2014 Legislative Session: Second Session, 40th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 6, Number 5

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)
ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2014

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1005]

Introductions by Members

D. Horne: It's with pleasure that I recognize my lovely wife today. I'm not certain that having her name, Larissa Horne, in the record will compensate for the fact that we're not together on our anniversary, but perhaps it might. I've heard that it's the thought that counts. I'd like to wish my wife a very happy anniversary and wish her well today.

C. James: I have a guest in the gallery today who is no stranger to this place. She is the former MLA for Victoria–Beacon Hill, the person I go to when I need someone to blame when it's a tough day in this Legislature and someone to praise for most of the good days. She's the former Minister for Children and Families. She was former Speaker of this House as well. She is here with her granddaughter Bronwen Clark-Brewin, who is visiting from Ottawa. She's currently attending Mount Allison University, in New Brunswick.

Would the House please make Gretchen Brewin and Bronwen Clark-Brewin very welcome in this House.

Hon. T. Lake: Members on both sides of the House are wearing the forget-me-not pin today to help raise awareness about Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. I rise to recognize members of the Alzheimer Society of B.C. who are joining us at the Legislature today to talk about this important challenge to society.

For more than 25 years the Alzheimer Society of B.C. has played an important role in the lives of people with Alzheimer's disease. With up to 70,000 British Columbians currently living with Alzheimer's or related dementia, they remain committed to raising awareness and working with government to provide the best possible care for those affected.

Maria Howard joined the society in late 2013 as CEO and brings years of experience from the health sector; Dan Levitt serves as the second vice-chair and secretary for the society; and Jim Mann is on the board for both the Alzheimer Society of Canada and B.C. His personal experience makes him a strong advocate for awareness of the disease.

From the great city of Kamloops, Monique Blanchet is here as well. Her family has experienced this challenge, and Monique is an outspoken advocate for awareness and support.

Would the House thank and please make welcome members of the Alzheimer Society today.

J. Tegart: On behalf of my caucus colleagues, I would like to introduce many of our constituency assistants who are in Victoria for a two-day training conference. As MLAs, we all rely on our constituency assistants, who are our eyes and ears on the ground when we are away from our constituencies. Could the House please make all of them feel welcome.

Statements

MESSAGE FOR VANCOUVER–WEST END
CONSTITUENCY ASSISTANT

J. Tegart: I would also like to give our entire caucus's support to the member for Vancouver–West End and his constituency assistant over the shocking incident last week in his office. We stand united against this type of hateful attack, and we wish the member's constituency assistant a full and speedy recovery.

Introductions by Members

S. Robinson: I take great pleasure to introduce to the House Sam Noh and Joe Ong, who are here from Coquitlam. They are here to support me in a bill that I'm going to be introducing in the House shortly, a bill entitled the Silver Alert Act. Mr. Noh's father disappeared in September and has yet to be found. I hope that the other side of the House will be as enthusiastic about a silver alert act as we are.

I want to give them a warm welcome for joining us here today.

[1010]

Hon. D. McRae: I have two introductions today. I'd like to welcome to the House two members of the B.C. Shellfish Growers Association. Roberta Stevenson serves as the association's executive director, and Yves Perreault is the president of the group. They are in Victoria to meet with government ministers and MLAs.

The B.C. Shellfish Growers Association is based in the beautiful and snow-filled Comox Valley. It has served the shellfish industry for more than 55 years, and the association's aim is to promote sustainable growth and help protect our shared marine environment. Please join me in extending a warm welcome to Yves and Roberta.

I'd like to take a moment to recognize Sharon Moysey and her husband, Bob, who have joined us here in the House today. After nearly three decades in public service Sharon has just retired as assistant deputy minister with the Ministry of Social Development and Social
[ Page 1554 ]
Innovation's regional services division.

Sharon joined B.C.'s public service in 1986 — also a good year; it's the year I learned to drive — as internal auditor at B.C. Ferries. Over the next two decades she became B.C. Ferries' comptroller and worked with the B.C. transportation authority and the Ministry of Transportation before joining the ministry in 2004. We're going to miss her. She has served our ministry and the province of British Columbia well.

Good luck in retirement, Sharon.

Statements

MESSAGE OF APPRECIATION

S. Chandra Herbert: I just wanted to rise to say thank you to British Columbia, to say thank you to members of the Legislature and legislative staff, of course. But really, it's the people of B.C. who have made my assistant, my office, myself as a member feel so proud of our province. While there may be a few who harbour hatred in their hearts, the vast majority of us are united with one heart, I believe, and one hope for a province that does not support hatred and violence but for a province that supports diversity in all its many forms.

There's much more to be done. Obviously, we do this work each and every day in our offices, but thank you on behalf of my assistants, the people of the West End and, of course, for everybody in British Columbia for speaking out in support of love and speaking out against hatred.

Introductions by Members

G. Holman: I have two visitors visiting the Legislature today, Judy and Kailyn Barlow. Judy is a writer for the Saanich Voice Online, and Kailyn is our recently elected Young New Democrat for the Saanich North and the Islands constituency. They've won the dubious honour of having lunch with me in a fundraiser. Would the House please welcome Kailyn and Judy.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL M202 — SILVER ALERT ACT, 2014

S. Robinson presented a bill intituled Silver Alert Act, 2014.

S. Robinson: I move that the bill be introduced and now read a first time.

Motion approved.

S. Robinson: Mr. Noh went missing on September 18. The former pastor, who enjoyed going for walks in his Coquitlam neighbourhood, has not been found, despite extensive searches involving the Coquitlam RCMP, volunteers and Coquitlam Search and Rescue.

His family and many in the community, including my husband and I, donned rain gear to search parks, streets and gullies throughout the fall. Shin's family is doing everything they can to find their family member, and we must do everything we can to ensure that B.C. has the tools in place if and when such a situation happens again.

Alzheimer's disease can erase a person's memory of one's familiar surroundings and make it difficult to adapt to new surroundings. As a result, it's common for those diagnosed with Alzheimer's to wander away from their care homes and turn up lost, frightened and disoriented, sometimes far from where they started.

Wandering is one of the many symptoms of Alzheimer's, and it can be fatal. If they are not found within 24 hours, there's nearly a 50 percent risk of serious injury or death.

Passing this bill would help the 170,000 people we are expecting to be diagnosed with Alzheimer's in the next 20 years, most of whom will be cared for at home. This bill creates a silver alert program to alert the public to a missing person who is diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or any other form of cognitive impairment.

A silver alert would work much like an AMBER alert, in which provincial law enforcement agencies and various partners would together increase collaboration in an effort to safely recover missing persons.

[1015]

In the U.S. there are over 32 jurisdictions that operate or are planning to operate a silver alert program, and Ontario is getting ready to come on line. There has been a concern that creating a silver alert program in addition to the AMBER alert program will desensitize the public and weaken the effect of such programs. However, as indicated in our proposed Silver Alert Act, it may only be activated under particular circumstances, which ensures that the alert programs in B.C. remain effective.

A silver alert program will help educate and inform the public about Alzheimer's and dementia and the risks of wandering behaviour. We all know it takes a village to raise a child, but it takes a community to care for our most vulnerable citizens.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for the second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
[ Page 1555 ]

Bill M202, Silver Alert Act, 2014, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

HUMAN RIGHTS IN NORTH KOREA

J. Shin: Imagine watching your husband dig his own grave to stand in front of and fall dead into after being hammered on the back of his skull. Imagine being forced to drown your own newborn baby in a bowl of water. With another 240 stomach-turning testimonies by the survivors, the United Nations Human Rights Council delivered its 372-page report this month on the systematic human rights violations in North Korea.

It is estimated that between 80,000 to 120,000 prisoners, including children, are held in these secret camps throughout North Korea, subject to starvation, rape, torture and execution for attempting to flee the country for freedom or for exercising religious and political beliefs.

As a form of collective punishment, it's not uncommon for three generations of a family to be abducted and killed. Over one million are thought to have been killed in the last two decades, amounting to a genocide.

Now, this is not news to many of us Canadians of Korean heritage. I grew up hearing those stories and joined others to write letters for Amnesty International.

British Columbians like Susan Ritchie founded First Steps to provide essential nutrients for the children of North Korea. Eunice Oh, the former president of the Korean Society of B.C., collected more than 5,000 petitions last year to advocate for the North Korean escapees not being sent back to face execution.

As one of the survivors said in his interview, awareness is the important step towards a coordinated international effort for human rights in North Korea. In a world where such extreme cases like in North Korea still exist to brutalize humanity and here in Canada, where such crimes may perhaps have morphed instead to take form as verbal or psychological abuses and character assassinations of one another, our work is far, far from being done.

