First Session, 39th Parliament

official report of Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 Afternoon Sitting Volume 8, Number 5

the honourable , speaker

ISSN 0709-1281 PROVINCE OF (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871)

LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR His Honour the Honourable Steven L. Point, OBC

First Session, 39th Parliament

SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Premier and President of the Executive Council...... Hon. Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations...... Hon. Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance...... Hon. Minister of State for the Olympics and ActNow B.C...... Hon. Mary McNeil Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation...... Hon. George Abbott Minister of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development...... Hon. Minister of Agriculture and Lands...... Hon. Steve Thomson Attorney General...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Children and Family Development and Minister Responsible for Child Care...... Hon. Minister of Citizens' Services and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau...... Hon. Minister of Community and Rural Development...... Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...... Hon. Margaret MacDiarmid Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources...... Hon. Minister of State for Mining ...... Hon. Minister of Environment...... Hon. Minister of State for Climate Action...... Hon. Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for the Integrated Land Management Bureau...... Hon. Minister of Health Services...... Hon. Minister of Healthy Living and Sport...... Hon. Minister of Housing and Social Development...... Hon. Minister of Labour...... Hon. Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General...... Hon. Kash Heed Minister of Small Business, Technology and Economic Development...... Hon. Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts...... Hon. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure...... Hon.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Leader of the Official Opposition...... Carole James Deputy Speaker...... Assistant Deputy Speaker...... Claire Trevena Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole...... Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly...... E. George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant...... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk...... Ian D. Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees...... Craig H. James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk...... Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms...... Gary Lenz Director, Hansard Services...... Jo-Anne Kern Acting Legislative Librarian...... Peter Gourlay Legislative Comptroller...... Dan Arbic ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING

Abbott, Hon. George (L)...... Shuswap Abbotsford-Mission...... Hon. Randy Hawes Austin, Robin (NDP)...... Skeena Abbotsford South...... Bains, Harry (NDP)...... Surrey-Newton Abbotsford West...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)...... Penticton Alberni–Pacific Rim...... Scott Fraser Barnett, Donna (L)...... Cariboo-Chilcotin Boundary-Similkameen...... John Slater Bell, Hon. Pat (L)...... Prince George–Mackenzie Burnaby–Deer Lake...... Kathy Corrigan Bennett, Hon. Bill (L)...... Kootenay East Burnaby-Edmonds...... Raj Chouhan Black, Dawn (NDP)...... New Westminster Burnaby-Lougheed...... Harry Bloy Black, Hon. Iain (L)...... Port Moody–Coquitlam Burnaby North...... Richard T. Lee Bloy, Harry (L)...... Burnaby-Lougheed Cariboo-Chilcotin...... Donna Barnett Bond, Hon. Shirley (L)...... Prince George–Valemount Cariboo North...... Bob Simpson Brar, Jagrup (NDP)...... Surrey-Fleetwood Chilliwack...... Cadieux, Stephanie (L)...... Surrey-Panorama Chilliwack-Hope...... Hon. Barry Penner Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)...... –Point Grey Columbia River–Revelstoke...... Norm Macdonald Cantelon, Ron (L)...... Parksville-Qualicum Comox Valley...... Don McRae Chong, Hon. Ida (L)...... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Coquitlam–Burke Mountain...... Douglas Horne Chouhan, Raj (NDP)...... Burnaby-Edmonds Coquitlam-Maillardville...... Diane Thorne Coell, Hon. Murray (L)...... Saanich North and the Islands Cowichan Valley...... Bill Routley Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...... Fort Langley–Aldergrove Delta North...... Guy Gentner Conroy, Katrine (NDP)...... Kootenay West Delta South...... Vicki Huntington Coons, Gary (NDP)...... North Coast Esquimalt–Royal Roads...... Maurine Karagianis Corrigan, Kathy (NDP)...... Burnaby–Deer Lake Fort Langley–Aldergrove...... Hon. Rich Coleman Dalton, Marc (L)...... Maple Ridge–Mission Fraser-Nicola...... Harry Lali de Jong, Hon. Michael, QC (L)...... Abbotsford West Juan de Fuca...... John Horgan Dix, Adrian (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kingsway Kamloops–North Thompson...... Terry Lake Donaldson, Doug (NDP)...... Stikine Kamloops–South Thompson...... Hon. Kevin Krueger Elmore, Mable (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kensington Kelowna–Lake Country...... Norm Letnick Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L)...... Surrey-Cloverdale Kelowna-Mission...... Hon. Steve Thomson Farnworth, Mike (NDP)...... Port Coquitlam Kootenay East...... Hon. Bill Bennett Fleming, Rob (NDP)...... Victoria–Swan Lake Kootenay West...... Katrine Conroy Foster, Eric (L)...... Vernon-Monashee Langley...... Hon. Mary Polak Fraser, Scott (NDP)...... Alberni–Pacific Rim Maple Ridge–Mission...... Marc Dalton Gentner, Guy (NDP)...... Delta North Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows...... Michael Sather Hammell, Sue (NDP)...... Surrey–Green Timbers Nanaimo...... Leonard Krog Hansen, Hon. Colin (L)...... Vancouver-Quilchena Nanaimo–North Cowichan...... Doug Routley Hawes, Hon. Randy (L)...... Abbotsford-Mission Nechako Lakes...... John Rustad Hayer, Dave S. (L)...... Surrey-Tynehead Nelson-Creston...... Michelle Mungall Heed, Hon. Kash (L)...... Vancouver-Fraserview New Westminster...... Dawn Black Herbert, Spencer (NDP)...... Vancouver–West End North Coast...... Gary Coons Hogg, Gordon (L)...... Surrey–White Rock North Island...... Claire Trevena Horgan, John (NDP)...... Juan de Fuca North Vancouver–Lonsdale...... Hon. Naomi Yamamoto Horne, Douglas (L)...... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain North Vancouver–Seymour...... Jane Thornthwaite Howard, Rob (L)...... Richmond Centre Oak Bay–Gordon Head...... Hon. Ida Chong Huntington, Vicki (Ind.)...... Delta South Parksville-Qualicum...... James, Carole (NDP)...... Victoria–Beacon Hill Peace River North...... Pat Pimm Karagianis, Maurine (NDP)...... Esquimalt–Royal Roads Peace River South...... Hon. Blair Lekstrom Krog, Leonard (NDP)...... Nanaimo Penticton...... Hon. Bill Barisoff Krueger, Hon. Kevin (L)...... Kamloops–South Thompson Port Coquitlam...... Mike Farnworth Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)...... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Port Moody–Coquitlam...... Hon. Iain Black Lake, Terry (L)...... Kamloops–North Thompson Powell River–Sunshine Coast...... Nicholas Simons Lali, Harry (NDP)...... Fraser-Nicola Prince George–Mackenzie...... Hon. Pat Bell Lee, Richard T. (L)...... Burnaby North Prince George–Valemount...... Hon. Shirley Bond Lekstrom, Hon. Blair (L)...... Peace River South Richmond Centre...... Rob Howard Les, John (L)...... Chilliwack Richmond East...... Linda Reid Letnick, Norm (L)...... Kelowna–Lake Country Richmond-Steveston...... Hon. John Yap MacDiarmid, Hon. Margaret (L)...... Vancouver-Fairview Saanich North and the Islands...... Hon. Murray Coell Macdonald, Norm (NDP)...... Columbia River–Revelstoke Saanich South...... Lana Popham McIntyre, Joan (L)...... West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Shuswap...... Hon. George Abbott McNeil, Hon. Mary (L)...... Vancouver–False Creek Skeena...... Robin Austin McRae, Don (L)...... Comox Valley Stikine...... Doug Donaldson Mungall, Michelle (NDP)...... Nelson-Creston Surrey-Cloverdale...... Hon. Kevin Falcon Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...... Chilliwack-Hope Surrey-Fleetwood...... Jagrup Brar Pimm, Pat (L)...... Peace River North Surrey–Green Timbers...... Sue Hammell Polak, Hon. Mary (L)...... Langley Surrey-Newton...... Harry Bains Popham, Lana (NDP)...... Saanich South Surrey-Panorama...... Ralston, Bruce (NDP)...... Surrey-Whalley Surrey-Tynehead...... Dave S. Hayer Reid, Linda (L)...... Richmond East Surrey-Whalley...... Bruce Ralston Routley, Bill (NDP)...... Cowichan Valley Surrey–White Rock...... Gordon Hogg Routley, Doug (NDP)...... Nanaimo–North Cowichan Vancouver-Fairview...... Hon. Margaret MacDiarmid Rustad, John (L)...... Nechako Lakes Vancouver–False Creek...... Hon. Mary McNeil Sather, Michael (NDP)...... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Vancouver-Fraserview...... Hon. Kash Heed Simons, Nicholas (NDP)...... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Vancouver-Hastings...... Shane Simpson Simpson, Bob (NDP)...... Cariboo North Vancouver-Kensington...... Simpson, Shane (NDP)...... Vancouver-Hastings Vancouver-Kingsway...... Adrian Dix Slater, John (L)...... Boundary-Similkameen Vancouver-Langara...... Hon. Moira Stilwell Stewart, Hon. Ben (L)...... Westside-Kelowna Vancouver–Mount Pleasant...... Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Stilwell, Hon. Moira (L)...... Vancouver-Langara Vancouver–Point Grey...... Hon. Gordon Campbell Sultan, Ralph (L)...... West Vancouver–Capilano Vancouver-Quilchena...... Hon. Colin Hansen Thomson, Hon. Steve (L)...... Kelowna-Mission Vancouver–West End...... Spencer Herbert Thorne, Diane (NDP)...... Coquitlam-Maillardville Vernon-Monashee...... Eric Foster Thornthwaite, Jane (L)...... North Vancouver–Seymour Victoria–Beacon Hill...... Carole James Trevena, Claire (NDP)...... North Island Victoria–Swan Lake...... Rob Fleming van Dongen, John (L)...... Abbotsford South West Vancouver–Capilano...... Ralph Sultan Yamamoto, Hon. Naomi (L)...... North Vancouver–Lonsdale West Vancouver–Sea to Sky...... Joan McIntyre Yap, Hon. John (L)...... Richmond-Steveston Westside-Kelowna...... Hon. Ben Stewart

Party Standings: Liberal 49; New Democratic 35; Independent 1

CONTENTS

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 Afternoon Sitting

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members...... 2485

Tributes...... 2486 Sandy Korman K. Conroy

Statements (Standing Order 25B)...... 2486 Bombing of Air India flight and death of Tara Singh Hayer D. Hayer Remembrance Day ceremony in Newton H. Bains Bill Ross, Doug Embree and Ron Bannerman D. McRae Diabetes awareness M. Elmore Burnaby Local Hero Awards R. Lee Climate conference in Copenhagen L. Popham

Oral Questions...... 2488 Olympic Games costs C. James Hon. M. McNeil K. Corrigan M. Farnworth B. Ralston Gravel extraction from Fraser River V. Huntington Hon. B. Penner Comments by David Hahn on comptroller general report G. Coons Hon. S. Bond Access to B.C. Ferries information H. Bains Hon. S. Bond B.C. Ferries and B.C. Rail executive salaries J. Horgan Hon. S. Bond

Petitions...... 2493 J. Horgan C. James D. Donaldson J. Kwan Orders of the Day

Committee of the Whole House...... 2494 Bill 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2009 L. Krog Hon. S. Thomson Hon. M. de Jong J. Horgan Hon. B. Lekstrom N. Macdonald Hon. P. Bell S. Simpson Hon. R. Coleman

Report and Third Reading of Bills...... 2512 Bill 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2009

Committee of Supply...... 2512 Estimates: Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources Hon. B. Lekstrom Hon. R. Hawes J. Horgan D. Donaldson M. Sather G. Gentner

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply...... 2527 Estimates: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General Hon. K. Heed M. Farnworth R. Fleming 2485

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2009 L. Reid: On behalf of the Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome a group of public ser- The House met at 1:33 p.m. vants seated in the gallery. They are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop offered by [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] the Legislative Assembly. The workshop provides a first- hand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater Routine Business understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how that work affects thisL egislature. Prayers. Would the House please make them welcome.

Introductions by Members C. Trevena: In the precincts today are a number of constituents from North Island. They came down to Hon. B. Bennett: It's my pleasure to introduce some show their concerns about public health care. They are folks today from the Kootenays. First of all, the electoral Joanne Banks, Richard Hagensen, Lance Klaasen, Larry area B director from Central Kootenay regional district, Widen, Betty Frost, Thora Hood, Anita Brochochka, John Kettle. John wears a black cowboy hat, but he's still Dave Kulyk, Steve Mooney and Lois Jarvis. I hope the a good guy. House will make them all very welcome. Welcome to the Legislature, John. I'd also like to welcome today to the Legislature the J. Rustad: It's a great pleasure to have some constitu- mayor of Castlegar, Lawrence Chernoff, and his CAO, ents travel down for a series of meetings here in Victoria John Malcolm — both sitting up here. Please help me today. With me in the Legislature are Linda Bush and make them feel welcome today. her daughters Rene Bush and Andrea Patrick as well as Delores Young, from Vanderhoof, and their lawyer M. Sather: Joining us today in the gallery is my sister Howard Rubin. I'd ask that the House would please Joan Scott and her husband, Allen Scott, who are here make them welcome. from Nanoose Bay. They've come down with a group of folks to express their concerns regarding health care S. Fraser: I'd like to join my colleague from Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows in welcoming Joan and Allen Scott. on the Island. Will the House please join me in making They are friends of mine from Nanoose. Accompanying them welcome. them today, also concerned with protecting public [1335] health care, is Bernie Pearce. Would you please join me in making them all feel very welcome. Hon. R. Hawes: In the gallery today is Dave Newnham and Bill Brooks. Dave is the vice-president and executive Hon. K. Falcon: A couple of introductions today. director and Bill is the special projects manager of the First of all, I'd like to welcome into the House Ethan Tim Horton Children's Foundation. They are here today Huberman and his father, Morry Hubburmin, who are to talk to government about…. As many here know, Tim joining us today. Ethan has been and continues to be a Hortons has children's camps across North America but strong supporter of the Asia-Pacific gateway strategy and none in British Columbia. They are here today to talk to the Gateway program in British Columbia. I want to wel- members of government about establishing a children's come them. camp in British Columbia. In addition, I understand someone I attended high I'd like the House to please wish them both Godspeed, school with is with us today. Eric Polson and his partner good luck and to thank them for all the work they do Kim Berekely are here today. I'd ask the House to make for all kids all across Canada. Tim Hortons is great for all of them welcome. what they do. M. Mungall: I'd like to add some words of welcome K. Corrigan: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to to those of the Minister of Community and Rural introduce a long-time friend of mine. Diane Gillis is Development. He welcomed John Kettle from electoral here in the audience today, in the gallery. Diane and I area B of the RDCK. Well, John happens to be a very first met many years ago when we were both parents at good friend of mine, despite our political differences, the West Burnaby Parent Participation Preschool. and I actually have one of his black hats in my office in Diane has continued to give so much to our com- Nelson. munity. Right now, just as one example, she heads up the Kingsway-Imperial neighbourhood house and does won- Hon. I. Black: There's an organization in B.C. called derful things in our community. I'd like you to make her MITACS. This is a group of individuals who are leading welcome. our province in the areas of science and mathematics. If 2486 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009 you've ever wondered if you can be passionate about math- will see hundreds of these unique pieces of art hanging ematics, this group can prove it with the best of them. on many necks around the province. She was mom to In the gallery today or in the precinct, we've got Shaun and Jen, sister to Sheren and Brian, auntie to her Daniel Fontaine, who's the vice-president of communi- nieces and nephews and a great friend to many of us cations and public affairs, and Olga Stackova, who's the who, although we will miss her, know her legacy will live chief operating officer of that organization. I ask the on in the many memories we all cherish. House to join me in making our mathematicians feel most welcome. Statements [1340] (Standing Order 25B)

D. Routley: I'd like the House to help me welcome BOMBING OF AIR INDIA FLIGHT grades 4, 5 and 6 students from Park Avenue Community AND DEATH OF TARA SINGH HAYER School in Nanaimo, from my constituency. We should feel very welcoming in greeting them in our House, in D. Hayer: Almost 25 years have gone by since Canada's their House. worst act of political terrorism, the bombing of Air India flight 182 and the related bombing at Tokyo's Narita R. Chouhan: I would also like to join my friend from airport. A total of 331 people, most of them Canadians, Burnaby–Deer Lake in welcoming Diane Gillis to the were murdered that day. Although it happened on June gallery. In addition, I want to welcome my dear friend 23, 1985, in the minds of the families of those who were Gordie Larkin, who's here — a community leader, a slain, the tragedy lives on as if it had only happened yes- great trade unionist. Please join me to welcome him. terday. Closure has not been achieved. Justice has not been served. J. Horgan: Joining us in the precincts today are three Several years after those 331 killings my father, a news- very good friends of mine from Sooke, down Highway paper publisher who'd reported on the tragedy, was assas- 14. I know that the Minister of Transportation is familiar sinated. He was a journalist who had the courage to write with that arterial road. They are Lorna and Ron Barry candidly about the tragedy and told what he knew to the and my friend Flo Tickner. Would the House make police. For speaking out his mind, he was killed. these Sookians very, very welcome. On November 18, 1998, my father, Tara Singh Hayer, was assassinated as he sat in his wheelchair at his home. K. Corrigan: I've just become aware that we also have I believe he was killed to prevent him from testifying in in the House another friend of mine, Leslie Dickout. court as a witness. She's staff at the B.C. Health Coalition, does brilliant My father was an outspoken advocate against terror- work for them and was here today with a number of ism and injustice, and he was for democracy and for other people expressing concern about our health care freedom. Today is the 11th anniversary of his death. My system. I hope you'll make her welcome. mother and my sister are opening a community centre in memory of his life in our village of Paddi Jagir in Punjab, Tributes India, where he was born. Funded by the Tara Singh Hayer Memorial Foundation, this community centre Sandy Korman will be expanded into a seniors centre and a library. It will remind us of his peaceful pursuit of justice and the K. Conroy: On November 11 we lost an amazing importance of freedom of speech and democracy. woman when Sandy Korman passed away. Yesterday I ask all MLAs, all MPs and all Senators in Ottawa, hundreds of friends and family gathered in Castlegar to on the anniversary of my father's death, to once again say goodbye, share our stories and remember her infec- remember the victims and their families and to encour- tious laughter and humorous stories. age efforts to bring the killers to justice and to prevent Sandy was well known in these halls as a capable such tragedies from ever happening again in Canada. assistant to Corky Evans throughout his 15 years in pol- [Applause.] itics. What isn't as well known is the influence she had on so many of our lives in the Kootenays. Her patience REMEMBRANCE DAY CEREMONY IN NEWTON and excellent political sense helped to create and sustain the Columbia Basin Trust, the Kootenay School of the H. Bains: I'm sure all members were able to partici- Arts, the Kootenay Gallery and the beautiful built-in- pate in Remembrance Day ceremonies to pay respect to the-Kootenays Osprey ferry that sails across Kootenay our fallen soldiers in their own way this year. Lake, just to name a few. [1345] Sandy was also an artist, creating beautiful pottery, I'd like to share with you the Remembrance Day cere- wonderful interior designs and of course her blings. You mony I attended, which was very unique and special. It Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2487 was special because it was organized and attended by the ing last June. He was a giant of a man whose physical size young people in our community. There were close to 500 was only exceeded by the size of his heart. He worked people in attendance, most of them youth. There were tirelessly with students needing both academic and Sparks, Brownies, Girl Guides, Pathfinders, Beavers, sometimes parental guidance. The number of young stu- Cubs, Scouts. All participated in this ceremony. These dents who achieved success in school because of Doug's are the youth of Newton. efforts is immeasurable. I believe it is important for our youth to learn of the Ron Bannerman is survived by his wife, Cindy; his sacrifices that were made and are being made by our father, John; children, Kim and Mike; and granddaugh- service women and men in return for our freedom and ter, Zoey. Ron was born and raised in Cumberland and liberty. The Pioneer District Girl Guides, along with all began his teaching career in the Comox Valley in 1968. the organizations who participated in this service, are He worked for 31 years as an educator, and I'm proud doing a great job in educating our young people about to say that Ron was my grade 6 teacher and inspired in those sacrifices. me a love of history and storytelling. He was also instru- I was so proud to watch the youngsters bring their mental in the creation of the No. 6 Mine Park and its hand-made wreaths and poppies and lay them at the maintenance and a driving force behind the Cumberland cenotaph. You could see in their eyes that they knew the Heritage Fair and the Comox Valley Heritage Tour. importance of what they were doing and were trying to The Comox Valley has lost three great individuals. understand. While their absence saddens both myself and those who I have attended this ceremony at Newton cenotaph for knew them, I can say with certainty that they touched so the past four years. This year's event was the largest. I many people during the course of their lives, that their believe this is a growing trend that will force us to look legacies will live on. for peaceful means to settle our differences. I say this because within a few years it's today's youth who will be DIABETES AWARENESS sitting in these chairs and other chairs of the parliaments of our country. The more they know of our history, the M. Elmore: November is when we commemorate better the position they will be in to make decisions to World Diabetes Month, the primary global awareness avoid wars and bring long-lasting peace. campaign for diabetes. World Diabetes Day is celebrated I would like to thank Kirstie Goy, who was the original every November 14 and was created in 1991 by the organizer of this event. Kirstie plans this event every International Diabetes Federation and the World Health year along with Heather Smith, Angela Roscoe, Janice Organization in response to the growing and escalating Chisholm and Pioneer District Girl Guides. I would like health threat that diabetes now poses. all of you to join with me in thanking all of them for With the passage of the United Nations World Diabetes their time, effort, commitment and the tremendous job Day resolution in December 2006, diabetes became the that they are doing in organizing this event every year. first chronic disease to be granted global recognition. Presently 3 million Canadians live with diabetes, includ- BILL ROSS, DOUG EMBREE ing over 283,000 people in British Columbia. AND RON BANNERMAN I'd like to take this time to congratulate and recognize the work of the Canadian Diabetes Association in work- D. McRae: It is with great sadness that I stand here ing on this issue, raising awareness and working towards today to recognize three long-serving teachers in the preventing and supporting people with diabetes, and Comox Valley who have left their friends and family also to recognize the leadership of the executive director, far too early. Within the past month Bill Ross, Doug Connie Abrams, and congratulate the Canadian Diabetes Embree and Ron Bannerman, with a combined teaching Association on their eighth annual seasonal dinner. experience of 106 years, have passed. It was sponsored by the B.C. Association of Podiatrists, Bill Ross is survived by his wife, Joanna; his children, and the focus this year was on providing practical gifts, Andi and Rob; and his grandchildren, Charlotte and such as walkers and socks, and support for people from Oliver. For 36 years Bill was a great role model for both low-income families in partnership with the Carnegie his students and his colleagues. He is described as firm Centre. but fair, a man who cared for his students, and they knew [1350] it. Young teachers also looked to him for advice and I had the opportunity of participating in an event, guidance, and he gladly gave it. Bill was best described Diabetes and the Filipino Family, and learned a lot from as passionate about his family, his teaching, his barbecu- Dr. Ranbir Mann and Noony Santos-Paletta, a dietitian. ing, his love for red wine and the Dallas Cowboys. I and also participated in community fundraising events Doug Embree is survived by his wife, Marilyn; sons, with my good friends Evelyn and Rey del Rosario. Owen and Ben; and grandchildren, Rhiannon, Maia, Together with the support of Dr. Keith Dawson and Dr. Hamilton and Quinnton. Doug taught for 39 years, retir- John Hunt, I encourage everybody to become a diabetes 2488 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

champion and to sign on as a diabetes champion onto ing an agreement at Copenhagen that is ambitious, fair worlddiabetes.ca and to support the great work of the and binding. Canadian Diabetes Association on this important issue. Unfortunately, Canada is falling behind. Our national targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions have been burnaby local hero awards called ineffective, and our performance at a number of recent climate meetings has been labelled "obstruction- R. Lee: On November 2 Burnaby city hall honoured ist." Does inaction or paralysis come from fear, or does 13 remarkable individuals from Burnaby. The Burnaby it come from greed, or does it come from the addiction Local Hero Awards are given to those who have made to fossil fuels that has such a grasp on us that we would outstanding contributions to community well-being. risk our entire planet? These awards have been granted since 1997, recogniz- I hope our fear regarding change can be overcome ing 187 people to date, from local business owners to and replaced with the stronger fear of doing nothing. I retirees, teachers and parents. These awards recognize stand in front of all of you today and tell you from my the efforts and contributions of a diverse group of indi- heart that I'm afraid of what our future holds. I would viduals, all of whom have been nominated by the people like to ask this government to join with the opposition in the community. to collectively send a letter of concern to the government The Burnaby Local Hero Awards, therefore, not only of Canada and together request a very strong Canadian acknowledge the hard work of active citizens but also presence at Copenhagen. encourage and enhance the sense of community living in Burnaby. This year's recipients of the award have Oral Questions unique stories to share. Stella Castillo, who is originally from Colombia, arrived olympic games costs in Canada in 2000 after being held hostage by a guerrilla group for five months.I n Canada she has been facilitating C. James: Documents obtained through freedom of a Latin American women's group through the REACH information show that the B.C. Liberal government con- Community Health Centre. tinues to cover up Olympic costs. Other winners are Merrilyn Cook, Sidney Cumbers, [1355] Sharon Freeman, Fatehali Jetha, Jack Kuyer, Tammy I have a letter here from VANOC's chief financial offi- Ozero, Wanley Poh, Deepak Prasad, Wendell Ratcliffe, cer to Philip Steenkamp, CEO of the Olympic secretariat, Mohammad Shamsi, Millie Wylie and Keanna Driedger, in which he writes: "Dear Mr. Steenkamp, I am writing who is the youngest member of this group, at only 16 to request funding from British Columbia with respect years of age. to the 2010 opening ceremonies and other projects. This These remarkable individuals have donated numer- request totals…." That's where the document ends — ous hours and have demonstrated the courage, commit- blanked out. ment and dedication to the variety of different causes My question is to the minister responsible for the they champion and to a better quality of life for the resi- Olympics. What possible reason does she have to with- dents of Burnaby. hold this information from the public? I would like to ask the House to join me in congratu- lating all of Burnaby's local heroes. Hon. M. McNeil: In just 86 days from now we will be hosting the 2010 Olympic Winter Games. Again, what climate conference in copenhagen we know is that these Olympic Games, if we take full advantage of them…. This is going to be even better for L. Popham: On December 6 world leaders will gather our province. If we don't, we will have a missed oppor- in Copenhagen, Denmark to negotiate a world climate tunity. VANOC is working incredibly hard to make sure deal. In order for this to succeed, this deal must include the 2010 Olympic Winter Games are the best yet and, binding targets for steep and immediate reductions of Mr. Speaker….

CO2 emissions. Copenhagen presents a most crucial opportunity at a Interjections. pivotal time. We have a chance to create a successor treaty to the Kyoto accord and move the planet towards a solu- Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister. tion before irreversible global warming takes effect. Climate change is the number one threat to our Hon. M. McNeil: Mr. Speaker, it's about time that the planet at this time. A rise in temperature will kill our members opposite get on board with the Olympics. forests, intensify storms, diminish our food supplies, threaten mass extinction and will ultimately lead to war. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a Many world leaders are already committed to negotiat- supplemental. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2489

C. James: Unlike this minister and unlike this gov- ment is going to make sure we are the host of the great- ernment, I believe that you can support the Olympics est Olympic Games ever. and look out for taxpayer dollars at the same time. [1400] It's no surprise…. K. Corrigan: Well, you talk about the benefits of the Interjections. games. But what's the point of figuring out whether the benefits are worthwhile if you don't know what the costs Mr. Speaker: Members. are? That's our problem. Again, secrecy and cover-up — that's this govern- C. James: It's no surprise to the public that the ment's legacy for the Olympics. Thanks to the govern- Olympics cost money, but this government appears to be ment's ask, don't tell approach, there's no way to know dead set on hiding just how much. It appears to be noth- how much money VANOC requested. Information ing less than a cover-up by this minister, refusing to put about how they planned to spend it was also severed. the information out there. We've seen this before, when Again to the minister: will she for once commit to be the minister refused to tell British Columbians just how open and transparent and release this information to much this government was spending on Olympic tickets. the public today? We see it again today. Again to the minister: why does she continue to refuse Hon. M. McNeil: Again, our budget for hosting the to put the information in front of the public? games, living up to the IOC commitment, remains the same at $765 million. In addition to this…. Hon. M. McNeil: It was interesting, and I'm thrilled to see that the Leader of the Opposition is now for the Interjections. Olympics, because she's been on record as not being. So that's great news to hear. Mr. Speaker: Members. What I can say today is that we are going to ensure that Continue, Minister. we do everything right when it comes to the Olympics, because this is an unparalleled opportunity for our econ- Hon. M. McNeil: What I will also point out, again…. omy. This will be the launching pad for the next decade, For the first time in Olympic history all of the venues and this government is going to make sure we get it were finished ahead of time by one year. These venues right. will continue to support a lot of our future athletes for Having said that, there will be a full accounting of years and decades to come, and I think that is incredibly every cost at the end of the Olympics. important.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a fur- Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. ther supplemental. K. Corrigan: I can't quite believe my ears. Three weeks C. James: If this government wants to do something ago in estimates I went through a whole series of costs right, put out the information about the real costs of the with this minister and asked specifically, one by one: is Olympics. It's simple, straightforward. Words that this this part of the $765 million? This minister confirmed minister and this government don't seem to understand that cost after cost — tickets, Crown corporations, the — openness, accountability, public oversight. Crown secretariat — and millions and millions of dol- There is no reason why this information couldn't be lars were not part of that $765 million. made public. So again my question is to the minister. At the end of those estimates I asked the minister Stop the cover-up, be upfront with British Columbians, whether there were any other costs that we should know and tell us how much money VANOC received from about. Sitting with that same official involved in this FOI, the government. she said to us: "No. After consultation, there is nothing else that we're aware of." Hon. M. McNeil: I think what's really important The public wants to know the true cost of theO lympics. here is that these 2010 Olympic Games are a major Does the minister think that the public will tolerate stimulant for our economic growth. I tell you, Mr. her government's continual whiting-out and hiding of Speaker, these games already have been a major job Olympic costs? creator — 22,000 new jobs. Over 800 businesses have been created. Hon. M. McNeil: Again, these Olympics are the lar- This is a very positive thing for this province, and gest economic stimulus that this province could ever ask we're going to make sure that we do it right. Again, there for. Leaders around the world envy us this opportunity, will be a full accounting, but I tell you that this govern- especially at this time in history. These games are going 2490 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

to drive tourism, they're going to create jobs, and they're Interjections. going to reinvigorate our economy at the very time we need it most so that we can continue to support educa- Mr. Speaker: Members. tion and health care in this province. Continue, Minister.

