. Jennifer Barclay has joined my staff recently, and she brings an excellent combination of training and skills, mostly from her experience in the private sector. I have no doubt she'll need them in the weeks to come. She's certainly an asset to our team, and I ask everybody to welcome her to the Legislature today.
I. Chong: I'm delighted today, as well, to welcome Joy Spencer-Berry. She's the executive director of the Queen Alexandra Foundation here in the Victoria area. She's here to observe question period and, as well, to observe very important legislation being introduced today.
Hon. G. Wilson: Hon. Speaker, today we have two guests with us who are well known to people on both sides of this House. Ms. Cherie Dealey is here along with her friend Georgette Poirier, and they're accompanied by a member of my office staff, Maureen Grant. Would the House please make them welcome.
J. Wilson: Today is one of those infrequent occasions when I actually get to introduce someone from my riding. Today I have two good friends here from Quesnel: Mayor Steve Wallace and his good wife Joan. I ask that the House make them welcome.
D. Zirnhelt: There's a delegation on the precincts and here in the gallery representing a group who want a consolidated campus for higher education in Quesnel. They are Karen Andrews; Nate Bello; John Bowman, the Quesnel campus manager; Bill Cave, the chair of the North Cariboo Community Skills Centre; Dennis Macknak; Steve Wallace, who was just introduced, the mayor of Quesnel; and Terry Weninger, president of the College of New Caledonia. They're here in a very strong delegation representing the people in the Cariboo in one of the outcomes of the economic summit that we held, and they're pursuing it very vigorously. Please make them welcome.
J. Reid: I'd like to introduce two representatives from Arrowsmith Lodge in Parksville, who are here in Victoria because of their concern over expropriation provisions in the Health Authorities Act. Please join me in welcoming Dr. Douglas Begg and Mr. Hector Pitcher.
D. Streifel: It's a pleasure for me to introduce to the Legislature this afternoon Mr. Gordon Taylor. Mr. Gordon Taylor is here on behalf of the Mission Foundation, working towards amendments to the Foundation's act. I understand that Mr. Taylor is also a friend of the member for Richmond East. I'm not sure if she's aware he's in the precincts, but he wouldn't mind a cup of coffee later, I'll betcha. So would the chambers please welcome Mr. Taylor.
B. Penner: It's my pleasure today to introduce to the House Councillor Bernie Cross from the city of Chilliwack;
[ Page 16874 ]
George Mohammed, owner of Cattermole Timber; and Ted Holtby, general manager of Cattermole Timber. All three gentlemen are committed to the forest industry and are working hard to make that a viable industry in the Fraser Valley. We had a productive meeting today at lunch with the member for Shuswap. I ask that the House please make them welcome.
G. Campbell: I just wanted to take a moment this afternoon to thank the four interns who worked for the opposition caucus over the last few weeks. These are really exceptional young people who come and serve us, as I know the members of the government understand as well.
Jennifer Ericksen has served with us, and this fall she'll be going back to get her master's in political science from UBC in the area of education policy. Marc Coward is going to leave British Columbia for Oxford University in the fall, and he's going to take a master's of philosophy in politics, so I'm sure we'll all want to hear his reports when he comes back. Simrita Johal has spent her time working with us, and she's going back to the University of Victoria to pursue her master's degree in political science. And Gerry Muir, who's been working with us for the last number of weeks, is going back to work with the Ministry of Employment and Investment, where he spent six weeks earlier in the year.
I'd just like to thank our interns on behalf of all of our caucus for the time, the effort, the energy and the expertise they brought to the fore. Thank you very much.
[1420]
Hon. C. Evans: Canada is a really big country, and my friend Rosa Johnson lives on both ends of it: in Newfoundland in the school year, where she just graduated from junior high school, and in Victoria in the summertime. So will everybody welcome Rosa back to B.C. and Victoria.
J. Weisgerber: In the gallery today is my wife Judy, my daughter Pam and my grandson Joshua. Now, Joshua was introduced about a month ago by my friend from Peace River North, but this is his first in-person visit to the Legislature. I'd ask everybody to make them welcome.
The Speaker: Members, I'm pleased to introduce a guest on the floor of the House, Mr. Ian Horne, QC, a long-serving and distinguished Clerk of this Assembly. And by pleasant coincidence, Joan McMillan, former secretary to the Clerk of the House, is visiting in the members' gallery.
COMMUNITY HEALTH ASSETS
PROTECTION ACT
C. Hansen presented a bill intituled the Community Health Assets Protection Act.
C. Hansen: I move that a bill intituled the Community Health Assets Protection Act, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and now read a first time.
Motion approved.
C. Hansen: For the last two and a half years, volunteers and not-for-profit organizations in this province have been under attack. The attack comes from the 1997 amendments to the Health Authorities Act, which gives the Minister of Health the authority to seize their assets and to fire volunteer boards.
In 1997 the then minister told me unequivocally in this House that there would be no expropriation without compensation, yet only three months later the Glacier View Lodge in Courtenay found that the minister had gone back on his word. In October of that year the government began the process of expropriating the assets of the society. These were assets, including land and buildings, that had been developed as a result of the tireless efforts of community volunteers. This does not just impact the Glacier View Lodge; it threatens charity-run health care facilities throughout British Columbia.
Hon. Madam Justice Mary Southin came down with a ruling from the B.C. court in April of this year. To quote a couple of references in that decision, she refers to this provision in the legislation as being a snake that "may have been scotched, but it has not been killed." She also goes on to say: "The Legislature is sitting and an election is not far off. Thus the supporters of the appellants now have an opportunity to persuade the ministry to introduce a bill to repeal the compulsory amalgamation amendments of 1997."
Hon. Speaker, this legislation still exists, and that is not good enough. Why would any community-based organization want to build new housing for seniors or special needs in British Columbia while the threat of expropriation hangs over their head? The only way to restore the rights of community-minded volunteers is to remove the expropriation powers. The legislation that I am introducing today does exactly that.
Bill M209 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
MISSION FOUNDATION
AMENDMENT ACT, 2000
D. Streifel presented a bill intituled Mission Foundation Amendment Act, 2000.
D. Streifel: By leave, I move that a private bill intituled Mission Foundation Amendment Act, 2000, be introduced without notice and now read a first time.
Leave granted.
D. Streifel: The purpose of this act is to provide amendments to the Mission Foundation Act, primarily to have the results and the proceeds, the returns, from the charitable donations used within the catchment basin of school district 75.
With that, I move that the bill be referred forthwith to the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills.
The Speaker: The motion on introduction should be dealt with first, member.
Motion approved.
The Speaker: On the main motion.
[ Page 16875 ]
Bill Pr401 introduced, read a first time and referred to the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills.
[1425]
WESTMOUNT CAREER MANAGEMENT LTD.
(CORPORATE RESTORATION) ACT, 2000
P. Calendino presented a bill intituled Westmount Career Management Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2000.
P. Calendino: By leave, I move that a private bill intituled Westmount Career Management Ltd. (Corporate Restoration) Act, 2000, be introduced without notice and now read a first time.
Leave granted.
Motion approved.
P. Calendino: This bill allows the company Westmount Career Management to be reinstated in the registrar of companies from which it was struck more than ten years ago. There is no provision in the legislation to have the company reregistered without this motion. The company also cannot continue business any longer, because it does not exist legally, even though the sole shareholder of the company has carried on for the last ten years without the knowledge that it had been struck off the register. This motion will allow the company to resume business and pay taxes, as it should.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be referred forthwith to the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills.
Bill Pr403 introduced, read a first time and referred to the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills.
WCB REPORT ON SAFETY STANDARDS
IN VICTORIA AREA HOSPITALS
I. Chong: According to a Workers Compensation Board inspection report, a major Victoria employer "is not meeting the minimum requirements for first aid," because there are no designated first-aid attendants and immediate access to first aid is not available. In fact, the WCB has condemned this employer for having unsafe worksites. So my question to the minister responsible for WCB is: what advice does she have for employees who are working in facilities that WCB says don't meet minimum requirements?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I expect that the second question is more important than the first on this one. [Laughter.] Let me just take this question on notice.
The Speaker: The question is taken on notice.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Quilchena.
C. Hansen: Well, the WCB says that this particular employer that does not meet minimum first-aid requirements because there were no designated attendants with level 2 first- aid certificates
But I'll tell you who the employer is. It's the capital health region, and the worksites not meeting the minimum requirements for first aid are the Victoria General Hospital and Royal Jubilee Hospital. Will the minister responsible for the WCB tell us: on what possible grounds would the WCB say that the first-aid services are inadequate at Victoria's two major hospitals?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We're in estimates right now on the WCB, hon. Speaker. Again, I am actually going to answer this question, so don't be fearful of that.
First of all, the WCB is an independent agency that sets its own rules and regulations. They're very, very important rules and regulations. They also set their own assessments for employers, and yes -- you know what? -- it's true that the hospitals of this province and health care institutions have had their assessments increased because of their poor health and safety record on behalf of their employers. As a result of that, the costs have increased to the hospitals. It is time for hospitals and it is time for the hospital administrators and administrations to get on to complying with WCB and, more importantly, to bring in proper occupational health and safety, so that the nurses that we do have can stay on the job.
[1430]
The Speaker: The hon. member for Vancouver-Quilchena has a supplemental question.
C. Hansen: We understand that the capital health region has had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to hire and train security guards who can give first aid at these hospitals. I don't know what the Minister of Health thinks, but I can think of a few things that the capital health region could spend that money on -- let's say, for example, the burn unit, new medical equipment, long term care beds or maybe even the pediatric intensive care unit and perhaps even some of the lifting equipment that would actually have an impact on worker safety and injury rates in British Columbia. Will the minister responsible admit that this is a case where the WCB is stretching its red tape and regulation beyond anything that is common sense?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I think that's a very appropriate question to put to the WCB in estimates today. Ask the independent agency that question directly.
The Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Quilchena has a further supplemental question.
C. Hansen: It's time that the minister responsible for WCB take responsibility. The actions of that agency for which that minister is responsible is costing this health authority hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it is being duplicated around British Columbia in other hospitals.
Will the minister responsible for WCB tell us how much she thinks it is costing the WCB to hire more first-aid trained security guards instead of putting those resources into equipment that will actually reduce workplace injuries?
[ Page 16876 ]
Hon. J. MacPhail: I engaged in this discussion with the Liberal opposition yesterday about the WCB. Let's be clear about WCB. Not one tax dollar goes to the WCB. It's employer premiums that go to the WCB. It's an independent board
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, members.
Hon. J. MacPhail:
R. Neufeld: Well, the first thing we'd do is straighten out the mess at WCB, so employers can get down to delivering the services that they should be able to in British Columbia.
My question is for the Minister of Health. Royal Jubilee and Victoria General Hospitals have been told they are in violation of WCB safety rules, because when a worker is injured on the job there, they are sent to the emergency room. The WCB says that emergency rooms do not -- this is hard to believe, but I quote -- meet the "minimum requirements for first aid." Emergency rooms do not meet the minimum requirement for first aid. Will the Health minister tell us why WCB doesn't consider Victoria's emergency rooms to meet first-aid requirements?
An Hon. Member: Are you working with Ottawa on this one? [Laughter.]
Hon. M. Farnworth: At least we can work with Ottawa, unlike the comments we've heard from them. They never will work with Ottawa. We recognize that if we want health care in this system that works, we will work with health providers in British Columbia. We will work with other provinces and with Ottawa to ensure that we have a national health care system.
Hon. Speaker, we are concerned about the rate of injury and accident that takes place inside our hospitals to health care workers. That's why we're working with the WCB to identify key areas where changes can be made that result in improvement to the health and safety of workers in hospitals and institutions in this province. That's why we have an $11 million occupational health and safety fund which can deal with things such as lifting devices -- elevating devices -- so that workers are in fact working safely and so we can reduce injuries and reduce claims to the WCB.
[1435]
The Speaker: The hon. member for Peace River North has a supplemental question.
R. Neufeld: Well, Mr. Speaker, it would be interesting for the minister to stand and tell us how he can work with the federal government. We've seen a massive bunch of mess-ups when this government tries to work with the federal government on anything.
The question to the minister, who didn't answer it at all, was
The report goes on to state -- and it's unbelievable -- that just because you're a nurse or a doctor, it doesn't mean that you can perform first aid. This is in the report. In fact, the WCB says that when a hospital wants to use the expertise of a physician or a nurse as a first-aid attendant, the employer "must make a written request to the manager responsible for first aid to issue a level 2 certificate" -- unbelievable. A level 2 certificate can be obtained through St. John Ambulance in one week for $485.
Will the Health minister tell us how a person with a one-week certificate outweighs a doctor or a nurse in our emergency rooms?
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, members.
Hon. M. Farnworth: The member asked a number of questions, and I'll answer them. The member asked a number of questions, and I'll answer them. First, in terms of how you work with Ottawa, you put together a plan that identifies where the key pressures are in the system. You sit down, and you put it forward to them -- which we have done -- and you negotiate with them.
Second, in terms of what's taking place inside the hospitals and institutions around safe working practices, we work with the health authorities to work with the WCB to look at how we can make things work better to reduce occupational health and safety injury rates. That is in fact what's taking place, and I've been encouraged by the results we're having to date in terms of dealing with that.
The third thing: we have prevention programs and funds set up in the province to ensure that we have safe working practices inside hospitals. I come back to what I said a moment ago around the $11 million occupational health and safety fund for things such as lifting devices, so that we can ensure that we can reduce the rate of injury to nurses and health care workers working in hospitals and reduce the number of claims. We can have a safer working environment.
The Speaker: The member for Peace River North has a further supplemental question.
R. Neufeld: Well, I further ask the minister to attempt to work with the WCB on this ridiculous issue, to allow at least nurses and doctors to work in the emergency rooms on emergency patients.
But I wonder if the minister could tell us, when he talks about $11 million, how many other hospitals, besides the two mentioned, across the province of British Columbia and how many other health authorities are faced with the same kind of ridiculous stuff from WCB that is costing millions of dollars to the system, when that should go to people on the front line, as the member for Vancouver-Quilchena said.
Hon. M. Farnworth: By training workers in the correct techniques and the correct ways in carrying out the duties of their job, you ensure a reduction in the rate of injuries. That is our first priority in terms of health and safety: ensuring that people are trained properly.
[ Page 16877 ]
You know, hon. Speaker, we have the occupational health and safety program in place -- $11 million -- that's designed to address the issues that are being raised in hospitals around health and safety -- ensuring lifting devices and those sorts of things. And you know what, hon. Speaker? How did they vote on that? How did they vote on improving workplace safety? They voted against it. They stand here decrying efforts to improve health and safety, and what happens? When it came up in this House to vote, they voted against it.
GLACIER VIEW LODGE
AND EXPROPRIATION LEGISLATION
J. Reid: On April 5 of this year the B.C. Court of Appeal addressed the NDP's attempts to expropriate Glacier View Lodge. The court said that the expropriation legislation is a snake that "may have been scotched, but it has not been killed."
[1440]
In January this year the Premier said that he would like to explore options for long term care that include charities and not-for-profit facilities. Will the minister responsible for volunteers tell us why any charitable organization would ever want to work with the government, when the threats of expropriation and the threats to volunteers are still on the books?
Hon. M. Farnworth: Well, I think there are a couple of points that are worth making. First off, in terms of the court case, the court sided with the government. It's important to remember that. The court sided with the government on the issue that was at stake.
The second point that's important to remember is that there is no expropriation taking place nor has there been any expropriation taking place. In fact, the government worked to try and come up with an agreement that both parties could live with.
J. Reid: It's true that the Health minister told us three times on April 5 that Glacier View would not be expropriated. However, the legislation that allows this government to seize the assets of charitable organizations is still on the books. Will the minister put this issue to rest once and for all and just repeal the legislation today?
Hon. M. Farnworth: You know, we have said there was no expropriation, and there was no expropriation taking place.
You know what, hon. Speaker? The hon. member asked why anyone would want to engage and work with this government to build new social housing, new facilities with the volunteer sector. I'll tell you, hon. Speaker. It's because this side of the House is committed to building social housing, unlike that side of the House, whose Housing critic says that we shouldn't build social housing and that everyone should get rent supplements. This side of the House would do something; they wouldn't.
The Speaker: The bell ends question period.
Hon. C. Evans: I have the rather dubious honour of presenting a petition against myself. Hon. Speaker, you'll remember that the member for Rossland-Trail got up and quite rudely attacked me in question period, demanding a free fishing day in British Columbia. And I had to say that I guess I'd go along with him if he could get any support.
Well, I'm stunned to advise, hon. Speaker, that this is a pile of support from MLAs all over British Columbia, although I don't think it's quite circulated the House. So I'm going to have to give up and, because he made me do it, will declare the B.C. Day weekend Family Fishing Days in British Columbia. Everybody go fishing. Take your kids and your grandkids. It'll be free, and hopefully it will last forever. I lose, and you win, member for Rossland-Trail.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order, members. I recognize the hon. Minister of Education.
Hon. P. Priddy: I am pleased to table the annual report of the Ministry of Education for 1998-99.
Hon. D. Lovick: Mr. Speaker, I call Committee of Supply. In Committee A, we will continue debating the estimates of the Ministry for Children and Families. And in this chamber, we shall continue debating the estimates of the Ministry of Labour.
[1445]
The House in Committee of Supply B; T. Stevenson in the chair.
The committee met at 2:47 p.m.
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF LABOUR
(continued)
On vote 38: ministry operations, $29,752,000 (continued).
K. Krueger: When we broke off last night, we were talking about the WCB's failed smoking ban, implemented for the first quarter of this year at considerable expense to the WCB and the economy.
Even though everybody in this House is certainly supportive of protecting workers from secondhand smoke or environmental tobacco smoke, people generally express consternation about the really slipshod approach that was used -- the lack of sufficient consultation, the arbitrariness of the WCB's approach, the WCB's apparent disinterest in exploring solutions that would have been more acceptable to British Columbians throughout and the stupid implementation date of January 1. Most of the province is in a deep-freeze, even if it is almost spring in Victoria. That exacerbated the problem.
There was the aspect that one hand of government didn't know what the other hand was doing, in that the liquor distribution branch had advised hospitality venues that they could put in a smoking room. After many of them had
[ Page 16878 ]
incurred that expense, they were advised by the WCB that they wouldn't be able to serve alcohol in those rooms since liquor inspectors couldn't go in.
And, of course, there was the major question of whether WCB would ever pay such claims to most people anyway, as we discussed yesterday, because WCB has a history of denying claims if it has any sort of pretext from a person's past. So all things considered, it was a really fumbled exercise, and I think the minister would agree with me on that.
Now, having been ordered by the court to do so, and having been thoroughly embarrassed by its own ineptitude, the WCB has gone out and done a second round of hearings. But one of the concerns is that it is only in four venues around the province, only in four communities, only eight hours each. I understand that people were having difficulty getting on the roster. It's certainly very difficult for anybody from the Peace River to come to one of those four hearing sites. I'd like the minister's view on why the WCB didn't have more locations for these hearings and whether or not she agrees that they should.
[1450]
Hon. J. MacPhail: In this case I monitored very carefully to make sure that the process ordered by the court was followed by the WCB. In fact, I asked the WCB to ensure that they go beyond what the court required in terms of consultation. I think it's safe to say that the WCB did deliver this time. After the initial declaration of four hearing sites, the WCB did expand the time available for people to come and present. They received hundreds, if not thousands, of written submissions.
On the point about hearings not being held in Dawson Creek, advocates on both sides of the issue travelled from Dawson Creek to the hearings in Prince George. I know that every single person who wanted to be heard was heard at the hearings. In fact, there was even unfilled room to be heard available.
The consultation is complete. This time the WCB consulted on a regulation that was different from the regulation that was struck down by the courts. Certainly, if there was a disconnect between the Attorney General liquor licensing and control and the regulation, that was resolved in the newly formed regulation that was put out for consultation.
K. Krueger: What I was hearing from the public was that they felt the small number of sites was another indication that the WCB really didn't want to hear their input. People were told that they should make written submissions if it wasn't convenient to go to one of those. The response was: "Well, obviously they just want to be able to chuck those the way they did all of our input to the royal commission, with no action seen there."
I think it would have been beneficial for everybody concerned, and certainly for the credibility of the exercise, to offer more venues. People don't believe that their written submissions carry the same weight with the government or the WCB that their verbal communication would at a hearing.
I want to read something to the minister that was said by Mr. Scott McCloy, who frequently acts as a spokesperson for WCB and certainly did throughout the time of the smoking ban in the first quarter of the year. This is from a CTV interview of March 13, 2000, which of course is a very short time before the smoking ban actually ended. What Scott McCloy said in that interview was: "This is an industry that's going through nicotine withdrawal. Some people are doing very well. Some people are adjusting, and they're doing not so well. And some people aren't adjusting well at all. The reality is that as time goes on, people will adjust just fine." I felt that was really arrogant and totally unnecessarily high-handed -- to put things in those terms when people were raising really legitimate grievances about not having been consulted properly and so on. Ultimately, of course, the court agreed with those.
I wonder if someone like Mr. McCloy faces any consequences for being so glib about an issue that British Columbians are upset about. Would the minister confirm whether the WCB had any sort of disciplinary response to those comments?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'm informed that the comments were well within the bounds of suggesting the outcomes of what had happened in other jurisdictions in this matter. But I might note that the member is quite free to take up those comments, his concerns, directly with the CEO, Ralph McGinn. It would be unusual for an MLA to recommend discipline, but feel free to do that.
K. Krueger: Well, I'm concerned, of course, about small business -- the people who work for small business and British Columbians in general -- believing that the government respects them and that the Workers Compensation Board respects them. The hospitality industry was badly hurt by the way this smoking ban was handled.
[1455]
Scott McCloy cynically and sarcastically talks about them having nicotine withdrawal. What they had was customer withdrawal. Their customers just didn't show up in a huge part of this province. I believe this government is going to face a major judgment as a result of the class action underway. There's going to be another significant cost to WCB and ergo to the taxpayers.
The minister indicated in question period that she doesn't consider businesses taxpayers, as I understood it, because business has to pay assessments. She says it's not taxpayers. Well, of course businesses are taxpayers. Thank goodness that we have them. The hospitality industry employs over 100,000 people in 12,000 locations. Many of them were severely impacted. It was cash withdrawal; it was funding withdrawal. It was people withdrawal, customer withdrawal -- not nicotine withdrawal -- that they were suffering with.
I think Mr. McCloy's attitude perhaps reflects the attitude of many more people who make decisions at WCB. If they don't think his attitude and his words were a problem
I'd like to know the number of extra staff used in the failed implementation of the smoking ban and what the administrative cost to the WCB was during that whole implementation of the failed smoking ban.
Hon. J. MacPhail: All of the personnel resources were within the current complement of employees at the board. But let me just
[ Page 16879 ]
has a view on this failed WCB regulation. It's true that it was controversial; there's no question that it was controversial. But the fact of the matter is that the WCB was addressing a very controversial health issue. There are strongly held views on both sides of the issue. So I think we should just try to move on.
The member is free to write letters to the WCB if he wishes to express his concerns about a particular employee. But I happen to know that on this particular matter around the WCB, the correspondence that I received is far more overwhelmingly in favour of the health care stand that was taken in the course of the regulation.
The WCB learned its lesson this round, though, and has been accommodating the hospitality industry's concerns. The regulation put forward certainly meets those concerns. The issue of concern between liquor licensing and WCB regulations has been worked through as well. The public consultation has been completed, and I think it's time for us to just await the public consultation and then the final outcome by the WCB.
K. Krueger: We will move on. We always hope that everyone who is spending taxpayers' money learns by their mistakes. Hopefully, lessons have been learned -- that the WCB must at least follow its own rules when it does things. As the minister and I discussed yesterday, there is pretty well universal dissatisfaction around the province with the way the WCB conducts itself and with its apparent lack of accountability.
The minister said that the enforcement, which was tremendous
[1500]
But a matter was raised in question period which needs to be followed up now. That involved the ludicrous, ridiculous, Monty Pythonesque approach that WCB takes in enforcing its myriad of regulations. People are convinced that WCB will never feel it has written enough regulations or imposed enough regulations on the businesses of British Columbia. We had a particularly bizarre and -- I know the minister's a commonsense person, so I believe that she will agree -- particularly ridiculous example raised in question period. I'm going to ask the Health critic for the official opposition to follow up that matter with the minister.
C. Hansen: Hon. Chair, I want to read from the inspection report that we referred to during question period today, and it's talking about the Victoria General Hospital. It says: "Employees at this worksite currently use the emergency room to acquire first-aid services. This situation is not meeting minimum requirements for first aid." I'm wondering if the minister, now that she has the assistance of WCB officials at her side, might be able to explain to us why the WCB does not think that our emergency wards meet first-aid requirements in British Columbia.
Hon. J. MacPhail: You know, I must say that for the life of me, I can't understand the Liberal opposition pursuing this question when you've taken such a strong stand against improper use of health resources. For the life of me, I cannot understand that somehow, because a worker receives an injury -- whose workplace is a hospital -- he or she should have automatic access to our emergency rooms as first line of treatment -- that our emergency rooms should be first-aid rooms. So if my colleague from Rossland-Trail cuts his finger here, he should head down to the emergency room. He should get down to the emergency room right away, and that's what we should be using our emergency rooms for. That is simply ridiculous. You better be prepared -- the Liberal opposition better be prepared -- to increase the health care budget unbelievably.
First-aid treatment is the first line of treatment for an injured worker. It's a matter of making sure that health care workers with minor injuries have access to first-aid treatment -- proper, trained first-aid treatment -- which may not mean it needs to be given in an emergency room. That makes sense; that makes perfect sense. Then, if the first-aid attendant, like a first-aid attendant anywhere else in any other workplace, determines that that person needs to go to emergency, the person goes to emergency. What is so ridiculous about that?
The hospitals also have access to having their emergency room defined with proper equipment as a first-aid facility if they so choose. If they so choose to train nurses and doctors in first aid, which is a special training
Now, the fact of the matter is that some of these hospitals didn't do either. I think that it's totally appropriate for a worker's safety for them to do that, and that was what the WCB was saying to the hospitals. In 1999 that was the order. I have all of the information here right in front of me. In 1999 the order was that they weren't providing proper first-aid treatment, and the WCB gave them several options for how to proceed on that.
So you know, it's unbelievable how the Liberal opposition will just set aside any common practices that apply to workers across the board for health and safety to score cheap political shots. But you know what? It's not going to work in this case.
C. Hansen: Well, hon. Chair, these are anything but cheap. We just talked about $300,000 worth of expenditures over a year and a half for one health authority alone. That's not cheap.
[1505]
But does the minister know how many individuals, how many employees in these hospitals have actually availed themselves of the first-aid attendants -- the security guards who have been trained as first-aid attendants? Does the minister know? The answer is none. It's been a year and a half since this was imposed on Victoria General Hospital. It was put in place because they were threatened. They were not given the third option, as the minister just set out. They were told that they had to comply, and it cost the health care budget in Victoria $300,000 over that period of time alone. I would like to ask the minister, since she seems so quick to defend this policy: is this happening in every single acute care hospital in British Columbia?
[ Page 16880 ]
Hon. J. MacPhail: The law is applied for all employers, including health care institutions. So let me just say one more time: if the Liberal opposition's position is that because your place of employment is a hospital, you don't have the right to properly trained, qualified industrial first-aid attendants, then put it on the record. Put it on the record that you say those workers are less entitled to the law than other workers, just because they work at a hospital. Put it on the record that you want health care dollars from an emergency room -- the incredibly expensive emergency room costs -- to be used for first-aid treatment, because you want to deny workers first-aid treatment.
C. Hansen: The ones who make this decision are those that are responsible for the administration of the hospital. The decision as to whether or not that injured worker can be more cost-effectively treated in their own emergency ward, as opposed to setting up a separate first-aid station and training security guards to be first-aid attendants
Hon. J. MacPhail: You're on the record now.
C. Hansen: I am on the record as saying that this policy that has been imposed on the two Victoria hospitals and on other hospitals that we are aware of in this province is a waste of taxpayers' dollars. I am on record as saying that I have full confidence in the staff in the emergency rooms of hospitals in British Columbia. I have full confidence in the doctors, and I have full confidence in the emergency room nurses.
I know for a fact that if this minister were in a hospital, she would much prefer to be seen by an emergency room doctor than by the first-aid attendant if she were in need of health care. I will leave it at just saying that I beg the minister to exercise some common sense. I beg the minister to instruct the WCB to review this policy, to sit down with health care administrators and health care workers in British Columbia and to come up with a program that actually allows us to put health care dollars where they're needed. Perhaps one of those areas of need is some of the lifting equipment, so we can cut down workplace injuries.
K. Krueger: It's really that type of ridiculous approach that is demonstrated all around the province. It's as if this giant organization attempts to eliminate common sense not only from within its own ranks and organization but even within the businesses that are obliged to work with it.
I mentioned earlier that given the fact that the minister said the existing resources of the WCB had been drawn away to handle the failed smoking ban in the first quarter of this year, I'd like to know why some other initiatives weren't given some of those resources and why the smoking ban, which clearly hadn't been adequately prepared for, took priority.
[E. Conroy in the chair.]
For example, I wrote the previous minister a long time ago about an issue surrounding self-elevating work platforms -- changed WCB regulations which my sources say led directly to the death on the job of a man named John Alfred Cook. Specifically, these regulations had been changed to allow for smaller wheels on these platforms, and when the smaller wheels hit a pothole, the platform can tip over. That's what happened to Mr. Cook. The minister wrote me back on February 2 and assured me the board would look into it. The board wrote me on February 10 with a long letter about the convoluted process that they were going to need to go through before they even decided whether this regulation was a priority for change. Perhaps the WCB could explain to the people who loved John Alfred Cook and to workers everywhere, why the smoking ban deserved precious resources that apparently haven't been there to work on this issue and what the status is presently of the self-elevating work platform problem.
[1510]
Hon. J. MacPhail: This isn't going to be a situation like: "If only you hadn't done the fast ferries, you could have done X, Y and Z." So we can stop right there. The WCB, I'm informed, did about 150 inspections on the
K. Krueger: I didn't follow all of what the minister was trying to say there, except that clearly the WCB isn't ready to answer the question on self-elevating work platforms, even though we exchanged correspondence on that matter in February.
Here's another matter that surely they're working on, and that is the safety of taxi drivers in British Columbia. Taxi drivers are being victimized by their clients. They're being assaulted, stabbed, murdered by their fares. The Attorney General is joking as I raise this issue, and the minister is laughing. That's ridiculous. This is a serious, serious problem. The WCB spent a million dollars on taxi drivers' claims arising out of violence last year alone. We already covered the ground yesterday that the WCB has never paid for a substantial claim relating to secondhand smoke. Yet the WCB chose to pour those resources -- and subject this province to the turmoil of the first three months of this year -- on the smoking ban. What has the WCB done to protect taxi drivers, where clearly the WCB does have a financial stake and a substantial claims record? We are all frightened for taxi drivers and the way they've been victimized over recent years and particularly in recent months. What is the WCB doing to protect taxi drivers?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The WCB is working rigorously with the industry itself and with ICBC on this very important issue, and they're moving forward towards solutions.
K. Krueger: Why, then, was the taxi driver issue -- where demonstrably there have been injuries and deaths, and there has been a cost to the WCB -- and the self-elevating work platform issue, again, where there has been at least one death that I know of and a substantial cost to the WCB
[1515]
Hon. J. MacPhail: My point earlier to the member was that he's comparing apples and oranges. I know he's doing it
[ Page 16881 ]
to make a political point. No resources were withdrawn from other files to work on the smoking ban. That was the point I was making earlier. There were 115 inspections and 27 letters written. That did not withdraw resources from other important matters. So I'm suggesting that the member make his case -- it's a very important case -- without assuming that the results on his particular point were harmed by the implementation of the smoking ban. That was the point I was making earlier.
On the issue of the resources, I happen to know -- because I'm responsible for ICBC -- that ICBC and the industry, working in conjunction with the WCB, take worker safety in the taxicab very seriously. There are very complex issues that are being faced in terms of service, it being a service industry -- that some solutions are more complex than others.
K. Krueger: It was the minister who said, several answers back, that the resources used with regard to the smoking ban were drawn from the existing complement. Hopefully, the WCB doesn't have a staff complement that just sits around. Obviously, if they weren't assigned to that, they would have been doing something else. So it can't be true that they didn't have their time diverted from some other priority. We won't go round and round about that. And far from wanting to score political points, I want to see people protected from faulty self-elevating work platforms and from criminals who get into their taxicabs.
For that matter, I'd like to see workers in government liquor distribution branches protected from what happens with the government's bottle-crushing machines. That's another crazy move. In October '98 the liquor distribution branch began using these glass-breaking machines to crush empty bottles returned by customers. I don't know why they can't do it outside; they're doing it inside, in the stores. The things are really noisy, and apparently they're making people sick, and employees have been complaining. Consultants have been brought in to do tests.
I asked the Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, who's responsible for the liquor distribution branch, how he can account for this. The WCB said over and over during the smoking ban period: "There is no safe level of environmental tobacco smoke inhalation." I believe them. I also think there is no safe level of carbon monoxide inhalation, but we all get a little when we fill up our tanks at the service station, I expect. There's no safe level. Probably you could use the same terminology for a lot of different substances that we're exposed to in the environment -- no safe level. But we survive it.
But apparently -- and it makes sense to me -- there are issues around whether there is powdered glass in the air as a result of these machines being used. I said to the Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, "Is there any safe level of powdered glass inhalation?" assuming that that was a rhetorical question. Obviously he was going to say, "No, there isn't," and my point was going to be: "Well, obviously this has at least as high a priority as the smoking ban, then." But he wouldn't say that. He wouldn't actually say to me that there was no safe level. I've written the president of B.C. Government and Service Employees Union about that, because it's so preposterous. I'm sure this minister will agree that there is no safe level of powdered glass inhalation.
But it isn't even just powdered glass; these things are causing fungus and mould spores to fly around in the air. Apparently the Corona bottles from Mexico, which people stuff slices of lime into when they drink from the bottles, give rise to some of these tiny microbes in the air, and they're released when the glass is smashed. Employees have discomfort and irritation, itchy eyes, runny nose, headaches. All of this just seems so predictable and so ridiculous.
Why is it that this same government has allowed the LDB, or obliged them, I guess it was
The WCB has been receiving claims once again from these workers -- 12 already in the year 2000, 32 in 1999 and six in '98, even though this only started in October '98. Some are respiratory-related, which of course is the only type of claim that the WCB has ever paid thus far with regard to ETS or secondhand smoke -- respiratory ailments. So here we have a government program that is giving rise to the same type of claims that the WCB has been paying, it says, for secondhand smoke inhalation. What is the WCB doing to stop this hazard and the fact that LDB workers are being exposed to it?
[1520]
Hon. J. MacPhail: It is interesting to note that the member is arguing, on the one hand, that WCB's orders at hospitals are inappropriate, silly and stupid, but when they go to make an inspection at a site and determine that there isn't a significant health hazard, that is wrong too. There is quite a bit of irony that we're seeing here today in terms of the Liberal opposition's view about the WCB. I think that what it is, is that they don't agree with the WCB's mandate to protect the health and safety of workers in a way that makes it cost-efficient and effective for the employer. They don't like that balance.
The WCB did the inspection at the site and was satisfied that the machines and the dust didn't pose a significant health hazard to the workers. They did test both the levels of airborne dust particles and noise levels, and determined that the levels were within all acceptable standards. I am informed now that the LDB employees and management are working to resolve this issue. They have a joint labour-worker-management health and safety committee and are addressing that issue through that committee.
K. Krueger: I think the minister said early in that little diatribe that this is not a significant health hazard. The WCB's paying these claims. It has accepted them; it's paying them. If one employee is sick as a result of these machines, to me, that's a government-imposed illness, on the basis that it's a direct consequence of a government decision to put these machines inside instead of outside. Why couldn't they be out in the parking lot at the back of the building, with a chain-link fence around them? It's preposterous.
And to relate that to our chagrin over this government forcing health authorities to blow money setting up a first-aid program so that doctors and nurses can be treated by a first-aid worker instead of by each other -- that is clearly ridiculous. I'm astonished that the minister doesn't think it's ridiculous, because I do think she has a lot more common sense than most of the people on that side of the House. It just doesn't make sense to compare these two issues at all.