February 26 is Pink Shirt Day, and I hope that we all stand together by each committing to more kindness and respect for each other.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST ECONOMIC REGION
SUMMIT IN WHISTLER

N. Letnick: I'm pleased to announce that the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region, or PNWER, will hold its annual summit in Whistler this summer, July 20 to 24. PNWER is a joint public-private partnership that has spent more than 20 years increasing the economic well-being and quality of life for people living and companies operating in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Washington, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories.

Together we work to promote greater regional collaboration and enhance our region's competitiveness in domestic and global markets. I encourage all MLAs to register and join more than 500 key business leaders, legislators and government leaders from PNWER's ten states and provinces. Global challenges and regional solutions — that is what drives PNWER.

In the throne speech a plan to grow the economy was outlined, and to deliver this plan, effective engagement with other governments and the private sector is key to its success.

At the summit, opportunities provided by LNG and our clean economy leadership will be profiled. It will be among some of the top priorities we'll pursue with participants. Another priority will be increasing access to skilled workers so that we can develop industry for the benefit of all British Columbians and the region as a whole.

Efficient borders, key to the province's competitiveness, will also be discussed with the leaders of other jurisdictions. By continually building relationships with leaders in neighbouring jurisdictions and with the federal governments in Canada and the United States, we will seek support for and advance our provincial priorities.

I encourage all MLAs to register for the summit. Your perspective as well as the participation of private sector leaders will be invaluable in shaping our province's competitiveness and capitalizing on our region's global opportunities.

ALZHEIMER SOCIETY OF B.C.

G. Heyman: It gives me pleasure to join the Health Minister today in welcoming citizens from around B.C. who are in the gallery, concerned about Alzheimer's — in particular, Maria Howard, Jim Mann and Dan Levitt from the Alzheimer Society, which happens to be located in my constituency of Vancouver-Fairview.

[1020]

Many constituents in Vancouver-Fairview volunteer with the society and have come in to my office to talk to me about this looming crisis. As the minister mentioned, there are more than 70,000 cases in B.C. today of Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. There are also 15,000 new cases a year being diagnosed, and the projection is that over the next 25 years that number will double.

The Alzheimer Society is the only provincewide non-profit organization that's dedicated to helping people who are facing dementia, and it's been doing this for over 25 years. As part of a national society, a federation of provincial societies, it's the largest non-government funder of dementia research, called the Alzheimer Society research program.

It supports biomedical research finding the causes and potential treatments for Alzheimer's and other forms of dementias. They also do quality-of-life research focused on improvements in care and improving the quality of
[ Page 1556 ]
life for those suffering and their families and caregivers.

Programs offered by the society include First Link, early intervention that connects individuals and families affected by Alzheimer's diseases with services; Minds in Motion, a fitness and social program; the Safely Home program to address wandering; and educational workshops and support groups.

I'd also like to particularly note Jim Mann who, since he was diagnosed seven years ago, has been the driving force behind Jim's Push for a Plan to make Alzheimer's disease a priority in B.C. He and the society are still pushing to address this growing crisis and improve the lives of the 70,000 sufferers.

B.C. WINTER GAMES IN MISSION

S. Gibson: On behalf of my fortunate constituents of Abbotsford-Mission, I would like to offer my congratulations to all the participants and organizers of the 2014 B.C. Winter Games, the first-ever for the district of Mission.

This year the games welcomed over 1,300 athletes and 500 coaches and managers who participated in 17 sports, including Special Olympians and those with a disability. Well over 1,300 medals were awarded throughout the games, but in my mind everybody is a winner.

The chance to compete and, perhaps, come like one of the many B.C. Games alumni who participated in the recent Olympic Games is an opportunity for any athlete. The training, the discipline and all the sacrifice that athletes, parents and coaches make over the course of the year all culminated in very successful games, which added to the exhilaration and excitement of competition.

In addition, thanks to the 1,900 volunteers, most from Mission and outlying communities, who donated so much time and energy to make these games an incredible success. A special thanks to Kelly Mann, Brian Antonson and, also, to the MLA for Maple Ridge–Mission riding.

We also need to thank all the games' sponsors, big and small, who know the value of sport in the community and helped to make the games such an incredible success. It was a pleasure for me to observe the excitement and passion.

Also, I'd like to acknowledge Mayor Ted Adlem, councillors Tony Luck, Nelson Tilbury, Jenny Stevens, Dave Hensman, Geoff Jewell and Larry Nundal of Mission council, who were such big supporters.

I'm certain that all those who visited Mission for the very first time will take home wonderful memories of a beautiful community and the amazing hospitality of the residents of the community.

NISGA'A NEW YEAR CELEBRATION

R. Austin: Last weekend I had the privilege of attending the Nisga'a new year celebration — or Hobiyee, as it is known in the spectacular Nass Valley just north of Terrace. The hoobix, or spoon, refers to the last crescent of the moon and is normally held in different weeks of buxwlaḵs, or February, depending on the phases of the moon in a particular year.

The event signals the beginning of the food harvesting year and the forthcoming arrival of the oolichan, a small fish about the size of a sardine that is a rich source of protein and oil, or oolichan grease, which has sustained First Nations of the northwest for thousands of years.

This year's celebrations were held in Laxgalts'ap, also known as Greenville, and was all the more remarkable, for an event that brought together over 1,000 people, when you consider that just last week the community was without hydro for a week. Nevertheless, the planning went ahead, and hundreds of dancers and drummers came from all over the northwest.

This is a celebration of community that has to be experienced to see the impact and joy on the faces of the dancers as well as spectators. The primary players are the four villages that make up the Nisga'a Nation, as well as Nisga'a and Tsimshian groups who come from Prince Rupert, Terrace and all over the northwest.

[1025]

It isn't only First Nations who participate. Indeed, non–First Nations are encouraged to join in the dancing. In one traditional dance, a female dancer has to choose a member of the audience and bring them on to the floor. That lucky individual must follow the lead of that dancer. I was so relieved when our local Member of Parliament was chosen, while the crowd around me was rooting for me to be the lucky one.

I hope that in the future other members of this House or, indeed, anyone watching this will take the journey to the Nass Valley and come and see for themselves what Hobiyee is all about. It is a journey worth taking, as listening to huge numbers of drummers and singers in one place is, frankly, a spiritual experience.

As is the case when the Nisga'a are hosting an event, the food was fantastic. I want to thank all the organizers and the community of Laxgalts'ap for a job well done. All that remains is for me to wish everyone here a happy Nisga'a new year. Hobiyee.

ORGANIC FARMING

L. Larson: First I'd like to thank the organizers of the 2014 Certified Organic Associations' conference for allowing me a few moments of their time to bring greetings from the Minister of Agriculture to start off their program last weekend in Nanaimo.

As we become more aware of the benefits to our health of homegrown organic foods and the demand increases, these mostly young and some not-so-young organic farmers seem more than ready to rise to the challenge. They came from all over British Columbia and the Yukon
[ Page 1557 ]
to discuss issues ranging from handling farm apprenticeships to creating value-added opportunities and even exchanging seeds.

I particularly want to congratulate this year's B.C. and Yukon Outstanding Young Farmer, Lydia Ryall of Cropthorne Farm in Delta. Lydia and her sister grow over 50 crops and raise 100 free-range laying hens on 10 acres. Through the innovative use of movable greenhouses, tunnels, row covers and raised beds, Cropthorne Farms can grow crops ten months of the year. Lydia summarizes the farm's mission by saying she wants her farm to be a positive example of sustainable agriculture.

In the last four years, three of the winners of the B.C. and Yukon Outstanding Young Farmer title have been organic farmers. Sara and Troy Harker in 2013 and Annemarie and Kevin Klippenstein in 2011 — who both come from the Boundary-Similkameen — also went on to win the Canadian title in that year. Please join me in congratulating Lydia and all the young farming entrepreneurs who are so passionate and dedicated to the organic farming industry in British Columbia.

Oral Questions

IMPLEMENTATION OF MISSING WOMEN
INQUIRY RECOMMENDATIONS AND
BUS SERVICE ON HIGHWAY 16

A. Dix: A question to the Justice Minister. Last week the official opposition asked the Justice Minister about a key recommendation of the Missing Women Inquiry. The report, as she knows, was released 14 months ago, and Commissioner Oppal urged the government to move immediately to provide safe, accessible transit options along the Highway of Tears. Will the Attorney General finally accept the inquiry's recommendation that the provincial government act immediately to support safe transit options for women in the north?

Hon. S. Anton: The missing and murdered women tragedy was one that must never happen again in British Columbia, which is why this government had the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry and why Commissioner Oppal helped us with his 63 recommendations.

The issue of the transportation is one where there are consultations with communities in the north, and we are working on that one. But let me emphasize to the House the important work that has been done on two major themes in the missing-women report: one on policing and the other on missing persons.

You will know, Madame Speaker, and the House will know that the missing-persons legislation was brought in and will be debated perhaps later today. On policing, we have made tremendous changes in the last 15 years, partially brought in by government prior to the report but also since the report.

[1030]

As a result of those changes in policing, British Columbia is a safer place than it was 15 years ago. As I said, a tragedy like that must never happen again.

A. Dix: Working on it isn't nearly good enough. On December 24 the previous Minister of Transportation said they were working on it. In July the current Minister of Justice was asked about the bus. She said: "We're working on it." In November they were asked about the bus. They said they were working on it. They might have consultations. Consultations have been already provided. Working on it, in this case, is not good enough.

If the minister takes Commissioner Oppal's conclusion seriously.... Here's what his conclusion was. "The need for these services" — referring to those transit services — "is so clear and the support for them is so broad and undisputed that no debate or further discussion is needed. All we need is a public commitment to prioritize…women who do not have ready access to transportation along the Highway of Tears." Those were the words of Commissioner Oppal.

So 15 months of "working on it" is not good enough. When is the minister going to act?

Hon. S. Anton: Let me remind this House some of the ways that we have acted. We have implemented PRIME. That's a system where every police officer in British Columbia has immediate access to the same information all around British Columbia. This is a remarkable system. We spend $70 million a year on integrated teams.

One of the key recommendations of Commissioner Oppal was to ensure that our police were not in silos but that they reached out, that they worked with other police departments, so that is why we're now investing $70 million a year in these integrated teams. We're investing in domestic violence units around the province.

The crime rate in British Columbia is its lowest in 40 years. The House heard the commitment in the Speech from the Throne to work towards a violence-free B.C. The strides and the changes that we have been making in policing in British Columbia are helping us get there.

A. Dix: It is so disrespectful. This is a crucial issue. It's been identified for eight years. The government hasn't acted on it, and this bafflegab is so disrespectful considering the seriousness of the issue.

What did Commissioner Oppal say? He said, and I am quoting him. He was imploring the "immediate implementation" of a response to this recommendation, not 14 months of the same answer and broken promises month after month after month. He said the immediate implementation of this measure, "based on this commission's strong and disturbing findings concerning the many ways we have failed in our duty to protect vulnerable women from serial predation."
[ Page 1558 ]

To a large extent, it's a matter of priority of choice. The safety and security of citizens, especially the most vulnerable, should be defensible priorities. Why is it taking the government so long to act on these immediate concerns in the north?

Hon. S. Anton: Bafflegab? Really?

Lowest crime rate in 40 years. Better information for police than any other jurisdiction in Canada. Madame Speaker, $70 million in integrated teams, which are a regionalization of services of policing. Continuing to work with the communities in the north to find solutions on the transportation issue. These are terrific strides.

Nobody in this House — nobody — wants to see a tragedy like the missing and murdered women happen again. All of us need to work to ensure that that does not happen. Government is working constantly on this.

[1035]

As I said, the two main themes in the Missing Women Inquiry were missing persons and policing. We have made huge changes in both of those, including the Missing Persons Act, of course, which we will be debating, I think, later today.

J. Kwan: The truth is that this government didn't even bother to put a budget, a dedicated budget, this year to ensure that the recommendations from the Wally Oppal inquiry be implemented. That is the truth. In fact, if anything, this government actually reduced the budget for crime prevention and victim services. That is the truth and the reality of what we face today.

Commissioner Wally Oppal described the case involving the missing and murdered women as a "tragedy of epic proportions." Based on factual evidence regarding the investigations, he concluded that the missing-and-murdered-women investigations were a blatant failure. After spending $10 million on this inquiry, and 14 months have since passed, violence against women in the Downtown Eastside and in this province continues.

Violence-free B.C. is only a slogan for the Premier. For the family members of the missing and murdered women, it's about the safety and lives of vulnerable women. Everyone knows that the lives of women are put at risk every time they hitch a ride on the Highway of Tears. Slogans will not keep them safe.

Will the minister today immediately commit to funding a shuttle bus service as recommended by Wally Oppal?

Hon. S. Anton: Let me tell the House some of the other ways that we are making British Columbia a safer place. We spend $70 million a year in crime prevention programs. There's $70 million a year on the integrated policing teams, $70 million a year on crime prevention programs. We have launched a domestic violence program. We have domestic violence units in Vancouver, which I was privileged to visit the other day, and domestic violence units around British Columbia.

Commissioner Oppal provided us a road map to prevent the kind of situation which happened with the missing and murdered women. We are working on that road map and the great changes that we have made in policing and missing persons legislation in British Columbia. As I said, British Columbia is a safer place than it was 15 years ago.

J. Kwan: The minister should know that a computer system is not going to make Highway 16, the Highway of Tears, any safer for the women who actually need a safe public transit system. The coalition of missing and murdered women asked the Attorney General for a response to the five priority recommendations from the Wally Oppal inquiry before Christmas.

It's now just about spring and still no commitment from this minister 14 months after the Oppal inquiry. There is no budget or timeline for a shuttle bus on the Highway of Tears, no mental health or addiction service programs for and by aboriginal women and youth, no mandatory police sensitivity training, no justice to victims' families through a compensation fund, no champion at all to implement the recommendations.

Coalition member Mona Woodward asked: "Why do we always have to fight?" and "Why can't the government fulfil their duty with due care and respect?" This is Canada's worst serial murder case. The women were forsaken twice: once by the society at large and again by the police. Will the women be forsaken a third time, or will the minister stand up today and honour the lives of the missing and murdered women and immediately provide dedicated funding to implement the recommendations with a specific timeline?

[1040]

Hon. S. Anton: I talked about quite a lot of funding, but I'll repeat it. PRIME — $1,000 per officer goes into PRIME in British Columbia. That is why police in British Columbia have better access to information than any other police department in North America.

We spend $70 million a year on the integrated policing teams. We also spend another $70 million a year in crime prevention units. We have launched the new provincial domestic violence plan. We have made significant changes in safety for women and safety for everyone in British Columbia.

There was a commitment in the Speech from the Throne for a violence-free British Columbia. That's what we're working towards.

The member opposite referred to a group which came to visit me the other day. She also referred to fighting. That group came to help, and I appreciate the help that they offered. We are working with that group.

This is an issue for everybody in British Columbia to
[ Page 1559 ]
be pulling in the same direction. That's what we're doing on the Missing Women Inquiry recommendations. That's why British Columbia is a safer place now than it was 15 years ago.

IMPLEMENTATION OF MISSING WOMEN
INQUIRY RECOMMENDATIONS

M. Karagianis: Well, the B.C. Liberals' record on responding to the inquiry report is so absolutely wretched that they are still counting the appointment of Steven Point as the report's champion as one of their great accomplishments for the recommendations. But in fact, Mr. Point resigned last May.

This budget, which fails to follow through on the inquiry's recommendations, demonstrates why Steven Point's replacement was needed yesterday. As Mr. Point himself said about the report: "Aboriginal people and poor people deserve to be given the same protection under the law as everyone else. This deserves more attention. It deserves someone to carry it forward."

My question is to the Attorney General. When will this government appoint a new champion to oversee the implementation of the Missing Women Inquiry report?

Hon. S. Anton: We appointed a champion, Mr. Point. I am pleased to report that he is now Judge Point, because he has recently accepted a reappointment to the Provincial Court bench. I think we should all congratulate him for that.

Mr. Point went out and met with families and brought us a tremendous amount of useful information and help, information which enabled us to pursue the things that we need to pursue in terms of missing persons and in terms of the recommendations.

Let me talk about the missing persons legislation. One of the issues with the missing and murdered women was that the police did not have the tools at that time which would allow them to go and find missing persons. They did not. Now we are introducing legislation, which I hope will be supported on the other side of the House, that sets out provisions for finding missing persons.

There were many tragedies. One of the big tragedies of the missing and murdered women was that some of them were known to be missing almost immediately, and the police did not have the tools at that time to go and find them. This missing persons legislation will give the police the tools they need to find persons who have gone missing when people around them know they are missing.

This is very good legislation, and I trust that it will be supported unanimously on both sides of the House.

M. Karagianis: I'm going to repeat the word I used earlier — a wretched, wretched response by this government. Nine months. We can't get a bus to help protect women on the Highway of Tears. We can't get a replacement for Mr. Steven Point so that we have a champion for this report.

[1045]

It's interesting. This past summer the Prostitutes Empowerment, Education and Resource Society, known as PEERS, here in Victoria had to close their drop-in centre, leaving many vulnerable women with no place to go to find services and, in fact, stay safe. Not just vulnerable women — all women were safer because of the work of PEERS.

Yet this government counts the funding for the wonderful WISH foundation, the drop-in centre in Vancouver, as another completed recommendation, even though the report has said that the government must support all emergency drop-in centres, not just one.

Perhaps we can get a better answer from the Minister of Justice on this one. Can she take action right now to make sure to fight to restore funding in this budget for a bus, to take action on Steven Point's replacement and to restore funding for services like this and the recommendations of the Missing Women Inquiry? Take action today, please.

Hon. S. Anton: I must say that I'm a little bit mystified by the question. If missing persons legislation is not action, what is? Giving British Columbia police officers the best information of any police service in North America — if that's not action, what is? If building integrated teams around British Columbia is not action, what is? Appointing Steven Point to go out and help us consult with families of missing women and stakeholders and leave us well positioned to move forward — if that's not action, I do not know what action is.

This government made a commitment when it established the Missing Women Commission. It has made a commitment to follow through on the recommendations. That is what we are doing.

FUNDING FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
PREVENTION PROGRAMS FOR MEN

D. Donaldson: Just in the last 18 days two young First Nations men in Stikine were stabbed to death. One death was allegedly the outcome of a domestic violence incident, the other a violent encounter on Main Street in Smithers. It's tragic to say these types of incidents are far too frequent for me to list, not just in northern B.C. but around the province.

This government speaks of a violence-free B.C. in their throne speech and specifically mentioned safety and First Nations. Yet their words ring hollow when we see no new supports in the budget for men who voluntarily want to break the cycle of violence in themselves and their families.

My question to the Minister of Justice: how do you propose to get a violence-free B.C. without offering any
[ Page 1560 ]
new supports for men who want to stop violence before it happens?

Hon. S. Anton: I am sorry about the tragedy that happened in the member's riding. Nobody in this House wants to see things like that happen. That is why this government is committed to helping communities, to helping people so that situations like that do not happen. That's why this government is taking significant action on domestic violence. That is why we recently launched the three-year, $5.5 million provincial domestic violence plan. That's why we have a commitment to introduce a long-term comprehensive strategy to work towards a violence-free British Columbia.

This government recognizes that aboriginal people, First Nations, will be, I'm hoping, our partners in this, because government does not act alone on this. We act with communities to make communities safer.

[1050]

That is why we are working so hard on the domestic violence — on violence-free British Columbia and on preventing violence against women. That is why we have paid such careful attention to the recommendations of Commissioner Oppal, because that was a central theme of Commissioner Oppal, and we are working toward that.

Madame Speaker: Member for Stikine on a supplemental.

D. Donaldson: We're talking about a simple action — funding for men's programming that wasn't in the budget. The minister started off her answer with sincerity, and I don't doubt her sincerity. I don't doubt anybody's sincerity in this House when it comes to the issue of domestic violence.

However, actions speak louder than words. This government is a lot more focused, spends more time and energy on getting to yes on uncertain megaprojects than they do addressing and getting to yes on domestic violence and ending domestic violence in B.C.

If we want to get to….

Interjection.

D. Donaldson: I hear a member speaking out, and I believe it just shows the lack of respect that the members on that side of the House have for this issue.

If we want to get to a violence-free B.C., we need to look to organizations like the Northern Society for Domestic Peace in Smithers. They provide support to men who voluntarily want to address their issues before a violent encounter takes place.

As the executive director says: "We have to have services for these men who come in prior to the first time or prior to a domestic violence incident." Yet men who are looking for help are being turned away because the society's fundraising activities can't keep up with the demand for services. Just for a few thousand dollars, they can't keep up with demand.

Madame Speaker: Pose your question, Member.

D. Donaldson: Why should anyone believe the Attorney General's slogan of a violence-free B.C. when the B.C. Liberals won't support a basic service that would significantly reduce violence?

Hon. S. Anton: The member opposite made a comment that was rather troubling. Every member of this House cares about their community, cares about their province, cares about the safety of this province, cares about the safety of communities and the safety of families. To suggest otherwise, as the member opposite did — I just can't understand it.

We are all here as politicians, as elected officials, to serve our province and to make our province a better place. That's why every person in this room ran for elected office, and I think it is highly offensive to ever suggest otherwise.

That is why this government has worked so hard over the last number of years to help families and to help communities address violence. That is why we have made such significant changes in policing — $70 million a year, I might remind the member opposite. That's why we have PRIME. That's why we spend $70 million on the crime prevention programs.

Madame Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

Hon. S. Anton: Madame Speaker, there is an extremely significant commitment by this government to making British Columbia safer.

SAFETY OF PERSONS WITH DEMENTIA
AND SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES

S. Robinson: Shin Noh, a pastor in his early 60s with mid-stage Alzheimer's, went missing last September and is yet to be found. Mr. Noh's family organized community searches, calling on hundreds of volunteers who came from all over the Lower Mainland to look for their father.

Does the Minister of Health agree that more must be done to support families like the Nohs, when they are facing the nightmare of their loved one's disappearance?

Hon. T. Lake: When a loved one goes missing, it's obviously very stressful for families. There is probably not a member in this House who isn't touched in some way by Alzheimer's and dementia and the challenges it poses to families.

The safe and speedy recovery of seniors who may have wandered away is important. That's why health author-
[ Page 1561 ]
ities work very closely with police departments when seniors with mental and cognitive illness go missing.

[1055]

I look forward to reviewing the member's proposed bill. She did mention that there is some concern about a desensitization effect, so that is something that needs to be addressed. I'm sure that her colleague from Vancouver–Point Grey would also be aware that the implementation may have unintended consequences: the possible violation of individuals' rights to privacy. This isn't straightforward. This has been identified in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law as a concern.

We would look to those potential challenges and work with all members of this House to ensure the safe and speedy return of members of our families.

S. Robinson: I appreciate hearing the minister's words, because over the next 20 years there will be an estimated 177,000 people living with Alzheimer's in British Columbia, and most of them will be living at home. We're talking about our parents. Many will be in danger of wandering. Six out of ten seniors with cognitive impairments will wander from their homes at least once during their illness.

Does the minister agree that we actually need to do much more to ensure that people with dementia are safe and that their families receive the support that they need to keep their loved ones safe?

Hon. T. Lake: I think I said to the member opposite that we certainly are interested in exploring this initiative. We are following the initiatives in Ontario and other jurisdictions. We're talking to our colleagues in Justice. The recently introduced Missing Persons Act will allow police to release information about missing persons to further their investigations. We're working with the Alzheimer Society on the Safely Home program.

There are many different initiatives that can ensure that our loved ones, should they wander when they are suffering from Alzheimer's or other dementia, are returned safely. We are all committed to that, and we will continue to do the work necessary to ensure that happens.

K. Conroy: The Premier once said that all people living with forms of dementia deserve the best form of care possible. Yet we continue to hear about dementia patients in B.C. who, by no fault of their own, have wandered out of care facilities and have subsequently been injured and in some cases have died.

Earlier this month an elderly White Rock man wandered from his care home and was struck by a train, just before Christmas. A woman with dementia left her North Vancouver care home and froze to death.

The families of these individuals deserve answers, and a call to action is not enough. When will this government take real action to improve the care and safety of those living with dementia?

Hon. T. Lake: As I mentioned earlier, we have the Alzheimer Society here with us today to talk about this challenge of Alzheimer's and related dementias. We've been partnering with the Alzheimer Society, and the Alzheimer Society in turn has partnered with the RCMP to develop Safely Home, which is an Alzheimer's wandering registry. They've also partnered with the Canadian MedicAlert Foundation and Safely Home to provide seniors who wander with identification to identify the person and quickly reunite them with their families.

I think I've made it clear that this side of the House is dedicated to making sure that our family members and our friends that are affected by dementia and Alzheimer's who may wander will be returned safely.

This is a challenge not just here in British Columbia, as the member is well aware, but all over the western world. There are different approaches. We are monitoring those approaches. We want to be thoughtful. I would look forward to working with members of all sides of the House on this particular challenge.

[End of question period.]

Motions Without Notice

APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES
AND REFERRAL OF REPORTS TO
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: I have provided to the hon. Opposition House Leader, and to the members for Delta South and Oak Bay, copies of motions relating to committee work that I am going to seek leave to table and have the House vote on today.

[1100]

It does require leave. I think everyone has notice, and I'm told that everyone is comfortable with the contents.

Rather than read them in detail, the first motion would be to appoint the special committee to select and unanimously recommend the appointment of an Auditor General.

The second motion is to appoint a special committee to review the Personal Information Protection Act, in accordance with section 59 of the Personal Information Protection Act.

Thirdly, a special committee to review the Independent Investigations Office, again, pursuant to, in this case, or in accordance with section 38.13 of the Police Act.

Further, in the fourth motion, that all reports of the Auditor General of British Columbia transmitted to the Speaker be deemed referred to the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts and that the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts be the com-
[ Page 1562 ]
mittee referred to in sections 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 of the Auditor General Act.

Fifthly, that the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be appointed pursuant to the provisions of that act — the Representative for Children and Youth Act.

Next, that the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services be appointed. That, for members' information, is the committee that, amongst other things, travels and does the pre-budget consultation but also does the review of the service plans for the legislative officers.

Finally, that the Select Standing Committee on Health be charged with considering the conclusions contained in the interim report, October 2012, of the Select Standing Committee on Health of the 39th parliament, and outline potential alternative strategies to mitigate the impact of the significant cost drivers identified in the report on the sustainability improvement of the provincial health care system and identify current public levels of acceptance towards the potential alternative strategies.

By leave, I move that:

[A Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously recommend the appointment of an Auditor General, pursuant to section 2 of the Auditor General Act [SBC 2003, c.2]. The said Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following
[ Page 1563 ]
any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[A Special Committee be appointed to review the Personal Information Protection Act in accordance with section 59 of the Personal Information Protection Act [SBC 2003, c. 63] and in particular, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the collection, use and disclosure of personal information by organizations.

The Special Committee shall submit a report arising out of the results of its inquiry to the Legislative Assembly within one year of this resolution being adopted by the House.

The Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to conduct consultations by any means the committee considers appropriate;

d) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

e) to retain such personnel as required to assist the committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[A Special Committee to Review the Independent Investigations Office be appointed to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to the administration and general operations of the Independent Investigations Office in accordance with section 38.13 of the Police Act [RSBC 1996, c. 367] and in particular:

1. To conduct, before January 1, 2015, a review of:

a. The administration and general operations of the Independent Investigations Office; and

b. The Chief Civilian Director's progress towards a goal of having an Independent Investigations Office that is staffed entirely with employees and Independent Investigations Office investigators who have never served as officers or members of a police or law enforcement agency.

2. To solicit and consider written and oral submissions from any interested person or organization by any means the committee considers appropriate.

3. To submit a report, including any recommendations respecting the results of the review, to the Legislative Assembly within one year of this resolution being adopted by the House.

The Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[1. All reports of the Auditor General of British Columbia transmitted to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly be deemed referred to the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts, with the exception of the report referred to in section 22 of the Auditor General Act [SBC 2003, c.2], which is referred to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services; and

2. That the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts be the committee referred to in sections 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 of the Auditor General Act [SBC 2003, c.2]

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the Committee be empowered:

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

d) to retain personnel as required to assist the Committee,

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[The Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be appointed to foster greater awareness and understanding among legislators and the public of the BC child welfare system, and in particular to:

1. Receive and review the annual service plan from the Representative for Children and Youth (the “Representative”) that includes a statement of goals and identifies specific objectives and performance measures that will be required to exercise the powers and perform the functions and duties of the Representative during the fiscal year;

2. Be the committee to which the Representative reports, at least annually;

3. Refer to the Representative for investigation the critical injury or death of a child;

4. Receive and consider all reports and plans transmitted by the Representative to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia; and

5. Pursuant to section 30(2) of the Representative for Children and Youth Act [SBC 2006 c. 29], complete an assessment by April 1, 2015 of the effectiveness of section 6(1)(b) in ensuring that the needs of children are met.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon Select Standing Committees of the House, the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be empowered to:

a) appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) conduct consultations by any means the committee considers appropriate;

d) adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

e) retain personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services be empowered:

1. To examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to the budget consultation paper prepared by the Minister of Finance in accordance with section 2 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act [SBC 2000, c.23] and, in particular, to:

a) Conduct public consultations across British Columbia on proposals and recommendations regarding the provincial budget and fiscal policy for the coming fiscal year by any means the committee considers appropriate;

b) Prepare a report no later than November 15, 2014 on the results of those consultations; and

2. a) To consider and make recommendations on the annual reports, rolling three-year service plans and budgets of the following statutory officers:

(i) Auditor General

(ii) Chief Electoral Officer

(iii) Conflict of Interest Commissioner

(iv) Information and Privacy Commissioner

(v) Merit Commissioner

(vi) Ombudsperson

(vii) Police Complaint Commissioner

(viii) Representative for Children and Youth; and

b) To examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to other matters brought to the Committee’s attention by any of the Officers listed in 2 (a) above.

3. The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services shall be the committee referred to in sections 19, 20, 21 and 23 of the Auditor General Act [SBC 2003, c.2] and that the performance report in section 22 of the Auditor General Act [SBC 2003, c.2] be referred to the committee.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, the committee shall be empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

d) to retain personnel as required to assist the Committee,

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

By leave, I move that:

[The Select Standing Committee on Health be empowered to:

1) Consider the conclusions contained in the Interim Report, October 2012, of the Select Standing Committee on Health of the 39th Parliament; as such, the Interim Report of the Select Standing Committee on Health, and any submissions and evidence received during the 39th Parliament, are referred to the Committee;

2) Outline potential alternative strategies to mitigate the impact of the significant cost drivers identified in the Report on the sustainability and improvement of the provincial health care system; and

3) Identify current public levels of acceptance toward the potential alternative strategies.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon the Select Standing Committee on Health, the Committee shall be empowered:

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to conduct consultations by any means the committee considers appropriate;

d) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

e) to retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

And shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.]

Again, I believe the two independent members have received copies of the motions, and I seek leave to proceed with voting on those motions.

Leave granted.
[ Page 1564 ]

Motions approved.

Petitions

L. Krog: I rise to table a petition, signed by hundreds of residents of Vancouver Island, calling for the control of community drinking watersheds.

J. Sturdy: I rise to submit a petition signed by residents of Bowen Island regarding B.C. Ferries.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading of Bill 2, the Electoral Boundaries Commission Amendment Act, 2014.

[1105]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 2 — ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES
COMMISSION AMENDMENT ACT, 2014

Hon. S. Anton: I move that Bill 2, Electoral Boundaries Commission Amendment Act, 2014, now be read a second time.

This bill aims to preserve representation in this assembly for British Columbians from northern and rural areas of our province. In particular, the bill focuses on three regions that are clearly at risk of losing representation during the next electoral boundary revision process if no action is taken.

Indeed, we were urged to take action by the last Electoral Boundaries Commission. That commission, as members may recall, recommended in its preliminary report a reduction in the number of districts in the North, Cariboo-Thompson and Columbia-Kootenay regions of the province. Both sides of this House expressed a great deal of concern about that possibility, and government responded with a bill that was very similar to the one we're debating now.

That bill did not proceed. But the Electoral Boundaries Commission nonetheless took heed of the opposition to reducing electoral districts and in its final report provided two sets of proposals for electoral districts in the affected areas. The alternate set of boundaries was adopted by this House unanimously.

Members and, indeed, many British Columbians may not be aware of the extent of the disparities between electoral districts in this province. The smallest in area is Vancouver-False Creek, at seven square kilometres. The largest is Stikine, at 196,437 square kilometres.

I can easily walk through my riding of Vancouver-Fraserview in an afternoon, whereas many of our rural and northern districts have a number of far-flung communities, some of which can only be reached by floatplane or extensive driving. It obviously takes time and effort for elected representatives in those districts to travel to meet with their constituents. I'm sure that no one would deny that people in those communities deserve to see their MLA every once in a while.

Advances in communications technology are a help, but they are not a replacement for face-to-face contact between MLAs and the British Columbians they serve. Effective representation means more than a phone call or an e-mail. It means an MLA who has the ability to interact personally and meaningfully with his or her constituents on a regular basis.

The previous Boundaries Commission, chaired by Justice Bruce Cohen, said this about the issue. "People living in rural British Columbia rightly contend that representation by population must yield to the extent necessary to ensure effective representation."

Conversely, the Alberta Court of Appeal succinctly articulated the interests of people living in urban areas when it stated: "No argument for effective representation of one group legitimizes under-representation of another group." That is the end of that quote, and then to finish Justice Cohen's quote: "It is not a question of which interest is more important. Both must be respected."

That's what the previous commission had to say, and that's what we believe we have done. The bill before us seeks to preserve northern and rural representation while limiting the discretion of the independent Electoral Boundaries Commission as little as possible.

The bill does not set current electoral district boundaries in stone. It does not alter the principles that the commission must apply in proposing electoral districts. The only change is the direction to the commission to propose no reductions in the number of districts in the three defined regions.

To be clear, the next Boundaries Commission can propose changes to the boundaries of any electoral district in the province. That includes district boundaries that are also regional boundaries, subject to the requirement to preserve existing levels of representation in the three defined regions.

[1110]

The commission will continue to be guided by the principle of representation by population, as well as the need to take into account the geographic and demographic realities of our province and the need to balance the community interests of the people of British Columbia.

Government publicized our intended amendments last fall in a white paper. We have been transparent and open about what we believe is the best way to deal with this issue. We are aware that a variety of approaches have been taken by other provinces that face similar urban-rural representation issues, and we believe that none of
[ Page 1565 ]
them would be better than the approach we have taken with this bill.

Finally, under this bill, the overall number of electoral districts in the province would remain the same as it is now at 85. There are some who have said: "Why not increase the number of electoral districts overall? Why keep it at 85?" Well, we could have done that. It might seem like an easy alternative to what we are doing, but simply continuing to add districts would not adequately address the problem, which really lies in the existing wording of the act.

That wording permits boundary commissions to exceed a 25 percent plus-or-minus population deviation rule in cases where it finds that very special circumstances exist. But when it comes to adding districts, it's really not clear how many would be needed to ensure that no loss of representation occurs in any area under the existing language in the statute. Indeed, the Cohen commission noted that simply adding seats only marginally assists in changing the population deviations found in some northern and rural districts.

This government has placed a high priority on fiscal prudence. We do not believe that we can simply continue to expand the Legislative Assembly, with all the attendant costs, every time we revise our electoral boundaries.

We have an average of about 54,000 people per MLA in British Columbia. That is more than some provinces, but it is considerably less than our two largest counterparts, Ontario and Quebec. There's little doubt that, assuming population trends continue, the average number of constituents in urban electoral districts will continue to increase. But I do not believe that the outcome of the next Boundaries Commission process will impose an unworkable burden on urban MLAs, nor should it unduly detract from the effective representation of constituents in those areas.

The Boundaries Commission will be free to propose the best and fairest set of boundaries for the province, subject only to the direction to retain the existing number of districts in the three defined regions.

I recommend this bill to the House and look forward to hearing the comments of other members.

L. Krog: I'm delighted to rise to speak to this particular bill. I have the honour of representing an area of this province that has had a member sitting as the member for Nanaimo ever since Confederation. I am very conscious of the issues surrounding rural representation, which the Attorney General believes the government's bill actually addresses. I was raised in a community that was rather small — Coombs, B.C. I recommend to anyone the opportunity to visit beautiful Coombs.

Having said that, I also want to thank the Attorney General for the briefing by her staff that was given to members of the opposition who wished to attend. That was a great courtesy, and I always appreciate courtesy from the Attorney General and would expect nothing less.

The Attorney General's job here this morning was to essentially be the advocate for government. Her position in second reading is to argue that what's before the House is in fact good legislation, that it's in accord with the principles surrounding electoral boundaries commissions and the kind of work that they have to do. Her job was to convince the people of British Columbia and the opposition that it's the right and proper thing, that it's probably if not the only course certainly the best course available to government.

With the greatest respect to the Attorney General, we in the opposition don't see it that way, and we don't believe the Attorney General this morning has been a successful advocate for the position of the government.

[1115]

One shouldn't use the language "gerrymander" easily. But when we're talking about a Boundaries Commission proposal in legislation that would essentially constrain the commission in such a way that 20 percent — 17 of 85 ridings, the area they represent — would somehow be protected as a special area certainly makes one question whether the term "gerrymander" is indeed the appropriate language to use.

The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act has been around for a little while, and it's where we're starting. The bill before the House itself is actually quite brief, hon. Speaker, as you well know. For the benefit of those watching at home, you're talking literally two pages.

What the proposed act does…. It amends section 9 by adding the following subsections, setting up three districts: Cariboo-Thompson region, which includes Cariboo North, Cariboo-Chilcotin, Fraser-Nicola, Kamloops–North Thompson, Kamloops–South Thompson; Columbia-Kootenay region, including Columbia River–Revelstoke, Kootenay East, Kootenay West, Nelson-Creston; and the north region, including Nechako Lakes, North Coast, Peace River North, Peace River South, Prince George–Mackenzie, Prince George–Valemount, Skeena and Stikine.

The premise of the Attorney General's position this morning, the government's position, is that this is designed to protect rural representation. The first thing that comes to mind is: if that is the true intent of the Liberal government, then what about Powell River–Sunshine Coast, Alberni–Pacific Rim, North Island? These are all substantial constituencies.

Powell River–Sunshine Coast is utterly ferry- or plane-dependent. There's no nice road all through that constituency. You can't hop in your car and just drive unless a ferry carries you in between. There are certainly areas you're not going to reach, except by plane, very easily or readily.

The premise that those rural constituencies aren't worthy of protection…. And yet, too — and I give my
[ Page 1566 ]
compliments to these great communities — the great cities of Prince George and Kamloops are worthy of protection under a proposal involving 17 of 85 seats. But the three constituencies I've mentioned aren't.

I am sure the Attorney General will have some sort of explanation during the course of committee stage of this bill. I'm assuming we're going to get there. I don't expect the government is going to withdraw just based on the eloquence of the members in the opposition or the fact that of 63 representations made to the white paper, the vast majority of them opposed what the government is doing. I'm not expecting them to withdraw.

I expect we'll get to committee stage. At that time I'm really looking forward to the explanation that the government will give through the lips of the Attorney General as to how it is those three constituencies, just as an example, aren't worthy, but the 17 that are described in the bill itself are.

The rest of the bill talks about adding a subsection that is rather important. It says:

"With respect to the Cariboo-Thompson Region, the Columbia-Kootenay Region and the North Region, the commission must be governed by the following additional principles:" — so we are giving the commission direction — "(a) for the purpose of effective representation in the Legislative Assembly, each of these regions must not have the number of their electoral districts reduced from the number of electoral districts that currently exist for the region; (b) for the purposes of complying with paragraph (a) of this subsection, the commission may exceed the 25% deviation principle established by subsection (1) (b)."

That has been in legislation for a fair time. Everyone understands that. A deviation of 25 percent, plus or minus, is not unreasonable — good constitutional principles supported by court decisions.

It then goes further:

"For certainty, for the purpose of making proposals under section 3 (2), the commission may propose (a) changing the names of electoral districts in the Cariboo-Thompson Region, the Columbia-Kootenay Region and the North Region, and (b) adjusting or changing the boundaries of electoral districts in the Cariboo-Thompson Region, the Columbia-Kootenay Region and the North Region…."

Now, the kicker is that we're also going to limit it to 85 seats. The opposition supports that. This place is a little crowded as it is. I don't think adding more seats is the top priority for British Columbians.

[1120]

I think the issues that were raised in question period today are far more important to British Columbians than whether or not we add more politicians to the B.C. Legislature. So we support the cap at 85.

But when the Attorney General argued that somehow this commission was being given unfettered discretion when it said, "Well, it can change the boundaries of every constituency," that was somehow reasonable. Well, that is a true statement on the face of it, but when you are protecting the existence of 17 constituencies, it's pretty hard to argue that, in fact, this is somehow a fair proposal.

The reality is this legislation implicitly says that in pursuit of the government's goal, and it is the government's goal, to preserve 17 so-called — and I say so-called very clearly — rural seats, including the great cities of Prince George and Kamloops…. In order to preserve these so-called 17 rural seats, it means the good people of Surrey or Vancouver are going to see an even greater deviation between the numbers of voters in so-called rural constituencies versus urban or suburban constituencies.

I don't think that those British Columbians who live in the rural areas of this province or, indeed, those who live in urban and suburban areas disagree with the concept of the preservation and the recognition of the fact that rural representation is important, that we will never have a completely equal system. I think you'll be hard pressed to find on the streets of British Columbia voters today who would say: "You know what? We want 85 absolutely equal constituencies in terms of population. We don't care where the boundaries are. We don't care about geography. We don't care about anything."

That is not in accord with what British Columbians believe, and moreover, it's not in accordance with what we're amending, which is the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act. I refer the Attorney General, and I'm sure she has been reading it at nighttime, to section 9, where it talks about…. This is where the amendment comes in as important.

"In determining the area to be included in and in fixing the boundaries of proposed electoral districts, the commission must be governed by the following principles: (a) that the principle of representation by population be achieved, recognizing the imperatives imposed by geographical and demographic realities, the legacy of our history and the need to balance the community interests of the people of British Columbia." It's a rather eloquent statement.

"(b) to achieve that principle, the commission be permitted to deviate from a common statistical Provincial electoral quota by no more than 25%, plus or minus; (c) the commission be permitted to exceed the 25% deviation principle where it considers" — wait for it — "that very special circumstances exist."

You know, when the Occupy movement was at its height, they talked about the 1 percent. I would say the 1 percent — arguably, you could use the term "special." I might even go for 2 or 3 percent, but I think, in most people's math, when 20 percent is special, somehow you've degraded the value of the very word "special." And I mean this without any criticism, of course, of the people who live in those areas, having been raised in rural British Columbia myself.

When you talk about 20 percent, it isn't special anymore, and I don't think you're going to feel very special if you're one in five. It just doesn't cut it in terms of the numbers of constituencies.

[1125]

Now, in subsection 2 of the existing act, it goes on to
[ Page 1567 ]
say: "For the purpose of making proposals under section 3 (2), the commission must take into account the following…." Must — so it's mandatory. This is the direction of the people of British Columbia, through their voices in the B.C. Legislature, that must be paid heed to, taking into account the following: "(a) geographic and demographic considerations, including the sparsity, density or rate of growth of the population of any part of British Columbia and the accessibility, size or physical configuration of any part of British Columbia; (b) the availability of means of communication and transportation between various parts of British Columbia."

Now, I agree with the Attorney General. She's quite right. Notwithstanding modern communication, the fact that many of us don't see our children physically for months on end now — we see them through Skype, or they text us, or we only telephone or whatever — British Columbians have a right to have that opportunity to see their MLA face to face once in a while. I don't disagree with that. It's something to be preserved.

But behind this legislation is a great principle. It is the principle, it is the belief system, it is the guiding light, I think, for most of us in life, and it's the question Rotarians ask. It's the question British Columbians always ask when they're evaluating any situation….

Interjection.

L. Krog: No, we won't talk about truth with this government, hon. Member.

"Is it fair?" The concept that 20 percent is to be special simply flies in the face of the fairness that is behind the very principles of the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act as it stands and, I would argue, is exactly the opposite of what is proposed in section 2 of Bill 2, which is that section which adds in all of these provisions preserving, if you will, all of those so-called rural constituencies.

What happens to this legislation after it's passed…. I'm going to presume it's going to be passed. If the government wasn't prepared to listen to the vast majority of representations made to the white paper…. If the government isn't prepared, I suspect, to listen to, I'm going to assume, the good legal opinions they've already received, which will probably indicate — how shall I say? — no small number of constitutional hurdles to mount…. If the government is not going to listen to that, to the people, to good legal opinion, to common sense and to that basic component which is fairness, which should drive this process, then, I suspect, this will pass.

Now, if it passes, we know what courts have done historically. We know that there are two significant cases dealing with this issue, that carry on, if you will, and are decided by the courts. One of them, of course, is Dixon v. British Columbia. It was a case in 1989, also followed by a reference through the provincial Electoral Boundaries Commission in 1991. The court ruled in those cases that boundaries….

There are two issues that may lead a court to rule that electoral boundaries are unconstitutional: first, the existence of large deviations from the average — that's exactly what the government is proposing — and second, when there is no clear rationale for large deviations from the provincial average.

Now, we're not talking about Saskatchewan preserving the northern half of the province with a couple seats. We're not even talking about the province of Ontario, where 11 of 103 seats deviate significantly from that average. We're talking about 17 proposed constituencies — 17.

Now, I hesitate to use the term "I'm a simple country lawyer," because I got an e-mail from a constituent once saying: "You represent Nanaimo, and you're belittling your community if you say you're a simple country lawyer." So I'm not going to say that, but I'm going to say that I'm not a constitutional expert. I don't claim to be.

[1130]

The Attorney General and I went through law school way back when. We listened carefully to Professor Elliot. I think enough of it stuck that I suspect even the Attorney General must have some small doubt in her mind as to whether or not this will pass constitutional muster.

You don't have to be a criminal lawyer to recognize that your client may be guilty or your client may be innocent. You don't have to be a constitutional lawyer to recognize that in all likelihood, this is, to paraphrase the movie title, a bill too far.

Now, there aren't a lot of cases in this area. But what we do know is that in the reference re the provincial boundaries act, Saskatchewan, 1991, the Supreme Court of Canada was pretty clear.

First, it reiterated Dixon. So it agreed with the B.C. courts. It held that the relative parity of voting power is a prime condition of effective representation. It held that deviations from absolute voter parity may be justified if they were based on factors such as geography, community history, community interest and minority representation. It affirmed Dixon when stating that deviations should only be admitted if they could be justified. That language sounds vaguely familiar because it's language that is already used in the existing statute.

In that case, the court sided with Saskatchewan — not an unreasonable thing to do.

The geography of this province presents incredible problems for representation. The member for Stikine, for Skeena, for North Coast, for Peace River North…. Those are big areas. They face significant transportation issues, particularly in the winter.

One can look at those constituencies and say that there's a good argument to be made that they'll have to be…. They will be larger. Notwithstanding population, they deserve representation, and we're going to recognize that their population is going to deviate significantly from the parity 25 percent plus or minus. British
[ Page 1568 ]
Columbians' sense of fairness, I think, allows us to look at that and say that that's okay.

But the purpose of the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act and, presumably, the purpose of the amendment is to recognize that these decisions are to be made by an independent commission.

An Hon. Member: Like the Utilities Commission.

L. Krog: The member refers…. Like the Utilities Commission. Experience in this House is always a wonderful thing to see demonstrated by the members who can call forth examples of where you want to have independence.

Notwithstanding the high principles that govern how most of us in this chamber behave, I'm sure, the fact is that political self-interest sometimes plays a role in decision-making. Governments will sometimes initiate programs that are popular but not necessarily good public policy or, on the other hand, reward friends, punish enemies — whatever the case may be. It develops a certain cynicism in the public.

That is why we have an Electoral Boundaries Commission Act, and most importantly, it's why we have an Electoral Boundaries Commission.

What does the act say about that? It says in section 2: "The Lieutenant Governor in Council must" — must, mandatory — "as required by this Act, appoint an Electoral Boundaries Commission consisting of (a) a judge or a retired judge of the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal who is nominated by the Lieutenant Governor in Council."

You know what? Cabinet gets to make the choice. We got it. Okay, we'll accept that the government, the Liberal cabinet, is going to make the choice. But it's a pretty limited talent pool.

If you want to talk about special people, I would argue that the few hundred folks who fall under the category of a judge or retired judge of the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal are indeed special people. They are highly educated. They are highly experienced. They are appointed through a rigorous process, highly ethical and owe no allegiance to any politician.

The second one: "(b) a person who is not a member of the Legislative Assembly or an employee of the government and who is nominated by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, after consultation with the Premier and the Leader of the Official Opposition." Again, it's someone who's going to have to pass the muster of both sides of the House.

[1135]

Thirdly, the Chief Electoral Officer appointed under the Election Act. Now, if there is ever a professional public servant, surely it is the Chief Electoral Officer. That passes the old test — you know, like Caesar's wife — of not only being above reproach but being seen to be above reproach.

Those are the three enshrined in legislation — the will of the people expressed in legislation, not left up to the politicians. The recommendations of the Boundaries Commission are from a commission composed of three parties enshrined in legislation.

In British Columbia, being the rough-and-tumble place that we are, I will fully acknowledge — and I'm sure the minister is going to point it out — that, of course, the way the legislation works, the commission is appointed, it reports, it has a year and then, eventually, legislation has to be passed.

As we well know from the last go-round, in the attempt to preserve what was seen as rural representation — and, I think, a much more accurate determination of what was rural representation than the 20 percent proposed by this bill — the legislation still has to be passed, and then the election proceeds on that basis.

But the people who will make the decision have to resort to the existing section 9 for determining those boundaries. They must resort to the legislation as it exists.

What is proposed, what I've read into the record this morning, is a very special direction, not from three disinterested, uninterested, principled, presumably respected, educated, elevated, intelligent people — not that threesome. Not the three friends of the electoral process. Not the three amigos that the province will be following with interest when they do their hearings around the province.

No, the judgment of those three individuals…. This government wants to substitute their opinion for those three individuals. They want those three individuals to be constrained in what they would normally do and undertake. They want political control of the process — political control.

I don't want to give what I jokingly refer to as my Magna Carta speech unnecessarily. But the long history that brought us to the day where in this House we can exchange our views without feeling the risk of being stabbed or the king coming in and throwing us out or dissolving us unnecessarily or the laws being breached or countries or counties being torn apart…. All of that stuff is gone. It's gone because of the long history that brought us here.

That ugly, long history — particularly in England, which is the mother of our parliamentary system — involved what were known as pocket boroughs. Now, I know that the members opposite understand that concept — you know, 20 or 30 landowners being bought off by the right person, sending off to parliament a member, when thousands of other people were represented by one member.

I'm not exaggerating here — to suggest for a moment that what's proposed by the B.C. Liberals in this bill is even remotely like that, like those dark and ugly days. But it's like the weather. You know, there are degrees. It might start out in the morning at zero, and it might get
[ Page 1569 ]
up to 15 or 20. You recognize that there's a difference, but it's still the weather. It's colder; it's a little warmer; it gets hotter. So I have to ask myself: "What is the remarkable difference in principle?"

[1140]

When you're talking about court cases that have given us guiding principles, what's the remarkable difference in principle between saying that you get to preserve 20 percent of the province, including — as I've said several times this morning, and the members opposite, I know, hear the words — the great cities of Prince George and Kamloops as rural areas but ignore the good folks in Powell River or Gibsons or Campbell River or Tofino or Ucluelet and suggest — well, for that matter, the good people of Coombs, B.C. — that somehow they're not rural enough for this government's vision of rural British Columbia. But Kamloops is.

You've got, on one hand, Coombs, B.C., and on the other hand, Kamloops, B.C. Now, I don't think you have to be the brightest bulb in the candelabra to recognize there might be a difference between Coombs, B.C., and Kamloops, B.C. They're both wonderful communities. Don't get me wrong.

M. Farnworth: And they both have two o's.

L. Krog: They both have two o's, as the member for Port Coquitlam has pointed out. But to suggest that one is rural and the other is rural as well and that one is worthy of preservation and one isn't just isn't on. It just isn't on. It makes no legal, constitutional or common sense, and it is anything but fair. Fairness is what we're trying to do.

The members on this side get it. We get it, because — you know what? — there are six of our members who represent constituencies now that…. Even under the terms of this bill, which talks about so-called rural representation, they represent areas that are rural, and they get it. They understand, and we all understand the necessity of representing our constituents to the best of our ability. It is an honour and a privilege to represent those constituents in this chamber, but we have a duty to all British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Member, are you the designated speaker?

L. Krog: I am, hon. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker: Carry on.

L. Krog: We have a duty to all British Columbians to ensure that the system is fair, so the person walking down to the Coombs country market for a cup of coffee feels as fairly represented as the suburbanite who heads down to the Surrey mall, or the citizen in Prince George who goes down to that lovely courthouse, or the citizen in Fernie, B.C., who walks through one of the most historic downtowns the province has to enjoy.

They should all feel that fundamental sense that the system, electorally, is fair, that it is justifiable not only in terms of the crass politics of it, if you will, but that it's also justifiable in terms of the law, that it represents something that we can all support. That is where the problem is.

When you take away the discretion of the commission to do its work — when you have a system in place that is designed to appoint some of the best and brightest among you to do what is right and fair and proper, and when you take away their discretion, when you second-guess them through what is clearly a political bill and a political measure — you essentially blemish the process. The process, in and of itself, should be aboveboard.

You know, you don't have to be that old to remember Gracie's finger. We've tried that sort of stuff in British Columbia before. When I say "we," I mean there is historical precedent. We're all citizens of the same province, and we get it. If you didn't work hard enough and you allowed the Socreds to get elected, then, arguably, you played a role in the process too. And if you voted for the Social Credit, you got what you wanted, which was Gracie's finger. You got one of the crudest and rudest and roughest examples of political gerrymandering you could ever hope to see.

Our great neighbours to the south — I would argue, if we had more time and it was more in debate today — present us with an example on an almost continuous basis, where the congressional boundaries are redrawn in such ways. I was looking at one that involved Maryland a few weeks ago where, literally, it's like little pockets — the congressional district.

[1145]

You're driving through one congressional district, part of it, to get to the other congressional district. That's the kind of stuff that goes on in the United States. Now, you wonder why Americans don't vote or have faith in politicians or why Mark Twain so famously said: "There is no native criminal class in America, save Congress." You understand where that cynicism comes from.

We, on the other hand, have worked to develop a system, a process, enshrined in legislation, which is, on the face of it, maybe not enviable, maybe not perfect, but it's a lot better the way it exists than what is proposed by the government in Bill 2.

What they are proposing to do is to bring in what will be seen, I would argue, by most British Columbians as the corrupting influence of partisan politics into a process that is supposed to set up the very system by which we elect the members of this assembly in a way that, once the election is over, people will say: "You know what? I'm not happy" — or "I am happy" — "but one thing I don't question is that the process was fair, it's right, it's proper. And I will live with the results until the next election."

In the meantime, the opposition will do its job and
[ Page 1570 ]
the government will do its job. Our system of democratic rights and the process by which we govern ourselves will continue.

But when you bring in a system such as proposed by the government that colours, that blemishes, that, I would argue, cripples the ability of the commission to do its work, then we dishonour not just ourselves and this assembly and its members; we dishonour the people of British Columbia. They didn't vote to bring in an electoral system that is unfair, that is probably unconstitutional and that doesn't represent the interests of the people.

Let's come back to it. It says, in the existing legislation, very special circumstances exist. "The commission be permitted to exceed the 25% deviation principle where it considers that very special circumstances exist." That's what the legislation says.

Now, I would love to hear — I assume a few of them are going to stand up and talk — from the members opposite, from the government benches, what's wrong with that section. What is wrong with allowing the commission to do its work, without adding a constraint, a direction, a political diktat that will not allow them to do the work that the legislation contemplates they must and lawfully do?

If we are to do anything in this House that brings the system into disrepute — and I would argue that's what this proposal does — what good have we accomplished? Does the government think that somehow it'll be able to pull another majority out of the bag in the next election if we do this? Will they feel better — or any of us, for that matter — about being elected by a system that people, in their guts, know is not fair, that isn't, to use the vernacular of many folks on the street, "legal" and that will encourage legal challenges?

What's the outcome? I mean, it's a very interesting scenario. If this legislation is passed the way it's proposed — the commission does its work, comes back, makes its recommendations, and the legislation is passed and it's approved and these are the boundaries — what are we going to do if there's a court challenge?

Are we going to run in the old boundaries — which people will argue, based on population growth and changes in B.C., aren't necessarily fair? I mean, that's why we have the legislation. The legislation is there and is designed to take into account population growth and changes in British Columbia. That's what it's designed for.

[1150]

You can't set an electoral system in stone. Democracy and electoral boundaries are one and the same. They are vibrant. They are alive. They change, and they grow.

So what are we going to do? Run on the old boundaries? That doesn't strike me as fair. British Columbians, through their collective will in this legislation, as it exists, voted for a system that recognizes that every few years we have to change the boundaries, because it's only right and fair.

It may come as a great surprise to the members opposite, but Surrey has grown a lot in the last few years — an awful lot. Are the members from Surrey going to stand up and argue that their voters should see their representation be diminished? That's the effect of this. Are the members from Surrey going to stand up and argue in this House that somehow — you know, the number gets bigger in Surrey, even though it gets smaller in wherever — that's going to be fair?

I want to hear that from those members. I want to hear them stand up and say that that's fair.

Now, what I will expect them to do is to do what I expect every member of this chamber to do, regardless of political party: to stand up and argue for the representation of their constituents in this place. That's their job. That's their first job.

It doesn't matter what the bill says. It doesn't matter what the government says, arguably. It's their job to defend their constituents' interests and to ensure, in accordance with the legislation and common sense and fairness, that rebalancing the legacy of our history, the need, the community interests, geographical and demographic realities — all of those imperatives the legislation talks about…. I expect each and every member to do that, and that's only right and proper that they do.

They can do that here, but most importantly, they will have the opportunity to do it in front of the Electoral Boundaries Commission, once appointed.

They'll be able to go in like every citizen and make their argument. They will argue their case. They will advocate on behalf of their constituents. But in this chamber their primary job is to ensure that the legislation is "legal and constitutional and fair" and will produce a Legislature that is representative of British Columbians, that will enable members to effectively represent their constituents, taking into account all the factors that exist — but not because the B.C. Liberals have imposed a system that says 20 percent is a reasonable number to preserve.

I don't think people will ever say that that is fair. How could it possibly be fair? Special circumstances, and I come back to it, mean just that — special. This is not special. It is anything but special.

The discretion that is given to the Electoral Boundaries Commission is there for a purpose. It is there to be exercised by an independent commission without the political interference that this legislation contemplates. There is no other way to put it. When you give these kinds of directions, it is political direction. It is political diktat. It is political interference. It is saying that the commission cannot be trusted, somehow, to do the right thing.

Yet even the legislation contemplates that, like W.A.C. Bennett, the commission gets a second look — even the existing system. I'm sure the members have read it very carefully. Section 12 allows the commission…. It says, section 12(1): "The commission may, after considering any further representations made to it, and within 6
[ Page 1571 ]
months of the date it submits a report under section 10" — the initial report — "submit to the Speaker any amendments to the report it considers advisable."

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Madame Speaker: Hon. Member, noting the hour.

L. Krog: Yes, thank you. I'm nearly there.

[1155]

There is even that fail-safe, that fallback process, that system that allows the commission, after it hears again from the public, to come back once again and say: "Hmm. We've looked at this again. We've taken further representation. We are, in fact, prepared to make a somewhat different recommendation."

The more you read the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act as it exists, the more you realize the thought and intelligence that went into this legislation to ensure a fair system that can be respected by the people of British Columbia.

I can say without hesitation that the opposition will not be supporting the legislation — in that it dictates to an independent commission that which is unreasonable; that which is unfair; that which, constitutionally speaking, is extremely weak. There is a process. The hon. members, like all British Columbians, will have their opportunity to speak to the commission, to make their arguments, as will all of the citizens.

I'm not hearing the voices of British Columbia rising in unison or any organization saying: "We like this bill." If the B.C. Liberals like it, that's great, because nothing will make me happier politically than to have the government isolated on this issue while the rest of British Columbians stand for the principles of fairness and respect the electoral system.

I'm delighted to conclude the debate for myself this morning and, noting the hour, move adjournment of the debate.

L. Krog moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Polak moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada