Hansard -- Monday, March 31, 2003 a.m. -- Vol. 13, No. 8 (HTML)

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

Point of Privilege		5723
	J. MacPhail

Private Members' Statements		5723
	Education in secondary schools R. Masi Hon. K. Whittred Rocky Mountain Trench ecosystem B. Bennett J. van Dongen Film tax credits S. Orr P. Bell Parents in education R. Stewart Hon. G. Hogg

Motions on Notice		5732
	Transportation infrastructure and funding for Trans-Canada Highway (Motion 10) (continued) W. McMahon Burnaby bid to host 2009 World Police and Fire Games (Motion 8) P. Sahota H. Bloy R. Lee J. Nuraney Hon. T. Nebbeling Hon. R. Coleman Ranching industry in B.C. (Motion 12) J. Wilson W. Cobb B. Lekstrom P. Bell D. Chutter B. Bennett

J. MacPhail: I rise at the earliest opportunity to reserve my right to raise a matter of privilege.

R. Masi: My remarks this morning are based entirely upon a report entitled Schools That Make a Difference by Norman Henchey and others. The report is an analysis of a two-year study of 12 urban public schools in British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec. The purpose of the study was to examine the inner workings of secondary schools in low-income settings that create high achievement for their students.

The schools were very diverse, ranging in size from 540 to 2,000 students, and collectively enrolled 16,000 students. Each school was attempting to adapt to a rapidly changing, increasingly challenging environment.

The report suggests there are two general approaches to studying schools. The first is sociological and quantitative, and involves collecting data on achievement and studying the schools as a complex institution of structures and functions. The second is ethnographic and qualitative, and involves collecting insights about multiple meanings of achievement and success and examining the school as a culture of expectations, norms, roles and relationships. This study used both the quantitative and the qualitative methods.

In the educational world today there are three broad responses to the questions of the effect of socioeconomic status. The first is the optimistic view that the school can make a major contribution. This view sees providing students with skills in literacy and numeracy, citizenship, values and preparation for the world of work, implying that the schools would provide all with equality of social and economic opportunity. The second is a pessimistic view that family background and social class of the student are more significant determinants of academic achievement in school. The third approach emerged during research on school effectiveness, which studied why some schools are more effective than others in promoting student achievement.

Recent studies have attempted to separate family background from school effects and how at-risk students can be more effectively engaged by schools. Generally, effective schools use five broad indicators: school leadership, instructional focus, orderly and safe climate, high expectations of achievement, regular measurement of program effectiveness.

In reference to the Henchey report, Schools That Make a Difference, it is noted that all 12 schools serve students with low-income characteristics, that all schools have a multicultural student population and that all schools had a significant percentage of single-parent families. All of the schools studies share a characteristic: their environments and the communities they serve have undergone significant changes which challenge the schools to meet new needs and, more importantly, to develop new responses.

A sample of reflections from the Henchey report indicates the following. First, secondary schools that serve low-economic-status young people and those from another cultural and linguistic tradition have a different mission from others, and their mission is not simply to socialize.

Second, secondary schools are conservative institutions. Consequently, we see two pulls — one from the past and one from the present. Schools go to great trouble to emphasize traditions in order to encourage students to see themselves as part of a continuum. However, because their clientele and communities changed, many schools were required to set new education priorities.

Third, in the 1960s and seventies, social values in education were emphasized — values such as human rights, social equity, gender opportunities and protection of the environment. However, in recent years the trend in education has been to emphasize the economic development of society and the preparation of young people for the world of work.

Fourth, the Henchey report states that the theory of being a principal stresses the importance of leadership, but the practice of being a principal stresses the importance of management — something quite different. Leadership deals with vision, motivation, modelling, innovation and communication, while management deals with organizing, follow-up, detail, maintenance, tact and problem-solving. It is clear in the report that principals have played a dominant role in the evolution of the schools. The question is: do the teachers rely too much on the principal to set the tone, establish the vision and guide the activities of the school?

Fifth, there is a certain irony in education that on one hand, they are in the business of change — trying to change young people into mature adults — and on the other hand, they are themselves often resistant to change in their goals, structures and operations. The report suggests that quantitative change — more students, more money, more teachers and more buildings — are more easily absorbed than qualitative changes — new technology, new curricula, new standards, new research, new approaches to teachers and learning.

Sixth, as the business of medicine is not treatment but health, the business of education is not teaching but learning. Learning is the acquisition of skills, knowledge and values. Teaching is the deliberate effort to promote learning in others.

At the beginning of the study, three questions were proposed. Are there common characteristics of low-

income schools? What characteristics distinguish successful low-income schools from those less successful? What are the implications for policy and practice? The report suggests that there are no clear and distinguishing characteristics of low-income schools. Differences are of degree, not kind.

Seventh, schools had different definitions of success, such as social integration of immigrants, results on examinations and sense of security in school.

Eighth, successful features of these schools do not differ from those described in the general literature on effective schools. These are: a positive climate of order and security, active leadership, collaboration among teachers, supportive programs and services, high expectations for performance, warm personal relationships between educators and students, and a wide range of learning opportunities for all students.

The report stresses that low-income schools are simply successful schools. They are "no excuses" schools that have accepted the responsibility to create high achievement for all students, irrespective of their socioeconomic background.

Hon. K. Whittred: I am delighted to be able to respond to the remarks of my colleague this morning. I am particularly delighted because this is a response of one ex-educator — I was going to say "aging educator" — to another ex-educator.

It gives me great pleasure to be able to respond to the report that was given, particularly as it affects this whole business of education. I was particularly interested to hear the outcomes of this particular report, and the phrase that the business of education is learning really caught my ear. I think that's something that we maybe should all keep in mind whenever we talk about education.

Out of the report that my colleague spoke of, there were sort of three things that came to my mind as being particularly important. Those were: the idea of school climate as it affects the performance of schools, the idea of expectations as they affect the performance of schools and, finally, the role of leadership. I would like to take just a moment to reflect on those three items, particularly as I reflect upon my own career as an educator.

On the issue of school climate, I am reminded of a video I saw not too long ago. It was about a school. This school was actually in Edmonton, but it could have been anywhere. It was a school in a low-income area, and yet it had amazing results. The video sort of focused in on what this school was doing. What it was mainly doing, it seemed to me, was creating a climate within that school. Those of us who reflect back can think of the days when we used to talk about school spirit, and that whole intangible thing that defined that area where we went every day to do our learning. There's no doubt in my mind that different schools do have a different climate. One gets a different feeling when you walk into one school from another. This is the kind of learning environment that is created by the people who work in that institution: the principal, the teachers and indeed the students themselves.

It is the intangible mix of how discipline is looked upon, how teachers and principals work together to come up with programming, how the sports teams and the clubs work together. All of these things create an attitude, create a basis from which learning is going to take place within that school. I find it interesting that all of the reports that come out that measure and assess the success of schools talk about the importance of school climate — having a positive learning environment — as one of the principal aspects of learning.

The second major concept that came out of the report from my colleague was this whole idea of expectations. This particular report had been done around low-income families and whether or not schools that cater to low-income people could in fact achieve the same success. The outcome of the report was that indeed they could. It stressed the whole idea of expectations. I think this is part of a total learning environment — that children go to school and that the people who work in that school create an environment in which children are expected to learn. Whatever background they come from is not relevant to the expectations around learning that are placed upon them. Children come to school, and they are expected to learn, to do their homework, to achieve and to pass exams. All of those things are what we put together and call expectations.

The third thing — and I think this is very important — is the whole business of leadership in schools and where this leadership comes from. I think the report asked a couple of really important questions around leadership, and certainly it asked the question about relying too much upon our principals and not enough on our teachers for leadership. Do we rely too much on educators versus principals or versus parents and versus students? These are all questions that need to be asked as we look at the way in which our schools are able to provide the very best quality of learning environment for our students.

R. Masi: I certainly appreciate the remarks of the minister. I know that in her own right she has had a long and very successful…. She's well known in the field of education.

With the limited time we have here, talking about education could go on for hours and hours. I realize that. I must stress that I've provided a very cursory analysis of this excellent report entitled Schools That Make a Difference. However, the report does provide some serious implications for policy and practice based on the effective schools philosophy. I have to emphasize that in the effective schools philosophy, we're not just talking about small-e effective; we're talking about

First, a commitment to success for all students. Governments, school districts, teachers unions and school communities should commit to the goal of success for all students in obtaining a graduation certificate.

Second, relevance of learning. Schools should make serious efforts to demonstrate relevance to students.