Interjections. Hon. M. McNeil: In addition, I think it would actually be a good idea for the members opposite to actually go Mr. Speaker: Members. on line and see what's happening today in Nova Scotia. That Olympic torch is being carried throughout the Interjection. small towns in Nova Scotia. Sidney Crosby has it today, and I tell you, the amount of people watching that is very M. Farnworth: That's something that you'll never exciting. have a problem…. It will never happen with you. This is a good thing for our country.I t is a good thing This is taxpayers' money that's being spent on the for our province, and this government is going to make Olympics. The public demands accountability and sure that we do it right. transparency. Under this government, under freedom of information, we've seen neither nothing free or informa- B. Ralston: The Premier, asL eader of the Opposition, tive about the information that this government makes once said: "Openness is better than hiddenness." Leaving available to the public. aside the grammatical problems with that statement, [1405] I recommend that to the minister. Will the minister VANOC is asking the Olympic secretariat, which follow that advice of her leader and reveal the cost of the according to this government is not even an Olympic request from VANOC? cost, for additional money. It's severed in a release. There can be no possible reason not to put that informa- Hon. M. McNeil: Again, without sounding repetitive, tion out to the public, not to let this House know what there will be a full accounting of the costs. that information is. So will the Minister for the Olympics, who's supposed Interjections. to know where these expenditures are going, supposed to know where this money is going…? Will she stand in Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister. this House and tell how much money was requested by VANOC from the Olympic secretariat? Hon. M. McNeil: Again, this government, in 86 days from now, is going to make sure we have the greatest Hon. M. McNeil: Again, the funding has not changed. Olympics in history, and we're going to make sure that It is within the $765 million, and VANOC still has a this province does everything it can to benefit from contingency within that. VANOC has been reporting every opportunity that will be happening. on their finances quarterly, and they show they're on track. In addition to that, our expenses are in our cur- Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. rent budget. B. Ralston: A couple of weeks ago the Premier, in this Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. House, made a speech in which he appealed to our better natures and to set aside partisan differences on the occa- M. Farnworth: Well, the request was to the Olympic sion of the Olympics. Does the minister not understand secretariat, which this government says isn't even an that this attitude of stonewalling on the costs destroys Olympic cost. How absurd is that? My question to the public confidence in the Olympics? minister is clear. If it's in the budget, tell us. What's she [1410] afraid of? What's she got to hide? Hon. M. McNeil: Again, there will be a full account- Hon. M. McNeil: Again, I'll repeat for the other side ing for the members opposite. But I just want to say that that there will be a full accounting of the expenses on the public isn't looking at this. What the public is look- the Olympics. ing forward to, as is seen by the number of tickets that What I would also like to say is that in 86 days from now have gone out…. there's going to be an opening ceremony that is going to be People are excited about these games; 1.6 million tickets broadcast to over three billion people worldwide. I know have been sold for these games. People are excited about that this side of the House is going to be glued to the tele- this. Athletes are coming here. They're excited. Over 80 vision watching, and it's going to be an exciting time. countries will be represented, and I tell you this govern- In addition to that…. ment is going to make sure that we do ourselves proud. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2491

GRAVEL EXTRACTION collapse on the Fraser River. On November 5 the Prime FROM FRASER RIVER Minister ordered a judicial inquiry into the sockeye collapse, announcing the most comprehensive review V. Huntington: The Minister ofE nvironment is charged ever undertaken into the administration of the Fraser with the public duty to protect wildlife in this province. fishery. His own conservation framework, which he described to We know that gravel removal does not assist flood me the other day personally, champions the use of pre- control, and we also know the Gateway has confirmed ventative science and the conservation of habitats and an enormous need for gravel through 2010, declaring ecosystems as his ministry's guide to decision-making. it will source it through gravel removal on the Fraser Yet we know that engineering and scientific studies River. show that gravel removal does nothing to aid flood con- No commercial activity should threaten the survival trol. We know that in the last few years the government of a species, and the minister's first obligation should be has removed two biologists from the technical gravel to do no harm. The minister has announced his support committee who are refusing to support gravel extraction for the judicial inquiry into the collapse of the sockeye as an aid to flood control. on the Fraser, and I would submit that a failure to halt The minister will also recall that in 2006 a gravel the removal of gravel prior to that inquiry would be extraction operation on the lower Fraser killed over two showing contempt for that very inquiry. million young pink right on the rearing area. I'm not sure how the minister can continue to cham- Mr. Speaker: Can the member pose the question, pion gravel removal and flood control in the same breath, please. and I ask him if he will stand by his conservation frame- work, do his duty and call a halt to the gravel removal V. Huntington: I would ask the minister again to on the Fraser. declare that no further gravel removal will take place on our river until the judicial inquiry has reported on the Hon. B. Penner: I think it's important to protect both reasons for the sockeye collapse. the environment and public safety. That is the priority of the Ministry of Environment when we participate in Hon. B. Penner: As I noted, we do take the inter- planning activities related to the permitting of gravel ests of protecting the environment and fish habitat into extraction projects that are designed to reduce the flood account in carefully planning any gravel extraction. risk for the hundreds of thousands of people and billions [1415] of dollars of investment that exist in the Fraser Valley in Interesting to note that in the member's supplemental the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. question she advocated for dredging in the part of the Our key priorities are protecting the environment Fraser River near her community, but people living as well as public safety. Since 2007 our government has upstream in the Fraser Valley also feel it's important invested in 168 flood protection projects, at a cost of that they should benefit from flood protection activities $85.5 million, in partnership with the federal and local as well. governments. I'd be pleased to welcome the member to our constitu- The recent flood concerns we had just in the last few ency, where she would learn that every year hundreds days underscore why it's prudent to protect both the of thousands of cubic metres of gravel are deposited environment and the public from the risk of flooding. in the stretch of the Fraser River between Agassiz and Chilliwack and downstream. That sediment accumu- Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. lates over time. What we've reached is an agreement with the federal V. Huntington: I think if the minister really wanted government. There's still federal permitting. DFO pro- to look at flood control on the Fraser, he would start to vides input. Federal approvals are required. work with the communities on the lower Fraser that are But we believe that doing nothing is not a responsible in jeopardy of infill on the secondary channels, given thing when it comes to protecting the environment or that the federal government will no longer dredge them. the people, and the hundreds of thousands of people that live in the Lower Mainland. Interjection. COMMENTS BY DAVID HAHN ON Mr. Speaker: Minister. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT

V. Huntington: Well, nobody knows it, sir. G. Coons: The Finance Minister said on Monday in The Minister ofE nvironment wrote to the Minister of regards to the report on B.C. Ferries and TransLink that Fisheries and Oceans calling for a review of the sockeye the comptroller has done a very competent and thor- 2492 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

ough job. The CEO of B.C. Ferries, David Hahn, said Hon. S. Bond: As we've said continuously since the the report was biased, nonsense, craziness and dumb. moment we received the report from the competent My question is to the Minister of Transportation. comptroller general, we will consider every single one Who does she agree with: the Finance Minister or the of her recommendations, including that one. CEO of B.C. Ferries? [1420] But we're not going to stand on this side of the House Hon. S. Bond: I think the member opposite knows full and listen to the member opposite talk about our legacy. well that in fact it was the government that requested the Let's talk about the legacy of that government when it advice of the comptroller general. She is competent. She was in control. Let's face it. They bankruptedB .C. Ferries. is capable. In fact, the Minister of Finance said exactly It was shameful and embarrassing. the same thing. We intend to consider every single one of her recommendations seriously. Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat, Member. We're not continuing until there's silence. G. Coons: The minister seems to forget that the office Continue, Member. of the comptroller general is responsible for the overall quality and integrity of this government's financial man- H. Bains: Very interesting. The minister called the comp- agement and control systems, and she needs to support troller general competent, but the CEO called it craziness the comptroller general against outlandish and outra- and dumb. Will she stand up and defend the CEO? geous accusations. Now let me go into another area here. The Auditor The CEO of B.C. Ferries shoots off his mouth, insults General's report yesterday raised some really red flags. B.C. taxpayers and ferry users, and at a million dol- But that report didn't even touch the salaries of B.C. lars per year, the entire province knows he makes too Ferries, because the government is shielding the corpor- much. In regards to the size of Mr. Hahn's paycheque, ation from public accountability. So my question again the Finance Minister said on Monday: "The Minister of is to the minister. What are you afraid of? Why won't Transportation spoke, I think, for all of us when she said you agree to open B.C. Ferries to FOI? she was shocked when she found out the level of com- pensation the board of directors had agreed to." Hon. S. Bond: In fact, we asked for advice. We asked Now, two issues are in front of us: the provocative and about how we can ensure that the model that's in place inflammatory statements from CEO Hahn and the total is working as efficiently as possible. We have a series lack of accountability and scrutiny from B.C. Ferries. of recommendations, and we intend to consider every Will the Transportation Minister ask Mr. Hahn to retract single one of them. But, you know, the member oppos- his brazen, insulting statements and apologize to the ite's legacy with B.C. Ferries continues. In fact, very comptroller general, and will she commit to putting B.C. shortly now we're going to see their legacy floated on Ferries under the Freedom of Information Act? the back of a barge off to Abu Dhabi. That's what the member opposite did with B.C. Ferries. Hon. S. Bond: We actually believe in the compe- tence of the comptroller general so much that in fact Interjections. we asked her to do the report and received it. At the risk of repeating not only what the Finance Minister Mr. Speaker: Members. said but what I will say for the second time: we take the report seriously. We asked for the advice. We're going B.C. FERRIES AND B.C. RAIL to consider every single recommendation, including the EXECUTIVE SALARIES recommendation concerning freedom of information. J. Horgan: As staggering as it is that the members on ACCESS TO B.C. FERRIES INFORMATION that side of the House don't seem to think it's odd that we're paying a guy a million bucks to run a monopoly ferry H. Bains: Let's be clear. The only reason British system, I think they'll be even more surprised to learn that Columbians even know how much they're coughing up six years ago they privatized B.C. Rail, but they continue to for Mr. Hahn's salary is because of the federal rules. The pay the chief executive officer and the president $500,000 comptroller general has called for more accountabil- a year to run zero trains on 40 kilometres of track. ity into B.C. Ferries, but this government continues to Now, they may have a miniature train set in the refuse to open B.C. Ferries to public scrutiny. boardroom, but you've got four chief executive officers My question is to the minister. Why won't the minis- making $1.2 million — no trains. Is that acceptable — a ter agree to include B.C. Ferries under FOI? million bucks for the ferries, $1.2 million for no train? Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2493

Hon. S. Bond: Well, in fact, it shows how little the Mr. Speaker: Sit down, Minister. member opposite actually does his homework. In fact, B.C. Rail Properties has a number of important respon- Interjections. sibilities, including… Mr. Speaker: Members. Interjections. Want to wind it up, Minister?

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat. Hon. S. Bond: I can hardly wait to wind it up.

Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. S. Bond: Very quickly, between 1991 and 1991, Continue, Minister. B.C. Ferries' debt went up by 1,800 percent under that government. Hon. S. Bond: …the disposal of surplus properties for revenue. They also look after the completion of sub- [End of question period.] divisions to support economic development, and they monitor the very important B.C. investment railway Petitions partnership. So there is work being done. In addition, like all of the Crowns in British Columbia, J. Horgan: I have a petition signed by over 500 British we in fact are going to review B.C. Rail Properties. Columbians calling on the government of the member for Vancouver–Point Grey to withdraw the HST. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. Hon. M. Polak: I seek leave to make an introduction. J. Horgan: Well, I'll give the Minister of Transporta- Mr. Speaker: Proceed. tion one more opportunity to do the right thing for the taxpayers of British Columbia. Will she, first of all, call Introductions by Members in Mr. Hahn to her office and tell him to mind his man- ners and then tell him that she's going to roll back his Hon. M. Polak: Joining us in the House today is the salary and, the second thing, call in B.C. Rail executives Carrier Youth Drum Group and their chaperones. The and say that their services are no longer required? Carrier Youth Drum Group is a group of teenage youth from the Carrier and Sekani territory. Hon. S. Bond: We have said consistently that we The youth participate in cultural programming to believe the comptroller general did an outstanding increase and strengthen their cultural identity. The job. We disagree with Mr. Hahn. Mr. Hahn can actually drum group has spent the last two years learning the defend his own remarks. traditional clan songs and stories of their territory and [1425] performing for various celebrations, events and forums. But I'll tell you what. What the member opposite They will be performing at the aboriginal child care con- should look back to is…. Let's just look at what happened ference in Vancouver. with B.C. Ferries under their leadership. In fact…. They are Ashley Lowely, Jenny Lowely, Kerri Palmer, Christine Batoche, Wyonna Batoche, Tammy Alexis, Interjections. Shane Palmer, Sheldon Batoche, Kurtis Alec, Elijah George West and their chaperones — Vernaye Morgan, Mr. Speaker: Sit down, Minister. Sonya Sheppard and John Alec. Would the House please make them welcome. Interjections. Petitions Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Minister. C. James: I rise to present a petition opposing the imple- mentation of the HST signed by over a thousand people. Hon. S. Bond: Let's just look at a fact. To the member opposite: between 1991 and 1991, B.C. Ferries' debt Mr. Speaker: Proceed. increased…. D. Donaldson: I rise to present a petition of over 480 Interjections. people from seven communities in Stikine and also five 2494 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

communities in Nechako Lakes, calling on the govern- a few questions that might be helpful to me and might ment to scrap plans to implement the HST. explain this fully to the public. There is a TILMA aspect to this, I gather, from the Mr. Speaker: Proceed. minister's response. We're now supposedly putting British Columbia ranchers and Alberta ranchers on the J. Kwan: I rise to table a petition. same footing. Is there an advantage to British Columbia ranchers arising out of this? Mr. Speaker: Proceed. [1435]

J. Kwan: I have a petition from the people of Hon. S. Thomson: This is an advantage to B.C. farm- Vancouver–Mount Pleasant calling on the government ers and ranchers. What it does is give them better access to reinstate the arts cuts funding in British Columbia. to ranchers and business opportunities in Alberta. It opens up those opportunities for them. It reduces the Orders of the Day barriers to trade and reduces costs for them.

Hon. M. de Jong: I call, in Committee A, Committee L. Krog: I just wonder if the minister could be a bit of Supply — for the information of members, the esti- more specific.I t opens up opportunities. Does this mean mates of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor that a B.C. rancher, for instance, can now purchase an General; and in this chamber committee stage debate on Alberta farm more easily and operate more easily in the Bill 20, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. province of Alberta? Or does it mean that he can simply 2), 2009. purchase livestock in Alberta and transport them back [1430] to British Columbia more easily? In other words, what are the specifics to that advantage the minister is talking Committee of the Whole House about?

Bill 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes Hon. S. Thomson: Just to clarify one point to make Amendment Act (No. 2), 2009 sure the member opposite understands that we're deal- ing strictly with livestock in this case. This has nothing to TheH ouse in Committee of the Whole (Section B) on do with in terms of purchasing farms or property. This is Bill 20; L. Reid in the chair. strictly related to livestock. What it does is that it makes it easier for B.C. farmers and ranchers by exempting the The committee met at 2:32 p.m. Alberta farmers and ranchers and putting them on the same footing as B.C. farmers and ranchers in terms of On section 1. recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

L. Krog: I'm delighted to rise and ask a few questions L. Krog: If I can kind of crystallize this for my mind…. around this very interesting provision. I'm just wonder- I'm a cattle rancher in the Cariboo, and I want to buy ing if the minister can explain the effect of section 1 and some stock in Alberta, but I'm not a livestock dealer. why the change is being made. If I'm a livestock dealer, of course, then I'm stuck with certain regulatory requirements, I assume, that are fairly Hon. S. Thomson: Before I respond to the ques- onerous because of all the concerns around mad cow tion, I'd like to introduce the staff that are here with me: and everything else. And if the minister nods that I'm Grant Parnell, the assistant deputy minister of Crown on the right track, that'll give me a hint that I am. land administration in the ministry; Linda Bates, our But if I'm just your ordinary, run-of-the-range rancher manager of legislation; and Judi Sigurdson, who is the and I want to buy ten head of Angus out of Edmonton manager of trade policy in the ministry. and bring them back, what this provision does is cut The purpose of the amendment is to….A s the member down the regulatory framework so that I can bring opposite may know, currently ranchers and farmers are those back more easily. Whereas if I was a livestock exempt from the Animal Disease Control Act. The pur- dealer, then I'm stuck with, I presume, regulatory and pose of this amendment is to apply that same exemption reporting requirements in order to exclude the possibil- to Alberta farmers and ranchers, to be consistent with ity of disease or whatever else may be an issue for the TILMA. This is for when they are purchasing livestock governments. for their own farm operations only. Hon. S. Thomson: Just to be clear, these amendments L. Krog: I want to assure the minister that I'm here to allow the farmers in both jurisdictions to be exempt get an education this afternoon around this issue.I have from the requirements for bonding and licensing. What Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2495 we're dealing with here are individual ranchers with without restriction, whereas an Alberta farmer presently their own livestock that have been raised on their own would face some restriction or prohibition on selling his farms dealing with an individual farmer and rancher in cattle to a B.C. rancher in British Columbia. Is that the Alberta. present situation? [1440] Hon. S. Thomson: There's not a prohibition. Those The livestock dealers' requirements are, as the sales can currently occur, but under the current regu- member opposite mentioned, much more strict because lation, without this change and the reason the change of the volumes they deal with, because of the fact they is being proposed, that Alberta farmer, doing business are moving cattle for other people and things like that. with the B.C. rancher on his own cattle — selling them — We're simply putting farmers and ranchers in B.C. and would now be classified as a livestock dealer and have to farmers and ranchers in Alberta on an even footing. go through those requirements of bonding and licens- ing and reporting. L. Krog: If I can understand it…. If I'm a rancher in What we're simply saying is that we're exempting the the Cariboo and I go to a livestock dealer in Edmonton Alberta farmer and rancher from that requirement that and purchase ten head, then the provisions around the the B.C. farmer and rancher currently has, in order to Animal Disease Control Act, etc., will apply to me and facilitate business between two farmers and ranchers. So I'll have to meet a rigorous regulatory arrangement, so as I said previously, the advantage goes both ways. to speak. Whereas if I'm a rancher in the Cariboo and I go to see my friend George in Edson and buy ten head, L. Krog: Just so I'm clear, my point is that right now, then I can bring those back without any concerns. the way I interpreted the minister's previous answers, as a B.C. farmer, I can sell my cattle to an Alberta rancher Hon. S. Thomson: Just to be clear, this change does without incurring the provisions of this act, whereas the not make any change to the animal health require- Alberta rancher presently can't do that. We'll do this one ments, safety requirements, as far as that side of it. All step at a time. Is that the situation now? it simply does is exempt Alberta ranchers and farmers, [1445] doing business with a B.C. farmer and rancher on their own cattle, from the reporting requirements. Right now Hon. S. Thomson: Yeah, the situation is that the B.C. farmers and ranchers are exempt from that require- current B.C. farmer and rancher is not classified as a ment, so if they are selling into Alberta, they're currently livestock dealer if he's selling his own cows or his own excluded. They're not subject to those same reporting livestock and dealing directly with another individual requirements that livestock dealers are. rancher in Alberta. What we're simply saying is that What we're saying is that for an Alberta farmer and we're putting the Alberta rancher on the same footing, rancher, on his own livestock, dealing directly with a opening up the opportunities for that B.C. rancher. B.C. farmer and rancher…. When they are selling their If he is looking to do business with and to bring cattle own livestock, they are on the same footing in terms of breeding stock or cattle from Alberta that he'd like to not having to comply with the same reporting require- purchase, it puts the Alberta farmer and rancher in ments, exactly the same as we currently have for our B.C. the same category, reduces those requirements. So not farmers and ranchers. considering that Alberta farmer and rancher a livestock dealer — that reduces the cost, generally reduces the L. Krog: If I get this straight, essentially, the purpose cost of doing business for B.C. farmers and ranchers. It of this is to give an advantage to Alberta farmers now in simply puts them on the same footing. dealing with B.C. farmers, which presently B.C. farmers enjoy in dealing with Alberta farmers, which gives us, L. Krog: So if I get this straight, right now as a B.C. arguably, comparative advantage. rancher I can sell my cattle to an Alberta farmer without prohibition, whereas an Alberta farmer cannot sell his Hon. S. Thomson: The member opposite has essen- cattle to a B.C. farmer without, unless he…. If he did, tially got it right. What it does is make it easier to sell he'd be a livestock dealer and have to register. Is that and do business between farmers and ranchers in B.C. correct? and Alberta on their own cattle — both ways. The advan- tage flows both ways. It opens up the opportunities and Hon. S. Thomson: Yes, that's correct. Under the cur- makes it easier or gives an advantage or business oppor- rent regulation, he would be considered a dealer and tunities and reduces costs to B.C. farmers and ranchers. subject to those reporting requirements — licensing, bonding. What we're saying is that when you're dealing L. Krog: I think the minister is perhaps missing my with your own cattle, B.C. rancher to Alberta rancher…. point. I understood from his previous answer that right This applies to a limited number of sales. We're not now a B.C. rancher gets to sell his cattle into Alberta talking about the livestock dealers where volumes of 2496 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

cattle are moving. We're simply talking about business What I want to know is: is this a government-driven between an individual rancher in British Columbia and initiative, or is this a request from the B.C. Land an individual rancher in Alberta. Surveyors? Is this a public request? In other words, where does the impetus for this change come from? L. Krog: So we've talked about selling. Right now, I take it, a B.C. rancher can buy Alberta cattle from a Hon. S. Thomson: This change was supported by the rancher there and bring them back, again without pro- Association of B.C. Land Surveyors. This is simply about hibition, whereas an Alberta rancher couldn't buy B.C. broadening the perspective and making sure that the cattle and take them back without prohibition. Is that decisions that that association makes are well informed. right? Consultation occurred with the land surveyors, and it is supported by that association. Hon. S. Thomson: I'm not sure. I think the member is talking about prohibition. There is no prohibition Section 2 approved. either way in terms of individual ranchers in B.C. deal- ing with individual farmers in Alberta. There are health On section 3. and safety requirements and biosecurity requirements and those kinds of things to meet. L. Krog: What is the point of this particular change? This doesn't deal with that. What we're simply deal- The explanatory note indicates it changes the eligibility ing with here is levelling the playing field as far as the requirements for land surveying companies to whom a reporting and bonding and licensing requirements so permit may be issued. I guess my first question is: what that an individual Alberta rancher is not considered a kind of permit are we contemplating, and why is the livestock dealer when he's dealing directly with an indi- change necessary? vidual B.C. rancher. Hon. S. Thomson: The permit process that currently L. Krog: Just so I'm clear, we've got to the point that exists — that isn't changing. That's the permit that the I want the minister to acknowledge, and I think he has association provides to the company. What is changing acknowledged it. The fact is that this provision puts by this are the provisions around the makeup of the Alberta ranchers on a level playing field withB .C., when companies, but the permitting process doesn't change. in fact, we have enjoyed an advantage up until this, and [1455] this is to comply with TILMA. Is that correct? [1450] L. Krog: I'd like concrete, simple examples that I can understand. So we've got two surveyors or three survey- Hon. S. Thomson: The advantage to the B.C. produ- ors now who operate a surveying company. It's Letnick cer here is the fact that a B.C. producer — I'll just use an Bros. Ltd. or something — B.C. land surveyors. example — may want to buy a good breeding cow out of The effect of this legislation is that if those three Alberta. Right now — because of the additional require- B.C. land surveyors are now the only shareholders of ments they have, where that Alberta rancher would be that company, then they could perhaps sell 25 percent considered a livestock dealer — that affects the trans- of their shares to a lawyer who could hold shares, and action costs. they'd still be entitled to get a permit to act as B.C. land What we're doing is simply putting the B.C. rancher surveyors. Is that sort of the essence of this? and the Alberta rancher on the same footing. That reduces the cost and reduces barriers to B.C. farmers Hon. S. Thomson: Yes. Right now you can't do that. and ranchers doing business with Alberta farmers and With this change, the suggestion or the approach that ranchers when we're dealing strictly between a B.C. the member opposite suggested could take place now rancher and an Alberta rancher and strictly with cattle under the change. and livestock that are from their own operations. L. Krog: As I understand it, then, the minister is Section 1 approved. confirming that right now if you're a land surveyor operating through a limited company — and the propri- On section 2. etorship example is too obvious, but a limited company — in order to get a permit to operate as a licensed land L. Krog: I understand this change will allow for lay surveyor facing all the professional obligations of the members to the board of management, the Association association, etc., that company can only belong to the of Land Surveyors, much like the Law Society and land surveyors — not their spouses, not their cousins, other governing bodies of various professionals in the aunts or uncles. It has to belong to the land surveyors, province. and this change will have the effect of allowing others to Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2497

own shares in a company that operates a land surveying L. Krog: This section, I take it, is simply doing what company. probably most British Columbians assumed it is, and that is that all the provisions of the Elections Act gov- Hon. S. Thomson: The provisions that are being pro- erning spending limits and all the regulation that goes posed with this change will still require the majority with the general election will now apply in by-elections voting shares to be held by surveyors. as well.

L. Krog: The next question that flows from that is: is Hon. M. de Jong: With one qualification to what the this a request from the land surveyors themselves? And member said. These are the provisions that deal with if so, is the point of it simply to allow them to get other candidate expenditures. As the member knows, there sources of capital, to spread income with spouses? What's are other parts of the act dealing with third party that the point of this, and is this in the public interest? are presently being litigated, and we purposely didn't You know, the hybridization of professions in terms touch any of those sections. The member is correct with of ownership may or may not be in the public interest, respect to candidate expenditures. so I want to hear the minister's comments on that aspect of it as well. Section 5 approved. [1500] On section 6. Hon. S. Thomson: The proposed changes will pro- vide relief to land-surveying companies regarding J. Horgan: As I foreshadowed in my second reading what I think are unnecessary restrictions in place on debates, I'm anxious to hear from the Minister of Energy the ownership of the business currently. This will allow the rationale for removing transparency from the Hydro greater opportunity in terms of raising capital and could and Power Authority Act. I'm wondering if the minister provide additional expertise. could perhaps introduce the staff that are accompanying It's expected that B.C. companies will now be more him here and then answer that question. competitive in the land surveying business. These are currently the provisions that exist in Alberta, so it makes Hon. B. Lekstrom: I will start by introducing the our companies more competitive. I think that's what is people and staff I have with me. We have, to my right, in the public interest. We want to make sure that our Les MacLaren and, to Les's right, Jennifer Champion land-surveying companies are on a level playing field joining us here today. and have that opportunity to be more competitive. Thank you to the member for the question. The sec- L. Krog: Just to confirm. This was, in fact, a request tions are really a product of the 1960s in this piece of for this change from the board of management of the legislation. What we're attempting to do here today in Association of B.C. Land Surveyors? section 6 of Bill 20 is to bring them up to date to reflect what the actual fact is today on what we do. As of April Hon. S. Thomson: Consultation occurred. This 1, 2009, for example, all Crown corporations, includ- change is supported by the Association of B.C. Land ing B.C. Hydro, have been subject to open and non- Surveyors. discriminatory procurement requirements — under TILMA, for example. Section 3 approved. [1505] We believe that this is, from my perspective, an update. On section 4. It will bring us in line with the modern-day procure- ment, whether it would be the different issues of power L. Krog: Just to confirm. This change is simply con- plants, as we're talking about. I know the member will sequential on section 1, I take it, in terms of including get into that here in his future questions. the definition. So if you reside in British Columbia or Alberta…. Again, it's to try and comply with TILMA. J. Horgan: I thank the minister for his answer, and We're putting livestock dealers on an equal footing. Is I'm delighted to see both the capable staff joining him in that the effect of it? here today looking dapper. I appreciate the member's response. We had talked off Hon. S. Thomson: That's correct. line about why we were using a miscellaneous amend- ment act to remove directly from the Hydro and Power Section 4 approved. Authority Act provisions around tenders and, more importantly, the opening of tenders. So that covers sec- On section 5. tion 6. 2498 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