[ Page 16882 ]
This is a health hazard. The government had better be paying attention to it. The WCB is paying claims as a result. Workers are sick and hurt as a result, and it's unacceptable. We want to give the government notice of that: it's unacceptable. We'll continue to pursue it.
There was a tragic accident this month, actually on May 27, in Kamloops. A tree blew over, struck a golf cart and killed a wonderful lady who was golfing with her family that day. That was a tragic story and a freakish occurrence, that tree coming down at the moment that it did.
There has been some really bizarre behaviour by WCB people following that. Rivershore golf course has been subjected to an individual with the WCB -- who, I'm told, comes from Vernon -- leaking material to the media, rushing around giving orders to the golf course and denying that he has given those orders. Then WCB apparently has expanded this operation throughout the province and is now obliging golf courses everywhere to incur all sorts of extra expense examining trees and employing arborists and so on. Would the minister update us on what in the world WCB's thinking is this time?
[1525]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, I have read about this in the newspaper, and it was a very tragic accident. The point of the WCB's involvement is that while the tragic accident was not work-related, the site is a workplace for other people. WCB has suggested to the employer that it is incumbent upon the WCB to make sure that the workplace is safe, because it is a workplace for other people.
Tragedy? Yes, a terrible tragedy in a public place at which people work, and this wasn't a particular
K. Krueger: Well, once again, everybody wants safe workplaces. But there's a limit to how far Big Brother can extend his tentacles and how much damage he can justify doing to the economy. British Columbia is full of trees. There are worksites everywhere in British Columbia with trees all around them; everybody knows that. Business can't afford the WCB going wild with new programs when a really unusual occurrence befalls someone, even though a tragedy resulted. Once again, this illustrates an attitude at WCB, an approach that it thinks is legitimate, with which it does tremendous damage to the economy in B.C.
I want to switch to the issue of experience-based rating. The minister doesn't need to go into a lot of detail about what the program's all about; it's been well explained to us by WCB. We know that WCB says that 57 percent of the employers in British Columbia have had a reduction in assessments as a result, and we believe them, and that 43 percent have had an increase. WCB has confirmed to me that some of those businesses with the 43 percent are not businesses whose claims record justifies an increase. But they've been reclassified as part of the process into a group which is paying higher assessments, as a result of, perhaps, that group's loss experience.
The WCB equates this, at least, as an analogy to ICBC's claim-rated scale, which I think has been a good program. Most people in British Columbia who use ICBC and pay premiums probably agree that it's fair that the people who run up the claims should pay a higher premium.
Well, that being said, it isn't fair that because of a reclassification and a new way of looking at businesses, people who've been lumped in with others suddenly have to pay substantially higher rates, even though they themselves haven't had claims experience with WCB. I hope the minister would agree with that.
The WCB is reporting a substantial surplus for the last year, and if there is some cost to making this change to this new system
So I would ask the minister whether she agrees with that, and if so, if there's a cost to implementing this new program. Couldn't the costs have drawn down something from the surplus rather than being foisted on businesses that we believe ought to be protected because of their sound claims record?
[1530]
Hon. J. MacPhail: There is no question that the experience-rated assessment plan is one that does differentiate us from Alberta. I know we spent a lot of time talking about the Alberta system yesterday.
Alberta does cross-subsidize; there's no question about that. They cross-subsidize so that an employer who is in a lower experience category will pay for those in the higher experience categories. When that was put to the employer representatives at the WCB, they rejected that, because it would unfairly penalize the lower-risk categories for the high-risk sectors.
But the member's point about the jolt that this may have caused for some who go into a high-risk category
As far as paying for these increases, I'm not quite sure what the member means in terms of paying for it out of the surplus. I'm not sure.
K. Krueger: I know the minister is briefed on the fly in these estimates. She said that it's $2 per year. What it actually is, the cap, is $2 per $100 of payroll per year. It's a very substantial amount, especially if you had a business that wasn't paying much of an assessment in the past and doesn't deserve to pay a higher assessment, because they have a good claims record -- or no-claims record. I'll give you an example in a moment. It's just another imposition by government, from the businesses' point of view, because of a change in its policy.
When I referred to the surplus. The WCB reports a 13 percent surplus on its allocation of income. I received this document April 25, 2000 -- 13 percent. So what I'm saying is that there's always a cost to making a massive change like this. Of that 43 percent of employers that have had an increase in assessments as a result of the change, a bunch of them deserved it. They've had bad claims records. There's been
[ Page 16883 ]
cross-subsidization from others. It's being cut off; that's good. If they're employers with a lousy safety record or a high claims record, they deserve that increase. But there are others who don't have any claims record at all, and they've just been reclassified. Suddenly they're having to pay way more because of the reclassification.
So I'm suggesting that if there's an interim period where there's a cost to the WCB of having given that reduction to the other 57 percent of businesses and feeling it needs to make it up somewhere, it would make a lot more sense and be much more appropriate to take that portion of the cost, which doesn't relate to employers with bad records, out of the WCB's 13 percent surplus than out of the hides of these poor employers.
Now, I'll give you an example. This example is Blackwell Dairy, which is in my constituency. It's a family-owned dairy in Kamloops -- wonderful people. Mr. Blackwell senior, who I've met and toured the farm with, shingled his barn twice over a 70-year period. He was a boy when he was up there shingling it the first time, and he shingled it again 70 years later -- an amazingly spry individual. It's a matter of pride to Kamloops that we have a local dairy, and it does really well.
It also does really well by its employees. It has a tremendous safety record. I believe that the WCB's total expenditure at Blackwell Dairy over the year prior to this assessment change was in the neighbourhood of $200. So it was quite a shock to Blackwell Dairy to find that they were losing out as a result of the change to experience-based rating. His -- Blackwell's -- experience rate for that firm is 98.23 percent better than the experience rate for the group he now finds himself in. In other words, he hardly has one, and the group does.
[1535]
So one would think he would at least qualify for the full 50 percent discount which is supposed to come with a good record. But it's somehow being phased in. His interim premium notice shows only a 10 percent discount. It's a lot of numbers, but the bottom line is that his assessment, his cost to meet his obligation to pay the WCB for coverage for his employees, has risen $6,000 per year -- $6,000 right out of his bottom line -- in an industry which is tremendously competitive, where we've seen a ton of our jobs exported to Alberta because apparently businesses, and dairies in particular, find it less expensive to do business in Alberta.
I do not want Blackwell Dairy to close. Local people don't want it to close. But we don't think it's right that Blackwell Dairy has a $6,000 additional assessment to pay as a result of a policy change. That's the only reason as far as Blackwell Dairy, because they didn't do anything to justify this increase in assessments.
So I'm suggesting that the WCB should cap the assessments of businesses like that at whatever they were prior to this change and not adjust them upward because of the reclassification. If the WCB needs to find the money somewhere, then rather than taking it from these employers who ought not to have to pay it, it should take it out of that unallocated surplus.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, I'm informed that part of that is done. But I'll certainly pass your suggestion on to the WCB and have the panel consider it.
K. Krueger: There are many other businesses and many other industries that feel aggrieved by this policy. It's not as many as I thought there might be, and to me, that bore out what the WCB told me when I asked them about this when they launched the program: that 57 percent are benefiting. Out of the 43 percent, a bunch deserved their assessment increase.
But certainly the member for Okanagan-Penticton has raised some concerns on behalf of his constituents, including a concern with regard to RV manufacturers -- again, an industry we really want to encourage in B.C. I've had concern expressed by cattlemen -- the Sullivan Valley Stock Association from Heffley Creek; the construction industry; the shellfish industry; the sport fishing industry. I've also had concerns from experts who try to work with WCB on matters like this, such as Angus Qualley Howard Consultants Ltd., people who used to be employees of WCB. They're saying WCB is being really arbitrary, not even being willing to give them the details of what their justification is, what claims were paid and what the reasons are that they are increasing people's assessments and holding them responsible for the claims that they're paying.
Again, fundamentally, it seems to me and to the opposition that this idea makes sense. It made sense to implement it; it makes sense to do it. But I think a huge organization like WCB needs to be sensitive and careful when it makes a major change and not be arbitrary with anybody. I've written to the WCB about some of these cases, and I get responses from Paul Krismer. They look pretty much all the same; they're as if you pressed a button on a robot and for that button he spewed out the same paper. That's what employers get; that is what I get.
We want individuals who deserve individual attention because of their good records to get that individual attention. We don't want to see them paying inflated assessments because of a policy change. I appreciate what the minister said, and I hope that she will monitor that with the WCB to make sure that due consideration is given those businesses.
I understand that health regions have a different deal on experience-based rating, and I want the minister to tell us what's going on there. The minister has said that health care in B.C. has a serious problem with worker health and safety. Totally aside from this whole, to me, ridiculous question of whether you have to have first-aid attendants in hospitals where they've got doctors and nurses everywhere
Nurses have been reporting that they are one of the highest-injury professions in British Columbia. We've talked frequently in this House about why that is. One factor is that we have an aging workforce in nursing -- average age 47 right now. Another factor is that they've got worn-out equipment or no equipment at all. They don't have proper lifting devices, and they end up lifting heavy patients. Their bodies don't stand up to the work. They get hurt. They end up on WCB.
[1540]
What I'm told -- and the minister will have better numbers than me, and I'd like those numbers -- is that the experience-based rating assessment formula was going to add about $35 million to the WCB assessments for health regions around the province. Is that correct?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes. It's in that range.
[ Page 16884 ]
K. Krueger: What I'm also told is that the government has told the health regions, the health authorities that this government appointed, not to pay it. They don't have the money for it in their budget. We all know they're strapped for money. So they've been told they don't have to pay that increased assessment. Is that true?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Exactly the opposite. They've been told to pay it.
K. Krueger: I take the minister's word for that. She's saying, then, that health regions have to pay the new assessed rates like any other business in B.C. She's nodding. Is that the case for every arm of government, every ministry? Are they going to be treated exactly the same way as private sector employers by the experience-based rating approach?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The government is treated exactly the same way as the private sector. But there is one
K. Krueger: Is that an option for private sector employers of any kind in British Columbia?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No.
K. Krueger: Well, obviously there's a very different standard for Blackwell Dairy, which would only be paying $200 a year in WCB assessments, than for government. Once again, that looks unjust to businesses and to private sector people throughout B.C.
Another thing that looks unjust to business in B.C. is what the WCB refers to as its claims avoidance program. I wonder if the WCB, through the minister, would explain this to the House. Businesses receive warnings from WCB that
Hon. J. MacPhail: The only penalties that have occurred on claims avoidance have been in other jurisdictions in Canada, not in British Columbia. This is a program that exists across Canada. I'd be happy to deal with specifics around the charges that the member makes and respond to those.
K. Krueger: There are large operations, large mining operations, that are raising this as a serious concern. Many employers are expressing unease because of what they've been hearing from the WCB. I will ask the individuals who are writing us if they would like their case presented directly to the minister. I understand that no company in British Columbia has actually been found to be trying to avoid claimants reporting claims by providing these kinds of incentives. Doesn't the minister agree we would want to encourage safety programs like that through employers in B.C.?
[1545]
Hon. J. MacPhail: I think occupational health and safety is one of the most important aspects of anybody's workplace, if not the most important aspect. So any program that encourages safe practices is valuable -- just the same way that a workplace be absolutely free of any intimidation when a worker is injured or when a worker wishes to report an unsafe work practice. Beyond that I'm not going to engage in speculation about programs that I have no knowledge of.
K. Krueger: I think the minister is obviously in agreement with me, then, that as long as there is no such coercion of employees, no intimidation from reporting claims, as the companies are obliged by law to encourage, no company in B.C. should or will be punished for having a safety incentive program where they give away items or give benefits in exchange for a good safety record. Is that an accurate statement?
Hon. J. MacPhail: My comments stand.
K. Krueger: The minister doesn't always want to put things as directly as I would like, to reassure the employers of B.C. That's what we're striving for there.
The WCB had an internal report recently entitled "Quality of Adjudication." According to the report, it found that 25 percent of the files reviewed were rated as having a quality of work that required improvement. The report said that the claims were more likely to be overturned on appeal if they were e-files or electronic claims. I wonder if the minister could verify those findings and tell the House what the WCB has done about these quality adjudication problems.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, this is the first program of quality assurance that has been done in a number of years. And yes, the most recent files that were e-files show that the system may not have enough room, enough fields, available to have enough information in order to properly process the files. So those problems have been corrected. It's probably good that the WCB is actually testing its own system.
K. Krueger: It's certainly good if the WCB tests its own system and reviews for quality. One of the things that has been consistently reported to me is that the WCB used to have a pretty comprehensive internal review system done on a random basis, where a series of reviews occurred so that the WCB was monitoring the quality of its claims files in an ongoing way.
I'm also told that during the term of this government -- and people perceive that it's a result of the influence of the B.C. Federation of Labour, with its suspicion of management when management conducts management processes like routine random reviews -- that those review systems were done away with internally. The quality of claims-handling, therefore, isn't subject to the scrutiny it used to be, and quality has diminished. It looked to me like this finding of 25 percent requiring improvement might substantiate that.
Is it true that there are substantially fewer internal management reviews for quality at WCB than there were prior to this government's election at the beginning of the nineties?
[ Page 16885 ]
[T. Stevenson in the chair.]
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'm informed that the quality assurance program of the 1980s was disbanded at the end of that decade in order to put those people on the front line when the pressures were on the Compensation Board to deal with an increase in files. Now the quality assurance program has been reinstated.
[1550]
K. Krueger: Would the minister then give us a thumbnail sketch of what the quality assurance program entails? What's the frequency of review?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'll get you those details and send them to you. I'm just the conduit here. Why don't I just send them to you in writing?
K. Krueger: I'd like the minister to be more than a conduit. I tried to make that point yesterday. The minister has the power to decide who's going to be in charge of the WCB. And of course, they have the power to change the behaviour, the attitudes and the performance of WCB.
The minister made brief comments on the royal commission recommendations and result yesterday. Of course, the royal commission published its final report in 1999. It had some key findings, including that the WCB has lacked direction from its board of governors and that it has failed to administer fair and equitable benefits for injured workers -- often those most in need of assistance. And it found that the injured workers could be trapped within the system for more than 1,000 days in the appeal process. All of these things are still the case; they are still a concern.
We have a panel of administrators which was supposed to be a temporary arrangement when it was appointed, and the years have gone by. There have been five years, I believe, since this approach was adopted. The minister has the capacity to change and to have a duly appointed board of governors. For the benefit of the people of this province who are waiting for something to flow from that final report of the royal commission, can the minister tell us what recommendations are actively being worked on? She indicated that the government was contemplating doing something with those recommendations within the next 18 months.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes. I reported on the government's response to the WCB, the royal commission, so I won't go over that. The specific question is: how many of the 222 recommendations are proceeding without legislation? It's about a third of them. The board is working on those right now.
K. Krueger: Has this government asked for recommendations from the WCB on any of the royal commission's recommendations that would require legislative change? Has the government requested the WCB's own expert opinion on whether legislation should proceed?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes.
K. Krueger: Has the government received those recommendations, and could the official opposition be given a copy of them, please?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The minute the information comes in written form -- the discussions are through meetings now -- I'll attempt to provide them to the opposition.
K. Krueger: I thank the minister for that.
Just before we totally move on from the issue of quality assurance and quality handling, could the minister tell me how many employees at WCB have been charged with fraud over the last nine years, during the nineties?
[1555]
Hon. J. MacPhail: WCB staff at present are aware of one. I assume that employment-related is what you're asking for.
K. Krueger: I'm aware of a case involving an ex-employee named Karen Mason, who pleaded guilty to defrauding the WCB from '91 to '96 of an amount of at least $395,000. Is that the case the minister's referring to? If not, would she identify the one she's referring to?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, that's the one.
K. Krueger: Would the minister tell the House what programs and policies the WCB currently has in place to look for and prevent fraud by employees and claimants?
Hon. J. MacPhail: There's an internal audit system. There's an auditing system of the computer systems, and the investigation branch of the WCB is responsible for detecting fraud throughout the system and covers potential for employer-related fraud, as well.
K. Krueger: Moving to another issue, the firefighters in British Columbia have felt very offended about the change with regard to their status with regard to a presumption involving heart illness, cardiovascular problems. They've requested that the opposition look into this. I've had a briefing on it. I understand it, but I'd like a brief comment on the record from the minister for the firefighters explaining why, from their point of view, they've lost this protection and coverage.
Hon. J. MacPhail: The panel of administrators is charged with keeping the regulations current. The panel of administrators made a decision to remove heart disease for firefighters from schedule B, which is a schedule where there is no proof required of the link between the occupation and the illness. Again it's an area where, because the government is not responsible for and is not the decision-making body on these matters
[T. Nebbeling in the chair.]
K. Krueger: There is still a plethora of issues around WCB that I'd love to deal with in this House. Of course we can't spend weeks on WCB, so I'm going to thank the people who've been advising the minister through this process. I'm going to urge the minister to take more of a hands-on
[ Page 16886 ]
approach with regard specifically to WCB governance. I appreciate that she has explained that she was seared by her early efforts to do so -- and, apparently, once bitten, twice shy.
But it seems obvious to the official opposition that major change needs to happen at WCB. That needs to be led from the top. If the people who are currently leading are delivering the kind of results that the minister and I have discussed, which we're equally unhappy with -- and she has said that she agrees with every word I've spoken on that matter -- it's incumbent on the minister to change the personnel at the top, if they aren't going to change their direction, their approaches and thereby their results.
We're going to move on now to the B.C. Ferries estimates. I know that my colleague for Richmond Centre is champing at the bit. If the minister needs some time to change personnel, we'll gladly wait.
The House recessed from 4 p.m. to 4:08 p.m.
[T. Nebbeling in the chair.]
D. Symons: Just a very few opening comments, because I have a lot of material I'd like to cover in the next ten or so hours, and we'll get on to it quickly. I think I can say to the minister and to everyone in the Legislature here that we on both sides of the House are concerned about the Ferry Corporation. We want the Ferry Corporation to work and be a benefit to the people of British Columbia. Certainly the Ferry Corporation, over the last few years, has gone through some difficult times. We'll be exploring some of those and exploring, I think, during these estimates the opportunity to look at what is coming down the tube: the direction the Ferry Corporation is going to go in order to address the very serious issues that face it, particularly on the financial side and also in it's ability to provide the service to the people of British Columbia who depend upon these ferries as their means of communication, their means of moving about -- their highways, in a sense. So we have to sort of make sure that whatever we do here, from either side of the House, we work only in the best interests of providing that service to the people who need it.
I would like to begin by looking
[1610]
I notice in this particular plan that it says that the corporation's maximum allowable increase in debt for the year '99-2000 is set at $135 million. I guess we want to know: did this debt include the completion for fast ferries 2 and 3? Now, 2 was last year, but 3 is still going on. So for the last fiscal year, when they talked about the increase in net debt, did that include the remaining work to be done on the two cats that, at that time, were not completed?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It included the completion of vessels 2 and 3.
D. Symons: I note that it says: "The following debt management parameters provide the basis of the debt service budget." I'm curious whether the Ferry Corporation has a debt management plan as such, because parameters and what not for a given year are not really a debt management plan for the long term. We've seen the Ferry Corporation go deeply into debt over the last three years. We've seen the government give it a bailout of almost $1.1 billion in order to reduce their debt-servicing charges to a level where the Ferry Corporation has a chance of surviving. It threw them, basically, a life preserver, saying, "Here's a life preserver for you, of $1.1 billion. Now deal with your problems there," since we've taken that huge cost of debt servicing off of their shoulders. But do you have a debt management plan, so that (1) we can deal with the remaining debt of the Ferry Corporation, and (2) we will never get into that position again?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes.
D. Symons: This will go quickly if we get answers like that. Thank you.
The repairs and maintenance expenditure has increased by 35 percent over the two years '97-98 and '99-2000. Is this primarily a result of the introduction of fast ferries into service? Is that why your in the repairs and maintenance budget has gone up? And I gather that this year it's increased as well.
Hon. J. MacPhail: In part it's because of the fast ferries, but also a part of it is because when we announced that the five-year capital plan and the renewal of the fleet was going to be based on refurbishment and maintenance of the current vessel stock, more money was allocated for repair and maintenance.
D. Symons: I would gather that this isn't part of the $800,000 capital plan that was introduced in 1995 just prior to the last election. This isn't a carryover of that; this is just what you're currently working on, the year-by-year needs of the corporation. This year you have budgeted $31 million for the maintenance and repairs to the fleet. I'm wondering if the minister could supply me with the costs of repairs and maintenance for each of the two Pacificats that have been in operation or are in service on route 2 for the first four months of this year. I know you will not have those figures here, but I'll just make that request. Then if you could give me the repairs and maintenance and maybe break it down by the Explorer and the Discovery -- let's make it for those two ferries for the first four months of this particular calendar year, since you'll have those figures, I'm sure.
The operating and expense contingency in this particular budget document I'm referring to increased this year to $2.3 million from $1 million last year. What were the perceived needs for this increase in the contingency budget?
[1615]
Hon. J. MacPhail: A different budgeting process was used this year, a much tighter zero-based budget. There was not a contingency by vessel. The contingency was amassed in one figure.
[ Page 16887 ]
D. Symons: So it would seem, then, that the contingency plans in past years might have been wanting and this has been corrected, if you've got it as a much larger figure.
One issue that the Ferry Corporation is facing is the fact of the increase in fuel costs. We've seen fuel costs certainly go considerably higher than a while back. So even from the time that this year's budget was prepared, have you had to make some adjustments with that, or would your contingencies cover that particular possibility? Fuel costs still seem to be increasing.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, this year's budget does contemplate increased fuel costs; however, those pressures continue to rise. They are a concern.
D. Symons: Yes, for this year I believe you budgeted -- for the amount of fuel you need -- for 34 cents per litre for diesel fuel. Can you give me the current price for diesel fuel on the market?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Today it's 37 cents.
D. Symons: I guess that gets back to the problem of when to have difficulties and make savings elsewhere or dig into contingencies or whatever in order to meet the costs of the fuel.
In the 1998-99 annual report
And what better
The Chair: Member, if you could wait until you are recognized
D. Symons: Yes, thank you. I don't think you had unrecognized me; that's why I kept
I didn't put a word in that maybe is important to the question. I'm looking for the operating expense per passenger. When I made those comments, I didn't mention per passenger. The reason I raise that is because I think it's one of the measurement things you have in something I'm going to ask later on. So the operating expense per passenger has gone up by 24 percent over that five- or four-year period. What is the operating expense per passenger for the last fiscal year, and what are you expecting for it for this fiscal year?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll get that for you.
D. Symons: I note also in last year's annual report that we have a 5 percent drop in the percentage of operating expenses recovered. I'm curious why we've had a drop of five percentage points in the operating expenses recovered.
[1620]
Hon. J. MacPhail: We didn't increase fares.
D. Symons: A good answer.
A third point I have here is the return on assets. I'm reading, by the way, from the '98-99 annual report. There is a five-year trend table on page 26, if you have that particular document. I ask your forgiveness for not having xeroxed off a copy and maybe put it before you. If you have that there, that makes it handier, so we can be looking at the same sort of thing.
I'm now looking down the page on the return on assets. The return on assets has gone from negative 5.2 in '95 to negative 13 percent in '98. I'm wondering what steps are being taken to reduce the operating cost so that we will be able to turn around this return on assets.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Many of these indicators are what led to the government's decision to put the corporation on sound financial footing. During the period of last fiscal year, the corporation did reduce their administration costs by $5 million. However, that wasn't enough, so the financial plan, which is part of the performance plan for this year that the member has, puts the corporation in a situation where they have a dedicated stream of revenue, and they have to get their operating costs matching that.
D. Symons: Thank you. If you could just cast your eyes over to page 27, that's directly opposite the table we're looking at. In the middle of the page it says: "The corporation is committed to its contract with CFI to complete the construction of the two remaining vessels for the purpose of its revenue-generating services across the Strait of Georgia." Do remember that this is the annual report for the year '98-99. And by the time this report was put together and published, the consequences, I guess, of what was taking place at the fast ferry program -- the excessive expense of it and all the rest -- were quite well known.
I'm curious, since the extent of that cost overrun at the fast ferry program had become publicly known by the time this report was put together
Hon. J. MacPhail: We don't need to belabour the point about the fast ferries. We're selling them. We agree that they need to be sold because of their excessive operating cost. But I just note that this report was tabled about six weeks after the first ferry had been in service.
D. Symons: The report might have been tabled then. I think you'll find out that the first fast ferry had been used and facts were known about it. We were having, by that time, an investigation by Hugh Gordon on the financial consequences; we'd had an investigation by McMullen on the performance of it; and we had the auditor general looking at the fast ferry programs. So we had quite a number of things looking at it. The problems were there.
My question still stands. You have spent more money since those problems were known on working on fast ferry No. 3 than you will be able to receive in revenue from selling
[ Page 16888 ]
fast ferry No. 3. You might have spent, let's say for a moment, $60 million prior to the time I'm referring to and now another $30 million since that time when all these problems were known. That $30 million isn't recoverable. It is thrown away, because you're going to get less than that when you sell the ferry. So you've spent more money on fast ferry 3 since the problems of ferry 1 and 2 were known than you're going to be able to recover on the sale of fast ferry 3. That seems to be money thrown away. The work you've put in since the problems were known is simply going to disappear, because you cannot recover that money in the sale of it, let alone all the money you spent beforehand on fast ferry 3.
[1625]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, if the member is suggesting that we shouldn't have completed building fast ferry 3, that wasn't an option. And fast ferry 3 is not being used in operation.
D. Symons: Yes, I realize that. If, at the tail end of something, you can sell it for $25 million, let's say -- which sounds like it may be the case on the market today
Anyway, a year and a half ago now, the treasury group of B.C. Ferry Corporation came out with a series of five-year fiscal projections for B.C. Ferry Corporation. It projected the high-speed-ferry reservation revenues to increase fourfold, from $3 million to $12 million, and tariff revenue increases also to jump substantially. Now we don't have to worry about the fast ferry reservations, because that's not going to occur. But are the projections of revenue increases still relevant today?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No.
D. Symons: This was that "Where were we in '98?" sort of document that had that in it. Of course, that was before all the difficulties of the fast ferry program were understood. But if that's the case and these figures generated by the treasury group are no longer relevant -- and I suspect they are not -- then surely the corporation has done some fresh projections. In the spirit, then, of transparency and openness that this government's now involved in, would the minister share the most recent fiscal projections with us?
Hon J. MacPhail: Well, the performance plan has the budget in it that gives the fiscal performance, and
Interjection.
Hon J. MacPhail: He's asking for a complete five-year projection.
Interjection.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes. We also tabled that with the opposition during the debate around the debt recision -- the five-year performance estimates. We can get you another copy if you want.
D. Symons: I'm not sure whether they had the financials in here. This one that came out in, I believe, November of '98 had the various costs of administration, use of crews, productivity, tariff increases and service efficiencies. Then those sorts of figures, put together by the treasury group, were projected through '98, '99 through to 2003-04 -- that fiscal year. I wonder if the minister might tell me whether that's been done now and also maybe inform me as to who constitutes the treasury group of B.C. Ferries.
Hon. J. MacPhail: The decision by the Minister of Finance in the 2000-01 budget to dedicate to basically redo the financials of the corporation to assume the debt onto the government's books and to dedicate a source of revenue to the corporation has permitted them to plan for this year. And they're working on their five-year plan based on those new sources of revenue. The treasury group that you referred to has disbanded.
[1630]
D. Symons: I'm going by the figures here. Maybe that's a good move too. I'm wondering also
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes. Those costs are known. We do know those costs, and those costs contributed to a decision to sell.
D. Symons: That would be the projections, as well, for the years. And I'm assuming, then, that you would be as willing to share those with us as the people were in '98, when they put this document out.
Moving on to the five-year capital plan that was put out on November 3 of '99 -- just a few questions there. Again, I'm pleased to give you a heads-up on where I am and am heading. The recent detailed survey of the corporation's ships and terminals found many assets to be in better condition than expected. Just by sort of asking that question, I'm curious then
Hon. J. MacPhail: In fact, the survey that was done to reach the conclusion of refurbishing the current stock was different. The survey was done ten years ahead, whereas previously they've been done one year ahead.
D. Symons: I think I remember -- to refresh the minister's memory -- that back in 1994 and '95 when the govern-
[ Page 16889 ]
ment was trumpeting its wonderful decision to build fast ferries and reinvigorate the fleet with new vessels, they claimed that it was an absolute necessity to do it, because the vessels were in such poor shape. It seems that now you've discovered that the vessels aren't in such poor shape. So you're saying either that now we've done the job we should do on a proper survey of the ship, and then we didn't, or that you did a proper survey of the ship then to determine that this was the case, and now you're misleading us by saying: "Well, they're okay, and we can stretch it out further." One or the other of those comments -- in '94-95 or the one that's now said that the ships are okay -- is wrong.
[1635]
Hon. J. MacPhail: A lot of these premises by which the corporation did the reviews of their stock were the industry standards. But the corporation, with new management in 1999, decided to go beyond that and do the ten-year intensive review. Where there are industry standards where a vessel is supposed to have a life of 40 years, to then suggest that the vessel may, upon intensive review, have a life that's 10 percent longer isn't like a giant leap of faith, but it is very valuable to the corporation.
D. Symons: I'm wondering if the minister might tell us how much money was paid to Kvaerner Masa Marine, because I believe they're the firm that did your survey of the ships for you for their review of the fleet.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yeah, we'll get that.
D. Symons: And, also, can you say whether there were other consultants or organizations hired to work on this review, or was Kvaerner the main firm for doing it?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Peter Mehta, who is a ship surveyor.
D. Symons: I note that the Queen of Sidney is recommended for retirement later in this particular year. Will B.C. Ferries be keeping this vessel as a backup, particularly for the summer season -- not this summer but the following summer? I note in the performance plan that the Queen of Sidney is to retire in the fall of this year, but its replacement vessel, which is the Queen of Burnaby will be brought into service in the spring of 2001. I'm curious -- there's an interval period between the fall of this year and the spring of 2001 -- what vessel will be in service on that route during that interim period.
Hon. J. MacPhail: The Sidney will be sold, and it's the Burnaby that will replace the Sidney in the spring. The Burnaby is being used as backup now but will go in for refurbishment and then, in the spring, be put into service from Powell River to Comox.
D. Symons: In the plan, you have the Sidney being sold in the fall of this year; you have the Burnaby going into service in the spring of next year. I asked what vessel would be replacing
Hon. J. MacPhail: The Tsawwassen.
D. Symons: The Queen of the North and the Queen of Prince Rupert have, I think, some problems. Those ships are elderly. The Queen of Prince Rupert was, in the original ten-year capital plan, the first ship to be replaced, and the fast ferries displaced it. I gather it's being kept on now and will be in service for a while longer.
What's it going to cost, though, to upgrade those vessels to current marine standards? Will they be able to meet the coming ISO 9001 standards?
Hon. J. MacPhail: They are at current marine standards.
D. Symons: I believe Queen of the North is a single-hulled vessel, not double-hulled. The process of the single-hulled vessels is, I believe
Hon. J. MacPhail: It meets all the standards now.
D. Symons: Just one further question: will it meet the standards two years from now? The standards are changing this year.
[1640]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes.
D. Symons: Prior to the push for fast ferries
Hon. J. MacPhail: Is that question from 1996?
Interjection.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Okay, then we'll have to get you the answer. We're prepared for estimates of 2000-2001, but we will get you the answer.
D. Symons: The question was
I've got here a news release from May 8 of this year, which may help you again to see where I'm coming from -- "B.C. Ferries Outlines Its New Capital Plan." In that capital plan they identified undertaking projects for $117 million for the first year of the plan. This also involves the reacquisition of the Queen of Burnaby. The Queen of Burnaby was sold by B.C. Ferries to Victoria Line for $3.5 million a number of years
[ Page 16890 ]
back. The Victoria Line did about a $3 million upgrade on the Queen of Burnaby in refit to use for the Seattle run. B.C. Ferries now has bought the ferry back for, I believe, $2.8 million.I'm curious as to what you might consider the book value and the market value of that particular vessel. There was somewhere in the neighbourhood of $12 million spent on operating the Queen of Burnaby when it was with Victoria Line. I believe Marguerite III was its name. B.C. Ferry sold it for $3.5 million and bought it back for $2.8 million -- that sounds like a good deal. If you could do that with vehicles and cars, that would be great. And in the process, you've also got a $4 million upgrade. B.C. Ferries seem to have done very well in that.
What would the value of this particular vessel be on the open market?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's hard to tell, because the vessel would require modification to fit docks. The advantage to the Ferry Corporation was that the ship fit the docks.
D. Symons: It sounds something like the concerns you may have in finding buyers for a couple of fast cats as well. They're made specifically for our docks.
They also talk in this plan of a new 110-car ferry to be built over two years. I guess that's to spread the costs over two years. For which route is it planned? Will it be Century-class style, like the Skeena Queen? And when is it going to tender?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It will be Century-class, and it will be used either on the southern Gulf Islands route or the Bowen Island route.
[1645]
D. Symons: For 110, it seems to be just a slight expansion or lengthening of the current vessel. There were some problems, and I will get into them later, with the Skeena Queen, so we'll determine whether this vessel will suffer those same problems. I assume not.
There was also $1.6 million in the capital plan for this year for the Horseshoe Bay maintenance building. I notice that a few years ago when they were doing that, the maintenance building was going to be $2.8 million in a different location -- in the '99 announcement. Has the building been downsized? Will it be able to perform the same function that it had when it was going to be a $2.8 million building rather than a $1.6 million building? It's changed its location. Has it also changed the functions that will be performed there?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's basically the same building.
D. Symons: Now, that's a great financial saving, when it goes from $2.8 million down to $1.6 million. So if I'm going to build a home, I'm going to get those people to come and do the contracting for me. It will be interesting to see if that happens.
Now, I do know that the member for West Vancouver-Garibaldi will want to ask a number of questions related to Horseshoe Bay. That will be coming up later, so I won't go any further on that particular topic.
The next thing I want to look at is a document called "British Columbia Ferry Corporation, Long-Term Debt Analysis as at March 31, 2000." So if we can take a look at that particular document
Hon. J. MacPhail: What's the date on it?
D. Symons: It just says: "as at March
Hon. J. MacPhail: Just tell me what it reads at the top.
D. Symons: I read the title a moment ago: "Long-Term Debt Analysis." It's a single page.
Interjection.
D. Symons: Looking under "Major Capital Additions" in this, I find the Queen of Chilliwack listed. I'm curious, because there's a $21.5 million cost. I'm wondering if that was the cost of a refit to the vessel that was done prior to its preparation to go on to the mid-coast service? Because, as far as I understand, we didn't purchase
Hon. J. MacPhail: That includes the purchase and refit.
D. Symons: You might tell us who we purchased the ferry from.
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll get that for you.
D. Symons: It's my understanding that we've owned that vessel for quite a number of years. That's why I'm asking that question. I'm curious when it's here as a purchase price. That's why I'm asking who we purchased it from.
How about doing the Queen of New Westminster? We have a $51.9 million debt there. I'm curious as to how that particular figure appears here under "Major Capital Additions."
Hon. J. MacPhail: The design was changed, and the boat was re-engineered so that the speed was high enough for it to be assigned to the Tsawwassen-Duke Point run.
[1650]
D. Symons: The Queen of New Westminster was built in Victoria in 1964. It's had modifications made since that particular date, where the vessel has been stretched and a deck has been added in there. When did this work take place, then, on the Queen of New Westminster?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, you're correct. Is there some
D. Symons: Yes. I'm still curious, though, where, listing down here, you can come up with a debt owing on the Queen
[ Page 16891 ]
of New Westminster -- a ship that has been owned by B.C. Ferries for a large number of years -- of $51 million. I'm just trying to determine where that $51 million that you're saying you're basically writing off
Hon. J. MacPhail: This debt has been accumulated since 1988. The $51.9 million is to do the refit, the re-engineering and the changing of the design that occurred in the mid-nineties to the Queen of New Westminster.
D. Symons: I'm wondering if the minister might give me a book value for the Queen of New Westminster. Has the minister any idea of what its market value may be? That might be the answer to the other one, where you say it may not have a good one because of the configurations needed at the docking.
Hon. J. MacPhail: No, we don't know the market value. The corporation isn't intending to sell these, so that exercise hasn't been done. We'll get you the book value.
D. Symons: I'm assuming you have a book value on each ferry, because certainly you made a book value of the fast cats by reducing it from one figure to another. So I assume that you have book values, for the purposes of bookkeeping, for all the ferries. If you would do it for both the Queen of Chilliwack and the Queen of New Westminster, I'd appreciate that.
The last one comes through the fact that you did sell a ferry recently; I believe you put it up for market, anyway. That's the Queen of Victoria. I'm wondering if you might be able to give me an idea of what you got for the Queen of Victoria. It was built at roughly the same time as the Queen of New Westminster. What did you manage to sell that ship for?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We're still in negotiations with the potential customer.
D. Symons: Noting that you put it up for sale in December and this is six months later, then the sale of ships goes slowly.
I'm looking now at the 2000-01 performance plan, and on page 3 it states: "B.C. Ferries, in conjunction with government, has completed a planning and financial analysis which formed the basis of the sustainable financial strategy." I'm wondering if we could have a copy of this sustainable financial strategy that B.C. Ferries has put together.
Hon. J. MacPhail: We've given the member opposite the synopsis of that. That was the five-year forecast after the announcement was made of the debt recision, the 1 1/4 cents a litre, and there's all the work behind that. But that is the summary of it.
[1655]
D. Symons: I'm glad to hear there's more behind it, because I couldn't take that to the bank and expect to use it for collateral on any loan I might want to make.
I'm wondering, then, if we can go to page 10 of this performance plan. Under "Route 2," towards the bottom of page 10, it says: "The fast ferries will remain in operation between Nanaimo and Horseshoe Bay on a supplementary and rotational basis in order to prove their reliability
Hon. J. MacPhail: Point taken.
D. Symons: Next is page 12. It says: "While extraordinary maintenance is not normally part of a capital plan, it is reported as an adjunct to the capital plan because it is an important element in the 'repair-replace decision' regarding capital assets." And further down: "Extraordinary maintenance over and a $14 million scheduled for year 1." So I'm gathering, then, that this $14 million is in addition to the $117 million that was set aside for the capital plan for this particular fiscal year. Is that correct?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, and it's part of the operating budget.
D. Symons: A problem that seems to have come up quite frequently with the ferries in the last couple of years has been the problem of sewage. We seem to have had difficulty with the sewage on a number of vessels at various times. The Queen of Oak Bay has been described by somebody as a biological hazard. The sewage has spilled over into the bilge, and I understand that B.C. Ferries is not paying for that biological waste sludge to be disinfected before it's disposed of. It seems that the Queen of Surrey did have similar problems, and these are sister ships. With the Queen of Surrey, the waste was disinfected before disposal. So I'm wondering why they're not doing it for the Queen of Oak Bay. And has this disposal received the approval of the Environment ministry?
Hon. J. MacPhail: All vessels comply with Ministry of Environment regulations.
D. Symons: My question was regarding a firm that's been hired to take the material away. The Ferry Corporation paid the amount that was necessary to have the Queen of Surrey disinfected before it was disposed of. They're not doing that for the Queen of Oak Bay. I'm curious as to why on one vessel the same sort of sludge, I'll call it, was required to be disinfected and not for the other vessel. I don't think I heard an answer to that.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, we'll make sure we get an answer for you.
D. Symons: When the job was done on the sewage tank in the Queen of Surrey, one tank was cleaned, and the absorbent material or media replaced, while the other tank was basically untouched. Yet there are still problems with that other tank. Why wasn't the complete job done for the Queen of Surrey?
[1700]
[ Page 16892 ]
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll take it on notice.
D. Symons: The Swartz Bay to Vancouver harbour route has been suggested as a possibility for a fast ferry service. This was in your five-year capital plan on page 27. There was talk of putting in a fast ferry service there. I'm curious: is this a proposal? The vessel that was being considered, mentioned on that page, is a catamaran. Is the vessel you're looking at similar to the vessel that was used by the private sector eight years ago?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We're not actively looking at any passenger-only vessels at this time. It will be considered as part of a five-year capital plan.
D. Symons: Maybe I should read, because the minister isn't particularly familiar with this. It's part of the British Columbia Ferry Corporation five-year capital plan document. On page 27 it has: "In January 1999, B.C. Ferries identified an ideal secondhand vessel for the service." They're talking about a fast ferry service. "The three-year-old Australian-built Japanese vessel had the desired speed and capacity and was being offered at an attractive price of $3.75 million (U.S.). After accounting for an import duty, modifications and delivery costs" -- sounds like you're looking seriously into this -- "it was estimated the vessel could be in service for about $7.5 million (Canadian)."
They talk here about trying to
Hon. J. MacPhail: Oh, dear. The member was leaked a draft, unfortunately. So the final plan doesn't include that, and the new management of the corporation isn't considering that.
D. Symons: Very drafty, obviously.
It also says in here, and this is something that I was amazed at
It says, earlier in this particular thing -- again in regard to putting in a passenger-only service between Swartz Bay and downtown Vancouver: "Although the competition has not materialized, the threat is still a real one, especially when the traffic turns around and continues on long-term growth trends." I'm curious why you consider competition a threat. It seems that part of the reason for looking at putting in this particular service is because there's a threat that somebody else might do it. That smacks very much of an attitude that B.C. Ferries must have: "We've got a monopoly, and we're not going to let anybody else get into our monopoly in ferry service between the Island and the mainland."
Hon. J. MacPhail: The member has been leaked a draft unfortunately. He shouldn't rely on drafts, because drafts are discussion documents by which people make decisions. The CEO of the corporation took the same offence that the member articulates and had it deleted.
D. Symons: I would have to commend, if that's the case, the CEO for doing that. He might be one of the few people in B.C. Ferries that seems to not have the attitude that they've got a monopoly that must be protected at all costs. Let's hope that's the case.
Anyway, "B.C. Ferries Wants $400 Million" is the heading in a March 17 Vancouver Sun article for a capital plan. I'm curious. If the corporation starts on a new five-year plan
[1705]
I asked earlier about a debt management plan. Well, I'm curious exactly how you're going to handle the debt that you're going to put on at the same yearly rate that the past ten-year capital plan brought upon the people of British Columbia
We had B.C. Ferries, we had the government, we had the Crown corporations secretariat, and we had the Treasury Board all look at the ten-year plan. Look what happened to that: $1.1 billion had to be written down. So what's happening with this $400 million? It's a slightly less ambitious plan, but on a per-year basis it's the same amount as we had in the ten-year plan back in '95, prior to the last election.
Hon. J. MacPhail: The member has this information. It was given to him in the debate around debt recision. The plan, the five-year forecast, explains all of this. It's based on the fact that the debt has been written off, so there are no debt-servicing costs up till now. There's a new dedicated source of revenue, as was being asked for by the communities who rely on the ferries. All of the corporation's future debt-servicing responsibilities must be serviced by the corporation. I'm sorry -- I've given that information to the member.
D. Symons: I guess the minister must excuse me for this. But the fact is that if we go back to '95 and '96, I was asking the minister then responsible for B.C. Ferries the very question I'm asking now. When he announced that $800 million plan -- announced the fast ferries -- I basically said: "How are you going to pay for it?"
I was assured that due to revenue growth, due to passenger growth and so forth, it was all in the plan. Those were the words given to me by the minister: "It's all in the plan." I kept asking for the plan and never really got one.
But I'm concerned. Has the plan you put together been looked at by somebody independent of the Ferry Corporation, the Crown corporations secretariat and Treasury Board, who all approved the other plan that didn't work? Have we got somebody else looking at it besides yourself? The ones who looked at it before were wrong, and it seems like it's the same people looking at this plan.
Hon. J. MacPhail: You know, that's ridiculous. The member can't have it both ways -- on the one hand, hold in high regard Treasury Board staff when it's convenient for him, and then on the other hand, just brush them aside and say: "Oh my God, you've got to go outside somewhere." This has been a thoughtful plan that has been reviewed by the Ministry of
[ Page 16893 ]
Finance staff and by the Ferry Corporation -- the new management of Ferry Corporation -- and has been approved by Treasury Board.D. Symons: I would like to make here a fine distinction between Treasury Board and Treasury Board staff. I gather from information that is now coming out, and has come out through the auditor general and so forth, that the Treasury Board staff were indeed raising flags about the program that B.C. Ferries was entering onto. But that was ignored, because Treasury Board, which is made up of politicians -- half of the members now sitting on the government side of the House at one time or other sat on that Treasury Board
I'll make the distinction: I am not faulting Treasury Board at all. Unfortunately, Treasury Board is not the organization that makes the final decision. They can make their recommendations; they can point out the problems -- as they did, I gather, with the fast ferry program. Those recommendations and things were ignored. It was much like a balanced budget, you know. You get the information, but you put a lot of optimism into it. The same thing seemed to have occurred with the fast ferry program. I have concerns that we might be getting into that same box. The minister assures me that we're not, so let's hope that the minister is correct this time around.
When the government assumed $1.1 billion, or slightly less than that, of B.C. Ferry debt as of March 31 this year, what debt remained with the corporation? Did that completely wipe the books of the Ferry Corporation, or were there some dollars left within the corporation?
[1710]
Hon. J. MacPhail: There's a capitalized lease of $21 million still on the books.
D. Symons: That's the one remaining lease that was done back in '88 by, I think, the Vander Zalm government on the ferries, and that's all that's left of that. Basically all the other debt was assumed, and you could say that except for the particular process of paying that debt off, the books were wiped clean.
Can the minister then tell me: will the remaining capital costs for fast ferry No. 3. which have gone on since March 31 of this year, now be part of that debt assumption? Will that begin to climb the debt up for B.C. Ferries again? I would gather that number will be up in the millions of dollars. Will the repair and maintenance costs of ferries 1 and 2, which seem to be fairly substantial, remain with the corporation, or are they going to somehow be assumed into that debt of assuming the problems that occurred because of the fast ferries?
If you could tell me, then, tied in with this, what is the anticipated cost for these items for this particular fiscal year, if they're going to be part of this fiscal year's operations?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Operations and maintenance costs of all vessels are part of the operating costs of the B.C. Ferry Corporation. The finalization of the construction of Pacificat 3 is part of the year 1 capital plan. This year 1 has been incorporated into that.
D. Symons: Therefore this year's capital plan, as you say, will be included. That will be starting to add to the debt, along with the other costs of this year's capital plan -- $117 million plus
In February of 1998 B.C. Ferries issued a request for expressions of interest, I believe, for the sale of the fast ferry program. Apparently none of the bids met the specific criteria. That was the reason given that it didn't carry forward. Since that's now a dead issue, could the minister tell us what the criteria were, and how these bids fell short of those particular specifications?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll get that information for the member.
D. Symons: I gather there was one bidder that was reasonably eager to get involved in the program, but for some reason, he walked away from it. He said they found it difficult waiting for decisions to come from B.C. Ferries. I'm curious. We were told that the bidders didn't meet the criteria. I'd be delighted to find out what your criteria were and where these bids fell short.
The corporation has put a book value of $7 million on CFI assets. I remember it cost $13 million to build and equip the assembly building, so you've written that down quite badly. What value has been placed on that particular asset -- the assembly building itself? The overall value of the assets is $13 million. How about that particular asset -- the assembly building? What's the book value put on that?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The vast majority of the book value is the facility.
D. Symons: I gather that B.C. Ferries has sold the unused aluminum. Can you tell me what price per pound was paid for that scrap aluminum?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll have to confirm that CFI has actually completed that. If indeed it is true, we'll get you the price per pound.
[1715]
D. Symons: Well, I understand that when B.C. Ferries originally bought the aluminum for constructing the ferries, they bought it all in advance of the program going in, and they paid in the neighbourhood of $2.50 a pound. I gather it's somewhat less than that for the sale of the leftover aluminum. If the minister could get that back to me, I'd appreciate that.
I might also ask, dealing with this year's and last year's cost and the write-off and so forth
[ Page 16894 ]
the Ferry Corporation, for the debt? Or did that occur after March 31 of this year? Will that $40,000 then appear in this year's expenses? And I'm curious why that crane had not been built earlier, anticipating that it would be needed at some time. Was it a way of simply keeping the capital costs of the ferries hidden, by putting off to a later date a thing that would be needed?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The $40,000 crane is an operating cost for this year's budget. The failure of the engine was premature, so the corporation wasn't anticipating having to use the crane. The ships are now up for sale.
D. Symons: I find it interesting that a crane for removing them would be considered an operating cost, particularly. I also find it interesting what the minister says, that this was premature, when I know myself, and other people in the industry were saying, that when you're running these engines at close to 100 percent of their output, you are bound to have premature problems with them. They would start with the turbo charger and move down into the engine at various stages. I don't think it was premature at all; I think it was very predictable that that was going to happen and that that crane would be a necessity. But we'll have to differ on that, apparently. I think, again, there's a case of looking at things through rose-coloured glasses, hoping this wouldn't happen.
Anyway, I'll move on. I note that the CEO of B.C. Ferries spoke in the press, the Times Colonist, on Saturday, June 19 of last year. Maybe he's changed his mind, but he talked about the mystique of the debt of B.C. Ferries, basically, when he was asked some questions about it. And it says here: "Lingwood speaks about the 'mystique' of the debt. 'This is just an absolute mystery to me,' he said." I find that an interesting comment. He goes on to say: "Look at the infrastructure. The replacement value of our ships is $3 billion. So with an asset base like that, debt and borrowing $1 billion or thereabouts is to be expected." He goes on: "How can you pay for it? Well, we are a large company with enormous revenues." I find those comments interesting. I'm curious whether the minister might concur with those business concepts.
Hon. J. MacPhail: The point that is being made here is that the Ferry Corporation is a corporation that operates with the use of very expensive assets. And it is absolutely true that for the entire duration of this corporation's history there has been debt. Sometimes the corporation itself has held the debt; sometimes the government has held the debt. It's been moved back and forth. It's the kind of discussion that we have all the time and that we disagree on: whether debt in itself is bad. The Liberal opposition would say yes. In this case, we would say no, because this debt actually is for vessels and assets.
[1720]
D. Symons: I wonder if we can go back to this statement, because I asked, "Does the minister concur with those business concepts?" and I really didn't hear a yes or no in there. The statement here
Now I'm curious. I have a Plymouth Acclaim -- ten years old. And basically you're saying that the replacement value
Hon. J. MacPhail: Sorry, I'm not quite sure why the member is so exercised. I don't want to disagree with him on anything, but could he try to articulate more clearly what's upsetting him, and then I could address that issue.
D. Symons: Well, I'm looking at the absurdity of the statement made: "The replacement value of our ships is $3 billion. So with an asset base like that, debt and borrowing $1 billion or thereabouts is to be expected. How can you pay for it? Well, we are a large company with enormous revenues." That to me sounds like totally irresponsible statements to be making about the replacement value: because a replacement value is high, we can therefore go out and borrow more money.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Look, the member can discuss the newspaper article all he wants. The issue here is that if the corporation is to be accused of having no assets and no value, then that's just wrong. There are assets that have value. And it's on the basis of those assets that the government now can borrow. It's the underpinnings of the right to borrow -- that's all. I hope the member can just relax about this. Nobody's trying to scam anybody or suggest that there are not sound principles going on here. I think the CEO that's in place now has demonstrated clearly the skills of sound fiscal management.
D. Symons: I did ask a moment ago what the current book value of the fleet is. I was told before that you didn't have it vessel by vessel, but you must have a book value for the fleet.
I gather that that's going to come at a later date, because it's not handy. That's fine.
About a year ago B.C. Ferry Corporation put some management staff and an office in Fulford Harbour, moving somebody from Long Harbour into Fulford Harbour. I understand that that office has now been closed, and I'm wondering what the reason was for this little experiment in splitting up the office and then putting it together again. How much did that little experiment cost us?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No, there's an office at Fulford Harbour with administrative staff.
D. Symons: Then I stand corrected. I was under the impression that that office had been closed recently, so if that's not the case, that's fine.
I think this, in a sense, has actually been covered. Let's just take a look here. Okay, that's done with.
I'm looking at the route report from March 31, 1999, and I note that route 40 runs an annual deficit of between $2 million and $3 million. It seems to vary a little bit year by year. I do
[ Page 16895 ]
remember when that particular service was put in. The minister of the day and I had some discussion over it. I was looking at the proposal the government was going to do to put the Queen of Chilliwack on that particular service and
[1725]
Anyway, at that time, I was saying that that's been done by the private sector up to now, and you're now going to have B.C. Ferries take that particular service over, and I asked: "Well, why are you taking it over from the private sector?" And basically he said: "We're giving a $1 million subsidy to operate that service up there, and that's absurd. We'll do it."
Well, it's costing you $2 to $3 million a year in extra costs -- that is, losses -- on that particular route to save yourself the cost of having a $1 million subsidy. Does that make sense? I'm wondering if the corporation is considering returning the route to the private sector.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, in fact, the route 40 by the B.C. Ferry Corporation is different than the service that was offered before. It's a much expanded service and brings greater value not only to the communities themselves that use the ferry but also to the overall economy through tourism.
D. Symons: Yes, and we're subsidizing it quite heavily. I'm wondering if the minister might tell me whether there were some incentives given to B.C. Ferry employees to take their families and so forth and go on the route 40 trip, in order to raise the ridership numbers on that particular route.
Hon. J. MacPhail: That is no longer the practice of the corporation.
D. Symons: That means that it had been done, then.
I note that the member for North Coast is anxious to get into debate. I don't know if he wants to ask me questions or ask the minister questions, but I would be delighted to have the member who was the Minister Responsible for B.C. Ferries -- the minister, who, when I was in this House asking questions about the fast ferry program, kept insisting that there were no problems with it
Hon. D. Miller: Well, it's not my job, Mr. Chairman, first of all, to comment on the ability of the critic to do his job, so I'll just leave that one. But I do think the issue of route 40 is one that all British Columbians probably would support.
Just to briefly recap, we're talking about the midcoast of British Columbia. We're talking about small communities that have really a great deal of difficulty in developing an economic base -- communities that have been devastated by the fundamental changes that have taken place both in fishing and forestry. The establishment of route 40 using the Chilliwack has created a huge new opportunity for those midcoast communities -- for Ocean Falls, for Bella Bella, for Bella Coola, for Kitasoo.
I would hope that the Liberal opposition would be able to stand up in this House and say: "We support that kind of development." The induced value to the economy in that region is far greater than any money we've put in, both in terms of the vessel or indeed the subsidy. If the member wants to start talking about subsidies, let's talk about the subsidy to the people who live on Bowen Island, who, when we suggest that we put a car ferry on at non-peak hours, because we're wasting money running a big ferry back and forth -- as the member knows; he knows exactly what I'm talking about
[1730]
So the member should really think about British Columbians who live in those coastal communities. I'll invite him to go up. Maybe he has taken the trip. If he has taken the trip, then he will have seen firsthand the developments that have taken place in Bella Bella and in Bella Coola, and he'll know the value of that to the people who live on the midcoast. At the very least, rather than talking loosely about, "It's subsidized
You can get to Saltspring Island three ways. People who live in my constituency have a summer service that's really, effectively, a good tourism service, and this member stands up and complains about it. I'm going to make sure I tell all the people on the midcoast what the Liberal position is with respect to this service.
D. Symons: Thank you for that little harangue. I'm interested in the opening comments of the minister about the quality of the critic. You know, this is the minister who was responsible for B.C. Ferries all those years that the debt was doubling. It's interesting that he has the gall to get up here and criticize other people, when he let the Ferry Corporation go up in debt, and the fast ferries jumped up to where they were. Talk about credibility! I mean, that's the most bizarre thing -- when he would get up and talk about credibility.
I will just point out -- obviously to the minister -- I did not question the service to the midcoast. I questioned what you are doing with the ferry that's currently there and whether you might go back to the private sector performing that service. I did not suggest in any way any reduction in the amount of service done. So just let that be clear: no comment I've made, regardless of what the previous member just said moments ago.
Let's leave that particular run and look at the statement of financial information that I have here, with a pile of various things that have gone on. I note that we are getting close to dinnertime, so I will try to move on to a logical place to stop for that. I note that in here Detroit Diesel has a number of charges. How much of the $9.9 million that went to Detroit Diesel was related to fast ferry work?
Hon. J. MacPhail: There are a number of Detroit Diesel's MTU engines in the fleet, so we'll have to get the split on it for you.
D. Symons: I'm interested in the engine repairs, tune-ups, and whatever Detroit Diesel was involved in with the fast ferries, because indeed they carry other engines that may be in
[ Page 16896 ]
use in other ferries. Could I have a copy of any engine warranty relating to the fast ferries or extended warranty that you may have purchased from them -- or a maintenance contract or anything of that sort that would relate to the fast ferries? If we could have a copy of that, that would also be appreciated.
I found in here a rather interesting
Hon. J. MacPhail: They're a food supplier for the ferries.
Interjection.
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's frozen yogurt.
[T. Stevenson in the chair.]
Interjection.
D. Symons: Obviously I don't, not being a yogurt eater. I just found it a rather interesting name, and now I know.
However, getting to something maybe a little more serious, I find some articles in here relating to dry cleaning. I'm just wondering if the minister
[1735]
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll get you the information about
An Hon. Member: The cleaning costs.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Oh, the cleaning bill -- absolutely. And then also, the provision of uniforms is subject to the collective agreement.
D. Symons: If you could just give me a brief outline of what the collective agreement includes as far as clothing allowance goes. Does it vary ship to ship or department to department? If you could give me that, and also, while you're looking up material, get me at a future date
What is the corporation policy regarding the purchase of supplies and materials? I want to know: is there a dollar figure over which the purchases must go out to bids?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Minimums vary according to the nature of the purchase. For instance, for contractors the threshold is $20,000. But the policy is generally to go to tender.
D. Symons: I'm wondering if you could tell me how the purchase orders are handled and if they're monitored. Also, I'll just ask the second one here as well. Is preference given to B.C. products? If so, at what point does the low bid outweigh the local-buy policy?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, the corporation does monitor purchasing policy, and preference given to B.C. companies is according to government policy.
D. Symons: I'm just wondering if you can tell me at what point the local buy will outweigh the fact that there might be a lower bid from not-in-B.C. I suspect you must have a figure where you say, "Well, if there's a 10 percent difference, we'll buy locally" -- or 20 percent or whatever. Is there some figure, when you say "government policy," that would describe how somebody in a purchasing department can make a difference, make the decision as to who they're going to award that contract to?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The governmentwide policy is generally at 10 percent.
D. Symons: Can the minister tell me whether employees or their families or business people that they're associated with, or the families associated with, are allowed to bid on contracts for B.C. Ferries?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Generally, yes -- the employees' families.
D. Symons: Can the minister tell me when the last outside audit was done on the Deas dock, in the purchasing department?
[1740]
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's done annually.
D. Symons: Have these audits turned up any concerns that the corporation might have?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No.
D. Symons: The auditor general's report on the 1995-96 performance audits listed a number of projects that needed to be done on some of the older vessels. They said there's a limited amount of maintenance work that has been deferred, and then they mention a group of things here. I'm just wondering if some of this work has been
Hon. J. MacPhail: All of the older ships have asbestos. The corporation has in place a program to identify and seal.
[ Page 16897 ]
D. Symons: Have all the problems with asbestos been identified by B.C. Ferries -- all of the potential asbestos problems, I should say?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The corporation has identified whether there's asbestos on the ships.
D. Symons: The member has too many papers here. We'll have to come back to this; I'm missing a page.
I wonder if we can look at some personnel services contracts. The first question is: how does B.C. Ferries Corporation determine when to award a contract and when to go to tender, and what is the policy as to whether you award it without tendering or you go out to tender to award it?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, it's on a case-by-case basis, depending on what the services are that are needed. Personal services is what I'm talking about. If one is looking at a distinct set of skills, one may or may not put that out to tender.
D. Symons: I'm curious, though, whether indeed there might be more than one person that has the skills that may be needed. Are they notified and given a chance at the job, or do you end up having one person that you depend upon? Is there a dollar figure also, above which your contract will go out to tender? If you have such a policy, is it faithfully followed, and particularly, was it followed in fitting out the fast ferries -- in the construction and the fitting of the fast ferries?
[1745]
Hon. J. MacPhail: The member's probably talking about CFI, if we're talking about personnel services contracts -- are we?
D. Symons: Anywhere.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Oh, I thought you asked about fast ferries.
D. Symons: Including fast ferries.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yeah, okay. We'll have to get the information on this for the member. He could probably have the whole personnel services manual.
D. Symons: I'm curious then, too, that there seems to be a number of them where people are there for quite a while, giving their services to B.C. Ferries. I'm wondering why some of these people aren't hired onto staff rather than continue
Hon. J. MacPhail: The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency sets down the rules in this area, and the corporation is following those rules. The general principle of the corporation is the same as the member articulates: if they're there long enough to be employees, they should be.
D. Symons: I think the union will be very happy to have heard that last statement.
Just one -- and if you don't know this one, it doesn't matter that much, but I'm just curious. Going through these professional service contracts, one thing turned up again and again, large columns of them: EDS Canada. Do you happen to know, off the top, what EDS Canada is? If not, don't worry about it.
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's a supplier of computer support services.
D. Symons: There are a great number of entries in there under professional services for that, so that piqued my interest.
B.C. Ferries talked awhile back -- almost a year ago now -- of an annual reduction of $5 million. In that process, they were going to announce that 65 positions were being cut. I'm wondering how many were vacant positions, and how many of those who retired or were let go are now back working on contract?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The CEO of the corporation had instituted a hiring freeze in preparation for this. At the time of the announcement there were 23 vacancies, all recent, because of the hiring freeze. To the best of the corporation's knowledge, there is one person back on a part-time contract.
D. Symons: I'm wondering, then, when you talk of a $5 million annual reduction, but a third of the people that are being reduced aren't there and aren't being paid salary
I'll ask the next question too, while I'm at it. How many people in the non-fleet management and administration side of B.C. Ferries are hired on contract?
[1750]
Hon. J. MacPhail: The member must realize that if the corporation hadn't frozen positions, they would have been filled. So it is absolutely proper to count those positions as part of the downsizing. I mean, it is a 4,000-person corporation, but to the best of the corporation's knowledge there are no personal service contracts -- perhaps the odd one in engineering, but that's
D. Symons: Last September, the then Minister Responsible for B.C. Ferries was quoted in the Vancouver Sun as identifying other areas where costs could come down, but he said it would be a tough job. They involved such things as built-in overtime and maintenance practices. So I'm curious if the minister might give us a little bit of a background as to what the minister might have meant. I know this is not the minister who made those statements, but what are some of the problems to do with built-in overtime? What he mean by built-in overtime, and how might that be dealt with?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Overtime is pursuant to the collective agreement, and it is a bargaining issue on the table. It's as a result of work shifts and ferry schedules.
D. Symons: So I'm gathering from what the minister said that the way a shift goes will involve automatically, then, that there'll be overtime. If the worker's got a ten-hour shift, he's
[ Page 16898 ]
paid eight hours regular time, with time and a half for the remaining two hours. This is built in to the work shift and everything, so is automatic. Overtime normally means that when you've finished your job you're asked to stay on longer. In this case, the overtime is built into the whole schedules employees have. The minister
I wonder, then, if you might give me how much of the yearly wage bill is overtime, as a percent of the regular time. You know, if it's $5 million regular time, but you've got $1 million more in overtime, you can just give me the two raw figures, or you can put a percent on it. The $1 million on $5 million would be
Hon. J. MacPhail: We want to double-check the accuracy of the numbers, so we'll get that for you.
D. Symons: I'm wondering whether the shortage of senior engineers and officers might also be causing a considerable amount of overtime in that particular hiring aspect of the Ferry Corporation.
Hon. J. MacPhail: A lot of the overtime is in the engineering department. They do have different hours of work than the rest of the crew. Last year there was a problem with a shortage of engineers, but not this year.
D. Symons: In that case I was also asking about overtime beyond whatever their normal shift would be -- they're coming for another day or covering part of the next shift because there wasn't somebody available, and that aspect. That, I assume, was the answer the minister was giving. If not, she can correct me in a moment.
I gather there's been a lag in training, though, for senior positions. I'm curious what incentives the Ferry Corporation is offering employees so that they will get the proper training. They'll have both the experience within the Ferry Corporation and possibly the opportunity to go to the proper training facilities, so that as current masters and engineers retire, we will have trained staff ready to take over within the corporation.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Training, of course, is an issue of collective bargaining as well, and we are at a sensitive time in bargaining in the corporation. I'm hopeful they'll go very well. There is a new training program that involves ensuring time off and payment of tuition, and it's newly implemented.
[1755]
D. Symons: Now, I do know that the corporation is having problems with collective bargaining. It's been dragging on for quite a while, and the last contract
It seems a lot of overtime is occurring because of the fact that we have not enough employees as permanent employees. You're bringing in other people to fill the gap. I'm told that this number can add up to thousands of dollars a day in overtime alone, so I'm wondering why you don't increase the number of full-time employees and cut down the amount of overtime.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, the corporation does spend over a million dollars a day. I hope you'll indulge me here to
Noting the hour, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 5:56 p.m.
The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.
Committee of Supply B, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
The Speaker: When shall the committee sit again?
Hon. D. Lovick: Later this evening, hon. Speaker.
The Speaker: Section A has just recessed -- okay.
Hon. D. Lovick: In that case, hon. Speaker, I call private members' statements.
THIRD WORLD EYE CARE SOCIETY
L. Reid: It's my privilege this evening to talk about an organization that I have come to be very impressed with over my number of years of association. It's the Third World Eye Care Society. I'm pleased this evening to dedicate my remarks to Dr. Marina Roma-March, who was kind enough to introduce me to the work of the Third World Eye Care Society.
This society comprises a group of dedicated individuals who collect old eyeglasses and distribute these eyeglasses in conjunction with eye exams given by properly trained individuals. Their mission statement talks about the distribution of eyeglasses in developing countries where because of poverty or lack of availability of eye care services, individuals are unable to obtain eyeglasses and primary eye care.
The professional teams have recently completed projects in the Philippines, Grenada and Malawi. The Philippines team held clinics in Tacloban City late in November 1999. They examined -- and this is the astronomical thing, hon. Speaker
The Malawi team has just returned. Clinics were set up in six villages, and 2,000 people were examined in eight clinic days. The Third World Eye Care Society's upcoming projects
[ Page 16899 ]
include Achacachi, Bolivia, in November 2000; Sonora Valley, Mexico, in the fall of 2001. Their statement, if you will, that they offer to all
[1800]
One of the points I want to put on the table is exactly who comprises the Third World Eye Care Society. It consists of optometrists, medical doctors, opticians and dedicated individuals who volunteer their time. They travel to the Third World typically at their own expense. These are groups of individuals who hire locums to cover their clinics while they are absent. They typically use holiday time to do it. They fundraise on behalf of eye care in the Third World, and they deliver an amazing product in a very short space of time. So I take my hat off to them. I think they've done just amazing work.
Their goal is to deliver care for a leading cause of blindness, which is uncorrected refractive error. So they are doing some amazing things in terms of setting the standard -- raising the bar just a little bit higher -- in some of these countries. This is a service the majority of us in Canada and British Columbia take for granted. If we believe that our child or a member of our family needs eye care, we simply find a service that is offered in our community.
We know where optometric offices are and where ophthalmologists practise. These are services that are, frankly, not available in many, many of these countries. According to the World Health Organization, there are more than 28 million blind people, of which 90 percent live in the Third World. In these countries, unemployment is already difficult to find for workers with good vision. What is there for someone who cannot see?
Illiteracy, as well, is widespread. But even with social programs for education, how can it benefit a poor child who cannot see the alphabet clearly? Many millions in the Third World simply need a pair of eyeglasses to vastly improve their chances for a better life. Unfortunately, the most difficult part of this volunteer work is raising awareness of the desperate need for a simple pair of eyeglasses for those who have neither the access to eye care nor the funds to purchase spectacles.
Again, for the most part, we in British Columbia have access to the service or to the funds to purchase the service. The cost of a single pair of eyeglasses for someone living in Malawi today is astronomical. They would never be able to afford that service, never be able to have that product.
All too often the difference between feeding one's family with dignity and begging for food is the ability to see, to seek employment. Sadly, eyeglasses that can correct poor vision and combat illiteracy in the Third World are the very ones we throw away, because they no longer provide us with adequate vision. The society exists to tap into a renewable and valuable B.C. resource, your old eyeglasses.
So my appeal this evening is to have more British Columbians become aware of the need for a product that, frankly, they would often throw away. Maybe every other year they would purchase and renew their eyeglass prescription. What I'm asking for is that they may give some thought to having that benefit someone who currently lives in the Third World.
This organization is relatively new. Since they began in May of 1995, the Third World Eye Care Society has successfully completed a project in the barrios of the Philippines, Mexico, Malawi, Africa, India and the mountain villages of Guatemala and Grenada. In five years 12,000 underprivileged people have been seen by our optometrists, and over 14,000 pairs of used eyeglasses have been given to the poor by our opticians. As well, 310 cataract surgeries have been performed by ophthalmologists. Presently plans are underway for eye projects in different parts of the world.
Preparing for a project takes at least a year. A typical team will consist of ten to 15 members ranging from trained eye-care professionals to people from all walks of life. Each person who joins a project is financially responsible for his or her own air fare, transportation and accommodations. We can help 1,000 to 3,000 people during a one-to-two-week mission, depending on the number of volunteers travelling on the team and the number of eyeglasses that volunteers have collected, processed and shipped with them. We can take 10,000 to 15,000 pairs of eyeglasses as checked baggage. Those that are not used are returned to Canada with the team for use on a future project.
In the host country we set up mobile clinics, similar to a MASH unit, in a church, a school house or a community hall where we find the people who benefit -- the poor mountain villages and city barrios.
The eye clinics are run in a station-to-station fashion. The first station contains the familiar eye charts. They give a rough measure of a patient's vision. Subsequent stations refract and provide prescriptions and check for and treat eye pathology, while at the last station patients receive their recycled eyeglasses.
[1805]
So again, hon. Speaker, an appeal for individuals who might like to assist or to collect eyeglasses on behalf of individuals in the Third World. The telephone number of the association is 688-8150. Leave a message, and a volunteer will return your call. The Third World Eye Care Society is located at 2453 Commercial Drive in Vancouver and will absolutely accept financial donations as well. They're a 100 percent volunteer, non-profit charitable organization that, in my view, is doing some outstanding work in the province of British Columbia today. I for one congratulate them on the work that they've done and the work they will continue to do as we lead into the next decade.
J. Cashore: It's a great privilege to be able to talk on this subject. I commend the member for Richmond East for the research that she has done on this issue and for bringing it forward for the information of the House and of all British Columbians.
What I think is one of the results, as well as the very important and urgent benefit to those in need in Third World countries, is what I think is also an urgent need, and that is that those of us who do not live in Third World countries, those of us who live in countries such as Canada, might be enabled to gain the insight -- if you'll notice the pun in that word "insight" -- into something beyond what we in the Western world understand as only the surface of Third World issues.
So I think that through this project and the work of Dr. Marina Roma-March, we are seeing something that, while of
[ Page 16900 ]
very significant benefit to people in the Third World, is also of potential benefit to all of those who become involved in the projects to help what she has enabled by doing the work that she's done with a wide variety of groups.
I think that all of us, when we look at issues in the Third World, ask ourselves, if we want to be able to do something valuable and constructive: where do you begin? Obviously this project to assist in improving people's vision in the Third World has shown a way that you can begin. It shows a way in to the issue. It's a practical way; it's a way that's not paternalistic. It's a way that makes use of existing resources, and it's a way that expands on knowledge, which then becomes an enriching benefit to those who participate.
As such, it brings a great deal of credibility to the concept of volunteerism. The fact that church groups, service clubs, professional associations and students attending schools and colleges are able to be involved by being able to address issues of raising financial support, of volunteering and indeed finding people to donate eyeglasses is very important. So whether it's somebody such as Elton John, who allowed his glasses to be auctioned off in order to raise funds, or whether it's somebody who's just starting to understand the concept of the Third World and hearing about a land known as Malawi, there are people along that entire spectrum who are learning a lot. I think that more locations will benefit from this service as we see more of this activity.
I just want to mention the MLA office of the Minister of Community Development Cooperatives and Volunteers. The minister, in her office, collected glasses from MLAs and others. It turns out that Dr. Marina Roma-March is her optometrist, and through this relationship, again, she was able to learn about the very tremendous benefit that can be achieved through this service. Through that office there has been recognition within the city for her work.
Also, at Douglas College, which is in the area of New Westminster and Coquitlam, I understand that students donate their time to repair the glasses prior to the glasses being sent to the warehouse. I also understand that ophthalmologists perform cataract surgery and that 300 surgeries on cataracts have been conducted within the past five years.
[1810]
Just recognizing that volunteers, prior to venturing on one of the eight-to-ten-day missions, must donate their time in the warehouse that gathers these glasses, for a year. They must also find a way to pay for their own airfare and accommodation while abroad, while sacrificing their suitcase allowance so that a wide variety and number of glasses may be bought. This indicates that truly this is one way whereby a very significant connection can be made. It is one that is very valuable to all concerned, and I commend the member for bringing this to our attention.
The Speaker: To reply, the hon. member for Richmond East.
L. Reid: I would very much acknowledge the words of the member for Coquitlam-Maillardville, because this is a project that's worthy of support from all sides. I just want to close with a few references through some other individuals that have assisted the Third World Eye Care Society. One is the UBC pre-optometry club. Members of the UBC pre-optometry club have been donating their time at the Third World Eye Care Society warehouse in Burnaby on Monday evenings. Several students try to help out at the warehouse every second week. The students appreciate both the hands-on experience they receive as well as the contribution they are making to helping those in developing countries.
So again, my thanks to the UBC club and to the Smithers eyeglass sorting centre. Dr. Barry Lester's latest effort for the Third World Eye Care Society has been the opening of a new eyeglass sorting centre in Smithers. Thanks to the generosity of the local Anglican Church, the centre has the use of two rent-free offices in the church building. Volunteers from the local teen club of the Christian Reformed Church form the backbone of the centre. Groups of up to 12 teens can be found there on Friday evenings processing and packaging glasses for distribution onto TWECS projects.
Not only do these enthusiastic teens have fun doing this worthwhile project, but they also enjoy the fashion history they discover through the more wild styles and colours of glasses. Many hundreds of pairs of glasses have already been processed for the Third World Eye Care Society at the Smithers centre. For more information about the centre, please contact Dr. Barry Lester at 250-847-3611.
The reason I am taking the opportunity to put the addresses and the telephone numbers on the record tonight is that we would very much like to see individuals come forward and offer their eyeglasses and offer their time, hopefully, to support these missions. As a country, we have tremendous expertise to share with individuals who reside in the Third World. The compassion and humanity that come forward when individuals give of their time so freely -- and their expertise
Certainly there's an enormous cost to them, both personally and financially, to do this. Yet it's a priority; it's an objective that they
I thank you, hon. Speaker, for the attention this evening.
FOURTEEN YEARS -- WHAT HAS
CHANGED AND WHAT HASN'T?
L. Boone: My speech tonight is going to talk a little bit about 14 years -- 14 years in this chamber and things that have changed, things that haven't changed. Some things have changed for the better. How it's changed in the operation of this chamber and how it's changed the lives of us that work in this chamber
If you look at the picture in the hallways out here, you'll see a huge difference from 1986 and prior to 1986, today. In 1986, with all due respect to all my male white colleagues here, the pictures that were out there were basically male, white -- and that was it. A few women were elected prior to 1986, but never more than six. We had a few persons of colour -- most notably of course, our former Speaker, Emery Barnes, and Rosemary Brown.
But in 1986 we saw some changes. We saw actually four Socred women that were elected -- five. One went on to be
[ Page 16901 ]
the Prime Minister of Canada for a very short period of time; one went on to be the Premier of British Columbia for a very short period of time. We saw five NDPers elected and then later on two more. So we went up to 11 women in that area. We saw one aboriginal person elected, and for the first time a person from the East Indian community -- the hon. member for Esquimalt-Metchosin -- was elected. That was the first time ever.
[1815]
In 1991 we saw the face of the chamber change again; 19 women were elected in that time -- 19 women. In 1996 we saw 22 women being elected and even more multiculturalism shown, with more individuals from the East Indian community. And of course, for the first time two individuals from the Asian community were elected, and that has changed the face of this chamber. We've also seen that we had elected at that time members from the gay community. So for the first time, hon. Speaker, this chamber is actually starting to look a little bit more like where we actually live -- the communities that we actually live in.
I'll never forget when I was first elected in 1986. I called down to Victoria and said: "Okay, what do I do to get my office up and running?" I was told that I had $2,200 to get my office running. That was it; $2,200 per month is what I had to run my office on. That included money for staff, rents, phone, furnishings, everything. I couldn't believe it. So I said: "Well, surely Jack Heinrich must have some furniture around that would come to me, because he was the former member there." They said: "No, no, no, no. Jack Heinrich -- that furniture belongs to him because he bought that, so that doesn't go over to you."
Well, now we actually have reasonable amounts so that we can pay our staff reasonable wages. We actually have full-time staff, and we actually have the Legislature purchasing equipment for our offices. And then, amazingly, the next member can get this equipment to them. That's an interesting concept but one that they hadn't grasped in 1986 -- that you should be able to pass on furnishings and that this should be government owned and operated.
In 1986, I was also amazed when I was doing my maiden speech. I had written it and then made some revisions, and I handed it to my legislative assistant -- somebody by the name of Shirley-Anne now, who in 1986 was just plain Shirley. I came out of the office, and she was typing it -- retyping it. I said: "What are you doing?" She said: "Well, I'm typing your speech." And I said: "Well, why are you doing this? Don't you have any computers?" No. We had no computers in our offices in the Legislature -- maybe in the ministers' offices, but certainly not in our caucus office.
So we've now got computers and all of those things and all the bells and whistles that go with those areas, and it's nice to see that our people no longer have to do those things. We have fax machines now. I never had a fax machine until about two years after I was elected. You used to have to go down to the government agent's office to pick up faxes -- no Internet, no e-mail, no web sites, none of those things. Cell phones were unheard of. Maybe a few limited people had them -- people who travelled with the Premier or maybe with some cabinet ministers. And you know, I've got to think about it, and that might not necessarily be a bad thing if we didn't have those cell phones. We might actually have our lives back again.
Fourteen years ago MLAs got the massive amount of $75 a day when the House was sitting, and that was limited to 60 days. So after 60 days, you got nothing -- absolutely nothing. I remember there was a time when we actually went about 30 days over that, so we had about 30 days when we were receiving no stipend to pay for our accommodation whatsoever. I remember the Whip of the day, Mark Rose, saying to us: "Joan, Lois" -- I'm not saying the last names, so I can say that -- "why don't you guys just be quiet so we could get out of here?" But of course we always thought that we had the gem of a question in estimates that would destroy the government, and we had to do those things because we were wide-eyed and bushy-tailed and full of enthusiasm. We learned a little bit more the next year.
Some of us struggled financially for those times. Fourteen years ago, hon. Speaker, people were still smoking legally in this building. I know some do so illegally, but people were still smoking legally in this building. We had no cameras in this chamber -- none at all. I remember when the former Speaker, John Reynolds, went around and looked at various buildings to find out how we could incorporate cameras in this area here. At that time there were no pictures to be shown on BCTV or any of those things. They just had to use voice clips because there were no television cameras in here whatsoever.
While we've improved in our ability to serve our constituents and to do our job, not everything has been positive for MLAs over this time. We used to have government jets that helped us get around and back and forth to our constituencies. Let me say that I was not very happy when they sold those government jets. People don't even know that we've sold them and think that we still have the opportunity to do those things.
There was a time when MLAs who had served two terms and reached an area where their years of service plus their age equalled 60 got pensions. Well, we stopped that in 1996, and we no longer have those pensions. That's not necessarily a good decision, and one that's reflected by a lot of MLAs here.
MLAs were given life ferry passes after two terms. That no longer exists
The Speaker: Excuse me, member.
L. Boone:
Oh, sorry, hon. Speaker. I see I've run out of time.
The Speaker: Thank you, member. To respond, the hon. member for Kamloops-North Thompson.
[1820]
K. Krueger: Generally, just so the public is aware, we don't have too much knowledge of what's going to be in a private member's statement when we agree to respond to it. The title that I was given tonight was "Fourteen Years -- What Has Changed and What Hasn't?" I was anticipating perhaps a set of remarks about what the member attributes in her term in office as the achievements of her party, this government and the government before it. And I was interested to hear what her view of those things would be. I'm a little bit astonished at the things that we've actually heard about throughout the private member's statement.
I frankly couldn't care less if I got a B.C. Ferries pass for life, and I don't think I'm entitled to one. I think it's a tool of the trade, part of getting to and from work while we're in
[ Page 16902 ]
office. I don't deserve or want a pass for life. I think that the past MLAs who have one should actually turn it in and not use it. Because out there is a public, an electorate that is really hurting. The economy is really tough in B.C. People's take-home pay, on average, is something like $1,800 less than it was at the beginning of the 1990s. That's seems unnatural to me. All my life people could expect that there'd be something of an increase in take-home pay from year to year, as long as they worked hard and particularly if they were progressing in their careers. On average, that hasn't happened for British Columbians.
I don't think it's appropriate to criticize a past MLA for keeping his furniture, because that was the deal at the time. Many of the MLAs previous to my vintage -- MLAs who were elected before 1996 -- have pensions that would certainly dwarf what Jack Heinrich's furniture was worth, whatever that might have been. It might not have been much if he was getting along at $2,200 a month, as the member said they had to at the time, including his staff and his office and so on.
So I'm a little bit at a loss as to how to respond to this private member's statement. It seemed like a long complaint about the loss of perks to MLAs, and I didn't come here for perks, nor did anybody else on this side of the House. Most of the people in the official opposition were earning substantially larger salaries in private life before they were elected. We came here to represent the people of B.C. We knew we were taking a cut in pay to do it and didn't care about that. It's public service and something that we were prepared to do, something we offered ourselves for and something that we were elected to do. So I don't think you'd ever catch an official opposition MLA saying that they feel hard done by, by salary, perks, travel, benefits or anything like that.
I appreciate the member's comments about the change in complexion of the House to where the House is somewhat more representative of the general population of British Columbia. I believe that politics should be colour-blind, and increasingly I think that British Columbia is that way. I know I certainly don't weigh the colour of a person's skin or their background or their sexual orientation or any of those things, when I consider whether or not they would be a fit person to represent me municipally, federally or provincially. I don't think most British Columbians do. There are probably still some people out there with those bad, old-fashioned attitudes, but hopefully not many.
I also think that it's a real negative when governments develop affirmative-action-style programs -- reverse discrimination programs -- where people are singled out for negative treatment because of the way they were born. I can't help it that I'm a white male -- not Anglo-Saxon but certainly white -- rather portly, in my forties, probably pretty representative of a lot of other guys who look like me. Maybe there are lots of us in business; maybe that's because that's where we found ourselves, and many of us
[1825]
I was married young and had children young. My wife wanted to stay home and look after them, and she was better at it than me. We have a partnership, and it worked fine. The people of Kamloops-North Thompson chose me as their MLA. It's been a pretty happy relationship between my constituents and me.
But I don't think anybody ever thinks about the colour of my skin or the fact that I'm not representative of some minority. They just chose me as the person they'd like to represent them, and I hope that's the case for all the members of this Legislature and all the ones in the election to come.
Who would ever be ashamed of the way the Lord created them, of the genes that caused them to be the way that they are? Those things are beyond our control, which is why pride and arrogance always strike me as such ridiculous traits in a person, as if anybody has any choice about those things.
The Speaker: Thank you, member.
K. Krueger: So I hope the member winds up on a more positive note, because I don't think the public wants to hear us complaining about the perks of office.
The Speaker: To reply, the hon. member for Prince George-Mount Robson.
L. Boone: Well, thank you. I don't think I was the one that was being negative, hon. Speaker. But I do have something here that I was wanting to comment on, and that's talking about a tendency that I see that has developed since 1986. And that's a tendency to move towards a more American style of politics, which is focused on personal attacks and family member attacks as well. In 1986 there was an unwritten law that personal lives were off-limit.
I think we saw that with Vander Zalm. Perhaps that's because he was sort of a charismatic person who brought his whole family to the forefront, so we saw attacks on him and on his family. But whatever the reasons, rules seemed to shift, and suddenly personal lives became fair game.
I've jealously guarded my personal life and my family, and I would encourage member of this House to do the same. I feel very strongly about this: that our families put up with enough, and that we need to all work together to make sure that we can get back to where we were in 1986, where families were off limits, and where attacks on us were fair game, but attacks that included any family members were not.
I would be remiss if I didn't talk a little bit about some pieces of legislation that have changed the way this place operates. Prior to 1992 and the passage of the Freedom of Information Act, the public's opposition
It wasn't too long ago when there was only one Committee of the Whole that sat for estimates, and now we do sit in two, and we have to move back and forth.
There are some things that don't change, and these are things that I think we should all recognize. One of the things that hasn't changed is the smiling faces of those women in the dining room that have served all of us in this House and treated us like family members when we're away from our own homes. I want to thank them for every little hug they give us and every little smile that they give us. It also hasn't
[ Page 16903 ]
changed
The other thing that hasn't changed is the awe that I feel when I enter this magnificent building and the chamber full of history. That hasn't changed one bit -- this is by far the most magnificent place -- nor has my feeling of honour that I've been privileged to serve this chamber and to represent my constituents for 14 years.
[1830]
The Speaker: Thank you, hon. member. For the third private member's statement I recognize the hon. member for Delta South.
OUR CANADIAN FABRIC:
PEACE AND SECURITY
V. Roddick: We recently witnessed news coverage of a truly historic national event, the peaceful meeting of the leaders of North and South Korea. These two figures, representing countries that have been mortal enemies for half a century, came together with hands extended in friendship. It was a symbolic signal of détente. The world now watches with hope and optimism that this overture can lead to a lasting peace in the Korean peninsula.
What received less media attention here at home is the critical role that many brave Canadians played in the Korean War. Among the first UN nations to respond to the North Korean attack, Canada called on the Royal Canadian Navy to carry our colours to war from the Esquimalt naval base, mere minutes from here, followed by the Royal Canadian Air Force, the army and the Red Cross.
June 25, 2000, marked the fiftieth anniversary of the start of the Korean War. But many people, particularly those born after 1950, know little or nothing about this pivotal conflict, which virtually stopped the progression of communism in Asia. By the time the war ended in July 1953, Canada had lost 516 brave fighters, among more than one million deaths, both military and non-military, on both sides of the border.
But according to Richmond resident, Bob Orrick, who is a veteran of the Korean conflict, at the beginning of North Korea's aggression our federal Parliament, under Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent, was too busy debating the price of cheese to address this international crisis.
And 50 years later, have we adequately acknowledged the Canadian soldiers, sailors and airmen who gave their lives in this crucial Korean conflict? I don't think so. And it's no surprise. Our Canadian Armed Forces and their contributions to global peace and security have been neglected for years; that is shameful.
Some illustrations of this neglect: in the recent Kosovo conflict, peacekeepers were expected to give their lives on the line in carrying out duties with sadly outdated equipment and insufficient support. The federal government has abandoned probably the most universal symbol of Canadian identity, the RCMP musical ride. And according to a recent article in the Horse and Hound, the famous British periodical made more famous recently by the film Notting Hill, the English themselves paid to have the musical ride travel to and perform at Windsor Castle.
Canada now ranks third-last of all NATO countries in defence spending as a percentage of the GDP, and the budget has been cut 23 percent since 1993. There are 540 vacancies for RCMP officers Canada-wide. Just think of that for a moment: 540 RCMP officers required across the country to keep our communities safe, but the government can't or won't fund them.
So we have both a deterioration of our global reputation for peacekeeping and a lack of support for policing at the local level. How ironic that the federal government recently honoured the contribution of our armed forces in the Second World War by repatriating our own Unknown Soldier to Canadian soil. It was an important and moving event for our veterans and the families of those killed in battle who were never properly identified and buried. But there is hypocrisy in honouring a soldier who died over 50 years ago while neglecting our current armed forces in the year 2000.
In fact, it is in the past half-century that we have increasingly put our mostly young military men and women at risk by asking them to protect our security at home and abroad with too few resources and too little gratitude. We neglect such globally important symbols of our identity as the RCMP musical ride, surely a golden thread in our Canadian fabric, respected and revered internationally.
[1835]
We live in a wonderful country, the envy of the world. Our freedoms and freedoms that we have helped garner for other nations in their armed struggles are our most precious treasures. In fact, these freedoms enable institutions such as this hallowed Legislature, where we enjoy the luxury of reasoned debate in pursuit of good laws and good government. But with this freedom come responsibilities.
As citizens, we each have responsibilities to exercise our democratic franchise, to scrutinize the actions of government, to respect those laws that derive from our due legislative process and to support, morally and financially, the institutions set up by government to deliver services. This support is as important to our armed services as to any other public sector, perhaps more so, for a healthy, strong, respected national peacekeeping force is the best safeguard of all that is best about life in a civilized democracy.
The Speaker: Thank you member. To respond, the hon. member for Victoria-Hillside.
S. Orcherton: Many thanks to the member opposite for raising these issues. Indeed it is important for us to reflect -- and we should reflect more often than not -- on Canada and what Canadians stand for, what the symbols are that we hold high for ourselves and that others in other countries look to and recognize when people talk about Canadians, what it is to be a Canadian.
The member has talked about the Korean War and the work that many Canadians did there. Indeed, many Canadians lost their lives and were injured in that war. That was really the precursor to the peacekeeping exercises that now Canada is very well known for all around the world. There's a tremendous history there that sometimes gets lost in the hustle and the bustle of what we do here in this assembly and what the people of British Columbia are involved in, in their day-to-day lives. It is really important. This is a good time, just before Canada Day, for us to start having a discussion in this
[ Page 16904 ]
House about some of the things like the Korean War, like it being a precursor for the United Nations peacekeeping force, and to recognize the contributions that Canadians have made and the contributions that Canadians will continue to make in that regard.
I remember that my father actually was on his way to go over and serve in the Korean conflict. Many of the children that I grew up with -- their parents indeed were there. I come from a military background, and these were the people we associated with. I know that the struggle and the individual circumstances are very difficult for families when people go off for peacekeeping exercises around the world and serve in the military. They really take our flag, as a country, and fly it proudly in many, many places around the world. It's very tough on those families. I'd just like to make a point to thank all the families over all the years that have supported their family members who have attended to those kinds of duties on behalf of Canadians and on behalf of freedom and democracy all around the world.
Every year, members and hon. Speaker, in the first weekend of August in Victoria at the Legislature, there is a ceremony here. I know many members may not be aware, because they're off in their own constituencies. The ceremony is indeed about celebrating the United Nations peacekeeping force.
There are two individuals here in Victoria who have put the United Nations and the peacekeeping force on the map nationally and globally, in terms of recognition of people who have served in peacekeeping. They are James MacMillan Murphy and Harold Leduc, two outstanding individuals who have really taken the United Nations peacekeeping issues on behalf of all Canadians and put in place programs like the August event, where people can come and listen to what the history is and how many peacekeepers have lost their lives, and pause for a moment and reflect on that contribution.
Those two individuals have done tremendous work. They have more work to do, indeed. They're working right now on trying to secure, through Veteran Affairs, support for UN peacekeepers who continue to suffer from disabilities through their endeavours of flying the Canadian flag across the world and building our reputation as Canadians.
[1840]
We have a lot to be proud of as a country; we have a lot to be proud of indeed. What the military has done and peacekeeping has done and the symbols that have been put in place around the world that define what Canadians are -- it's a tremendous thing. It's important, I think, that we are having this discussion this evening to talk about those kinds of issues. You know, when you travel abroad and you tell people you're Canadian, there's an immediate thought of a people and a country where there's compassion, where there's a sense of commitment to freedom and democracy, where there's a society that welcomes everyone, irrespective of your race, of your religion and of your social or economic standing. We have a lot to be proud of in this country.
If I can just close, I'll look forward to the member's closing remarks as well, and say one thing and offer a suggestion, hon. Speaker. This weekend is Canada Day. I hope and I know that all the members here will be out doing events in their constituencies around Canada Day. If I can encourage all of the members to say one thing with sincerity and certainty, it's that we live in the greatest province in the greatest country in the world. I think that will go a long ways to building Canada and continuing to build Canada, because we have a heck of a lot to be proud of. We should tell the world and tell our constituents and tell the people about the history of our country, Canada.
The Speaker: Thank you, member. To reply, the hon. member for Delta South.
V. Roddick: We will all be out there on Saturday.
The concepts of rights and responsibilities in a democracy, so apparent in the consideration of well-trained, well-supported armed services, can be broadly thought of in contractual terms. Under a democratic system, we as citizens enter into a form of contract with our fellow citizens, organized around a governmental framework. Under the terms of this contract, individuals promise to obey the law, pay assessed taxes when required and respect the rule of the majority, while allowing the voice or voices of minorities to also be heard. On the other side of this contract, governments -- whether municipal, provincial or federal -- promise to respect and protect the freedoms granted to individuals, collect and distribute tax dollars in a fair and prudent manner, and provide safety and security both at home and abroad by building and sustaining a professional peacekeeping presence.
As we proudly raise our flag and sing our national anthem on July 1, we should all reflect on this contract. We do live in the best country in the world. In return, we have to recognize that peace comes with a price. We must adequately provide for our own security and the protection of all nations threatened by tyranny. The cornerstone of that protection will always come from our professional, respected and supported armed services. The alternative, Mr. Speaker, is simply unthinkable.
The Speaker: For the fourth private member's statement, the hon. member for Bulkley Valley-Stikine.
CONNECTING RURAL B.C.
B. Goodacre: The topic that I've chosen to speak about is connecting rural British Columbia. The riding that I represent, Bulkley Valley-Stikine, is the largest in the province, at close to 200,000 square kilometres.
One of the things you find in remote areas is that access to basic telephone service is not something that is enjoyed by all of the communities in my riding. In particular, I've got an entire community living there on Babine Lake who have no telephone service. We have people scattered throughout our riding who have inadequate telephone service and no telephone service. Cell phone service in my riding is restricted to three of our communities. Houston, Burns Lake and Smithers are the only communities that have access to cell phone service, and Internet service as well is limited to the urban areas. Very few people living outside of the small, urban communities that we have, have any access to that kind of service.
[1845]
But there is a silver lining in that particular cloud. Modern technology is making it possible to provide a wireless option into places where it is not economically feasible to bring in copper wire through telephone poles. We have the
[ Page 16905 ]
story of Telegraph Creek, where just a year ago April, a large American telecommunications company by the name of Lucent had offered equipment to a local Internet society to do a little pilot with wireless Internet connectivity in that small, small community in the far north of British Columbia. The experiment was a big success. They hooked up the community to this wireless technology and beamed it up through the PLNet at the school in Telegraph Creek to the satellite, and they now have one of the best Internet connections in my riding in this little tiny community of Telegraph Creek.
Now this little success story has led me as the MLA for the area to do a follow-up on this issue with the folks down here in Victoria to see if we can't stimulate some more interest in helping the communities in rural British Columbia to have access to this wonderful new technology. We brought a representative from Lucent to come and talk to some people at the Legislature here. They demonstrated this wireless technology to us and also indicated that the price attached to these instruments is very modest. It's something that's well within the realm of economic viability to seriously look at a project that was dubbed "Ethernet north" by one of the Internet service providers in Terrace, Rainer Giannellia, who installed the Telegraph Creek model. Rainer was one of the first people to bring to my attention, through the work that he'd done, that it's entirely feasible to provide wide-band Internet access to all of rural British Columbia through a line-of-sight backbone, in their terminology. This would give what I've come to explain to people as full video-conferencing capability to rural villages, to aboriginal villages that are isolated and which you have to fly in and out of or are extremely remote and to fishing lodges that are also extremely remote.
We've got one place in my riding, it's a lodge that does heliskiing, and they provide their own communications through a satellite phone. They've got one phone and one fax line, for which they pay $40,000 a year. An outfit like this will find access to this for a fraction of the cost that they're paying now for a phone and fax. They will have full Internet access to their European customers. Just that shift alone has got people very, very excited in rural parts of British Columbia.
We've got another situation in the southern part of my riding, in the Burns Lake area. There's a group of people in the southern part of the Lakes District in south Ootsa -- there's about 22 families down there -- who for years have been trying to get telephone service, basic dial tone. Telus has been unable to justify the investment through the Infrastructure Works program for many, many years. They've been turned down one more time. And so we approached them about a wireless option. As people in Burns Lake started talking about it, they got very excited. We now have a pilot project that is in the works in Burns Lake, and we could very well see very shortly every community within a 100 kilometres of Burns Lake being hooked up through this wireless technology into the backbone that exists in the Burns Lake Village. These people living in these remote areas outside of Burns Lake will have, in effect, better Internet service than the people who actually live in the village of Burns Lake, because the people in Burns Lake are still using copper wire technology, whereas the people outside will have access to this new wide-band Internet wireless.
[1850]
Further down in another part of the province, in the Cariboo, where similar issues have arisen
J. Weisbeck: My thanks to the member for Bulkley Valley-Stikine for his comments. I certainly agree with the member on the importance of connecting all British Columbians. Obviously the biggest challenge is those British Columbians that live in the rural ridings and rural areas with their sort of lack of traditional infrastructure. We must not only connect all British Columbians but connect them with high speed, with broadband access, so that everyone can maximize what is available in the latest technologies. So now we talk about not only having dial tone; we talk about having web tone -- to be able to access unified networks that will offer IP-optimized networks that support telephony, data and video applications. The days of the 56K modem and dial-up access are no longer appropriate. They're just simply too limiting.
Tere are a number of different pipes in the system at this point in time. You have the copper wire which the member spoke of, which is the typical telephone line, which gives you voice and data. For those of you that have cable hookups, you know that's a lot faster. You have a lot more access; you have voice, data and some images. Of course, fibre is the latest line where you have unified networks where you get voice and data with video, and obviously a huge number of options are available with that.
The member spoke about wireless. Now we've come to the point we call 3G wireless -- third generation wireless -- and it's a big pipe. Obviously the bigger the pipe, the more bytes you can send down that line, and obviously the more applications you would have.
We're involved in a networking revolution, and obviously there are several networking revolutions that are leading to a new area of networking. They are characterized basically by the unification of a number of things. Number one, you've got your local area networks -- the LANs -- combining with the wide-area networks. You have data and telephony being combined. And now we have the wire line and wireless being connected.
So basically we have the technology now in which you can take a signal, in the case of optical networks, and you change it to wireless. Wireless, typically, is electromagnetic or acoustic waves, and in most wireless systems you have radio frequencies or infrared. But traditionally, wireless has not been a broadband application and so has had very, very limited applications. But this is changing, and according to some statistics in Wired magazine, experts say that by the year 2003, more people will access the Internet on their wireless hand-held devices than on PCs. In the U.S. more than 400 million handsets will be sold in the year 2002 -- so quite an explosion in the whole wireless technology.
But there is a broadband revolution taking place, and it has been driven by a huge increase in data traffic. Today the backbones, the networks, are being built on very large fibre optic transmission systems -- 320 gigabytes per second. I think we've developed a whole new language, and new words are added to this language as we add more and more
[ Page 16906 ]
capacity to these lines. And the one that really fascinates me more than anything else is that you have combined all this with dense wavelength division multiplexing. And what this basically does is it takes light, which is the typical medium for sending down fibre optics, sends it through a prism, breaks it down to its component colours, and you send a message down each one of those component colours. So you can imagine
Some people believe that the growth in broadband will be in the wireless, and I agree with that. It gives huge opportunities. And not only wireless and hand-held but creation of your backbones of wireless as well. I think the province of Alberta has made the commitment to work with some of the major providers, not just providing service but providing that broadband service.
[1855]
So how does this affect rural B.C.? As the member commented, he would like to see -- and I agree with him -- more services to rural B.C. It would have a huge impact on these communities. To improve the skills of everyone
We have some of the technology in place right now. Some of the institutions -- the Centre for Curriculum Transfer and Technology -- would be able to give value to these various courses. E-business and e-commerce would be accessible to rural B.C. not only for purchasing but for selling products and services. And you'd be able to live in some of the beautiful parts of this country, this province, and still have access and still do your business from home. Obviously another advantage to this, of course, would be e-government, on-line services -- to be able to access government services. Seven-by-24 government, where you'll be able to change your driver's licence, access information on health care
The Speaker: Thank you, member. To reply, the hon. member for Bulkley Valley-Stikine.
B. Goodacre: I want to thank the member for his comments and express to him that I find his knowledge of the matter incredibly impressive. Hopefully more and more people in this chamber will speak the way he has about this particular issue. In wrapping up, I'd like to read into the record a few things about the moves that have been made by both the federal and provincial governments in terms of meeting commitments to connect folks in our more remote areas.
All telephone switches in B.C. are now digital. Going back to 1995, there were 52,000 party lines in the province, and that has been reduced to 2,600 or so. Communities with no service -- in the 80 to 90 range in 1995 -- are down to 54. There were seven libraries providing public access in 1995. Now every single library and school in British Columbia has access. PLNet coverage is at 1,800, and the rest -- up to 1,900 -- will be connected this year. That is a sign that our province is taking this need very seriously. I don't want to neglect the federal government in this issue, because they have done a very wonderful job in helping communities in our region.
The CAP program is the program that they have used, the community access program. We drew up the list of the programs that CAP has provided here in British Columbia, and over 200 projects in British Columbia have been financed by our friends from Ottawa. So this is a wonderful issue in terms of commitment by all the provinces and the federal government in this country to make Canada one of the most wired countries in the world. In fact, they have been very successful, in that the United States is the only country that has a higher concentration of connectivity than this country.
One of the things, when we talk about penetration in this area, is that the cities get it first, and those areas that have yet to be serviced happen to be in ridings like Bulkley Valley-Stikine, Peace River North, Cariboo South and Cariboo North. Those are the prime constituencies in this, and in the North Coast riding outside of Prince Rupert.
[1900]
Actually, Prince Rupert is another success story that we should mention while we are talking about this issue, hon. Speaker, in that they have had their own telephone company for years and have been one of the leaders in rural British Columbia in connecting their own community.
I want to thank the House for listening to our presentation and hope that we're connected soon.
Hon. J. Kwan: I thank the members for their private members' statements and the replies. I call Committee of Supply in this House. For the information of the members, we're debating the estimates of the Ministry of Labour.
The House in Committee of Supply B; E. Gillespie in the chair.
The committee met at 7:04 p.m.
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF LABOUR
(continued)
On vote 38: ministry operations, $29,752,000 (continued).
D. Symons: I think we were dealing with issues of overtime and employees and so forth prior to our break, and I just want to carry on with that for a while. One thing that I noted happened fairly recently was that B.C. Ferries had to move the Queen of Nanaimo -- I believe it was the Queen of Nanaimo -- from Deas dock to the Tsawwassen terminal. Since the Queen of Nanaimo port is part of the inter-island services, they brought a crew down from Powell River to move the ferry. They paid eight hours regular time plus five hours overtime in order to move this ferry, because they have a ruling with the ferry union, obviously, about home-porting and where the crews of these ships come from. Instead of using a spare crew from the mainland service -- in other words, four hours of regular time -- they had to bring down this crew from Powell River and move it.
I'm just wondering if the minister might say whether that is the sort of situation that occurs in manning ships. When there's a problem of that sort
[ Page 16907 ]
the contracts what crew can man which ship and where they start from -- and indeed whether we have to pay them deadhead time to get them to the location where they might begin their work?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No.
D. Symons: I am told there was a move from Deas dock to the Tsawwassen terminal, where they actually brought a crew down to make that move from Nanaimo, paying them regular time and overtime rates for making that move, when there was a crew available in the local area of the Deas dock. If the minister would look into that, I'd appreciate it.
[1905]
I'm wondering whether there's also a problem with maintenance at B.C. Ferries, in the sense that they end up doing what I'll refer to as reactionary maintenance. That is, they wait till something breaks down, almost, rather than doing the regular maintenance on it. For instance, the clutch on the Queen of Cowichan, operating on the Nanaimo-Horseshoe Bay run, was giving some trouble a while back, and it operated for over a month before they actually repaired it. Earlier they had done a partial, hurried-up refit of that particular ship, and I gather that particular job was one of the ones that got left off the refit thing, and they ended up paying for it at a later date. Could the minister comment on that particular practice?
Hon. J. MacPhail: As the ships age, they require more maintenance, but in order to get the maximum use out of the ships' useful life and to cope with situations such as the member describes, the corporation is upgrading the maintenance programs. Therefore those situations are happening less and less.
D. Symons: Good. I'm glad to hear that. That may mean we'll cut down some of the downtime for ships. Particularly in the summertime, that can become a real problem. A couple of years ago, I think, the Queen of Nanaimo was down quite often on the Gulf Islands run in the summer, and it caused quite a bit of disturbance to the users of that particular service.
I've got a variety of questions here, most of which have come from concerns expressed to me by employees of B.C. Ferries. One of the things that I know you're dealing with in the current negotiations is the whole concept of casual employees. It seems to be a problem where some of these employees have been working for B.C. Ferries in excess of seven years and they don't really have any form of permanency or job security.
So I'm wondering if this might create within the corporation sort of an attitude of "I'm only here for the paycheque, because they don't owe me any loyalty and I don't owe them any loyalty." I'm wondering if this idea of having employees who seem to be working full-time but are still classified as casual might have a negative effect on employee morality -- morale, rather -- in the Ferry Corporation. I won't talk about the other. [Laughter.]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Again, I would ask the member opposite if he could indulge this process that actually
D. Symons: Yes, and I didn't think that asking about employee morale would possibly be interpreted that way, but that's fine.
There's also some concern expressed about the autonomy at each terminal. And if the minister tells me this is also part of the discussion, that's fine; we'll deal with it another time. But there are people that feel that in a sense the different terminals and operations out of them operate almost as independent or separate companies. So the interterminal utilization of resources isn't used that much, and that would allow cross-training and opportunities for promotion. If things weren't sort of centralized out of one terminal, then people would find it easier to access training at other locations and opportunities for promotion at other locations.
There seems to be a feeling among some of the employees that because of the way things seem to work out of terminals, employee access to training programs and promotion seems to be limited because of that. I'm wondering if you might comment on whether that's before the union now or whether that's indeed the case or whether these employees are mistaken -- or what the case is there.
[1910]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, actually, yes, employees are trained at their own terminal because that's where they work, and it makes more sense to do that than do central training. However, as I said earlier, the training program across the corporation is being revamped.
D. Symons: I'm wondering, in that, as you're saying, "works out of a terminal," whether employees then accrue seniority in a given position in one terminal. Therefore, they might be more senior to a similar position in another terminal, but they don't have the seniority count in getting a promotion. They can't go to a different terminal. The seniority will only count in theirs. Does this discourage people who are on a career path? Where they're at, they're deadlocked because of the people who are above them. There's nowhere for them to move there. Their seniority doesn't count in other locations in the corporation.
Hon. J. MacPhail: I offer the member a copy of the collective agreement. I'll make sure he gets that before we convene estimates after today. All of these are issues of the collective agreement, and those answers can be found in the collective agreement.
D. Symons: This one I don't think is, but maybe you'll inform me if I'm wrong there. I'm wondering if there's any thought of basically downsizing or even removing the operation of Deas dock and putting that into the private shipyards, which are in need of work because right now we don't have a ferry building program going with the fast ferries, anyway. It's been greatly reduced. A lot of the maintenance work and certainly the annual refits could be done by the private sector. In addition to that, if you could then end up having the crews do more of the maintenance on board ship while they're there,
[ Page 16908 ]
this would give them a more personal contact to the ship and a little bit more, I guess, pride in their vessel -- if they were part of the keeping the vessel shipshape as well. It would also be a way, I think, of increasing morale in the Ferry Corporation, if you could get some of that maintenance done on board either during working hours or, indeed, if you might have people on board, a new crew on board after hours -- have it done
Hon. J. MacPhail: There are no plans to move Deas dock into the private sector; however, there are no plans to expand Deas dock either. Given that it's the status quo at Deas dock, all increased maintenance will be done in the private sector, and there will be a substantial amount of it.
