Hansard -- Volume 3, Number 17 -- Monday, March 4, 2002

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY



CONTENTS

	Routine Proceedings
		Page

Private Members' Statements		1415
	The establishment of an SFU campus in Surrey B. Locke Hon. S. Bond Hon. K. Falcon Victoria's economy J. Bray B. Kerr Vancouver Food Bank V. Anderson L. Mayencourt Little hospital that could V. Roddick R. Masi

Motions on Notice		1423
	Access to justice services (continued) J. MacPhail Representation of small communities at annual provincial conference (continued) J. MacPhail Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt J. Kwan P. Bell

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, I have the honour to present the opinion of the conflict-of-interest commissioner relating to an application by the Leader of the Opposition.

B. Locke: I rise today to tell you about a welcome addition to my city of Surrey. Just two weeks ago the Minister of Advanced Education announced that Simon Fraser University will develop a satellite campus in Surrey. This is truly an exciting and revolutionary event for Surrey.

Approximately 2,000 students travel from Surrey to SFU's Burnaby campus every day. We are growing at a very fast clip. Over 370,000 now reside in Surrey, and we are a young, active and progressive city. A university, especially a unique one like Tech B.C., was a great fit for our city. SFU's integration in Surrey will fill that critical need and will mesh very well with the vibrancy of our city.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, the new SFU campus will absorb students who were enrolled at the Technical University of B.C. From the start, I supported a post-secondary institution in Surrey, and I am pleased to stand in the House today and tell you that our government has delivered for Surrey and for all of the South Fraser.

Let me tell you, it wasn't easy. It wasn't easy to say to my constituents: "We can't afford Tech B.C." The bottom line was that the previous government approved an elaborate business plan for Tech B.C. and left us to foot the bill. As you well know, Tech B.C. is not the first instance where our government has been left footing the bill for the previous government's whims. The previous government took the easy road. They said to the people of Surrey: "Sure, we can have a technical university. It can come at any price." But as we know, the previous government had a flair for looking out for their own short-term interests.

We and the students want and need a university that is sustainable in the long term. I am proud to stand today with the SFU campus in Surrey as a concrete example that our government is looking out for the long-term interests of all British Columbians. I am proud to stand up today and say that the decision to amalgamate the existing Tech B.C. program with the new SFU campus is the right choice, one that I fully support.

I want to talk about the process we went through and how our government came to this decision. We received several proposals from existing institutions, as well as revised business plans from Tech B.C. itself. SFU's proposal was the most feasible option. Its business plan offers more certainty than the Tech B.C. plan did. It has the added bonus of being an established and reputable institution from which students will earn a respected degree that is world-renowned.

SFU's plans for Tech B.C. will accommodate current students and expand to 800 full-time-equivalents at the university's present location. SFU will continue to offer Tech B.C. programs and will eventually amalgamate and add to these programs with existing SFU offerings.

An SFU campus in Surrey will be a tremendous boon to our students, our citizens and our local economy. I want to share with you some numbers on what this new campus means to Surrey.

SFU, once it's located in Surrey, will generate over $3 million in wages. It will spend just over $2 million locally on supplies, and it is estimated that students attending SFU will spend over $9 million in Surrey. All told, it is estimated that SFU will mean over $15 million to our local economy. This is a tremendous investment in our city. I am proud that this government has made it happen.

I would like to say thank you to two ministers, the Minister of Advanced Education and the Minister of Finance, for their hard work on this project. I would also like to sincerely thank my fellow MLAs in Surrey and the member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.

It's not easy to turn around a project like Tech B.C. There were lots of vested interests in its development, which we had to appease while keeping the Tech B.C. students our number one priority. It would have been much easier to let Tech B.C. go on burning a hole in our provincial pocket, but we have shown ourselves to be a responsible government. We are not going to allow any more fast ferry fiascos. We are not going to let taxpayers' money go down the drain.

The decisions we make aren't always popular, but they are responsible, and they will serve us well in the long term. I have heard reports in the media that MLAs are wavering in their support for our government's agenda. The media say that the MLAs don't support the tough decisions we are making. I assure you that we're just as committed now as we were when we started out — even more so.

It's a tough agenda, Mr. Speaker, and everyone is feeling the effects of it, but that doesn't mean we don't support it. If anything, we are adhering more firmly to the agenda which we have laid out for ourselves, because we realize that with each tough decision we make, we get a little closer to being fiscally responsible. With every penny we save, we pull ourselves out of the red just a little bit more.

My colleagues and I face some tough challenges, but I'm confident that we will work together to turn this province around. I want to set the record straight. I have spoken to many of my caucus colleagues about our government's plan. I want British Columbians to know that we all stand firmly behind our agenda, and we will see it through.

We have made a commitment to the people of B.C., and we are going to follow through on it. SFU in Surrey is just one of the commitments that we have made in post-secondary technical training.

Hon. S. Bond: I am pleased and would like very much to respond to the statement made by the member for Surrey–Green Timbers on the issue of Tech B.C., or the Technical University of British Columbia.

First of all, I would like to thank the member for her comments today. I will make no bones about it: I am very proud of the work done on this file by my ministry staff, by the members of the Surrey caucus and, in particular, by the member for Surrey–Green Timbers.

As the minister responsible, it was a very difficult decision and process to determine the future of Tech B.C. Operating and capital costs were absolutely unsustainable. There were also very valuable programs and faculty that we wanted to preserve — but, most importantly, a cohort of students working towards their degrees in a variety of high-technology disciplines. However, many members of our caucus — including the members for Delta South, Delta North, Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain and the Surrey caucus — proved instrumental in reminding me about the other component of Tech B.C. that was important to preserve: a university presence in the growing community of Surrey.

While everyone recognized that something must be done to bring Tech B.C.'s costs under control and restore certainty for students at the university, the caucus were excellent advocates for this process, and some made incredible extra effort and worked extremely hard with me to find a solution that was not only fiscally responsible but also very good for Surrey. That is certainly the case of the member for Surrey–Green Timbers.

It is fitting that I take this opportunity to recognize the contributions of my colleagues and the interest that they had in resolving a very challenging issue, which in the end was a win for students, for Surrey and for B.C.'s post-secondary education system as a whole.

As was pointed out by the member for Surrey–Green Timbers, over the course of several months we examined a number of possible options. My ministry staff, as well as the staff in the Ministry of Finance — and in particular Treasury Board — spent countless hours scrutinizing every subsequent business plan and working with the staff at Tech B.C. to ensure that we had all the facts. We looked at proposals from other institutions, both public and private, which again were subject to a thorough and detailed analysis. Just when we thought we had come to a resolution, we would go back again and again to make sure that we had considered every option. We were unwilling to bring the matter to a close until we were certain that we had reached the best possible conclusion.

Throughout the process, though, our primary focus was always the same. We wanted to consider what was best for students. As a matter of fact, while people were urging us to hurry up and make a decision and pushing us to make a much quicker decision, we were uncompromising in our insistence that we make the best decision for students both at Tech B.C. and across the province, and we took the time necessary to ensure that this was the case. My only regret is that the process and the time spent did create uncertainty for students and faculty.

Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, I am convinced the decision we made to look at the proposal from Simon Fraser University was the best decision we could have made. Students will graduate with a degree from a university with an excellent national reputation while being able to complete their studies on campus in Surrey. Simon Fraser University will integrate Tech B.C.'s programs into their own high-calibre programs. They will make every effort to retain as many as possible of the world-class faculty at Tech B.C., and in addition, they will establish an SFU campus in Surrey, which we are hopeful will lead to even more university offerings.

I want to take this opportunity to thank each institution that submitted a proposal for consideration, but in particular I want to recognize Kwantlen University College for immediately beginning to collaborate with Simon Fraser University to look for ways that, together, they can serve the needs of students in this area of the province. Very recently there was a very public demonstration of Kwantlen's ability and willingness to work with Simon Fraser. That is exciting, and it can only help create extra benefit for the students when two excellent institutions work together to create even more exciting opportunities for students. That is an added bonus, and I'm very, very pleased and excited about the collaboration that's taking place.

Finally, I would again like to thank the member for Surrey–Green Timbers for her interest and her diligence in helping me bring this challenging situation to a positive conclusion. I look forward to working with all the members of our House over the coming months to continue to create a top-notch education for every student in British Columbia.