I'm wondering if the minister could direct me to or heck we're talking about, so good on the minister for table documents at a later time or provide them to me at that. a later time — those references to B.C. Bid and TILMA [1510] where we can determine how it is that contractors seek- I just want to touch, then, on section 15 of the Hydro ing opportunities from B.C. Hydro would be assured and Power Authority Act. That, again, is the section that the open tendering process would continue under which is being repealed with respect to the prices then these other provisions. being made known. I want to just get an assurance from the minister that existing provisions within TILMA or Hon. B. Lekstrom: I certainly will endeavour to get B.C. Bid ensure that all bidders have access to not only you that information, Member, as far as what you've the successful bid but to all bids that were submitted. My asked under the TILMA and the B.C. Bid requirements understanding is that that's guaranteed under section 15 for tendering. of the act. Will that guarantee be continued with these new provisions? J. Horgan: I just want to touch briefly…. The minis- ter talked about modernizing the procurement process. Hon. B. Lekstrom: I can definitely give the member Certainly, we look at statutes here every day. There's that guarantee. As a matter of fact, it will be as of often archaic language, and that's a challenge for con- November 3, 2009. B.C. Hydro has been making this temporary contractors. information available on B.C. Bid's website, as well, for I certainly find a value in having these provisions con- both tenders and requests for proposals. tained directly in the Hydro and Power Authority Act, This actually opens it up — greater transparency and and I'm wondering if the minister could just, beyond the the fact that you don't have to be there at the opening explanation he gave in his preliminary answer, explain per se with the new technology that we have and the how it is an improvement for those who are accessing advancements. I think the public of British Columbia statutes. should be very happy with what they'll be able to access Were I seeking to bid on a construction project, I and see formally. would first go to theB .C. Hydro act. Again, with modern technology and the Internet and so on, B.C. Bid is a sim- Section 6 approved. pler way for modern procurement to take place, but I think there is some value in leaving these statutes or On section 7. these clauses in place. Could the minister suggest to me why the removal of these is important when these other J. Horgan: For those that are trying to follow without processes exist? the aid of the documents that the minister and I and other members have in front of them, section 7 is called Hon. B. Lekstrom: The update really is necessary, and the transitional provision of this repealing of sections 14 the question is a good one. The scope is very narrow and 15 of the Hydro and Power Authority Act. under 14 of the existing Hydro and Power Authority Act. I'm wondering if the minister could just walk us It refers to power plants — what we're doing — and the through sections 7(a) and 7(b) so there's clarity on the reference is also to tenders. There are many other ways dates. Of course, it would come into force at royal assent, now, whether it be requests for proposals, requests for but you did make reference to November 3, 2009, in expressions of interest and so on. So this will bring it up. your previous answer in terms of the transparency and It also is broader. It will cover goods, services and con- access to tenders under the former section 15. How will struction, as well, under TILMA. That's the information the transition process work? that we have said we would forward to the member as well. It broadens it out. It brings it into today's era. Hon. B. Lekstrom: Section 7, the transition, is really I understand the member's question. As he said, going to ensure that, rather than during this transition people would go to B.C. Hydro. Also, B.C. Bid, for quite period — and as the member said, until this bill receives some time, has been utilized. I think most people are royal assent, it doesn't come into play — we can actually aware of it, but if there is an issue, such as a link from do the opening as it is today, which isn't just at their B.C. Hydro's website, we would endeavour to do that. If office.A s I said, going back to November 3 was the date. it's not there already, I believe it would be. It just bridges that so there isn't an inequity that people would fall back and say, "Oh, those had to be opened at J. Horgan: I firstly want to commend the minister the office of B.C. Hydro," when in fact they're actually for not using acronyms. That's the trap that ministers of posted now on B.C. Bid on line. all political stripes fall into. Rather than saying "request for proposal," they say "RFP." Those that are reading the J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that answer. I'm debate or watching the debate may not know what the just curious. ThisN ovember 3 date — I don't believe Bill Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2499

20 had been introduced at that point in time. Is there the conditions of the forest in a given area — it simply any magical reason for that? I assume that Hydro put won't require them to do an assessment when in their forward their request for legislation through the leg. judgment it is not necessary. It just creates flexibility for counsel. The papers were processed. Were they jump- the chief forester. ing the gun a bit on the November 3 date, or was it just convenient to do so in anticipation of the repealing of N. Macdonald: The changed circumstances, I pre- these sections? sume, would have to do with infestations, perhaps, or a [1515] beetle kill. Just maybe related to that is one of the con- cerns that has been expressed, which is just about the Hon. B. Lekstrom: November 3, to the member, for lack of inventory information that we have right now. information, was actually…. That day was chosen…. With this change, is there any concern that that would That was the day after this bill was introduced. That was, be problematic, or does the minister not see that as a I guess, the requirement under that for that date. concern? The other. These changes were actually drafted in February for the spring session, which would allow us Hon. P. Bell: The member asked initially what sorts of to work in conjunction with the requirements under circumstances might trigger the chief forester's decision TILMA for Crown procurement practices on that. to do a TSR earlier than a ten-year period or a five-year period. He pointed out beetle infestations. That would J. Horgan: Is this the only amendment that the minis- be an example of one. ter anticipates with respect to B.C. Hydro to be compli- There may be other reasons why the chief forester ant with TILMA, or will there be other amendments in would want to initiate a TSR — as an example, if one future miscellaneous amendments? were to enter into an extensive fertilization program and wanted to monitor the results and determine whether Hon. B. Lekstrom: We're not aware of any other that would create a potential uplift for the area; or land changes that would be needed. use decisions, where components of the land are pre- served for one reason or another; perhaps a species-at- Section 7 approved. risk initiative, treaty measures and those sorts of things. [1520] On section 8. The chief forester would look at all of the various circumstances that would impact the annual allowable N. Macdonald: These are all pretty straightforward. cut in a given TSR and then make his determination on whether it was appropriate to engage in a timber supply Interjections. review at that point in time. There could be a variety of reasons. Some of the ones The Chair: Members. the member pointed out already. Other reasons could include land use decisions, species-at-risk initiatives, N. Macdonald: Basically, the provisions we're going monitoring the incremental growth of the forest. to look at here that relate to amendments under this The member mentioned inventory as a concern. look pretty straightforward. The people I've talked to Would inventory information become depleted as a seem to feel that they're fairly benign. result of this? The chief forester is simply looking for Just a couple of questions. The first one is on section the flexibility to not have to do a TSR in an area where 8, which is an amendment to section 8 of the Forest Act. he believes the conditions remain the same as they did It changes the maximum time for the determination of on his previous timber supply review. The current rules the AACs from five to ten years and gives greater power don't allow that to happen. The current rules require to the chief forester in determining the annual allowable the chief forester to do a timber supply review after five cut by extending the maximum time that she or he must years. make an order. Just the question: an explanation of why This creates the flexibility for him to make the deci- that change was made? sion of his determination, and it is a statutory deci- sion, not a political decision. So the chief forester is the Hon. P. Bell: The chief forester still determines in one, ultimately, who has the responsibility to make that his or her own assessment when the appropriate time determination. to do a TSR is. However, it will allow the chief forester to focus the resources in areas where there are changed N. Macdonald: Just the last question, then. Presumably, circumstances. In areas that the chief forester, in their this was driven by a request from the chief forester in determination, believes are remaining consistent in terms of trying to create a framework that would work terms of the circumstances — the health of the forest, more efficiently. 2500 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Hon. P. Bell: That's correct. So the intention is, as I hear the minister say, to use it as a trial for a certain period of time. What sort of think- Section 8 approved. ing is the minister doing about how you evaluate the effectiveness of the trial?I s there a plan in place to go for On section 9. a specific period of time and have a specific evaluation to see if it's an accurate way of moving and it achieves N. Macdonald: This provides for stumpage amounts the results that the minister wants? to be calculated with the approval of the minister, based [1525] on a cruise of the timber rather than the volume reported Maybe the minister could take some time and just in the scale of the timber. Really, just one question on explain the thinking around that. that around: what are the circumstances that this sort of a change is intended for? Hon. P. Bell: We'll be monitoring the stands that are being influenced by this sort of a pricing system to see if Hon. P. Bell: We already have the ability to sell wood we are attaining the objectives, particularly as it relates this way through the B.C. Timber Sales program, through to maximizing value from the stand and decreasing the ITSLs, or innovative timber sale licences. We want to waste volumes that are left behind in the stand. be able to use those same principles for pricing timber I'm interested in seeing us piloting this, primarily in in tenured volume as well, and particularly as it relates mountain pine beetle areas for now, but I'm interested to homogenous stands of pine beetle–damaged timber. to see how it would be received in other areas. So it is, So the intent is to be able to sell stands where the I think, something that will take several years to move stand is very homogenous, where it's a relatively simple across the province. stand structure, to licensees who hold tenures, rather I don't want to suggest that there's a preconceived than using a scale-based system, cruising the stand and conclusion here that it will be successful. I think we have selling it and charging for the stand in that way. to monitor it closely and make sure that it is achieving the intended result, but we want to have it as a tool so N. Macdonald: Just quickly to build on that, then. that we can extend it beyond where we're at right now. This is seen as a tool that would be used in an excep- I think, also, that this is a very helpful tool from the tional way rather than a general way. It's just a tool that perspective of bioenergy. We've chatted on a number of would be used in very few circumstances, or is it some- occasions about bioenergy initiatives and capturing all thing that the minister would see using more regularly? of the stem as opposed to just the merchantable com- ponent of the stem. How do you do that, and how do Hon. P. Bell: Initially, I think we believe this is a tool you allocate that timber out to different licensees for use we would use in the pine beetle stands in specific cir- in bioenergy facilities — whether it's pellets, electrical cumstances where it's a relatively homogenous stand. energy or combined heat and power, or whatever it hap- But I think it has broader applications, and I think that pens to be? This is, we think, another tool that can help it offers some very real advantages to the way we cur- achieve that objective. rently sell timber. A number of different reasons. It creates a new tool When the stand is purchased as a whole and it is 100 in the tool box. Initial use will be primarily in the pine percent sunk cost on the part of the licensee, I believe beetle stands. We'll be monitoring it very closely to see that creates a stronger incentive to recover maximum if we're getting the results that are expected. We can value from that stand. The member knows that that's a still use either tool. It doesn't mean that we can only personal priority of mine — that I want to see us captur- sell volume using this model. We can still use our scale- ing more value from the stands. based systems that we've always used in the past. Then It eliminates a lot of the questions in a stand about we'll make decisions going forward on whether we think tops, about grade 4 issues, about all of those sorts of chal- this has greater applicability across stands that have a lenges that come to bear. I like the model. I think it's a variety of species as well as homogenous stands. better way of charging for wood. At this point the intent is to use it primarily for pine beetle–infested stands, but N. Macdonald: So that's one piece in terms of putting I would not want the member to think that we aren't a price on the forest, but you still have tools that you'll considering this as a broader tool if we find that it is suc- need to force the full removal of that. Even having paid cessful in achieving our objectives. for it, perhaps there still wouldn't be the economics for a company to remove all of the wood. N. Macdonald: Maybe just to spend a bit more time You're thinking of starting this in the pine beetle areas. with it, because it sounds like it's one of the tools that Then, if it is something that proves successful, the min- you're going to use, as you say, to make sure that you get ister sees expanding this to other parts of the province better utilization out of the wood that's there. over a period of time. But the initial area will be in the Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2501

pine beetle area around Quesnel, Prince George. Is that Clearly, February was too short a time. But are we look- the thinking? ing at years from now? Or is it a pilot that will simply have a few more months to go on? Just a sense of how Hon. P. Bell: That's correct — and down into the long the minister is looking at studying this. Williams Lake area, as well; perhaps into the Okanagan. Now we're starting to see stands there that have been hit. Hon. P. Bell: Initially, we were thinking it might be The Merritt area is another area that we could consider. just another year. We wanted to create the flexibility It'll be a tool that's in the tool box. by putting in the date by regulation. Realistically, we're The initial focus, as the member points out, will be in thinking probably two years. the pine-dominated stands. As we go forward, if we find success, we'll consider using it in other areas as well. Section 11 approved.

Section 9 approved. On section 12.

On section 10. N. Macdonald: This seems to go back to the…. Well, it does go back to the revitalization plan, which was six N. Macdonald: This changes the Forest Act, section years ago. Just a question as to why these changes would 128, and it provides the minister the ability to use orders- be made under the auspices now, six years later. Just an in-council to allow log exports to include residual wood explanation of, I guess, why this is being done now. products up to 5,000 bone-dry units. Here, again, maybe just an explanation to begin with by the minister of the Hon. P. Bell: We've not yet completed the deletions reason for the change. from the area-based tenures, so we need additional time to complete those deletions. [C. Trevena in the chair.] N. Macdonald: Does the minister have a sense of the Hon. P. Bell: In the past, in order to allow for export time frame? of either hog or chips, the permitting process was by order-in-council. This gives the Minister of Forests the Hon. P. Bell: Depending on whether I turn to my authority to make that decision as a statutory decision, right or my left,I got answers ranging from one to three as opposed to taking it to order-in-council. years. This is primarily the wood that's being allocated to both first nations and woodlots. That's why it's taking a Section 10 approved. bit more time to identify the specific areas in area-based On section 11. tenures that are appropriate for a first nations tenure or [1530] for a woodlot tenure.

N. Macdonald: Again, this is a change to the Forest Section 12 approved. Act. It allows the cabinet, essentially, to repeal by regu- lation this section respecting the area-based allowable On section 13. annual cut trial program. It doesn't seem to be particu- larly problematic. How is the area-based AAC trial pro- N. Macdonald: Just along the same lines. With this ceeding now? How is that going? change here, as I understand it, the holders of tree farm licences are now going to be compensated for the reduc- Hon. P. Bell: We believe that we're having good suc- tion in their cut. Just an explanation there of why this cess on this pilot. It was due to terminate shortly, so the change, and then we'll go from there. initial thought was that we would extend it by legisla- tion to a new timeline. I reconsidered that option and Hon. P. Bell: This applies specifically to TFLs and decided to create the flexibility to do it by regulation areas that were deleted as part of the revitalization act rather than bringing it to the House. in TFLs for woodlots, first nations, BCTS, community I think the question the member asked is: how is the forests — that sort of thing. pilot going? We think we're seeing some good success [1535] in this area and would like to continue it for a period of The Forest Act didn't contemplate compensation for time. That's why this particular section is here. TFLs and did contemplate compensation for volume- based tenures. So this is necessary in order to complete N. Macdonald: I think the final question is: is there the compensation requirements under the revitalization any sense as to how long a period this will extend to? act specific to TFL holders. 2502 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

N. Macdonald: Just to understand with the TFLs. S. Simpson: What it says to me is that the board, When private land was removed, there was no compen- which…. Under section 5, the "Composition of board," sation to the Crown. Maybe I just don't understand how "The board consists of up to 11 directors appointed by the TFLs work. the minister," which is all good and fine.B ut the sections Is it now the case that the TFLs are going to be treated (2), (3) and (4) that this Bill 20 will repeal removes some the same as…? Or was it always the case they were going significant components in terms of some of the people to be treated the same as the other tenures that were and the interests that are made up on that board and held in the province in terms of compensation? Was that provides no guarantees of those interests, which are cer- always the intent, and it simply wasn't laid out in the lan- tainly legitimate to the community living authority and guage, or is this something that has changed from what to families who are involved in these activities. was intended when this first took place six years ago? Again, I guess it comes back to the question I have. Why has the minister chosen to remove a reference Hon. P. Bell: That's correct.I should just highlight for in the current legislation that says "…members of the the member opposite that we've always had the ability to board have to have the skills, qualifications and experi- compensate for improvements in the TFLs — so roads, ence to direct the authority," and stay silent on that ques- bridges, planning, that sort of thing. This was for AAC tion in terms of this legislation? reduction specific to the TFL. Because of the nature of TFLs, in the past you wouldn't have contemplated Hon. R. Coleman: Just for the member's assistance that. But because this is an extraction from the TFL, it's here, that section that was in there before says: "All dir- believed to be fair to compensate for that purpose. ectors, other than a director referred to in subsection (4), must have the necessary skills…." The two sections — Sections 13 and 14 approved. the sections go together. We have Crown corporation board guidelines that On section 15. basically say people have to have the skill sets to be dir- ectors, and they're selected through a board selection process through the board resourcing office of govern- S. Simpson: Section 15, part 6, the housing and ment. What we're doing is repealing that and bringing social development amendments section, deals with the it back into line with the amendment so that it's for the Community Living Authority Act. Section 15 of the bill wider pool of individuals to also match up to how we repeals a number of sections about the composition of do every other Crown corporation in government with the board under the Community Living Authority Act. regards to selection of board members. First of all, it says: "All directors, other than a director They are selected based on their skills and what the referred to in subsection (4), must have the necessary board skill set needs. It doesn't matter which Crown it skills, qualifications and experience to direct the author- is. Sometimes you need one person that's good on legal, ity." That now is being removed as a requirement under somebody good on financial, someone good on certain this section. things. You actually build that board around that. There Could the minister tell us: why would he remove a are guidelines within government for how that takes section of the bill that talks about and obligates that dir- place, so it doesn't need to be in here because this was ectors should have skills, qualifications and experience an exception clause versus a directive clause. to direct the authority? S. Simpson: It's interesting that you would remove Hon. R. Coleman: Section 5 establishes a board of something that explicitly refers to the requirement for 11 directors comprised of a majority of directors who that skill set in the authority. But moving on to section fit the definition of "community living support," who 5(3), which is also dealt with by this and repealed under are significantly connected to those individuals. Two this legislation. What 5(3) says is: "Subject to subsection members must have a developmental disability. That's (2) and section 6 (2) (c), a majority of directors must the current provision. be (a) individuals referred to in the definition of 'com- [1540] munity living support', or (b) individuals who have a The proposed amendment repeals the requirement significant connection to the individuals referred to in that the board consist of a majority of directors who paragraph (a), including family members." fit the definition and thereby doesn't require also the It seems to me, and the minister can correct me, that subsection (2) of the same section. Basically, what this this is the section that ensures that a number of people amendment is going to do is enable us to make a selec- who will be on the board will actually be people who tion to the board of members from a wider pool of have a direct relationship to the services of the author- individuals, bringing the board in line with provincial ity, and they will have that relationship by being family Crown corporation operations. members of people who have a developmental disabil- Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2503

ity or fit the definition of members of community living going to have any representation at that board table at support. all? Could the minister tell us: why would the ministry make the decision to remove stakeholders — and this Hon. R. Coleman: The member is correct. We're will be true in section (4), clearly, which requires that making the change. That is the change in the legislation. two of the directors must be individuals with a develop- There will be an advisory committee to the board as set mental disability? out in legislation, and that advisory committee will be So sections (3) and (4) are removing the people who fully struck. We may choose to disagree that this would have the most direct interest as stakeholders in this and come out, but that's what this section does. I don't think providing no requirement at all — not a single require- there's any further explanation I can give the member ment here — that those groups who have the vested than, actually, that's what we're doing. interest, because of family members or because they have disabilities themselves, are going to have any rep- S. Simpson: Just for those people who are involved resentation on this board. Why would the minister do with Community Living B.C…. I know that those people that? who face, sometimes, the challenges related to the work at Community Living B.C. can now know that they will Hon. R. Coleman: They're not precluded from con- have additional challenges, because this government has tinuing. Those that are there will continue to serve.I f the just said that the people who have disabilities, the fam- member looks at subsection (6) of the same act, it also ilies of people who have disabilities, are not worthy of says: "The board must establish an advisory committee playing a role in the leadership of this organization. to the board composed of individuals referred to in the We are going to rip up the sections of this act that definition of 'community living support'." ensure that they have a role in the leadership of this [1545] organization. It's gone now. This is a $700 million operation. We were finding That is sad, and it's unfortunate, and the minister may that, as far as the understanding and the development of say that this is what we're going to do, and he truly, I'm long-term business plans dealing with the issues around sure, is going to do exactly that. But the loss will be to wait-lists and that sort of thing, it was important to add the families and people with developmental disabilities, some additional expertise on the board, and the makeup and it will be a loss to the quality of work that this of the legislation actually restricted the ability to do that. organization provides because they've removed those We've made that decision based on that, and we will people from the board. It is a sad day that those people have the advisory committee to the board as defined in no longer have a role to play as legitimate stakeholders the legislation. in this, because the government has chosen to close the door on them and turn their back on them. S. Simpson: The minister is saying "it doesn't pre- clude." That's not the problem here. The problem is that Hon. R. Coleman: I am prepared to accept the criti- this section quite rightly, in my view, in fact obligates cism as to what the structure of the board will be, but I that those folks have some representation, that they have won't sit here and have somebody demean the people a role on the board of Community Living B.C. that work hard at Community Living B.C. every day and Now, I understand that Community Living B.C. has say that their quality of performance is going to go down its problems, and I understand that there are challenges because we're bringing in a professional board to help in Community Living B.C. But the reality is that this the organization build long-term plans. requires people to be on the board. I won't accept the fact that he makes comments about The minister may talk about an advisory committee, the corporation being in trouble because, quite frankly, but there is a distinct difference between sitting on an the member knows very well that the funding for wait- advisory committee and sitting on a board of directors. lists has gone up. He knows very well they've just finished They're not the same thing, and I'm sure the minister the whole process of dealing with IQ 70. I can accept the knows that. fact that there's a difference of opinion on whether this Since the minister intends to remove all obligation should or should not be in the act. I think that's fine. of representation from families or people with develop- But I can't accept just taking what I thought, at the mental disabilities from this board — which will guar- end there, was a shot at the people that I think work very antee that not one single person who has a connection hard for developmentally disabled people in this prov- to developmental disabilities is obliged to be on this ince every single day at this Crown corporation, who I board — nowhere will that be a requirement. It is today; think have come a very long way in a short period of it won't be when this legislation passes. time building the programs and stuff as a management Why would the minister do that? Can the minister tell team and as the people who deliver on the ground on that community what assurances they have that they're behalf of those folks. 2504 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

I'm okay with the disagreement on how that board Homes built after July 1, 1999, have been protected should be structured. Of course we're going to have the by a mandatory 2-5-10 home warranty insurance. advisory board, but I do think that we should make sure Homeowners are not eligible for assistance under that that we don't leave the impression that there's something on the reconstruction program for those. wrong with the people that run this corporation. This insurance today, which they have since 1999, [1550] provides coverage for the building envelope for five years. Water damage caused by building envelope fail- Sections 15 and 16 approved. ure is expected to show itself within five years. This has been going for ten. On section 17. Just so the member knows, the program was started…. It actually went for 11 years. It was supposed to be a $250 S. Simpson: Just to confirm. Section 17 repeals the million program and deal with about 6,000 to 8,000 aspect of the Homeowner Protection Act that actually units. It has actually been a $700 million program and provides for what is commonly known as the leaky- dealt with 16,000 units over an 11-year period. condo program and removes that program as an obli- It's gone the course of what it was intended to do by gation under the Homeowner Protection Act for the those who put it together. It has served the purpose of agency. That would be correct? what it was supposed to do when it was put together. Today it's time to sunset that particular piece of the Hon. R. Coleman: No, that isn't correct. What this program. does do is it basically repeals the current purpose of the act with regards to administrating a reconstruction loan S. Simpson: I appreciate that the program has done program. what it was supposed to do for 16,000 units in the province. S. Simpson: The reconstruction loan program would The questionI had for the minister: has the Homeowner be the program commonly known as the leaky-condo Protection Office,B .C. Housing or any other area in gov- program, and it removes the administration. By that, are ernment done an assessment of how many other homes, we to assume that once you remove that, the program, how many potential strata units there are out there, that in effect, does not exist any longer other than having may face the problems that this legislation, this program, to meet the obligations that are referred to in section was originally intended to deal with? 20 — those that are in play now but will presumably Is there an assessment anywhere of how many units be completed at some point? It does end the program, may be outstanding and still face those problems and essentially, in terms of any new applications or new now not be eligible for a program? initiatives around that program? [1555]

Hon. R. Coleman: What it does is it basically ends Hon. R. Coleman: First of all, what we were finding the program as of an effective date. There would be no is that the applications we were getting were not being more applications taken after that date, which was July approved. A lot of them that were coming through, quite 31, 2009. frankly, were for a building envelope that had nothing to do with the reconstruction program. S. Simpson: Could the minister tell us: has there been The second thing is that we noticed our applications any analysis done by the Homeowner Protection Office were way, way down, significantly, over the years, and or by the ministry to determine whether, in fact, there we were not getting the applications in any sense. We are outstanding strata units out there that would, had also knew that water egress issues with regards to faulty the program continued, be eligible to avail themselves construction should have been identified within the first of the program? Has there been any assessment done of five years of the unit. whether there are units out there, and if so, how many? There's been new warranty on all of the units since 1999. It's 11 years since the new warranties were put in Hon. R. Coleman: This program was available to place, and we've actually gone five to six years beyond eligible homeowners of strata units constructed prior when any water ingress or egress took place. to July 1999. As of July 2009, these homes would be at We were finding that we were getting applications on least ten years old, and many of them are much older. projects that were not eligible and that should not have At this stage, water damage would have been identified been at the cost of the taxpayer to take care of because as a result of construction, but not necessarily because there were issues in and around owner responsibility, of poor maintenance. This is what we were finding on whether it was because somebody wasn't cleaning their most of our applications. It wasn't actually relative to a gutters on a regular basis or taking care of their patios construction flaw, which the program was initiated for. and construction or whether their maintenance wasn't Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2505

there. That's what this was not intended to be for. It The other thing we were facing, and the member will was actually intended to do with water egress issues in remember this, is the level of interest rates that we had and around construction that created the problem with at that particular time versus today. Today money is regards to leaky condos. actually a lot cheaper and can be financed more directly We have transitioned through what should be the time with regards to this, including things like reverse mort- frame for those types of applications. But the definitive gages and the things that have changed with regards to answer to the member's question is: is there a building the ability to use equity. So all of that changed over that out there today that may qualify? If it was under the actual ten-year period. rules that this was established on, I would say probably [1600] not likely because there will be other contributing factors What the program was intended to do is done. We to the fact that it has a water egress problem. made the decision that we would sunset it because that was the entire intention of the program to begin with. S. Simpson: Just getting back to the question. I fully We followed through on the intention with the excep- accept that if there are applications out there that weren't tion that it was certainly a lot larger than it was intended eligible under the intention of the program, presumably to be when it was first put together in 1999. those applications get rejected. Presumably that would have happened under the program. If people apply for S. Simpson: I appreciate that it was sunsetted. As the the money and they're not eligible because the damage minister says, significantly more money was lent out doesn't apply to what the program was intended for, with loans that were guaranteed, among other things, by then those applications get set aside. government for this program. What that tells us, more The minister said he presumed that there might not than anything, is that there was an underestimation of be any buildings out there and explained some of the just how big this problem was. history here. Am I, then, to assume that the decision to When the determination was made that this problem cancel this program was made without an assessment, was much, much larger than was originally anticipated, I without the ministry or the Homeowner Protection presume that the government would then have assessed Office having done any assessment of whether there are whether that ten years in fact made sense — as the min- units out there or reasonably expected to be units out ister says, 11 years; there was an extra year of time on there that would have been eligible and now will not be the program — or whether some additional time was able to apply? Was there no analysis done of that before required. the decision was made to cancel the program? I've asked the minister three times whether there was any research or analysis done to determine whether Hon. R. Coleman: We knew that the program had there is reason to believe, with evidence, there are build- run its course. We knew that the applications were ings or units out there that would have qualified for down. We knew that the ones that were qualifying were this program and are not going to be funded because down. But more importantly, Member, this program the program has ended. The minister has not answered was set up for a ten-year period. It was set up to meet a that question or been able to answer that question at this need because everyone knew that within five years you point, so I will assume for the moment that the answer is should know your water ingress or egress issues. no, there was no analysis done and that, as the minister A building which would have been in the last year says: "The ten years was up. We killed the program." of construction before the new warranty would have The question that I have is: did the minister or the been built in 1998 to 1999. So any water issues with that Homeowner Protection Office, in making the decision building relative to the construction should have been on killing the program, consult with organizations like known by 2004. We gave it another five years after that, the Condominium Home Owners Association of B.C.? which I think is actually prudent. That's what the whole Their executive director sits on the board of the HPO, I intent of the program was when it was designed in the believe — or did. first place. Was there consultation directly with that organization Then the other thing that changed, quite frankly, is to get some assessment from the people who are stake- that at the time the leaky-condo issue was there, one of holders in condos as to whether they had any informa- the biggest challenges and reasons that the reconstruc- tion that might inform whether there were in fact units tion loan program was put in place was because property or buildings out there that would still need support? values were lower than the value of the mortgages, so people were unable to actually finance their reconstruc- Hon. R. Coleman: I can tell the member that this was tion loan under traditional financing. The real estate a unanimous decision by the board of directors to do market has changed since that particular period of time this. They made this decision. The member mentioned and has gone up substantially, and the equity has grown who was on the board. They made a unanimous deci- into the units. sion to do this. 2506 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Our research, which would not have been a big, broad I appreciate that new buildings…. We know the work consultation…. I mean, we can't go to every single build- of the Barrett commission, which led to the establish- ing in B.C. and say, "What has your maintenance sched- ment of this program. Hopefully, the warranty programs ule been like? How have you been doing with cleaning that were subsequent to that…. The minister, hopefully, your gutters? Are you actually checking whether the is correct. We're not going to see, in buildings that were grout around your windows is strong?" — or whatever built post–that period, these kinds of problems. That the case may be. doesn't take away from the fact that these problems may The reality is that any building that had issues with still exist in some cases. regard to the leaky-condo issue should have known at The minister, though, in his answer, said that the deci- year 5, and they got five more years to identify it.I f they sion of the board of the Homeowner Protection Office didn't identify it, it's because they weren't doing their wasn't unanimous. Maybe the minister could clarify the maintenance. Or a strata corporation, for some reason, process for this decision. Was it a directive or strong decided that they were going to turn another eye to it advice from the minister to the board of the Homeowner and not get around to dealing with their reconstruc- Protection Office that this should occur, or was it the tion loan application, or not actually going and getting Homeowner Protection board of directors that came to the engineering reported because they preferred not the minister and said: "We should kill this program"? to admit the fact that they may have a difficulty. That's not the responsibility of the taxpayer. That's the proper Hon. R. Coleman: No, it was the board's decision ownership responsibility of the people who own the to do this. They did it without the minister being there. units. However, I did meet with the board and explained to Frankly, all this section does is sunset the program. them that we thought this program had run its course. The Homeowner Protection Office is still intact. It is That was through discussions with both the CEO and now in a management operation with B.C. Housing. the people with regard to the Homeowner Protection The board is still intact. We will look at the future of the Office, with the board and the people who were advising Homeowner Protection Office, but the services that it us on other issues in and around housing, that this was provided — which aren't subject to this section; just the something that needed to be looked at. loan program — are continuing. But this is done. They agreed with that discussion. They made their The program ran its course.I t wasn't this government own resolution, and the board made their decision that made the estimate of $250 million, hon. Member. It unanimously to do this. Quite frankly, I was supportive was the previous government. We agreed that we would of the decision. I also thought, when I'd had the discus- have a program that would work over that period of sion with the board, that it was the right thing to do, and time. We continued to do it for that particular issue that so did other officials within government. faced us in that particular envelope. If you look at it, it's a program that was supposed to Today the warranties are stronger. Today the con- be $250 million for ten years. I remember doing debates struction, things like rain screening, is stronger. We back in the '90s during the Barrett commission. Actually, know there was an era of construction. There were some one of the members was then the member for Port mistakes made early on in the program by the previous Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, I think it's called — what- government in allowing to go back way more years than ever the riding is now. They keep changing the names the actual construction flaws existed, as regards some of of ridings. the people who could come into the program. At that time we actually had conversations where we [1605] thought it might be bigger than $250 million. We also They were buildings that weren't built under a build- recognized at the time — all of us involved in this dis- ing code or under the situations that actually created cussion, both informally and formally — that this was this. They were buildings that were just getting older. probably a ten-year thing. Buildings would be reaching In a wet climate you're going to have some issues with the point within five years of knowing what their issues roofing, gutters, siding, trim and flashing and that sort were, and they should all be done within ten years. At of thing, which are ongoing maintenance. But the real- that point in time the program should sunset. ity is that it went the 11 years. It has run its course. We If this is anything, it's an example of some work being made the decision that it was the right time to do it. The done by one government, identifying an issue, identify- decision was made, and all this does is put the change in ing a timeline and the timeline working out, with the the law to implement the decision that's already done. exception of the dollar amount, to what the timeline should have been to actually sunset this particular pro- S. Simpson: I appreciate the minister's comments. gram. That's what this amendment does. That's what the program does, and this is the one oppor- tunity we get to have a discussion about this program S. Simpson: Just one last question on this, and then here in this place. I'll move on — hopefully, one last question. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2507