D. Symons: I'm pleased with part of the answer. I guess I'm concerned about the words at the end -- "a substantial amount." But indeed the fleet is getting older, and that is good if you're going to be looking after the ships.
Last question in this particular set
Moving again into labour relations -- and I think this is okay because it's past history I'm asking. How many grievances were filed by the union against B.C. Ferries in 1999?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll get that information for you.
D. Symons: And in looking for that information, if we could find out how many of those went to arbitration and how many of those that did go to arbitration were won by the union. So if you could add those in too, I would appreciate that.
I understand that the union called for an industrial inquiry in 1998. Could the minister maybe explain why the union went to that unusual step of calling for an industrial inquiry into the Ferry Corporation?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I have no idea. Perhaps the member could ask the union. I can't possibly speak for the union.
[1915]
D. Symons: I'm very much surprised that B.C. Ferries would not be aware if somebody else has filed for an industrial inquiry, that the corporation would not have been informed of that either by the union or by the Labour Relations Board or whoever does industrial inquiries. But I will ask the union that, then.
Can you tell me when the last contract expired and when that particular contract had been signed?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The collective agreement expired on October 31, 1998. And is the member asking when, at the beginning of the contract, it was signed? We'll make sure we get that information for you.
D. Symons: I'm curious about the current
You're in negotiations now with the B.C. Ferry Corporation and the ferry workers union. Can you tell me when that particular contract -- which I believe is now expired -- expired?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Sorry, that was the information I gave the member. The most recently expired collective agreement expired on October 31, 1998. The corporation and the B.C. Ferry and Marine Workers Union have been without a collective agreement since October 31, 1998. So if the information is about the previous contract, which would be back in the mid-nineties, I'll get that information for the member.
D. Symons: I guess that maybe I was unclear in the question. All right, the last contract they had expired on October 31, 1998 -- that is a year and a half ago, roughly. I was asking when it was signed, because I gather it was signed about a year ago, if that.
Hon. J. MacPhail: After it expired.
D. Symons: Yeah, the previous contract expired
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'm sorry.
D. Symons: Are they three-year contracts normally?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The term of the collective agreement is a bargainable item.
D. Symons: I was under the impression that they were three-year contracts. If they were, I'm curious
Hon. J. MacPhail: I appreciate the member's advice.
D. Symons: I wish I could give you some advice on how not to get into that box, and at this moment I think that's something that would be deeper than we could go into here.
I think there are some concerns, and the reason I was asking a lot of these question is because there are concerns among many people -- and I know the minister and the Corporation share them -- that any sort of service disruption, or indeed just the thought or the threat of service disruptions, has a really bad effect upon tourism particularly here on the Island. So I wasn't asking these out of any issue to do with trying to involve myself in the union negotiations, other than saying that we have this problem that the long-term effects of any service disruption are pretty bad. It doesn't only affect this
[ Page 16909 ]
year, but it can affect years coming, because tour providers from various areas will not sort of send people back in this direction if they experience a bad situation in one given year of tourism. So somehow we have to find a way that there's certainty in there that this won't occur.
[1920]
I'll move on, then, from that. I'm looking next at "Business Diagnostic: Administrative Processes -- Stakeholder Presentation, October 1, 1998." I realize that is a few years old, but if we can take a look at what has happened in the interim, between then and now, that would be appreciated.
There are just three little comments I want to make out of here. One of them, if you happen to have the document there
Under the general observations, it's the very first one. I was just going to comment about: "Safety measures are not implemented at a level that drives accountability and enforces positive behaviour." Under that, it's got a subpoint: "Safety measures by terminal are only just being implemented despite the fact that this was identified as a priority in the 1995 strategic plan." Apparently it took around three years to say they are just beginning to be implemented, and I'm wondering what the present state is, then, of these safety measures that they're showing concerns for. Are they fully implemented? Or if there was an internal audit done now, would it come up with the same comment?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The corporation has completed the International Safety Management Code program, and it's been audited.
D. Symons: On page 31, "Human Resources." I won't go into the middle one here, other than just to read it, and then we'll skip down to the bottom one: "Labour relations within the corporation have deteriorated recently. Arbitrations have increased considerably over the past two years." Remember, this is '98 and years previous to it that we're talking about here. I think from comments we've talked about a few minutes ago, dealing with labour relations, that may not be too much different today, but I gather you're working on it.
But the last item in that column, "Observations" says: "Performance measure to evaluate employer effectiveness and employee satisfaction within the corporation are not evident." I think the two that I read there might be tied together, but it says that these performance measures are not evident. What has been done about that particular observation?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I think it's safe to say that since this report was done, which is almost two years ago, employer/employee relations have improved at the corporation. But I also want to put on the record that the priority for the corporation is customer satisfaction. With the change in management and board, the priority is for customer satisfaction.
D. Symons: I guess in an ideal world we'd have both satisfactions in there, which I'm sure you're striving for. I did mention at the beginning that I know I'm asking things from the report two years ago, but what I am asking is the current state of the observations that were made back then. I was hoping you would end up being able to say that these things have been fully addressed or they're being worked on or indeed we're still at that stage. If the minister's being honest and the staff honest with me, that would be great, if that's the case.
If we can go on to page 32, "Strategic and Corporate Planning." Under this there's been a strategic planning process in place, but it says halfway down: "Performance measures, to the extent that they are evident within the plan" -- I think that's an important phrase there -- "are less than effective -- too high a level to force accountability at a department level." As well, 19 of the 40 measures identified in the 1995 strategic plan are still being developed. It is difficult to track the corporation's progress toward the strategic goals. Have you managed to get something where you can track progress toward strategic goals? And how is that process working?
[1925]
Hon. J. MacPhail: There is a set of performance measures in the performance plan this year, and they have been changed along with the change in the customer focus.
D. Symons: I'm glad to hear that. Indeed, I would expect that any performance measures would change as time goes along. As you reach certain plateaus or goals, then you'll want to continue with new ones. Again, this was two years ago, based on something that was three years prior to that, and it didn't seem at that time there'd been a great deal of movement, from the comment made in the internal audit. You're indicating that you moved closer to that, which moves us very nicely on to the 2000-01 performance plan.
I will be making a comment on page 26 of that document. To give you an idea of where I'm going with these particular questions, you're identifying in here some productivity measures that the corporation is putting into their performance plan now. I guess I want to find out where the base is going to be for these, so that when I come back next year and ask some questions
The first one under there is "Traffic carried per operational employee." I'm wondering, then, if you might be able to tell me, for that particular figure -- if you have a figure for last year -- if you've gone back to last year and worked out this particular performance measure, the traffic carried per operational employee, or indeed whether the base for that measurement is going to start with this fiscal year. Have you gone back one year to start a figure there, or is it going to start with this particular year?
Hon. J. MacPhail: These are new measures that arise out of the new budget, and so the base is the calculation that was calculated for this budget.
D. Symons: Do you have a goal for this fiscal year, then -- a figure you can give us?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No, not for the first year, and then this will be an annual review.
[ Page 16910 ]
D. Symons: So I'm gathering from that answer, then, that a year hence, we will not be able to know whether there's been any movement toward that goal, because you don't have anything to measure it against. Next year will be the first year; the year after will be the first year to know how we've moved. So, really, it's two years into the future till we can see whether you're achieving anything in your performance plan.
The same sort of question then deals with the
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes. That will be based on current rates. There are rates for that.
D. Symons: I'm wondering if the minister might share the last fiscal year rate with us. Again, you may not have it here, but if that's the case, I would expect you would be willing to send it. Thank you very much.
I did notice the one thing in here that was missing, and I thought it would tie in with something I asked earlier. I didn't see in here any rate of overtime versus regular hours, and I think that might be something, since we discussed earlier the problem of overtime
[1930]
Then, if I can skip back to page 27, there's another one called "Passenger-related safety claims." I'm wondering, then, if the minister might be able to give me an idea. The measure here is received per 100,000 passengers carried. I'm wondering if there were a number of insurance claims in the '98-99 or '99-2000 year and if you might be able to tell me how many insurance claims the corporation might have had in each of those fiscal years -- the past two fiscal years.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, that is available. We'll get it for the member.
D. Symons: I really didn't expect the minister to have those figures here, but I want it on record that I've asked for them. At the same time, for fiscal '97-98, '98-99 and possibly -- I'm not sure, really, if you have it yet -- '99-2000, the total number of insurance claims paid out
I think we can move on to the next one here. I wanted to speak next, if I can, about the Skeena Queen and some of the problems we had there. From the time that that program was started on the Skeena Queen till the time that the ship actually was put in the water and in operation, the price of the ship increased by 25 percent, roughly. I'm looking at a document again, if I can find it here somewhere. I'm not finding a date on this, but "Century-Class Ferry: Forecasted Costs" is the title. I don't have a reference for you, but the first one says:
So between '95 and September of '96, we're looking at a 25 percent increase in the cost of that vessel. I'm wondering, you know"The B.C. Ferry Corporation board of directors approved a budget of $18 million in May of 1995 to design, build and deliver a 100 car, 600 passenger ferry. In September '95, the contract to construct the ferry was awarded to the lowest bidder for $19.8 million, and the forecasted cost of the program was revised to $21.9 million. In September 1996, the forecasted costs were reviewed and finally estimated at $22.6 million."
Hon. J. MacPhail: These are matters that occurred four years ago. I'd actually be happy to get the information. Perhaps the member could spend the rest of his time giving us the series of questions. We'll write them down, and the rest of estimates could be getting that information. I'm not personally prepared to answer these questions at this time. I wasn't expecting them, that being four years ago. But I'm happy to get the information for him.
D. Symons: My concern is that I believe the Skeena Queen is going to be somewhat a model of the first ship you're going to be building under your capital plan that you have in mind, spreading over this year and the next fiscal year. I think the relevance of the building of this particular ship is directly relevant to the plans you have for the coming fiscal year in your capital plan. So that was the reason for this, and I'll just pass on.
If you want the other ones, it seems there have been tank-test design changes. The thing that amazes me is that apparently you found out somewhere along the line that the ship was going to be difficult to load -- this is after you had done all the design and had begun on it -- and that due to high tides, the vessel wouldn't fit too well into the terminal where you were going to put the vessel into service.
It seems that if we look at the budget for the planning, they only spent half the money that was budgeted for it on planning. The other half obviously went to somewhere else. The design -- they had an 83 percent increase in what they had budgeted for design. So on the planning, they only spent half what they budgeted, and on design, 83 percent more. Project supervision went to 145 percent of what they had budgeted for. I'm wondering where all that almost 50 percent extra supervision came from. Hotel services were $600,000. There seem to be all sorts of things here.
[1935]
Maybe you can answer one question -- it is relevant, I think, to now -- to do with the Skeena Queen. What was the cause of the vibration and the premature engine wear that caused that ship to be taken out of service for a few months to have some major repairs done?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The engine mounts.
D. Symons: I'm wondering, then, if you can tell me who is liable for the cost of the repairs and the modifications that were necessary. I believe it was $2.5 million.
Hon. J. MacPhail: There hasn't been a determination of liability yet. The tests are not complete.
[ Page 16911 ]
D. Symons: Tests are not completed, did the minister say? Or is there a legal argument in here?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No, I was referring to the tests on the work. The ship has only been back in commission for a few weeks.
D. Symons: And does the liability of paying for those repairs depend upon the outcome of these tests? In other words, if the tests go great, B.C. Ferries is paying for it. If the tests don't go great, the shipyard's paying for it. I'm just looking at the repairs that were done, not whether you might have to go back in for some further work because the tests don't prove out.
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's a factor.
D. Symons: I have had an answer, but I'm not quite sure what the answer says. It's a factor, then
Hon. J. MacPhail: The tests are a factor in determining the nature of the original problem and if indeed there was any liability in that -- and if there was liability, whose liability it is.
D. Symons: I'll take that as an answer that we're still out on that. Indeed, it may be the taxpayer, or the Ferry Corporation, that might end up with the $2.5 million claims -- or possibly more.
Just a couple of others. With these, again, the minister might claim that she wasn't there when this took place, but I think they're interesting facts. I have some purchase orders here from B.C. Ferry Corporation. I'm just wondering if it's from CFI. No, it's the Ferry Corporation. These are dated this year. That's good -- January 7, 2000. I've attached this one. Oh, sorry, it's December 31, 1999 -- not bad. What I have here is an order for some pens, apparently with the fast ferry
[1940]
I beg your pardon. Let's get this one right and do the right one here. November 2, 1999. This is an order for lapel pins -- Pacificat lapel pins. There is one order for $1,669.20. Then a day later they ordered 300 more of them, so we get a total of 1,100 pins. If you add the two figures up, we get $2,295.15. I realize that's chicken feed in the cost of the fast ferries, but I'm wondering why the Ferry Corporation wanted 1,100 Pacificat pins for the Pacificats -- and while we're at it, why they wanted 25,000 balloons for $2,883.69. It seems that for some ferries that didn't prove to be too much
I guess floating that trial balloon didn't work; I didn't get the minister up. Can we look at the Tachek? There was a gasoline spill back on February 2, I believe it was. I'm curious if the minister might tell us, because it was discovered after the ferry had been taken from the site of the spill
Hon. J. MacPhail: It occurred in what is called the void area of the ship, where people don't go, and to the best of the corporation's knowledge, the crew was not put at risk.
D. Symons: Well I'm sure that at the time the crew wasn't aware of it, so at that time, to the best of their knowledge
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes.
D. Symons: I assume yes means that the Coast Guard was involved and they suggested the ship should be moved or allowed the ship to be moved. I'm wondering now, because normally the void areas are sealed and it's supposedly, then, not accessible, in the sense the gasoline should not have got in there
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, these are areas where people don't go, as I said. But there are hatches to get to where the leak occurred.
D. Symons: Yes, my question is that
I'll move on to another question then. This is going to the B.C. Trucking Association. I'm sure that the corporation is aware that the B.C. Trucking Association is concerned about the fact that they do business with customers who, for various purposes
According to what I was told, they say they're waiting for regulation or cabinet approval of changes to the regs for this to happen. But they've been waiting quite a long time. Could the minister give me some idea as to whether they're waiting unnecessarily because it's not going to happen, or whether this is being worked on, or where this situation of a blended rate for commercial vehicles
[ Page 16912 ]
[1945]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, I met with the Trucking Association, and I'm certainly well aware of their issues and sympathetic on many. Cabinet will be considering this matter in the very near future.
D. Symons: Also, there's a lady who wrote to me a while ago, and I thought she had a fairly good suggestion. She's put together a travel book that has ferry fares, the routes they run and so forth. Now, B.C. Ferries puts out individual ones for them and has them on the ferries, but this one gets distributed quite widely around North America through travel agents, hotels and so forth. They cost money, which ours don't.
She approached B.C. Ferries with the idea of carrying these in the gift shops on B.C. ferries. Apparently Washington State and other ferries carry them, and there's brisk sales in them. It's called the Ferry Traveller Booklet. She puts it out. And because she was rebuffed with her first approach to B.C. Ferries, she suggested: "We'll put them there on the ferries. I'll give them to you. Just pay for the ones sold, so there's no cost to the Ferry Corporation of buying things up front. We'll see how well it goes and then do an experiment for a while and test it out." Apparently she was turned down on that proposal as well.
So I'm just wondering if the minister might be able to tell us why, if somebody's offering something as a trial at no cost to the Ferry Corporation, the Ferry Corporation would not be willing to take part in such a trial.
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'm sure the corporation gets many offers such as that; all businesses do. And businesses have a way of allocating space in a fair manner. I'm sure the member isn't taking this woman's case up with a great deal of fervour, because he knows full well that space in the gift shop has to be planned according to customer desire. Just because people offer free products on a consignment basis, the corporation can't say: "Oh, that's a good idea."
D. Symons: I'm just wondering if you might be able to give me some information regarding some, I gather, renovations being done to B.C. Ferries headquarters here in Victoria. I gather the renovation is to the corporate offices. Can you give me an idea of what's being done in that respect?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The building needs seismic upgrading. It is part of the emergency preparedness plan of the community. In the course of this seismic upgrading, the corporation is going to also adjust the office space to government standard. That will allow for greater use of office space -- more efficient use -- and we'll be able to continue downsizing the amount of office space. There were four offices before, and now there are two. This change will either allow the corporation to expand in this building, as needs require, without going to another building or actually allow it to collapse to just one building.
D. Symons: I wonder if the minister might be able to give me
[1950]
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's $2.3 million.
D. Symons: I'll have to go back to the person I was talking to and tell them they'd better learn to estimate better than that. That's amazing. How much of that is for the seismic upgrading? I would gather that the larger portion of that might be the seismic upgrading.
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's $1.5 million.
D. Symons: That brings it down, because I was told it had more to do with the other renovations than that aspect of it.
Another question here relates to the Nanaimo terminal office. It goes back to my comments earlier about bidding on processes and getting services and so forth. I gather that the Nanaimo terminal had a tile floor put in the building recently. Apparently, from what I gather, there was no bidding on it, nothing other than somebody phoning three or four of the various flooring companies and then awarding the bid by what they were told over the telephone. So I'm just wondering if that's the normal way of doing things. Or do you have people put in written statements what they're going to do, rather than just using a telephone call and taking the person that you decide you like best from the telephone call?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Depending on the size of the job -- and it sounds like this was a small one -- the process that was followed is the normal process.
D. Symons: There seems to be a problem -- this has occurred before, and I've notified the CEO of B.C. Ferries, but it seems to happen again -- where you have ferries that leave late from Horseshoe Bay, by a half hour or something of that sort. In this case, as happened once before, one of the customers asked if they would phone ahead to the Earls Cove ferry and say: "It's leaving late. Can you hold the ferry for a while in order that the cars will have a chance to get from Langdale up to Earls Cove to get the ferry across, rather than have to miss that ferry and wait a few hours more?"
I'm wondering if you might be able to give me an idea of whether that whole process can be tightened up when there's a delay in one of the ferries. I realize the Langdale one might be a problem. But certainly going the other way, up toward Powell River
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, it is a judgment call, because not all passengers on the second ferry would also have taken the first ferry. So it's a judgment call, and the judgment call should be customer-focused.
D. Symons: I'm wondering if the minister might be able to give me an idea whether there's some way, from the tickets sold, that you know they're carrying on to the Earls Cove one? Do you survey the passengers on the ferry? How do you have any idea when you're making a judgment call as to whether you end up
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'm wondering if we're ragging the puck here, waiting for something else. It does seem to be an
[ Page 16913 ]
inefficient use of our time. I assume we are. I wouldn't mind recessing, if the member wants to just do that. The crew knows what cars are in the parking lot.
Why don't we have a recess, hon. Chair?
The committee recessed from 7:55 p.m. to 8:03 p.m.
[G. Robertson in the chair.]
V. Roddick: The single biggest issue from Delta's perspective is traffic and the impact it has had on the community. Traffic to the Tsawwassen ferry terminal has more than tripled in the last ten to 15 years. The majority of the increase was a result of the addition of route 30, Tsawwassen-Nanaimo, which diverts significant traffic from route 2, Horseshoe Bay-Nanaimo. The use of the fast cat vessels on route 2 has compounded the problem, as even more traffic, especially trucks, must use route 30. As a result, the Tsawwassen ferry terminal, which now operates 21 hours a day, is the busiest passenger ferry terminal in all of North America.
This increased traffic has had significant impact on the community, as there has been virtually no transportation infrastructure improvement made to mitigate this traffic. Highway 17 has significant capacity problems, particularly at 52nd Street and 56th Street and Ladner Trunk Road signal lights at grade intersections. The single-lane westbound stretch between 56th and the ferry causeway further restricts traffic, and under certain conditions it can be somewhat of a hazard, to say the least.
The Delta situation is contrasted with significant infrastructure improvements at the three other major B.C. Ferry terminal sites. Highway 17, Pat Bay, connecting the Swartz Bay terminal to Victoria, has been upgraded significantly over the years. And the highway infrastructure built to connect the Duke Point terminal to the new Vancouver Island Highway provides an extremely high level of service.
Lastly, the Lonsdale and Westview interchanges, built to replace signal lights at grade intersections on Highway 1, significantly mitigated Horseshoe Bay ferry traffic impact throughout North Vancouver. It's ironic but unfortunate that Delta has been the most impacted of the four terminal sites and has been neglected with respect to transportation infrastructure.
[2005]
In this regard, Delta council has suggested on numerous occasions that a dollar-per-car or a two-dollar-per-truck levy be imposed on traffic travelling through Tsawwassen ferry terminal to generate revenue for infrastructure improvements. If the minister and the Ministry of Transportation and Highways will not help Delta South with upgrading this infrastructure, I would like to make a request yet again on behalf of Delta South: will the minister impose a levy on traffic at the Tsawwassen terminal so that we can improve our infrastructure?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, it is an interesting concept. I understand it's a motion from council, and I wonder whether there was a referendum done on it. If there was, I'd be very interested in that from Delta council.
There's no question that, as the traffic grows, the Ministry of Transportation and Highways has to work with Ferries to deal with the problems. I think it's safe to say that the new management of the corporation are onto it. They've met with the staff of Delta city council. I would be happy to continue that work and work with the member to resolve this problem.
V. Roddick: I will pass that information on, and hopefully we can get on with something that will help Delta South.
The next problem here is a differential fee structure, and I'm hoping you can help me with this. As we understand, B.C. Ferries implemented a differential fee structure during the lead-up to the fast cat service, which provided a financial incentive for commercial truck operators to use route 30 rather than route 2. We have been advised recently by B.C. Ferries staff that this differential fee was being discontinued. However, attached is a copy of material distributed at a B.C. Ferries open house in West Vancouver on June 13. It is the Horseshoe Bay terminal improvement program update, June 2000. And it says on page 4: "As in the past, on summer weekends a 25 percent surcharge on overheight vehicles travelling from Horseshoe Bay to Nanaimo, designed to encourage traffic to divert to route 30, will apply."
Delta is opposed to any differential fee structure that provides incentives for truckers or overheights to use the Tsawwassen ferry terminal as opposed to the Horseshoe Bay terminal. Will the minister please stop the sort of them-and-us, cat-and-mouse game and cancel the differential fee structure between Horseshoe Bay and Tsawwassen?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The differential does apply. This is, of course, the classic issue of "not in my backyard." Perhaps it's the Liberal opposition's position that ferry service shouldn't operate anywhere, because it certainly doesn't seem that they want to have any growth of ferry service at all. There is a serious situation at Horseshoe Bay, and the situation is acute -- I would say more acute than in Delta. The Ferry Corporation is doing its best to deal with these issues. I would say that the differential remains.
V. Roddick: I'm sorry to hear that. Being from Delta South, I can't agree with the minister that the situation is more acute in Horseshoe Bay than it is in Delta South. I would appreciate if you could look into the differential.
[2010]
Based on the B.C. Assessment Authority system, the annual municipal taxes payable for the Tsawwassen ferry terminal would be about $1.04 million, while the annual grant from B.C. Ferries is only $220,000. Given the significance of the Tsawwassen terminal to B.C. Ferries operation, together with the impact on the community, Delta maintains that the B.C. Ferry Corporation should increase its grant-in-lieu to be the equivalent of full taxation. This would make the Ferry Corporation consistent with other senior government agencies in Delta, such as the Vancouver Port Authority, Delta Port terminal.
Will the minister follow the rule set down by our own B.C. Assessment Authority system -- which every other BC'er has to adhere to -- and enable Delta South to collect its fair share of taxes, which would help us with all the problems that the ferries are creating in the traffic and the infrastructure?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Crown corporations across government pay grants-in-lieu. But if this is an issue that the member would wish to bring up with the UBCM about changing the system, I think she should do that.
[ Page 16914 ]
V. Roddick: I'm sorry. Could you please explain that to me? I don't understand what you just said.
Hon. J. MacPhail: That's fair enough. Crown corporations don't pay taxes; they pay grants in lieu of taxes. That's a governmentwide policy, and I think it's standard practice throughout Canada as well. If the member is suggesting that that practice should be discontinued and that the system revert to a payment of taxes by Crown corporations, that's an issue that perhaps should be taken up through the UBCM.
V. Roddick: I just didn't catch what you had said. What I meant was that the grant-in-lieu
Hon. J. MacPhail: I accept your position on this. I doubt that there will be change on it. My understanding is that most of the infrastructure is provincial infrastructure. I'm not sure about the municipal roads. These are the kinds of issues that need to continue to be discussed between the corporation and the council. I think it's worthwhile.
V. Roddick: Delta has been very frustrated, as you can tell, in the past at the lack of communication and consultation on B.C. Ferry Corporation's operational and management issues. Progress was made four or five years ago by administrators from Delta, Saanich, Nanaimo and West Vancouver, along with former B.C. Ferries president, Frank Rhodes, on a draft B.C. Ferries protocol agreement to address some of these issues. However, we -- we being Delta South -- were recently advised that the current B.C. Ferries administration now intends to deal with terminal site host communities individually.
Regardless of the method chosen, B.C. Ferries significantly affects Delta South. It is imperative that we establish a cooperative working relationship. Will the minister undertake this initiative as soon as possible -- i.e., even immediately, if that's possible?
[2015]
Hon. J. MacPhail: I think there has recently been a change, though, in that. Yes, I think the proposal is excellent, and the corporation is moving in that direction.
V. Roddick: The causeway leading to Tsawwassen ferry terminal is owned by the Ferry Corporation and provides the opportunity for very good public beach and water access. Delta has for several years, without success, requested that the B.C. Ferry Corporation create a ferry causeway park as an amenity for Delta residents. From our perspective, the causeway would be a minor issue in the corporate scheme of B.C. Ferries that would provide significant benefit to the community, which in turn would pay public relations dividends to the Ferry Corporation big time.
Minister, we need to establish, as I said earlier, a cooperative working relationship. This would be an excellent start. Will the minister give Delta South the go-ahead for a causeway park right now?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The causeway is a road to take ferry traffic to the ferry terminal. It would be an interesting dilemma to add more traffic to that causeway that has nothing to do with ferry traffic. I think the congestion would increase in that area. I mean, people do use the side of that causeway as a beach access now. I don't want to hold out any hope for the member on this one. Also, I'm not sure that I would be suggesting to the Ferry Corp, which just recently got on sound financial footing, to allocate funds in this way. Maybe, I must say, in the future as they go into a profitable situation, the request will be kept on the list.
V. Roddick: I hope you keep that in mind, because it is the side of the ferry. The next time you go, look as you're coming off the ferry to Delta South, and it's on your right-hand side. It's always packed with campers. They go anyway, and it would be much better if we could have a proper setup. The traffic's going to be there. Actually it's much better. There's a light there, the whole nine yards, and parking areas on the Tsawwassen first nation land for ferry traffic. So it's not a huge investment, and it would be an excellent public relations move.
Because of the incredible increase in traffic due to the ferries, I asked in Transportation and Highways estimates, and I'm asking you to work with Highways for two relatively inexpensive helpers, if you will, to augment our living traffic nightmare in Delta South: one, signage that allows no trucks on Highway 10 -- local traffic only that can access Boundary Bay Airport and the farming community that's there; two, have signage up so that the trucks stay in the right-hand lane when they go from Highway 99 to the ferries and from the ferries back to Highway 99. They're now racing, so that you could actually have four lanes: two trucks going this way and two trucks coming this way. It would be a terrific help and it's very inexpensive -- just the signage.
[2020]
The second thing is: please work with the Minister of Highways, because of the traffic, to paint the inside of the tunnel white and put some brighter lights in the bottom of it. Again, it's not a huge investment, and the safety factor is enormous. The traffic that pours through that tunnel, to and from the ferries, is huge.
This would certainly help Delta South, seeing that we have no spinoffs whatsoever. We don't even have the drydock facilities to repair the vessels. For heaven's sakes, the ferry hospital is in Richmond. Will the minister work with Highways, paint the tunnel and give us the signage we so desperately need?
Hon. J. MacPhail: We'll certainly continue to work with Highways, but I can't make a commitment on the specifics of the proposal.
V. Roddick: Thank you, minister. I'd appreciate that.
The following issue has been a thorn in the side of Delta South for several years now, and I'm hoping the minister can help me on this point. It's the water at Tsatsu Shores. The cost-effectiveness of what we've been told is an in-house desalination plant is extremely questionable. Therefore it is seriously rumoured that B.C. Ferries has diverted some of its water, which Delta South supplies to you directly, to Tsatsu Shores. Will the minister clarify this situation? Where does Tsatsu Shores water come from, and does the B.C. Ferries actually supply them?
[ Page 16915 ]
Hon. J. MacPhail: It certainly doesn't ring any bells here, but we'll look into it.
J. Reid: Certainly an awful lot of the questions with regards to ferries in a broad sense have been covered off. Parksville-Qualicum is a very ferry-dependent community, so I'm going to try to stick to some very specific issues here.
There is a proposed $5 million facelift for Departure Bay terminal. I'd like to know what exactly is included in that $5 million facelift.
Hon. J. MacPhail: A new tower, a new building and some marine works.
J. Reid: Is there a time frame? Are they all going to be done in this next year? Is this part of a longer-term plan?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It's part of a longer-term upgrade of Departure Bay, which has been going on for a number of years. But these are the projects that are in this year's capital plan.
J. Reid: With the connector roads to the Departure Bay terminal, they have certainly been neglected as far as planning goes compared to, for example, the connector roads to the Horseshoe Bay terminal. As ferry traffic increases -- we understand that that's going on -- are there any plans to address the connector roads heading out of the Departure Bay terminal? Is that part of the plan? Is the Ferry Corporation considering that? And what's going to be done?
[2025]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, there have been discussions between Ministry of Transportation and Highways and Ferries about exactly these issues. The corporation will continue that work with the city as well.
J. Reid: I'm glad there are discussions. Is this moving ahead? Is there a plan to actually do something about it rather than discussions? I'm glad that, yes, this is recognized as certainly a problem in that area. For example, there are three traffic lights -- one right after the other -- that aren't synchronized and that just cause terrible hazards, especially because, of course, there's a hill coming up from there. So is there actually a plan being formulated to deal with this, rather than just discussions?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The discussions will lead to a plan that has the reasonable steps that can be taken. Of course, the changes will have to be led by the Ministry of Transportation and Highways.
J. Reid: Is there a time frame to go from discussion to plan? Are we looking at something in the next ten years? Can we look at something in the next two years? What would the minister suggest?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, I would say -- and I take the member's point that she probably agrees with this -- that as soon as action can begin, it will begin. But it probably will have to be staged.
J. Reid: I understand that B.C. Ferries will be re-evaluating the use of the fast ferries on the Departure Bay-Horseshoe Bay run after the summer season is over. Would the minister explain what factors are going to be used in that evaluation?
Hon. J. MacPhail: It would be the cost of operation and what amount of sailing needs to occur to keep them in condition and class, which means licensed.
J. Reid: Will this require more studies than already exist? Is there information to be gathered that hasn't already been gathered?
Hon. J. MacPhail: No.
J. Reid: There has been a suggestion that there could be a reservation-only policy for the Departure Bay-Horseshoe Bay run. My question is: what would B.C. Ferries do to garner public input into making that decision?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The idea that was discussed was an idea around a much broader reservation system than exists now. I know that the discussion publicly got a bit off the rails. People thought it was the equivalent of a price hike, because everyone would have to pay the $15 reservation fee. That's not the idea at all. So the corporation is now, first of all, examining whether a much-expanded reservation system can be accomplished in a cost-efficient manner. How does that reservation system fit into also allowing for people to board upon arrival without a reservation?
[2030]
The corporation will be working with those that would be most concerned about this issue, which would be the chambers of commerce and the tourism association. They're the ones that can best advise about whether this system will enhance ferry service for the economy. So that's what's happening right now.
Did the member ask what kind of public input
The contemplation was that it was actually
J. Reid: I certainly have heard from a lot of people who have concerns over having to be restricted to reservations. With regard to public input, has the minister considered something as simple as giving everyone who goes on the ferry for a period of time a card to fill out, so that you're actually getting input from the ferry users rather than relying on selected groups for that input?
[T. Stevenson in the chair.]
Hon. J. MacPhail: The member may be aware that the corporation just expanded the existing reservation system to go onto the Internet, and it's wildly successful. So it makes sense -- I think the suggestion is good -- to start by getting input on the current reservation system. But probably the member would agree that it would make sense only to us
[ Page 16916 ]
customers, ferry customers -- about input on a different kind of reservation system once the options have been decided. We're not there yet. But it's a good suggestion, after the options have been decided.
J. Reid: Definitely the Departure Bay-Horseshoe Bay route has been impacted by the fast ferries. Do you have a comparison for travel on that route -- say, from 1997, '98 and '99 -- as far as whether ridership has been stable, has gone up or gone down?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Yes, we do have stats on that. But just let it be clear that in the previous five years, ferry traffic generally has gone down on that route. I have no idea whether it's related or not, but in 1999 ferry traffic went up on that route. I don't know whether the member's trying to make a link of the introduction of the fast ferry service to a decrease in passengers, because it's not the case. The first year that the Pacificat service was introduced, the traffic went up. I'm not saying they're linked, but it's also not true that the Pacificats caused a decline.
J. Reid: Over the period of time when Duke Point was introduced, certainly that was to divert some of the traffic. The Greater Nanaimo Chamber of Commerce has also ascertained that the tourist traffic has been diverted and that when people have to go to Tsawwassen instead of coming to Nanaimo, they seem more often to be making a choice to go to Victoria. Whereas when they were welcome and felt that they wouldn't have any problem getting over on the Horseshoe Bay run, there was a greater traffic flow of tourists. Has B.C. Ferries done anything with regard to tracking those statistics?
[2035]
Hon. J. MacPhail: I don't think anyone knows where people went after docking. We know that the statistic the corporation does have is that when the Duke Point terminal was introduced and opened, traffic at Departure Bay fell by 19 percent. But as far as where people resided or went to spend their dollars after that, I think only the tourism association may have that information -- if at all. The corporation works very closely with the tourism association.
J. Reid: That leads very well into my next question, because it is the relationship between Tourism B.C. and B.C. Ferries that I would like to query. There has been frustration in the past that it doesn't seem that B.C. Ferries is adequately addressing the tourism needs on Vancouver Island with the use of the ferries. Could the minister explain the relationship between Tourism B.C. and B.C. Ferries, and how they actually do work together?
Hon. J. MacPhail: There are regular meetings, regular discussions, regular planning. In fact, a senior staff person from the B.C. Ferry Corporation sits on the Vancouver Island tourism association board.
J. Reid: What would be the biggest concerns that B.C. Ferry Corporation has with regard to tourism on Vancouver Island?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, it is interesting. First of all, the Ferry Corporation
The member may not have heard this earlier in the evening, but the corporation has shifted its focus to a complete customer focus. So that will very much put a new face on the corporation. One of the reasons why we started talking about a reservation system was to have a more reliable service, where people would, say, be able to plan their lives much better in getting to the Island. We also know how important it is that there not be disruptions to service and are doing everything possible to ensure against disruptions.
J. Reid: I have a few questions about a couple of other routes, a couple of other ferries. One is with the Powell River ferry connection. It has always puzzled me -- and I've witnessed this myself -- that going from Comox, taking the Powell River ferry, wanting to connect with the Sunshine Coast and having to take the ferry in Saltery Bay
[2040]
Hon. J. MacPhail: That timing is actually under review, and there's no question that that will be one factor that will be considered in the review. I'm sure the member is well aware that there are other connections that have to be considered, as well, in there. But it is under review.
J. Reid: I'm very glad to hear that.
My last question is with regards to the ferry to Denman Island. The minister might be aware that Baynes Sound has been seeking a designation as a no-dump zone, and B.C. Ferries had a concern with this because the ferry to Denman Island does dispose of its sewage into Baynes Sound. It's my understanding that B.C. Ferries is committed to working on this problem. Could the minister tell me what has happened and what the plan is for the sewage dumping in Baynes Sound with the Denman Island ferry?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I'll have to get the specifics of that situation for the member, but just to note that the new five-year capital plan includes a $15 million, 26-ship conversion to new environmental technology to deal exactly with the problem that the member raises. But I'll get the specifics of the situation that she raises.
J. Reid: Just one more. Actually, to slightly revisit the question, because I do think it's important, with the statistics
[ Page 16917 ]
period last year. The chamber of commerce has been looking at this problem, and they do believe that it is connected with the fast ferries and that there's been a problem with tour operators in getting tourists over to the Island.
The other problem is an image problem. People got the understanding that that route was very difficult to travel on, which indeed it was for a period of time. With the C-class ferries back on the route, what is B.C. Ferries doing to counteract that bad image problem?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I understand that there's a horse to flog here, but I think it's safe to say that that's leaping to conclusions -- unfounded. Eventually it may prove to be so, but it certainly isn't now. The rest of
The tourism association complained about the lack of airline service. My personal experience is that the airline service is contributing to a huge dilemma in travel and tourism in this country. Of course, I also did say that the traffic to Nanaimo was up in 1999 -- not by any great amount, by any stretch of the imagination, but for the first time in five years, it's up. And that's the same year that the Pacificats came into service. I'm not linking the two, but by the same token, I don't think people should link the two to say that it's adversely affecting tourism.
The point here is that it makes sense for the corporation and the Tourism Association of Vancouver Island to work together. That's in the best interests of everybody. I am constantly amazed at how we undervalue the tourism potential of our ships, even just by travelling on them. There's been a change at the corporation to embrace that point of view as well.
[2045]
The Chair: I recognize the member for Okanagan-Penticton.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Have you got a problem with your ferry?
R. Thorpe: I'm sorry, I didn't quite hear the minister. Usually the minister waits to hear the question before she answers. But then, this minister has been accused of being unique before.
Could the minister please confirm that there is a shortage of marine engineers at B.C. Ferries?
Hon. J. MacPhail: I did answer this question earlier in the day, so I'll just repeat it. No, there's no shortage; there's an adequate supply. There previously had been a shortage, but there's an adequate supply now.
R. Thorpe: I don't believe the question earlier was specific to marine engineers, but it may have been. So there's no anticipated shortage in the near future in looking at your manpower requirements. Do you look at those manpower requirements also with respect to your five-year capital plan?
Hon. J. MacPhail: That sarcasm of the last part of that question wasn't missed by me. Staffing requirements are unrelated to capital. Yes, I'm very worried about future trained staff -- in areas other than just the Ferry Corporation, as well. The Ferry Corporation is not an exception to this. The age of our trained personnel is increasing. There is a real requirement for corporations to start training much more, in a much better fashion, than perhaps has occurred over the decades of the eighties and the nineties. The corporation is well aware of that and is preparing by upgrading its training substantially.
R. Thorpe: I don't recall any sarcasm. If my words were misunderstood and misinterpreted by the minister, I certainly would apologize for that.
With respect to a system called Immpower, could we please be advised by the minister: how much money has been spent to date, how much do you anticipate spending in the future, and when will a final decision be made on this project?
Hon. J. MacPhail: The system so far has cost about $5.5 million, but the original estimate was about $12.6 million. So the corporation is at the point of spending $5.5 million. But the corporation is evaluating this system right now as part of its maintenance management system. That review will be completed later this summer. Just so you know, Immpower is a software package that consolidates data on labour, inventory, materials and equipment history. The corporation is continuing to use the program where it's presently operational, pending the outcome of the review.
R. Thorpe: When will that decision be made? Will it be made by the end of the summer? If that is correct, what is the Ferry Corporation planning to do, going forward? As I can recall, one of the things that required some attention at the Ferry Corporation was the management of maintenance costs. So what is going on? You're going to have a decision by the end of the summer or sometime around that.
But more importantly, where are we going into the future? If this is such a large cost -- some would argue that it's going to be larger than anticipated, because of the age of the fleet -- how are we going to have confidence that we're managing those costs on the ships and in the head office?
[2050]
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, in fact, those are the questions that need to be answered in the review, in our part of the review. The review will be used to answer those questions. The member is quite right. This system is there to
Now, of course, the member's probably aware that the Ferry Corporation, because it's a ferry corporation, presents unique challenges in this area because the vessels aren't stationary and normal communication links are not available. So the goal is for an efficient and effective asset management system, and that's what the plan is to put in place. This system will be reviewed on the basis of that goal.
R. Thorpe: Well, I wish I could allow you to move on here, but I just get
[ Page 16918 ]
maintenance costs at the B.C. Ferry Corporation in a timely way -- not months after the fact, but in a timely way -- so that management can respond to situations that are unexpected?
Hon. J. MacPhail: Well, yes. Actually, the corporation is confident that that goal can be achieved. There are challenges in getting there; there's no question about that. I would note that the change in management brings experience in achieving exactly this. The current CFO at B.C. Ferry Corporation did have to bring in a system such as this at B.C. Transit. As I said, Ferries is a different situation because the vessels are not stationary. Yes, I think that the corporation is confident of the outcome.
Noting the hour, hon. Chair, perhaps we should move the vote.
Interjection.
Hon. J. MacPhail: Oh, I see. I move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 8:54 p.m.
[2055]
The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.
Committee of Supply B, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
Committee of Supply A, having reported resolution, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. D. Lovick moved adjournment of the House.
The House adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM
The House in Committee of Supply A; D. Streifel in the chair.
The committee met at 2:50 p.m.
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY FOR CHILDREN
AND FAMILIES
(continued)
On vote 22: ministry operations, $1,500,955,000 (continued).
L. Reid: We left the debate last evening with the minister telling us that $7.5 million would be available to the community living sector. My question is: exactly how much of that $7.5 million will go to front-line service delivery?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The majority of the money will be going to front-line direct service.
L. Reid: The other issue I wanted to canvass today is services to street kids and the integration around that process. The minister may recall that in my opening remarks, I talked about pockets of excellence. There are some very, very superb programs operating in downtown south and downtown east side. One of the ones I want to reference particularly is the Watari group and their survival manual. The minister may recall that I spent the evening there on their Hard Night Out, the dusk-to-dawn orientation, if you will, for individuals who need to understand better how the issues come to play on the downtown east side and what the issues truly are for young people.
Certainly the issues that were brought home very strongly to me that evening were the issues around safety security and the issues around housing. This lovely information guide, this survival manual, talks about those kinds of issues. I have a number of other documents that talk about how to inspire or craft opportunities for young people to look for appropriate housing -- what that looks like, what kinds of dollars should change hands for exactly what they're getting.
I spent some time with Mark Tanzola, one of the downtown south housing folks, in terms of getting a handle on the kinds of services that are available. Again, there are some superb pockets of excellence, but it's a very fragmented process in terms of providing a leg up to kids who truly have some real desire to better themselves, to make some different choices, to have some choices that they don't currently have. What I want from this minister today is some sense that there is some coordinating effort underway to manage that.
I attended a meeting of service providers for the downtown south just this last week. There were probably 30 individuals in the room, all of them doing some wonderful, wonderful programming. The venue that brought them together was brand-new. It was something that doesn't happen routinely in the downtown east side or the downtown south. Individuals who need to avail themselves of those services have a heck of a time, a deuce of a time, discovering what's available. How you come to understand all those types and levels of service is a maze in and of itself. The fact that you can survive as a street kid, just trying to figure out how the process really works
It seems that over the years that I've been here, the government has placed that responsibility in a variety of different ministries. I know that the Volunteers minister has had a piece of it and the MSDES folks have had a piece of it. There have been varying degrees of success around a coordination-integration message.
Is the Ministry for Children and Families taking any responsibility, any leadership on that, in terms of at least making available to young people the grid of what's available in terms of service -- whether it be drug and alcohol, detox or particularly housing?
[1455]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: On several levels, the Ministry for Children and Families is involved with young people who are in and around the street scene. First of all, in most communities there are what are called Reconnect workers, whose job
[ Page 16919 ]
it is to talk to the kids and help reconnect them and help them work through how to make those changes that they're looking to make.
Secondly, Children and Families, along with B.C. Housing, is in fact developing a youth housing strategy. That is also part of a federal-provincial initiative on youth housing. We know, too, that in many communities the volunteer service sector puts out directories. I know that my constituency office has done one over the years -- a youth directory, which has now moved, and a seniors' directory. But that's moved into the volunteer sector.
I know that it's -- I agree with the member -- certainly one of the issues that comes up from time to time. I too did A Hard Night Out, only it wasn't in the downtown east side; it was in Victoria. It was an eye-opener in terms of how the young people manage on the street -- it's extraordinary, and my hat goes off to them -- but also how very difficult it is.
I think we need to be pressing forward on some of the initiatives. Some have happened in Victoria already. Pandora project has eight units for transient kids with mental disabilities -- mental illness of various kinds. There are other organizations that also have facilities. So I think it's a direction initiative that we're all keen to work on.
L. Reid: I appreciate the minister's comment on reconnect workers. That's the first time I've heard that term. I know that most of the folks that I met with that day have never heard that term, because they didn't have a clue how to find the individuals who might be able to put the puzzle pieces together for them.
So could I at some point request a list of who those folks might be for downtown south and for downtown east side? Let me know, frankly, what the turnover would be in those roles. The points I've been attempting to make since this debate began is that it's the durability of relationship that matters, which makes a difference in the lives of these kids. And if these individuals
I appreciate the minister suggesting that the constituency office had put out a directory. My question was more like: is there something that looks at perhaps Vancouver Island and something that looks at the lower mainland -- downtown south, downtown east side -- that someone within this ministry would have taken responsibility for -- not a single constituency office, but an actual person somewhere who I can make contact with to ensure that it does happen in the future?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: What we can say is that we occasionally provide some funds for some volunteer agencies who wish to put together some initiative like that. At this stage we have no plans, nor do we provide that for each individual region. It would be, in my view, up to the regions who wish to put something like that together, if they want do that and if it isn't already happening in some areas.
[1500]
I just wanted to read into the record a little more about what I chose to call Reconnect workers. They are indeed outreach support workers. Let me just describe a bit about what they do. They are intended to work with at-risk street, sexually exploited and alcohol-and-drug addicted youth, and to provide to skilled intervention, transitional support services to those youth wishing to exit the street for a healthier, safer lifestyle. Positions are intended to work in tandem with safe housing, youth drug and alcohol initiatives and on youth agreements.
In 1998, 24.5 FTEs were announced with the addition of four safe houses. It's my understanding that that program has been fully implemented in the 11 regions. In the Vancouver-Richmond region there is the equivalent of 4.5 FTEs. At this point I won't be providing any specific names, and I'm sure the member wouldn't be asking me for that. But they are in all regions -- one or two or 1.5 FTEs who have that responsibility and that undertaking. And it's a good idea.
We also have 34 -- and here's the title -- Reconnect programs existing in 29 individual communities: Abbotsford, Castlegar, Trail, Chilliwack, Courtenay, Cranbrook, Creston, Dawson Creek, Delta, Hope, Kamloops, Maple Ridge, Mission, North Vancouver, Nanaimo, Nelson, New Westminster and Osoyoos -- so some specific communities for which this role exists.
L. Reid: I thank the minister for the information. And yes, at some point I would like the names. If you could just send it over to my office, that would be helpful.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We don't provide names of workers.
L. Reid: Well, we will continue to have discussion. There has to be an opportunity for constituency offices to put in the hands of young people the names of people who would make good sense to them. If there's another process, I'm certainly open to receiving that as well.
My request is not complex when it comes to a directory of services. At the very least there must be a list of the agencies that the ministry provides funding to in the downtown east side. Would the minister share that with me at her
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes.
L. Reid: Thank you. That is the kind of information that these young kids are looking for: what kind of services are available? If the minister is prepared to say that her ministry hasn't taken responsibility for putting out a particular directory for a particular region, no problem. If they've got the list of all the services that the ministry funds, they would probably have a much better idea of the kinds of services that are available. I don't mind if you call it inventory as opposed to a directory, but I think it only makes sense to put that information into the hands of the young people who need it, as opposed to having them screwing around all over looking for information. That's a great chunk of their day, when it should be readily available, particularly if it's funded by this ministry, by the taxpayer or by the province. Why would we make it more difficult for them to get that information?
That's my concern. I certainly have not spent enormous amounts of time on the downtown east side, but I'm up to probably a dozen days of having had different opportunities, whether it was the needle exchange program or the life skills housing folks, trying to piece together some of the things. And
[ Page 16920 ]
it's always about misinformation. It's always about sending kids to programs that don't exist, giving them phone numbers that just ring endlessly and people not getting back to them.
There has to be a way to provide a process that's more transparent with a whole lot less frustration involved. That's not the case today. I'm sure the minister shares my frustration in that. The bottom line is that for the dollars that leave this ministry to fund programs, there has to be some way to get a sense of how successful that is in terms of putting the right information in the kids' hands at the right time.
Timeliness is the issue. We're going to be debating secure care legislation. Timeliness of adequate programming is going to be the issue around that debate. If we don't have it today, I'm not clear we're going to have it tomorrow. With the best of intention, this is about ensuring that there are some resources that people can easily put their hands on when it comes to wanting that service. That's what we expect. We expect kids to be able to avail themselves of this new legislation and then go forward. If there's nothing to find at the end of the tunnel, we haven't done very much in terms of delivering some reasonable programs.
[1505]
Some of the other issues I wanted to canvass today
It is written by Sharon Creech, and the picture is just an amazing picture of this little soul."Thirteen years ago today my family's life was changed forever. My daughter Emma was born with severe physical and mental disabilities. In the beginning I had no idea just how desperate our lives would become. I thought we were fortunate to have the at-home program come into being when Emma was three. I'm not so sure anymore. I have been provided the equipment and supplies that Emma requires to live with her family now that institutional care has been replaced with community living.
"From the beginning I have been the sole provider for my now 17-year-old son, Emma and my husband. I was totally accepting of the responsibility from the beginning
. . . However, I was unprepared for the strain Emma's disability would have. . . The first five years of Emma's life were difficult, but I was able to continue working while she attended the Pearkes preschool program."Unfortunately, as Emma got older, life became more difficult as the full extent of her disability became apparent. Her school years have been traumatic, ending in my needing to be at home to care for her on a daily basis. Emma's constant feeding, toileting, physio and her wide range of seizure activity made it impossible for her father to provide care on his own. We have been living on welfare ever since.
"I can't emphasize enough the negative impact these years of poverty have had on my family. The welfare system is not designed for long-term support such as ours. Our case worker at welfare continues to look for ways to help us further, but there is just no slot for us to fit into, so we fall through the cracks in the system.
"Emma's social worker with the at-home program has been very sympathetic to our situation as well. However, there is no provision to accommodate families such as ours. The ministry can provide a never-ending series of caregivers to invade my home and can care for Emma and provide a homemaker, even though that is not what my family needs. It would seem that the ministry is more concerned about providing paycheques for all the service providers than actually looking at the individual family and providing the necessary supports that are required.
"What good is having more respite, when I can't even afford to buy food? Even if I was to become Superwoman, welfare regulations won't allow me to earn even a small amount of money, nor am I eligible for the B.C. earned income benefit. After all, what I do daily in caring for Emma is only considered work if it's done by someone else. If your needs are somewhat unusual, then you receive no help at all.
"I'm told that I'm an exception, as most families do not want to provide the day-to-day, never-ending personal care that is required for their children. Personally, I can't think of a more rewarding job than caregiving. When I know Emma's needs can best be fulfilled by her mother, what choice do I really have?
"Extreme poverty is preventing me from adequately caring for Emma. I need the support of the ministry to accomplish this lifelong task that I am committed to. How can the ministry choose not to recognize the invaluable resource that parents such as myself are in caring for our disabled children? I have long since reached the breaking point, however. Only you have the authority to compensate me above the $10,033 that welfare provides. I love my daughter so much and can only imagine the heartbreak of having no other alternatives but to place her in the care of the ministry so that I may rejoin the so-called real workforce. Please, please help me to be able to keep my child in her home where she belongs."
In terms of new discussions, new parameters, new criteria around the at-home program, can the minister shed any light at all on this woman's predicament? The letter was dated March 30, 2000, and this woman would dearly love to have a response.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Thank you very much, member, for the information on the record of that case and the difficult time that that mom is having. I applaud the work that she has done and the tremendous effort that she has put into looking after her daughter and the passion that she has for wanting to do that. I understand that completely. It seems that she is getting services that meet most of the needs. They don't meet her personal needs, but they meet some of the needs of the child.
[1510]
There's no doubt that this is a difficult issue in terms of government policy and the development of how society as a whole responds to the needs of the vulnerable people in our society. We have come so far. Some would say a long way, and others would say it's still not quite far enough -- and that may be the case -- in terms of the supports that we provide. I understand that there are currently three human rights tribunals proceeding on the issue of paying family to look after their family members. We'll see what direction they go in and how that unfolds.
There's a tremendous amount of unpaid caregiving happening in this province. I think we all, as a society and as legislators, must be grateful to those folks who do that, because it would be almost impossible to in fact cover that off from the revenues that come into the general coffers of government these days.
L. Reid: I appreciate the minister's comments when she says that most of this woman's needs are being met. The bottom line is yes, the woman has respite care, but she doesn't
[ Page 16921 ]
have any money for food. We have to change the sense of priority around how we support that family. I'm happy to continue to have this conversation with the minister. Can she give me a sense of what the time line is for those tribunal decisions?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The tribunals are part of the human rights processes, and our understanding is that it could take up to a year before they complete their work.
L. Reid: I also have correspondence from the British Columbia Paraplegic Association on the same issue. They are talking about a consultation which began a year ago, when several of their members met with the former minister in Victoria. They expressed their concern over the urgent need to bring about change to the existing policies governing the at-home program in clearly identified areas of service delivery.
Since that time they met with the policy manager and have provided a considerable input and further clarification of their concerns. They have reviewed the "Determining Future Directions" discussion paper and have "identified specific changes we felt must be made to the eligibility criteria and equipment benefits in the at-home program. We have also identified specific changes to other service delivery areas that currently fail to meet the needs of children and youth and their families in the province of British Columbia." They indicate that there is going to be a meeting on April 4 and, again, some further review.
My point in putting this on the table is that this process regarding the exact same example I've just given has been underway for a year. The tribunal process may take another year. It's not helpful. The best of intentions in the world are not helpful unless there's some kind of resolution to these issues. It's not new. The work went on prior to you obtaining the role of minister.
It appears that these groups have done all the things they should have done in terms attending all the committee meetings, writing all the policy and putting all their thoughts and concerns in writing. They've done their part. This family -- she's done her part. I am only putting one example on the record. I have many letters today from individuals who have concerns about the at-home program -- that it could in fact meet their needs with some fine-tuning, some refining of the process.
To have all of these discussions come to fruition, hopefully before this summer passes, and make some changes in the lives of these families come September
In terms of child and youth mental health issues, similar discussions
[1515]
The Ministry of Education no longer funds reasonable counselling services within school. They will tell you that yes, those programs are in place. But, as a past school administrator, I can tell you that when you have a single counsellor who has four elementary schools of 500 students each and somehow their caseload is 2,000 possible children, you don't have a counselling service. No matter how effective and efficient you might be as an individual, you simply cannot deal effectively with children. We all know that to spend an hour or two on a weekly basis with a child is usually critical to get some kind of planning going on in terms of their social and emotional well-being. For a person who has 500 kids in a single school, that person may be in that school one afternoon a week and may see two children.
So now that focus leaves Education and comes over to Children and Families. The frustration for me, for my constituents and for constituents I hear from across the province, is that there are some opportunities to engage their children in a reasonable service if their child is a teenager. You can find some community placements for some of those children. The dilemma is the elementary-age children, which definitely falls within this ministry today. If I can ask the minister: what's the plan? What does it look like in terms of expectations that parents could have in terms of receiving decent mental health services for children who are under 12 years of age today?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Let me begin with a few general services that are provided. First of all, it centres around school-based support workers, and they exist at all levels of the school system. Their role is to provide support for children and youth who are experiencing great difficulty at school. The intent is to provide those supports that enable those students to participate in a meaningful way in their education programs.
The older ones may have left school -- actually, some middle ones do too -- and be experiencing social or emotional problems that prevent them from attending school or being enrolled in a specialized school program. The services then assist youth to acquire basic skills which make it possible for them to re-enter school, proceed to further training or employment, or support them in a specialized program usually provided in the form of in-school youth and child care support workers. Clearly that last part would be for the older student, but obviously there are services available in a generalized way.
We have seen that child, youth and mental health services have established specialized contract agency-based services, which have been established in two key areas across the province. Crisis response, suicide-prevention counselling and sexual abuse intervention -- specialized contract agencies provide those services to young people, and presumably it's whether they're in school or wherever we find them.
L. Reid: I thank the minister. What I hope, again in this new spirit of interministerial cooperation, is that indeed there will be some discussions between this minister and the Minister of Education in this province so that the services which have been allowed to lapse can, frankly, be reinstated in
[ Page 16922 ]
schools. I don't mind if they're funded by MCF. The bottom line is that the school is the most likely place that those children are going to be found.
[1520]
The community outreach
Perhaps it's better to have a long-term plan, and in this instance there's no question that it's better to have a long-term plan. If it takes this ministry working closely with the Ministry of Education, I would ask that that discussion at least unfold and that at some point we return to a decent level of counselling service within elementary schools in the province of British Columbia. I'm not comfortable with the fact that Education has said it has somehow shifted this to MCF and that it is still going to happen in some kind of reasonable way. Today it's not happening. I say that with every good wish that we can change the current scenario.
There are certainly some questions that have come across my desk regarding the status of the migrant children in the care of the Ministry for Children and Families. Perhaps the minister could give us an update on that as well.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The Chinese migrant situation
[1525]
L. Reid: Can the minister tell me what was spent on that process since it began and what the speculation will be for possibilities for expenditure in the coming year?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I've got bits of paper coming at me from all directions.
A Voice: Certainly not from this side of the table.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Well, hey, we can share some of this.
The response to that is that in the first year we spent $5 million. We are anticipating, given the information we get from Citizenship and Immigration Canada, that we may need to be spending in the neighbourhood of $12 million this year.
L. Reid: I thank the minister for the information.
I want to spend just a minute on voluntary care agreements. My information is that they've dropped by 40 percent, 1998 through 1999. Is that in fact a valid statement?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Perhaps the member would like to ask another question while we're looking up that information. It takes a minute. Thanks.
L. Reid: The sentiment in the field is that the ministry appears to be backing off from services to 16 year-olds. I don't have any way to validate that information, but I would certainly ask the minister for her comment on that. What is the current sentiment of the ministry regarding youth agreements, and how many young people are currently involved in a youth agreement with the Ministry for Children and Families?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Back to the first question on the voluntary care agreements. In April of '99 the numbers say there were 1,341, and in April 2000 there were 695. So there has indeed been a drop in the number of voluntary care agreements.
L. Reid: It begs the ever so sophisticated question: why?
[1530]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There is a connection, of course, to both of these two issues. The emphasis has been strengthened on the voluntary care agreements to work with family supports and to try in fact, in a larger measure, to keep the child within the family circle, so that when it comes to the attention of the ministry or the process of that happens, the case is reviewed, and the plan of action that has been considered is reviewed. Then sometimes it's: "Well, maybe as we look at this one plan, with some other kinds of supports, we can keep these young people at home." And that is the preferred way to go in many circumstances.
The big change that has happened in the drop of those numbers has to do in fact with the 72 -- I think it is -- youth agreements that are in place. Those are for young people over 16. These agreements have helped the young person find a different way. So it's an individual agreement about the kinds of supports that they need for their lives and to work their lives with their families and for their own personal needs, in terms of training or education or other kinds of supports that they might need. So the voluntary care agreement, in sum, has shifted to the youth agreements for those who are 16.
L. Reid: So the question, the speculation that the ministry is backing off from services to 16-year-olds
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The member might be interested in some of the financial supports and resources that have been put in this area since '97. For the three years since '97 until now -- from $10 million in '97 to $16 million last year. I think the member would be aware of some of the kinds of programs that are in place and provided through these programs. The youth agreements are only one part of that process to provide
[ Page 16923 ]
services to youth: promotion and prevention, parent/teen conflict programs and services, the Vancouver action plan, post-majority services program, youth rent supplement, at-risk minors, youth agreements, payments to youth, safe houses and residential services for pregnant teens. So there is a whole range, and as I say, the dollars have been increased over the last three years to provide supports so that we can work with the young people where they are.
For some of them, the younger ones, home-based may be what they need. But they need more resources there. For the older ones, there may be no need for them to come in to be part of the ward of the state. They're looking for some independence and some support doing that, but we're still working with them to keep those family connections so they work out some of the differences that pushed them in that direction in the first place.
L. Reid: When the minister talks about 72 youth agreements
[1535]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We haven't got that information. There are certain criteria that the young people have to meet in order to qualify for an appropriate youth agreement that works for them, and it's actually part of the CF and CSA Act. Section 11.2 of the act allows the director to make a written agreement with the youth who cannot be responsible. You would be familiar with all of that. For criteria, youth demonstrates addiction or severe substance abuse; youth has significant behavioral or mental health disorder; youth is involved in the sex trade; youth does not attend school, work or an educational or therapeutic program and is living in inadequate housing. Those are the criteria for those agreements.
L. Reid: At the minister's convenience I'd be pleased to learn if 72 percent is 50 percent of those who've applied, or 25 percent -- just some ballpark. And I'm happy to receive that information at a later time.
The other sentiment I want to put on the record is that I'm hearing that some wonderful things are happening around aboriginal services with moms and very young infants. Is that a program the minister is able to give me some more information on or simply direct me to who I might glean that information from?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We'd be happy to do the best we can to get some information about that area. We've got a lot of contracts, and it's being delivered in a number of different areas. So we'd need to spend a little more time than we have just at this moment to find that information. Certainly if we're doing it and we're doing it well, we'll tell you about it.
V. Anderson: I wanted to ask the minister a couple of questions about some of the programs that are operating for aboriginal people, for children, in the Vancouver area. Are there particular contracts that have been signed? There are contracts that you're doing on the reserves for bands doing work that the ministry would normally do. Are there agencies in the Vancouver area that are doing that ministry work for aboriginal people within the urban community, and if so, which are they?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I might, as we move into this area, introduce Fred Storey, who is the director of aboriginal services for the ministry. He is the fount of all knowledge on programming. There are quite a number of programs with the ministry in a number of different areas, particularly in urban areas. I'll speak generally while some further information is being provided.
We have various programs, aboriginal children and family in general, and there are dollars attached to that budget. The total budget for funding for services is $11.88 million last year and this year. That funding is continuing.
Urban aboriginal services in general, $4.43 million. We have home support workers; we have child and youth care workers, school-based support services, youth services, resource support and development, child and care services provided under aboriginal funding agreements. And then there are some new initiatives. Those seem to be with bands and tribal councils and other aboriginal organizations under contract.
[1540]
In the Vancouver area the Vancouver Aboriginal Child and Family Services organization receives some $1.3 million, and their program is classified as developmental. There's a date that says September 2000. I'm not quite sure what that means.
In addition, there is the Métis Family Services organization in Vancouver. They receive $770,000. Their organization, too, is classified as developmental. It's in the process of being developed, and it looks like the expectation was that by the end of May the Métis Family Services was ready to have something on the ground and ready to go.
V. Anderson: If I understand the minister rightly, the last two she mentioned, the Vancouver Aboriginal Child and Family Services and the Métis, were both in the stage of development -- both of those programs. Could you tell me what stage each of them is at and what's happening at this point? What is the projection for them? What is the forward-looking part of it?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I'm pleased to elaborate. The ministry is indeed very proud of the aboriginal strategy that has been developed over the last while. The aboriginal strategy deals with child protection services across the province, and the purpose of it is to be the delegated authority for guardianship in the protection field for aboriginal children.
The information I provided a few minutes ago related to the amounts of money being provided to both those organizations to undertake these services. We are very, very close to signing agreements with both those agencies for that service that they will be providing. What that will mean generally, if I remember, is that in the urban setting of Vancouver, if an aboriginal child is found to be in need of protection, the aboriginal group the Métis society or the Aboriginal Child and Family Services Society will be the group that does that, so that they are within their own culture and within their own communities. The services will be provided that way. We are supporting them in their planning stage and then in the delivery of that service.
V. Anderson: If I understand, probably both the Métis society and the Aboriginal Child and Family Services Society
[ Page 16924 ]
would be working not only in Vancouver but also across the region. So they would be working with a number of regions. Have you found a way to work that out? Regions don't necessarily have the same way of operating or the same priorities. Is there a way of rationalizing between the regions in the lower mainland that those two societies both work with that variety of
[1545]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We have put in place a staff person in the region whose job it is to coordinate within the lower mainland the work that needs to be done in this field. So there's an aboriginal services manager in the Vancouver area for the purpose of doing all that with the urban folk, as opposed to the individual bands and the reserves and that sort of thing. That's a separate part of this, and we have in fact this one. We understand that Fort Langley to Yale is what these folks cover. The Stó:lō nation covers that part of it, and they have 300 kids that they're now working with -- children in care currently.
V. Anderson: What kinds of services are planned to be covered? Are there resources for mental health workers? Are there resources for family counsellors? As I understand, there's a lot of work that needs to be done with families as units, both in prevention and in protection. And within the aboriginal community, they're tied in together very closely with each other. So are there mental health resources and family counsellors that are there? Are they available outside of this grant? What are the resources that are available to give them the kind of follow-through that's needed?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The moneys that I mentioned earlier will cover the costs in four areas: guardianship, child protection, intake and also family support. The ministry is, in the near future, putting one mental health FTE into the region -- in terms of mental health issues. Plans are devolving for the more long term. I may have more information.
V. Anderson: I appreciate that. Was that one FTE that will be working primarily with the aboriginal community for mental health? It is, I understand. Thank you.
In the contracts that are being written up -- I know they've been relatively new forms of contracts because of this new undertaking -- what process is there for ongoing evaluation or accountability for results, as against input?
[1550]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: First of all, part of that delegation service has to meet the standards that have been set for all child protection areas in the province. That is audited by the protection division from time to time. Built-in evaluation, in addition to that
V. Anderson: I appreciate the comments in this area. I've had a chance to visit with the Vancouver Aboriginal Child and Family Services and was quite impressed. These are some of the areas that were discussed as we met together. I think they're anxious to get on with the contract; I trust you are too.
Another area that I wanted to comment briefly on is that I had the opportunity to attend the annual meeting of the B.C. and Yukon division of the CNIB in Vancouver recently. They have put a real emphasis on early childhood development. In the studies they have undertaken over the last while, they have discovered that this is a real and urgent need and that there are many gaps in this area. If I understand rightly, it was a program that, up until a number of years ago, the association took on, on behalf of children in the province. Then there was an agreement to work through Sunny Hill Hospital for youngsters with vision difficulties from 1990 on to 1996 or so.
In their studies they have discovered that because of cutbacks in resources and a variety of reasons, the kind of needs that the preschool children and the families have are not being met. They're looking at an opportunity to work again with the ministry and others involved to examine the gaps and to develop a program to use the facilities and things that are underway, but also to cover the gaps which are not being met. I wonder if the minister has any comments on whether the ministry is involved in this discussion and, if so, where they are in this particular very important development.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, there are ongoing conversations with the community in this case -- well, not with that organization, I understand; the CNIB has met with ministry officials. One of the issues that came up at that time that was of significance for them was interpretive services, particularly for those in the blind-deaf category. We put some in place, and we're looking to expand those services. So the member can be assured that we're having ongoing meetings with them to hear about their concerns and are responding to them as best we can.
[1555]
V. Anderson: One of the items that came up at their annual meeting was having low-vision equipment -- equipment that's available nowadays and is helpful for children and others. It's something that helps them in their process, but it is somewhat expensive and not available either for the blind parents, who need it to work with their children, or for the children, who need it themselves working on their own behalf. In other provinces -- Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario -- this equipment is provided with some kind of a funding arrangement between the government and the families. B.C. is one of the few provinces that doesn't provide this. Have you discussed this? Is it something that's just been overlooked, or is it something that is in discussion? And will it be possible to resolve on behalf of both the parents who are blind and the children who are blind themselves?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We do, at some levels, supply some supports. But this is an area in which we're continuing to work with the sector within the ministry to continue to do that and to continue to provide some supports -- indeed, to do what we can to expand those supports.
V. Anderson: I appreciate the minister's comment. I think the other thing that came up in their study was that resources and trained personnel are much more readily available for the person in the lower mainland than throughout the province. There's a shortage of persons who have training, if you like, in working with blind persons and also then training parents, teachers and others who are working with blind children throughout the province. Is there something happening at this point to enable more persons to be available for the consultations and advice both to children and parents and to
[ Page 16925 ]
those who are working with them throughout the province to upgrade the facilities that are available, because it is a fairly unique undertaking?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I meant to mention earlier that the member obviously has some very excellent information, and we would very much appreciate it if the member would find a minute to forward some of that information to us so that it would increase our body of knowledge about working with all of that.
It's fair to say, I think, that the ministry relies pretty heavily on the CNIB to provide many of these resources. They do a super job in our communities, as we all know, not only with public awareness but with direct service to individuals in the community -- adults and children. We are indeed quite grateful for that information. We will continue to work with them in this area to see what we can do about providing more and better services.
V. Anderson: It may not have circulated through the system yet, but a letter was sent from the CNIB to the Premier on June 20 on many of these issues. So I would just highlight it -- and some of them I've referred to -- so that it might come to the surface more rapidly than
Also, they have a summer program for both children and families -- on their Island program -- for camp and training during the summer. Are there resources available through the ministry, as there are for some other camp programs, for blind children or those who are deaf-blind so that they and their families might be able to participate -- to help those who couldn't afford it otherwise to participate in those summer programs? And if so, how would they make that application?
[1600]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes. The camp services are provided through the Vancouver-Richmond regional area, who manage the contract, which is with the Canadian Deaf-Blind and Rubella Association, for the summer camp program. The ministry does indeed have some money into that; $0.16 million goes towards that camp. Last year there were some 36 children involved, and the year before some 32 children were involved in this program.
V. Anderson: I'd just like to thank the minister for highlighting this and will be glad to discuss it with her further.
D. Jarvis: Minister, as you probably know, I'm a little bit of a statistical man, and that comes from years of not being able to balance my cheque book. I wanted to get some figures, and so I hope your briefing books are up to date. A lot of it pertains to performance measures and everything.
I was wondering if you could tell me the number of children in B.C., who are under 19, that are in the minister's care or being dealt with by the minister -- a breakdown just for alcohol and drug abuse, if you wouldn't mind.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I can share this much with the member, and the member will know this. There are approximately one million children in the province, and we have approximately 9,600 in care. We don't divide them up by the nature of the issues that surround those children. We don't keep statistics on how many are this or how many are that. So we can't tell you that.
D. Jarvis: I find that sort of unusual, in a way, in the sense that when I look at your performance book on your future performance and the output section of it, you say the number of alcohol and drug residential beds for children and youth and the number of clients receiving substance abuse services. How are you going to discern or measure your performances then?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The member likes statistics -- okay. I should also say that I am happy to provide the sheet to the member so that he can peruse them more at his leisure. We have several client types, if you like, and some numbers that relate to that. In terms of substance abuse, the other categories include substance-affected, problem gambling, problem gambling-affected.
But let's just look at the substance misuse. We screened 1,886 males who are classified as youth. We admitted 1,794 into a program. The parallel for the young women: 1,297 young women were screened, and 1,230 were admitted into a program or programs of various kinds. I also have adults and seniors in that same category, so I've got quite a lot of those kinds of numbers.
[1605]
D. Jarvis: I was going to ask about the above-19 as well. But that's fine; if you can send me that, it would be appreciated. I just thought you had in your outcomes here rates of alcohol-related deaths and rates of drug-induced deaths. You've got to have some
Minister, I've only been involved in this ministry for a short while, but it's amazing what you find when you start digging around out there. Over the months that I've been involved, it seems to come to me, anyway, that it's considerably underfunded in the addiction services. It's provided in a piecemeal fashion. Everyone seems to be wondering what is going on in the ministry on that end of it.
Vancouver leads the nation, I guess, in probably every category of addiction problems. We lead in HIV among drug users and deaths by alcohol or related disorders. That's not just me saying it; it's even your own B.C. Government Employees Union. They have probably just recently written you a letter to that effect -- well, it was about a month and a half ago, anyway. Do you not
It seems that very little has been done to deal with the issue. I understand that since 1989, there has been little or no funding to the outpatient addiction services. The different groups are all calling for improvements. Everyone, of course, wants more money to improve the services, either to reduction or to the care end of it or to the treatment. The delivery service is always in question.
As you know, the Kaiser report came out a short while ago, and they were questioning it. As I said, the B.C. Government Employees Union, the child advocate and the workers out on the street are all talking about the fact that there is no
[ Page 16926 ]
sort of concerted effort or joint effort to consolidate the treatment and prevention. I notice that the Premier put out a response to the Kaiser report back on May 19. He said he'd have an answer within two weeks. That would be June 2 or 3, and I don't think we've seen it yet. The weeks are pushing on, so I'm going to probably ask you in a short while about what you intend to do with that.
[1610]
But all these people have said to me, "What's wrong?" and all the rest of it, what they've told the government or talked to the ministry about. My only answer is that obviously the government is not intimidated by logic. Government seems to proceed along.
I was at a drug and alcohol service meeting last week, when we had that week off. The speaker at the time -- you probably know him well; it was Dan Reese, who runs it. It was quite interesting. He actually told a humorous but sad story, in a way, as a final result. You've probably read it; it was about the little boy that wakes up in the morning and sees a dragon on his bed, about cat-size. His mother says: "It doesn't exist." By breakfast time the little cat had grown to the size of a dog on the breakfast table and was eating two or three plates of pancakes, and his mother kept saying that it didn't exist -- the dragon that he was talking about. By the time he got home from school, the dragon was out all the windows and doors of the house and all the rest of it; but it didn't exist.
He was trying to relate it to the fact that this is what government people feel towards what's going on there with regards to the treatment services in the drug and alcohol problem that we have in British Columbia. In a sense, the government is saying that it doesn't really exist. He said he was of the feeling that he probably should send that child's book to everyone in the government to read and try to appreciate that there is a great problem out there.
I would ask you at this time if you could give me some idea as to if there is going to be some consolidated treatment and prevention plan coming up from the government. Is it really that government can't be intimidated? Or are you going to try to follow the advice that's being given to you by people that are out on the streets and seem to know probably more than what we as politicians do about the problem?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There were a couple of comments I wanted to make before I get to some of the
I also wanted to add, in terms of the numbers that I gave the member earlier in response to his earlier question, just to underline that those numbers for the male and female youth -- they're not all children in care. I'm not sure whether the member was
May I put on the table the changes that have indeed happened, let's say, since 1996? At that time we were spending about $58 million. As of this year, in the blue book, the number that will be seen by the member is $72 million, covering many different kinds of services. There are obviously some management services, out-patient, program delivery, alcohol and drug in the regional offices -- much of this happens across the region. There are school-based prevention programs. We've got youth justice, alcohol and drugs. There are also several other program areas: prevention, withdrawal management, out-patient services, residential treatment, supportive recovery, accreditation training, gambling addictions. In other ministries there is also a further $24 million that we're aware of: in the Ministry of Attorney General, two programs; in the Ministry of Health, three programs. That makes for a total of $9,506,000 -- $97 million; I'm sorry. Now, there may be some other stuff here.
[1615]
D. Jarvis: I think the essence of my original question was that we've got all these services going together, but are they really all working together in conjunction to give the best services that are out there? I think this is what the papers that are coming from outside, either the Kaiser or that, are trying to say: that there's no continuous treatment given.
I'm not an expert. I'm looking at you to
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: My response is in two parts. First, the Premier is indeed very interested in this issue. I know he has met with Kaiser. The ministry working group on this issue has met with the Kaiser Foundation people, plus others who have an interest in this field, and are working closely to develop the next stage of what should happen. The Premier did receive a report on Kaiser after two weeks and decided that it needed to be something different than what he got -- hence the program that's being worked on currently.
I also wanted to draw attention to the one issue that seems to have been agreed upon by all the groups and all the individuals who are part of this and have expertise in the field: the delivery system has to be an integrated one. This means that we're not just dealing straight with a drug and alcohol issue, but mental health has to be part of it and youth justice has to be part of it. There are a number of factors. The ultimate picture may be that it's not all on one piece of paper. The service delivery will not all be one monolithic operation.
Because it's regionally based in many areas, with a big chunk in the urban centres, and because there are many areas where drug and alcohol and addiction services have to be delivered, it's going to have a look that may not be as tidy as we might like. But that's what's coming. It will be looked at and reviewed. And that information will be provided to everyone. We'll then have a better picture, I guess.
[1620]
D. Jarvis: We can only hope that something better will come, I guess. We're certainly not creating any records here at the moment in regard to the treatment, because it seems to keep growing. There's obviously a great inefficiency in all the different methods that we are using to approach the problem.
[ Page 16927 ]
I wanted to go into the aspect of the long
Could you give me a complete breakdown as to the existing beds, the ones that are in place now and those that aren't, when they're coming down the line and where they are located? Has there been a change since her original list that was put out back in late '99 or early last March, I think it was?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The immediate response is that there are 72 beds in permanent service and nine spaces, which means that these are extra places available should they be needed on a crisis basis. They are all over the province: Cranbrook, Kamloops, Williams Lake, Fort Nelson, Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Terrace, Surrey, Maple Ridge, New Westminster, Burnaby, Vancouver, Nanaimo and Victoria. I've got the actual numbers.
D. Jarvis: Are all these beds in operation?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The response is that in terms of the permanent services, all the service contracts have indeed been awarded. We have different kinds of services in different parts of the province. But the contracts have been awarded. The anticipation is that they are beginning to be filled up with patients.
D. Jarvis: Well, I don't want to be persistent on this -- yes, I do. Last time we discussed it -- I think it was during supply -- we were told that the original 75 had increased to 80 beds. There is a suggestion there that this must be 80 plus one somewhere. But nevertheless, at that time, I think -- I lost that figure -- we were down to only about 35 or 40 actually in operation. The rest were either coming in the spring of this year -- and I think we're past spring -- or coming in later on, at the end of August.
I was wondering: can you give me a statement? Can you give me the figures now? What is in operation as of today? How many? As you say, contracts have been let out. But when are they supposed to be finished, those contracts? And how many of those are there?
[1625]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I've got lots of information here. First of all, I wanted to point out that the 72 plus the nine add up to 81, which I think is the total we talked about, if not on this occasion, on an earlier occasion.
We have a couple of beds
In New Westminster there are two beds, interim services are in place, and program design is being finalized. In Burnaby, awaiting the review of the utilization of interim services, the interim services are now in place.
Then in Vancouver -- there are a couple of issues around in Vancouver. The program plan has been finalized for five detox beds related to the aboriginal community. Interim services are in place while a contractor is being identified. Permanent service is expected in early September. Also in Vancouver, also with the Vancouver aboriginal community, interim service is in place while a contractor is identified. These are another five; one's attached to youth justice -- again, also permanent services in September of this year.
[1630]
D. Jarvis: I found my stats. On March 29 you said to the House that there were 80 beds; 71 were new, and there were nine spaces. Of those 71 new beds, there were only 30 in operation, 38 were coming on stream by August 1, and three were coming on stream in 2001, so probably early into January or February of 2001 or something like that.
Now, I couldn't quite follow the way you were reading them off as to my list here. This is the third time that we've gone through this. And I've made the unfortunate mistake of putting them all on one page, all in pen, so therefore I couldn't discern from it how we're moving along.
I'm really surprised that
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I think what I would like to do is to in fact identify more precisely what is happening in each of the communities that have beds and how the program has unfolded and where they all are. This is what is happening.
In Cranbrook there is a day treatment program. In Kamloops we have permanent services for five detox treatment beds.
In Williams Lake there are six detox treatment beds. Also in Williams Lake is a day treatment program. In Williams Lake the youth family counsellor, as I mentioned earlier, comes on in September or later this year.
In Fort Nelson there is a youth family counsellor in place now. In Fort St. John there are six detox residential beds. Also in Fort St. John is a day treatment program and a youth and family counsellor. In Dawson Creek a youth and family counsellor is in place. In Terrace -- we've talked about Terrace -- it's six detox beds.
In Surrey there are two detox beds and elsewhere in Surrey -- I guess it's youth justice -- five detox beds. In Maple Ridge there's a youth and family counsellor.
In New Westminster there's a youth and family counsellor. In New Westminster also there is a day treatment program. Also in New Westminster a final program plan is being reviewed, and I mentioned it earlier in terms of the design of that program.
[ Page 16928 ]
In Burnaby there is a day treatment program. Also in Burnaby, I mentioned earlier also, awaiting review of utilization of interim services
In Vancouver there are three areas: five detox and treatment related to aboriginal; also aboriginal youth justice, five detox in Vancouver; and then, just straight, four detox beds in Vancouver. We have this list, and those are the numbers. In addition to that, a short one before we're finished: in Vancouver there's a ten-bed detox facility, with discussions happening in fact around the downtown east side as to whether that might be a suitable place, in and around there.
In Nanaimo there are six detox beds. I knew there were some missing here, obviously; Nanaimo and Victoria weren't here. In Victoria there are a youth and family counsellor and also three detox beds and nine spaces for detoxing kids in their own homes.
So that's the total. The grand total adds up to 72 beds, nine spaces and quite a few youth and family counsellors and day programs.
[1635]
D. Jarvis: I assume that if the minister would send us a copy of that
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yup.
D. Jarvis: That would be appreciated. While you were talking, you did mention nine in-homes. I assume you're talking about host homes.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The home program is a bit of a variety of services, depending on the situation. It can be a host home; it can be a foster home; it could be the family home. The services and the workers required go there and work with them there in that home setting.
D. Jarvis: I wonder if the minister could explain to me why they opted for this expression of "host homes" or "family homes." Ostensibly, does it save money, putting workers into the home rather than having treatment centres outside or in a centre where there's a controlled environment? In addition to that, if this is what you've elected to do, who says that this is the best way of doing it? And do you have any data to that effect?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: One of the points that I think we have to remember in all of this -- and the experts will tell us that -- is that there is more than one kind of service delivery model. In terms of the housing ones here in the Victoria area, consultation with the community and all the folks here said that what they wanted here and what would be best for here was, in fact, some residential home -- host, foster or their own home.
I've got a phrase for you: "Treatment is a process, not a place." It can be a place, but it is fundamentally a process. And parts of it require this, and parts of it require something else. We just keep moving along. We've done lots and lots of research on the variety of models.
Regions will talk to their communities about what will work there, what makes sense, what they would like to have, how they will manage it, what they think is best for them. That's what happened here in the greater Victoria area. All sorts of people were there at the announcement when it happened, in terms of municipal support and that kind of thing. So we give the community a consultation process of fair participation in the solutions.
D. Jarvis: I have just, in my own way, thought that treatment would be better if it was a controlled treatment. Like even the bill that is coming up tomorrow, the fact that you're taking the party away from their environment and providing treatment, theoretically, down the line -- that's questionable too. But we won't get into that bill yet; that's tomorrow's discussion. My own feeling is that once the treatment at a host home or at a foster home
[1640]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We have a range of services, simply because no human being and no child is the same as any other one. Sometimes for a child it works to be sent absolutely away from their family, to be isolated from the family and all those natural and regular supports. For many others that doesn't work; they need to know their family is there.
One story around the further discussion on the secure care will say that detox can happen in a family. The mother and the father, or the mother and sisters or mother and cousins, are there with that young person in that detox piece of treatment for the long-term addiction. Getting oneself off addictions and away from addictions is a long-term process. The alcoholic folks say: "I am a recovering alcoholic." They have to say that every day of their lives, because the temptations are always there. So the pieces of treatment require
Sometimes the first part is recognizing that there is a need and then maybe moving into an immediate kind of detox work. Then there's the ongoing work. You don't need to be locked up. I don't think it would be right to lock people up, because that could take a long time. It can take a different kind of time. You want to be in the community where you deal with, on a daily basis -- when you're ready to -- those temptations that come at you, and you can say no. You can work and go in a different direction.
So it's all of these things. The ministry and government are trying to provide services to respond to all those different pieces of what goes on in addiction services for all the age groups that we have all across this huge province. There's no one easy solution, unfortunately. It'd be nice if there were.
D. Jarvis: Would this call for an increase in staff in your department for treatment in the host homes, etc.? Are they already in the field now, or would you have to bring them in from other branches?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: They are part of the contract services. When a contract is signed with an agency that will provide these treatment services, then that's part of the contract. They provide the supports and the people who will do that work.
D. Jarvis: I believe that there was about $2.18 million going for youth justice and addiction services. But now I've
[ Page 16929 ]
heard that there has been quite a good success in about three treatment centres that had sort of temporary funding. But now I hear that the funding has stopped in that area that has success, and there was a question as to why that had stopped. What's going to happen now?
[1645]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We'll start this way. I assume that the member was indeed concerned about youth justice beds. Yes, there were some interim services that were contracted short-term until permanent facilities were available. I understand there are now, if I've got this right, some youth justice-specific beds that have now been contracted for. The previous ones were just interim services until the permanent plan was in place.
D. Jarvis: And those ones now are in that list that you're going to supply me with. Have they already been designated a specific time in that list
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Youth justice beds?
D. Jarvis:
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, I saw them.
D. Jarvis: Okay, thank you.
When you first announced that increase of all the detox beds, there was a general feeling around that things were going to get better, in that sense, for the beds to be available. The waiting list, however, did not go down; it's rising. So are there any plans that the ministry may be having for another round? As I said, the waiting list has not gone down; it's rising and continuing to rise, from what I've been informed, unless I'm getting different information from you. Could you expand on that, on whether you plan to create more beds?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Part of this needs to be understood -- as I'm beginning to understand it, I think -- in terms of the nature of the programs that happen and the number of beds and the length of the program that's required. So at Peak House, for instance, which is Pacific Youth and Family, the program length is eight weeks. There are six beds there. The intake is continuous. So if you have six right away, then you would have to wait for a cycle until you could take six more, because they have to go through the
So there might be a wait time of two to three cycles, which is eight weeks' time. Each program area that has a facility like that and works on a facility base would operate in a somewhat similar fashion. There is a period of time that you're there, and then others would come in after that.
[1650]
D. Jarvis: I appreciate what you're trying to say. But we know that the intravenous drug use, etc., etc., is at almost epidemic rates, especially in the east side of downtown Vancouver. We know that we don't have enough beds now. The wait-lists far exceed what you've got there and what you've planned in this last increase. Now, even with the way you're trying to shuffle beds through places like Peak House and all the rest of it, is there no future plan in the ministry to try to create detox beds and following up with
Are we just trying to hold what we've got together now and hope that the answer will come or the cure will occur? Or are we planning a project down the line to increase the beds substantially along with new treatment centres? When we get into the bill tomorrow, we're going to have even more problems when we take on the care aspect of it. What have we got? Are we going to clear out all the people that have got problems in the Maples now and reconvert that into beds? Or are we going to shut down Willingdon and start making beds there? Surely the government has got to be concerned enough to look down the line, to have a basic plan. I'll leave it with you and ask for your comments.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I appreciate the member's significant concern about wait-lists and what's happening down the road. I bring us back to what we're doing here today, and that is vote 22, which is this year's budget. So we need to look at whether there's enough money in the budget today, in this budget, to do the job that we have undertaken to do in this year.
We don't want people waiting any longer than they have to. There's no question about that. Nobody does. But it's not to say there aren't programs; it's not to say that a wait of a couple of months
Again, I would also say, as I said earlier, that treatment is a process not a place. It's possible to move off a wait-list within a different kind of program. So that's good.
In the meantime, back to some of the issues you raised that are related to the secure care. I think we'll get into that when we get to committee stage of that bill. That's where we should have that discussion.
D. Jarvis: I hope, even tomorrow when we get into this, that you've got a plan somewhere in the back of the books there -- that you're ready to come out and do it, because we're closing down treatment centres at the same time. There are treatment centres closing down. For example, where's the young girl that's living on her own? Where is she going to go for treatment? It's a lost society out there right now -- those people that have problems like this. Only a few unlucky or lucky ones -- I don't know how you would decide which they are -- seem to be able to get treatment, and that doesn't seem to be too successful at that.
[1655]
When I said closing down, I was thinking they could put more towards the Campbell Valley situation, which I think was discussed during supply. We had 13 beds there; now there are only seven beds.
A Voice: Four.
[ Page 16930 ]
D. Jarvis: My associate just said four; that makes it even worse. Seven of the beds were going into foster homes for therapeutic treatment. That, I understand, was more expensive than what Campbell Valley would be. The treatment for each person there was around $275 a day, where at Campbell Valley it was $250 a day. To me, that is not logical. Out of the 13, it was seven beds left, and six were going into the foster homes. So that left six girls now put out. I wonder what's going to happen to them. Where are they? For the cost of it, that's about $171 a day that the girl's life is worth, so I was just wondering if you could explain to me further the reason behind that. Do you now still feel that that was the best bet to go where we are short in treatment beds, in that specific incidence at Campbell Valley?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I'm sure the member didn't mean to say or use the words "put out," or that girls were "put out" from the Campbell Valley Centre. The Campbell Valley, as he pointed out, remains open. The young women who were there completed their cycle. It was time to move on to the next phase of whatever it was, and off they went to do that.
In terms of the other programs, the member mentions costs. They are different programs. I'd be happy to have the member come and have a discussion around the difference between the kinds of programs we offer -- not just Campbell Valley and something else, but a lot of the other ones. I think that information would be very valuable and then useful in terms of the discussions that we get to have.
I've got information here about Campbell Valley and the work that they do. No one has ever argued about the value of the work that they do. It happened that there were services required in Surrey. There were no services in Surrey. Surrey is huge; Surrey is almost bigger than Vancouver. Vancouver's got quite a lot of them. There were no services of this sort in Surrey; Surrey needed services. The demographics, the number of youth that needed service, became very clear.
The kind of service that was identified that would be effective for Surrey was, I gather, put out in proposal call, and for whatever reason the person at Campbell Valley did not apply to provide that service, which is too bad. He's got a good service, but it is located in that one place as opposed to being able to provide something in another community.
It's really important that, again, we talk about a variety of models of delivery service. That is an essential piece of this. Not everyone suits being put in or going to a treatment centre for differing lengths of time. So I want to say that we've had many meetings with the Campbell Valley folks, and we're looking forward to continuing to cooperate with them on the kind of service that they provide and in that spirit of there being many service models that can be available to kids. That can be one of them, hence the four beds that are being paid for and being covered by the ministry at the moment.
D. Jarvis: I look at it very
[1700]
Interjection.
D. Jarvis: No, I'm not telling them that. They're telling me this, and that's why I'm bringing it to you on this basis. That's why I'm suggesting that you should maybe go and talk to your street workers, because they think you're closing down treatment centres. They're feeling a little exasperated over it. Believe me, they are.
Anyway, I wanted to finalize just by asking one more question, and that was in regard to volunteer organizations. Where does the ministry stand with volunteer organizations like the Salvation Army? I understand that they have beds available, things like that, and they're not utilized by the ministry. I'm not sure about that, so that's why I'm asking the question.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We deal with a number of volunteer organizations. The Salvation Army and the ministry have a good relationship and provide services jointly -- funded services in a number of different areas in downtown Vancouver and some other spots around the province.
L. Reid: The questions I have around methadone treatment, I trust, still relate to MCF . Apparently there are young people today, methadone patients, who cannot access residential services if they're part of the methadone program. Would that be something that would be followed up under Health? Indeed, do these folks have any ability to receive some residential component to their treatment program, as someone who is under 19 years of age today?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The member is correct to this extent: the methadone program is Ministry of Health. However, for those under 19, we
[1705]
L. Reid: I appreciate the requirement. What I am trusting is that the minister could maybe get back to me within the next number of days. My understanding is that it's incredibly difficult to access residential services if you are indeed on a methadone program. I don't necessarily need the information this instant. But in terms of whom I might direct individuals to, who would provide them some assistance to weave their way through the process, that would be very helpful.
Perhaps the status report on Maple Cottage detox
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: It's still where it is.
L. Reid: The people, apparently, in Abbotsford
[ Page 16931 ]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: To clarify, it is part of the capital plan that down the road, some years away, the Maple Cottage Centre, which is located on the Woodlands site, is to be moved. It's been part of the capital plan that was agreed to, I guess, last year -- or recently.
L. Reid: My understanding is that the original plan was, many, many years ago -- maybe even 15 years ago -- that that should in fact move to Abbotsford. So I'm not thinking that the folks in Abbotsford would find comfort in the minister's answer that at some point it will happen. Could the minister tell me if indeed it is something that's budgeted for in this fiscal year?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Briefly put, what is happening this fiscal year is that the site search is actively happening, along with BCBC. They're working with us on that.
L. Reid: That pleases me. Will the minister keep me apprised as to how that site search goes? Hopefully there will be some further information forthcoming.
Interjection.
L. Reid: Thank you very much.
It's also my information that less than 10 percent of supported-recovery situations -- treatment placement services -- are funded or licensed by the province and have a set of standards in place. Is that the minister's information? And indeed, what kind of work is being done on the creation of standards to govern the operation of these homes?
[1710]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There are two ways in which folks may be in a supported-recovery situation. One would be the ministry-funded ones, which have to be accredited and acknowledged by the ministry and are supported by the ministry. Then there are some others in which a private operator will open up a home and offer some service, but MCF is not involved in the funding of that kind of operation.
L. Reid: Perhaps the minister can confirm that 10 percent of the services available today are funded by the province. That would mean that 90 percent would be at the discretion of other operators, who may or may not be open to an accreditation model.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We can't confirm or deny the numbers. If you have some information about that, we'd be pleased to hear that. But we have no idea, quite honestly, how many private operators there are out there.
L. Reid: This is the frustration in this debate in this ministry over time: there's no inventory of need. So we will never be able to get to the point of having a needs-based budget around any delivery models, because it's something that the ministry never collects data on. It would seem to me that, at the very least, the minister could tell me the number of supported-recovery programs in the province of British Columbia that are funded by the Ministry for Children and Families.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Supported recovery services. We can tell you that there are 20 support recovery organizations that meet alcohol and drug services standards. Some of them receive ongoing government funding, and others are funded on a purchase-of-service basis -- access to a total of 174 beds in that program and the 20 agencies that we deal with. In 1999-2000, 1,657 people were screened, and 1,660 people were admitted. The total number of clients served was 2,254, and in 1999-2000 -- and this year -- the amount of money in the budget for this is $2.3 million.
L. Reid: I thank the minister for the information.
Is the minister aware that the Quality Recovery Society, which has been operating supportive recovery houses in both Surrey and Burnaby since 1988, will be closing its doors at the end of the month, due to lack of adequate funding? QRS has found itself to be dependent upon gaming revenue for the ongoing operation of its services. And the question: is there any plan to provide a form of funding for supportive recovery services which does not rely upon proceeds from the avails of gambling addiction, and which assures ongoing funding?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I have a list of the agencies across the province that are supported by the ministry. That agency named by the member is not one of the agencies that receives funding from the Ministry for Children and Families. We've got three in the Prince George area, two in Vancouver-Richmond -- three, four -- and, in the capital area of Victoria, Streetlink emergency shelter and Coastal Community Services. I can name the others, if the member would like that.
L. Reid: I'm aware that that one is not currently receiving funding. That's the point; they are indeed reliant upon the avails of gambling revenue to provide the service.
The minister, in her earlier remarks, suggested that Surrey, a very large area, needs some access to this type of service. If that is indeed the case, all I would ask is that the minister and her staff look at the Quality Recovery Society, perhaps with some commitment to try and maintain their stature as a service program beyond the end of June. That's all I'm asking, and indeed that would make good sense.
Certainly there is lots of discussion about the number of dollars that society recoups as a result of investment in recovery programs. Addiction treatment saves $7 for every dollar invested. So is there any plan for the Ministry for Children and Families to increase the provision of addiction services across the province? I realize the list that the minister has read are the ones they currently fund. Is there a plan in place to expand the service -- not just for this particular agency, but because your secure care program, which we will debate tomorrow, will need access to services?
[1715]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: A little bit of apples and oranges here. Tomorrow's discussion will be about youth generally under 16, and many of these are not about youth. These are about youth and adult services. I would suggest to the member, if she's in touch with the organization she refers to, that she might suggest that they approach the ministry. The ministry would be happy to determine whether it is an appropriate one that can be accredited, and then we go from there in that process.
But accreditation is key. The ministry and society need to have some assurances that the kind of programs that are being
[ Page 16932 ]
offered, staffing -- all of the issues that go into an accreditation program and process -- are in place, so that we have some confidence in the services being provided.
L. Reid: My final comment on this topic before I turn it over to my hon. colleague. Covenant House Vancouver's addictions management program, their CHAMP program -- is the minister familiar with the program? Indeed, is this the program that she would look to for the secure care discussion of tomorrow?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We are very much aware of Covenant House and the programs that it provides, and aware of the variety of programs that it provides. It is not now a contracted agency with government. But there may be some programs and some government needs where they might well fit in with some of the program systems and deliveries that we need to do. No doubt they are talking to us, and we're talking to them.
L. Reid: It's certainly my understanding that they've become a leader in the areas of chemical dependency. Since the project's inception, follow-up studies performed one year after completion of treatment have shown that, of the youth who completed the CHAMP program, 80 percent maintained their sobriety. That's an outstanding track record. I would offer my sincere appreciation and commendation to the staff and to the individuals who currently support Covenant House. I think they do some amazing work. I'll turn it over to my hon. colleague.
D. Jarvis: I just wanted to mention to the minister, on her offer to set up a meeting to discuss treatment services: you name the time and place, within reasonable order or period of time. We'll be there.
B. McKinnon: I have a few questions to ask the minister on youth justice. But before I get at that, last night we were discussing with the minister Access housing, which was a problem in my constituency. After the minister said last night that the ministry didn't have any information on Access or didn't know anything about them, it made me kind of curious. I did a little more research. I looked into Public Accounts. I checked Public Accounts, and there was an Access Building Association that was given $97,995. I also found out that Access housing was run by a Marion Haden, who works out of Whistler and runs a post office box
What I would like from the minister is, because of the way this company behaved so disgracefully with the neighbourhood where she said she was putting in this group home
[1720]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I thank the member for her information. Thank you.
B. McKinnon: I ask the minister: will she give me her assurance she'll look into this company, then, if it's working for the ministry and you're paying out all that money?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Be assured that we will be doing that. The ministry will be doing that.
B. McKinnon: Thank you.
The ministry announced on May 10, 2000, that they were starting a pilot project, through the Justice Institute of British Columbia, to help stop sexual exploitation of youth. This is going to be at the cost of $65,000. I wonder if the minister could explain to me what this project is.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The allocation of dollars is for a training program for workers who are working with sexually exploited youth. I've got some other information here. Approximately 50 participants have begun the program. It's a two-day program, I understand. There was one in the lower mainland on May 15 and 16, and in Prince George there was one in June for two days. Fifty participants have been in the program.
B. McKinnon: Was there a manual made up with this funding, also, that was to be given out to exploited youth?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes indeed, manuals were produced. There were manuals for the workers who participated in the program, for workers in general, for the police and for the community.
B. McKinnon: I was asking specifically for the exploited youth themselves. I had some understanding that there was a manual made up for them. I was wondering if that was so or not -- the youth themselves.
[1725]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The manuals were for the youth workers. As I understand it, there's information in them that can be conveyed to the young people about their rights and some of those kinds of things. That's there and produced for the workers to share.
B. McKinnon: I'll go on, then. The non-profit Fernwood House, which was a place that provided a safe shelter for troubled boys, was closed down due to cutbacks in the ministry. My understanding is that this home had been in operation since 1968. It operated programs for children with severe behaviour and learning programs, winning praise from the government for its services.
Under the minister's new policy for deinstitutionalizing children's care -- that five beds are too many -- it sort of reminds me of the time the mentally ill in this province were put out in the streets because we didn't house them anymore. My concern is that these boys went into this home because they went from foster home to foster home. What's going to happen to them now? Are they going to just be put back into foster homes? Or have they been?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: First of all, this was part of last year's budget, not this year's budget, so it doesn't technically need to be part of this discussion. But I can reassure the
[ Page 16933 ]
member that the beds were not lost to the community. There was a reconfiguration done, and that facility
B. McKinnon: I'm not sure, hon. Chair, if this question has been asked, so you just can tell me whether it has or not. How many safe houses are there that are accessible to youth that want to get off the street today? How many are for boys, and how many are for girls?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: In Vancouver, three safe houses with three beds each for youth 13 to 16; two with seven beds each for youth 16 to 19; one home for aboriginal youth; and the other, Family Services of Greater Vancouver. In Kelowna -- this doesn't differentiate male and female -- Central Okanagan Boys and Girls Club on Penny Lane, six safe houses and two beds
I can give you that. Prince George, Kamloops, New Westminster, Burnaby, Victoria -- I don't have a total on this page of all of that, so obviously in those centres, we've got quite a number of beds.
B. McKinnon: There is a program called Third Step, which helps troubled teens. My understanding is that this program is for youth that are on probation for criminal offences or those who fight with other students or who have stopped attending classes. Does the minister know anything about this particular program?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Would the member give us the name again?
B. McKinnon: Third Step.
[1730]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: In terms of the information we have here, we can't respond. We can't answer that question just at the moment. We'd have to check if it's one of our contracted agencies.
B. McKinnon: Many of the youth in this province say that they don't know what their rights are, and they are continually complaining. Is that manual that we talked about earlier the only way that you get out to the youth what their rights are? Do you actually have different ways of letting youth know what their rights are? There are a lot of complaints out there with youth themselves -- that they don't know what their rights are.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I can tell the member that all children in care with the ministry are provided with a brochure, which was developed along with the youth-in-care network. It describes what their rights are. As well, of course, the existing agencies -- like the advocates, the children's commissioner, the Children's Commission and the ombuds office -- have all that information as well. My information from the night I spent on the street was that those folks all knew their rights.
B. McKinnon: Last year when we did estimates, the ministry announced $15.7 million for construction of a new Victoria youth custody facility. I am wondering what stage that facility is at now.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The long answer is: architectural engineering services were secured through BCBC in November last year for the design and construction facility. The project, respective of detail and design, was completed by this spring; site work beginning late this summer; call for tenders for construction scheduled for January 2001; project expected to be completed by July of 2002. The project team in place met with the View Royal planning and zoning committee to present the time lines and strategies. Open houses were held this year on February 22, 24 and 26. A citizens' advisory board made up of local private citizens, municipal personnel and representatives has been established. This board will be meeting regularly with the management, staff and youth to provide
B. McKinnon: Once that facility's up and running, will the ministry be tearing down Willingdon and the other facilities? I understand this facility will take the place of the two facilities that are here in the Victoria area.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: First, only one of those facilities -- the location on Pembroke -- is being replaced, and the folks who are there will be going over. The determination of that site and the buildings there has yet to be determined.
[1735]
B. McKinnon: Last year in estimates the then-minister said that the ministry was committed to replacing the Burnaby Youth Secure Custody Centre. Is there any truth to that, and if so when would it happen?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, we are currently involved with the activity of trying to find a site. The approach will be that Willingdon will be replaced by two buildings. One will be on the Willingdon site, and the second one will be elsewhere in the valley. BCBC is working with MCF to find that location.
B. McKinnon: I just have one more question of the minister: how many Reconnect programs are there in British Columbia, and what is the cost of these programs?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: As the member suggested earlier, if a question has already been asked, then I would suggest to her that yes, we canvassed this question earlier in the day. Some of that information is in the Blues. If it's not sufficient, then get in touch with us, and we'll be happy to fill in the blanks.
B. McKinnon: I'd like to thank the minister and her staff for their answers, and I'll pass it on to my colleague over here.
R. Thorpe: Just a few questions, quickly -- just an easy one to start with, hon. Chair. I wonder if the minister could provide me with a list of what is detailed under supported child care programs. The reason I'm asking that question here today is that since June 5 we've made a number of inquiries to the minister's office asking for a detailed list, and to this day we have not received the list. I just wonder: what's the problem in providing a list with respect to supported child care programs in the province of British Columbia?
[ Page 16934 ]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Chair, some apologies for not responding earlier. We don't have that information directly in that form with us today. We will undertake to get it to him as quickly as possible.
R. Thorpe: What's today -- Wednesday? Hopefully we could have that by the end of the week. We shouldn't be, I wouldn't think, launching rocket ships to provide this kind of information here.
Let me ask a couple of questions with respect to early childhood health and development. Often I hear that early intervention is the key to addressing the issues, whatever the problem is, with respect to our children. I had the opportunity to visit OSNS in Penticton, a very highly regarded facility and organization in my community servicing the South Okanagan. I've been told that in most cases, early intervention
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Generally the ministry agrees with that philosophy: zero to four, zero to six -- in that range. Plus -- and the member would agree with this -- I know that in terms of the development of mental illness, the earlier we catch it the better. It doesn't always show up when they're six.
R. Thorpe: I wanted to make sure that we were all in agreement on the parameters we're working with here.
My next question is: what does the ministry do to monitor, throughout the province, the growing wait-lists with respect to
[1740]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The information the member requests is generally kept at the regional level and is kept manually. It's forwarded on a regular basis to head office. Eventually we're expecting that we'll be able to have this information on line and therefore with more ready access.
R. Thorpe: Is it fair for me to conclude, then, from the feel that's coming up to head office, that this is done on a fairly frequent basis and that head office is conversant on a fairly timely and regular basis with what the situation is with different situations around the province? Is that a fair assumption for me to make?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The information I want to provide to the member is that the information is provided on a regular basis. The member's assumption and question are essentially correct, and it's fair to put it that way.
What we're developing is indeed a wait-list strategy, so that we will have some consistency in the tracking and how it's dealt with. That strategy is being developed as we speak. It will be ready, along with a special needs framework, so again, that is a further tool to help us understand and work with this sector. It will also be coming forward by September. The member is aware that we put $6 million in this year's budget for improved access.
R. Thorpe: So as we work our way through this -- and I realize it takes time to put these systems in place
[1745]
[L. Reid in the chair.]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: As the information comes from the regions, we become aware of some of the needs in the particular areas where special services are required. As that information has accumulated in the last while, we've recognized the need to make some changes, to put some more funds and resources into the system in order to respond to that -- hence the $6 million. We have a health advisory committee to help us work out the retention issues around the clinical positions that we need to have in place in the regions. We're working with them, as some information for the member to
B. Penner: I thank my colleague from Okanagan-Penticton for allowing me to interject at this juncture.
I understand that a bit earlier some questions were asked about youth justice, and I'd now like to touch on that again. I've heard a rumour that the ministry is considering closing a facility known as Centre Creek Camp, which is located about 45 or 50 kilometres outside of Chilliwack, in the Chilliwack River valley. I wonder if the minister could confirm if that's true. If it is true, what is the rationale for closing that facility? What will it cost to build and operate a new facility somewhere else?
[D. Streifel in the chair.]
The Chair: Minister, minding the time.
[1750]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: A brief response, and then I'll take note of that. First of all, there are no immediate plans to close Centre Creek. The member is aware of the replacement plans for Willingdon. I went into that response just a few minutes ago, in actual fact. A site search is underway for Willingdon, which is to be divided into two parts -- one piece to stay on the Willingdon site and another somewhere else in the valley. BCBC is working with the ministry to do that.
There are many steps yet to be taken before any alteration or any change to the use of Centre Creek will happen. Part of the capital plan suggests that Centre Creek and Boulder are under some discussion and that before anything happens, a business plan must be put to Treasury Board.
I understand that the member has another question. I'll be happy to do that, and then we'll go.
B. Penner: I ask the minister to keep me appraised of any decision with respect to Centre Creek. I do get calls from time
[ Page 16935 ]
to time from staff that work there. I'm quite familiar with the area. I used to be a park ranger up at Chilliwack Lake, and that was near Centre Creek. It's an excellent location, I think, for young people because of its outdoor setting.
My other question relates to an e-mail I received this morning. I was told in the e-mail that the Ministry for Children and Families is planning to close a small office presence that it maintains in Agassiz, located in the riding of Mission-Kent. This is something that might interest the Chair. I wonder if the minister can confirm if in fact the office in Agassiz is going to be closing, and if so, why. I understand there is some concern in the community about maintaining a presence on the part of the ministry in that community.
The Chair: The minister, responding to what should be a fairly familiar question. [Laughter.]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: It comes up from time to time, Chair, I gather. I have heard that.
We have no immediate plans to close the office in Agassiz.
Noting the time, I move that the committee recess till 6:40
A Voice: After private members' statements.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin:
The Chair: The motion before you is to recess till after private members' statements.
Motion approved.
The committee recessed from 5:53 p.m. to 7:07 p.m.