Third, leadership in the institution. Principals should foster leadership beyond their office. We talked about the role of the teaching staff in terms of excellence.

Fourth, areas of excellence. Every school needs one or more areas of excellence as sources of special pride and achievement.

Fifth, a balance of learning opportunities. Remember, we are talking about low-income schools here. Low-income schools must offer courses with a balance between academic and career programs, theory and practical experience, and curricular and extracurricular programs. Sixth, an integration of effort. A good school has a unity of purpose — not simply a vague philosophical base, but a well-considered base of information on accomplishments and problems, serious reflection and a plan of action, which is very important.

Seventh, teachers as professionals. Schools need to have the freedom to analyze their own needs and select their own teachers.

Eighth, extension beyond the schools. Schools have the responsibility to extend themselves in two ways — first, to expand access to learning through information technology and, second, to expand the learning opportunities of their students through involvement in the community.

B. Bennett: Today I am talking about an issue from the heartlands of B.C. that's been around for over half a century and which our government has an opportunity to resolve. This issue won't be making the front page of the Vancouver Sun, and it's highly unlikely that the columnists would even take the time to poke fun at this one. It's a regionalized issue, important to those areas of the province that have natural grasslands and to those people in B.C. who care about grasslands.

Normally in this Legislature we talk about trees in terms of their value to the forest industry and the jobs that go along with using those trees. The issue I'm talking about here today puts trees in a very different light. In the Rocky Mountain Trench region of the East Kootenay, there are too many trees. Mother Nature used to burn off the Rocky Mountain Trench every ten to 15 years, and aboriginal people would help that process by lighting fires. Smaller trees and shrubs were removed by fire, leaving the large ponderosa pine and larch that grew to huge size and towered over open, rolling grasslands. I've heard the old-timers talk about when they first came into the trench. They could ride their horses out onto the grasslands and see for miles and miles.

Today small interior Douglas fir and ponderosa pine cover the floor, the benches and the lower slopes of the trench. These two biogeoclimatic zones tend to be very susceptible to a natural phenomenon known as ingrowth. Ingrowth is the inexorable process of natural reseeding from existing trees — that is, the annual growth of seedlings into small trees. As the forest cover increases year after year, the forage needed by wildlife, particularly elk and cattle, declines. Of course, we lose more and more natural grasslands. There are various estimates of the number of hectares of forage that we lose each year, starting at 3,000 hectares per year and going up from there. No one disputes that the region has lost tens of thousands of hectares of forage since the 1950s.

Right now a majority of the ranches in the East Kootenay are receiving at least some level of damage from elk. Some ranches are close to bankruptcy because of crop depredation by elk and deer. Many people, even those who live in the East Kootenay, don't understand that the thick patches of spindly trees that grow in the trench are, in reality, not part of the natural ecosystem of our region. If folks can imagine the large, sprawling thickets of skinny little sticks covering miles and miles of land, that is increasingly the state of the Rocky Mountain Trench. Satellite photos over the decades show huge losses of open grasslands. Some people that I know refer humorously to the condition of our rangelands as "squirrel habitat."

It is, in fact, not a healthy ecosystem. It won't support deer and elk that are natural to the trench, and it won't support the cattle that graze the Crown land in the East Kootenay and that have been there for 60 years.

The issue I'm discussing today I've heard described as an agriculture-wildlife conflict, and I've heard it described as a hunter-rancher conflict, but these characterizations as conflict are due to the competition for forage by the elk and the cattle. We currently have between 20,000 and 25,000 elk in the area, as well as 17,000 mule deer and 20,000 white-tailed deer. There are about 150 ranches, most of them cow-calf operations, and most of these ranches use Crown range for summer grazing, combined with feeding operations on private property during the winter months. We've got about 11,500 head of cattle utilizing Crown range. That goes up to about 24,000 animals in the spring-to-fall period when the calves are out on the range.

This conflict between agriculture and wildlife and between hunter and rancher is a symptom; it's not the cause of the problem. The real problem is the ingrowth of the skinny trees on the land that used to grow grass and the subsequent lack of forage for the elk and the cattle.

There is a longstanding history of elk-agriculture conflict in the trench. The problem has been studied and reviewed for decades. You can go back to the 1950s and see recognition of the problem. The first study was

in the early 1960s. Then today in 2003, after decades of managing elk populations up and down and then up again and going through some periods of angry recriminations between ranchers and wildlife enthusiasts, we find ourselves steadily losing ground in terms of the annual growth of trees and the corresponding loss of open grasslands.

There's been much good work done. Hunting groups, provincial government wildlife staff, the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Agriculture have all worked hard. They've raised funds to restore grasslands habitat. There have been many of these good restoration projects over the years. A few years back the region came together and formed the Rocky Mountain Trench Natural Resources Society.

I must say that this particular issue has brought together a broader consensus of people in the East Kootenay than any other issue in my experience. Forest workers and mineworkers work shoulder to shoulder with environmentalists. Ranchers and hunters cooperate, most times, on the issue. I've chaired some meetings where the diversity of views is staggering, but at the end of the day everyone in the East Kootenay region, which runs from Golden down to the U.S. border, desperately wants a workable strategy for grasslands restoration.

There are, of course, intrinsic benefits to restoring the natural ecosystem. Many of B.C.'s endangered species of flora and fauna are native to B.C.'s natural grasslands. For this reason and because of a lack of grass for elk and cattle, the restoration of grasslands in the Rocky Mountain Trench has the support of such a wide group of groups and individuals.

These people believe that the people of our region could fix this problem, except for government rules and policies. This really is the crux of the issue. Forest companies are told to plant trees. The rules around removing these trees are based on the forest industry. British Columbia, quite understandably, I think, has developed a regime of rules for most of rural B.C. that relates to the forest industry.

Ranchers, conservationists, environmentalists and hunters who would voluntarily take on the grasslands restoration themselves are told by government: "Sorry, the Ministry of Forests does not generally support the conversion of forest land to rangeland. Sorry, we can't direct-award the tenure to you outside the normal bidding process of the timber sales program without an order-in-council from cabinet. Sorry, we can't let you take down that poor-quality timber, even though the forest licensee doesn't want it, because it will reduce the licensee's AAC volume. Sorry, we can't give you reduced stumpage rates, because government policy under the Financial Administration Act views that as a government subsidy, because there are too many applications for reduced stumpage already and because the U.S. will see reduced stumpage as a subsidy even though Montana mills are desperate for the logs. Sorry, we can't help you get those poor-quality logs into Montana, where they are wanted. The politics of exporting raw logs is just too difficult. Sorry, you can't proceed without an archaeological assessment, even though what you want to do is make the land more like what it used to be like prior to European settlement."

J. van Dongen: I'm pleased to respond on the issue of forest ingrowth. Last August I toured the East Kootenay and met with members of the East Kootenay Livestock Association, the East Kootenay regional district and the Windermere Farmers Institute, as well as MLAs for the East Kootenay and Columbia River–Revelstoke areas.

One key issue demonstrated to me was forest ingrowth — scrub brush, spindly seedlings and other growth, which choke out good grassland production to the detriment of both wildlife and cattle. Historically, forest fires were nature's way to clean out unwanted ingrowth, thereby making room for a fresh growth of native grasses between the trees and in open grassland areas. On my visit I also saw a lot of forest land with a very high density of trees. In fact, in many cases the density is too high to achieve the objective of a large quantity of high-quality wood. In my travels through the East Kootenay it was very clear that thinning a forest stand is just as important as replanting new trees in a clearcut.

We have a problem: forest ingrowth robbing wildlife and cattle of valuable grazing, and forest stands which are so dense that the trees simply look like toothpicks and never grow beyond that — overall, a lose-lose situation. I agree with the many people in the East Kootenays who believe that win-win in the way of a much better solution is possible. Presently we not only have forest and grassland management problems, we clearly have many lost economic opportunities. In the way of more grazing for wildlife and cattle, better-quality forage and more productive stands of higher-quality timber — these are opportunities we're missing. In addition, I believe there are many situations where grazing cattle in a low-density stand of trees for timber will maximize utilization of our Crown land resource.

We can only make progress on these issues if we can develop a common sense of direction amongst the various government agencies and the various community interests. Getting community stakeholders to appreciate their common interests is sometimes difficult.

However, it is especially true when the responsibility within government is fragmented between four or five government ministries or agencies. Sometimes these ministries have mandates and responsibilities which are in conflict with each other or which may at least appear to be in conflict. Interministry issues such as forest ingrowth demand new forms of leadership and decision-making within government.

In the old days resource ministries could operate independently quite nicely. However, those days are gone. Unfortunately, the complexity and lack of clarity around interministerial decision-making and process needs further study and further decisions. Improving the functioning of government on issues where a number of ministries are involved is a critical mission of our

government. Cooperation and enlightened corporate thinking within and between ministries cannot be taken for granted.

I like the idea of a working interministry committee or task force at the regional level. Such a committee may already exist. However, for an interministry effort to move ahead effectively, it is critical that all ministers give clear direction to staff to participate constructively and corporately. Not only are public servants responsible for their individual ministry's mandate, they must also be trained to balance their ministerial responsibilities with the government's overall corporate objectives.

Another innovation that can lend great impetus and direction to an interministry committee in the East Kootenays, for example, would be for the ministers involved to agree that one or more MLAs could participate in the process. A knowledgable and interested regional MLA on the committee can help speed things up and reduce roadblocks, sometimes just by virtue of being there.

A discreet and respectful MLA can help both staff of various ministries and stakeholders to develop and implement a viable plan. It is critical that this MLA have the confidence and the support of the ministers involved. I would like to suggest to this House that the government consider setting up a pilot project in the East Kootenays to establish an interministry committee with direct MLA involvement and that the committee be tasked with establishing ways and means to eliminate unnecessary and unwanted forest ingrowth. I believe that the member who initiated this private member's statement would do an excellent job of participating in or possibly chairing such an interministry committee.

I consider forest ingrowth a huge lost opportunity for wildlife and cattle, and I hope that we can take some positive steps to address this serious common concern. Let's get to the root cause of the problem.

B. Bennett: I'd like to thank my colleague from Abbotsford-Clayburn for his remarks. I appreciate the suggestion that he made, and we'll work with them to try and implement that suggestion if that's the will of the government.

I would like to thank him, also, for coming up to the East Kootenay and looking at this problem and learning about this problem firsthand. The Minister of Sustainable Resource Management has done the same thing a couple of times. The Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection is coming up, I think, in early May to investigate this problem. In the sense of the interest that our government is showing in this problem, I think we're getting somewhere. It first takes some understanding before you can solve the problem.

I did want to say that I think we also need to pay close attention to the people on the ground who have been working on this problem for a number of years — people like Maurice Hansen from the Rocky Mountain Trench Natural Resources Society; people like the local regional wildlife biologist, Mr. Forbes, who has a lot of knowledge about the two different types of elk that exist in B.C.: one that migrates up into the high country in the summer and one that stays right down in the trench and tends to like alfalfa. Those are important things to know about.

I think that the combination of habitat improvement and animal culling has worked to a degree, and we should carry on with that. This problem is a perfect example, I think, of where these interministry committees would be beneficial in resolving the problems out there on the land.

Once again, I'd like to thank everyone who's shown some interest in this, and I look forward to working with them as we go forward to find a resolution to a problem that's 60 years old. I think we can solve it.

S. Orr: I am today going to talk about the movies, which everybody really enjoys, I hope, so I hope everybody is going to be riveted to this speech.

The film industry is an industry that most communities in the province would love to have. It brings very good-paying jobs, excitement and economic development. It's usually very environmentally friendly, and if you're lucky, you also get to star-watch.

I got involved in the film business when I became part of a group of business people who decided it was time to bring more film business to Victoria. That was in 1995. Prior to that date Victoria had its own film commissioner, and when the funding was cut from the government of the day we lost that person, so a group of business people who had a reputation in this community for getting things done got together. There are fond memories of those past days of Mel Cooper, who is the owner of CFAX Radio, baking muffins at the first meeting, and they were actually quite disgusting. Of course, this is the stuff that urban legends are made of.

What we decided at that time was that we had to find sustainable funding, and we did that by partnering with the municipalities, with the federal government, but most of all with the private sector. The history of how the Victoria regional film commission got going is long, varied and very exciting, and is indeed a model of how other regional film commissions could work.

Telling you all the details of how we became successful and moved our film business up to $17 million a year…. That was direct funding. That's not economic spinoff. When we do the multiplier, we estimate that to be at about $36 million. However, going into this would take up my entire time.

What I really want to talk about is how the film industry is now positioned and in an opportunity to grow. In my opinion, it can grow as big as we want it to grow, with the forward-thinking actions of the Min-

ister of Competition, Science and Enterprise when he introduced the new British Columbia tax credits.

Let me give you a brief breakdown on how that works. The British Columbia production services tax credit, known as the PSTC program has been extended to May 31 of 2008. With new enhancements, that can be accessed by a broad range of foreign or domestic productions. There are now three components: the basic tax credit, which is 11 percent…. The new regional production tax credit is 6 percent, and we also have a new digital animation and visual effects — fondly known as DAVE — tax credit, and that is 15 percent.

These incentives are huge for the film industry in our region, and let me explain why. When a movie company in Hollywood — and I'm just going to use Hollywood, because they're the ones who produce the most movies — decides that it wants to shoot a movie, what they do is look at locations around the world, and then they take…. First of all, what they do is look at movie locations, and then they try and figure out where their movie is going to work.

When they've decided that, they then send scripts out. Those scripts go to film commissions, and those are film commissions everywhere. They might send out 50 up to 1,000 scripts to different commissions. These commissions have to read these scripts, and then they put together what's called a photofile. That photofile shows locations that would suit that script. They in turn send it back to the person who is going to produce the movie. They do that as fast as they can. We try for a 24-hour turnaround. Also, at that point the film commissioner of the area looks to see what extra pitch they can make that could entice that producer to come and shoot the movie in that specific location.

Historically, the many regions of this province could not compete with Vancouver and the lower mainland, because, simply put, Vancouver is a cheaper place to shoot. They have the airports there. They are all set up. Because of that, Vancouver has grown into a huge film location and created great infrastructure. They have movie studios; they have paint shops. They have lighting companies, wardrobe, technical equipment, hairdressers. Everything that spins off the movie industry has grown in Vancouver — and good on Vancouver. They've done a great job, and they're growing at a rapid rate.

In the past the regions have been sort of out of the picture a little bit, because we couldn't compete with the fact that they were so centrally located and easily accessible. With these tax credits, we will now have a chance.

I'm going to give you a ten-foot view on how that actually looks to a movie producer in the States. The movie producer has just received back a photofile from one of the regions, and it looks like it's going to work. It's got the right environment. It's got the right amount of people. There are film crews there. This is good. But attached to the script…. This is where they always look. Movies look at the location, but they look at the budget. This is a big, big, big, big business financially.

Imagine the photofile arriving, and attached to the photofile are the new tax incentives. This is how it will look to a producer. A producer in Hollywood right now pays about $20 (U.S.) an hour for a film technician. That could be makeup, grip, costume designer, etc. The first incentive he has is that if he shoots here, of course he gets the weaker Canadian dollar. That basically shoots the technician's hourly rate down to $12 an hour. Second, he gets the federal labour tax credit, which is 16 percent. That again reduces the hourly rate to $10 an hour. We've had this before. That's very good. Third, if that movie producer — and I'm going to call her a she — chooses British Columbia over the other eight or nine provinces, that rate drops another 11 percent, bringing it down to $8.90 per hour.

Now, this is the best part. Fourth, if that movie producer says: "Well, I want to make a movie in, say, Prince George or Victoria" — probably Victoria….

Deputy Speaker: Member, would you please conclude your remarks. Your time expires….

It comes down another 6 percent, and therefore that technician is now worth $8.45 an hour to the movie producer in Los Angeles. They still get a lot more when they are paid here, but on his budget, that's what he's going to pay.

P. Bell: Mr. Speaker, I'd really like to thank you for allowing the member for Victoria-Hillside to conclude her remarks there. They were truly entrancing, even though she did red-light for the better part of 35 or 40 seconds. I'll try and make my comments a little more brief in the sense that we appear to have been having trouble with red lights this morning.

Prince George would not normally be anticipated, perhaps, as a hotbed for film, but it actually has been very interesting. We've developed a bit of an industry around film. There have been three major films shot in the last few years in Prince George. We have a fourth film coming to Prince George.

You might ask: what is it that has created this opportunity for folks in Prince George to actually be involved in this admittedly very exciting industry? Certainly, the initiatives that have been taken by this government in terms of providing funding for the Prince George Film Commission have been very successful. Just a week or so ago $40,000 this year was announced by my colleague from Prince George–Mount Robson. That will enable the film commission to continue doing its fine work. Certainly, all of the comments that the member for Victoria-Hillside just stated in terms of the weaker Canadian dollar and the various tax incentives have helped our film commission do their work and bring some very exciting productions.

I'd just like to outline some of the productions that have occurred in Prince George and perhaps the reasons

why some of them have occurred. Probably the best-known film that has been filmed in Prince George in the last few years is Double Jeopardy with Ashley Judd. It was a wonderful film. All of the jail scenes…. We're very fortunate in Prince George to have an empty jail, thanks to the fine work of the Solicitor General's office. That's been a key feature of our ability to attract film to Prince George — the ability to actually shoot some of these things in the empty jail. So Double Jeopardy was a great film, a super production, and has aired broadly. I'm sure everyone has seen that at one time or another.

That was followed by Reindeer Games, which also featured our jail as part of it. There were many areas in Reindeer Games that were in my riding. Members may recall the casino scene in Reindeer Games. That casino was in my riding and is actually a community centre, but it was dressed up to look like a casino. The various motel scenes in that were also filmed in my riding, not far from where my MLA office is in Prince George.

We then moved on, and fortunately we managed to get out of the routine of simply having an empty jail as being the only reason. Last year Dreamcatcher was filmed in Prince George. I was fortunate enough to see Dreamcatcher about a week and a half ago. It was interesting to see all the assorted areas. Of course, being a Stephen King film, it's received a tremendous amount of publicity. The main feature in this particular film was the snow.

To finish things off, I'd just like to say that the film that is coming up and going to be shot in Prince George in the near future is Miracle, which is a Disney production. I'd like to say that the reason why Miracle is coming to Prince George is because of the great hockey fans in Prince George. I have to add that the second choice for Miracle was Kamloops, but the hockey fans in Kamloops don't quite match up with the hockey fans in Prince George.

S. Orr: I thank the member from Prince George for giving us that wonderful dissertation on all the great movies that have come to Prince George. Of course, we had way more in Victoria, but that's good too.

Just to finish off, I want you to visualize the snapshot of the L.A. producer receiving that photofile and attached to it that $8.45 per hour instead of paying the 20 bucks an hour that he's going to pay down in Los Angeles. Again, I reiterate that person will be earning more than that. It's just for budget purposes. So that is really, really key. What we have done here in British Columbia is very key to the moving forward of this business. It's highly competitive. We have the best location, but the rest of the world feels the same too.

I have to say that what we have got in front of us, what we've just had presented to us with these new tax credits, is going to really change things and bring more to British Columbia. No doubt Vancouver will still attract the bulk of the film business, but now all the regions of this province have a kick at the can. We all know there are many areas of this province that have locations that can never be reproduced in Vancouver.

With this new incentive, we are now highly competitive and on the world stage of film-making. This industry will always grow as long as people want to have that break from reality and go to the movies or rent videos and DVDs. I don't see that coming to an end. That's my biggest night out — Friday night, on the TV, with a bowl of popcorn and my husband.

S. Orr: In that order. [Laughter.] The husband definitely comes first. Please, husband, don't be watching this. You come first.

Anyway, with that I will conclude, reminding everybody that this is a growth industry — the best-paying jobs, highly competitive and very environmentally friendly.

R. Stewart: I rise today to speak about parental involvement in our school system. Parents play a variety of roles in the lives of our children. Whether it is as a counsellor, a disciplinarian, a mediator, a taxi driver, a cook, a coach, a protector or simply as a friend, a parent must attempt to master not only these roles but a whole host of other roles.

As a father of four children, I can attest to the diverse role that parents play in the lives of their children. However, I can also attest to the rewards that come with those roles on a daily basis. I think back to my own parents and the way in which they supported my brothers and me. I consider how many times we were driven to events and how we were encouraged in school and other activities. I consider how my parents worked hard at our schools to ensure that we had every opportunity available.

I know that hasn't changed with today's parents. Today's parents are continuing to play a meaningful role in the lives of their children. Perhaps the most important is the role that parents play in supporting their child at school. Schools would not be the same without the participation of parents. Parents aid in facilitating many programs and events. They act as lunchtime monitors; they do field trips, fun days — hot dog helpers — as well as coaching. They even take time out of their hectic schedules to serve on parent advisory councils and attend award ceremonies and performances to support their children. It is this constant involvement that keeps school spirit and morale high. It creates a welcoming environment, and it makes school life safer and more comfortable for children.

I believe there is nearly universal support for the important role of parents in our education system. True, there are a few who disagree, and there are even some organizations that would propose a much smaller involvement. As well, I have spoken with some parents who have felt discouraged from becoming involved in their children's lives at school — in some cases because of a policy, in other cases because of an individual. That's a shame.

There are even government directions that have had an effect on parental involvement. In the past it is clear that the commitment of governments to this philosophy that parents can and should be deeply involved in their children's education has been mixed and at times has been very negative. We should keep in mind that schools were made to educate children. In that role parents can, when given the opportunity, play a vital role.

The impact of this involvement has far-reaching effects for students. My wife is a teacher, and she knows full well what parental involvement can do in the lives of her students. For example, many of today's students carry a school planner that goes back and forth from school to home. My wife and I both feel that this is a vital tool to increasing parental involvement in a child's education. Many teachers use this planner to foster a daily communication with parents, who are now able to follow the progress and lessons of their children and to keep as informed as they care to be about the challenges and successes their children are facing in school. This allows parents to reinforce learning, to provide personalized assistance where necessary and to tackle any problems early.

My wife has also made use of parents in the classroom. For example, she has had a Jewish parent come into the classroom to explain for her children some of the traditions surrounding Hanukkah. I'm sure that having a menorah in front of them helped these students gain a better understanding of a culture different from their own. In the same way, a parent came in to explain her family's Chinese new year celebrations. My wife tells me that the questions and answers this elicited were invaluable to fostering a better understanding between cultures.

It's not just in the classroom or in the realm of fundraising that parents can be involved. I suspect that almost all parents would agree with our government's plan to increase parental involvement in decisions around our education system. This government has taken many important steps in this direction. Within the first 90 days of our government being elected, an amendment to the School Act was introduced to establish the right of parents to work in our school systems.

We are encouraging parents to do just that. This continues to be a priority of our government because it is well known that the more parents are involved in a child's life at school, the better the child does not only in school but in all aspects of life.

To further our commitment, the Minister of Education introduced school planning councils. The councils were designed to formally acknowledge the importance of parental involvement in improving student achievement. Their main purpose is to consult with the school community in developing, monitoring and reviewing school plans or improving school achievement. The councils will be composed of the principal, a teacher and three parents. This is great news for school communities. Not only are parents getting the benefit of spending time with their children and learning about them, but students are also able to get the support they need to succeed. With greater participation from parents, schools are becoming better places to learn. Of course, when parents and teachers have open communication, everyone benefits. Parental communication and involvement are the most effective tools in helping our children to succeed.

I recently received a letter from a constituent on the issue of parental involvement, and I want to read parts of it now.

That letter may well sum up some of the feelings of many parents about parental involvement.

Hon. G. Hogg: Thank you to the member for those comments, particularly referencing the letter from a parent near the end, which suggests the notion and perception that some people have that it's a very parsimonious approach that is taken to the goals and the visions of education. There's an old African proverb that says that it takes a village to raise a child. Within the context of the school, certainly that's a part of that village and a part of the contributions of that. Since the days of Socrates there have been debates about the role of education — whether the role of education is to somehow look at the aspirations and goals of the individual or somehow to support the notions of the state. It is important, I think, in our society to look at the role and support that this government has placed on the notion of family and the participation of family to ensure that we do have a positive and healthy outcome for children. The role of play, which all societies have used and looked at as a method by which we teach the values and mores of our families of our societies, and the need for participation, coordination and communication for that to occur…. The integral, central part of all of that is, as the member says, the role of parents — parental involvement.

We know that educational performance is better for those students who have the active participation of their

parents. We know that reading to children from the point of birth makes them better prepared to learn. We know from early childhood development research that the first three years of life and the involvement of parents in support of that is crucial to the educational performance and, indeed, to the overall well-being of the child.

I remember reading in the late seventies while doing some work on my master's degree that at one end of the extreme, there were schools in Chicago where they had virtually no parental involvement and, in fact, became prescriptive. The levels and degrees of violence through a number of factors in those schools resulted in having to place police officers in the hallways to ensure that there was effect and change between classes, to be able to reduce the amount of abuse and neglect that took place within them.

At the other end of that extreme, I think…. Last Thursday I had the privilege of visiting Grandview Elementary School and meeting with a number of parents. This is an elementary school on the east side of Vancouver, a school that has a high degree of poverty and students coming from homes with families on income assistance. There's an active participation and involvement of parents within that school. They've been able to see a change over the past three or four years in the educational performance, the culture and the feeling within that school. Primarily because of the participation and involvement of parents and the changes which this government made to make the right of parents in that involvement through legislation, their involvement became that much more prevalent within the context of the school.

The parents' role in terms of supporting the child — the feel of education, the sense of education and their sense of support — is all a part of that growth which facilitates the role of society and the role of state in terms of doing that. Children so often develop their sense of well-being, their sense of self through the context that they relate from their parents and their parents' values. As they get older within that context and reaching into their teens, that becomes much more dictated by their peers. If we haven't done a good job of ensuring the support of parents through that context then, we have the types of problems and issues that we all want to avoid.

Information and knowledge does not mean change. We also need to ensure that there is communication and there's support, that teachers are a part of that, that the administration is a part of that, that the school boards and indeed the government are a part of it. Collectively, they — we — become the village, the village of support necessary for supporting our most valuable resource: our children. For our children to achieve their goals, their dreams and their aspirations, to have the best opportunity of achieving those, we need to continue to support parents and give parents the tools, the resources and the information necessary to provide the type of environment necessary. The member most appropriately points out the role that the parents have within that not just within the context of the home but, importantly, within the context of the schools. The actions which we have taken and which the Minister of Education has taken to support those provides us with the best opportunity possible for children to be able to reach those goals, those dreams and those aspirations, and I thank the member for his comments.

R. Stewart: I thank the member, as well, for his insight into this important issue.

I agree that the parent who wrote that letter…. You could sense the frustration in the letter, and I think the letter does sum up in many ways the feelings of many other parents in our community — that schools are about students, and that parents want and need to be involved in student achievement. So I hope we will achieve greater acceptance of increased parental participation in our school system. I know that some of the schools I have been able to visit in the last 18 months have shown very much that feeling that parents should and need to be involved in the decisions that take place in an excellent learning environment.

Yesterday I had the chance to talk at length with Linda Reimer, the president of the district parent advisory council for school district 43, about this very issue. Linda Reimer feels very strongly about parent involvement in education. She knows that when parents get involved in education, students learn more. She knows that when parents get involved in education, students approach school with higher aspirations. She knows that when parents get involved in education, students achieve better results and have brighter futures. Of course, there are different levels of parental involvement, and traditionally there have been many communities with the expectation that parents would simply raise the money, as I said earlier. This is an important role; there's no question. But Linda believes that parental involvement in our school system should be much more than that, and she believes, as I do, that the advent of the new school planning councils the member spoke about carries with it the potential to raise the level of parental input and involvement in education for the benefit of student achievement.

Certainly, the traditional parent advisory councils have had and continue to have a very important role in ensuring that parents can participate in school life, but with school planning councils parents now have a formal voice in some of the important decisions that affect student achievement. I believe this can only be positive.

Linda hopes that school planning councils can develop properly into the structured voice that parents should have in our education system. I share that hope. I want us to support and encourage parents to be more involved in children's education in their local school. I want to do it for the benefit of those students and of our society, because when a child succeeds in school, often the reason is a parent.

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND
FUNDING FOR TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY
(continued)

I will continue to bring to the attention of my colleagues the stretch of highway that is of significant importance to the entire province. It is our lifeline to Alberta and the east. It also connects us with the west coast of British Columbia. I am committed to working with the minister, the federal government and all groups to ensure that we have the safest highway possible to carry our goods and services, our friends, our neighbours and our families throughout the province. I move adoption of Motion 10 under my name on the order paper.

It gives me great pleasure to speak about the exciting opportunity not just for Burnaby but for our entire province: the British Columbia 2009 World Police and Fire Games. The House may recall that last year, firefighters from the great city of Burnaby came to Victoria asking for support. My Burnaby colleagues and I at that time endorsed their bid to host the 2009 World Police and Fire Games, and we did so with pride and great anticipation that these games would be good for all of us. With this motion, I'm urging all my colleagues to support the bid.

Firefighters and police officers play a pivotal role in keeping our communities safe. They serve our communities with pride and dignity. Now they're putting such a tremendous effort toward getting the games for all British Columbians because they know the benefits will accrue to all of us.

The World Police and Fire Games started in 1985 as a means of promoting physical fitness and sport within police and fire organizations. Since then, the games have grown to become a truly international event. The 2003 games are set for Barcelona. Quebec City will play host in 2005, and Adelaide is organizing the 2007 games.

The World Police and Fire Games are the second-largest event outside of the Olympics itself. More than 12,000 athletes are expected to attend the 2009 games from close to 70 countries. Most of the athletes are full-time police officers and fire competitors — approximately 60 percent police officers and 40 percent fire competitors.

I had a chance to look at the statistics from the 2001 games, which were held in Indianapolis. Athletes competed in 70 sports. Sports such as basketball, cycling, ice hockey, soccer and swimming form a partial list of the 45 core sports. Total athletes competing in the 2001 games were 9,023. Total hits on their website were 3.5 million. There were 118,000 volunteer hours logged, and 581 media articles were published in that state.

Of course, one of the most important measures would be the economic impact. The games would have a huge economic impact estimated between $35 million and $50 million. The 2001 World Police and Fire Games in Indianapolis had a direct economic impact to the local economy of $27 million. It was because of these positive indicators that the firefighters from Burnaby thought this would be a tremendous opportunity for all of us.

The idea and the hard work was started in Burnaby by two firefighters, Jeff Clark and Miles Ritchie, who both competed in previous games and thought: "Why not here in British Columbia?" Thus it started out as a grass-roots effort. A $5,000 (U.S.) deposit for the games was put on Jeff Clark's and Miles Ritchie's personal credit cards, believing this was the right thing to do for Burnaby. We're now very close to knowing if the games are ours.

To date, the Burnaby firefighters have successfully completed detailed application forms by the bid deadlines. They have been able to bring together numerous organizations. Matthew Coyne of Tourism Vancouver has been working hard to make sure the committee enjoys its stays at the various hotel facilities we have around the lower mainland. Brian Pound of 2010 Legacies Now, with the 2010 Olympics committee, is helping to put the bid book together.

The city of Burnaby is supporting the bid. They have met with many organizations, sat through many meetings, and each time they have made their case for the bid. Today a core committee has been formed, comprising mainly firefighters and police from the lower mainland.

The next big step as a bid committee is the site inspections visit to the lower mainland. The site inspections are scheduled from April 23 to April 25. On April 26 the committee will hear from various people who will present on the reasons our province should get the games. I'm pleased to inform the House that the Premier will be speaking on the 26th at this very important presentation. I'm also pleased to advise the House that my colleagues and I — the members for Burnaby North, Burnaby-Willingdon and Burquitlam — are

hosting a reception for the bid committee on April 23, and we're very pleased to have the Solicitor General confirm that he will be attending the reception and addressing the committee.

This bid is a tremendous opportunity for my community, for B.C. and for Canada as a whole. There's no doubt in my mind that a successful bid for the 2009 World Police and Fire Games will only add to the momentum of the Vancouver bid for the 2010 Winter Olympics. Athletic events like this bring a sense of community, pride and renewal. In addition, they bring spectators and athletes and attract thousands of visitors to our beautiful province.

It has been a long and exciting journey for everyone who has been involved in making this happen for British Columbia. Thanks to the hard work, commitment and dedication of many people — especially the firefighters from Burnaby — British Columbia is poised to win the bid. I ask my colleagues in the Legislature to join me in supporting this motion in honour of their hard work on behalf of Burnaby and British Columbia.

Deputy Speaker: For the information of members, I just want to note that the motions that precede this motion will retain their place.

H. Bloy: I have the pleasure to rise and support the motion introduced by my colleague from Burnaby-Edmonds. The 2009 World Police and Fire Games coming to Burnaby can be summed up in one word: opportunity. The 2009 World Police and Fire Games would be a great opportunity for Burnaby to showcase its unique setting in a place within Vancouver and British Columbia. In 1989 the games came to Vancouver and highlighted our city's ability to put on world-class events. Burnaby's bid could only improve our province's reputation.

The economic benefits to Burnaby would be immense. The games held in Indianapolis in 2001 had approximately 9,000 participants and contributed over $27 million to the local economy. If successful, we are going to see thousands of people come to watch these firefighters and police officers take part in over 60 different sports.

These games are different from other games in that the families come with the participants, so there are two and three visitors coming with each participant. These police officers and firefighters will stay in Burnaby hotels. They will eat in Burnaby restaurants, and they will shop at Burnaby stores. I could go on and on forever about the economic spinoffs with the athletes competing in my hometown. Suffice to say, Burnaby will be left with a great legacy when these games are finished. This isn't just the estimated 9,000 athletes. It's also about the people, the families, the friends and sports lovers who will come to watch the games. Quite simply, more people is better.

Of course, Burnaby will not be the only beneficiary of these. I predict the economic benefits will be all over our great province. People will not just come to watch the games. They will take the opportunity to explore British Columbia, to go hiking in the Rockies, to enjoy the wilderness, to enjoy the orchards and vintners of the Okanagan and to go fishing on the coast. Most importantly, the 2009 games are a chance to showcase the splendour of British Columbia less than a year before the Olympics roll into town.

I'm excited for Burnaby and British Columbia that our firefighters are pursuing the 2009 games. I am pleased that many more than just my colleagues and myself have hopped on board to support this bid, recognizing the tremendous opportunities our community will see. It will give us the opportunity to showcase to the world that we are ready for February 2010, as the whole province gears up for the international spotlight that will undoubtedly shine on British Columbia throughout the year leading up to the Winter Olympic Games.

This is a tremendous prospect for the city of Burnaby and for my constituents. I would like to voice my support in favour of this motion and to encourage the House to do the same.

R. Lee: I'm really pleased today to rise in the House to support the motion moved by my colleague the hon. member for Burnaby-Edmonds.

I'm excited that firefighters in Burnaby are taking the lead in bringing the 2009 World Police and Fire Games to Burnaby. The World Police and Fire Games have been held biannually since 1987. These games are open to active or retired members of the public safety community including firefighters, police officers, correctional agents and customs officers. It's estimated that this event will attract over 12,000 participants from more than 65 countries who would compete in up to 67 different sports.

The games will bring in not only athletes but also their accompanying persons from all over the world. For the 2005 games in Quebec, it's estimated that there will be 10,000 athletes and 10,000 accompanying persons generating $48 million in economic benefits around Quebec City. It's interesting to know that Quebec City had to compete with 13 other cities to win the right to host the 2005 World Police and Fire Games, while the Burnaby firefighters are the only public community services group in the world to meet the deadline for the competition to host the 2009 games.

This kind of estimation of economic impact was based on past experiences. A study of the 2001 World Police and Fire Games showed that it had a direct economic impact on the Indianapolis economy of $27 million. A multiplier factor of 2, which is not unusual, will bring the economic benefits to the range of $50 million.

The 2009 World Police and Fire Games will also be a perfect event for British Columbia to prepare for the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. Volunteers in the order of 10,000 may gain invaluable experiences by getting involved in organizing and helping with the 2009 games. Not only cities in the lower mainland, but also those in the heartlands, will play host then to some 30,000 visitors for two weeks.

No doubt, tourism in British Columbia will benefit tremendously when we win these two bids. I'm pleased to see that organizations like Tourism Vancouver and the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games candidate city bid team have no hesitation in endorsing Burnaby's bid to host the 2009 World Police and Fire Games. It's nice to know that the experienced staff at Tourism Vancouver, who have helped prepare the 2010 Olympic bid, have also been helping with the preparation of the bid for the 2009 games.

The city of Burnaby has a long history of hosting large-scale games. In 1993 the B.C. Disability Games were held in Burnaby with almost 1,000 physically disabled athletes. In 1997 the B.C. Summer Games took place in Burnaby with over 4,000 young athletes. Thousands of volunteers were trained. Local businesses were very supportive, and I remember that many residents even opened their homes to visitors.

With over 20,000 visitors from places outside this province, it will be a rare opportunity to showcase Burnaby and British Columbia. Our visitors may participate in education forums and conferences, learning about the practice of community policing, study the emergency response logistics, test their advanced communications systems, share experience in combatting crimes, participate in professional development or compare legislative measures.

The opportunities are limitless. The friendship and working relations developed through these games will bring better understanding between the visitors from all cultures around the world. With strong support from the three levels of government, I am sure that the 2009 World Police and Fire Games will be coming to Burnaby, British Columbia and Canada. I totally support the motion put forward that this House endorse the Burnaby firefighters' bid for the 2009 World Police and Fire Games as a tremendous economic and social opportunity to showcase Burnaby and B.C. to the world.

J. Nuraney: I rise in the House today to wholeheartedly support the motion presented by my colleague from Burnaby-Edmonds. Burnaby is not just a diverse and prosperous city but also a tightly knit community. For months now, a group of Burnaby firefighters has been working to bring the 2009 World Police and Fire Games to Burnaby. Since they began their quest, my colleagues and I have fully supported the bid and have worked to bring broader support to this effort. The mayor of Burnaby and the members of the council have also expressed their cooperation and support.

These games will not only bring fame to our city but also help cultivate the spirit of athleticism and volunteerism among the youth and the residents of our fair city. Bringing the games to Burnaby would bind this community together with a common goal. I can say this with confidence, as I had the pleasure of working on the B.C. Summer Games held in Burnaby some years ago. I remember the excitement and the legacies that this event left us with in Burnaby. We have the resources, the will and the dedication to make these games the best ever in 2009.

Let there be no mistake: the World Police and Fire Games are an athletic event. These games are second only to the Olympic Games in size, and the message is the same: to strive to be your very best and work hard to achieve your goals in the spirit of healthy competition and fair play.

I predict that a successful bid will shed more light on the hard work and dedication that firefighters and police officers have brought to our community. Children have always been inspired by the work of these men and women, seeing them as the brave heroes that they are. A successful bid for the Burnaby games adds a new dimension for our children: the spirit of teamwork and athleticism.

I would like to congratulate these individuals for their hard work. I would like to congratulate the many people who have rolled up their sleeves to help the local bid committee attain their goal. This committee sets an example that not only strengthens our community…. In the long run, if both the bid for the 2010 Winter Olympics and this bid are successful, I can think of no better place to be than in Burnaby in 2009 and in 2010.

Hon. T. Nebbeling: I'd briefly like to speak in support of the motion presented by the member for Burnaby-Edmonds and backed up, of course, by our colleagues from Burnaby.

There is no doubt that British Columbia has developed over the years a tremendous reputation for its ability to host major events. Of course, being here in Victoria, we immediately think back to the Commonwealth Games that were held here in 1994. Not only did it give the province tremendous exposure, but it truly did something for the community as a whole — and that was bringing people from all walks of life together to participate as volunteers and as spectators, of course, in an event of that calibre.

Two years ago in Vancouver we had the figure skating world championships. Because of the character of that event, we got exposure on a very global level — again a good thing for British Columbia. Every time an event like this happens, we do see the world turning their eyes to British Columbia and to Vancouver.

If we succeed in 2009 in bringing the World Police and Fire Games to Burnaby, it is again an opportunity for British Columbia to shine on a global level. But there is something else, of course, as well: 2009 is only one year away from 2010. By the time 2009 comes around and when we are indeed successful in Prague this year in bringing the games to our shores, the World Police and Fire Games will give us a tremendous opportunity to actually test our system. A year later we will welcome the world again. Much of the organization that will happen between now and 2010

will have innate opportunities to see that indeed the system works. Here's another opportunity.

When we bring 10,000 people…. As the member for Burnaby-Willingdon just stated, this brings a group of athletes. Although they're not professional or amateur athletes, they are sports people related to their profession. It's a force of 10,000 people that bring their families along as well. This is a massive group of people, second to none — or second to the group of people we will bring for the Olympics. I think that bringing the games here is not only going to be a tremendous opportunity for Burnaby, for Vancouver, for British Columbia again…. British Columbians will participate in being spectators as well, no doubt, as these games are known to be very exciting and often very entertaining, I've heard.

My support for the games is 100 percent. I think we need them. They give us the opportunity to test our 2010 Olympic system as well, but more importantly, they bring people again to British Columbia to see what a magnificent province this is and what an ability we have to host events of this nature.

Congratulations to the member for Burnaby-Edmonds for putting the motion in front of us. I'd like, through this brief statement, to show my support.

Hon. R. Coleman: One thing about these games is that I don't imagine we'll really have a security-cost issue related to this group of people coming to British Columbia.

Hon. R. Coleman: Oh, it's a timing joke. I know you probably will get it when you get time.

I'd first of all like to thank the member for Burnaby-Edmonds for bringing this motion to the House and also firefighters Clark and Ritchie, who actually had the vision to pay on their own credit cards a $5,000 (U.S.) deposit so that we could have the opportunity in this province to host these games. It's good for our culture, it's good for policing, it's good for firefighters, it's good for the community, it's good for the economy, it's good for friends, and it's good for volunteers, so obviously it's good for us.

For these two fellows to have had the vision and the guts, frankly, to be able to stand up and do this…. We should all be thankful, if we win this bid, to those two people. They had the vision to bring millions and millions and millions of dollars of economic activity to British Columbia as the result of their vision for the 2009 games.

It is an interesting thing that will take place in 2009 when the firefighters and police and people from around the world come. The police officers will walk into what will probably be the most modern infrastructure of policing anywhere in the world. We will be able to show off our preparations for the 2010 Olympics. We will be able to show off the fully integrated system of PRIME. We will be able to show off how integration in policing and reorganization and regionalization have improved policing for all our citizens. They can take that model from British Columbia to everywhere else in the world to improve public safety for all.

For me, it is great to see 70 sports or more represented by over 10,000 athletes that could come to our province to participate in these games. Whenever you have an organization or a set of games that could come to your community and give you these standards — the striving to do your best, the striving to reach goals and the whole notion of fair play, honesty and integrity — it can only be good for our communities. I endorse the 2009 bid, as every other member in this House does today, for the city of Burnaby and for the firefighters and police officers in our province.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, is the motion resolved that this House endorse the Burnaby firefighters' bid for the 2009 World Police and Fire Games as a tremendous economic and social opportunity to showcase Burnaby and B.C. to the world?

J. Wilson: I would like to speak on Motion 12 on the order paper in my name:

I would like to take a moment and digress here a little bit. Ranching has historically been around for well over a hundred years in this province, and how did it come about? Well, British Columbia has a natural resource out there in huge quantities, and it's forage grass production. Ranching is the process by which we take all of this production and convert it into wholesome, nutritious protein that we can consume ourselves.

The importance of this industry has, in my mind, not been recognized for a long time. The people that are in ranching do not have powerful lobby voices out there on their behalf. They simply work the land year in and year out, do what they love doing and, for the most part, remain relatively silent unless something comes along that really upsets them. Then they have to become vocal in order to survive.

I remember that 22 or 23 years ago, we experienced a rather severe economic downturn in British Columbia in the forest industry. It was 1980. It was long before I ever got involved in the political arena, but as a producer I would go into town and would do my business. The people that were in business in the community — the fuel dealers, the welding shops, the fabricating shops, the parts dealers — when I walked in the

door, said to me on many occasions: "Thank God we have some ranchers in this area; otherwise we would have to shut our doors in this time of economic downturn." They were right. Those people were there, and they created the economic stability the community needed to keep those small businesses operating.

That holds true for many small communities in this province not only then but today as well. Ranching has been a growth industry in this province ever since its beginning. From 1986 to 2001 it experienced a 35 percent growth increase. In the Cariboo and Peace, 66 percent of that increase was in that region.

Now, how do we expand this industry? There are several ways. First of all, we can increase production. We do that through a number of different avenues. We have today modern technology advancements in a number of fields: crop production, animal husbandry, genetics, marketing — all of these. Ranchers, for the most part, try to stay abreast of the leading edge in all of the things that will help them do a better job with their operation.

In the Chilcotin and the Cariboo, too, we have had a lot of ranchers that sit in isolation. They are very remote. They are actually beyond rural; they are remote. Today, fortunately, we have on-line Internet access for these people. Some of them have to rely on satellite Internet access, but they do that. It keeps them abreast of everything that's happening today in the industry.

The other area where we have huge potential in this province is in our great amount of Crown land that still remains, which could be put into production. In the southern part of the province it doesn't come into play quite as much, because the ranches there are older. Historically, they are much older. That's where the grasslands were, what's left of them. We see that they are diminishing because of encroachment. The actual land that was available has been for agricultural production. It was taken up earlier in our history, but in the central interior and in the north we still have a great deal of opportunity to expand our agricultural land base.

The thing about ranching that a lot of people really don't understand…. As I said earlier, we don't have a lobby group out there to promote this. The actual dollars generated through ranching come second to mining on the land base. If you go into straight forage production, we have approximately $2.75 generated for each dollar that would be generated, say, in the forest industry, which encompasses most of the north. If you go into beef production, the dollars generated on a given unit of land are $3.66 to one dollar compared to forestry. Mining is, of course, a highly intense industry and generates the best use in a small area.

But the thing that comes to the forefront when we look at economic stability is the jobs created through ranching and agriculture, and it's 20 to 1. That's where our future lies in this province and many of our small communities, and it's time that we addressed that.

Where we have land today that is suitable for agriculture, we need to recognize that. It may be growing timber today, but that's fine. That timber can be harvested, and then this land could be put into production.

The thing that a lot of people don't realize, too, is that wherever agriculture thrives, we find our wildlife thrives as well. They go hand in hand. People in agriculture really are good stewards of the land, and they love to see that wildlife out there, for the most part. There are times when it gets to a point where you've got grassland encroachment, and then you end up with no grass except for what the producer is trying to raise as forage. That wildlife may come in, and it would be a problem. But for the most part, it's not uncommon to drive through the country and, looking out there, see deer grazing in a field; you'll even see moose grazing in a field. The producers are not unhappy with this, and all our hunters should be right along there with them, because it does encourage a better resource in both areas.

W. Cobb: I support and thank the member for Cariboo North for bringing forward this important motion.

Ranching is one of the great stabilizers, as he mentioned, in our heartlands economy. In the Cariboo and in my riding in particular, we have some of the largest ranches in the interior. There's the Gang Ranch, Chilco Ranch, Alexis Creek and Alkali Lake as well as the famous Empire Valley Ranch, to name only a few. Plus, there are probably hundreds of smaller spreads operated by two- and three-member families. Some of these larger ranches also are being operated and managed by probably third-generation family members. That stability is what helps and what keeps people in the Cariboo.

The member for East Kootenay stated in his private member's statement that there were some concerns in that area. Well, those concerns also generate and follow through in the rest of the region. As the member for Cariboo North stated, some of the opportunities that could be available and what could be done to ensure the growth of that industry actually do take place.

I pulled some stuff off the Internet to give a little bit of history and some of the statistics as to what the member mentioned. The European settlement in the Cariboo began with the fur traders and the goldminers. Entrepreneurs brought beef cattle to the open range of the Cariboo to harvest the abundant forage and feed for the miners. Ranching built many Cariboo communities and today continues to contribute to the community stability in a sustainable manner, as the member stated.

He also stated that forestry and tourism were relative latecomers in the economic picture. There are about 270,000 beef cows in the province, and a little less than one-third of those beef cows are actually produced in the Cariboo. At an average of $1,000 per cow, ranchers have a significant investment in cattle alone. About one-third of the province's Crown range is also found in the Cariboo. In the Cariboo we support

316,000 animal-unit months — so that's a huge, huge portion — out of 940,000 for the whole province.

Williams Lake, which is the base for my riding and the biggest community in my riding, has the largest livestock auction market in the province. This is a relatively new one, and it's probably one of the most modern in the province as well. Out of a total of 101,000 animal units sold in the interior or in British Columbia, just about 43,000 of those cattle are sold through the Williams Lake stockyards. These numbers do not reflect the cattle also sold by private sales or through auctions in other markets. These numbers are only a portion of the farm-gate receipts.

Think about the economic multipliers, as the member indicated — the terms of service and supplies purchased; employment; property; sales and income taxes; the huge investment in land, livestock, machinery and equipment — behind these numbers. Then, of course, there's the whole value-added retail sector which brings that food to our plate every day.

I think with the other things that are happening in the country today, this industry has trade issues with the U.S. similar to what we're experiencing with the softwood lumber agreement — or softwood lumber dispute. Unfortunately, it's not an agreement yet. I think this motion will also bring that to the forefront, and I ask each one of my members here today to support this motion.

B. Lekstrom: It's certainly my privilege to stand in the House today to support my colleague from Cariboo North's motion, Motion 12, dealing with the expansion of the ranching industry in British Columbia.

Ranching is about many things. It's about families; it's about communities; it's about the heartlands of B.C. All of this together makes British Columbia what it is today. I'm from Peace River South, and both Peace River South and my colleague from Peace River North have the privilege of having probably more cows on the ground than any other jurisdiction in British Columbia. It's quite amazing. [Laughter.] Yes, I knew you would get a laugh out of that. We have more beef cows on the ground in Peace River South and Peace River North than we do people, on the east side of the Rockies. We had over 75,000 beef cows in the Peace River region in 2001. It's our goal to expand that.

I talked earlier about the families. Families of ranching people are out there, and they do it because they love it. They don't do it to get rich, because the average annual income of a cattle operation in British Columbia is about $37,400. People don't go into the industry to get wealthy. They go into it for the love of the animals, the love of the land and the love of the lifestyle. There's a lot to be said about that. Their commitment to the land, as my colleague from Cariboo North has talked about, is second to none.

We talk about people that depend on what that land will bring them. In the ranching industry we hear about the grasslands and the issue there and access to it. We hear about other issues such as wildlife management. Certainly, an issue for us in the Peace area is the wolf population — one that plays a big role in the loss of many of the calves, especially come calving season, and individual animals. I know many people debate whether it's proper to go out and look after the overabundance of the wolf population or not. Well, from a person that lives in the area, from a person that knows family and friends in the ranching industry, it isn't something that they're proud to go out and do. It's a necessity. It's their livelihood, and it's taking away from their livelihood and their ability to supply for their families and for their communities.

Communities is another issue I touched on. Communities like Dawson Creek, Chetwynd and Tumbler Ridge, Fort St. John on the north side of the river and Taylor don't all survive because of what it takes within these imaginary municipal boundaries. That's what makes up a municipality, but it takes a great deal more to make that a community. The community depends on the rural area around our communities. It depends on our ranchers and our farmers. In our case, it depends on the oil and gas industry and mining.

The people that have been there, and the people who understand the needs of what communities are and the needs of the land and what's required, are truly the ranching industry. Trying to bring expansion to this is something that I think has probably been long overlooked by provinces and by our country. I've said this before in this House. We can take the power out of our houses, we can take the natural gas out of our houses, and we'll find a way to survive as people. But you can't take the food off our plates, or we won't continue to survive as the human race. I will do everything I know, with the cooperation of my colleagues, to bring the importance of the agriculture and ranching industry to the top of the list where I feel it so rightfully belongs.

Calving season — when we talk about our families and ranchers and their commitment — is quite a time. For the people that have been involved in it, they'll know what I'm talking about. A rancher doesn't set a schedule on an eight-to-four schedule. It's a lifestyle. It's 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They don't pick their holidays in June, July or August, because there's not a single day in the year that goes by that they aren't committed to their animals and their herd. It's one that they take on, as I indicated, with a great deal of pride. Pride flows from these people. You can see it in their way of life. You can see it in the way they treat their families and their friends, and you can see it in their commitment to the land and to their ranch.

There are a number of issues when we talk about building communities. I indicated earlier that communities are built from all areas, not just the municipality itself. The portion that the ranching industry contributes is far more than just the cow itself. The cow-calf operation contributes to the economy of communities through the slaughterhouses, through the auction marts, through the sales, through our exports of beef. It's quite incredible to think that in the Peace region alone in 2001, total beef sales were over $53 million.

That's a significant portion of money, when you think that fewer than 63,000 people live in the entire Peace region alone.

I could go on at length about the importance of our ranching industry and what we need to do to look at expansion capabilities for it, but a number of my colleagues, both my colleague from Cariboo North who introduced the motion and my colleague from Cariboo South who spoke on this issue, have touched on a number of issues that relate to this industry. It's one that I think is vitally important to the economic well-being of our province, and one that I will do my part, as my colleagues will, to bring to the forefront so people have an understanding of what it really means to the economy of British Columbia.

Today, in closing, I want to reiterate my full support for this motion on the expansion of ranching in British Columbia, and one that I will do my best to bring forward all that I can to this Legislature to ensure that that happens.

P. Bell: I'm going to try and be very, very brief because there are a number of speakers that want to speak after me, but I just want to speak in support of Motion 12.

I certainly congratulate the member for Cariboo North in bringing this motion forward. It makes a tremendous amount of sense. I had the honour last fall of hosting a natural resource forum in Prince George of which one-quarter was dedicated to farming and ranching in the province of British Columbia, and, certainly, the member for Cariboo North did a wonderful presentation and clearly outlined the benefits of ranching.

I have the fourth-largest ranch in the province located in my riding — that being the Bar K Ranch — but many, many other operations. These folks really understand the dynamics and the importance of the ranching industry. There is a tremendous amount of employment provided throughout my riding as a result of ranching. Just in closing, I'll say that this particular Legislature, I believe — although I don't know this to be a fact — probably has more representatives that have an ownership stake of some kind in the ranching-farming industry. I count five different members that I'm aware of who have a stake in ranching and farming. So I think we clearly understand the importance of this motion, and I am very, very pleased to support it.

D. Chutter: I, too, am pleased to speak in support of the motion brought on by my colleague and fellow rancher from Cariboo North. You might ask: what is ranching? Typically, it is a family business, perhaps with an employee or two, that raises beef cattle for food. Beef cattle ranching is all about converting grass into protein. Because of that, ranching typically involves the use of the land and, typically, a lot of land.

As the beef cattle industry is a North American market, in order to stay competitive, ranchers must use the vast open spaces of British Columbia — for example, the open grasslands and the grasslands in the timbered areas — in order to graze the cattle, as the use of intensive cultivated land is too expensive. As a result, ranching takes place throughout the province and provides an important economic stabilizing influence on our small rural communities.

The B.C. beef industry contributes about $230 million in the farm-gate cash receipts, which translate to about $750 million, or three-quarters of a billion dollars, to the provincial economy. I think that's pretty unique and pretty substantial. What is important about the beef industry is that it has been a constant source of jobs and economic activity in small-town B.C. Each day of the week, in towns throughout the province, a rancher is going to town and spending money in the local businesses by buying parts for their equipment, fuel, hardware items, groceries and what have you.

I can't think of an industry that is more sustainable than ranching. For example, to replace beef in our diets by a crop grown on cultivated land would require millions of acres in North America to be cultivated and farmed, and this would result in dire consequences to our environment. The rangeland grazed by beef cattle can't be used to grow other food crops. The beef cow goes out onto the rangeland, harvests the grass and returns with surplus beef to sell. That grass grows again and again, year in and year out. Not only does the great recycling machine — the cow — turn non-edible forages into human food, but it also provides ingredients to other industries for a long list of items — for example, ice cream, pasta, pharmaceuticals, medicines, bandages, boots and plastics. The list goes on and on.

This land base involving open and timbered grasslands not only provides food for cattle but sustains the ranching family and the rural community. If the land is properly managed, this land and community relationship can carry on long into the future, providing a unique quality of life for rural families and a stable source of economic and social participation in rural communities.

Beef cattle graze on about 10 percent of the provincial land base. What is significant is that about 95 percent of that land base is Crown land. We cannot forget that. It's for this reason that provincial policy can have significant influence, good or bad, on the ranching industry.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, careful consideration in this Legislature of this dependency on Crown land for the success of the provincial ranching industry can go a long way to encouraging a stable or expanding industry. This would, in turn, continue the positive impacts of ranching, providing economic and investment activity in the many heartlands areas of our province.

B. Bennett: It's an honour to stand in the House today and support the member's resolution. It's also an honour to talk about the ranching industry. We don't do that very often in this House. As one of my col-

leagues has stated already, they're a very quiet, hard-working bunch of people that mind their own business and just go about earning a living and looking after their families, and they do a fine job of that. It really is an honour to talk about those people in particular.

I spoke earlier in the House about a specific problem that ranchers encounter in this province. It's not just in the East Kootenay. As the member for Cariboo South stated, it's a problem that actually applies to anywhere in the province where we have natural grasslands and where ranchers are accustomed to grazing their herds of cattle on Crown grazing. That would be the Cariboo, the Okanagan, the north, the Peace, the Kootenays, etc.

What I wanted to say before I wrap it up here this morning is simply that we can't expect these hard-working people to be out there working as hard as they do — and the members have already described how hard that is — and not give them the tools they need to be successful, to raise the food that we need to consume in society. Specifically, what I'm talking about is that we need to help them manage the ingrowth problem in this province. We have to find ways to deal with all the regulatory hurdles that they must get past to remove the trees from areas where trees didn't normally grow and where grass normally grew. That obviously is a major raw material that ranchers need to be successful.

Once again, it's a pleasure and an honour to speak in favour of the motion. I would just like to express my personal gratitude and the gratitude of the ranchers that I know in the East Kootenay to the member for Cariboo North for bringing forward the motion.

In addition to providing transcripts on the Internet, Hansard Services publishes transcripts in print and broadcasts Chamber debates on television.