I just want to be clear. The minister, in a previous there's a $700 million liability out there, or some loan answer, said this decision was not unanimous. Then I liabilities that have to be taken care of. As those are believe he just said that it was unanimous — the deci- extinguished, then the levy would be reviewed as we sion of the board, in this recent answer. Was there unan- go through how the homeowner protection operation imity on the board to do this? I might have misheard the — and where it rests with government in the future — is minister. Just to get a clarification. managed, etc. Basically, the levy will continue to fund the recon- Hon. R. Coleman: I think that if you check Hansard…. struction program, including the payment of interest You misheard the first answer. I said it was unanimous subsidies. It's expected that the majority of loans will be in both situations when I described the decision of the retired by 2020 on a ten-year loan repayment estimate. board. S. Simpson: Well, maybe I'll just continue to get the Section 17 approved. couple of questions I have in relation to this done under [1610] 18, and then we'll be able to move through 18 and 19 pretty quickly. On section 18. The fee, the $750, continues to be collected.C ould the minister tell us: what was the value of those fees — the S. Simpson: Section 18. I'll use this. This is the discus- collection, say, for last year and what we know — and sion. As we know, part of this program — the renovation what's the projection for the dollars that the office will program, the reconstruction program — was financed collect this year? by a fee of, I believe, $750 a unit on new construction. Those are the dollars that were used to underwrite this Hon. R. Coleman: It's forecast that in 2009-10, the program. levy will bring in about $3.75 million. Could the minister confirm that that's where the dollars came from? And could the minister tell us S. Simpson: The minister spoke about the projection whether those fees will continue to be collected by the being that the loans…. I'm assuming that what we're Homeowner Protection Office? talking about here is the interest that the government is paying on the loans on behalf of the people who are Hon. R. Coleman: This is actually a housekeeping participating in the program, because we're paying the amendment. I'll just read the description for you: "This interest on this. That's where the $700 million comes amendment is meant to clarify that the assessment from, largely — or the $50 million or whatever the loan under the Homeowner Protection Act, section 26, is is. I'm sure the minister has the number there. I don't one of the fees that must be collected by the registrar. have it. But the cost of the interest charges on that $700 The assessment in the per-unit levy paid by residential million is what we're talking about — these fees being buildings for new construction of multi-unit buildings paid. in the coastal climate zone is where these are collected." Could the minister tell us: how much of that are we This is actually a housekeeping amendment, as it was actually paying in terms of interest? What's the out- always the intent of the Homeowner Protection Act standing interest or projected interest from now to 2020 to do that but that the registrar collect the assessment. that we're going to owe on this? Is the minister saying Basically, it really clarifies that the registrar must collect that the $750 fee will disappear after these loans have the assessment that is imposed. It was just, I guess, an old been retired? drafting error that needed to be clarified with regards to [1615] this particular section. Hon. R. Coleman: I don't want to go into a lengthy S. Simpson: Maybe the minister could give me dir- estimates debate here with regards to this section, but ection as to which of these two sections would be the I'm going to try and give the member the answer. If he appropriate place to have some discussion on the ques- wants more technical information, we're happy to pro- tion of the fees — either under 18 or 19. I'd be happy to vide it. I'll try and contextualize it. do it under either one. The minister can tell me which There's an active loan program. The program has one would be the best place to discuss it. given out loans of $700 million or so over a number of years. I just want to try this for the members opposite. If Hon. R. Coleman: I think you could do it under we could just have a moment, because this is technical in either. They're both housekeeping amendments.B oth of nature, and I want the member to be able to hear it. them are housekeeping amendments to the legislation. The active loan program is made up of 4,200 loans They are not germane to the operations of how things today worth $210 million, with an additional 38 co-op are today. The levy will continue to be collected, because projects representing another estimated total of $32 mil- 2508 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

lion in interest subsidies due to CMHC between April 1, major policy change that we discussed in the earlier 2010, and March 31, 2020. That's because we have a loan section. relationship on those, the ones with CMHC. [1620] The interest paid to financial institutions is $1.722 million forecast for 2009-10. CMHC is $3.411 forecast L. Krog: I know that the minister has received numer- for '09-10. Financial institutions — the present value of ous pieces of correspondence from across the province. the loan and of those in the long-term liability, I guess In particular, in my own constituency the folks at the you'd call it, on the financial institution side is $13.1 mil- Creekside development, the folks who are in the condo lion as of September 30. CMHC issued $22.1 million as tower at the corner of Vancouver Avenue and…. It will of September 30. come to me in a minute. Those people have faced enor- When our interest liability is extinguished, that's mous costs. when we would extinguish the loan. That could happen Many of them, like many condo owners in British quicker, depending on market. That's one thing we can't Columbia, are senior citizens, people on fixed income — control. In actual fact, if these sold, the loans would be people who, in the larger centres, certainly can't afford a paid out, or our interest liability would extinguish by single-family dwelling to the same extent that someone loan. in perhaps Dawson Creek or Prince George could. These This is actually a pretty technical financial piece of are people who are restricted, by income, to buying con- this thing. If the member wants, we could give him a dominiums. It's not always a first choice. summary of that, but we obviously weren't prepared to For others, it is very much a first choice in terms of go into that much detail today. accommodation. They are too elderly to care for yards. They can't afford yard upkeep, so they've moved into S. Simpson: Maybe a summary on that would be condominiums. good. I don't want to dwell on this. I'm just trying to As the minister is well aware, literally thousands and determine…. The Homeowner Protection Office is col- thousands of units across this province are affected by lecting $750 a unit. How much money is coming in? the leaky-condo syndrome, as it's called. It is very clear Where's the money going in terms of paying off those on the evidence that the buildings that have been dis- interest charges — interest that the government is pick- covered now to be leaky-condo units are certainly not ing up on behalf of people who are participants in the the only ones. Indeed, builders have suggested to me — program? and people who work for builders — that they believe I just want to figure out the basic math on how that there are significantly more in my own community that works. I'm happy to just have that in a summary from will be discovered. The penny will drop shortly for strata the minister. That would be fine. councils, as they will in strata councils across the prov- In terms of that, I think that exhausts my questions in ince, that they are in leaky-condo buildings. relation to 18 and 19. I think my colleague might have The costs of repair now are becoming even more questions on another section. extraordinary, taking into account the initial survey to determine there's an issue, the engineering cost, the Sections 18 and 19 approved. rehabilitation costs. It's not uncommon now to see some- thing in the order of $100,000 or $150,000 easily. In my On section 20. own community these may represent the costs of repair to a unit, which if in tip-top shape might be worth $250,000 L. Krog: I would call this the meat of these sections, or $300,000 in the market if it was certified by an engineer and I think the minister would agree with me. This is the not to be a leaky condo. In other words, literally half of provision that actually — how shall I say? — destroys the value of these units is swallowed up in repair costs. the program. Is that a fair comment? Now, for some of these people, particularly newer owners, if they have entered into a mortgage, as most Hon. R. Coleman: Yeah. Basically, this amendment people do when they make a first purchase, the cost gives effect to the government announcement that no of the repair added to the cost of the mortgage means new applications for financial assistance under the pro- there is absolutely no equity whatsoever. Indeed, there gram would be accepted after July 31, 2009, and ensures is what's referred to as negative equity — $50,000 or that applications received after July 31 are not eligible for $100,000 or more, quite commonly. financial assistance under the reconstruction program. If those people, those owners who are the victims…. This is the section that puts…. The first section was They are almost invariably innocent purchasers who may basically what was being cancelled. This actually fin- have bought from innocent vendors, for that matter — ishes it up. We discussed what the major policy change ignorant vendors, not in the pejorative sense, but vend- was probably in section 16 or…. I guess it was 17. But ors who thought they had a marketable product to sell. in actual fact, this is the section that gives power to the Those people will face bankruptcy. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2509

You can argue that the ultimate responsibility will fall A person buying a unit after 1999…. Both the legal on the banks, the institutions that will loan them the profession and the real estate profession had those moneys. Perhaps the Canadian banking system, being requirements put on them with regards to a sale of a unit as strong as it is, is in a better position to swallow the in British Columbia. So those things have taken place. loss. But in the meantime, those individual owners will Also, the difference in interest rates is about 9 or 10 literally lose everything. percent with regards to what it was back at the time For those individual owners, for instance…. The this was put together. Today interest rates are such that example I used and some of the buildings I used are they're substantially different. dead accurate. If you're looking at $150,000 in repairs This has run its course. The member may think that and your unit is worth $300,000 and you're living on there's…. I mean, the challenge with describing a build- a fixed income, without an interest-free loan, you will ing…. I'll tell the member this, because I actually did not be able to maintain ownership. So it will fall into these debates in '96, '97 and '98, in opposition with the foreclosure. As sure as the sun comes up in the morning, former government, when the whole issue of this came you will fall into foreclosure. up as to what were the issues in and around the mainten- The human tragedy that flows from this is enormous.I t ance of buildings. The issues of water ingress and egress affects thousands and thousands of British Columbians. within a building were much more substantial than just It creates incredible concern in the real estate industry. the construction. It restricts economic activity. It discourages people from It also went to maintenance. It also went to repair of purchasing, because they're concerned about being stuck certain things in a timely fashion. Other things with with this problem. It creates enormous uncertainty in regards to a building, including how you're planting the marketplace. around the edges of a building with regards to water The cost to government, I would suggest to the minis- ingress into other areas of the building, took place. ter, is minimal in terms of the economic impact across the This has done what it was set out to do.I t's done so in real estate industry in general and amongst homeowners a bit of a longer timetable than was set out by the previ- in particular. So my question to the minister is: what is the ous government — but has done so. We have completed actual cost potentially to government to maintain this pro- the program, in our opinion, in the time frame that it gram, based on the current numbers, for another year? was said it would be done. Because of all the different [1625] changes — interest rates, disclosures, how we do build- ing code and build buildings today and know the timing Hon. R. Coleman: Thanks for the member's of when a building should be identified — we feel that comments. more than enough time has been allowed for this par- It's not about the cost to government to maintain ticular issue to be taken care of. a program. In the service plan of the NDP, when this program was put in place, it was a ten-year program for L. Krog: I appreciate the minister's comments. I think $250 million. It's been over a ten-year program for $11 that, essentially, what he's saying is: "Everyone should million. The applications, as I told your colleague ear- know now. It's been acknowledged. From a practical lier, change dramatically as to those that had the issues. perspective, this should have run its course. The build- What some people classify as a leaky condo today has ings that are leaky should have been identified, and nothing to do with the construction of the building. there's no more necessity for the program." That is what Anything that should have been identified should have I draw from the minister's comments. been identified in the first five years of the ownership of The second thing I draw from the minister's com- the building. That would have meant the last buildings ments is that, essentially, you've got the right to sue built under the old warranty and water egress issues in everybody. It's very clear now that you can pursue this. B.C. were built in 1999. The building code was changed If something untoward happens now, if you discover subsequent to that — how things are constructed and you've got a leaky condo that wasn't disclosed, you're the warranty program changes subsequent to that. So going to sue the realtor. You're going to sue the strata from that point forward, buildings were built on a totally council. You're going to sue whoever. But you're going different thing. to take legal action. I think the member knows that the disclosure laws The minister well knows that one of the problems with regards to real estate were changed. The require- facing all British Columbians today — and the Attorney ment for three years of minutes to be made available General is very conscious of this, having discussed it from strata corporations when people were doing their yesterday in estimates with him — is the cost of litiga- disclosure on a sale and the disclosure that was required tion. It is not just beyond the reach of the poor and vul- with regards to every building in B.C. being disclosed, nerable in this province. It is beyond the reach of much whether it had any water issues subsequent to that of the middle class in British Columbia. Indeed, argu- through that number of years, also took place. ably, it's beyond the reach of many of the members of 2510 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

this assembly to pursue any significant litigation for any just the effect of the date for the end of the reconstruc- period of time. tion program, July 31, 2009. That's done. In essence, what you're really stuck with is an empty I get that the member may want to enter into more of remedy. The ability to sue someone in British Columbia a lengthy debate or estimates debate in around the dol- and the right to sue are two different things. The ability lars or what have you. I've already offered the member indicates you've got the money to do it. The right to sue opposite the numbers that he asked. I'm happy to pro- you may well have, but in essence, for many people it is vide the member opposite with the same information almost an empty remedy. when I send it to the member from Vancouver-Kingsway What it means is that with the elimination of this — is it? Kingsway, I think it is. Anyway, the critic for HST. program, if you discover you're a victim now, you are I'm happy to provide that to him. absolutely out of luck. I understand that the minister's But this section here gives force to what has already position on this — and the government's position — actually been passed in the previous section. Basically, is: "Look, the program was set up by my party when it is just that it's done, and that was the date that it was we were in power. It's done its job, and it's run its sunset. It was appropriate to do it. course." The member may wish to want to enter into debate [1630] about Homeowner Protection Office stuff. I could tell Well, that may well be a wonderful argument, but it's the member opposite that this announcement was made like discovering that with the H1N1, you needed two in July of 2009 and was not canvassed in detail during million vaccinations — that's what you thought initially three or four days of estimates debate. — and now you need four million. "The program was for two million, and we've met our goal. We've reached our L. Krog: Again, I appreciate the minister's comments standard, so the other two million — well, that's your on this and the criticism about whether this was raised problem." That's essentially what I draw from the minis- under section 17 or section 20. But there are thousands ter's comments: "We've established a program. It has run of British Columbians who are not going to be com- its course. If you haven't been able to get in under this forted by this minister's words, who are going to look at deadline of July 31, tough luck." a retirement that is now utterly gone for many of them, Now, I have to say that for those who got under the in which they will not be able to sustain ownership of deadline, they must feel especially comfortable and their home. It is no comfort whatsoever to hear from the lucky, but for those British Columbians who are still minister that the program has run its course. facing this problem — and there will be more, and there It's like announcing a housing program when you have are more — this is pretty minimal comfort to them. identified 10,000 homeless people in British Columbia So I come back to my point. The minister says that that will provide housing for 5,000 — when you know it's not a cost to government, arguably, but there is there's 10,000, the program's finished its course, and the clearly a cost to the people of British Columbia who problem's solved. It's like Nixon in Vietnam declaring have been victimized by shoddy construction. There victory and going home. are suggestions now that the building code was respon- I have to say that that provides no comfort whatsoever sible for this. It wasn't just shoddy construction; it was to my constituents. But the minister has given his answer. the building code. It was the way we designed things — He's given his answer on behalf of this government. They the whole gamut of possibilities and reasons that led to know there's a problem. They refuse to acknowledge it. this crisis. And it is still a crisis for thousands of British I'm not going to waste the time of this House anymore Columbians. continuing with this issue, but I want to tell the minister My question, again, to the minister is: can he tell this on behalf of my constituents who are still suffering from House what the actual cost to government is if this pro- this that they're not going to be happy with what he had gram were continued for another year or two? Does he to say in this House today. have any numbers? Does he have a paper in front of him? [1635] Does he have an assistant there who can give the House some idea what the actual cost to government would be Sections 20 and 21 approved. to continue with this program? On section 22. Hon. R. Coleman: The program has run its course. There's a $750 levy that's actually been there to pay for L. Krog: I'm delighted to see the Attorney General it. Now the levy will pay for the liability still outstand- assisting in the debate in this matter. I've spent so much ing over a number of years. All this section does is give time with him in the last few days. Always a pleasure, effect to the debate that the member wants to have now and I have no doubt he'll be as forthcoming in his that should have taken place in section 17. Section 17 answers today as he was yesterday during the course of was where the program was actually discussed. This is estimates. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2511

If the minister could just explain the effect of section 22. The second thing I'm reminded of is that on occa- I take it this merely relates to the definition and replaces sion the law does evolve to take account of changing that so that it expands it to include, how shall I say, the technologies and Internet luring. I'm not sure how rel- definitions that are necessary to carry out the intent of evant that is to vulnerable seniors, but one never knows. this group of sections under part 7, which will have the On occasion the law does evolve to take account of effect of putting people who work with vulnerable adults changing technologies, including that the regulatory in the same position as people who work with children. power will ensure the means exist to keep pace with that change. Hon. M. de Jong: That's correct. The overall focus of the following 20 sections — I think 22 through to 41 or Sections 41 and 42 approved. 42 — of the bill relate to giving effect to an initiative that is designed to extend the protection that presently exists On section 43. for children to vulnerable adults, and the definitions contained within section 2 are those which are required L. Krog: A simple question to the minister. I take it to give effect to that policy intention. — or I'm going to assume, and you can correct me if I'm wrong — there was some court case that determined Section 22 approved. these fees and charges weren't appropriate, and that's why we have this section in front of us. On section 23. Hon. M. de Jong: I know there is someone on the way L. Krog: Just for the purposes of clarification, this that I'm going to verify this with. I think that, as opposed substitutes the existing description of the purposes of to arising in the course of litigation, this was discovered the act. It simply expands it to include vulnerable adults, to be a gap in the law. I'm going to check on that because and that's the only significant change. Otherwise, the it goes to the heart of the member's question. statute previously simply referred to the physical and It is as I thought. There was no litigation. The over- sexual abuse of children. Is that correct? sight relates to the failure to create the regulation that should have been necessary to authorize the fee. It was Hon. M. de Jong: That is correct. The specific- pur discovered and is attempted to be cured through the pose is to prevent the physical, sexual and financial mechanism that we have here, but there has been no liti- abuse of vulnerable adults, and that is the extent of the gation pertaining to the point. alteration. L. Krog: I'm not expecting the minister to go to great Sections 23 to 40 inclusive approved. length if he doesn't have an answer to this question. Just out of pure curiosity: how much money are we talking On section 41. about that the treasury would be out if we didn't pass this section? L. Krog: This is the provision relating to the authoriz- ation of regulations amending the schedule of specified Hon. M. de Jong: I'm advised that something in the offences. My question is simply this: why is that section neighbourhood of $13 million over the years may have necessary? been collected by the Motor Vehicle Sales Authority. We have identified a fairly lengthy list of specified Arguably, it wouldn't be the Crown, necessarily, that is offences. I think it would be commonly acknowledged vulnerable here. But obviously, the collecting agency that those are the probably appropriate offences under would be. the Criminal Code. Why are we leaving it open? Why not satisfy ourselves with that schedule as opposed to Sections 43 to 45 inclusive approved. leaving it open for regulation for further additions — or, as I understand it, amending, which could mean that Title approved. you could literally, for instance, declare that breaking and entering wasn't to be a specified offence? Hon. M. de Jong: I move the committee rise, report [1640] the bill complete without amendment.

Hon. M. de Jong: Two reasons. One relates to the dis- Motion approved. tinct possibility that the sections within the Canadian Criminal Code may change or be amended, and there- The committee rose at 4:45 p.m. fore, contained within the act they wouldn't any longer be valid. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. 2512 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Report and Electricity — I expect a number of questions on Third Reading of Bills that. We have an incredible system here in British Columbia. Our heritage assets are something we should Bill 20 — miscellaneous statutes be extremely proud of. We have developed a system in Amendment act (No. 2), 2009 British Columbia that really is second to none in the world. Bill 20, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. I think we're blessed with a diversity of opportunity 2), 2009, reported complete without amendment, read a with our existing heritage assets. With the clean, renew- third time and passed. able electricity opportunities we have, whether it be wind, biomass, tidal, solar — gosh, there are so many Hon. M. de Jong: I call Committee of Supply, the esti- opportunities we have — run of the river or large hydro, mates of the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum we're fortunate. Many jurisdictions around the globe Resources. have one or two of those. In British Columbia we have a [1650] diversity that is really the envy of the world. We have a number of Crowns under the ministry that Committee of Supply fall under the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, being B.C. Hydro, B.C. Transmission ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ENERGY, Corporation, the Columbia Power Corporation, the MINES AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES Oil and Gas Commission. All of these do an amazing job for British Columbians right across this province. I The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); C. do expect some questions as we move through the esti- Trevena in the chair. mates on a number of those fronts. Before we get into the questions, I do want to just The committee met at 4:51 p.m. say a huge thank-you to our staff. I do have staff with us today. I do want to introduce on my right, Mr. Greg On Vote 24: ministry operations, $67,793,000. Reimer, who is my deputy minister. Also joining us as we move in, I know, with the Minister of State for Hon. B. Lekstrom: I am looking forward to the ques- Mining, we have John Cavanagh, who is the ADM for tions that will be put forward under these estimates. We Mining. As well, we have Brian Hansen, who is our do a great deal of work within the Ministry of Energy, executive financial officer. We have Jody Shimkus, who Mines and Petroleum Resources, and I know my critic is our ADM for marketing, aboriginal and community as well as other members will be asking questions on a relations division. wide array of issues. Not only those employees that we have and the staff I do want to take just a brief moment to reflect on what that we have here today but all of the staff in the Ministry our ministry does for the province of British Columbia. of Energy and Mines…. I'm sure the members across It deals with the oil and gas industry, an industry that would join me in giving a heartfelt thank-you to all of is doing very well in the province of British Columbia them for the work that they do on our behalf each and today. Most recently, we had a stimulus package that we every day to make this province what it is and to make put forward a number of months ago, and last month we this ministry what it is, which I believe is the greatest saw an incredible land sale of $372 million brought into ministry in all of government — no slight to my col- the revenue of the province. leagues. You know, no slight intended, but it's an amaz- We have established an atmosphere within British ing ministry. It does amazing things. It is really at the Columbia under the oil and gas industry that really forefront of our economic ability to deliver on health allows us to be competitive with jurisdictions not just in care and education. Canada but really North America and around the world. [1655] It is helping drive our economic well-being. At the same I do want to say thank you, and I know that the time that we do this, we ensure that we have the highest member for Juan de Fuca, my critic, will join me in environmental standards. As we extract our resources, agreeing that we have some of the greatest staff, I think, this is about finding the proper balance to ensure those in British Columbia delivering and working on behalf of resources work for us. We maintain the environment in the Ministry of Energy and Mines. which you and I and our families and our children live At this time I do want to pass it on to the Minister of in, and I'm very proud of the work that we do. State for Mining. I know there are a number of ques- Mining is another area that our ministry looks after.I tions, and then we will reconvene. know my colleague the Minister of State for Mining will I look forward to the estimates process. It is some- be dealing with that, so I won't go in depth on that, other thing that we can all learn from each and every day. The than to say that we're doing very well on that front. British Columbians that are watching, I think, are going Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2513

to be intrigued with the questions and answers that are happened in the past — direct sharing of the revenues shared in this chamber. and the riches that we as people in British Columbia With that, I will take my seat. receive when mining industry actually goes out and mines the minerals that belong to all of the people of Hon. R. Hawes: Just to carry on from the minister's British Columbia. We're making sure that first nations, statement, I am the Minister of State for Mining, and rightly, get a proper share of those resources. it's a great opportunity to answer the questions that are The last thingI want to touch on is some of the innov- going to be posed today. This is my first opportunity ative things that we have done in British Columbia, such to participate in estimates as the Minister of State for as Geoscience B.C., which is out there exploring for Mining, so I do look forward to the questions. new mineralization through all kinds of very modern What I do want to say, though, is how fortunate we techniques like magnetic and gravity imaging. That's are in British Columbia. We are extremely lucky to live producing great results for British Columbia, and in the in a province that's so rich with natural resources — exploration business we are leaders in Canada. with minerals that are wanted all over the world, with [1700] coal deposits that are the envy of most of the world and With that, I do look forward to the questions that are with the talented people that explore and produce those going to come. I'm sure that all of us here share in the materials through mining. knowledge and in the satisfaction that mining in British We have a staff that's so dedicated, from the deputy Columbia is not just an industry that's here to stay, but minister through to the assistant deputy ministers, the it's so necessary to provide the income that all of us want senior management, all our staff in Victoria and through to see the province receive to fuel our health and educa- to the regional offices throughout British Columbia. tion sectors. We have people that are dedicated to making sure that With that, I look forward to the questions from some people are safe, that the mining activities in this prov- of the members opposite. ince are done to the highest environmental standards and that we actually produce revenue that helps drive J. Horgan: It's a pleasure for me, as the official oppos- what all of us want to see happen in this province, and ition's Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources critic, to that's better education, better health care. once again…. I think this is my third or fourth go as This is where dollars come from: the extraction of critic, and I couldn't let that pass by, noting that this is resources and putting families to work in, actually, the the fourth Minister of State for Mining in that period highest-paid heavy industry in British Columbia, which of time. I think today has an average salary of $112,000 a year for Although longevity doesn't appear to be the strong the average person working in the mining industry. suit in the position, I'm confident the current resident I do want to say that in 2008 we established the of the office will be attentive to the questions that my Minister's Council on Mineral Exploration and Mining. colleagues and I have over the next number of hours and This council is about building relationships between that he will do his level best to give us straight answers government, first nations and the industry to ensure in a timely fashion. that mining and the mineral sector have every oppor- I want to comment briefly, before we get into the sub- tunity to grow responsibly. stance of the estimates, on some of the comments by the To ensure that B.C.'s mining sector remains highly Minister of Energy, who I have, a number of times in visible and competitive, the government has taken this place, called my friend. I continue to do that, even steps to enhance tax regimes, such as extending the B.C. though we are in an adversarial relationship here as min- mining flow-through share tax credit to the end of 2010, ister and critic. I am confident and hopeful, as is he, that and we've actively promoted B.C. exploration and mine we can set a new standard for debate on these issues. development investment opportunities on the inter- We have profound disagreements on policy questions, national stage, particularly building on our connections and we will canvass those, whether it be the direction with Asia. of this government to overlook the decisions by the I do also want to say that the implementation of the Utilities Commission in terms of its independent role HST is going to be of great benefit to the mining indus- to monitor and regulate B.C. Hydro, Columbia Power try and is going to actually help create new jobs in that and the B.C. Transmission Corporation…. We have industry. significant differences. The opportunity for the public I want to also say that we are actively seeking to to understand those differences is best done by a civil increase the participation of first nations peoples in exchange on the substance of the issues. mineral exploration and in the mining industry. The I know I'll do my level best, with the guidance of the government has authorized provincial negotiators, as Chair and my colleagues on both sides, to try and meet they speak to first nations, to include revenue-sharing a standard that the minister and I both would like to with first nations on new mining projects. That has not set for this debate and, potentially, subsequent debates. 2514 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

We'll see how it goes is how I think we're going to pro- when we get to the broader ministry, could outline what ceed from here. the impact of the MSP premium increase has been in As I say, there are profound differences on policy ques- terms of salaries and compensation for staff right across tions, on approach. We need to get those on the record, the piece. and that is the process that we're about to embark on. I'll then go to ask the minister…. The mining and There are a few issues around electricity that are para- minerals division, in February '09, for the '09-10 budget mount for me personally and for the opposition. We will tabled before the election, had a budget of $11.905 mil- be laying those out tomorrow. lion. In the September budget it was reduced to $4.676 I had a discussion with the minister and his staff, who million. Can the minister outline for me why the signifi- — I also want to echo the sentiments of the minister — I cant change? find to be very capable and articulate and committed to ensuring that the energy component of our economy is Hon. R. Hawes: I'm not sure that I heard the num- as vibrant as it can be. bers that the member quoted. It sounded to me like Again, we quibble around the edges, but I've said in he said we'd gone from $14 million to $4 million. The the past — and it won't be a surprise to members here figure for 2008-09 was $14.037 million. For 2009-10 it's — that were it not for the work that's being done in the $12.667 million. That reduction is attributable to things energy sector, whether it be oil and gas…. like travel reductions and administrative savings and In the mining sector, in terms of mineral exploration, through contract savings. we haven't had a lot of mine development, and the min- ister, I think, would be the first to admit that. Perhaps J. Horgan: I think the minister just gave me the '08-09 not. The two or three or four secretaries back seemed number juxtaposed to the '09-10 number, as revised in to think that we were doing great guns, but there's no September of this year. Can the minister advise if there significant evidence that we're putting jobs into active was a difference between the February '09-10 tabled mines. There are a number of good reasons for that. budget and the current budget? We'll debate those over the coming hours. [1710] The challenges before British Columbians are pretty stark. The minister touched upon them. As we look at Hon. R. Hawes: Again, the actual number I have for energy and the consumption of raw materials and com- 2008-09 was $14.037 million, and we agree on that. The modities in B.C…. number that I have in front of me now is $12.544 million Our economy is in transition. We're shifting away in the '09-10 updated estimates. from our forest base and looking to minerals, metals and energy through electricity, natural gas and coal. J. Horgan: I'm asking the minister if there's a dif- These are big-ticket items. They're not insignificant. ferential between the budget tabled in February and I have a number of colleagues on this side who want the budget tabled in September. And if so, what is that to engage in the debate, so without too much prophesiz- number? ing, I think I'll just dive in. I'll ask my first question to the current Minister of State for Mining. That would be: Hon. R. Hawes: What we have for the member are the can he outline for me how he plans to manage the MSP numbers that have been provided. We do have numbers, increases that were announced in the budget in terms of the restated numbers, for the entire ministry. We'll have meeting the targets outlined in the budget estimates? to provide the broken-down numbers for you tomorrow [1705] morning.

Hon. R. Hawes: That's an interesting question, but J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that. I thought it the management of MSP actually falls within the scope would have been easy to put a hand to…. I don't have of the entire ministry. It's not segregated just to Mining. my blue book with me. I just asked for it, so that might It's a budget that's for the whole ministry. help us move along. I would point out to the member that we have cur- I will then move to order-in-council appointments tailed a number of expenses right across the ministry, within the minister's office and within the divisions that including things like being prudent and restricting he's responsible for. Could he give me a figure for this travel, etc. Through numerous cost-cutting measures, fiscal year and then also tell me if it's an increase or a I know that the ministry is going to be able to absorb decrease from last year? those costs, but it will be across the whole ministry and not restricted just to the Mining section of the ministry. Hon. R. Hawes: There have been no OICs this year if you're talking about directly in the minister's office. I J. Horgan: Well, perhaps when we get to the minis- have two support staff, which is the same as there were ter's component…. I'll just flag it for the deputy. If he, last year. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2515

J. Horgan: So there's no executive assistant, no minis- our regional offices, for example, I think it's all hybrid terial assistant — just two administrative support staff? vehicles. There are bicycles available for when it's a suit- able thing. Hon. R. Hawes: There's a ministerial assistant and an There are bicycles that some of the staff would util- administrative clerk. ize where it is applicable. There are a number of steps that are being taken, but it is a broad initiative across the J. Horgan: Were there salary increases from last year whole ministry and administered through a green team. to this year for those two individuals? [1720]

Hon. R. Hawes: The answer to that would be no. J. Horgan: Perhaps, then, this will be one that the min- ister would want to think about overnight, because this J. Horgan: With the divisions and staff within the min- is of great importance. One of the issues…. Certainly, istry that the minister of state is responsible for, what's you want to know where you're starting from and how the FTE number this year as opposed to last year? we determined what the footprint of the ministry was, [1715] when that footprint was determined and what steps have been taken in each of the fiscal years since the commit- Hon. R. Hawes: There were previously, directly in the ment was made to realize that neutrality by the date pre- mining component, 118 staff members. There has been scribed by whatever statement it was the Premier made some reallocation of staff and some movement of staff on the subject. that are actually shared right across the ministry, and Are there significant or noteworthy climate change the number today is 107. initiatives underway within the Minister of State for Mining's orbit? J. Horgan: Does the minister of state have an adver- tising budget — STOB 68 or STOB 67 — and if so, how Hon. R. Hawes: Within the ministry there is a task much? force, a ministry-industry task force, that's working closely with industry to try to decrease the carbon foot- Hon. R. Hawes: No. print of mining throughout British Columbia.

J. Horgan: My colleague from Maple Ridge–Pitt J. Horgan: Could the minister table the membership Meadows will be touching upon aggregate and its role in of that task force or direct me to where I can find it? the economy and within the ministry. I do know that when gravel extraction applications Hon. R. Hawes: The task force is comprised of the are about to proceed, there are advertisements in the Mining Association of British Columbia. There are newspapers. They make reference to ministry employ- representatives from both large and small companies in ees. Who pays for that? Does the proponent pay for that, the mining sector. There are some ministry appointees. or does that come out of another budget? Also, the climate action secretariat has membership.

Hon. R. Hawes: When there is that type of advertis- J. Horgan: Would those names be made available ing, the proponent actually pays for the advertising. through this process, or can the minister direct me where I can find a comprehensive list without too much J. Horgan: The government has spoken about…. cutting and pasting? Again, one of the challenges…. Through you, hon.C hair, to both ministers and to the staff: some of the issues that Hon. R. Hawes: We don't have that list here, but we I wanted to canvass in terms of the scope of the minis- can provide it to the member at a subsequent date. ter's activities will cross over and perhaps be the respon- sibility of the senior minister. Perhaps we can canvass J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that commitment. these questions, and if I'm asking the wrong horse, we I want to now, if I may…. The minister, in his opening can go at it again tomorrow. remarks, made reference to the harmonized sales tax. I wanted to know what the Minister of State for Mining I'm wondering if the minister can advise what analysis is doing to meet the commitment of carbon neutrality the ministry did in advance of the announcement of the by next year within the ministry in its activities. proposal to harmonize the GST and the PST.

Hon. R. Hawes: Across the ministry there is a green Hon. R. Hawes: Actually, questions relating to the team that does put together programs for carbon neu- HST should rightly be placed to the Minister of Finance, trality that run across the whole ministry. Specifically who I'm sure would be happy to provide you with those within Mining, some of the examples I know…. Within answers. 2516 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

J. Horgan: Well, I pose the question to the minister competitive across Canada and in the global market- because he said as much in his opening remarks — that place in which we all live. he, as the Minister of State for Mining, felt strongly that Other than giving you those general statements, I the HST would be a significant boost to the mining would really suggest, if you have some specific questions sector. I'm assuming that his staff had done some analy- around HST, that they're better addressed directly to the sis on that to give him the confidence to make that state- Minister of Finance, who I know will be happy to answer ment. On what basis did he make that statement? them for you. [1725] J. Horgan: Well, I don't doubt the rhetoric from the Hon. R. Hawes: Actually, as we look at this, it's infor- business community. I mean, if I was going to get a $2 mation that we receive from the mining industry itself. billion tax break, I'd say it was a good idea too. The mining industry, through the Pricewaterhouse My question is not about the veracity of the work being annual survey, has estimated the savings to them to be done by external sources. My question is specifically to approximately $19 million per annum. the minister and the staff that report to him. Surely to goodness, the minister responsible for mining must be J. Horgan: I'm delighted that the sector has the from Missouri. So wouldn't you have said to your staff: resources to hire consultants to provide data for them "Show me. Demonstrate to me that public dollars being to support their arguments, but I'm curious as to why transferred to the private sector will somehow be a net the ministry wouldn't have done some due diligence on benefit to the province"? that data. Can the minister confirm — yes or no…? Did Has no one in the ministry given you any material to ministry staff do an assessment, at a minimum, of the confirm that position which at this point, based on what Pricewaterhouse work? What's their opinion, and what you've said, is rhetorical? did they provide to him? Hon. R. Hawes: I'm absolutely confident that the Hon. R. Hawes: Again, these questions about HST, Minister of Finance has done an analysis. I know the other than the general statement that I made and what figures I've given, and I think they're pretty much out I've just answered to you, I think, should better be there publicly, that across the energy sector, including addressed directly to the Minister of Finance, who I mining, the saving is about $80 million. It's $19 million know would be happy to answer those questions. estimated by the industry. [1730] J. Horgan: In my opening remarks I spoke of my I know that there was considerable work done by the confidence in the staff at the minister's disposal — both staff of the Minister of Finance, but that overall work ministers. Again, I have to believe, based on my time in would have been done within the Ministry of Finance. government and my understanding of how the processes So I would suggest that those questions are best aimed work, that there would be some at least water cooler at the Minister of Finance. chatter about what is good or bad for the industry. You have people that work on these things all the time. J. Horgan: I'm very certain that my colleague from You have policy staff at your disposal. Did no one in the Surrey-Whalley will canvass this issue thoroughly with ministry provide a note to the minister confirming or the Minister of Finance. But my concern is that the min- supporting or disproving the data that the ministry pro- ister of the Crown for mining has stood in this place and vided to support their position that they are going to get advised all who are listening and all those who will read a $1.9 billion tax break? the material later on, with great certainty, that the net benefit to the province will be significant. [L. Reid in the chair.] I'm just asking to the minister: prove it. Show me what analysis has been done by ministry staff — whether Hon. R. Hawes: I know we have a difference of opinion it be in concert with Treasury Board staff, with Ministry on the value of the HST to building a better tomorrow in of Finance staff, with the man on the moon. Show me our economy in British Columbia, but let me just say this how it is that transferring $1.9 billion in tax savings to then. I know that the HST…. If you listen to pretty much the private sector is going to be a benefit to the prov- anyone across the business sector in British Columbia, if ince, and particularly to the mining industry. That's the you listen to the leading economists in the country, they responsibility of the minister. tell you that the HST is the best and biggest thing that we can do to spur our economy on at this time. Hon. R. Hawes: First and foremost, I guess I would The estimates we have all received, and you've read say that I think everyone knows that for anyone to invest them many times, are closing in on $2 billion that would in any sector, you first have to have confidence. We've be the benefit to business, which would make them more heard from the industry that this is going to help them. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2517

They're convinced it's going to help them, and it's giving J. Horgan: I'll just leave it at this, then, with the min- them more confidence. They have stated that publicly. ister. If the minister's intent is to be an apologist and a The other thing is that through the Pricewaterhouse front man and an advocate for the position of the indus- study, they claim there is a $19 million savings annu- try, that's great. But when you're a member of the execu- ally to the industry. Those are,I think, real numbers. We tive council and a member of cabinet, your obligation is can debate back and forth whether they're real, but I just not just to the industry, and it's not just to the title on the don't see the value in that. The industry itself is saying door. It's to the people of British Columbia. that this is inspiring confidence, that they will be look- [1735] ing to make some investments and that this is going to It's my view that the minister of mines should not help them make those investment decisions. Frankly, I'm just take at face value the presentations which I have prepared to accept them at their word, and that benefits heard with him, side by side, as members of the Finance British Columbia. Committee — not take it at its word — when he has very capable staff who would have been, had they been asked, J. Horgan: Well, my neighbours have said to me cat- delighted to do an analysis. egorically, with great confidence, that a reduction in the Simple question: was there any analysis done on the sales tax would be a net benefit to their family income, impact of the HST prior to its announcement by staff and I take them at their word. I've not done any analy- under his watch? sis on that, but I'm fairly confident that the Minister of Finance would not give a blanket tax break to my neigh- Hon. R. Hawes: We can go around and around on bours based on their good word. this, but the bottom line is that this government has a So my question once again…. I don't want to go belief that cutting taxes and now the reorganization of around and around the mulberry bush here, but I'm taxation to an add-on tax actually is going to be of huge talking to the minister responsible for mining who has benefit to our economy. We take the words that the lead- a responsibility not just to encourage and enhance the ing economists in this country have said. There's been sector but also to challenge them on their assumptions a huge amount of study, whether it be through econo- — not to take them at face value. mists in Ontario, you name it — actually, around the I've met with the Mining Association. I've sat in com- world. The world is moving to this, Member. mittees with the minister where presentations have been So I would strongly suggest that…. I know that we have made with respect to the HST. I've heard the rhetoric. a very big difference of opinion on whether the HST is I've seen the data from industry. My concern is that I beneficial. However, if you have specific questions, I'd haven't seen any data from government, and govern- still recommend…. I have answered your questions. You ment is the one that's giving the money away. should refer the specific ones to the Minister of Finance. So again, has anyone under the minister's responsibil- ity worked with the Ministry of Finance to demonstrate J. Horgan: Again, last shot. While the minister has unequivocally that there's a net benefit to the people of been in his chair at the executive council, have any staff British Columbia from the HST, transferring $1.9 bil- on his watch provided any information to him to demon- lion in tax revenues from consumers to the corporate strate that the statements by the Mining Association and sector? others interested in getting a tax break in this sector…. Has anyone in his ministry provided data to him since Hon. R. Hawes: I hope the member can cast his mind he was sworn in? Anyone? back to 2001 when we gave a 25 percent tax increase actually to your neighbour. Our belief at that time was Hon. R. Hawes: The information that has been pro- that this was going to…. vided, and I'll repeat this again, was that there is — com- bined, across the whole ministry — about $80 million Interjections. worth of tax savings to the overall industry, $19 million of which is attributable to mining. That's the informa- Hon. R. Hawes: A tax cut of 25 percent in 2001, fol- tion that I have been given. lowed by numerous tax cuts, all of which we believed Any other questions you have about it, perhaps through would spur the economy. Over time I truly believe — the Minister of Finance…. I know that the Ministry of and I know the Finance Minister is convinced — that Finance has done some analysis, and I think some of those tax cuts have spurred the economy. There's no those numbers are from the Ministry of Finance. reason to believe that this change in taxation to the HST, which is actually something that's going around the J. Horgan: We're making a bit of progress. We've got world, isn't going to do exactly the same thing. I know an $80 million number, a $19 million number and an that the Finance Minister would be pleased to answer all assertion from the minister that some of that data would of your questions on this. have come from within the ministry. So I'm asking: will 2518 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

the minister table the data that's been provided by min- Geoscience has been an enormous success, and I'm istry staff, employees of the province ofB ritish Columbia, really pleased that the members opposite see the same committed to protecting and preserving the integrity of thing we do — that this is a great initiative. It's one that the Crown and its interests that are materially affected has been heartily supported. by this tax change? I will say, though — and I think the member knows Will he table that information — not produced this from the time that he spent in government — that by Pricewaterhouse, not produced by the Mining when funding announcements are going to be made, Association — produced by ministry staff? A briefing they're generally made by the Finance Minister as part note or something — anything, a fig leaf — that dem- of a budget. Today Geoscience B.C. has funding in its onstrates that there's been due diligence done within the coffers until 2011-2012. We're not about to be making ministry to justify this tax shift. some announcements today.

Hon. R. Hawes: The questions are getting quite J. Horgan: That's a good answer, Minister. Well done. repetitive. I have answered them. I would ask if we could I just want to reinforce that Geoscience B.C. has been move on. I really don't intend to answer the same ques- very, very successful in providing opportunities for min- tion with the same answer any further. eral exploration. That's the thin edge of the wedge.O nce you find what you need, the challenge then is: how do J. Horgan: In the interests of time, I'll just press on. I'd you get it out of the ground? like to now talk about Geoscience B.C. I know all sides I'd like to move to that component. I said in my open- of the House support the work. ing remarks — and I'd be delighted to be corrected — I see the minister of mines two or three ministers that this is the opportunity I give the minister to stand ago supporting the initiative. I'm wondering if the cur- up and say that all of these projects are in stream. Well, I rent minister can tell me if there's been an increase in say that none of them are underway. What has the min- the budget for Geoscience B.C., since the minister who ister in mind for the coming fiscal year to try and get a was clapping was the minister, and the minister who is mine operating in British Columbia? answering was the minister. [1745] [1740] Hon. R. Hawes: I just want to go back one little piece Hon. R. Hawes: Since 2005 Geoscience has received first as we talk about Geoscience. I think we're remiss $36.7 million. There has been no budget allocation this if we don't talk about the geological survey of British year, but I think their funding does continue, or they Columbia as well, which is an extremely valuable com- have funding to last until 2011. ponent to the exploration side. I just want to pay a little bit of homage to Dave Lefebure and his group at the J. Horgan: The minister's right. The information that geological survey because they do absolutely great work, I have is that it begins winding down 2010-2011 and too, and they work hand in glove with Geoscience B.C. wrapping up March 2012. In terms of what's coming, New Afton, just outside I'm wondering, again thinking of the enthusiasm from Kamloops, is 40 percent complete. They're now going the member for Kamloops–South Thompson and others underground. I had the pleasure of going through that about the work…. I know my colleague from Cariboo mine earlier this summer — my first experience going North and my colleague from Stikine have benefited in underground, a place that I personally wouldn't want to their communities from the good work at Geoscience work. But I really give kudos to those men and women B.C. What is the plan from the minister and the ministry that do work underground. It takes a special type of beyond the current funding targets? Is there any plan to person, and I was absolutely blown away by the pride revive this very successful program with new funding in that they take in what they're able to do underground. the next budget? I know that's out of order. The Copper Mountain, the old Similco mine in Princeton, has now been permitted to put the footings Hon. R. Hawes: Before I get into the funding part of in for their mill. I also had the pleasure of attending a it, I just want to make sure that people are aware that signing ceremony in their offices in Vancouver with a Geoscience has completed, first, UEQ ST-North, which Japanese partner who has invested considerable money was a survey of the northern part of this province. in getting that particular mine reopened. Immediately they tabled all of the results that they had. So those are two that are very, very close, and I believe There was a fairly substantive increase in staking and we will be seeing them in production within the next interest in exploration in the northern area. They're just year or so. finishing now andI think are very quickly going to table There are at the present 28 mining projects that are all of the rest for QUEST-South, which we expect will in the permitting process. They're going through the have the same kind of result. environmental assessment certification and operational Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2519

permitting. In addition, there are six other projects that Hon. R. Hawes: In the certification process, two of have received their permits and are yet to commence three adjudicators are just now going through the pro- production. So this puts us in a very, very strong pos- cess of being appointed. ition to see a number of new mines and very, very soon. J. Horgan: So two of three. What news of the third? J. Horgan: I, too, like the minister, had a trip down the Quinsam mine just outside Campbell River. It scared the Hon. R. Hawes: We are in the recruitment process daylights out of me when it started to get black, but after for the third. about five minutes it was fine.L ike you, you couldn't pay me enough to do the good, hard work that you do in J. Horgan: Well, perhaps the minister could explain an underground mine. The people that do that are def- to me and to members in the House the function of the initely a rare breed. They provide for their families by board of examiners when it comes to certifying assayers doing work that I don't think too many people in this and what the role and function of that board of exam- place would do, so I commend them as well. iners is. I want to take the opportunity to also speak just briefly about the geological survey — again extraordinary work. Hon. R. Hawes: We're just bringing in a staff member When I was in the ministry many years ago, the excite- who has some real expertise in this area. It happens to be ment — and staff are nodding their heads — within that someone from the geological survey, so I'm sure you'll section of the ministry about what they do was really be very pleased. uplifting. It's something that when we talk about public [1755] servants, quite often we're thinking about paper moving around and information being provided. But this is J. Horgan: Well, in the interest of time, while we're under-the-fingernail stuff that really gets people going waiting for a new staff member to come in, perhaps I'll in that branch, and it's exciting. just ask one more quick question before I give the floor I want to ask the minister: what was the budget lift for to my colleague from Stikine for a couple of questions. this very important division this year? It would be going back to Geoscience B.C. just for a [1750] moment. Again, we've heard from Mineral Exploration B.C., Hon. R. Hawes: I now have the restated number for from the Mining Association and many, many others February, which was $11.905 million. Overall, the budget that stable funding at Geoscience B.C. would be as reductions in the ministry this year were shared across the significant a symbol and message to the sector as the ministry, including geological survey, which did take a alleged benefits from the HST. Can the minister once budget reduction, along with many other parts of the min- again confirm that his ministry and the government will istry. I don't have a complete breakdown here right now of continue to support Geoscience B.C. into the future? what their total budget is for this year. But if the member needs it, I can provide it for you likely tomorrow. Hon. R. Hawes: If it were up to me to write the budget, I would always want to support Geoscience. But J. Horgan: That is disappointing that there's been as you know, with your time in government, Member…. a budget reduction in that section after we both sung He knows, too, that the Finance Minister actually will the praises of the good work they do. One would think prepare a budget and will make the suitable announce- there would be a budget lift to meet the new challenges ments at the appropriate time. I'm quite satisfied to wait that we've talked about or at least heard about in throne for him to make those decisions. As I think we both speech after throne speech, from minister after minister know, he has made some extremely wise decisions over in this sector — that there would be a budget lift for the the past few years, and I expect he will continue to do good and exciting work done there. so. I'll thank the minister for giving me last year's figure, the February figure, and the restated figure in September D. Donaldson: Thank you for the opening comments for that sector. That would be terrific if he could provide from the minister and minister of state. There are parts that tomorrow. of the opening statements that I can concur with and There's been an issue raised with me. It was raised others that we disagree on, and I'll get to some of those. with the Finance Committee. The minister might well My first question for the minister of state is with have read some of the briefs. It's from the B.C. Assayers regards to mining flow-through shares. We've had dis- Certification council, which is looking for certification cussions with the Association for Mineral Exploration for assayers. I'm wondering if the minister has had any B.C. and with the Mining Association of B.C. about those discussion or correspondence about the assayer certifi- flow-through shares. I note that they were extended to cation program and what he plans to do about it. the end of 2010. 2520 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

The question I have is: what would be the value in tax Hon. R. Hawes: Every mine is required to have a mine deductions that the mining flow-through shares would closure plan. Those are renewed and reviewed every five have represented in this past year, in this budget, and years. Staff do an extensive amount of review to make then in the years leading up to 2010? sure that they are reasonable and workable. There are mine closure plans for these mines. Through Hon. R. Hawes: Madam Chair, if you could just our staff and the chief mines inspector,I have every con- indulge us for a moment, because the answer that we fidence that the Wet'suwet'en will be satisfied with the were getting a new staff member in to provide or to help ultimate closure of some of these mines. us with actually…. He's now going to give the answer directly to the former questioner from…. D. Donaldson: The mine closure plans are reviewed Yeah, okay. So what we're going to do is get another every five years from staff within your ministry. How staff member back in to assist with this.I f you'll indulge many staff under this budget that we're talking about us for one minute, then we'll have your answers for you. here are responsible for that and actually do the work in This is a tax-related question, and as such, the Minister the area I'm talking about? of Finance really is the person that these sorts of ques- tions should be addressed to — the value of the tax cut Hon. R. Hawes: In each region there are about 25 staff to investors. He, I'm sure, would be pleased to provide members that can review these plans. In addition, there you with that information. are six specialists. So there are 30 to 31 staff members that would review these mine closure plans. D. Donaldson: I see that it's within the minister's purview that developing and reviewing regulations and D. Donaldson: Is that staffing level fully fulfilled at policies as they relate to promotion of mining is part this point in the region that we're talking about? of the responsibility. That's why I posed the question around mining flow-through shares, because they're Hon. R. Hawes: There are currently two vacancies out apparently a very worthwhile tool. of 30. [1800] I also wanted to point out that in the deliberations D. Donaldson: Thank you for that. Is there an of the Finance Committee, we had presentations from appeal process? As we know, technology improves. the Association for Mineral Exploration B.C. and from The permits were approved 15 years ago or 20 in some the Mining Association of B.C. We came to the unani- cases. The reclamation plan that was put in place or the mous conclusion that they were a good tool and should mine closure plan might not have been as up to date be extended beyond 2010. They made some good argu- as possible. ments around permanency related to that. [1805] My question was specifically related to the value of So as they're reviewed every five years….I s it after the that tax deduction. I will take that up with the Minister mine closes that it continues to be reviewed every five of Finance, if you're unable to answer that question. years? Is there an ability or a component where there's a I'll move on to another area under this minister's public review of those five-year reviews? responsibility. That would be around reclamation and monitoring of minesites that are no longer in produc- Hon. R. Hawes: There is a closure plan when the mine tion or will soon not be in production. I'm wondering first opens and before it becomes operational. Then it's about specifically…. Kemess, Huckleberry and in the reviewed every five years through the entire operation of past Equity mine, in and close to my area, are soon going the mine for its life. In terms of public input, actually, it's to be out of production, and one is already. reviewed by specialists. That is a fairly technical review, There have been concerns expressed to me, especially and once the mine closes there is a continual monitor- from Wet'suwet'en First Nation whose traditional terri- ing process. tory two of those mines are on, around the reclamation and monitoring work. It's troublesome to me that I see D. Donaldson: Thank you for those answers. I have there's actually a decrease in your sector of the overall one more in this area. After the mine closes, is it then the budget in this ministry. responsibility of your ministry staff to monitor whether Considering it's such a revenue generator for the the mitigation measures are being fulfilled and efficient province and such an important part of the future of and effective? the province, I was hoping to see that reflected in an increase in the budget for your department. Hon. R. Hawes: Once the mine closes, the ongoing Specifically, what kind of reclamation and monitoring monitoring is a cross-ministry initiative. There are some for those minesites will be undertaken by your ministry staff from this ministry, but there are also staff from under this budget vote? the Ministry of Environment who would be looking at Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2521 water quality issues and the like. So it is a cross-ministry One of the questions I have on certainty and con- initiative. fidence is the confidence amongst the first nations on whose traditional lands many of these projects are D. Donaldson: I'm going to move on to another taking place. When mineral exploration takes place, area under the minister's responsibility. It's regulation what's the responsibility, under the legislation that you of industries that explore for minerals by regulating talked about, for making the traditional owners of the environmental responsibility. land base aware that the exploration activity is taking It has been brought to my attention on a couple of place? What's the onus on the company for doing that? occasions, one specifically in the area which I represent, where mining exploration activities were seen to have a Hon. R. Hawes: The legal obligation to consult lies very heavy impact on the environment. Could the min- with the province, but we encourage — in fact, I think ister describe to me the actual enforcement teeth that the we pretty much insist — that all proponents first engage minister has in ensuring that the mineral exploration, early with first nations. We work with the companies which is a very important stage of mining development, to make sure that engagement takes place, and then is done in an environmentally responsible manner? we later fulfil our total legal obligation for consultation before any exploration. Hon. R. Hawes: In terms of teeth, the chief mines inspector actually has lots of tools at his beck and call if D. Donaldson: The reasonI 'm asking these questions there are infractions. I should first say that the industry, is that it's obvious that in many instances where I am by and large, is extremely responsible, and I think the living and representing, when the people whose trad- member would agree with that. itional land base this is taking place on find out after There are always going to be some exceptions, and the fact, it leads to erosion of confidence and is not very when there is an exception the chief mines inspector good for the future around communication. has the ability to go in and stop the work immediately. If I heard the minister right — and maybe you could We can cancel the permit. There are a number of fairly make sure I've got this correct — there's no legal obliga- progressive steps that can be taken to ensure that the tion for a company to let a first nation know that they're environmental plan that is laid out with the exploration coming into their traditional territory to do exploration. is followed and all of the permit conditions are met. You talked about insisting that they engage, but there's no legal obligation to do that. D. Donaldson: Yes, I agree with the minister that often- [1815] times there are very responsible exploration activities. I know personally many of the people involved in that Hon. R. Hawes: What we do is, when a proponent industry in my area. They do care about the land base. comes forward with an application, we strongly encour- [1810] age them to engage first nations before anything is done. But unfortunately, when there is a bad example it gets However, before any permit or activity can take place, highlighted and talked about a lot. So just to clarify: we make sure that we have fulfilled the legal obligation under the code, are mineral exploration activities and to do the full consultation. ones that don't comply with environmentally respon- sible behaviour under a code? Is that a legal code — D. Donaldson: The minister mentioned at the outset infractions under the code? around revenue-sharing on new mining projects with first nations. In the work that has been done to date, Hon. R. Hawes: The mining code is legislation, so it which we're discussing under this budget vote, is he is legal. referring to royalties being shared? If so, what's the amount of royalties that have been shared, under this D. Donaldson: Thank you for that.I 'm going to ask a period we're talking about, with first nations around few questions that relate to certainty on the land base. I mineral development? know it's within the minister's responsibility about con- sulting with communities and first nations. The Minister Hon. R. Hawes: First, I should explain that revenue- of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources talked about sharing applies to new mines and major expansions. confidence and competitiveness. What we're sharing here is the mineral tax revenue. I think what we've heard from the Association for There is a negotiation on each project to determine what Mineral Exploration B.C. and also from the Mining the amount of sharing would be, and it's done on a case- Association of B.C. is that certainty on the land base, they by-case basis. feel, is the biggest impediment to moving forward with some of the mines that we know have great potential D. Donaldson: Thanks for that answer. We haven't and create the revenue that the minister has described. had a new metal mine opened in B.C. for the last eight 2522 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009 years, and we're looking forward to one being opened they could grant the extension approval in as little as a soon, as I'm sure members on that side are as well. One in week. Can the minister comment on that? the area I represent that's quite close to potentially being opened — this is according to the Mining Association of Hon. R. Hawes: I'm not sure where that information B.C. — is Red Chris, for instance. came from, but that is not accurate. Full public input is Considering how negotiations over the sharing of received and considered. The chief mines inspector takes mineral tax revenue could take quite a while and actually many factors into consideration. It's not just a matter of cause delays in the opening of a new mine, could the making a submission, and in a week you have a permit. minister shed some light on the negotiations that have It doesn't work like that. been underway for mineral tax revenue-sharing with Red Chris and what stage that might be at with the M. Sather: Well, Pitt River Quarries actually had Tahltan people, on whose territory that is? written a letter to me saying that they're going to have a public process in four to six weeks, which would be right Hon. R. Hawes: As I know the member knows, the around Christmas — not a very opportune time for the Red Chris project right now is in the Supreme Court of public. In any event, can the minister of state confirm Canada. We have not yet begun the negotiation process that that means there wouldn't be any action taken, that for revenue-sharing. But as this wends its way through there wouldn't be any extension granted, before that court, if the mine in fact finds its way through success- period of time? fully, we would be looking to sit down with first nations to begin that discussion on revenue-sharing. Hon. R. Hawes: First and foremost, there can't be a public consultation over the Christmas period. That M. Sather: I'd like to ask the Minister of State for would have to take place not during the Christmas Mining some questions about the Pitt River Quarries period, so I'm assuming it would be sometime after- operation in Pitt Meadows, which is an operation that's wards. been going since the 1960s. The chief mines inspector, though, will gather all of Although there have been complaints from time to the information from the public input. He will also con- time from residents of Sheridan Hill, they have been sider all of the other factors, including safety and other minimal compared to most recently, because in recent things. When he makes his decision, it will be after all years the mine has expanded greatly. They're looking at of those things. A permit will not be issued until he has a further expansion proposal now that would leave…. made that full consideration. Mind you, we're taking a recognized land form, a geo- graphical feature, in Maple Ridge and levelling it to sea M. Sather: Well, Mr. Richards has told us that in an level here, so there's a lot of concern from residents e-mail he received from the minister of state, the min- about what effect this is going to have not only on them but the viewscapes in the area, the effects on tourism ister of state said that this process of expansion could and so on. conceivably be stopped by an environmental assessment. [1820] Can the minister of state comment on that? I just want to start by asking the minister about the materials that Pitt River Quarries presented to Pitt Hon. R. Hawes: If the proponent was trying to pass Meadows council. They had a very outdated map on the threshold of 250,000 tonnes — which he's not — that there, in terms of the extent of their operation to date. Is would trigger a full environmental assessment. But if there any requirement that they produce a current map, he's under that, then a mine development review panel or is it up to local government to figure that out? is struck. They review pretty much all aspects, includ- ing the environmental aspects. So there is an environ- Hon. R. Hawes: They would be required to provide mental scan taken prior to any permit being issued. The updated maps. Certainly, the chief mines inspector information that they compile, I think, goes to the chief would be looking for that material from them. mines inspector and also forms part of the information he uses to form his decision. M. Sather: I hope they do provide those soon, because [1825] even on Google now, 2008 is their last satellite photo, and it's quite out of date. M. Sather: Well, the minister is quoted in the local There's a gentleman named Brent Richards who will press as saying that the chief inspector of mines makes have contacted the minister of state and who has sort of the decision on this. "There can be no political interfer- been a spokesperson for our residents around this issue. ence," I believe was the phrase that he used. Can the One of the things he was told by a ministry official was minister of state tell me, then: can the minister not have that as soon as the ministry received a reclamation bond, any involvement in this process? Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2523

Hon. R. Hawes: The chief mines inspector is a statu- Frankly, at that point the minister could always, I sup- tory officer.H e's a statutory decision-maker. Across gov- pose, if they were following through with what you're ernment, all statutory decision-makers make decisions saying, in every instance stop every aggregate operation free from political interference. I think the member, if from ever happening because everyone who lives near you sat down and thought about why that should be…. an aggregate operation will make an argument that it's It's pretty clear to me that you don't want political inter- in the public interest to stop it. That's just the way life is. ference in the types of decisions that these statutory The chief mines inspector, though, takes a position decision-makers are charged with making. that first he has to protect the public. He protects the Frankly, I have absolute confidence in not just the staff environment. He listens to the public input, and he acts within the ministry and the information they gather but in the public interest. I am absolutely confident that also in the chief mines inspector. that's what he will do in this case. That's what he does in every case. M. Sather: I'm not sure what the minister of state [1830] means by "political interference." Section 11 of the Mines Act under "Permits – powers of minister," says: "If the M. Sather: Well, it's clear that government simply minister considers it to be necessary in the public inter- doesn't want to become involved. There are massive est, the minister, in respect of the issuing of permits, has environmental effects that are going to happen here and and may exercise all the powers that the chief inspector that already have happened, notwithstanding the other may exercise under this Act." How, then, could the min- effects. ister not be involved if he chose to be? You know, we've seen this government push aside decision-makers before. We saw it on the RAV line when Hon. R. Hawes: In fact, that provision is there where they did that with TransLink. They didn't like the deci- a really rapid decision in an emergency is necessary. But sions that were made and just got another board. We saw it has, in the last 15 years, never been invoked. I'll be it with run of the river, where they changed the rules so blunt about it. I have no intention of invoking it. The that local government doesn't have effect. ministry has full confidence in the chief mines inspector We've seen it in a number of cases, the BCUC decision and the work that he does. most recently, so it's pretty clear to me that the government simply doesn't want to get involved. The minister is simply M. Sather: Well, there's nothing in that section that hiding behind the skirts of the bureaucrats, and that's says anything about an emergency response or rapid simply not acceptable to the people of Pitt Meadows. necessity. It's very clear from the act that the minister could get involved if he wants. It's not a matter of pol- Hon. R. Hawes: I'd just remind the member that this itical interference, but he's saying, in effect, that this is is the estimates for Mining. If you have questions about not in the public interest. I mean, there's a great deal of BCUC or any other matters that don't fall under Mining, public interest in this. I would suggest you address them to the appropriate Once that mine has levelled most of the hill…. Some spot. of those are historic homes in there. Some are homes that are recently settled with the understanding that M. Sather: I want to move on to the issue of aggregate they would have a future there. They're not going to gravel mining in the Fraser Valley, which is very conten- have a future there. Their home values are going to tious. I think a lot of people don't realize the value of the be diddly-squat, if I can use that technical term. How fishery along the Fraser. The gravel reach is considered can this not be in the public interest for the minister to from Mission up to the Chilliwack and Hope area. become involved? There are some 30 species of fish that occupy that reach. There's the largest run…. Spawning grounds Hon. R. Hawes: The first thing I guess I would say is for pink salmon are there. This is a very valuable piece that the chief mines inspector always acts in the public of real estate for fish, yet this government consistently interest. That's his job. As I've said, we have full confi- seems to — does — totally ignore any of the environ- dence in our chief mines inspector and the work that mental effects of the gravel operations there. he does. For example, in a recent article: With respect to what the minister can or can't do, as "TheB ritish Columbia government plans to remove gravel from the Fraser River this winter" — this was on November 12 of this I've said, the intent of that section was originally to act year — "despite a federal Auditor General report that found the in emergencies. It has not been acted upon in the last extraction has killed up to 2.2 million young pink salmon…. The 15 years. But I am aware, particularly with the service Fraser River gravel removal stewardship committee urged Ottawa that I've had at the local level, that every time there is on Thursday not to enter into any long-term agreements withB .C., pending the results of the commission of inquiry announced by anything to do with aggregate in any community, there's the federal Conservatives last week into the collapse of the Fraser always a lot of opposition. River sockeye." 2524 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Yet we heard the Minister of Environment say earlier is roughly in equilibrium in regards to erosion and this afternoon: "There's no problem. They're going full deposition…." steam ahead." With all these concerns and many more, which I'll talk about if I have a few more minutes, what The Chair: Member. Member. does the Minister of State for Mining have to say? I know he's been very involved in this issue over a number of Point of Order years. Hon. R. Hawes: Point of order, Madam Chair. This is Hon. R. Hawes: I'm not sure where this member has the estimates for Mining. As I've said, this ministry has been. For a long time removal of gravel from the river absolutely nothing to do with the removal of gravel from has fallen under the Ministry of Environment, and also the Fraser River — nothing — so there can be no rel- the Ministry of Solicitor General, through emergency evance whatsoever to any of the statements being made preparedness. here by that member. I would ask that he confine his The Ministry of Mines has not been involved with remarks to items that are relevant to the estimates for gravel removal from the Fraser River. I'm going to the Ministry of Mines. answer, though, as a resident of the Fraser Valley, in the area where…. My fellow residents in that part of the The Chair: The minister's point, Member, is well valley have extreme concern about the gravel that's infil- taken. I would ask you to confine your remarks germane trating the river, particularly in the Chilliwack area. to the ministry under debate. If the member were to come up and have a look at what's going on there — and I don't know as how you M. Sather: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Well, clearly, have — and if you took a look at how the channel is although this member has been hugely involved in this being turned by some of the gravel infiltration… issue, he doesn't want to face the facts. Let's look, then…. The Chair: Minister, through the Chair. The Chair: Member, he does not have ministerial Hon. R. Hawes: Through the Chair. responsibility for the questions you are now posing. You …and you looked at how the erosion is taking place need to find a different chain of questions. and large tracts of land…. It's moving towards dikes, and this is extremely dangerous. That's why it's so important M. Sather: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I take that to get aggregate, the gravel, out of the river — because under advisement, certainly. it's a safety issue, pure and simple. There were estimates for the Ministry ofE nvironment Debate Continued that ran earlier this week. I know, having looked and having spoken with the Minister of Environment, that M. Sather: I will talk about an issue that the minis- the member was present in the room while the Minister ter certainly does have involvement in. That's the Fraser of Environment was there to answer questions. Not Valley regional district aggregate pilot project. one single question about gravel removal in the Fraser Now, this pilot project was initiated by the Minister of River. It's a little late in the day, and today he's asking the State for Mining back in 2004, as I believe, in response wrong ministry. to persistent and intense conflict surrounding aggre- gate operations in the Fraser Valley regional district. M. Sather: Well, we've seen this kind of response from The project was guided by a committee, chaired by the the government many times. "Oh, don't talk to me. Talk current Minister of State for Mining, comprised of the to somebody else." The other one says the same thing. Aggregate Producers Association of British Columbia, [1835] local governments and the Ministry of Energy, Mines The facts simply don't support this government's con- and Petroleum Resources. tentions. The consultant, UMA, did reports and studies You will note the total absence of any environmental on this in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2004 and found that involvement in that committee. They go on to talk about "despite the net deposition of larger classes of material, some of the challenges that committee is facing. I won't the net sedimentation was approximately neutral when go into many of them, except that all of the challenges all…classes of materials at all locations…." This is over they list — noise and dust, blasting and vibration, etc…. the period 1952 to 1999, so it was over a long period of There's nothing whatsoever about the environment or time. fish here. They went on to say in the report: "That is, contrary to How could the minister chair a committee that abso- what many believe" — apparently — "the Fraser gravel lutely ignored the effect that gravel operations have on reach is not filling up with sediment…. Thus, the reach fish in the Fraser River? Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2525

Hon. R. Hawes: The Fraser Valley aggregate pilot I would be happy to give you a briefing at any time project actually is going to be — and I believe sincerely you want to come to my office so you could fully under- — a very, very positive step forward to end the friction stand it. Or perhaps talk to some of the municipalities that exists between residential growth in municipalities that took part in that operation, which think it was huge and the aggregate industry. I think there would be very benefit to them and the taxpayers. few members anywhere that would dispute that aggre- gate is essential to our economy. Seventy percent of the The Chair: I would ask all members to direct their aggregate that's produced is actually consumed by local comments through the Chair. government and the provincial government in the con- struction of roads and housing, which we all enjoy, and G. Gentner: I want to move from the aggravating public buildings and infrastructure. aggregate to something that's really interesting. I know First and foremost, I'd like to say that the produc- the members in the northeast sector, the north part of tion of aggregate is totally, totally essential to the proper the lower Fraser basin, have quite the time together, and operation of our economy. The second thing I would it's quite enjoyable. say is that the aggregate pilot project, in trying to con- I want to address the minister relative to the Flathead. sider what we're going to do in the future, didn't look at I sent a letter to the ministry asking for information existing aggregate operations. relative to what the delegation came forward with — the What we tried to do was to say that in future, if there's UNESCO delegation that was in Fernie. I have yet to going to be an aggregate operation somewhere, let's plan hear. where it ought to be and let's agree on where it shouldn't I do commend the Minister of State for be. Let's agree on the areas where there should be con- Intergovernmental Relations. She's made it clear that ditions and perhaps areas where there don't need to be there will be some, but to date I have yet to receive any- conditions and where you can do more things in an thing from this ministry. aggregate pit. I'd like to ask, first of all, the minister: did the min- [1840] istry send UNESCO a presentation when they were here First and foremost, I would like to say that this min- in British Columbia? istry does an outstanding job in its environmental man- agement around all mining operations — an outstanding Hon. R. Hawes: Member, I know that you canvassed job. We have a very, very strong team that works on the this issue with the Minister of Environment. I think his environment and environmental stewardship and mon- answer to you was that the lead ministry on anything itoring. We work in conjunction with the Ministry of to do with UNESCO is the intergovernmental relations Environment, which has dedicated staff to this purpose. ministry because this is the United Nations. I think their When you're looking at where a future mine might estimates are coming up in the next few days, and I would exist…. strongly recommend that you address your questions regarding the UNESCO mission to the IGR ministry. Interjection. G. Gentner: Will the minister confirm that Mr. Ricci Hon. R. Hawes: If the member doesn't want to hear Berdusco from the Ministry of Energy, Mines and the answer, then he should stop asking questions. If you Petroleum Resources attended and was there to make don't want answers, don't ask questions. a presentation? The bottom line is this. When you're planning where a future mine might go, there's obviously no environ- Hon. R. Hawes: The answer to that is yes. mental impact on a plan. This is a high-level plan that's a mapping exercise. That's all it is. So if and when a mine G. Gentner: Would he confirm that Mr. David Grieve, is located, or a quarry, in any of the areas designated in regional geologist in mining and minerals division, this plan — happily agreed to by local government and Cranbrook, Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum the industry all working together rather than through Resources, was also there to give a presentation? the court system, which has happened in the past…. At that point the full environmental scan of the ministry Hon. R. Hawes: The regional director is Mr. Ricci would be put towards any permitting application that Berdusco. He may have had staff there.I 'm really not sure. would go in any of those areas. I suppose that if the member continues to have curiosity To the member: I think a little homework and a little around this, we can find out from Mr. Berdusco. understanding of the kinds of things you want to ask [1845] here would be helpful. I think you're showing that you don't really understand how the industry works, nor do G. Gentner: Are these reports available to the oppos- you have an understanding of the pilot project. ition — as soon as possible? 2526 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Hon. R. Hawes: We're kind of getting into the detail arrangement signed by allowing this to proceed — pro- around the UNESCO visit, and again, this is the IGR jects that would never be allowed to proceed, necessarily, ministry that would answer those questions. I suppose on the Montana side of the border relative to mining the only thing I would tell you is that I think that at some itself? Is this in violation of the goodwill that was point UNESCO is going to issue a report that — I'm developed by the Premier and the Governor of 2003? assuming, although I don't know — would have minutes, [1850] probably, of every presentation. Perhaps if the member wants to ask the Minister for Intergovernmental Relations, Hon. R. Hawes: I think it's pretty obvious that you're she may know when that report is coming forward. talking about an intergovernmental relationship. If the member isn't sure, then let me remind him that the min- G. Gentner: Therefore, I'm making the assumption istry for intergovernmental relations…. There's probably that the reports are going to the Minister of State for a clue in the title there. They would be responsible, and Intergovernmental Relations as the messenger. Then it's that's who you should ask. Their estimates are coming going to come to me. Is that correct? We are going to within the next few days. get the reports that the ministry submitted to the United Nations? G. Gentner: I'll try this one, then. Why is the govern- ment concealing documents relative to its approval of Hon. R. Hawes: I think I have said that questions sur- Max Resource Corp.? An organization has asked for it, rounding the UNESCO visit should go to the ministry of and I'm asking the question: why are these documents IGR. If these questions continue to come, I've answered being concealed from Ecojustice, and why won't the them, and I really don't see the point of continuing to ministry come forward with them? say: "Ask the ministry of IGR." Hon. R. Hawes: I guess I'd say that the ministry never G. Gentner: In December 2008 the B.C. govern- conceals documents. When people want documenta- ment exempted the Flathead River Valley from the Mist tion, there is a legal process. I'm sure that the member Mountain coalbed methane tenure granted to BP Canada. knows what that process is. If Ecojustice doesn't know, At the time, the B.C. government declared that the Flathead perhaps the member could remind them. Or if they was an "environmentally sensitive area," yet BP Canada want to ask the ministry, we would be happy to explain still wants to drill coalbed methane in the Flathead. to them what the legal process is. In the absence of permanent protection of the Flathead, what stops BP Canada from continuing with G. Gentner: Noting the hour, I move adjournment its exploration? of debate.

Hon. R. Hawes: I think the member knows that Hon. R. Hawes: I move that this committee rise, mining is mining, and coalbed methane is not. If there report progress and ask leave to sit again. are questions around coalbed methane or anything per- taining to oil or gas, there is an appropriate minister, and Motion approved. I think you'll be talking to him tomorrow. The committee rose at 6:52 p.m. G. Gentner: Well, let's talk mining, then. Let's talk about gold mining in the Flathead. Can the minister The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. explain: how is it that he granted an exploratory permit for the proposal by Max Resource? Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. R. Hawes: There was an application made by the proponent based on the current land plan. The applica- Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported tion was received. It was reviewed. It's an exploration progress, was granted leave to sit again. application. It was reviewed by the chief mines inspector, and based on the current land use applicable in that area, Hon. B. Penner moved adjournment of the House. the permit was granted. Motion approved. G. Gentner: It's interesting that this was granted at the time when the delegation was here. Frankly, it was mud in Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 your eye when it comes down to the United Nations. a.m. tomorrow morning. Would the minister agree that by doing such action, B.C. is violating the 2003 environmental cooperation The House adjourned at 6:54 p.m. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2527

In terms of the minister's office budget and the min- PROCEEDINGS IN THE istry budget in general, has there been an increase in the DOUGLAS FIR ROOM minister's office budget? [1440] Committee of Supply Hon. K. Heed: There has been a slight decrease of ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF $17,000 from '08-09 to '09-10. PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL M. Farnworth: What areas does that decrease The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. involve? Bloy in the chair. Hon. K. Heed: Those are other operating costs, The committee met at 2:36 p.m. which were mainly used for travel and other business expenses. The Chair: Good afternoon. Before we start, I want to remind all members that they're allowed to use a M. Farnworth: Has there been any change, or is there BlackBerry and a computer only while they're seated an advertising budget within the ministry? in the committee chair. Once they take the floor, they cannot refer to any device. For everyone in the commit- Hon. K. Heed: We don't have a separate advertise- tee room, cell phones are not allowed at all. There is no ment budget for the minister's office or for the ministry. voice contact. For the gallery, the rules apply the same here as they M. Farnworth: Have any programs been transferred do in the big House. There's no use ofB lackBerry or cell under the current budget to another ministry? phones. It's an honour system, so we expect you not to use these devices. If you receive a call, you have to leave Hon. K. Heed: There were no actual programs moved the room. out of the ministry. We did have funds moved out of the ministry to the Public Service Agency, and that was $3 On Vote 38: ministry operations, $625,431,000. million for human resource services. [1445] The Chair: Minister, would you like to make an open- ing statement? M. Farnworth: Has there been any reduction in any program spending areas? Hon. K. Heed: Yes, I would, and I'll make it very, very brief. I am pleased to have the opportunity to present the Hon. K. Heed: Within the Estimates, the "Ministry estimates of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor Summary," there were two reductions. One was the General. civil forfeiture account special account, for $750,000, which was an accounting adjustment. Under correc- [D. Hayer in the chair.] tions work program account special account, there's a $23,000 reduction, and that was due to administrative I'd like to introduce some of my immediate staff right reductions. here. I have David Morhart, deputy solicitor general, to [1450] my left; to my right, Wes Shoemaker, Deputy Minister of Public Safety. I have Tara Faganello's assistance here, M. Farnworth: On the $750,000 in the civil forfeiture, and Ted Stevens. Other staff will be brought up here as can you tell me what type of accounting change, reduc- necessary as we proceed through. tion, that was?

M. Farnworth: Before we begin, I'd just like to out- Hon. K. Heed: This was money that was provided by line…. I've got a number of questions directed more to the ministry to get the program up and running. It was the minister's office in the beginning. ThenI 'd like to pro- startup funds. This is a self-funded program.A s a result, ceed through a series of areas of the minister's respon- this was removable money, and it was removed. sibility in the ministry involving restorative justice, gang issues and programs, municipal police forces, the RCMP M. Farnworth: In other words, the government pro- contract, regionalization, correctional facilities, an issue vided the money to start the program — the civil forfeit- around coroner's inquests and finally victim services ure. So when we realize assets, either financial or monetary, and ICBC. For particular points, besides myself, other and they now come under the possession of the Crown, colleagues of mine will be coming to ask questions. and the money that was used to set that up…. 2528 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

What the Crown is now doing, then, is clawing that Hon. K. Heed: The question was with respect to this back. Is that correct? They're saying: "Okay, we've particular budget, and that's what the answer was refer- received this money from civil forfeiture, but we're now ring to. We're in the process of looking at future budgets, going to take back our startup costs." and the question I answered was in reference to this par- Is this something that happens on an annual basis, or ticular budget. is this a one-time thing? M. Farnworth: But the service plan the minister oper- Hon. K. Heed: One time. ates, which is part of this budget and the future service plan out, does anticipate staff reductions in a number of M. Farnworth: Has there been an increase or decrease areas — does it not? in the number of FTEs in the various programs in the ministry? Hon. K. Heed: FTEs for each ministry are currently being reviewed across government and, therefore, are Hon. K. Heed: The FTE allocations are under review, not reported in this service plan. as discussed in the government September budget update. The Chair: I remind the member to keep the ques- tioning to the motion before the committee. M. Farnworth: In other words, you're showing reduc- tions over the next two years. Is that correct? M. Farnworth: Thank you hon. Chair. We are dis- cussing estimates of the ministry, and part of that work Hon. K. Heed: That is still under review. is, as the minister has indicated, a review of FTEs. That [1455] review is clearly taking place with a mind to next year's budget, but that work is being done and that expendi- M. Farnworth: Can the minister tell me which areas ture is taking place in this year's budget, and it's clearly a focus right across government. of the ministry are under review? Is it…? Or let me put What I hear the minister saying is that while — for it this way. There must be a goal, or there must be some example, in the case of Corrections — he's not antici- sort of idea of a reduction that the minister is working pating any front-line reductions in staff, the fact is that towards in terms of the review. What areas are under the ministry is reviewing because they have to deal with review in terms of reductions, and can the minister give cost pressures that are in place that have been imposed, an idea of the size of the potential reduction that's under clearly, in terms of a review of FTEs. review? So can the minister tell me: is the government's recent change in this budget to MSP premiums accounted for Hon. K. Heed: I can assure the member that there in this particular budget? Has the ministry received will be…. We're not looking at program cuts. We want to increased funding to take care of those increased maintain all front-line services. Where we would be look- costs? ing at areas for efficiencies would be back office staff. [1505]

M. Farnworth: So are Corrections under the review Hon. K. Heed: There were no dollars added. MSPs for potential staff reductions? are reflected in our current employee benefit plan.

Hon. K. Heed: No front-line services would be looked M. Farnworth: But they are increasing. Has the min- at in Corrections. istry looked at the impact of HST on its operations and at how much that is likely to be? M. Farnworth: How about funded provincial police positions in some of the integrated teams? Hon. K. Heed: We have started the analysis. There is no impact in the current fiscal year because HST will Hon. K. Heed: Not in this budget. come into effect July 1, 2010.

M. Farnworth: So it's not in this budget but poten- M. Farnworth: I understand that it doesn't come into tially in the budget that we will be dealing with in a few effect until July 1 next year. But in terms of the impact months and in the service plan then. What you're saying on the ministry and the operations of the ministry, it is that that may well be the case. will have an impact, particularly when you're looking at [1500] it in a way that you're having to do a review of FTEs, for example, in terms of cost containment. You've got [D. Horne in the chair.] increased costs from MSP. There are increased costs Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2529

from HST. Any idea when that work will be completed delivered or administered is the ministry undertaking and when the impact number will be known? or contemplating at the current time? [1515] Hon. K. Heed: The review is currently underway. If there are any more questions related to HST, I would ask Hon. K. Heed: We are not contemplating any changes. that you direct them to the Minister of Finance or the This is to support communities. It's led by these local tax policy branch for the Ministry of Finance. communities and with respect to their local needs.

M. Farnworth: In other words, the ministry is not M. Farnworth: It is led by local needs, but the money involved in any way, shape or form in terms of the impact that's available to allow them to do the work they do on HST? They're not involved in providing information comes from the province. If funding does not increase and not involved in providing areas where they think over time, then the amount of money they have avail- that there will be an impact on HST? Is the ministry able to them decreases, and therefore, their ability to do involved in any way, shape or form with this? the work they do also decreases, and in part, many of these people, by and large, are volunteers. Hon. K. Heed: Yes, we are involved, but the Ministry I'd just like to get the minister's perspective on how of Finance is taking the lead with respect to this. he sees restorative justice and how it can work within the current criminal justice system in the province and M. Farnworth: So it's a good thing we have Finance whether or not he believes that it should be expanded. estimates to come up too, because I think that there will be an awful lot of questions being asked then exactly Hon. K. Heed: Personally, I'm very, very supportive about the impact, because it's pretty clear that that hasn't of it. Our ministry is very, very supportive of restorative been assessed. justice. We're working with the communities, as indi- Okay, let's move on to one other area. Have there cated. We're letting the communities take a lead, and I been any changes in terms of performance measures think our commitment is demonstrated in the fact that either being added or dropped from the ministry ser- during the times that we're in right now, where we are vice plan? looking for efficiencies, we've maintained restorative [1510] justice programs. We will continue to advocate for other levels of gov- Hon. K. Heed: I've been advised that there have been ernment and other stakeholders to get involved in no performance measures changed since the February restorative justice. 2009 service plan. M. Farnworth: I would expect, given the minister's M. Farnworth: One of the key areas that the minis- background, that he would recognize the role of restora- ter is responsible for is around crime prevention. One tive justice and its importance. One of the ways to ensure of the key areas that has received, I think, a lot of atten- that its success continues and that we're able to use it in tion over the last number of years has been around the more communities is that it's something that is access- issue of restorative justice as an alternative way to the ible right across the province. Right now that's not the court system. It has received a considerable amount of case. There are a number of areas in the province where support in the local communities, but also among police restorative justice doesn't function. Does the ministry themselves. have any plans to address that? Can the minister tell us what the state is and how the [1520] budget is changing for restorative justice this year com- pared to last year? Hon. K. Heed: We have outreach programs and out- reach workers that go across the province giving infor- Hon. K. Heed: The restorative justice program has mation with respect to restorative justice programs been maintained at the same level from year to year. that are offered. There's an application process and an application that communities go through to apply. This M. Farnworth: So in other words, it has not had any year the deadline was October 19 for those commun- funding increases. ities to submit their applications for restorative justice programs. Hon. K. Heed: That's correct. M. Farnworth: When you apply, there's a set amount M. Farnworth: Setting aside for the moment the of money that you can get. Is that not correct, Minister? lack of increase in terms of funding for restorative jus- I see the minister nodding his head. For the next ques- tice, what changes in the way that the program is being tion, a nod will probably apply as well. There's also a finite 2530 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

amount of money that is available in terms of restorative Hon. K. Heed: I've been advised that this is a part- justice for communities to access. Is that not correct? nership between the Attorney General, the Ministry of I again see the minister nodding his head. In other Children and Families and my ministry, and we do have words, the problem becomes that if you want restora- the lead on that. tive justice to function across the province — where you have equity in terms of a community's ability to access M. Farnworth: Given that the ministry is taking a it — right now there's not enough money in the restora- leadership role on this, can the minister tell us if mem- tive justice program to do that without cutting the fund- bers of the restorative justice community are on the ing to those communities that are already participating. committee? Isn't that right? [1525] Hon. K. Heed: We will have to get back to the member with respect to the composition of that committee. Hon. K. Heed: The ministry provides up to $150,000 for restorative justice programs in British Columbia, M. Farnworth: I appreciate that. I'm hoping the and it's up to $2,500 per program in 2009 to 2010. As answer is yes, but does the minister not believe that it I've indicated earlier, our goal was to maintain services would be important, if there's an interministerial com- this year for restorative justice across the province. The mittee that's reviewing restorative justice and looking government also supports a variety of other restorative at restorative justice issues, that it have members of the justice initiatives, including 31 provincewide coordin- restorative justice community on the committee? ators around restorative justice, with our corrections people working with our federal partners. Hon. K. Heed: I certainly think it's very, very import- ant to have them involved at one particular step and be M. Farnworth: The bottom line is that we have a there when we go to them and talk to them. As far as the program which we know works. The minister knows it composition of the committee, we will get back to the works. Front-line police officers know it works. There's member with respect to that. a budget of $150,000 right now which communities can access, but it doesn't go right across the province. M. Farnworth: Well, I would encourage the minis- As a result, we have what is potentially a very effect- ter to ensure that there is participation and represen- ive tool in terms of crime prevention, particularly in tation from the restorative justice community on this preventing those from reoffending, and all we're doing committee. is maintaining, when, instead, we should be looking at how we can increase its effectiveness, make it more avail- [J. McIntyre in the chair.] able and encourage more communities to be involved across the province. I think it's a problem that the min- I think that if you're looking at how restorative justice ister needs to address. I don't think that just maintaining can fit into the justice system but also in terms of being that current funding is going to achieve what I think he more effective in how it does its role — and I think we knows is an effective program. all agree that it is important — then I would think you'd I've got a few more questions on this particular want to hear from the people who are actually engaged area. I'd like to know: is the ministry involved in, and in that front-line delivery of the program. So if the min- could he provide details on, the interministerial com- ister could commit to that, I would appreciate that. mittee on restorative justice, which is currently under Is this committee going to be looking at the way development? in which restorative justice is currently funded, for example? Hon. K. Heed: We are working across government from an interministerial goal to deal with this particular Hon. K. Heed: We would be looking at partnership problem. I would like to be as specific as possible for the funding, best practices and community needs, to name member, so if we could, we will get that information to a few. him so he has actual specifics with respect to that. [1535]

M. Farnworth: I appreciate that. M. Farnworth: Nice to see you, Chair. I'll ask a few more questions, then, so that hopefully, To the minister: those are laudable, and I think we all if he's got the answers, we can get that resolved now. Is it want to see an increase in potential partners and having the Public Safety and Solicitor General's ministry that's as many people as involved as possible, but what I've taking the leadership role on this committee, or is it heard so far sounds a little vague. another ministry? In terms of funding, is the current funding model [1530] going to be part of the committee's purview? Are they Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2531

going to examine the current funding model, which ister knows how effective restorative justice can be. So I is basically grant-based? Are you going to be looking would ask that he do those things. at, perhaps, changing the model to a more sustainable model that's based on either contract funding or a more Hon. K. Heed: Yes. permanent system of funding? M. Farnworth: At this particular time I'd like us to Hon. K. Heed: That would be part of the funding move on to some of the gang-related programs, issues. model discussion that would take place with this par- So if there's staff that the minister needs to come up, I ticular committee, not just with reference to our min- think now is the right time to bring them forward. istry but all of the other ministries that are involved. Hon. K. Heed: Hon. Chair, I'm joined by my ADM M. Farnworth: So does the minister believe that the Kevin Begg. current funding model does need to be changed, and is it the ministry's position that there should be changes in M. Farnworth: The minister commented earlier this terms of the funding model? year that we not only must be tough on gangs but equally tough on social conditions that breed them. We need Hon. K. Heed: It's part of the review that the commit- to put in place a comprehensive, coordinated, assert- tee will look at, and it's prudent, in my opinion, for that ive regional gang suppression strategy that addresses committee to look at the funding. intervention and prevention while moving law enforce- ment from being random and reactive to proactive and M. Farnworth: Will a review ensure that there's a sustained. cost-effectiveness analysis done of the current model I'd like to know what changes the minister has put in of funding, and perhaps compare it to other alterna- place or are in place in this budget that are aimed at pre- tive models, such as a more long-term contract, moving venting young people from entering gangs. away from the uncertainty of grants? Hon. K. Heed: We've added $1 million to the allo- Hon. K. Heed: Yes, that is something that they would cated $3 million that we've invested in youth programs, look at. I'll just provide some additional informa- youth education programs, programs that are designed tion. This year we moved from grants to contracts for to be proactive and to prevent our youth from getting accountability reasons and to ensure that we focus on engaged in gang activity and the gang culture. best practices. M. Farnworth: Can the minister outline where the M. Farnworth: I think one of the things that the additional money is going to, and can he also outline restorative justice community has been looking at how the programs are being monitored? is ensuring that there is long-term sustainability. So [1545] whether it's done by grants or if it's by contract, I think that's one of the key issues that needs to be addressed, Hon. K. Heed: To give a few examples of the preven- and I think that's one of the things the committee needs tion programs we have in place…. We have the Youth to be looking at. Against Violence line. We have the Children of the Streets Has the committee started its work yet, and when is it Society that we do fund for various programs — also anticipated that it will finish its work? school districts, many around British Columbia, includ- ing Prince George, Richmond, Vancouver, Kamloops Hon. K. Heed: We will commit to the member that and Abbotsford. we will get back to him with that specific information. [1550] We also provide funding to the South Asian commun- M. Farnworth: I would appreciate that, because I do ity, to groups around there to come up with prevention think it's important. I would also, before we move off, programs for some of the gang prevention side of it. like to once again stress, I think, the need that if there's One particular program that there's a lot of promise — a committee — an interministerial committee that the and I'll go back to the Surrey school district — is called ministry is taking a lead on — that is looking around the Wrap program. We're hoping that we can duplicate restorative justice issues, it include members of the the results of that particular gang prevention program restorative justice community. throughout the province. That's one that right now is [1540] showing some very, very promising results. I think that they have important insight and advice to We will look, from an accountability point of view, at give, particularly since they're the ones who are deliv- all of these particular programs and work forward from ering the program on the front line, and I think the min- a best-practices point of view on what actually is work- 2532 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

ing to prevent our youth from getting involved in gang M. Farnworth: Will the minister guarantee that that activity. money will go towards fighting youth gang activity and existing programs? Let's put it this way. It would not be M. Farnworth: Are those programs new programs the first time that a government has said: "We're going that this million dollars is going to, or are those already- to spend money in this area on a new program. We're existing programs that the money is going to? going to get all these partners in place, and we've got this money budgeted." The public looks and says: "Oh, that's Hon. K. Heed: Part of it is for an expansion of existing great. Government is doing something." And the reality programs. We do have some new programs, and we are is that for one reason or another, it doesn't materialize. currently working with some partners in a very, very So you have this pot of money that government has innovative way in order to ensure that we have a very said is to fight gang activity, and you have existing pro- sound prevention program in place that we can evaluate grams that are providing some services. The minister as we move forward. has talked about ensuring some expansion, so what I want to know is: is there a firm commitment that the M. Farnworth: Can the minister tell us who those money that has been allocated will, in fact, be spent in partners are? this fiscal year on gang prevention programs?

Hon. K. Heed: It's in development right now, and Hon. K. Heed: Yes, I'm committed to spend that until we confirm the relationships and the arrangements money on gang prevention programs by the end of the we have with those particular individuals, it would be year. premature to give those names out. M. Farnworth: Now that we've established that the M. Farnworth: Any idea how long this will take and money will, in fact, be spent, can the minister tell us: what the timeline is for accomplishing it? You've got this does the ministry have targets in place in terms of new money that is there. Some of it is going to the expan- reducing the level of gang activity — in particular, youth sion of existing programs, and some of it is going to new gang activity — and if so, what are those targets? programs. What timelines are we looking at? What sorts of concrete actions and dates is the minister trying to Hon. K. Heed: As far as the contracts go with some work towards to get this accomplished? of these providers, we will be looking for a measurement of the success of their particular prevention programs. Hon. K. Heed: Several of those programs are already We do not have specific targets on this simply because underway, as I've mentioned. We will be launching a when you're involved in preventing crime, as you move new program in the near future. forward, especially when you're dealing with the youth, what we invest now with the youth may not pay off for M. Farnworth: The government says that youth gangs several years. It's difficult to measure that. are a priority. They say, "We've got additional money for From our point of view, there have been indications it," and that there are partners, but they can't say who of success, like I mentioned in one particular program. the partners are, because that's still under negotiation We're hoping that we can use best practices as we move or it's still not been ironed out yet. Now the minister is forward. We have not set specific targets with respect to saying there's going to be a new program. this prevention, but we've built accountability into the My question is this. Is he expecting all the money contracts that we've provided to the various providers that's allocated in this year's budget to be spent in this and groups out there. year's budget on gang and youth prevention programs? So if that money that's earmarked for new programs…. M. Farnworth: I understand what the minister is saying If those programs don't materialize until later down the about investments being made today paying dividends road, when we've got those partners in place that are down the road. That applies not just in crime preven- somewhere out there, and there's this money that's not tion but right across the spectrum. In other areas around spent, is that money going to go to existing programs, or crime prevention — poverty reduction, for example — I will that money go back into general revenue? guess that same principle would apply, that money spent [1555] on this end will pay dividends down the road. But surely there must be some indication within the Hon. K. Heed: Our intent is to expend the dollars by the ministry that they have a sense of the scope of the prob- end of the year. With some of the existing programs, we do lem right now and would be looking at that, for example, have contracts in place, and we will honour those particu- as a baseline in terms of…. We don't want to see increas- lar contracts. As we move forward, as I've mentioned, our ing; we want to see the trend line decreasing. intent is to spend the dollars by the end of the year. [1600] Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2533

Can the minister tell me if, in fact, the ministry gangs has grown significantly. So the question becomes: has a sense of how big the problem is — is it present clearly, the problem is growing, so how do you look at it — and how that differs from, let's say, five or six years in terms of your success rate — okay? Now, in terms of ago? Has the trend line been increasing, or has it been prevention — I think that's a key area; what we're talk- decreasing? ing about here is prevention — there's one way of know- ing whether or not…. You're only getting new members. Hon. K. Heed: As we've mentioned earlier, the com- You have to recruit them into gang activity. mittee would be looking at best practices and at the data If your prevention program is successful, clearly you're that is available. not recruiting gang members. Right now, if you're in a But I just want to go back to talking about my experi- gang, there are only two outcomes. You're either going ence. A lot of the individuals that are involved in gang to be dead, or you're going to be in jail. and organized crime activity right now were individuals Either way, it's still going to end up, most likely, one that were back in elementary school in the early '90s. At of those two things — right? If you're taking people out, that time we didn't have prevention programs to any if your gang is being reduced by attrition by those two degree in the schools to deal with gang problems. methods — you're either in jail or you're dead — then As a result…. I'm sure the member has heard me say if your prevention program is successful, that supply of many times in my previous career that we had a genera- wannabes is being reduced. tion of kids that grew up looking at certain gang members So that's the question I'm asking. You must have some that were out there, and these young kids were aspir- method, some targets, to say: "Okay, here's how we're ing to be these particular gang members. Unfortunately, being successful" or "Here's how we're not being suc- that's what we have taking place right now. The individ- cessful." It could be something like a reduction in the uals that we're arresting in our balanced approach to number of people coming into contact with police, a this are those young people that were at that age group, reduction in the number of people being arrested for the demographic that we're focusing on right now. gang offences. Even though we're putting more money Again, it's difficult for me to give quantifiable numbers, and more emphasis onto those areas…. Are you looking if that's what the member is actually looking for, on not at measuring those things to determine the success of only the scope of the problem with our youth…. I can give those prevention programs? numbers on the scope of the problem in general with gang I think it's all well and good to talk about account- members out there operating and the number of gangs, ability, but there must be some way in which we know you know — the number of killings that have taken place. that the program is being successful. If they continue to Albeit our crime rate is down, but the murders are up. function, and they continue to grow, then clearly they're I can certainly talk about the success we've had since not, given the fact that, as I stated moments ago — and February in locking up several of these gang members I see the minister is nodding his head — the outcome of and charges we have, but I think, bringing us back, what belonging to a gang is one of two or three choices, and we're talking about here is prevention, and we're talking none of them are particularly palatable. about whether or not we can quantify an indicator that shows the success or the failure of our prevention pro- Hon. K. Heed: At this time it's difficult to separate grams. That is difficult to give at this particular time, not the outcomes of our programs, simply because, as we only from my point of view but from my experience in see, our investment in our youth to prevent these mem- law enforcement, even from my experience in the world bers from filling the void of these gang members that of academics when we've looked at and talked about this we take off the street will show in many years. We've particular problem. been successful. I've advocated, as the member has said, [1605] for a balanced approach to this, and that's no surprise to everyone. I'll continue to advocate for a balanced M. Farnworth: I agree with some of what the minis- approach to dealing with this. ter has said, that there aren't definitive…. But certainly The problem we have right now is that when we're there's an idea of what the scope of the problem is. If you successful in removing these entrenched gang mem- look at it just in a nutshell, if you have X number of gangs, bers from our streets, the void is filled. We know that is and you have an idea of how many people are associated taking place right now. We've been successful in dealing with those gangs — through intelligence, through law with some very, very prolific gang situations in British enforcement, through contacts with the court system — Columbia right now based on our strategies that we've there must be some sort of sense of how many people put in place and the enforcement model we have put in are involved. You can get a sense over time of whether place to put these gang members where they belong — the problem is growing or not growing. in jail. If you go back to…. The fact is that the government Where I'm going with this is: we're investing in the has now been in power for eight years, and the number of youth. We're hoping that when they reach that demo- 2534 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

graphic where they're actually attracted or going towards Hon. K. Heed: Yes, those are areas that we look at gangs, we will have prevented them and put them off in when we're talking to these particular groups that are a different direction. We will be able to determine that, offering these programs and that we expect, from an because once you get to that point, when you take these accountability point of view, they will be able to address gang members out, whether it's through incarceration with their various programs. or something unfortunate — you know, death takes I have to talk about one program which still has a place or something like that — the void will not be as lot of success, and we're hoping we can replicate those easily filled as it is now. results. That's the Surrey Wrap program, and that is [1610] actually taken into place. Although there is a strong ethnic community around that particular program, the M. Farnworth: Which comes back to my original ethnicity really doesn't come into play because there question in terms of how big, which is the scope of the are some very, very common characteristics that youth problem right now, in terms of the adequacy of the are attracted to and that youth get involved in at a very, resources that we have in place to deal with, particularly very young age, regardless if it's wanting to be a member on the prevention side of things, youth being attracted of the Hell's Angels or wanting to be a member of the to gangs. Independent Soldiers. I think that one of the key things the ministry needs [1615] to be able to provide in terms of assurance to the public is that there's a sense of: "Okay, how big a problem are M. Farnworth: So how is that accountability built we dealing with? How many individuals?" You know, it into the contracts, and how is it reported out to the min- doesn't have to be exact, but some sense of how many istry? Then how does the ministry report that out to the individuals are being involved, so that the ministry itself public? is able to say: "Okay, we have enough resources at the pre- vention side of things to ensure that that long-term goal, Hon. K. Heed: Each of the contracts has an action which we want to have in place, is in fact achievable." plan attached to them on what they're expecting to accomplish. They also have deliverables. Those deliver- Hon. K. Heed: I want to be as accurate as I can for ables are monitored by program staff, and those deliver- the member, so we will provide him information on ables and the programs are reported as a best practice, if the number of gangs that we know of that are operat- they're successful, through newsletters, etc. They're also ing in British Columbia, the number of gang members reported out in the annual report in relation to the ser- associated to those gangs and the number of gang hang- vice plan. So they report out on the service plan, and the arounds or gang associates that our law enforcement annual report — the upcoming one — will reflect that. people, our intelligence people, know. We'll get the [1620] numbers to the member. M. Farnworth: In terms of accountability, the report- M. Farnworth: One of the areas around prevention out is out. It's reflected in the service plan. Still, at the same that I think is important is that different gangs have dif- time, we don't have, in essence, within the service plan ferent recruitment methods, different ways of recruiting. itself, targets in terms of: "Okay, here's where we are now. I mean, some gangs are very tightly knit — Hell's Angels Here's where we think we should be. Here's how we judge as an example — compared to others who are target- it for being successful — by the programs that we have in ing, you know, either vulnerable youth, ethnically based place." I see the minister nodding, so I will say that I think targeting…. that that is a weakness that needs to be addressed. I'm not singling that out separately, because I think I want to move on, because I am mindful of the time the minister would agree that the stereotype that gang that we have here, and move from the area of preven- activity is — as many people think — ethnically based, tion to some of the issues around current gang activity in fact, is wrong. It's a much broader problem than that. — dealing with those who are currently in gangs and There are ethnic gangs, but there are multi-ethnic gangs, our efforts in terms of fighting current gang activity and and there are gangs that have been around for a long organized crime. time, but there are different strategies they employ for One of the areas I'd like to focus on right now is the drawing people in. issue around provincial policing resources that are avail- So my question is: do the programs that we have in able. I know the minister said earlier in February that place reflect that and recognize that, and are they targeted the police, more than any other factor, are in a position to that? And does the ministry take those different types of to make a difference. We've shown, time and again, that approaches in terms of recruitments and the sort of attrac- if you invest in law enforcement and hold police leaders tion, that variability that's out there, into the development accountable, you will absolutely have a definitive effect of its programs and into implementing its programs? on crime. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2535

I agree with that. I think that's the right approach. But Hon. K. Heed: I'm advised that it would be over the in terms of the budget that was tabled in February, there last five years, the time when we added traffic fine rev- was $284 million for policing and community safety. In enues and gave that money back to municipalities. the September budget that number is $283 million. If more law enforcement is one of the keys, how many M. Farnworth: So those are actually officers that new police officers did we get with the $1 million reduc- were added by local government. It was local govern- tion in community policing and safety — going from ment that decided who to hire. It was local government $284 million to $283 million? How does that jibe? that decided how many they were going to hire. It wasn't the province that made that decision on how many they Hon. K. Heed: I'll make an assumption that the were going to hire. member is referring to the February 2009 estimate and So when the province says that we've added 1,100, the September 2009. There was a change, a decrease, of that's actually not correct. The fact is that local govern- approximately $672,000. That was as a result of internal ment has added that 1,100. Now we're saying we have 168, efficiencies. No front-line resources were affected with and I accept the issue around maternity leave — that it that reduction. does fluctuate.B ut there should be a sense that — okay — through rates of attrition, through retirements, you know M. Farnworth: So there are efficiencies, but there how many are new and how many are truly additional. are no new additional front-line resources, then, taking Let's, for a moment, focus on the 168, because that's place in this — are there? what I want to talk about right now. How many of those [1625] 168 are dedicated to fighting gang activity? How many of those new 168 police officers are dedicated to fighting Hon. K. Heed: There were 168 additional police gang activity? resources added, and they were the result of police offi- [H. Bloy in the chair.] cer recruitment funding that we received from the fed- eral government. Hon. K. Heed: Just before I answer the question that the member had right now, I just want to correct some M. Farnworth: That's resources that came from the information that he brought forward. federal government. That's not additional resources [1635] coming from the province. Can the minister tell me: The additional 1,100 officers were not all local gov- what's the net incremental increase over people who ernment officers. The province provided money to local have left, over attrition, people retired, in terms of the governments in order for them to hire police officers actual number of new police officers? through the traffic fine revenue to put them on the street. Hon. K. Heed: We've added about 1,100 additional In addition, the province added 215 members to the police officers to policing here in British Columbia, provincial force, 110 members to the integrated road including provincial, municipal and federal resources. safety unit and 168 officers to deal with the gang situ- The 168 positions are on top of the positions that we had ation we have in the province. We have a total of 368 here in the province of British Columbia. It's an addi- positions dedicated to dealing with the gang situation tional 168 positions. we have in the province. Out of the 168 positions that Now, it's difficult to give an exact number of how were added, all of them are utilized to deal with the gang many boxes — if I could use that term — are actually situation. filled right now, because it fluctuates almost on a daily basis because you have people that are off on extended M. Farnworth: Hon. Chair, it's nice to see you in leave, people that are off on paternity leave, maternity place. leave, people that are on leave of absence — all of that. That's one of the key questions. It's like you're saying: [1630] "Forget the 1,100." When the government stands up and It fluctuates almost daily across the province, so says 1,100, sure, there's money provided to local govern- it's difficult to give you an accurate number as to how ment. But that's their decision. That's their money. They many hot bodies are in those boxes, but we did add 168 make that decision on how many police officers they positions. hire. We now are at where we're saying: "We've hired an M. Farnworth: I know the minister has made the additional 110 for integrated traffic." Over what period comment about 1,100 police officers. Can he tell me of time were those numbers that the minister just men- what time frame they were added over? Was it, like, last tioned hired? Was it last year? Was it five years? Was it year, the year before last or over the last…? since 2001? 2536 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Hon. K. Heed: Over the last five years. M. Farnworth: So we have all these things in place. Are they put in, for example…? Are they down in terms M. Farnworth: It comes back to the same question. Is of targets and goals that the ministry has, so that they that a net increase, or does that take into account attri- can measure the success? tion through retirement, for example, and people leav- ing those forces? Hon. K. Heed: A lot of this information is captured and tabulated through the criminal intelligence section Hon. K. Heed: It's an actual increase in positions. As of B.C., which is part of the criminal intelligence sec- a matter of fact, when people retire or whatever, those tion of Canada. We've created what we've termed right positions are also filled. now a fusion centre that brings in and accumulates all this information and really determines from an intel-led M. Farnworth: We're digressing a little bit, and that's perspective who our targets should be and where our fine, because there are some additional questions that resources should be deployed as we go forward. I want to ask in terms of where we are putting individ- [1645] ual members. We're dealing with the issue of gangs and So not only are we gathering and accumulating those some of the resources that we're deploying and issues quantifiable numbers; we're doing something with that dealing with that. I'll finish on that, and then we'll come in more of a qualitative fashion where we're taking those back to the resources the minister has just outlined that numbers, we're applying it to our intelligence, and we're have been hired in terms of new police resources. directing our resources based on that. That information We're hiring new officers. I'll ask the same question is all captured there, and it's reported out in various I asked earlier in terms of youth gangs. Does the min- forms. Where it's reported out…. istry have targets in place around how it's viewing suc- It's in our service plan where we talk about perform- cess in terms of the battle against existing gangs? What ance measures. We have violent crime, and you have our are those targets? What's the accountability, and how are performance measures with respect to violent crime. We have other crime categories, such as property crime, they being reported out? listed here also. [1640] M. Farnworth: But that's fairly broad in terms of Hon. K. Heed: What we are actually going after with saying violent crime. This is specific targets in terms of respect to the gangs…. I'll get into some quantifiable sta- dealing with gang violence and how that's measured and tistics that we look at. We go after the top echelon of the how that's reported out — like, in particular, gang activ- gangs. We've had some success with respect to that. We ity, reducing the number of gangs, reducing the number also go after the mid-level because a lot of these individ- of people specifically related to gangs. I mean, I under- uals are hands-on. stand what you're saying in terms of violent crime. That's For example, in the drug trade we go after the street- fairly broad. That's whatI 'm trying to get at through the level individuals because those are many of the indi- ministry. Are those types of targets and reporting out…? viduals that frequent our licensed premises and cause Is the ministry doing that? problems and create a lot of dangerous activities at the street level. Hon. K. Heed: The official reporting out is in our We also go after the profit margin that these particular service plan under violent crime. We do report out that gang members are involved in — for example, the drug additional information, especially when we remove trade. In addition to that, we have a strategy in place some of the descriptives with respect to that. For example, to advocate for federal changes with respect to dealing you may have heard me in the last little while report out with the problem. that since we've had our strategy, we've had 135 organ- From a quantifiable point of view, we look at the ized crime and gang members that have been arrested. number of gangs that are operating in British Columbia. They've been charged with over 350 serious offences. We look at the number of gang members that we have So we do report it out in that particular fashion, but in British Columbia. We look at the number of known for an official reporting out under the service plan, we gang associates that we have in British Columbia. We report out the violent crime rate. There are other avenues look at actual gang members or associates that have we utilize in — if I could use the category — unofficial been charged, the number of charges, the number of reporting out of these statistics that I've mentioned. individuals involved. We look at statistics around vio- lence on the streets and in our licensed premises with M. Farnworth: I know, and I have heard the minis- respect to these particular gang members, and we look ter make those comments that X number of people have at our accumulation of intelligence with respect to the been arrested and X number of people have serious activities of these particular individuals. charges. The one statistic I'm still waiting to hear is that Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2537

X number of people have been convicted and X number So that's where we will continue to push for changes of people have been put away for X number of years. from the federal level and, of course, moving forward on I have not heard that yet, and I have been listening for our provincial changes. that for quite some time. So I would say that that, I think, is one of the key pieces of information that the public M. Farnworth: I'm glad…. Those are changes that have is looking for. I think that only when that's in place are been asked for, for quite some time. Some of them have you really going to start to see some decline or potential been achieved. Some of them have yet to be achieved. decline in terms of gang activity. They will take, in many cases, particularly on some of We've yet to see that, which brings me to my next those issues…. The government…. At the federal level, set of questions, and that is on the consequence side of they're going to take quite some time, particularly redo- things. I know the minister and the previous minister ing legislation around wiretap evidence. I mean, that's have made much about the issue around two-for-one not something I think is going to happen overnight. sentencing. We support that, and we've advocated that. But I think there are other changes that we could be I'd like to ask the minister: what other specific chan- looking at. For example, has the ministry approached ges at the federal level has the ministry been advocating the federal government with regards to making it more for to help us in the fight against organized crime and difficult for gang members and convicted gang mem- gang crime in B.C.? bers to have access to passports so they can travel out- [1650] side the country and pursue their illegal activity outside the country? Hon. K. Heed: I just want to make a comment before [1655] I actually answer your question. I, too, am looking for- ward to conviction rates, incarceration rates, the length Hon. K. Heed: Let me just lead up to the specific of time that we're able to keep these people in jail, and question that the member asked. We work hand in that's all part of where I'm going to with respect to what glove with the Canadian border security agency, with we've advocated. The previous Attorney General, the the U.S. immigration services. We are part of a national previous Solicitor General and I have carried that torch, committee on organized crime. We're a part of the if I can use that term, as we go forward. cross-border crime forum that looks at some of this We have to be aware — and I'm a fan of gathering cross-border activity between these gang members in that data and measuring our success — that we really criminal organizations. started gathering that when the gang strategy, the organ- Specifically with regard to the passport part of it, that's ized crime strategy, was announced in February. So as something that we would advocate for them to look at, we move forward, we will capture that data. at this particular forum too. Areas that we've advocated for the federal govern- ment to get involved…. Of course, lawful access so we M. Farnworth: Well, it's one of those things that I can deal with some of the wiretap, with the proliferation don't think really takes a forum. I think it takes a prov- of new electronic devices that we have — for example, ince just to stand up and say, "You know what? It's just BlackBerrys. We've advocated for changes in the way we nonsense that someone involved in drug activity, traf- deal with the part VI, the information to obtain war- ficking in drugs, gang activity has the ability to access a rants. There are volumes of work that is required by offi- passport and go to China or Vietnam or wherever." cers to get their warrants. We know they're doing it. I think that that's some- We've advocated for changes around the disclosure thing we should just stand up and say: "You know what? rules because often police officers' time is just taken That's wrong." It should be changed. It should become a away simply because of the processes we have around priority of the federal government. It should become a court disclosures. At times that process is lengthier priority of the province to do that. than the actual investigation leading to the particular That's one of the things I get concerned about some- charges. times. Things get caught up and end up being discussed We also went in and advocated for changes around and discussed and discussed, and here we are — you body armour, but I'm happy to say we were able to do know, you're years later down the road. I think that that within the province. Of course, as the member men- that's something that I would like to see advocated very tioned, bail reform…. We keep advocating for changes strongly, because I think that that would be another around bail reform, but a big plus was getting them to effective tool. deal with the two-for-one problem we had on remands. Now, I know that that's at the federal level and that We also have been advocating for changes with respect that's not something the province can change, but I do to the illegal firearm problem that we have, which is not think the province should be taking leadership on that. I only prevalent in British Columbia; it's certainly preva- do think that that is something that the province needs lent all across Canada. to stand up and say very loud and clear. 2538 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

I want to come back, for a minute, to some of the example, where they have specific T-shirts. You look at issues that we can be dealing with at the provincial level. the logo. I mean, if I were the real United Nations, I would The minister mentioned body armour. Well, yeah, that's be looking at copyright infringements on the way they've finally been done, but only after, you know…. It was the got their design and the logo, because it's not dissimilar. opposition that stood up and raised the issue, and the The point being is there has been a growth in the last government dismissed it and said: "No, we're not going number of years — for example, in paraphernalia — to to do that." mark out and to identify. I think that if there are other I'd now like to raise another particular issue that the jurisdictions that have used it, it's incumbent upon us to government at one time considered and then said, "Oh look at that. I think that's something that the ministry no, no, no. We're not going to do it," after having indi- should be taking into account, which brings me…. I am cated they would do it. That's the issue around gang col- mindful of the time, and I know that there's an awful lot ours and gang paraphernalia. in this particular area that we could go to. Maybe we'll Is the minister open to doing what some other prov- just have to leave that till next spring. inces have done in that area — for example, Saskatchewan I want to come back for a minute to the question of and Manitoba — in making it an offence? I understand resources in terms of number of police on the streets that the arguments are the same as around body armour, and the increase in the number of police officers and but making it an offence to display gang colours in some of the areas where they've been deployed or not public…. Is the minister prepared to reconsider his pre- been deployed. vious minister's decisions not to go ahead with that? Can the minister tell me the current operational [1700] strength of the integrated child exploitation unit and the integrated sexual predator observation team? Hon. K. Heed: Although I'm quite enjoying this [1705] discussion I'm having with the member opposite, I'm reminded that we are here to talk about estimates. But Hon. K. Heed: I am getting that information. If you'd I'm enjoying this. like to wait, fine. I will have that. Or if you've got some Let me just go on. In answer to your question, we do other area you want to explore now, I'm willing to do look at best practices, and we're aware of what some of that. the other provinces are doing with respect to gang col- ours and gang paraphernalia. I'm advised that there's M. Farnworth: I'll be glad…. We'll go back to that only been one charge laid. That was in Manitoba, and particular issue in a minute. It actually in some ways that charge was actually stayed. There were some con- leads into my next particular topic that I'd like to talk cerns around Charter issues. What we are doing is work- about, and that is the RCMP contract negotiations and ing with the federal government to ensure that we are regionalization. dealing with those particular Charter issues. If the minister needs any additional staff up front, now is probably a good time to take a five-minute break. M. Farnworth: No, we are talking about the estimates, and part of that is money that is spent on gang prevention. The Chair: The committee will recess for five minutes. So I think it's appropriate to ask questions on — okay — We'll come back at 5:15. where our money is being spent and what the priorities are, but also to raise things that I think are important The committee recessed from 5:06 p.m. to 5:12 p.m. that the government examine, particularly when the gov- ernment has said in the past that it would look at these [H. Bloy in the chair.] particular aspects in terms of fighting crime. If it's been done in other jurisdictions, and looking Hon. K. Heed: The member opposite asked a couple at it here in British Columbia…. I would submit to the of questions regarding the strength of the integrated minister that just because there's been a charge some- child exploitation unit and the integrated sexual preda- where else that's been stayed, has not been used, doesn't tor offender team. mean that it can't be something that could be used as ICE is funded for ten positions. It is fully staffed — a tool in British Columbia. Because I know that when that's what I'm advised — with the exception of one it was discussed, there were, for example, restaurant member who has been on maternity leave. Okay? owners who contacted me and said: "Look, we would ISPOT, the integrated sexual predator observa- appreciate something like this, because it takes the onus tion team, is actually operating — and this is what I'm off of us as a business people, and police have the ability advised — with 13 of the 18 positions filled. The RCMP to deal with the issue." has advised that they are actively recruiting members to I think what you're seeing in gang activity has been fill the vacancies we have here. However, I am further that growth in paraphernalia. I'll take the UN gang as an advised that the team is fully capable of carrying out the Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2539

necessary surveillance activities. Their operational cap- So I'd like the minister to be able, if he can tell me…. acity is still up to what it should be in order for them to How long have these positions been vacant? do what they should be doing. Hon. K. Heed: We don't have that type of detail at our M. Farnworth: Some comments on this particular hand's reach right now, and that will be an additional issue. I've raised this before in question period — this piece of information that we will endeavour to get to you particular issue. The ICE unit, while it's fully funded, as soon as possible. was initially intended to have significantly more than that. I think, if I'm not mistaken, it was intended, when M. Farnworth: I appreciate that, because the point it was announced…. that I want to get to on these particular issues is…. I I think that was just over, probably, two years ago. I think, and the minister will find, that these positions may be a bit out of date on that because I remember that have been vacant now for quite some time and that there the last time I raised the question, I think it had been 18 are issues around these two particular units that have months earlier. So just over two years ago, it had been not been addressed and that are causing problems and funded and was supposed to be upwards of around 30 challenges right now in the work that the members on people. That was the expectation when the program was these particular teams are doing. first announced. I think that these are and should be very high prior- My question — and I'd appreciate the minister's ity areas for the province. The ability to monitor and to response — around that is: what was the program ori- track sexual predators, particularly those that prey on ginally designed to be operating at, and when was it children, should be a very high priority. If there is an reduced down to ten individuals? issue in terms of vacancies and positions not being filled [1715] for a particular length of time — and I think that if he looks into this, he will see that it has been a significant Hon. K. Heed: We've explored this particular area. amount of time — there's a real problem there, and we None of us…. Certainly, I'm advised that we're unaware need to figure out what it is and get it addressed. of where the number 30 came from. When we look at Likewise, the same with the integrated child exploita- the fact that ICE and ISPOT, which would equate to 28 tion team, particularly around Internet pornography and members, are under the behavioural sciences unit of the child pornography. Again, the program was announced RCMP, that still doesn't get us to 30. with a set of stated objectives that it was to achieve a We would have to explore that with the RCMP to see certain size. If we're not doing that, I think that we need if in fact there were indications that the unit would be to be looking at why that is. If it's a question of resources, increased to that number. We're having difficulty at this we need to be addressing that. But more importantly, if particular time determining where that number came we're hiring additional officers,I think that this is one of from. those areas that we need to be focusing on. One of the things that I am concerned about is that, M. Farnworth: Here's what I'd like the minister to inasmuch as we are…. Fighting gang activity, clearly, is a do. As I said, I'm not exactly sure on the specific, on the key priority. I want to make sure that what's not happen- 30. But I do remember, because I've asked the question ing is that officers aren't being seconded from units such before, that it was significantly higher than ten. as this to other areas. That's what I'd like the minister to When the program announcement was announced look into for me, and if you could get back to me on that, by the government, it was intended to be significantly I'd really appreciate that. more than ten, but over time, since the announcement, it has been scaled back. I would like to know — and if Hon. K. Heed: Yes, as indicated, we'll get those num- the minister can get it to me in writing within the next bers back to you, but I just want to make a point here. seven days, I would appreciate that — what the initial When we talk about these positions, they are not the announcement was in terms of when the program was only positions that are dealing with these horrific crimes first announced, what it was intended to be. The fact that that do occur related to youth. There are several other it's ten is less than what the intent was. So if the minister resources that are on an ad hoc basis that are dealing would do that, I'd appreciate that. with this. The other question I have around the integrated I'll go back to my experience. In Vancouver we had a sexual predator observation team is if the minister can separate unit that actually looked at the child pornog- tell me, because 18 and 13…. That's a significant vacancy. raphy part of it, which was embedded in the vice unit Almost 30 percent of those positions are vacant in what within the Vancouver police department, and other is an extremely stressful — and I'm sure I don't have to municipal police departments also have resources tell the minister this — type of work. that are available to them in-house to deal with this [1720] problem. 2540 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

We'll get back to you on the numbers there, but I just like to know — where we're going in terms of policing don't want you to believe that those are all that we have in British Columbia. that look at this particular problem. The minister himself has made some statements around policing. In September the minister said: "At M. Farnworth: I appreciate the answer. I know that the end of the day I can't quite tell you" — don't you there are other activities that go on and other resources hate it when words get quoted back to you? — "what that are available. What particularly concerns me is that policing will look like in B.C. We are negotiating with when there are specific units that are tasked in dealing the RCMP. If that contract doesn't work for all people in with a particular issue, and those are usually formed…. I British Columbia, we will need to find something that think it's incumbent on the government that they are at does work." full strength and that we have a plan in place if there is a That's a pretty direct statement in the sense that we're problem to deal with that. in negotiations, and if that doesn't work, then we've got [1725] to do something else. Okay, so I want to break this down Let's move now to the issue of the RCMP contract into a number of components. Let's deal with the issues and issues around delivery of policing in the province that you've raised in terms of negotiation. ThenI 'm going of British Columbia. In the last set of estimates on this I to go to: okay, where are we and what if? And then: what raised a number of questions about: what stage are we at are the alternatives, and what work, if anything, has the with regards to the renegotiation of the RCMP contract province has done in those particular areas? that is up for renewal in 2012? If the minister could tell The minister says that there are three prime areas that me where we're at, I'd appreciate that. they're focusing on in phase 2: relationship, account- ability and audit, and cost containment, if I've heard the Hon. K. Heed: We have moved beyond phase 1, minister correctly. So in terms of the relation…. I think which is this information-sharing back and forth with that this is one of the questions that people have. Okay, the federal government, where we would obtain infor- this contract is up for renegotiation — the first time in mation from them and, of course, exchange any infor- 20 years that that's happened — and there's a unique mation that they would like from us. opportunity here to get changes not just in terms of how We've now entered what we call the negotiation phase. policing is delivered but in issues such as the relation- There are three themes attributed to that negotiation ship and those things that the minister has laid out. phase as we move forward. Number one is the rela- The first question I'm looking at is this. Is the contract tionship. We're viewed not as a client but more or less that you're busy negotiating…? Are you looking at either as a partner in the delivery of policing here in British an extension of the existing, or are you looking at another Columbia. We're looking at improving the relationship 20-year contract? What type of term are you looking at? we have with them. The second theme that we have here is around accountability, not only from an operational Hon. K. Heed: Currently we're looking at a 20-year point of view but, certainly, from a financial point of contract, a new contract with a five-year review of the view. The third theme that we have is cost containment. cost base. We can certainly look at the current costs and any future costs in relationship to this agreement. M. Farnworth: Within those three objectives, in What flows through these themes is an increased abil- terms of the negotiation that the minister has outlined, ity for us to audit the process with the RCMP. It gives us are there specific changes, as opposed to general, that the ability to increase evaluation and judge our progress the province is trying to achieve? Are there specific with respect to these three particular themes. goals by which we can measure the success of negotia- [1730] tions around this contract? As part of the discussion and negotiation is around [1735] the cost impact to us if, in fact, the federal government was going to go a particular direction or make a particu- Hon. K. Heed: First, areas around partnerships. We lar announcement or change something in particular — no longer have Ottawa dictating to us — for example, what that cost implication would be to the province here changes in the way we deliver policing here in British in British Columbia — we would now be engaged in a Columbia. Now, with this partnership agreement — or discussion with them with respect to that. the area around the contract that looks at the relation- ship as being a partnership — if they're changing an M. Farnworth: Last time there was sort of like, "Okay, aspect of policing, they must have agreement from us in we're engaged in some discussion and sharing of infor- order to do that. They just cannot dictate the change to mation but nothing," and so now we move to phase 2, British Columbia. which is actually into the negotiations. This opens up a It certainly gives us greater control not only in this whole range of questions that I think the public would particular theme but in all the other themes. That's all Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2541

part of each section of the agreement as we move for- Hon. K. Heed: It currently is two years, and that is ward — in that we maintain control. It's not dictated to what we plan on staying with. us as we rewrite this particular contract. In other areas around the complaint process against M. Farnworth: The minister made some comments police officers, the process would have to satisfy the that I just want to clarify — and that is, in terms of the provinces, and of course, it would have to satisfy British negotiation around other provinces. One of the things Columbia. It would have to be at the standard that we that I want to make sure we do not do is sort of sacri- have set here in British Columbia for our municipal offi- fice our goals or lessen our goals in what we're trying cers. It would be at the expectations that we have for our to achieve because other provinces may be reluctant, police officers here in British Columbia. or they're not priorities of those particular provinces, It's all around looking at some type of a harmonized because at the end of the day, we are the largest RCMP or unified process, but we are negotiating on the princi- detachment in the country. ple that this process definitely has to meet our minimum Frankly, it should be British Columbia that is setting standard here in British Columbia and the standard that the table. It's British Columbia that should be saying: we certainly have for all other police officers. "This is what our key interests are if we're going to con- Another major part is ensuring that our costs don't tinue around this contract." I would be concerned if go up, that we have some control over the costs for that there's any sort of hint that other provinces don't want to particular agreement. go down some of the paths that we feel are important. We need to make it clear that, look, this is a contract. M. Farnworth: Just in terms of dealing with the There are some very serious issues of concern in British length of the contract. I want to come back to the com- Columbia around that contract. We want them to be plaint commissioner in a moment, because I think that addressed if we're going to continue with the RCMP would be one of the key central issues that has to be dealt model, and that that is very much part of the negotia- with in these negotiations. tions. Okay? But just some questions in terms of the length. Why [1745] 20 years? The minister mentioned the opportunity to review — one five-year review. Why not be able to Hon. K. Heed: We lead the negotiations. As a matter review it every five years? of fact, my assistant deputy minister is the lead negoti- [1740] ator on that. We have most of the analysis. That is, we Then, what about the issue in terms of…? The minis- have most of the experts around the negotiations on our ter has mentioned, for example, cost containment. What particular team. about the ability for an independent audit done by the The other provinces have been looking to us for province, for example? Will that be part of what the leadership with respect to that. We have most of the province is trying to achieve and one of the things that it players at the table, and we have one-third of the RCMP wants to accomplish? force in British Columbia right now, so we are driving the program. The other provinces are following our lead Hon. K. Heed: The reason why we are negotiating or and will continue to do so as we try and hammer out a looking at a 20-year contract is that our partners in the negotiated agreement. negotiation are the other provinces and the other muni- cipalities that do contract with the RCMP. They have M. Farnworth: Just if the minister could clarify: who certainly indicated that they would like some stability, are the other partners? some surety, as we move forward. That would be deliv- ered through a 20-year contract. Hon. K. Heed: The partners are the eight provinces. The cost-based review would be done every five years, Quebec and Ontario are not on this particular one. We not just once after five years. The audit process — we have the three territories. Each of the provinces has would be looking at an independent audit here in British municipal reps that are part of it, and we have a munici- Columbia where we in fact would hire the people that pal rep that sits on our team here in British Columbia. would audit that particular part of it. It wouldn't be the RCMP auditing it. M. Farnworth: Who is that representative?

M. Farnworth: Is the government planning any chan- Hon. K. Heed: It is Murray Dinwoodie, and I believe ges in the negotiations around the notice period to get that Mr. Dinwoodie is the city manager for Surrey. out of the contract if the government so chooses? It's He also has a committee that my ADM sits on. That's currently — what? — I think five years. Is the govern- made up of representatives from other areas in British ment planning on changing that? Columbia with respect to municipal representation. 2542 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

M. Farnworth: We've got the goals around the rela- of issues that have come forward and a variety of experts, tionship, and the minister has outlined some of those, or people that proclaim to be experts, that have come and he's made it clear, okay, that we are taking a lead in forward. terms of the negotiations in regards to other provinces I must admit that Josiah Wood was an actual true — that they're looking to us to lead. expert that really explored the issue around police On some issues I can see that that would work fairly accountability and oversight here in the province of straightforwardly, but I'd like to come now to talk about, British Columbia. We're very pleased that those amend- I think, the issue that is probably — I'm not going to ments based on Josiah Wood's recommendations were say unique to British Columbia, but — where we have passed in this session as we move forward. And yes, I've the most concern around the renewal of the contract. I made statements that this is a starting point on increased think it's one of the key issues around policing in British accountability here in British Columbia — for example, Columbia, and that is the issue of police complaints and Dziekanski, Commissioner Braidwood and the excellent the fact that we still have in this province two different work that he continues to do there. processes in place. Part 1 — we accepted all 19 recommendations. Now, Previous ministers have said that they would like to how that relates to what we do here in British Columbia move to a unified complaints process. I've said that we as we move forward…. We want to make sure that there should have a unified complaints process.I n fact, I think is just one process here in British Columbia regardless that we need to give serious consideration now to the of the colour of your uniform. Whether that's a uni- Ontario model. You've got the Dziekanski case which is fied process or stand-alone process, that's all part of the unfolding and a report coming down from that, which negotiations with the RCMP right now. We're moving will no doubt make recommendations. into a stage right now where they are going to look at [1750] some draft legislation from the federal side of it in work- A whole series of questions flows around this particu- ing with Public Safety services in Canada to make sure lar issue, and the minister himself has made some state- that we have that. ments in this regard. The police chiefs came out and said [1755] that they want to see a more independent body, and if During the negotiations it appears that they're very, I recall, the minister says that he sees this as a starting very open to this. I can tell you — and I'll make the state- point. So we have a whole series of things happening at ment again — that we truly believe that here in British the same time. Columbia we need a unified process, one that the people We've passed new legislation this term that deals with in British Columbia understand, regardless if it's some- the police complaints process and the Braidwood recom- one that comes to their door or that they deal with that's mendations. We have the negotiations with the contract wearing an RCMP uniform or if a municipal police offi- taking place. We have the police chiefs having said the cer comes to the door. need for an independent body, and the minister has said: "Well, in terms of negotiations, what we're looking for is M. Farnworth: Has the minister directed, or has the either a standardized process where the RCMP have the ministry done, any policy work on, for example, a model same standards" — and if I am quoting out of context, similar to what Ontario has in place, for here in British let me know — "and similar procedures to what we now Columbia? have here in British Columbia." My question on this is: look, what is it that we're Hon. K. Heed: The Police Complaint Commissioner, trying to get in this set of negotiations? Are we trying Stan Lowe, continually looks at not only what's occur- to get just comparables, or are we trying to get a unified ring in Canada as far as police oversight, police account- police complaints process? Or are we now at a point of ability; he also looks throughout the world to determine saying: "You know what? It's time to look at the Ontario what's going on. So in fact, we're continually looking at model, and that is going to be part of the negotiation"? the different models that are out there with respect to the question. Hon. K. Heed: We're working on increased account- ability here in British Columbia, and you've heard me say M. Farnworth: He's an independent officer. The ques- that we want the most effective, accountable and trans- tion I'm asking is: has the ministry specifically looked at, parent police service here in British Columbia. A lot of done any policy work around, for example, the Ontario that is around how we deal with police complaints. model, or has the minister directed the ministry to look We're certainly well aware that the RCMP polices at that particular model? about 70 percent of the people here in British Columbia. I've been, and members of my ministry have been very Hon. K. Heed: Yes. The ministry continues to look at vocal about the fact that we want increased accountabil- the various models that are out there. The ministry, in ity here in British Columbia. There have been a variety conjunction with Simon Fraser University, will be con- Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2543

ducting a forum to discuss the various models that are things. As a matter of fact, we look at recommendations out there with respect to oversight and accountability of that come from these inquiries. We look at what the B.C. the police. Association of Chiefs of Police have brought forward. We are continually looking at it to ensure that we have the M. Farnworth: Has the minister directed, or has the most accountable, transparent process here in British ministry done, any work in terms of, for these negotia- Columbia for every police officer in British Columbia. tions, how a unified complaints process — as opposed to two separate processes — would work? M. Farnworth: The key way in which we do that is by ensuring that every officer is treated…. You know, the [N. Letnick in the chair.] process works regardless of whether you're in an RCMP uniform or a municipal police uniform. There's a pro- Hon. K. Heed: We have indicated to the RCMP that cess that's the same. The appropriate time to do that…. we won't sign a contract unless the complaints process The unique opportunity we have right now is the fact meets our expectations. So we are working with them, that a contract is up for negotiation, for 20 years. Now, separate from the contract, to determine what the com- I understand that that is somewhat separate, but at the plaint process should be. That's how it's enshrined as we same time it is one of the key things that the province move forward. has in terms of leverage to get a change. You know, it's [1800] like this is a big contract. This is one-third of the RCMP forces based here in British Columbia. M. Farnworth: I want to be really clear on this because I want us to make sure that we are clear in what our I think this is a really important part of the negotiation objectives are, particularly around this issue, because and what's taking place. as the minister knows, this is an issue that has shaken I want to make sure that what the ministry is doing, public confidence in how these issues are dealt with. We and what the minister is hopefully directing the min- have a number of inquiries that are currently…. Well, istry to do, is that we have worked up thorough policy I mean, we've got two very major, serious, important that we can implement, depending on where we are, inquiries that have been underway that will come down around a model that is a stand-alone model similar to with recommendations. Ontario, a model that is a unified process based here in In terms of how those recommendations are imple- British Columbia. mented, the fact that the contract is up for negotiation That's what I want to make sure of, that that work has again gives the province leverage in terms of imple- been done. I think that if you're in negotiations, it's not menting whatever recommendations do come down. I enough to say: "Oh, okay. We're working. We've done want to make sure that we are taking full advantage of some policy development with Simon Fraser." Rather, that position. it's to be able to say in that negotiation…. I want to know that that policy work has been done, Let's not kid ourselves. This is a federal organization that policy work is in place. The question that I'll ask and a province, and this is a serious, hardball, 20-year on top of that is: will the province, the government, be contract. It's: "Look, it's either this model, or we've got making those positions, or making their goal of what it this model." But we're clear in what it is that we want, is they want, public? and we're clear in what our goal and objective are. If Will the public know — not just in a broad term of: we don't get that, then we have the ability…. And they "Yeah, we want to have a policy that's applicable to both"? know we're serious. You know what? We're able to do Will the public, before the contract is done, know that, something else. "Look, this is the specific model that the province wants I want to make sure that's what the minister has to see in place" — before that contract is signed? got developed in terms of policy around a complaints [1805] process. Hon. K. Heed: Policy work is going to be ongoing, Hon. K. Heed: I just want to point out a couple things just so the member opposite is aware. We're going to here. What we do here in British Columbia is just not continually look at matters that affect British Columbia based on the contract negotiations. We have said here in because of the changing environment around policing British Columbia that we want an accountable, transpar- and accountability. I think the member would agree ent process. Whether it's the RCMP or whether it's our that's the due diligence we have to do. own municipal officers, we want the process that affects We'll also do our due diligence in how we deal with them. the RCMP. We're in the process of them drafting up Certainly, we've added the accountability and the legislation, and we expect that legislation will be out oversight through the amendments to the Police Act there before we actually sign an agreement here with the here, and as we move forward we'll look at various RCMP. As far as what that looks like and how we share 2544 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

it with the public here, I can tell you that what that has At the last set of estimates I asked the minister what to look like from a minimum point of view is what we work had been done. Had there been any work done on already have in British Columbia, which is public for all regionalization? I was told there had not been any work municipal police officers. done in the area of regionalization of police, particularly in terms of the Lower Mainland. M. Farnworth: I don't disagree with that. We've made I'll ask the question of you as the new minister, some changes, some improvements. But what has hap- because I know you've had opinions around regionaliza- pened since that report has come down and formed the tion before becoming Solicitor General. I'd like to know: basis of the legislation we passed this year…. There has what work has the ministry done around regionalization been the Braidwood commission. The Dziekanski case of police services in British Columbia? came down. Plus, there have been issues raised by the chiefs of police themselves, and a considerable amount Hon. K. Heed: The approach we're taking here —I 'm of public debate has taken place. It is definitely an issue sure the member understands that my perspective is a of considerable public interest. lot broader than it was in my previous role — is for more I think where we are as a province and the standard coordination within the province on how we deal with that we've got…. Public opinion, even with the chiefs police matters. thing, has moved beyond that. There's a recognition that We certainly respect, from a 24-7 point of view, the we need increased public oversight, accountability and local accountability that many of the municipal forces all those things, particularly related to the RCMP. and RCMP detachments have. But at a much broader I think that's a good thing from the police perspective level, from the Lower Mainland district, the RCMP in terms of having a system that people are confident in have actually regionalized several of their resources. and in terms of accountability and transparency that's fair The examples that come to the forefront right now are to the police, but also the public has confidence that they around emergency response teams, dog teams, traffic know exactly what's happening and what's taking place. analysts and forensics. What I am concerned about and what I'm hearing Those are some of the examples where it has been is that we've said — previous ministers have said and regionalized with the Lower Mainland district. There you've said: "We want to go to that unified position." are municipalities, municipal police departments, that What I'm worried about is that we could still end up are now working together to deliver services across their with two separate processes. jurisdictional boundaries. That's why I'm saying I think it's important that we have that model out there so that the public knows what M. Farnworth: The minister is saying that there it is we're trying to achieve. That's why I've asked about has been regionalization of some services taking place. the Ontario model and why I've asked about the uni- Some of that is new. Some of that is not new. There have fied model. I think that if one of the key goals is to have been issues around cooperation, and we want to see that public buying on this and public acceptance on this, taking place. you've got to have that out there. In terms of, specifically, the ministry looking at how You have to have that work done so that people can a regional police force could be implemented or could see that this is why this model has been chosen and work, it sounds like that work has not been taking place. that's why we're going down that particular path. It sounds like nothing really in that sense, as regards the [1810] province's position or the work that the province has If that's not done, I think that to some extent we'll done, has changed since the last time we discussed this undermine some of the work that the ministry is trying issue at the last set of estimates, which would have been to do. As I said, I don't want to be repetitive on it. But last year. I want the minister to know that I think it's crucial that [1815] that work is done and that the public have a strong idea about the direction the province is going to go in terms Hon. K. Heed: The province has said that if local of these negotiations. governments wish to have a regionalized police ser- vice, they would look at that with local governments. Hon. K. Heed: Hon. Chair, I can assure the member We don't have local governments chomping on the bit that we are doing that work. coming forward and pounding their fists on the desks, saying: "We want you to regionalize. We want to work M. Farnworth: This now brings me, with that state- together." We don't have that right now. ment, to the next part of the process. That is dealing with We work with local governments the best that we the issue of…. Okay, if we find that we're at an impasse can to ensure we're delivering a quality police service or that we're not happy with what we're hearing or what here in British Columbia. Albeit there's been some suc- we're getting back, what's the alternative? cess in certain areas, and we talk about a different level Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2545

of policing, but there is no ongoing study being done We recognize that this is a particular opportunity point with respect to creating a regional police service — for in time where we can look at how we're policed in this example, Metro Vancouver. province, and we're going to sign a contract." And we've done the work, and it looks at this alternative, and we've M. Farnworth: I thank the minister for that answer. done the work that's this alternative. Does the minister One of the issues that I think certainly the public would not think that it would be appropriate to have that work like to see or would like to have a better understanding done? on, for example, is…. The minister's answer — what I can take from that is that there has been no work done — Hon. K. Heed: Several studies have been done with for example, in looking at the costs of the regional police respect to regional policing. I think I heard the term force or the benefits and downsides study that looks at "regional policing" over 30 years ago when I actually how a regionalized police force could work or how it got into policing. Governments, academics and others would not work, what the costs and the implications have certainly talked about it and written about would be. What the minister is saying is that work has regionalization. not taken place to this point in time. I see him nodding. I can tell you that a lot of municipal governments that Which will bring me to my next question, and that are on contract with the RCMP have told us that they're is: has this similar type of work been done in any way, happy with the RCMP, and that comes from areas not shape or form around the establishment of a provincial only within the Metro Vancouver but certainly across police force in terms of how a provincial police force British Columbia and in the capital region. could look or what the benefits or costs associated with Areas around fragmentation in policing — the silo the establishment of a provincial police force would be? approach to certain parts of policing, which tend to lead Has any work taken place on that particular issue? many areas across Canada and North America to look at regional police models — have been addressed by the Hon. K. Heed: There's no stand-alone separate province — for example, how we deal with the records work being done on creating a provincial force here in management part of it here in British Columbia with the province of British Columbia. We are working on PRIME-BC so that we can share that information and coordinating and integrating our resources, whether it's intelligence across the province, how we deal with com- RCMP or municipal police departments, across British munication systems so that there's interoperable capabil- Columbia. That's the approach we are taking at this par- ity through our radio systems and our dispatch services, ticular time. and how we deal with serious crime around the region. Of course, we're very hopeful that we will be able to, We're looking towards creating more coordination on as a partner, negotiate an agreement with the RCMP. serious crime, gang crime, organized crime from across But then again, if there are significant problems that we all of British Columbia and certainly across Metro cannot overcome, we would have to look at different Vancouver. models here in British Columbia. M. Farnworth: I'm going to move off this issue afterI M. Farnworth: We're in negotiations on a 20-year make a comment. The issue is really clear — in my mind, contract with the RCMP — first time in 20 years. It's a anyway — and that is that we are negotiating a contract unique, I think, opportunity for us to get improvements with Ottawa. Most municipalities are happy with their in a number of those areas — I don't disagree with the police service — the RCMP police service and local minister — in terms of accountability, relationship, cost police. Communities are often happy with theirs, but containment. I think one of the most important areas, there have been a lot of questions raised. again, is around the issue of the police complaints pro- [1825] cess. Yet at the same time, we have said: "Look, we're not Your former municipality of Vancouver has been going to sign a contract unless it meets all the goals and very outspoken on the issue of regionalization. Other meets the needs of British Columbians." police departments have been outspoken on the issue Does the minister not think that it would be wise, in of regionalization. It's not a question of someone being terms of public policy, to have an examination of the happy or if everyone is happy or if there have been stud- public policy and an examination around the costs and ies or work done 30 years ago. What the question comes benefits around those issues around the question of down to is the role of the province, the leadership shown regionalization of police — for example, in the Lower by the province in saying: "We're in negotiations with Mainland — or on the issue of a provincial police force? Ottawa on a contract with the RCMP." [1820] I think that it would have been the right thing to do It's not in the sense, necessarily, that that's the dir- for the province to have also undertaken — the province, ection you want to go but in a sense of saying to the the ministry, to undertake — some work that looks at: public: "Okay. Look, we've done our due diligence here. "Okay, here are the alternatives that people have talked 2546 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, November 18, 2009

about. Here are some of the alternatives, and here has books and all the basic things in our education system. been some detailed policy work that we have in place But have we really got to the point that now, to send before we embark on a final contract with the RCMP." criminals back to provinces where they are wanted on I think that is something that would have been an warrants, we literally have to have organizations like extremely positive initiative and a positive piece of the Downtown Victoria Business Association hold bake work to have undertaken, and I think that it would have sales so that criminals can be sent to places where they instilled a great deal of confidence in the public in terms have evaded trial and potentially conviction for crimes of what the final decision is. that they're wanted on? I mean, it may well be that we stay with a new RCMP Is that the point, or will the Solicitor General review contract. But I think at least the work should have been the con air program to date, see that it has been suc- done on those other issues — on regionalization or cessful? Police agencies find it very cost-effective. They provincial police force, on those alternative models that advocate for it. Mayors and city councillors want it. are out there and that are discussed — so when that final Our citizens want it. They feel that their cities are safer decision is taken, you can say: "You know what? Here's because of it, when violent offenders are sent back to why it's done. Here's why it makes sense." When that's where they're wanted. Will the Solicitor General just give not done, I think that lessens the end product. the small amount of money that it has cost to run these The next question. Some of my colleagues have time, programs and help local government and downtowns will have some questions. I'm going to take of advantage that are struggling to make their communities safer? of their asking questions to get something cleared away. [1835] But the Davies Commission report into Frank Paul. The report has a number of recommendations, and I Hon. K. Heed: We strongly believe in the con air pro- want to know: will the ministry be implementing the gram. It's a very, very successful program and ensures recommendations contained in the report? that criminals go back to their jurisdiction and are held [1830] accountable for their offences back in those particular jurisdictions. [H. Bloy in the chair.] These criminals do escape prosecution by fleeing to Victoria or Vancouver, which are the predominant Hon. K. Heed: I did reply to you at length in writ- areas in British Columbia where they seem to move to ing regarding the Davies recommendations, and I really escape prosecution, so it has been a very, very successful don't want to go through all of that. I just want to talk program. from a more global perspective. A lot of what Davies I am advised that VicPD, Victoria police depart- actually brought forward certainly was captured by ment, did receive $10,000 for the con air program. I'm Josiah Wood in his review and his subsequent recom- also aware that they were able to raise additional funds mendations with respect to that. of somewhere in the area of $16,000. We have not dis- One area that I'll point out, and I pointed out in that counted giving them more money for their particular letter that I submitted to the member and the member program. for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, is around the independ- We have asked for an accounting of the moneys ent complaint process. That's the one recommendation because we are led to believe that there still is $16,000 that we did not move forward on. It is all part of our sitting in their particular account that they've earmarked ongoing process to review the accountability and over- for con air. When there is a financial need for additional sight of policing here in British Columbia. funds, we've indicated to them that we would be open to their requests. R. Fleming: I want to ask a couple of questions to the Solicitor General just about policing issues in greater R. Fleming: I'll move on to another question, Victoria and in the city of Victoria in particular. The although I would comment that when a program like first question is around the con air Victoria program. this has been successful on a trial basis and organiza- This is a program that has received no funding this year tions and business people have to contribute to it out from this ministry. I note that there was an agreement of their own pockets and people have to literally raise recently to supply a limited amount of funding to the money by holding fundraising lunches, that suggests to city of Vancouver for their con air program. me, for an interprovincial matter, an absurd way to do This program has been successful in a number of policing in this province. instances and in a number of communities in British I think it just begs the Solicitor General to go back Columbia, mine included, and I want to ask the minister and consider this a permanent program that has a multi- this. Does it not…? year funding commitment and that his ministry plays I mean it's bad enough that in our school system a role in administering, rather than passively receiving parents have to fundraise for computer labs and text- requests when the fundraised money runs dry. I think Wednesday, November 18, 2009 British Columbia Debates 2547

there's an obligation to take an interest in it and to help my view. They have reviewed it. They promised they cities fund that. would look at it. They have a review in their possession. I want to ask a question about the greater Victoria They're still underfunding Greater Victoria Police Victim victim services organization. In 2008 this ministry did Services, and I'm wondering if this Solicitor General is a review called the ViSDA review, the Victim Service going to sit down and meet and fulfil the internal poli- Delivery Analysis review. It was 2008. I know that was two cies of his ministry and fund greater Victoria to the predecessors ago, but I want to ask this Solicitor General population level that it's entitled to run this service. about that, because the premise for the review was that this ministry wasn't following its own internal funding policy Hon. K. Heed: We're willing to sit down with whoever. for victim services in greater Victoria — that the amount We're willing to sit down to ensure that we have the right of funding we got for staff was based on a formula of one funding formula in place in order to look at the services FTE per 86,000 citizens, that we were underfunded to the that are required for that particular area. We're looking tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. at various models. We are now one ministry that looks Now government, rather than acknowledge that it after, for example, the violence against women program, wasn't following its own policies, held a review. That versus it spread out. review again confirmed that the money should be We want to make sure that there's a consistent deliv- enhanced to this agency, to this volunteer group, which ery of services across, for example, the Victoria area. We has a couple staff positions. We've been through theO ak want to ensure that the funding model addresses the Bay murders. We've seen the demand on this service in needs within that particular region. this community. This organization is tapped-out. It's I move that the committee rise, report progress and burning its volunteers out. ask leave to sit again. [1840] They have been to this ministry several times. Mayors Motion approved. and police chiefs have pleaded the underfunding situa- tion. Government has run out of stalling techniques, in The committee rose at 6:44 p.m.

Hansard Services

Director Jo-Anne Kern

Manager of Print Production Robert Sutherland

Post-Production Team Leader Christine Fedoruk

Editorial Team Leaders Laurel Bernard, Janet Brazier, Robyn Swanson

Senior Editor — Galleys Heather Bright

Technical Operations Officers Pamela Holmes, Emily Jacques, Dan Kerr

Indexers Shannon Ash, Julie McClung, Robin Rohrmoser

Researchers Jaime Apolonio, Mike Beninger, Brant Felker, Morgan Lay

Editors Anton Baer, Aaron Ellingsen, Deirdre Gotto, Margaret Gracie, Jane Grainger, Betsy Gray, Iris Gray, Linda Guy, Barb Horricks, Bill Hrick, Paula Lee, Nicole Lindsay, Donna McCloskey, Bob McIntosh, Anne Maclean, Constance Maskery, Jill Milkert, Lind Miller, Lou Mitchell, Karol Morris, Dorothy Pearson, Erik Pedersen, Peggy Pedersen, Janet Pink, Amy Reiswig, Heather Warren, Arlene Wells, Glenn Wigmore

Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker.

Printing Agent Crown Publications, Queen's Printer for British Columbia 563 Superior St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 9V7 Toll-Free: 1-800-663-6105 telephone: (250) 387-6409 Fax: (250) 387-1120 e-mail: [email protected]

Rates Single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $396. GST extra.

www.leg.bc.ca

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.