Hon. K. Falcon: Just a couple of brief comments, if I may, on the Tech B.C. decision that was ultimately rendered by the Minister of Advanced Education. I am particularly proud — as a member representing Surrey-Cloverdale and as a member of the Surrey caucus of seven, as we like to call ourselves — of the work that was done by the minister, who did an exceptional job in dealing with a very difficult file. Also, I want to recognize the other MLAs that were involved in this decision, who really played a critical role. Certainly Gulzar Cheema and Brenda Locke….

Hon. K. Falcon: You're right. I should mention the districts. That will indeed be a challenge, but I will go slower as I mention some of these districts: the member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge; of course the member for Surrey–Green Timbers; the member from Surrey North; the member for Surrey-Tynehead; the member for Surrey-Cloverdale, of course; the member for Surrey-Newton; the members from Surrey-Delta, north and south, who both contributed greatly and tremendously towards this effort; the member for Surrey–White Rock; and of course — this may surprise you —the member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, who I believe I saw in the House earlier and also was a great assist in this area.

All of these members recognize the importance of technology and technology training. We wanted to preserve what was good about the concept of Tech B.C. in terms of educating our young people and ensuring that they can meet the challenges of a rapidly changing world, but we wanted to do it in a financially responsible way. Having Simon Fraser University come to Surrey and operate a satellite campus there is a tremendous win for the community, for the students and for the provincial government, and it's a tremendous win for fiscal responsibility.

Just a final word. While I was on my Team Canada trade mission, it occurred to me how important technology is in the world today as we move towards a rapidly globalizing economy where decisions can be made very quickly through the use and advent of technology. I want to tell you that a log house producer from Chilliwack was there on the trip with us. They had received a contract from Israel, of all places, through the Internet. In days of old, 15 years ago, you would never have that happen, because you wouldn't have the ability to budget or advertise in foreign countries like that. Today with technology, the Internet and all the exciting things that come about as a result, we have small businesses in B.C. able to leverage the technology to the benefit of British Columbians.

In conclusion, I want to congratulate the minister again and all the MLAs, the private members and everyone else that worked hard for this. It's exciting for British Columbia and exciting to be part of this government.

J. Bray: Today I have the privilege to speak about the economy in Victoria. I speak not only of my riding in Victoria–Beacon Hill but in fact of the entire capital regional district, of which many people refer to Victoria. Mr. Speaker, obviously when we go through times of change, there's a lot of talk in the media — sometimes rhetoric, sometimes fact — but there is a great deal of activity with respect to reporting positives and negatives. Unfortunately, sometimes the negatives outweigh the positives.

My job as a private member, as an MLA, is to listen to people in my community to ensure that I bring their issues and concerns forward, and I do that on a daily basis. My other role is also to ensure that those successes — those positives, the things happening in the community that are good — are also brought forward. This is supposed to be a place of positives as well as challenge. This place is supposed to be good news, not just perceived bad news, so let me tell you about Victoria.

The economy in Victoria has been revitalized for many months now. We are becoming an economic growth leader for the entire province — in fact, for the entire country. Unemployment in Victoria is down to 6.2 percent, down a full half point from last year. Retail sales are up. In fact, over half of all retailers surveyed recently indicated that their Christmas this year was better than their Christmas in the year 1999-2000. In other words, despite the doom and gloom that sometimes is out there in the media, retailers are actually doing better now than they have in many years.

Last year housing starts were up 45 percent in the Victoria area. I will remind the member for Prince George North that those are wood-framed houses. That means a lot of things. First of all, housing starts is one of the key indicators of confidence in the local economy, so the fact that they were up 45 percent means that people here in Victoria and people looking to move here are confident in the economy in Victoria. Also, each new house constructed equates to 2.5 permanent jobs in your local economy. With so many new housing starts, we know there are good-paying, high-skilled jobs being created and sustained in this economy.

Housing sales and housing prices are also both up, despite some of the rhetoric that is out there in the community. In fact, if you go talk to real estate agents, they're busier than they have been in some years. They're actually receiving more for the houses they're listing now than a couple of years ago — a sign of great confidence, a sign that people are looking to Victoria to move here and not just to retire, but to set up businesses, to grow businesses, to raise their families.

Cruise ship visits this year will be up 64 percent over last year. Last year it was estimated that the cruise ship visits of 77 ships brought approximately $22 million into the local economy, so you can imagine what a 64 percent increase in visits by cruise ships to our Ogden Point will mean for the local economy for retailers, for restaurateurs, for service providers.

Tourism rebounded well after the tragedies of September 11. In fact, hotel room bookings are up this last November-December over this time the year before. We are doing better than what we thought we would after September 11. Next year — and this is very exciting, because tourism is B.C.'s number two industry — Victoria is projecting a record year for tourism. Why? Because people are recognizing the qualities of Victoria. They're coming here to visit, and they're not all just tourists. They're also business people, investors, coming to look at what's happening here on the South Island, coming here to become involved in this commu-

nity. That is why you're seeing a trend of increased tourism, increased housing starts.

We also have one royal visitor coming this March — Prince Michael of Kent — but we're also hoping very strongly that Her Majesty will also visit Victoria in October as part of her celebration of her golden jubilee. We all know what that does for the local economy and for our ability to market Victoria to the world whenever we have a royal visit.

High-tech. We just heard the previous members speak about Tech B.C. and the positive results in Surrey. Let me also tell you that nowhere is high-tech growing faster than right here in the South Island, and it is going to be supplied by some of those graduates.

The formation of the Victoria Harbour Authority will ensure local management and local control over our harbour. It will ensure a vibrant working harbour that will improve the economics and the aesthetics of the harbour and the environment around the harbour, benefiting everybody in the community.

These trends are showing up in individual projects. The Marriott hotel right outside the door of the precincts here will be spending $90 million in Victoria to build a new hotel. The proposed multiplex is a public-private partnership that is being proposed in Victoria where a private sector company from Kelowna is prepared to take all the risk of loss. Because they feel so strongly our ability to sustain a facility such as that, they're prepared to take the loss. That's an incredible show of confidence in the local economy.

The announcement of the major high-tech complex, Harbourside Lane, that will be built along the dock lands in Vic West from, among other people, Arthur Griffiths. As we all know, he used to own the Canucks and other things. He recognizes the potential and the capacity of our economy here in the South Island and the growth in high-tech.

Recently it was announced and brought up by my colleague the member for Saanich South that Peter Berrang from Austria is bringing his company, Epic Biosonics, to the high-tech park out in Saanich. That one company alone expects to hire over 500 highly trained, highly skilled workers to work in that one company in a large 50,000-square-foot complex. That's very exciting.

Also, out in the Western Communities, part of the capital regional district, there's the continued expansion of major retailers such as Wal-Mart, Zellers and the Bay. Again, these are companies that make long-range plans based on their confidence in the economy. They're building here because they know that Victoria's economy is growing.

UVic, Camosun and Royal Roads — some fantastic post-secondary institutions in the capital region — all have waiting lists because people from around the country and around the world want to study right here in Victoria. They know they'll find employment right here in Victoria. They know it's a community that will allow them to raise their families in a healthy way with strong employment.

B. Kerr: It gives me pleasure to rise and support the comments of my colleague from Victoria–Beacon Hill. Not having lived in this region very long — having come here, let's say, in the past six years — I moved up-Island to a beautiful area in Malahat–Juan de Fuca above the Malahat highway. I didn't come to Victoria that much, but when I did, the beauty of Victoria and the outlying areas just astounded me. It is absolutely spectacular. I can understand why tourists want to come here.

In fact, prior to becoming an MLA and working seven days a week, I used to like to take lengthy holidays and travel around the world and visit other countries. When I'd go to places like Africa, Turkey, the Far East or Europe, I'd mention to people I was from Vancouver, because I thought that was the city that people would understand. Even though I didn't live in Vancouver, it was the major metropolis in British Columbia. It amazed me how many people were not familiar with Vancouver but were in fact familiar with Victoria. They'd say: "Oh yes, we visited Victoria Island, we went to Butchart Gardens, and we stayed in Victoria." I would say: "Well, what about Vancouver?" They'd say: "Oh yes, we just passed through."

I can certainly understand what my colleague is talking about here when he talks about the beauties and how great tourism is in Victoria. I've come from a tourist location. I have a business in a tourist location, and I can really understand the importance of tourism to the economy.

You all know the story of Whistler — what's happened to Whistler. When they really started to push for tourism and got involved, it just took off and created a tremendous economy, so much so now that they're looking at the Olympics along with Vancouver in 2010. Tourism is terrific, and it is great for the economy.

I'd like to discuss some of the other things that my colleague mentioned, and possibly the reasons. He mentioned that retail sales are up. I spoke to the Retail Council of Canada the other day, and I was mentioning how retail sales are up. I said: "This is terrific. Clearly, a lot of it has to do with the low Canadian dollar and low interest rates." This is what I was telling him.

He said: "Mr. Kerr, don't sell yourself short. You guys have done a tremendous job in what you've done — coming into government and the policies that you've put forward. That's instilled confidence in the people, and that's one of the reasons why retail sales are up." He was actually correcting me and telling me not to sell ourselves short — that our policies, according to him, had a lot to do with the increase in retail sales.

Some of the other issues, when we talk in terms of high-tech and getting good, high-paying jobs here. In my profession as a chartered accountant, 86 percent of the members said that one of the challenges they're going to face is getting good labour, getting a strong labour force of qualified people.

One of the things we've done is lower the tax rate. I've met with the doctors. I haven't met with many high-tech people in Victoria, but I imagine the same would be true. When you're trying to recruit, you have to have some positives. Having a low competitive tax rate is certainly a positive issue that we can bring when trying to headhunt and bring people to the Victoria area. I met with the doctors, where we talked in terms of social services. Of course, a strong economy allows you to have better social services. When I met with the doctors, that was a strong indication on their part — the lower tax rate.

One of the issues as far as development is concerned. When we talk in terms of people putting in $90 million developments and when we're asking people to come and invest their money into the area, we can't tax them for just investing their money. We've done that. We've reduced the corporation capital tax. Now they're not going to be penalized for coming and investing in this area. We've reduced that tax, and that has a lot to do with stimulating the economy and giving people confidence in the economy — that we're not going to tax them for just investing their money.

My riding includes an area called Langford. For those of you not familiar with Langford, Langford has all the big box stores in it. Here's an example of what can be done when you reduce regulations and let developers know exactly where they stand and give them some good, hard terms, but don't move the goalposts when they agree to those terms.

Langford is absolutely booming. The big box stores have moved in there. They've created a large tax base for the community. The community then has been able to take that tax base and put it into amenities, and as a result of the better amenities that Langford has, more people want to move to that area, creating a demand for housing starts. That reduction of regulations and working cooperatively with developers has shown how you can create an atmosphere that would create housing starts and good, high-paying jobs in the community. That's one of the reasons that housing starts and housing sales are up in the Victoria area.

Mr. Speaker, I can see that my time is up. I would like to thank the member for bringing up this great subject, and I'll give the floor back to my colleague from Victoria–Beacon Hill.

J. Bray: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Malahat–Juan de Fuca for his words. In fact, he raised the other half of the equation, which was the need for a strong economy and why it's so important in Victoria. A strong economy supports a strong and healthy community. Victorians take great pride in their community capacity to provide for all members of the community — to support the arts and festivals and activities for the family and also to support strong community-based social services that ensure that those most vulnerable are receiving, on the ground, the kinds of services that they need to support themselves, their children and their aging parents.

That is why a strong economy is so important. That's why I rise in this House to talk about a strong economy. I want the world to know about Victoria. I want them to come and invest here. I want them to come and raise their families here. I want them to come and buy new homes here. That activity ensures that the provincial government and the municipal governments can provide the services that people rely on.

We've got such great assets in this community. We've got the James Bay Community Project; we've got the YM-YWCA; we've got the Boys and Girls Clubs; we've got the Social Planning Council of greater Victoria; we have the Cool Aid Society — all there with dedicated community volunteers working on the ground. They know the importance of a strong economy, because that is one of the social determinants of health — that a strong economy allows government to deliver those services to people so that they can improve their lives and their circumstances.

The United Way this fall had a record-breaking year for their fundraising campaign. Again, despite the doom and gloom in the media, the United Way reached out to the community, and the community responded in a bigger way than it ever has before, because the capacity is here, the economy is strong, people are working, and they're working full-time at high-paying jobs.

Children who are graduating from university now don't have to go to Alberta, Ontario or Washington State. They're going to graduate from one of the great post-secondary institutions right here. They're going to stay right here, they're going to contribute to their communities, they're going to raise their families here, they're going to build their dream houses here, and they're going to retire here. They're going to stay in British Columbia, and they're going to stay in Victoria because our economy is leading not just the province; our economy is leading the entire country.

I am proud to be a Victorian. I am proud of the work that our community is doing, and I will continue to fight and support our community all the way along.

V. Anderson: Today I'd like to talk about food banks in British Columbia. I'd particularly like to use as an example the one that I know best, and that's the Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster and North Shore food bank.

It was my privilege in 1983, when the food bank first started, to be chair of the committee that undertook this along with a great many community agencies. It's interesting to see the developments that have taken place in the last 18 years. The food bank, as I said, began in 1983 with a donation of three cans of food from a senior citizen. A lady came in and heard we were talking about this kind of program and wanted to give it a boost.

Now, in this Vancouver area — Vancouver, Burnaby, New West and the North Shore — because that's

the area the Vancouver Food Bank serves…. Richmond has its own food bank. Surrey has its own food bank. Every community in the province has its own food bank. But in the lower mainland they are in a variety of locations, with 18 weekly food distribution points in community centres, in churches. Altogether there are 87 food banks distributed throughout British Columbia, plus of course the Salvation Army, the churches and the community groups. Hundreds of them have food banks over and above those that belong to the food bank societies of B.C. and Canada.

There's about 25,000 people a week who are served in this lower mainland food bank in just these four communities. Over 9,000 of these are in the weekly distribution depots. Another 9,000 of these are in the food that is given for the meal programs, which are looked after by some 145 agencies within these communities. Another 5,000 are receiving food from the Food Runners program.

The Food Runners program was made possible initially by an act of this Legislature. It enabled people to take restaurant and hotel food, which had been prepared but not used, to be protected from liability and gave them the ability to donate to the community. That's picked up on a regular basis by a refrigerated van in specially prepared containers and then distributed to the service agencies around the community who have need of it. That particular van works full time, and if they had a second van, they would be able to double the program, because there is more food available than they have the resources to undertake to rescue at this particular moment.

The food bank, it's interesting to know, has no direct government support from any provincial or municipal government. It relies on the individual donators of cash and food. It relies on commercial donators who have become very active, from right across the province, in supporting the food bank undertaking. Right from the very beginning the school children have been very much involved, particularly in the Christmas drive each year. I know in the first year, in 1983, they depended almost entirely upon the food that came in from the children in our schools across the community.

Besides the regular family food banks, there are two special food banks for single-parent families. These are very important to them and to their children because in these food banks not only are food and groceries made available to them, but there is also companionship, sharing and an opportunity to come together and support each other. This is a very important undertaking.

I've been there at the food bank lineups and seen the people who come out of necessity. You do not come, as they did in previous years, to stand in the rain for an hour or two for one bag of food unless you had grave necessity. Yet they came, and they shared with each other. They had companionship and acquaintances that have stood them well through the years.

Across Canada 41 percent of food recipients are children, a fact many people do not realize. Sixty percent of the households receiving food are families with children. In order to make this possible with the minimum administration budget the food banks operate on, there are over 500 volunteers in the four communities that are there week by week, year after year to help with the packing, sorting, collecting and distribution of food to community people. In those food banks they get to know the people who come, personally and friendly, and can call them by name. It's a very warm place for them to come in times of necessity.

The number of people requiring food has grown beyond our wildest imagination. In that first year, two months after we opened, there were about a thousand persons coming to the various food banks. Now there are 25,000 a week, as I mentioned earlier. Normally, over these 18 years the food bank crowd has grown by 20 percent over three to five years, but in the last two months of this year the food bank lines have grown by 14 percent. The need is greater at the moment than it's ever been in our province.

The director of the food bank reports to me that this is made up by an increased number of seniors. It's made up by an increased number of children. It's made up by an increased number of students, and it's made up by an increased number of the working poor. Also, there are those who have disabilities who come on a regular basis.

The annual food drive in Vancouver receives and distributes some ten million pounds of food a year. It's hard to imagine how much that is. Still, you go into the warehouse and see the huge shelves that are stacked with food. After the food distribution has gone out for the week, they're nearly empty again and have to be refilled. It's very much an ongoing, week-by-week process.

In order to respond to the special needs, I must pause for a moment and let the member for Vancouver-Burrard join me in this discussion.

L. Mayencourt: Thank you to the member for Vancouver-Langara for his passion and his conversation about a very valuable resource in all of our communities. The Vancouver Food Bank is an agency I have become familiar with from many years ago.

I want to start off by saying that the member for Vancouver-Langara is much too modest when he speaks of his involvement with the Greater Vancouver Food Bank Society and for his very wonderful participation in making that agency work.

Agencies often start from very, very humble beginnings. I was touched when the member spoke of the food bank starting with three small cans of food. When I look at what the Greater Vancouver Food Bank Society does to provide help, care, compassion, friendship and food for people of greater Vancouver, I remember its humble beginnings. I remember the contribution of that member of the Legislature, and I remember the contribution of the many volunteers that make that service available.

I took a walk around this morning and talked with some of the other Members of the Legislative Assembly and asked them about their communities and if they had a food bank. It was really interesting.

I spoke for a few moments with the member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, and he talked about the food bank he has that serves the Tri-Cities communities. It's run by the SHARE Society. It's got a number of volunteers, and they serve many hundreds of people in the Tri-Cities areas. I understand that the wife of the member for Burquitlam works for that food bank. So I see that some of the members of this Legislature and their families have some real connection to the food banks. I'm very grateful for that.

I talked for a moment with the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, and he spoke about their community and the dozens of bakeries and food suppliers that contribute to their food bank, and the fact that his municipality has donated space so that their food bank has a place to operate from.

The member for Prince George–Mount Robson spoke about how her community is being served by the St. Vincent de Paul Society.

In Delta South — I spoke with the member for that riding — they have a Farmers Institute that contributes thousands of dollars' worth of food every year. It's just a huge response to people in need in their community. The chamber of commerce put together a group of business people to help them find a new home when they ran out of space. I'm encouraged by that.

The member for Yale-Lillooet is a rancher, and he contributes excess beef to the food bank in Merritt.

I think that what we have here is a number of people within this Legislature who have taken the time to become involved in their local food banks.

I remember that several months back, just before the election, I had an opportunity to take the now Minister of Health, the Premier and the now Minister of Finance over to an agency in my community called AIDS Vancouver so that we could talk for a few minutes with them about some of the needs they have for the people that live on long-term disability. One of those, of course, is the need for food.

After that meeting we decided that we would give them a tour of the Pacific AIDS Resource Centre. We walked through the facility and saw some of the staff, and we then went downstairs to the library. We were walking around there, and there was a lineup. I didn't know what the lineup was for, but I saw many of my friends — people that I had met through my work in the AIDS community — in that lineup. As we walked past that lineup, I began to realize that my friends, the ordinary people that I know in my community, were here because they needed food. They needed some help. They needed some compassion. It touched me greatly. Also, as the Premier, the Minister of Finance and the Health minister walked through, we realized that these are real people. These are people that need the help of their community.

So it's wonderful. When I hear the member for Vancouver-Langara speak of committing some time and effort into making the food bank work in his community, I'm very, very touched. I'm grateful that he mentioned Food Runners, because it brought to mind a very important memory for me. I'll just sum up very quickly. Many years ago good friends of mine — Leslie Diamond and Jacqui Cohen — got together and decided to help that Food Runner program. They bought a van so that the Food Runners program could happen in Vancouver. I want to pay tribute to them and to the many hundreds of volunteers that make food banks work in our communities.

V. Anderson: I want to thank the member for Vancouver-Burrard, who brings a very compassionate understanding and personal relationship to this opportunity that each and every one of us has to serve within our communities.

One of the special programs that was begun by the Vancouver Food Bank is the special kids program. That's a preparation of bags of food with special nutrition for children who are 18 months to six years old. Another special program is the Community Kitchens program. There are 40 of these now in this area, where with food provided through the food bank, members of the community come together to a common kitchen area and cook meals together. They are then able to take home to their own families what they cook. At the same time, they're able to have companionship and sharing and to learn from one another, even sharing recipes with one another.

The B.C. Sharing program has been a helpful program whereby those who are in stores can leave money available, which comes to the food bank program. However, the B.C. Sharing program is somewhat in doubt as to the continuance of its existence, and that's a concern for the food bank community. In 1983 when the program was begun, as I mentioned, it was begun as a temporary program to deal simply with the 1980 recession. Unfortunately, it has continued because the number of economic poor has continued to rise, so the need is still there.

On behalf of these thousands of people — children, adults of all ages and in physically well and unwell conditions — I want to say thank you and express appreciation to all those people who have been part of making this program possible. I want to thank the thousands of individuals who have given food and money and continue to do so.

I want to thank the hundreds of volunteers who over the 18 years have given their time, week by week, to collect, distribute and make the food available in a friendly and helpful fashion. I want to thank the commercial businesses who have become increasingly involved in the giving of their surpluses and their items of all kinds: fresh food, as has been mentioned, canned food and vegetables and whatever else they have to share.

I want to thank the dedicated board members and the staff of the food bank, who have spent untold hours and days and weeks planning and preparing what has

been a very difficult and very uncertain job. The uncertainty is whether the food will be available. There will always be the people who have need of it, but it's whether the food will be available.

I want to give a special thanks to the media — the print, radio and television — who from the very beginning made the food bank possible. They prepared the notices. They watched us clearly, and they made us aware as a community that there was a need. They helped us, and they led us. They have continued to do so. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this opportunity.

V. Roddick: We have been discussing all sorts of communities and their issues this morning. On that note, where is the heart of a community? Where can you stand and say: "Here I am. Here is my town. Here are my people"? Where does the highest level of caring and sharing at the community level take place?

In earlier times it might have been the church, which is a place of solace and succour for those in need. When there was little recourse for the sick and the disillusioned, the church offered hope — if only, as was so often the case in those days, for the next life. As towns grew, the centre frequently evolved around the high street, where locals gathered daily to buy provisions, meet with friends and share news.

The new means of transportation and communication meant that buying and meeting often now take place in malls and big box stores in far-flung areas. The guiding voices of over 31,000 of my friends and neighbours have firmly shown the heart of our town recently. That heart is Delta Hospital, which has garnered extensive public opinion locally and provincially during the period of health care restructuring but retains its reputation as the little hospital that could.

Delta Hospital did not spring fully formed from some central health planning agency. No, it was the concerted effort of many local citizens, often against the resistance of local and provincial governments, beginning during Canada's centennial year in 1967. Over many years it grew from an extended care facility in the mid-seventies and eventually developed into a full-time facility with emergency, acute and extended care.

Delta Hospital in its current configuration was officially opened in September 1980 by the then Health minister, Rafe Mair. At the opening Mair praised the persistence of the community in making their dream heard in Victoria and the unselfish efforts of the auxiliary in making that dream a reality. Since then, the hospital has been supported and enhanced by the efforts and generosity of many in our community, helping the hospital auxiliary fundraise well over $5 million for equipment and improvements through the years.

The hospital itself has not changed a great deal since. What has changed is the community around it. Delta's population has increased from 66,000 in 1976 to 102,000 today. We have attracted new industry and business to our industrial parks and added the Roberts Bank coal ports and container ports plus the growing towns of Ladner, Tsawwassen and North Delta.

New neighbourhoods are developing side by side with farms, parks and oceanside. Expansion of the B.C. Ferries terminal, the international border and the highway system moves people evermore from other places through our community. Of course we are part of the greater Vancouver area, which has also experienced explosive growth in recent years.

Not so long ago one could drive through Ladner to Vancouver and only have to stop for one traffic light. In years past, residents in need of medical assistance could actually be at Vancouver General Hospital within half an hour. That trip now takes at least twice as long, and that's not counting time hunting for parking. We also go to Richmond but are still at the mercy of the tunnel, the traffic and the waits at Richmond General Hospital caused by their own population growth. Clearly, the need for reliable, accessible health care in Delta is greater than ever before. The question is: what services should community hospitals provide?

I believe the greatest current concern about Delta Hospital is the suggestion that emergency services might be reduced to daytime only. I insist, along with my community, that there is simply no such thing as part-time emergency care. It is either available when it's needed, or it's not an emergency department. Heart attacks, broken bones, strokes and children struggling to breathe do not restrict themselves to daytime.

Most families moving into a community consider reasonable access to emergency services a necessity. As our world expands, businesses have to abide by such things as Workers Compensation Board regulations requiring them to provide their own ambulance service if they're not within a designated distance of a hospital emergency department.

Community hospitals work to be fiscally responsible and balance budgets through citizen participation via volunteer auxiliaries. The people of Delta want a chance to pursue new ideas for saving health care in Delta, including pilot projects and community care, expanding pharmacy and niche specialties such as laparoscopy and liposuction, exploring aboriginal health initiatives, working with neighbouring health authorities, and increasing corporate and community financial support.

As quoted in the Select Standing Committee on Health's report entitled Patients First: Renewal and Reform of British Columbia's Health Care System, we need to have common principles throughout B.C. in what we're trying to do, but I think we have to be very flexible about how it is actually structured and funded in each area. Different communities are different, and their needs are going to be different.

R. Masi: I certainly do agree with my colleague from Delta South about the necessity for maintaining

emergency service in Delta Hospital. You know, if you drive through Delta on Highway 99, all you see is vast expanses of farms and not too many people. The reality is that there are three very heavy concentrations of population in the Tsawwassen, Ladner and North Delta areas. As my colleague mentioned, there is a population there of well over 100,000 people.

I think the critical point here is that it's a very high traffic area. My colleague went very carefully over all the industries, the transportation hubs that have a definite effect on the need for emergency services.

I'm very pleased today to add to the remarks of my colleague on the important and pressing issue of health care in our shared community of Delta. I believe it is incumbent upon us as legislators and indeed as a society to look into the future, to identify what our common needs are, to develop the policy framework around which we will meet these needs and then implement our plan.

This is never more true than with our health system today and as well, I might add, with our education system. Hospitals and our health care system have evolved greatly over the past hundred years, like every other entity in our society. What worked a hundred years ago in the era of Florence Nightingale does not apply today. Medicine has made tremendous strides over this period. We've witnessed discoveries such as antibiotics, insulin and polio vaccines and, of course, the major advances in heart surgeries. I can remember that when I was a teenager, polio was a dreadful disease, and we were all terrified by the outbreak. Now, of course, with advances, that's been beaten.

To effectively capitalize on these advancements, we need to be willing to look at new models of patient care and preventative health care delivery systems. We can encourage the focusing of our precious health care resources through the development of major regional centres of health care excellence, which will specialize in areas such as cardiac, cancer and geriatric care.

As well, we should seriously consider the potential benefits of developing community-based health centres which would be staffed and fully equipped to provide basic emergency aid, like wound care, casts for broken limbs and stabilizing patients who require more advanced care until they can be transferred to a hospital, thus easing the crushing patient load being experienced in our current emergency ward system.

We must harness the tremendous potential of technological change and advanced research techniques such as nuclear medicine, biotech and genetic research to protect and enhance the health of our citizens by organizing and, if necessary, reorganizing our delivery systems. To meet the cost pressures of these changes, we need to explore innovative methods of financing and adopt flexible approaches to building, maintaining and staffing our health care facilities. Careful planning and innovative uses of our resources are critical if we are to balance society's goal of fiscal prudence and economic renewal while providing quality health care to all British Columbians.

We need to look impartially at private-public financing to determine if it meets our needs and if every health facility in B.C. should be totally equipped or if specializing will provide more effective delivery of health care services.

As a society, we need to be cognizant of the impact of the world economy, the effects of globalization and current economic realities on our own provincial economy. I believe that we enjoy one of the finest health care systems in the world, and we sometimes put ourselves down. We have a fine system; if you look around the world, we're right up there.

However, we do face some very tough decisions in the near future. We know that health care costs are rising, eating away at our provincial budget. We must then look at innovation, a totally new method of dealing with this problem, and we'll have to maintain our excellent health care system.

V. Roddick: Communities are helping to rethink and redesign health care in B.C., exploring new avenues of efficiencies, as my colleague said, and partnerships. It will take determination, energy and goodwill to ensure that we emerge with workable, viable, high-quality facilities and services. Communities recognize that it will require cooperation and compromise. Although change is often difficult, it is necessary in order to break through to newer, better ways of doing things.

My work on the Select Standing Committee on Health has convinced me that the talent, vision and energy are out there. Now it's time to roll up our sleeves and get to work. Our community gave the Fraser health authority a clear visual sign of their feelings when they gathered 3,000 strong and joined hands around the hospital to protect it. We all hope the Fraser health authority will keep that vision in mind. I believe — in fact, we all believe — that true health care in communities, based on equity, patient-centred delivery and evidence-based accountability, can be achieved in Delta Hospital, the little hospital that could.

Mr. Speaker: Division has been called for. Pursuant to standing order 31, the division will be held at 5:30 today.

REPRESENTATION OF
SMALL COMMUNITIES AT
ANNUAL PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE
(continued)

The Premier of the province did hold the provincial congress last week — on February 26, I think it was. The feeling in the room was that it was a worthwhile exercise, and I certainly concur. Of course, the Premier suggested at this congress that he will hold further like meetings on aboriginal issues, the softwood lumber dispute and transportation issues and then thereafter hold an annual provincial congress.

My point is on the issue of what we need to discuss and who needs to be at the provincial congress, which is what the Premier is calling it. My motion says "provincial conference," but the Premier has called it the provincial congress. It is simply this: there are almost 200 small communities in this province, and for some reason the Premier felt there was limitation of representation because of the number of seats available in the particular room.

Well, it is my view that the issues facing smaller communities in this province are of such import that perhaps we should find a different room — that we should not be limited by logistics but limited by needs and challenges facing these smaller communities. Surely the issues of the next three sub–congress meetings — aboriginal issues, the softwood lumber dispute and transportation issues — disproportionately affect the smaller communities of our province.

Yes, it is true that the opposition caucus here represents the community of Vancouver. We're travelling the province, and we're trying to do our best to represent those smaller communities who may have issues with the direction of this province socially, economically and environmentally. This congress would be the perfect place to allow smaller communities to have their voices heard. The needs are growing ever greater daily.

Just this past week we had an announcement where school boards throughout this province are having their funding adjusted dramatically. There are two or three school boards whose funding will increase, and the rest are being held steady for three years or are actually being decreased. Smaller communities are being disproportionately affected in a negative way by the funding for school boards. That is an issue.

I had actually put that issue on the agenda to be considered at a provincial congress in the area of aboriginal education and smaller communities education, and it makes perfect sense for communities such as Burns Lake, Smithers, the whole Bulkley Valley area, the East Kootenay and the West Kootenay area to be represented at the provincial congress.

I know there are some mayors who would stand up and say…. The mayor of Lytton wrote specifically and said that the last ten years created a difficult time, and yet the mayor of Lytton also said in a subsequent piece that he was devastated by the ending of the Job Protection Commission by this government and how that would negatively impact particularly small communities. Even mayors who want to support the government, whether through political affiliation or through agreement with the agenda, have concerns about substantial portions of this government's agenda and how it affects smaller communities.

I know that as the health agenda unfolds and as the real new era of this government in health care is implemented, smaller communities will be disproportionately affected in a negative way once again, as services that used to be in their own small communities are regionalized or centralized and citizens have to travel further and further. We heard on Friday of the town of Princeton, I think it was, whose hospital is under threat now of being closed. That community is desperately worried about not being able to get health care services in their own town and having to travel to Penticton or to the Fraser Valley.

I hope every single person in this Legislature can rise up and join with me in passing this motion. The Premier has made it clear that the provincial congress is an ongoing entity in this province. I hope we can agree and urge the Premier to not be limited merely by a seating plan but to expand the input into the provincial congress according to the needs of all British Columbians.

Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt: I wish to make a few comments on the motion as put forward by the Leader of the Opposition. I agree to an extent, and I think our government has recognized that we have a new era in British Columbia and that we have to have a new way of dealing with business, municipalities and other levels of government in our province. A good example of that, I think, is the Vancouver agreement, which the members opposite will certainly be very familiar with. It involved local government in terms of the city of Vancouver and the very hard work by Mayor Philip Owen, the provincial government at the time — we've certainly picked it up — and the federal government.

When we have a problem where there are overlaps between levels of government and we need to focus on it, then we need to bring all levels of government together to deal with a particular issue. As someone who has spent a number of years in local government, I struggle with some of the comments by the hon. member. Particularly, I can remember in local government…. I think we had a fund that was a rainy-day fund, based on resource revenues, of around $200 million in the early nineties, and the government of the

day announced that they were simply erasing it from the government books. All that money had been built up by local governments, owed to us as local governments around British Columbia — simply disappeared in the early 1990s.

Following that, the funding to all the larger municipalities in British Columbia was steadily eroded over the middle to late nineties, until most of the larger communities in British Columbia had absolutely no funding from the provincial government. That was begun and completed by the previous government.

In fact, our government, in spite of a $4.4 billion deficit expected this year, is committed to living up to the commitment of the grants to local government that exist at this time. We're very, very proud to do that in spite of the difficult financial situations we find ourselves with in British Columbia.

Further to that — something that those members of local government have been working on for a number of years — we're bringing forward the community charter. When we get control out of Victoria and turn it over to our local communities and our local elected members, we give them the responsibility to deal with the issues in their community and the financial resources to deal with those issues as well. They get to shape their destinies; they get to run for election every three years.

As a matter of fact, there's one this November, on the third Saturday of November, across the province. Various candidates will be running on the issues in their communities, and we respect that. The community charter will be empowering them to look after their own communities. Hopefully, it will give them additional financial resources within the scope of that charter.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to move an amendment to the resolution that's in front of the House:

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, member. Just one moment, please, while we peruse the amendment.

Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt: I was pleased to hear the member opposite praise the proceedings of the provincial congress two Tuesdays ago, because indeed it was a revolutionary meeting. The idea of the provincial congress, as I'm sure most of the members here know, was in our New Era document in terms of our political commitment to identify and overcome those issues that affect all of us across British Columbia, particularly our relationship with Ottawa in terms of our role in Confederation and equality within Canada.

Originally, the idea was for members of the Legislature in British Columbia and our Members of Parliament, including the Senators. Our government has expanded the congress to include the aboriginal leaders in British Columbia — we do meet with them on a regular basis, at any rate, in a separate forum — and also the mayors of the 15 largest cities.

Originally, we were going to invite 12; we moved it up to 15. This was partly given the size of the Wosk Centre for Dialogue in Vancouver, which can handle 150 people. We had over 140 in attendance at the time. These 15 largest cities represent two-thirds of the population of British Columbia that are in organized municipalities.

In speaking to the amendment, we particularly wanted to give strong and effective representation to the smaller communities across British Columbia, which represent about a third of the population. In doing that, we added the president of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities and the presidents of the five municipal associations.

I would just mention those particular areas, as I think the members can get a flavour of how they in fact reflect the smaller communities across British Columbia. The president of the UBCM is from the Central Kootenay regional district. The representative from the lower mainland municipality is from Surrey, one of the larger communities. The representative from the North Central Municipal Association is a councillor with the district of Kitimat. The Okanagan Mainline Municipalities Association is represented by a councillor from the village of Cache Creek. The Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities is represented by a councillor from the district of Campbell River, and the Association of Kootenay and Boundary Municipalities is represented by a director from the Kootenay-Boundary regional district.

In fact, these members who attended very effectively and very strongly represented many of the smaller communities around British Columbia. Something that we also overlook — and perhaps we get caught up sometimes in government — is that our MPs and our first nations leaders, our Senators and our MLAs in fact represent many of the smaller communities around British Columbia at any rate.

For many who may not realize it, our municipalities in British Columbia have a consistent and ongoing dialogue with the provincial government. The Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services, again, usually attends the regional association meetings throughout the province, meeting with those association directors and executive and dialoguing on the particular issues in their regional associations. Also, the Minister of State for Community Charter, who's preparing that, is meeting on an ongoing basis with community leaders around British Columbia.

Again, as we know, the municipalities have their own special time with their own conferences, but they

also meet with the provincial government. Of course, that's the Union of British Columbia Municipalities convention held in September or October of each year for five days. At that convention, there's the opportunity to have an accountability session or a dialogue with cabinet ministers. There's the opportunity for mayors and councils to meet with various ministers of the provincial government and to hear from the Premier — often from the Leader of the Opposition — and, again, for MLAs to meet with individual councillors.

It was a very successful provincial congress and the first in the history of British Columbia and, from the other members that we spoke to from the federal level of government, probably the first in the history of Canada. It was a great dialogue in the sense that it opened up with communications between various levels of government and how we could break down the differences.

I'd just like to mention that we had the minister from the federal government representing Western Economic Diversification and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs talk about the Vancouver Agreement, the Fraser Basin Council and other structures on how we can come together from different levels to deal with different issues. We had the leader of the federal Alliance party asking us, please, to dialogue with the opposition and to meet with them when we're in Ottawa or when their provincial caucus is meeting here in British Columbia. They've got answers; they've got solutions. They represent a lot of ridings in British Columbia, and they want to be involved.

We had a presentation from the president of the UBCM reflecting issues of communities around British Columbia and how they often need other levels of government to assist them, usually economically, on issues within each one of their communities. We had one of the leaders of the First Nations Summit address us, talking about some of the issues that they face — concerns over the upcoming referendum on the treaty process and other issues. We also had one of the Senators address us, reflecting the Senators from British Columbia, talking about the role that they play in the federal Parliament and how they can assist us in identifying and bringing forward British Columbia issues.

We had a report from the chair of the B.C. Progress Board talking about topics from that — infrastructure, transportation, softwood lumber and the fishery. We had a presentation from the Lieutenant-Governor, followed up by a look at health care and environment issues. We had an address by Mr. Wilson from the First Nations Summit task group, followed by Dr. Gosnell, the president of the Nisga'a Lisims government on the Nisga'a experience and a wrap-up on aboriginal issues.

As was mentioned by the member opposite, we did come to a conclusion at the end of the forum that there were three particular areas we wish to have further dialogue on: transportation infrastructure, health care and aboriginal issues. An e-mail has been sent out to all the people who attended the provincial congress, outlining those particular topics, and the Premier will be writing to each one of them over the next few weeks, indicating where we go from here on those topics and who would be interested in attending further sessions on those particular issues.

Also, we had an evaluation form at the congress. Again, it will go out with a letter from the Premier, looking for suggestions and ideas from people who attended. If there's a way to do something a little bit different next time, certainly we welcome it, and we opened a dialogue on that and how we might proceed in the future.

In conclusion on the amendment, I believe we had strong and effective representation from small communities across British Columbia at the conference. We continue to dialogue with mayors and representatives of small communities around this province. We've put forward these three main topics that came out of the congress and look forward to how we can structure that, going on to the future. As I say, we look forward to ongoing consultation. This was really a very first in British Columbia and probably in Canada. We look forward again to working with our MPs, our Senators, our first nations and our communities on how we can continue to be open and accountable and deal with these issues.

Mr. Speaker: The debate is on the amendment to private member Motion 9. We continue with the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant.

I, too, was at the provincial congress last week. Representation, particularly from the small communities, is an issue and remains an issue.

Looking at this Legislature even — the MLAs from the government bench that were there — I observed with intensity to see which MLA would rise up from the government bench and raise the issues, particularly those from the small communities. You know what? Not one government bench MLA rose up to raise an issue that is of concern to their community — not one of them.

Why wouldn't they? Why wouldn't they, when they say, "Don't worry. The representation is there. The people in this House representing their community will go to the provincial congress and make sure their views are heard"? Yet at the provincial congress it was stunning silence from the government MLAs and particularly those from small communities. Not one of them participated in that debate, raising any concerns, any questions or any issues.

I sit back and look at what the communities are saying and their concerns, especially those from their local councils. We had a letter from the district of Hope prior to the provincial congress meeting, asking to be involved in and invited to the provincial congress. I quote this letter from Kelly Ridley, the chief administrative officer from the district of Hope: "The district of

Hope is asking that we be allowed the same opportunity as the larger municipalities to meet with government officials. The issues facing smaller municipalities are not the same ones facing the larger ones, and we want to ensure that this government understands what issues our community is facing in the next couple of years." That's from the district of Hope.

From another community — this one happens to be in the district of Lillooet. There's a long motion here, so I'll just read only a portion of it: the last "whereas" leading to the first "now therefore be it resolved." From the district of Lillooet they say:

So, Mr. Speaker, this is a motion from the district of Lillooet. I looked, too, at the provincial congress to see whether or not the MLA representing the area of Yale-Lillooet would rise up and raise the concerns on behalf of the district of Lillooet. You know what? The MLA did not rise at this provincial congress, did not speak at the provincial congress about any of the issues that have been highlighted by the district of Lillooet.

Lillooet, of course, and Hope are not the only ones that have concerns. There are a variety of communities that have written and passed resolutions in their own council, expressing concerns over government cuts. These are just some of them from the list: 100 Mile House, Abbotsford, Langley, Hope, Maple Ridge, Mission, the Cariboo regional district, the Central Coast regional district, Clinton, Cranbrook, Creston, Dawson Creek, the district of Mackenzie, Duncan, Esquimalt, Fernie, Fort St. James, Golden, Invermere, Kamloops city council, Kelowna city council, Kimberley, Mackenzie economic development advisory committee, McBride, North Van, Penticton, Port Alberni, Prince George, Quesnel, Sparwood, Squamish, Vanderhoof, Vernon, Victoria, Williams Lake. These are just some, not all, because this was compiled back on January 16 in terms of resolutions that have been passed by councils with concerns about the Liberal government's direction.

One would have thought that at the provincial congress, there would have been an equal opportunity for every single community to have representation there. Last week, when my colleague the member for Vancouver-Hastings raised this issue, government members said: "Don't worry. We're all going to be there. We're going to raise this issue." You know what? The congress meeting came and went. Not one government bench MLA from these communities rose up and raised the concerns of their council.

I have difficulty in understanding how the representation — strong, effective representation — would be there. What we must strive towards is not just strong and effective representation but equal representation to make sure that the voices of the small communities are indeed heard, to make sure that their concerns are brought to the table. Quite frankly, you can't depend on the MLAs, because they won't do it. We haven't seen it to date.

In fact, I was just in Port Alberni this last weekend. You know what? This coming Sunday, the member representing Port Alberni will not be showing up for the third town hall meeting — I understand from the community — that's being hosted there. The dates were actually put forward by the MLA, suggesting that she would be there. Well, that will be the third town hall meeting that the MLA will not be available to the people of Port Alberni.

There are many other communities like that, because the MLAs are nowhere to be heard. They are simply silent for whatever reason. Is it because all the decisions are coming from the Premier's Office, and they don't even know these decisions are happening? In Princeton the mayor had to inform the MLA about the closure of the courthouses. This past weekend the pub owner had to inform the MLA about potential closures of the hospitals. So, who's speaking for these communities? Certainly not the members around this chamber.

I would not support the amendment that's been put forward. I think it is critical that there be equal representation at the provincial congress table to hear firsthand from the almost 200 smaller communities throughout British Columbia and for their voice to be direct and to have a place in the provincial congress so that we can all work together as a unit — MPs, MLAs, elected officials, community leaders, aboriginal government leaders — and for us all to sit around the table to solve challenges that are facing British Columbia and not to exclude small communities.

Mr. Speaker: On the amendment to Motion 9, the member for Prince George North.

P. Bell: I actually support the Leader of the Opposition's direction with this particular motion. I think it's actually an excellent motion. I think that with the little bit of tweaking that has been made here, it truly is representative of the direction we need to go.

I am, however, offended by the comments made by the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. I highly suspect that she could not name more than one or two of the small communities in my riding. I think it's relevant to talk about some of the firsts that have taken place in my riding of Prince George North.

The community of Mackenzie, which undoubtedly the member would be familiar with, is a town of about 6,000 people, a resource community. For the first time ever in the history of Mackenzie, they now have an MLA's office located there on a permanent basis with a staff person. I think that's significant in terms of true representation of the community. I think it's appropriate.

I also have two other communities in my riding — one of them named Tsay Keh and one of them named Kwadacha — who had never received a visit from an MLA until December of this last year. I travelled to those two communities to clearly understand the issues they were faced with so that when I come to this House and go to the provincial congress, I'm able to understand the issues they face. When I hear from speakers such as Mr. Bill Wilson, the issues that have to be dealt with are much clearer to me.

I do think that we have effective representation. I think the key is that it has to be effective. Equal does not necessarily mean effective. I think that was demonstrated over the last ten years or so by the previous administration. We've now moved to a new format in government where we have government caucus members sitting on government caucus committees on a regular basis. We have an opportunity in those government caucus committees to review decisions that are being made by cabinet and to make suggestions about those decisions. I think that's appropriate as well.

The resolution from Mackenzie that the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant mentions comes from my particular area. I really think it's important to visit that particular resolution, because the concern expressed was one that we needed to review in the community of Mackenzie — what issues they would in fact be faced with, with the cuts. When you actually review that, it's kind of interesting. Mackenzie has benefited to the tune of $2.5 million in terms of the tax cut that was implemented last July, which moved all people in British Columbia with incomes of $60,000 or less to the lowest income tax rate in all of Canada. We added $2.5 million to the community of Mackenzie.

The job cuts as of today in Mackenzie represent approximately seven individuals. That would translate into approximately $280,000 in terms of income lost from the community of Mackenzie, which clearly is nothing close to the $2.5 million that got added back into the community. Mackenzie is prospering right now. In fact, for the first time in the last eight years, Mackenzie has been hiring in the mills. They've added third shifts. The community is prospering. It's moving ahead. It's being very aggressive. If you look more closely at the resolution, I actually think that they simply wanted to have a clearer understanding of the effect that the cuts would have on Mackenzie. I believe when that is formally submitted, they'll find that Mackenzie has benefited from those changes.

I think there is significant representation — an MLA office in a community of 5,000 people. I travel to Mackenzie probably 40 times a year — something in that order — and meet with people on a regular basis. I have many other communities in my riding that need representation, as well, and that did not have representation in the past: Reed Lake, Bear Lake, Nukko Lake, McLeod Lake, Chief Lake, Salmon Valley, Ness Lake, Summit Lake, as well as Tsay Keh and Kwadacha. Each of those communities really does need representation, but it would be impossible to have an individual from each one of those communities at a provincial congress. It would simply be unattainable to try and have the literally thousands of individuals that would be necessary to have representation from each of those communities come to the Wosk Centre. Clearly, there's seating for about 150 people at that particular centre. It would not be possible to have everyone in that building. If you moved to a different venue, what would happen? Not everyone would have an opportunity to speak.

I agree with the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant that it was a challenge to have an opportunity to speak through that discussion session. I thought that the bulk of the communication that took place was very effective. I actually congratulate the member for Vancouver-Hastings because I thought she took the politics out of the particular session. I thought she really did represent herself and her constituents well at that session. I thought that was admirable.

There was one particular federal MP who was not quite as cognizant of the efforts to try and keep the politics out of that session, and that was unfortunate. I would say that was the one blemish on the session. However, speaking to the amendment, I do think that focusing on having a strong and effective — as opposed to equal — representation really is the direction in which we need to take the provincial congress. Equal simply would not work.

Another couple of specifics, I guess, just in terms of speaking to how small communities have representation…. In the past six or eight months since I've been in this House, I've been able to arrange extensive ministerial meetings for people from small communities. At this point, in fact, I'm working on setting up a series of meetings for the individuals from McLeod Lake.

McLeod Lake is a community of approximately 200 people located an hour and a half north of Prince George. So far, I've been successful in securing, I believe, three or four ministerial meetings in one day. We hope to expand that group out to about half a dozen, and those folks are really pleased that they're having an opportunity to come down and have individual representation in this House.

Certainly, I stop by McLeod Lake on a regular basis. I attended their first-ever conference they held last July, I believe it was — a very successful event. It's an aboriginal community, a very forward-thinking community and a community that has actually completed their treaty already. I think there is strong and effective representation. Speaking to the amendment, I think that's what is absolutely necessary.

In some other issues that we've worked on at a local level, the Husky Oil refinery has met with several ministers. Again, that gives them strong and effective representation. They wouldn't have that if we tried to represent everyone equally. The community of Mackenzie, Abitibi-Consolidated…. All those various organizations have had truly effective representation.

You know, there are so many communities in this province of 200 people, of 100 people, of 300 people. If

we tried to have an individual from every single one of those communities…. Where do you cut it off? Do you have an individual from a community of 50 people? Do you have an individual from a community who lives at the end of a road with ten or 15 people? Where do you draw the line in terms of equal? I'm afraid that the challenge of doing that is really constrained by the amount of time that you're prepared to spend debating a certain issue.

To pull a big group like that — federal politicians, provincial politicians, federal Senators, municipal mayors, the president of the UBCM, the leaders of the various municipal associations, aboriginal leaders…. To actually pull those folks together and have them in a single group like that for much more than a day would truly be challenging. I don't know how the member would expect, actually, that we would be able to do that. I think it was a challenge to bring the folks we had together there. I think you have to move to the sense of strong and effective, because equal simply would not function in that particular situation.

The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant talks about decisions coming from the Premier's Office. Again, I'm offended by those comments. I sit on a core review task force. I've had an opportunity to have direct input in many of the decisions that are made on a core review level, and I'm very proud of that.

I think our government has taken huge strides towards having input from many of the private members in this House, and every single one of us has an opportunity on an ongoing basis to speak to different issues. I think the two-minute statements that have been introduced by this government are a very positive step towards having the role of the private member enhanced.

I think the fact that we're sitting here today on a Monday morning, on private members' morning, is wonderful. I can tell you that I'm responsible for looking after private members' morning, and I find it a real challenge. I have so many private members looking to advance the issues from their small communities that it's very difficult for me to actually get everyone in. I have a long list of private members who want to do two-minute statements now, so it's a challenge for me.

The private members of this government are absolutely committed to the direction of this government, and they're absolutely incensed at the intimations by the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant that they're not representing their communities. They are representing their communities. They're representing them aggressively, and I find it very distasteful that someone would comment otherwise, given the record of the previous government and the lack of representation in many of the smaller communities.

Remember, it's the first time Mackenzie has ever had an MLA office located there. It's the first time that Tsay Keh and Kwadacha have ever had any political leader visit their communities. I drove for seven hours on a road that I would prefer to forget, actually, because the road was so rough that we had to stop a number of times.

In fact, the gentleman who went with me…. As we were driving down the road, there were various types of debris on the side of the road. We saw one particular piece, and we wondered what it was. We stopped, and it was a shock absorber off a brand-new pickup that had simply been torn off because the road was so rough. It took us over seven hours to travel, I believe, something in the order of 300 kilometres north of Mackenzie. That's representation, but that's effective representation and strong representation, which speaks to the amendment. It indicates that strong and effective is much more useful than what we would conventionally call equal representation.

What is equal representation? Is equal representation one member from a community of 200 people and five members from a community of 1,000 people? Is that equal representation? Perhaps it is. I'm not sure. I don't think you can use the term "equal."

I do think that the sense of the motion that the member for Vancouver-Hastings has put forward is actually excellent. I'm very supportive of the general direction of that motion. I think that it truly shows the leadership of the Premier of this province. He has established a provincial congress on behalf of all of the various members and allowed them to come forward and relay the issues that are facing them.

Some of the key points that came out of the provincial congress — the sense of establishing further working groups to work on transportation, health and aboriginal issues — were very useful. I would certainly encourage the opposition members to continue to support those efforts. I think they have something to contribute to those issues. Certainly, their view of transportation might be different than my view. I'm thinking in terms of trying to get a 300-kilometre road plowed two or three times a year, which is a challenge in my particular riding, and they're thinking about larger, mass transit issues. Each of those issues is equally important, and that's why we have a House of 79 representatives. I think that, in fact, gives us that strong sense of representation as opposed to, again, the equal sense.

Some of our ridings, if you look at us provincially, contain relatively small groups of folks. The member for North Coast represents a smaller, unique riding, and the member for Vancouver-Hastings represents a very large riding in terms of population base. The member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine represents a riding that is vast. I know that particular member travels on an ongoing basis to the outlying reaches of his riding to meet with folks in the small communities. Again, in speaking with the member — as I do on a regular basis — he's indicated that this is the first time that these folks have ever had representation. Given that we provide that type of representation in the House, I think the amendment moved by the minister is very suitable. I think we do get very strong, supportive and effective representation from the members of this House.

It's been a challenge to ensure that we get out to some of these rural components of our ridings. I can

tell you that I missed a significant meeting in Vancouver — softwood 3, as we referred to it — in order to go to Tsay Keh and Kwadacha just prior to Christmas, on December 19 or 20. On that particular trip I certainly learned much on the road. I learned much about the communities. It was exciting for me to do that. An interesting point, in terms of talking about representation and understanding your riding and how you have to represent folks….

The communities of Tsay Keh and Kwadacha are at the very north end of Williston Lake. Of course, Williston Lake is created by the W.A.C. Bennett Dam, which flooded much of their traditional territories and provides electrical energy for much of the lower mainland. In fact, I would guess that the SkyTrain operates on some of that electrical energy.

The beneficiaries from that particular lake are a lot of the several million people who live in this small part of B.C. that is represented by the two members of the opposition. I can tell you that one of the most unique problems that the people of Tsay Keh and Fort Ware have is lack of electrical energy in their two communities. Here they're sitting on the edge of a lake that was created to provide power to the people of the lower mainland and people in the United States, originally, at the time — although that isn't occurring at the same level today — yet they don't have a consistent source of power for their own communities.

Now, I'm not sure if someone would understand that was an issue if they didn't take the time to actually drive to those rural communities, talk to those folks, find out what their issues are and deal with them.

The two communities are very progressive. The folks up there are working hard to achieve their treaties. I think the comments made by Mr. Wilson at the provincial congress were very effective ones. It helped me understand their issues better.

I do think that when you're talking about having strong and effective representation, you need to have the rural MLAs going out and dealing with their local communities. I know that the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine, the member for Peace River South, myself and all of the other members from the rural ridings, in fact, do that on an ongoing basis.

Speaking to the amendment, having strong, effective representation can be achieved by bringing in the rural MLAs. I think that having the presidents of the five municipal associations, again, gives a reasonable level of representation to the provincial congress. We should comment that part of the amendment that the minister has moved actually speaks to ensuring that the name of the meetings is appropriate — that it is in fact a provincial congress. I think that's just a simple clean-up thing on the amendment, Mr. Speaker.

I think having the municipal associations at the meetings was very effective for myself and many of the other MLAs. Really, we were there to listen to the concerns that were expressed by a lot of the regional mayors. I was very interested in hearing from Dr. Gosnell, in terms of the issues that were faced by the Nisga'a and the challenges that they were facing.

I don't think information exchange is necessarily about talking all the time. I do think it's important to listen to what folks have to say. Certainly, I felt my role there was to listen. I was very interested in the comments made by the B.C. Progress Board. I thought that was an excellent presentation. I understand that both members of the opposition had a good opportunity to have a view of that as well. I think they would probably agree with me that it was a very worthwhile presentation.

I think it addressed some of the social issues as well, and that probably surprised a few folks. I think they thought that the B.C. Progress Board was probably there just simply as something to develop statistics around our financial well-being in the province. That wasn't the case. I think that was very worthwhile, and some of the statistics we saw, quite frankly, were shocking in terms of our level of graduation from secondary schools. I thought that as a province, we were well ahead of where we were.

If we had 2,000 people there, I'm not sure how the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant would have hoped that each of those individuals could have relayed their concerns. They have to do that through their local MLAs. When you travel to communities like Kwadacha and Tsay Keh and McLeod Lake and Bear Lake and Mackenzie and you have an office in Mackenzie and you talk to folks on an ongoing basis, I'm pretty sure that gives you really strong and effective communication with those individuals. Certainly, I try and give equal representation throughout my riding, but it's a real challenge. For me to have been the first MLA to have ever travelled that 330 kilometres, I believe it is, from Mackenzie to Tsay Keh and then another 70 kilometres up to Kwadacha really does not speak highly of the previous representation in those particular communities. It gives me a great deal of concern.

Now that we've started to move ahead as a government, I think it's a great opportunity for rural MLAs to get out and speak to their communities. I know that the Minister of Energy and Mines, who represents Peace River North, on an ongoing basis travels to the outlying areas. He has a huge riding to deal with, with many communities. It's a real challenge, especially in a ministerial position, for him to be able to see those individual areas of his riding.

Again, you come back to the principle: are we giving these folks strong and effective representation? I do believe that is the case, Mr. Speaker.

I'll just close here on a couple of final thoughts that I have. I think this government's direction in terms of, first of all, having a provincial congress…. Again, I would congratulate the Leader of the Opposition on putting this motion forward, because I do believe it's an excellent motion, and it makes a great deal of sense. I congratulate her efforts on putting forward the motion. I do believe that in order for us, the provincial

I would share the Leader of the Opposition's concerns, if it was not for the representation from the rural MLAs and from the five municipal associations. I would share her concerns; I would actually agree with her that that would be the case, but I do think that when you have provincial MLAs, rural MLAs, who get out in the field, talk to the folks in their local communities….

I have one particular constituent who I've been working with for some time, who has a small sawmill located approximately 130 kilometres north of Mackenzie — a great guy. He's been working very hard to try and establish a sawmilling business where he can cut railway ties. I actually stopped at his house for coffee. I drove 130 kilometres north of Mackenzie to see him; I stopped in and said hi to him. We had a great conversation, actually, with his wife. That, I think, is representation.

As I was travelling to Kwadacha and Tsay Keh, it was interesting, because we use radio communications up in that end of the world to make sure people are safe. The community of Tsay Keh was checking with us

on the radio as we were travelling up the road to ensure that we were in fact safe. It really displays the type of intent, I guess, that people in the north have in terms of looking after each other and ensuring that we support each other. Support translates into strong and effective representation. That's what the provincial congress is all about. I think that, really, is the key point.

You know, Mr. Speaker, really, what we're talking about is strong and effective representation versus equal. In my opinion, strong and effective representation is much more suitable. Noting the time, I would move adjournment of debate.