[D. Streifel in the chair.]
R. Thorpe: Could the minister please advise what actions are being taken to overcome the shortage of services related to speech-language pathology in the South Okanagan?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: A number of actions are in place, because the issue is a good one -- recruitment and retention of the kind of therapists that the member is talking about. We have been consulting with the health advisory committee. They are a body of people who have tremendous expertise in a whole range of health-related areas. They have provided us with some very good advice and ideas.
The second thing we're doing, in the short term, is that we're talking to the Ministry of Advanced Education, Training and Technology about providing more spaces in the university sector for opportunities for training here in British Columbia, therefore some encouragement for young people and folks to go into that field of work.
We're also looking at what some of the barriers are that prevent people in the field from staying and searching for ways to enhance the work setting and the position field, so that we've got more of them and they stay longer.
[1910]
R. Thorpe: I don't want to be rude, but we're consulting, we're talking, we're looking at universities and we're looking at barriers. We have a shortage. My question is very direct: when are we going to get the services there? Stop the studies, stop the consulting and stop worrying about the barriers. When are we going to get the speech therapists there to serve the children? The minister said: "We have to address it by the time they're four years old." When are we going to do that?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Well, member, I would be pleased to turn Les Foster here into a speech therapist tomorrow, but he would need some more training. The problem is that there is a severe shortage of speech therapists. I think it's not just in British Columbia but everywhere. So that means if that's the advice -- that's the information we have -- we're going looking wherever we can. We will be doing a recruiting program across the country to find where they are and offer people positions here in British Columbia.
There are funds available for that, and that's what we're going to be doing. But we do need to talk to the right people about where you go to get these folks, help us define who they are and what we need. That's what's happening. These are the people on the health advisory committee who are the experts in the field and can help us recruit -- as well as give us good advice. So all of these things are part of the effort that we are involved in, in trying to respond to that need. That's what we're doing. As soon as we can, we will be doing that.
R. Thorpe: Just so I understand clearly
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: One of the pieces of the barrier issue has to do with a therapist who may be in an area working 0.6 of the time -- because that's what the need is at the present time -- for the ministry. The other part of the full-time job is with another agency, like the education system, and the education system may be pulling back. So that's part of what we have to do with those who are already there in place. Part of the $6 million, as I mentioned earlier
R. Thorpe: Hon. Chair, I'm not sure I got an answer to my question, so let me just try it. If it was a yes, if that was the minister's way of saying a yes
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: While we have a little consultation still to do, that would be a logical conclusion -- that yes, we will be rolling out these dollars as soon as we can.
R. Thorpe: Let me ask, hopefully, just a couple of questions. I suppose it does depend on the answer. Six million dollars to reduce the wait-lists. Where? How? When? And how do we get the money to the different regions of British Columbia?
[ Page 16936 ]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, I've got a number of responses to that, and I think we need to be comprehensive here, so I'm sure the member will appreciate it all when he's got it all.
First of all, consultation does need to happen. The provincial table is happening. This is what consultation has taken place so far, and a bit ongoing. A task force selected from the provincial table, plus the health advisory committee and other stakeholders -- and health advisory committee separately. With the regions, for funding distribution the regions are to develop a simple, straightforward plan based on readily available information which sets out where the funds will be distributed in the region. Headquarters staff will be available to assist the regions, as requested, to help develop those plans.
[1915]
Funds will be used to support the expansion of existing services, as the member has suggested: speech-language therapy, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, infant development programs and supported child care. All those areas are going to be part of this money. All funds will be used for services for children zero to six. We are making a recommended regional allocation model.
We talked yesterday about the sort of socioeconomic basis for this, adjusted as follows: using population zero to six, where they're located; using existing budgets for supported child care, infant development program and early intervention. Every region will receive a minimum of $285,000. This amount is to fund three therapy positions or an equivalent combination of therapists, infant development and supported child care. Several models have been explored, with allocation based on the Children and Families proposed socioeconomic model or a weighted system, using the socioeconomic model 50 percent and staff-to-population ratios 50 percent. Another possibility would be a weighted system using the socioeconomic model 50 percent plus weightless data 50 percent, and distribution based on population of the children zero to six.
Centrally allocated funding will cover areas of infant development, an aboriginal consultant, a supported-child-care consultant, contracts for provincewide recruitment and retention of therapists, training and mentoring plan to enhance pediatric skills for therapists, infant development program and supported child care.
Allocation of training for the training branch to negotiate an increase in seats in the therapy areas. Further to funding distribution, allocation letters to the regions will set out the parameters, which include the need to focus on services to aboriginal populations and guidelines on recommended staff-to-population ratios. Regions chosen for a learning site must include, in their plan, resources to support that initiative. And then a monitoring factor must be part of this so that we monitor the distribution and impact of the funding -- clearly a pretty critical part of this. The program and management audit branch is heading a subcommittee developing a process for monitoring the allocation of the funds. The provincial table has identified that they, too, can play a role in the monitoring, and at a future time this will be developed further.
R. Thorpe: I wonder if the minister would be prepared to give me a copy of those documents that she just read from. I'd appreciate getting those later today, if that's possible. I notice the minister nodding, and I appreciate that.
I believe you said each region will get a minimum of $285,000. When will that money flow, and when do you expect to have these programs -- the $6 million -- in the field, doing the services that are required by the children in need in British Columbia?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: By September, at the very latest.
R. Thorpe: We'll watch that very carefully, but I appreciate that commitment.
With respect to the $2 million for pilot projects for intervention and support, where are those pilot projects taking place?
[1920]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Discussions are clearly ongoing. The design of the kind of program, the pilot and the location have yet to be determined. We anticipate two to four locations in the province also will begin to roll out by September, and we're consulting, as we must, with those who are most involved with all of this -- the community living subsector table and, again, the health advisory committee.
R. Thorpe: So it's between two and four -- is that correct?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes.
R. Thorpe: When will the locations in British Columbia be selected? And can you give us any idea what the possibilities are here, at the present time?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Two parts to this. First, we are looking at and will decide, over the summer, on rural and urban centres which make sense in this province. The focus of the pilot will be screening and early identification of needs of the young children, so that we can provide the services quickly. Then we will be pursuing the testing of outcomes over the course of time.
R. Thorpe: On April 7 of this year, as part of the $9 million investment in early childhood activities, you identified $1.1 million that will go to the early behavioral intervention pilot for children with autism. Can the minister advise whether there's a business plan to cover this pilot project, the $1.1 million?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I have a number of notes around the development of this particular pilot that I will be happy to share with the member. I could send it over to him.
Suffice it to say that an RFP is being developed for this program, helped by an advisory committee that's involved with this. There is also an interministerial working group who will be working with this -- Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education -- regarding transition into the school system. An evaluation framework is part of that RFP; it must be part of that RFP. It's $1.1 million in year 1, and $3 million in years 2 and 3, as I think I've indicated in the past.
[1925]
We expect the RFP, in consultation with the Purchasing Commission, June 30, 2000 -- expected proponents selected in September 2000, service delivery to begin in the fall of this year. I'll leave it at that for now.
[ Page 16937 ]
R. Thorpe: I'd appreciate getting copies, as the minister offered. Can the minister please advise: with respect to the overall action plan that was introduced last year for autism, what is happening with this plan? Is it just the pilot project, or what is actually happening? In the interest of time, what funding is committed to children with autism and the families this year, as compared to last year in the budget?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I think the plan identified
R. Thorpe: Through the collection of information that we talked about prior to the dinner break and private members' statements, we talked about information coming up from the field and coming to head office and looking at it. What kind of new information has the ministry identified with the number of children that suffer from autism? What kind of increase have we identified in the province of British Columbia over the past year?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There are approximately 1,400 young children and young people -- that means age zero to 18 -- who were currently having some service in British Columbia. Of that, approximately 250 are in the zero-to-six age range. I don't have an actual number of the increase over last year. We believe it to be about 100 over all those age groups.
May I add to that that the numbers we have aren't all receiving services from us.
R. Thorpe: Since we have a provincial number, could the minister then confirm how much the wait-list for children with autism has grown in the South Okanagan?
[1930]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We'll have to take that on notice. We don't have that number in front of us right now.
R. Thorpe: I would appreciate the minister, through the staff, getting that number and advising me as quickly as possible what it was last year and what it is this year. I'd also like, if it's possible, an indication of the amounts of money that were addressed to the issue last year and are identified for the coming year. I believe I'll be very surprised if it's not shown that there was an increase, because I have the opportunity to work with many of the families, as some of the ministry staff know.
Just a couple of quick questions. What work has the minister done with respect to MMR and the possibility of a relationship to autism?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: At this stage I gather the medical research academics are working on that in order to research it thoroughly so that we know what this is all about and what those connections are.
R. Thorpe: Again, I don't want to put words in the minister's mouth. Is the ministry actually doing any work on it? Or are you waiting for somebody else to do some work on that? Who's doing the work within government on this issue?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: It's my understanding that the Ministry of Health may have more direct information about this than we do. No one in the ministry is doing any research on it at this stage. That's not our forte. It's the medical research world that is doing the work on this.
R. Thorpe: I would hope that the fact that someone's raised this issue with respect to the issue
My final question: what is the current status on the approval and funding options for families with children with autism with respect to Lovaas treatment?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: At this time, because that issue is before the courts and has not been resolved yet, I'm not at liberty to comment.
[1935]
B. McKinnon: I have a special report here from the Province newspaper that was put out on May 21, 2000, regarding Bountiful, which is a polygamous community near Creston. I'm sure the ministry has heard about it. I would just like to first give the minister an overview on this special report, because I have a few questions I want to ask the ministry about it.
Ex-employees of the school of this commune say that the goal in this commune is to prepare girls for marriage. They have a school newsletter that states: "Marriages by appointment, by revelation, should be the desire of all parents for the children that attend this school." Now, a 15-year-old girl is paired with a 57-year-old man, her stepgrandfather, who already has five wives.
At the same time that the 1989 contract was signed between
According to this article, the woman who was that 15-year-old girl who married her stepgrandfather went on to marry a 59-year-old man who kept her and another wife and eight children in two uninsulated rooms. This young woman apparently tried to get help but was threatened. She attempted suicide twice and had a nervous breakdown. She eventually wrote a research paper in 1993, commissioned by the Ministry of Women's Equality, and this article apparently is collecting dust on the shelves of that ministry.
The article mentions a so-called 1989 policy document on child abuse signed by a member of the RCMP; then-Social Services staffer Brian Ross; and the leader of the commune, Winston Blackmore, who is also the school superintendent. The article goes on to say that the Children and Families ministry official would be meeting to renegotiate the contract. That would be last month, in May. So I was wondering if the ministry is renegotiating a contract with this group.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The only thing that's been signed in this situation is a child protection protocol, which
[ Page 16938 ]
has to do with the reporting of abuse and neglect of children. That's the extent of it. If a complaint's been laid, there's a whole process for what you do with all of that. So the only connection is that child abuse and neglect part of reporting. That's part of the child protection protocol.
B. McKinnon: So has the ministry itself done anything to investigate? I mean, even though they haven't heard of anything, have they ever done anything to investigate any child abuse in Bountiful?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: If a complaint has been made, then it was investigated.
[1940]
B. McKinnon: Apparently the woman who did the report, which cost the Ministry of Women's Equality $20,000 and which is sitting on the shelf gathering dust
The problem here is that silence is the code word in Bountiful. No one, under fear of harm, is allowed to talk. The kids are taught to keep quiet; the women are taught to keep quiet. A 15-year-old girl marrying a 59-year-old man -- a stepgrandfather -- is child abuse in my opinion. Is the government going to condone this behaviour? Or are they going to sit back and allow them to just go on with that type of life under the name of religion?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I repeat my response to the previous question, and that is: if there is a complaint, the ministry will investigate. So encourage complaints.
The Chair: Member, I just offer some observation. It may be more appropriate to examine this issue under the Attorney General ministry or
B. McKinnon: It was the Attorney General ministry that decided British Columbia is the only place in Canada that will not prosecute men for polygamy. I wanted to bring what is happening to the attention of the ministry. It is disgraceful. It is in Canada; it should not be happening here today. I just wanted to bring it to the minister's attention that you are allowing this to happen, being the government of British Columbia, and you are not doing anything about it.
S. Hawkins: I know that drug and alcohol addiction was addressed before the supper break, but if I can just go back to it for a couple of minutes
I understand that Crossroads has a 16-bed facility which is currently being held at eight beds, pending a review of how the operating dollars and staffing go. I understand that there is a desperate need for 16 beds, and I think that's what was being planned. There is a need for another 1.5 FTEs in nursing, a maintenance person, a housekeeper and a cook's helper. Certainly that means extra operating dollars; I think I was told it was about $150,000 more in operating dollars. Even with that money, it's still a lower cost than detox is in other parts of the province.
I know that Crossroads is working with the ministry to achieve that goal. I am wondering if the minister can just update me on what's happening there to try and get the facility up to the number of beds that are desperately needed for our part of the province.
[1945]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: As the member knows, I've got some facts to put on the table about how the Kelowna detox opened two months ago as a partnership between the health board and the Ministry for Children and Families. The ministry contributes some $300,000 to the contract, and the health board contributes $150,000. There are some capital grants provided as well -- $38,000 and $23,000 for a treatment centre and the safe housing. At this stage the talks are ongoing about any future developments.
S. Hawkins: I neglected to mention Paul MacDonald and the staff of Crossroads, as well, who worked very hard to make this a reality. I know it's a priority. It certainly was a priority the last couple of years to drive this project and make sure the doors opened. So it's something that I hope the ministry works with our community to help it get to the level of the need that's there, because definitely the need is there.
One thing I did hear from the committee and from the people working in the area of addictions
Certainly the ministry has been through different reviews as well. Hopefully, we'll see them coming together and the different ministries working well together. I don't think the public has been that well served over the past few years with all the changes and the programs being bumped around across different ministries. But I know the minister and the ministry are aware of that. Certainly the front-line workers have made their concerns known as well.
At this time the critic has allowed me to address the issue of gaming addiction. Is the staff there to deal with that? Yeah? Okay.
I raise this, and certainly other members raise this, every year in estimates. It is also something that is a growing concern and certainly an area that
But I do want to quote from a public opinion survey on gambling that the Canada West Foundation did. They ran this
[ Page 16939 ]
survey in June of 1999, and they interviewed 2,202 Canadians from across the country. The analysis presented in the report that I received in February of this year was based on five regions: B.C., the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada. It indicates here that there is a 95 percent certainty that the results are accurate to within minus 2.1 percent.
I'm just going to go over some key findings in the survey. The first key finding was that 72 percent of Canadians participated in the last year in regulated and unregulated gambling -- regulated gambling being lotteries, casinos, bingos; unregulated gambling meaning sports pools, bets with friends, stock speculating -- that kind of thing. Sixty-three percent of Canadians feel that, on the whole, gambling is an acceptable activity in their province; 68 percent of Canadians feel that gambling has not improved the quality of life in their community; 84 percent of Canadians feel that government should hold public consultations before introducing new forms of gambling; 63 percent of Canadians feel that it is their right to gamble regardless of the consequences, and 32 percent disagree; 77 percent of Canadians feel that government should do more to limit the negative effects of problem gambling; 92 percent of Canadians feel that gambling is inevitable and that people will find a way to gamble even if it was made illegal; 32 percent of Canadians indicated that they know someone who is a problem gambler -- that is, they spend more than they can afford on gambling. Those are some pretty interesting findings from the pool of people that was surveyed.
What I am going to raise with the minister is that I want to know how many FTEs the ministry has currently designated to deal with gambling addiction -- that is, currently in the ministry. Are there designated FTEs?
[1950]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I've got a group of comments to make, and I might as well put them all on the record. The breadth of the response to this issue, which I appreciate the member's concern about -- no question about that
I know the member is already aware of the toll-free information, referral, crisis and telephone counselling line, in place since October of '97. Another area of awareness -- gambling awareness stickers and brochures have been distributed to all the usual outlets where gambling happens, so that that information is available. We also have standardized screening, assessment and evaluation tools in place and being used. Each region has a small amount of money -- $5,000 annually -- to support innovative community projects on prevention of problem gambling. Training sessions for gambling counsellors, supervisors and other addiction-service professionals have been held in each fiscal year.
The annual allocation of $2 million is provided through the budget process with full recoveries by the B.C. Lottery Corporation. Calls to our line in 1999: 758; and counselling was pursued with -- I would guess this is how this reads -- 569 of those folks who called.
S. Hawkins: The FTEs that the minister mentioned -- is that an increase or decrease from last year?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Chair?
The Chair: Minister. Sorry.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Thank you. It would be the same as last year.
The Chair: I get caught up
S. Hawkins: Thank you, Chair. I'll try to speed it up for you -- try and keep you awake.
Other provinces link the amount of funding spent on addiction to revenues from gaming. I'm wondering if the minister can tell us if this is what the ministry is planning to do or has considered doing. Or is that what they're doing currently?
[1955]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: No, the province of British Columbia does not base the responses on the revenues that are taken
S. Hawkins: The province embarked on expansion in gambling over the last couple of years, but the budgets remain practically the same. So I need to know: how does the government decide what resources are adequate for gaming addiction? We've seen an increase in gaming and gambling, but we haven't seen an increase in the budget. Does the ministry, then, do studies? Is there any research into whether the resources that are in place currently are adequate or whether more are needed? Is there some kind of a sliding scale anticipated? As gambling increases, perhaps the budget to deal with addiction will increase.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, work is being done now. An evaluation is underway now about what is happening and how the programs are indeed working and functioning. That analysis is needed so that we will be able to identify whether we need to do a change in budget allocation for next year. We're doing that so that we will have some more accurate numbers, as the member is suggesting, for next year.
S. Hawkins: I'd ask that the minister make those analyses available to the opposition as well, when she gets them, if that's agreeable. Obviously the ministry is capable of running those studies, and it would be interesting to see how the ministry generates those numbers and decides how much to put into the addiction services.
[ Page 16940 ]
I'm also interested in whether there are beds available in addiction treatment facilities to deal exclusively with gaming addiction. Are there dedicated beds in treatment centres?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I'd like to add a comment for the information of the member in terms of the results of the analysis and evaluation that we're doing. That information is being prepared for Treasury Board, so that will emerge when the budget is prepared and presented.
[2000]
In terms of the dedicated beds in a residential treatment centre, no, there aren't any dedicated beds for gambling addictions. We do have 100 workers in the system who are trained in gambling therapy work who work with
S. Hawkins: Are these contracted workers? What requirements do they have to meet? What standards do they have to meet before they get work with the ministry to work with gambling addicts?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: For those who receive the training, it will be training that is added on to existing training. The workers are already accredited addictions workers, and then we add on the particular training for gambling. That training has been delivered every year, and plans are for training this year as well. There are some details about level 1 training, which is an introduction to problem gambling with clinical practice, and level 2, advanced clinical skills in problem gambling treatment. Training has been developed and delivered by the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba and Davis Consulting.
S. Hawkins: I won't get into the details of that, but if the minister can send me some information on the programs -- who delivers them, how many times a year training is done, how many workers are trained a year. Those kinds of statistics and information would be helpful. I'm also interested in knowing how many British Columbians were treated this year for gaming addiction. And is that an increase or decrease from the previous year?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I've got one and a half sheets of information that we have, which came through from the numbers I mentioned earlier: the number of calls
[2005]
S. Hawkins: I'd appreciate that. Is the minister telling me that the only statistics they keep, then, are from the 1-800 line? She informed me that 758 calls were taken in 1999 and 569 people were treated, but that's just from the self-help line, right? They call in on the 1-800. Does the ministry not track from anywhere else? Do they not know, from the 100 workers that are out working in the field, how many people they are treating? They're not necessarily, I think, treating the people from the self-help line.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Part of the information we have here is, "How did people learn about the service?" -- which means it must have been how they
S. Hawkins: I'll be interested in getting those figures. I'm also interested in whether the ministry supports a family-based approach to treatment of gambling addiction and whether there are services available to families of gaming addicts.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The short answer is yes. We have some numbers of how many were involved and a cross-total of all of the problem gambling-affected -- about 143 cases.
S. Hawkins: It's my understanding that there are problem addicts -- gaming addicts -- that are treated out-of-province. I'm wondering if the minister has information on that. How many British Columbians were treated out-of-province for a gaming addiction? And if the minister has the costs, what did we pay to have them treated out of province?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Not that we're aware of -- that there were any that went out of province that we covered any costs for.
[2010]
S. Hawkins: I have other issue areas, but in the interests of time -- because I know the critic has a lot of other areas to cover -- I'd ask that the minister make her staff available, and perhaps we'll do a briefing on this. There are areas like advertising standards and how the ministry interacts with Lotteries and the Gaming Commission to ensure that gaming addiction is minimized.
I'm also interested in whether the ministry has considered introducing self-exclusion policies for gaming addicts to ban themselves from casinos. Things like that are probably areas that the ministry has considered. If they haven't, maybe the briefing will work two ways. So perhaps we can set that up later this summer or early in the fall.
L. Reid: The issues I want to see if we can canvass this evening are contract reform and accreditation. We'll spend a few minutes there before moving to the advocate's office and the commissioner's office.
One of the questions I posed during the briefing that I held on May 15 was support for agencies going through accreditation. The answer to my question was that the minister offered up to $4,000 to the first 20 contractors who volunteered for contract reform and accreditation. The four agencies who have submitted bills to the ministry for this purpose have received assistance. A fifth agency is under review for assistance. There isn't any date on this sheet that came attached, so I'm wondering if that number has changed. Is it still four agencies that have been supported in their accreditation? Or indeed, are we closer to the 20 that it appears were given permission to seek that funding?
[ Page 16941 ]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The member is right in identifying the four, and at this stage it's still four. We have some totals in terms of the number who have been accredited. Twenty-seven have been accredited, and eight are in the process of being reaccredited. In terms of what's ongoing at the present time, there are four that are receiving funding for their process.
L. Reid: How did the ministry arrive at the sum of $4,000? I have to believe that the cost of accreditation is far more significant than that to each agency. Perhaps the minister can give me a sense of what it would cost, if the ministry has indeed costed it out -- and I trust that they have. What would it cost for an agency that has contracts totalling more than $350,000? What would be the cost of the accreditation process to them?
[2015]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: This is one of the answers that says: "It depends." We always love those kinds of answers. The $4,000 seems to be a bit of a rough number to offer some assistance to some of those who want it, because there are some agencies that have worked it in as part of their regular management plans to do this work, and some have not asked for any money and haven't used any. Others are working out what they think it may cost. The $4,000 was an across-the-board offer to give them some impetus, to get them going. It wasn't, I think, necessarily meant to cover all their costs but to be some incentive for them.
L. Reid: So of the 27 accredited, does the minister have a sense of what it costs to go through the co-op program and what it costs to go through the CARF program? What I want to learn from this discussion this evening is what the cost to each agency would be as a result of the accreditation process. So even one example would be helpful to me.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: For the member's information, there are ministry costs for each agency that amount to about $11,000 over the three-year time period of the accreditation. I'm sure she's aware of what some of those relate to. We work with them on the issue of mentoring, some travelling costs and the costs of some of the review parts of it. The ministry picks up some of that. For the agencies obviously, as the member would be aware, it's time and staff involvement. We have no information about the CARF program.
L. Reid: My concern continues, frankly, that the ministry would place before agencies an opportunity to participate in accreditation without having some sense of what it's going to cost the individual agency. I heard and appreciate the minister's comment that it's $11,000 per agency from the ministry perspective. What is it from the agency perspective?
I have a plethora of figures that have come before me. I simply want to know which one is most accurate in terms of what the ministry's sense is of cost per agency. I certainly put it into the ballpark in terms of agencies that had more than $350,000 of contract on behalf of the ministry. What would they need to spend?
It seems to me that the clawbacks had happened to front-line service providers. If we're talking $11,000 are your costs, their costs are probably equal to that. That's well over 1.5 percent of a $350,000 contract and probably double that by the time this is done. So at the same time you are clawing dollars back, you're imposing greater financial implications on their program delivery. You're offering them $4,000 in the process -- and only to four agencies out of the 27 that are currently accredited.
[2020]
It seems to me that there should have been some clear communication around the cost of accreditation. I absolutely support the notion that it's time and staff. Yes. I have been involved in accreditation on behalf of school districts. That is exactly what it is. But those are not insignificant sums of money. That can be astronomical sums of money. Surely the ministry has a test case -- agency X -- to walk it through the process in terms of what the cost was on behalf of the province and what the cost is on behalf of the agency, to come up with a total of what that expenditure would be.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I actually have a couple of comments I want to make, and I do have an example for the member. First of all, I am sure the member is aware that at this stage this is a voluntary process. There is nothing compulsory about it at this stage. The response that we are receiving about it is that the agencies which participated like it very much and find it very much a valuable exercise to be going through.
I have here some numbers from Westcoast Family Resources Society, which is a large enterprise and, I gather, covers two or three regions in the province. They reported their internal costs at $8,774.58, of which $6,984 was for extra admin support. We reimbursed them for $4,000 of that admin support.
L. Reid: Given that there's roughly $9,000 and your $11,000, it's roughly a $20,000 exercise per agency that would have contracts over $350,000.
The minister intrigued me when she said that it's an optional process. The information I received at the briefing was that for agencies that had contracts over $350,000, it was required. It was optional for agencies with contracts between $100,000 and $350,000, and below $100,000 was not required. Has that information changed?
[2025]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: My goodness me, we do some complicated things in this ministry. We're in year two of the accreditation program and the accreditation exercise. The ministry asked the community: "We're going to be doing this. Who wants to volunteer to be part of the first group?"
Out of the some 6,300 MCF service provider contractors, some 390 are working their way through the system now. These would be the groups that the member mentioned, whose contracts are over $350,000. What the government needs to know, and the community needs to know, always, is that they can be assured of the quality of the service they're going to get from any agency that is providing service on behalf of government.
One could do it as sending a fleet of folks from the government. The ministry descends on an agency and reviews all of these things and gives them some kind of a gold star. Or one contracts with a third-party accreditation agency, which is the approach that's clearly being taken here.
[ Page 16942 ]
L. Reid: The minister certainly didn't suggest that it was a required operation, so I'm going to take her at her word that this accreditation process is optional. Indeed, that's the information that she's put on the record.
My other comments were around the nature of the contract between MCF and between CARF and between COA. It would seem to me that the ministry is probably directly purchasing, if nothing else, the application forms, etc., that those two suppliers would be providing. Can the minister tell us what the cost to the taxpayer is today for the accreditation contracts that exist between MCF and COA and MCF and CARF?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There are two things I would like to say, and I want to clarify on the issue of the voluntary process. Just so the member is clear, what I had said was that the first group that was going through was going through voluntarily. The program is a five-year program, and by the end of that time the ministry expects that all those agencies that wish to do business with government will become accredited. So at this stage they're volunteering. They're volunteering to come forward -- those who want to be early off the mark and get started at it. By year four, there may be some who maybe haven't quite got organized to do it. But they know that the writing's on the wall and that if they want to do business with the government, they need to be accredited. The public -- the population and taxpayers -- need to know that the services we're buying are from accredited
[2030]
The second part has to do with the agreement. The current agreement with the agencies amounts to some $500,000 per year. We expect that at the end, as more come on stream to accept this and undertake this work, it will range between $1.5 million and $1.8 million, which in fact is 0.2 percent of the current budget for contracted services. The way it works is that the agencies choose which of the two, COA or CARF, they wish to work with, and then the ministry pays a unit cost.
L. Reid: The minister mentioned that after five years, this will no longer be an optional process. If she can just tell me what year we're in now. Is this year 1 of the process? It's year 2. So by 2003 every agency that wishes to do business with government will have to comply. Okay.
The other issue that I want to canvass for a few minutes is the report of the office of the child, youth and family advocate. On April 4, Joyce Preston wrote to all members of the Legislature. Her words:
She's saying that funding isn't adequate. She's made 17 recommendations that, if implemented, would significantly improve services to children and youth. Only three of these recommendations have been fully implemented, two partially implemented, and 12 have not been implemented. In her view as British Columbia's advocate for children and youth, it is simply not good enough."I'm disturbed by the lack of progress, indeed, the erosion of services, especially early supportive services for children, youth and their families. Children in government care need dedicated social workers' time, appropriate foster homes and other services such as counselling, alcohol and drug treatment and speech therapy. Early intervention services are seriously lacking, and there continues to be a staffing crisis, particularly with social workers. Repeated restructuring of the Ministry for Children and Families has yielded no real improvements in direct services for children who need them."
My question, based on this, which is an interesting summary of the debate we've had over the last three days, is: if indeed this ministry and this government created the office of the children's advocate, said it was an important role that the voices of children in the province should be heard, why is it that today the recommendations are not being implemented? Why is it that the ministry is not taking the best advice of the day from an office that they in fact created? The priorities of the children's advocate office -- the minister needs to explain to me why those are not the priorities of this government.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I will say, as I have before, that I appreciate the work that the advocate and the commissioner and the others in this field do. I have had a number of occasions to meet with Ms. Preston and discuss all these issues. I'm pleased to and will continue to do that kind of work.
As the member knows, we have reviewed the recommendations. We have acted on some. And there are some, in fact, such as the needs-based response
I think that, in the big picture, we're well on our way to responding to -- more than responding, we have implemented -- many of those issues. Indeed, I think that the thrust of the ministry on the many fronts that it works on in fact incorporate some parts of every bit of all the recommendations that were there.
[2035]
L. Reid: The concerns that continue to confront me and individuals who attempt to provide these services are the staffing question and the adequacy of plans of care. I know I saw a press release from this ministry some months back where it said, frankly, that only 8 percent of the plans of care were adequate. Roll the clock forward, I think, six additional months, and it was up to 20 percent of the plans of care were found to be adequate, on behalf of the Ministry for Children and Families. When we talk about accreditation, benchmarking, measurement, I support those notions.
But it seems to me that one in five plans of care being considered adequate cannot be the goal for this ministry. In close to a year we haven't got above 20 percent. I'm hoping there is new information today that the minister can impart that in fact there has been some success in this area. Otherwise, I'd continue to come back at the minister in terms of her suggesting that 900 recommendations have been implemented. This is one of the most important ones that obviously still needs enormous work.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes, we are moving vigorously in the direction of improving those plans of care. The plan of action includes the following. Late last year, last September, we identified a British model called Looking After Children that was seen to be a very effective tool. That involves foster parents, workers and others involved in developing the plan of care using that model. We're implementing that across British Columbia in all regions.
[ Page 16943 ]
Training is underway to make the plans more effective, and we do expect improvements in the percent of plans that are indeed adequate. To support that, we have put 30 guardianship workers into the regions. Indeed, we have 11 guardianship consultants as well, all of whom are there to help develop those plans and to help put that Looking After Children model into effect so that the plans of care will be as thorough and appropriate as they ought to be.
L. Reid: What is the percentage today of care plans that are found to be adequate?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: The commissioner stated a couple of points. One was that last year, 8 percent were complete. But he also said that 30 percent were mostly complete, and we're working on those; sometimes you take mostly too. But you work on those. This year the target that he has set is 50 percent, and that's what we're shooting for.
L. Reid: Since the comment was made, of 20 percent -- it was probably six or eight months ago. Has there been a summing-up of what the percentage is today? The target is 50 percent. Are we at 40 percent? Are we close to the target?
[2040]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We're not in a position to be able to say what percentage, how far along we are. We have our internal way of testing. We do samples of files and have a look. If they don't seem adequate, as we understand the criteria, then we will send them back to the region for pursuit, for further work. If that's not adequate, then they come to the director for that. At the end of the day, which is the end of the year, when the director closes his file on this and has done an audit, then he will determine -- because the 50 percent is his number -- whether the ministry, in his view, has reached that point or not.
L. Reid: I appreciate the information. But let me put on the record my heartfelt concern that by the end of the year, half the children in the care of this province will still not have an adequate care plan. That gives me enormous concern.
The issue that's hinged to that is around staffing. If the minister could put on the record for me the percentage of vacancies that still exist across the province? My understanding is that, at last count, it was probably 40 percent in the north for child protection social workers and 20 percent across the province. If there's new information to add to that, I would appreciate receiving it.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: There are 121 vacancies out of a base of 1,200 people. In the north it's around about 40 percent of shortages, and that is a serious concern -- and has been. That was one of the very first issues that I heard about when I took on this ministry. Clearly we're still working very hard on it. It's also the case that the major centres of Prince George in fact are, as I understand it, fully staffed.
L. Reid: Let me say this: I wish the ministry every success in terms of filling those vacancies. The bottom line, for me: every time there's a vacancy, that's 30 or 40 children's lives that are unattended, if you will. That's where the miscommunication, the mishandling of information happens in this ministry -- when different people handle the file. And we've discussed this, I think, strenuously, extensively in the opening remarks -- that it's the durability of relationship that makes a difference in the lives of these children, not a different person every two or three weeks, and not a different person who may just check on the file periodically. So again, I hope my concern has been noted.
In terms of the children's commissioner's report, I have enormous regard for the work of Paul Pallan and for the Children's Commission and certainly his issues. He has his five themes, as you work your way through it, in this current report weighing the evidence.
Rationalizing the wait-list for special needs children. This minister and I have touched on this topic repeatedly through the last three days of debate. There still seems to be a lack of a plan to do that. The Surrey-White Rock individuals who have come and met with both myself and this ministry will tell you there are 100 special needs infants on the wait-lists for services; and that's just one little tiny pocket of this province.
So again, by choosing not to serve them when they're zero to six years of age, there will be enormous difficulties later on. The research is absolutely, abundantly clear on that. You intervene when the services will be the most effective and the least expensive, or you simply wait and intervene later, when the services are less effective and a whole lot more expensive. His comment, I think, needs to receive some real consideration from this ministry when it comes to how we are best to address the special needs wait-list across this province.
[2045]
The early intervention piece, the Building Blocks program, is again a pocket of excellence. But I need to hear from this minister, hopefully, that there's a plan to expand that to every corner of this province. Some of those issues need to be advanced with just plain good human resolve. The minister needs to take those issues forward.
The sense of reading his document, the 15 priorities, the 100 initiatives
So the folks who are doing their absolute best to perform on behalf of this ministry -- I take my hat off to them. I think there are some fabulous folks, and I've certainly met a number of them in the last number of weeks, in terms of preparing for these estimates.
But the dilemma is that they, today, feel unsupported. And I'm not providing any new information to this minister. She knows there's tremendous low morale in folks in offices across this province, in terms of people who day after day are there to do the right thing, who absolutely are there to do the right thing and often feel unsupported, unappreciated by Victoria, by what happens in this place. It concerns me that the ministry continues to say: "Yes, this is a recurring problem. And yes, if no action is taken, it will continually be a problem before us." So I'm hoping that the ministry will take to heart the care plan issue and the staffing issue as being absolutely pivotal to any future success this ministry might have.
My hopefully last comment on this topic is regarding the adoption. It's my understanding that 178 outside adoptions occurred last year. My question is simply this: were those foster parents adopting their special needs foster children, or were they other types of adoptions?
[ Page 16944 ]
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: Yes. The information is that of the 174 adoptions last year, 35 were foster families adopting their children.
L. Reid: Apparently there is a six-month residency requirement before an adoption will be finalized. The foster parents who have been speaking to me on this question, for the most part, have now adopted or are in the process of adopting foster children who have resided with them upwards of two, three, four years. Why is it they too must wait an additional six months before those adoptions can be finalized?
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: We're aware that this is part of the regulations in the Adoption Act. But we are reviewing those to see whether there
L. Reid: Frankly, if a reasonable resolution can be sought for that, it would warm the hearts of foster parents. They know in their hearts -- and frankly, legitimately -- that they've already met that requirement. That child has resided in their home in excess of six months and often, in cases, years. So if the ministry can move on that, that would be a very good thing. I won't ask for the time line; I just trust that it will be soon.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members present and the staff members from the ministry. I've learned some very good things. I trust the debate has been useful to the individuals on whose behalf I've posed questions as we've moved through this debate. I thank you most sincerely. Noting the hour, hon. Chair, I would take my seat.
The Chair: It is now the Chair's duty to call the vote. Does vote 22 pass?
Vote 22 approved.
Hon. G. Mann Brewin: I move the committee rise, report resolution and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 8:50 p.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]
Copyright © 2000: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada