2008 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 38th Parliament
HANSARD BLUES
This is a DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY of debate in one sitting of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. This transcript is subject to corrections, and will be replaced by the final, official Hansard report. Use of this transcript, other than in the legislative precinct, is not protected by parliamentary privilege, and public attribution of any of the debate as transcribed here could entail legal liability.
(Blues)
HANSARD BLUES DRAFT TRANSCRIPT
The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. Bloy in the chair. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee met at 2:34 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On Vote 26: ministry operations, $1,527,012,000 (continued). [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: A quick introduction. We're joined today by the deputy minister, Cairine MacDonald. Welcome back. Nice to see her back after an illness. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1435]
The other staff that were here were introduced the other day, but just to refresh everyone's memory, Andrew Wharton, ADM of policy and research division; Heather Davidson is in the room with us, assistant deputy minister, regional services division; Sharon Moysey is here, ADM and financial officer in management services division; and David Curtis, executive director, corporate planning and operations division. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Thanks to the minister for the introduction of staff members again. I particularly welcome the deputy minister, Miss MacDonald. I know she was sick last week. I hope you're doing fine now. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Keeping in mind the time limit — my earlier information was that we were going to go to the end of the day today, but now I know that we only go to 5:15 — I'm going to move to a new topic, which is similar to what we were talking about last time. It's about what we call the employment program for people with disabilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to know what percentage of people with disabilities reported any earnings at all and what percentage of people are receiving full $500 earning exemptions? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I think I've got all the information that the member wanted. The total monthly caseload of those on PWD is 60,087. The cases declaring earnings per month are 9,233 or 15.4 percent of PWD cases. Those declaring in excess of $500 per month are 2,094 or 3.5 percent of the PWD cases. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: The PWD caseload has gone up significantly, as I'm aware and the minister recognizes, which is almost 70 percent if you go back between 2000 and 2008. This is actually into the upwards direction if you look at when we compare that with the other part of people, which is the ready-to-work category. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Can the minister provide for me why the caseload on this file has gone significantly up as compared to the ready-to-work file? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1440]
Hon. C. Richmond: Actually, there are a couple of reasons why the number of PWD clients has gone up and the expected-to-work has gone down. First of all, in determining who is eligible for income supports, the ministry expanded the definition of "disability" to specifically include mental illness, to provide those individuals with income supports and additional services that will make a difference in their lives. So we expanded the criteria. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Also, it's because of an aging population and people living much longer than they did before. So the persons with disabilities are on the increase while, of course, the persons that are expected to work are on the decrease because we have put over 50,000 people back into the workforce of the expected-to-work category. That's a good time to be doing it, especially since about 2004-05 when the economy has picked up significantly. We have the lowest unemployment rates as far back as records have been kept. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have been very successful in putting a lot of people back to work, and the ones left on that list of expected-to-work who are still collecting assistance are either in a course and learning skills to get back to work…. Also, they are the most difficult ones to employ. The easier ones have already been placed back in the workforce. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: If we look at the business service plan, the minister does establish what we call the performance measures for the B.C. employment program — in other words, for people in the ready-to-work category. But when it comes to the people with disabilities in the program for that, which is the employment program for people with disabilities, there are no performance measures for that in the service plan. Can I ask the minister why they're missing? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1445]
Hon. C. Richmond: Although an actual performance measure may not be in the service plan, we do have a form of performance measure for PWD clients applying for EPPD. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First of all, I should point out that the program is strictly voluntary. It's not compulsory like it is for those expected to work. Secondly, it's open to all people with disabilities, not just those who are clients of the ministry. So there are some people who are not on PWD assistance that are eligible. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We do have a performance measure where we are encouraging people who wish to re-enter the workforce and are PWD status to avail themselves of the program. Some of them may want to do just part-time work, some may want full-time, some may want to work up to the $500 allowance, and some may want total independence. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So we do have a form of measure of evaluating their performance, but it's not as rigid or as strict as the one for expected-to-work. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: I will take it as, at this point in time, that we don't have the specific performance measures as we have for the other programs, particularly the B.C. employment program for what we call ready-to-work people. I will leave it at that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would appreciate, if at a later time the minister has some specifics on this…. I think we are spending a lot of money. I understand the client group and the sensitivity around that area. I understand that and appreciate that as well. But at the same time, we're also spending almost $44 million on this program alone for five years. We need some accountability from the service providers. So I will leave it at that at this point in time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to move on to a new report that the minister is probably aware of. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives recently released their report called Removing Barriers to Work: Flexible Employment Options for People with Disabilities in B.C. This report urges the provincial government to adopt a series of recommendations that would make employment possible for many more British Columbians with significant disabilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The primary focus of this government policy has been on those individuals able to participate in the labour market on an equal footing with their non-disabled peers when provided with limited accommodation and unbiased opportunities. Less attention is paid to those who may be able to participate only on a part-time basis or at a level below the norm of expected productivity. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The CCPA report found that the community-based supportive employment program tracked in the study achieved placement rates of 36 to 54 percent for people with a psychiatric disability and 47 to 81 percent for people with a developmental disability, while MEIA performance-based programming — employment program for people with disability, EPPD — achieved a placement rate of only 12.5 percent over four years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1450]
So keeping that in mind, will the minister expand quality-based adult special education programs, given the evidence that these programs have been very successful in supporting young people with disabilities to transition into mainstream employment? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I think I got the gist of the first part of the question. It was the college-based special education programs. That really doesn't fall under this ministry. That's under the Ministry of Advanced Education, Minister Coell, and I'm sure he will be happy to comment on that during his estimates debate. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But I do want to inform the member that through community consultations with stakeholders on EPPD, it was recognized that some individuals who have developmental disabilities may need a slightly different approach to achieve their employment goals. Therefore, Community Living B.C. and this ministry will jointly fund a three-year customized employment demonstration project. Procurement for this project is expected to commence in the spring of 2008. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: I would like to just go on. They made a number of recommendations under the CCPA report, which I just mentioned a couple minutes ago. There are some recommendations that I think are important to look at, so I'm going to just mention those. I would like to ask for a response from the minister about those recommendations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that the recommendations I'm going to mention are part of the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance, but it may not be true, so the minister can correct me on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The first one that they recommend is to ensure that individuals receive continued medical and dental benefits at the same level as provided while on income assistance until they receive an equal or greater level of expended benefits from their employer, as is the case in Ontario. Can the minister respond to that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1455]
Hon. C. Richmond: I will read into the record the answer to the question for the member. I think it answers it pretty fully. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
PWD clients and persons with persistent multiple barriers, PPMB, receive earnings exemptions beyond which income is deducted. When they leave assistance, PWD and PPMB clients retain all their aftertax earnings and all of the above benefits retained by employable clients. They also retain provincial benefits — Pharmacare prescription costs paid 100 percent, medical equipment and supplies; basic dental and orthodontic; and employment services, EPPD — and federal benefits — the working income tax benefit and disability supplement. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know we're not supposed to use props, but I'll just show the member. We have a good brochure on Working: More Than Just a Paycheque. It shows all of the benefits that people are entitled to, both expected-to-work and PWD and PPMB clients. I will table that with the Chairman for the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Thanks to the minister for the answer. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The other recommendation that the CCPA report makes is to maintain the bus pass provision or provide $120 per month transportation allowance for people who can't access public transportation, with the possibility of additional transportation support based on individual need for people who are working and are not receiving PWD benefits. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have received a lot of letters on that as well, so if you can comment on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: At the moment, hon. Member, persons with disabilities, PWD, who leave income assistance for employment or Canada Pension Plan disability benefits are not eligible for the annual subsidized bus pass after the calendar year in which they leave assistance. While we in the ministry regularly review programs and services, at this time we don't plan to expand the bus pass program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: The other recommendation which is also very important, particularly to move people with a disability to meaningful employment…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I appreciate the earnings exemption we have at this point in time, which is $500, which could probably be an incentive for people to move from income assistance to work. But when we talk about people with a disability, they have all kinds of disabilities, and they will not be able to work as any other regular worker who can commit for 35 hours or 15 hours or whatever. Sometimes their disability decides they're up and probably good to work for two months, and then they're not good to work for one month. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What the report recommends is…. It's talking about developing working credits for that to even the flow of earnings exemptions for those who, because of their disability, have fairly dramatic fluctuations in their ability to earn employment income. Working credits are used to average the earnings over time so that people who can work significant hours but only intermittently are not penalized. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think that's a good system. I would like to ask again what the response of the minister is on this one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1500]
Hon. C. Richmond: To answer the member's question about averaging income over a certain period of time, we have looked at that as we do look at all options from time to time. At this moment we are not contemplating doing that, but one thing we have done to make it a lot easier for persons with disabilities is allow them to move into the workforce and back out. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If their job only lasts two or three months, they can move back onto assistance. They don't have to start over at square one. They'll just move back onto income assistance, and they don't lose any of their benefits or have to fill out forms or anything like that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We did make that change to allow people…. A lot of times with persons with disabilities, the nature of the work they get is temporary. They can work for a couple of months, and then they're laid off or their job ends. So we've allowed them to move back and forth into the system and into part-time or full-time work again without any penalty. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: The other recommendation the CCPA report indicates is a very interesting one. At this point in time I know that we have an employment program for people with disabilities. There are three or four different providers offering that program, but they're probably talking about a new concept, about social enterprise. They recommend to provide stable, long-term four-year provincial government funding for three to five social enterprise coordinating groups around the province to support vision development and ongoing social support for social enterprises employing people with disabilities and/or a combination of people with disabilities and people without disabilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, I would like to ask the minister what the minister's response on that one is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1505]
Hon. C. Richmond: We are always looking at social enterprises, and whenever they're brought up to us, which is not too often…. But we are interested in finding ways to encourage the creation of social enterprises, especially for persons with disabilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The self-employment program is intended to provide support to clients engaged in operations that are as small as seasonal, part-time microenterprises or as complex as businesses that require full-time involvement, significant loans for equipment and inventory, and paid employees. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think this would be a good time to remind the member and others who may be watching this program — the six or seven; I don't know — of the good work that's being done by WorkAble Solutions, which is a self-advocacy group. They work in conjunction with the ministers council on disability, and they're having some great successes working with employers, both large and small, to encourage them to hire the disabled. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Also, it works in conjunction with our 10 by 10 Challenge that we have out to communities to increase the number of persons with disabilities employed by 10 percent by 2010. That has been taken up enthusiastically by 59 or 60 communities in the province now, and some have achieved some great success. If I get a chance later, maybe I'll expand on that and give out some of the results of some individual communities and how successful they've been on the program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: I appreciate the updates on WorkAble Solutions as well as 10 by 10. I think that when we call 10 by 10 formally, I'll ask you a question on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would certainly like to ask a question, since the minister mentioned it. Is there any special program funded by the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance to encourage people with a disability to seek employment with or participate in the Olympics? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I'm so glad you asked. I've got a lot of information on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Through the ministers Council on Employment for Persons with Disabilities, we have worked very closely with the Olympic and Paralympic Games. We're using them as a catalyst in establishing our 10 by 10 Challenge, a council initiative to increase employment for persons with disabilities by 10 percent by 2010. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A key aspect of the government's provincewide disability strategy, the challenge is aimed at increasing the current employment of persons with disabilities from 132,000 to 145,000 by 2010 in communities across the province. Communities and business sectors have been provided with challenge targets and supporting tools such as WorkAble Solutions materials and the Measuring Up guide, a document prepared by the 2010 Legacies Now, which allows communities to assess their levels of accessibility and inclusion for persons with disabilities. The challenge is a win-win proposition. Skilled workers are given the chance to join their local workforce, and employers are provided with skilled and dedicated workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The province provided 2010 Legacies Now with a one-time $900,000 grant to establish Access Works, a program that will help persons with disabilities benefit from employment and volunteer opportunities resulting from the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. Access Works is a unique endeavour that will aid persons with disabilities to take full advantage of all the exciting opportunities leading up to 2010 and beyond. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1510]
Over 40 agencies — including the Neil Squire Society, the program's lead disability service provider; the Canadian Mental Health Association; the Canadian National Institute for the Blind; and the British Columbia Paraplegic Association — are enrolled in Access Works. Working with these providers, Access Works will establish connections between organizations needing to fill a job and volunteer positions with disabled persons who are qualified for these opportunities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In addition to its role in facilitating employment and volunteer opportunities, Access Works will also identify potential joint economic ventures between business, disability-friendly organizations and disabled entrepreneurs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: My question was particularly on one piece of this, which the minister mentioned in the detail offered just now. That's about the $900,000, I think, grant given to Legacies Now. I would appreciate it if the minister can briefly tell me the purpose and if there are any set goals or targets for that money. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: To answer the member's question as completely as I can, we have not set specific numbers for these organizations, but we specifically chose people who are very skilled at hiring the disabled, such as Neil Squire, the CNIB, the B.C. Paraplegic Association and others who really understand and work with these people all the time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We do have a commitment from VANOC that they will do their very best to comply with our wishes. That is by increasing the number of disabled people employed by at least 10 percent by 2010. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: My understanding is that this is a stand-alone, one-time grant and that it's not part of 10 by 10. That's my understanding. If that's not it, I could be corrected. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If you're spending close to a million dollars on this one and, as the minister said, there are no specific numbers, then how can we establish the accountability for the tax dollars we're spending — if there is any accountability at the end of the day? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1515]
Hon. C. Richmond: We will be getting reports back from all of these institutions that we talked about. They haven't been up and running that long, but as the program progresses, we will be getting progress reports and final numbers on how they're doing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is a one-time grant. You're correct in that. It was $900,000, specifically to build on the excitement and the publicity that the Olympics will garner for us. It's an aside from an Olympic event but naturally using that event to build on the number. And as I said earlier, we know how many people with disabilities are working now, and we'll be able to measure it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Just so that I'm clear, I want to put on the record that I support the initiative. I'm not against the program. But being in my past life part of the non-profit sector and receiving grants from government, I understand that whenever government gives you money, even if it is $10,000, they always bring back with that grant: "This is what we want. This is what the expectations are." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Having said that, having no expectations listed, the reports won't serve a meaningful purpose. That's my comment on that. I would like to move on to a new question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister just mentioned a few minutes ago, about the people with disabilities, that if they lose employment, they can come back again. Again, that is one opportunity they have, but my understanding is that the disability designation is not a permanent one. Each time they come back, they have to go through the whole process again. That's one question. The second one is: why is it not permanent? If the minister can respond to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: Earlier I said that we have revised the rules so that people can move into employment and out again. It was always a concern to people that if they got a job for two months or three months and then had to come back onto the income assistance roll — it's PWDs we're talking about — they might have to start all over again with an application. That is not the case anymore. They can move in and out of employment into temporary employment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1520]
As to whether it is a permanent designation or not, technically, no, it's not. But for all practical purposes, it is, except in very rare occasions. That would be that while it is within the authority of the minister to rescind an individual's designation, in advance of which administrative fairness would require a review, the ministry has conducted designation reviews in only a handful of very exceptional cases — for example, where there is clear indication of the falsification of evidence on a PWD application. That's the only time that a PWD has been rescinded. So while it is not absolutely permanent, for most practical purposes, it is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: I would like to move on to a new line of questions, but before I do that, I would like to just make these few comments and ask the minister whether this is actually a line of questions I should be asking this ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Recently the government of British Columbia has signed a couple of agreements with the government of Canada. One is called the Canada–British Columbia labour market agreement, known as LMA. The other one is called the Canada–British Columbia labour market development agreement, known as LMDA. I would like to know whether these agreements have anything to do with the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm asking because, particularly the labour market development agreement — the second one which I asked about, providing the employment programs which are now under the federal government — and the employment program to people on employment assistance, as compared to income assistance…. It would make sense, in my opinion, to move those programs, when they move to a province, within the Ministry of Employment because the Ministry of Employment is providing very similar programs. So before I start asking my question, I would like to know, Minister, whether those contracts have anything to do with the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I just wanted to get the exact description of the two programs that the member mentioned. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First of all, the LMA, the labour market agreement, is a program being transferred to the province by the federal government, as the member said, with funding of $66.4 million annually for five years. And yes, it will be run out of this ministry, but on that program there will be several ministries delivering the LMA program. There will be other ministries involved, but it's basically run out of this ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The LMDA program is quite different, and it's quite extensive. The staff of both provincial and federal governments have spent the best part of the last year negotiating the agreement. The agreement was signed in February of this year with the federal minister, the Hon. Monte Solberg, and now they are working on working out all of the details because it is a very complex program. Yes, it will be run out of this ministry, and we will take responsibility for the program on February 1, 2009. By then the details will probably be in place. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1525]
I can tell you that it involves approximately 268 staff who are in the federal government now, and they will have a choice of probably three options. They can have the choice of transferring to another branch of the federal government if they wish to stay with the federal government, or if they're older and approaching retirement, they will probably have the option of a bridging or a buyout to take their pension. The third option is that they will come over and work with the provincial government and transfer from federal to provincial staff. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So it's very complex. As you can imagine, there's a lot involved, and we're dealing with a lot of people here who all have different goals and objectives and aspirations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[A. Horning in the chair.] [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The program is $288.2 million a year, and it's in perpetuity. I should add that the federal government has divested itself of this program in several provinces. B.C. is not the first to do it, but it is a very large and very complex program, and as the member said, it involves people on employment insurance. So it's a good fit to come over to our jurisdiction, where we already are running several similar programs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I said, that takes effect next February 1. By then we'll have all the details ironed out, and the program will be transferred. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Thanks to the minister for that very useful briefing on the program. That actually does answer quite a few questions that I would have otherwise asked on these. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a similar set of questions for both the agreements. I will probably ask those questions, and the minister can respond as it relates to both the agreements, rather than asking the same question separately for both. These are simple questions in my opinion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My first question is: can the minister tell us as what client group each agreement, the LMA and the LMDA, will serve? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm asking the question so that I'm clear. As of today the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance programs — whether it's the B.C. employment program or EPPD, the employment program for people with disabilities — are, in my understanding, limited to people on income assistance only. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Similarly, a lot of programs offered by the federal government at this point in time, particularly by the ministry of — they keep changing different names; it used to be HRDC at one time — social services, only serve the people who are EI eligible. That's why I'm asking this question as to what client groups these two programs will serve. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1530]
Hon. C. Richmond: I think we got it straight. It's a little confusing at times; they tend to overlap. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The labour market agreement will allow the province to invest in labour market development strategies for non-EI-eligible individuals who are either unemployed or who are employed and low-skilled. The Ministry of Economic Development will have oversight responsibility for ensuring that LMA funds are targeted at key labour market priorities as identified in the WorkBC action plan. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The LMA program will be delivered through a number of government ministries, including this ministry, the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. It is specific. To name some of the groups: immigrants, aboriginals and women — amongst others. But those are the three principal groups. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance will utilize LMA resources to build upon existing programs and services that support persons with disabilities. In particular, MEIA intends to expand return-to-work supports for a broader range of disabled individuals, increase access to assistive technology and workplace accommodations, provide work incentives to encourage disabled persons to move off government income support and into full-time employment, and increase employment opportunities for aboriginal persons with disabilities by addressing specific gaps in employment training. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When we get to LMDA…. The LMDAs are funded under part 2 of the Employment and Assistance Act. All LMDA programs and services must be similar to the employment benefits and support measures, EBSMs, described within the Employment and Assistance Act. LMDA programs and services are intended to assist employment insurance clients and the unemployed general public to prepare for and obtain employment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In addition, sector-specific initiatives to assist employers to meet their human-resources needs may be implemented under the LMDA. A devolved LMDA will provide the province with an opportunity to create an integrated made-in-B.C. labour market system that will meet the needs of all British Columbians. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
These programs and services will complement existing provincial employment programs. As I said, the LMDA EIA part 2 budget is $288.2 million, and at the moment it's in perpetuity. The LMA program has a five-year time limit on it. The LMDA does not. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Once again, thanks to the minister for the answer to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, that's quite a bit of money moving from the federal government to the province. I would appreciate if the minister could tell me: where will that money go? Will that money go to the general revenue, or is it going to go directly to the respective ministries which are going to work on those programs? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The reason that it won't appear in this year's budget is because the agreement was signed after the budget. It is targeted to specific programs. The LMDA will be coming specifically to this ministry and, in the LMA, to the ministries that I mentioned that will be involved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The other thing that I should add, though — and it's very pertinent to this — is that we are bound under this agreement to honour contracts that the federal government already has with service providers, however those contracts last. They could be in the middle of a contract, or it could be a year, two years or three years left on the contract. Some go up to three years. We are bound to honour existing contracts. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1535]
J. Brar: Thanks. Actually, that's a bit of an interesting comment. My understanding was that the provincial government would maintain the federal program for two years, but what the minister said is something different. It could be two months. If the contract ends in the next two months, then it could be a different thing. I just wanted that clarification. It's not a flat two years; it is based on the contract. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But is there any limit? Is it clearly at the end of the contract, or does it have time attached to it? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: To make it perfectly clear, we take over the program on February 1, 2009, and we honour any contracts that are in force. The member is correct. There could be any amount of time left, and I think the maximum is up to about three years or maybe a little less. As contracts expire and we assume those programs or the service providers for those programs, it will all go out to competitive bid again — RFPs — for contracts, but the contracts this time will be with our ministry in the provincial government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: The organization called ASPECT — I'm sure the minister and the minister's staff is aware of it; it's called the Association of Service Providers for Employability and Career Training — made a submission to the Select Standing Committee on Finance, which has a lot of direct relationship, of course, as to what happens in the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just to put on the record, ASPECT represents a membership of more than 150 employment training organizations, with approximately 30,000 employees in 60 communities throughout British Columbia. ASPECT members are both non-profit and private organizations that provide community-based employment and career training specifically designed to assist individuals in overcoming their barriers to employment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
ASPECT also joined hands with some other organizations and made another umbrella organization called the B.C. Career and Workforce Development Alliance. They have been very, very concerned about the whole transition of this program. I'm sure the ministry is also very, very careful to make sure that the transition of the programs is very smooth, because it's a huge transition, in my opinion, to take over. It's a huge initiative for the ministry as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They made three recommendations. I would like to see the response from the minister to those recommendations. The first one is that the government ensure that key members of the B.C. Career and Workforce Development Alliance are included in the advisory committee struck to implement the LMDA funds. Can the minister respond to that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1540]
Hon. C. Richmond: Currently the transition office is developing a process to consult with LMDA stakeholders. It is anticipated that this process will be established by April of 2008, which we are in now, so we're just about there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In addition, the ministry has created a website that allows clients, community groups, service providers and federal Service Canada staff to provide direct input to the LMDA transition project team. I have the site address here. It's, essentially, labourmarketservices.gov.bc.ca. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Our procurement processes are designed to fairly evaluate all proponents, whether non-profit or for profit. Our staff have met with ASPECT in the past and would be pleased to meet with them in the future. So we do want to involve groups like ASPECT and other stakeholders in the transition process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: One of the concerns which is very common among many stakeholders providing employment programs now funded by the federal government is that the model used by the federal government is much different than MEIA's. In particular, the program of the federal government is delivered by many, many non-profit small organizations throughout the province and probably some private organizations as well, whereas the employment programs of MEIA are offered by three or four — particularly by two big organizations — big contractors. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The fear is that these programs may also be centralized and handed over to these big corporations. I would like to see what the response is from the minister on that. Is that a real fear of those organizations, or is this just not true? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1545]
Hon. C. Richmond: Just to give a recap of how a lot of our contracts have been let. BCEP — that's the B.C. employment program — is delivered by three prime contractors. We're using GT Hiring Solutions, WCG International Consultants and THEO B.C. These contractors work with over 80 community-based service providers to ensure a range and depth of services are available for clients. Services are available in both rural and urban areas, as determined necessary by the ministry's caseload demographics. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The contractors are required to flow through a minimum of 25 percent of the service fees to community-based providers. Over 35 percent of service fees have been paid to these service providers since the program's inception in July of 2006. So they're required to flow through 25 percent, but since the program's inception over 35 percent of service fees have flowed through to these providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We make no distinction between profit and non-profit agencies during our procurement processes. Both profit and non-profit agencies can participate in the open bidding process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On the EPPD contracts there are ten contracts, as you said, held by three contractors: THEO B.C., West Coast Group and Neil Squire Society. Out of these contracts, worth $18 million, eight contracts are geographically based for all clients and all disabilities and two disability-specific contracts in the Lower Mainland serve individuals with mental health and mobility and physical impairments. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The contractors utilize 30 service providers and over 70 identified community partners for individuals' referral and services. Over 50 percent of the $18 million in contracts was awarded to not-for-profit organizations — over 50 percent. While EPPD contracts do not stipulate a percentage flow-through to community-based service providers, the disability-specific needs of many EPPD clients will ensure that contractors acquire the services of agencies that are positioned to address the needs of those clients. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think that people do not have to have a worry about where the RFPs will go out. Everyone is entitled to bid on them. Just by the nature of the contracts, a great percentage flow through to community organizations and not-for-profits. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I can't get into all of the details, but as you can imagine, the other thing we will have to do as we take over this LMDA program is sort out the physical location of a lot of things like offices — which offices should stay, and which should go — so that we do not duplicate services and overhead. As I said earlier, there are a lot of details to sort out in this program. It's a huge program, and it involves an awful lot of people. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: So my understanding on that is…. I understand the explanation, which means that at this point in time the big corporations actually have the pie. Then they are asked, probably, to bring in the other sectors — the non-profit sector or small organizations, which in one case receive only 25 percent. My understanding from that is that a similar system could follow for those programs in the future. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Having said that, keeping in mind the time, I would like to move to some questions that I received from the clients. One of the questions I have is from Robert Holmes and his wife. They're disabled and are on disability benefits. Robert is having surgery in the near future, and his wife is receiving cancer treatment in Campbell River. Instead of being helpful, in their opinion, MEIA has made their life a nightmare. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1550]
First, MEIA asked this family of three to stay in a homeless shelter in Campbell River while receiving cancer treatments, at a cost to the taxpayer of $240 per night, instead of the $60-a-night motel the family asked for. They had to fight back to get a motel room. This would have put their young daughter in the same room as drug addicts. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Second, the ministry denied their travel expenses 14 times, saying that this is the policy — each time you have to appeal and get it. They get back all 14 times. I don't understand that policy as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The question the family is asking now is this. The Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance paid 20 cents per kilometre for fuel costs while they're travelling for medical appointments. This rate was set a couple of years ago when the gas price was about 90 cents per litre. Today it is over 115 cents, and sometimes it even goes up beyond that. So it's almost 25 cents up. This does not include the gas tax, which could quicken horribly as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ministry policy at this point in time states: "The ministry authorizes over the allowable 20 cents per kilometre if there is a significant gas price increase." So I would like to ask how the minister defines the significant gas price increase, in this case. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The member is correct. Our policy is that any rate above 20 cents per kilometre will be authorized if there is a substantial increase in the price of gas, unless there are less expensive modes of transportation available. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We reviewed the cost of operating a vehicle, factoring in the cost of fuel, but it hasn't been done for a couple of years. In February of '05 we did increase it from 12 to 20 cents, but I think that you're absolutely right. With the way that gas is going right now, we better have another look at it pretty quickly, because it has gone up, like you say, about 25 cents a litre. We will be having a look at that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As you know, I can't comment on individual cases. We can only talk on policy and the general policy but not as it applies to a specific family. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just to clarify something I said before, so that no one gets the wrong impression. When I said we will be looking at offices throughout the province, it will be to become more efficient and cut down the overhead. I don't think we're going to be moving or closing any offices, but we may be amalgamating some offices with LMDA and with ourselves. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's too early yet in the process to have chosen a model for the RFPs. We haven't chosen a model — how we're going to go out and look at these programs. The program for LMDA is different than programs…. They're similar but different. So we haven't chosen a model yet. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But I just wanted to just make that clear about offices. We're not going to be looking to close a bunch of offices. We're just going to be looking to be more efficient and see…. Maybe there are properties in communities that lend themselves to amalgamating offices. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1555]
J. Brar: I understand the minister cannot probably comment on the individual cases. I brought this case in as an example. There may be many other people who are in a similar situation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Particularly, I appreciate the response from the minister. I think what the minister is saying is that the minister is committing today to review again what you call the allowance and probably adjust it to the level, which is good. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Interjection. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Yeah, I just want to mention that. This family…. I spoke to Robert a few weeks ago, and he told me that they travel about 800 kilometres every three weeks for medical appointments, which is a huge mileage they have to go through. So the allowance around the gas is very, very important for them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just to put that on the record. When the minister or an MLA goes on legislative duty, the policy of the government is to give them 48 cents. You know, those people who earn a very good salary, in my opinion, get 48 cents as compared to people who are very, very vulnerable and on income assistance and particularly going through a tough time — both husband and wife are on sickness and disability — and travelling a lot. It doesn't make much sense to give them just half of what the minister gets. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I won't ask any question. I will just take the commitment from the minister on that one. With that, I will probably move to my other questions and hand it over to my fellow member here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is another case where I just want to explain the story to the minister, again so the minister understands that story. There may be other stories like that as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A 14-year-old boy, Tavin, if I pronounced it right, succumbed to leukemia a couple of months ago, and his mom, of course, was trying to help him. From the day he was diagnosed, it was a struggle for the mom. She had to basically quit the job and, unfortunately, go on income assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of course, it's very, very tough when your son is in hospital and you're only receiving $500 per month, when you're to make numerous trips to hospital and probably spend some money on things that you otherwise won't spend. She got, as per the explanation here, her income assistance reduced. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question to the minister is whether the minister can explain why the ministry reduced her income assistance benefit. Is that a policy — when her son was in hospital? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I think that I heard the member correctly. The boy is suffering from glaucoma? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Interjection. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: Glaucoma, I think. Anyway, I don't have any specifics — you know, an answer to say why this particular woman's income assistance was reduced. I have no knowledge of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.] [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But, as in the case of the other person too, if you will give us the specifics — their names, etc. — we will look into it. Just as a random case you bring me and say, "Why was her income assistance reduced," I can't tell you. But if you give me the letter that you received from her, I will look into it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On the previous one, I want to make it clear, too, that on the gas prices, we've committed to review it — not necessarily increase it, but we'll review it. Let's face it. I don't think that gas prices are going to go down. Maybe that's what everyone was hoping a few months ago, but I doubt that very much. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In both these cases, give us what you have on file, and let us look into it — especially the latter one if her assistance was reduced. We have no way of knowing why unless we know the case we're talking about. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1600]
B. Simpson: Before I start this line of questioning, I just want to clarify whether or not the minister has this program. It has to do with $129 million transferred from the federal government in the announced community stability fund, the $1 billion community stability fund. So just check and see if that fund or any portion of that fund is being managed through this ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: No. We do not have responsibility for any portion of that fund. It comes under the Ministry of Economic Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
B. Simpson: I just want to be clear, because there've been discussions about the older worker program, possible pension bridging, all kinds of things. The minister's ministry won't manage any of that in the foreseeable future? Is that correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer is no. We work with the other ministries on these programs, but they're not our programs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Well, the program I would like to dwell on, then, is the outreach program that the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance runs. The outreach program is run by the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance and also run by the ministry for housing. Can the minister clarify as to what is the difference? If the minister can just explain to me how these two programs stand alone and work for the same cause, that would help to understand the issue first. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: Yeah, it is a pretty complex program. It's easy to see why it's a little bit confusing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The original outreach pilot program was done by our ministry, funded by our ministry, but now the program has literally been taken over by Housing. We work very closely with them, and it's mostly our staff that are the outreach workers, in many cases. We work with Housing and other ministries, and $3 million annually comes out of our ministry to pay for our staff who work with Housing across the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is, of course, to connect B.C.'s most vulnerable with housing, health and income supports that will make a real difference in their lives. A lot of these people that we outreach to are people who, let's say…. Many of them have never been in a government office. They don't even know the programs that are available for them, so that's why we go out to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1605]
I don't have the statistics in front of me because they are with Housing, but the program has been very successful, and the retention rate has been fairly good. The Minister for Housing said to me the other day that the retention rate on the program has been close to 80 percent. So it has been successful, but not 100 percent. I don't know if we'll ever reach 100 percent success. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In all the larger urban centres the staff have regularly scheduled hours at the major hospitals. Other hospitals are served on an as- and when-needed basis. Clients being discharged from correctional facilities have access to prerelease phone services in regions that contain correctional facilities, primarily Fraser, Kamloops and Vancouver Island. We do extensive work on predischarge inmates in prisons to try to put some stability in their life the minute that they are discharged. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In Victoria and Nanaimo the ministry has also established downtown outreach service offices that are located with other community social service providers. This allows the staff to reach clients who are uncomfortable attending regular government offices and ties our services with those of our community partners. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is a complex program and funded out of more than one ministry. This ministry has funded projects that offer specialized outreach services that continue to run through partnership funding such as Vancouver homeless outreach and Kamloops integration project. Of the 2,613 files opened provincially since our homeless outreach project began in October 2005, 1,804 files were still open as of January 18, 2008. Of the open files, 1,391 included shelter. That's 77 percent of these clients that have shelter and are receiving assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Can the minister tell me the number of FTEs working in the outreach program under the MEIA program? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The number of FTEs working on outreach in our ministry is 38. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: Last brief question on the outreach. Then I'll move on to something else. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In Surrey, the second-largest city in the province, now with probably close to 500 homeless people — which is also second largest — there are only one and a half FTEs for outreach, which is nowhere close to the capacity which is needed. I don't know whether that's funded by MEIA or the ministry for housing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is: is that a sufficient number, or is there any review going on to actually add some more people to do the outreach work to reach out to the 500 people who are homeless in Surrey? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1610]
Hon. C. Richmond: I don't have absolute numbers of how many work in outreach in Surrey. I don't know where the number of 1.5 comes from, but we can get those numbers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Here are several pages on service delivery in Surrey, just to give you an example. A lot of it is outreach: "job placement success, Surrey and surrounding areas, employment and community assistance programs, interpretation and translation, mental health and community corrections." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just for example on this one.... "MEIA Fraser Health and the community corrections and B.C. Housing have a joint project building on previous pilots in the Fraser region. MEIA and Fraser Health co-fund six mental health and addictions liaison providing services in seven employment and assistance offices." So there's a lot of FTEs there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Community corrections provides community corrections workers who work in the same seven employment and assistance offices. Then there's corrections outreach, corrections prerelease project, Surrey pretrial, drug and alcohol facility outreach, service integration coordinator, Phoenix Alcohol and Drug Recovery and Education Society — MCFD have outreach there — hospital outreach services, homeless outreach, homelessness committees, emergency social services outreach, immigrant services outreach, residential tenancy and integration and outreach, fire commissioner, Surrey fire department— on and on it goes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It sounds like there are a lot more than one and a half FTEs working on outreach in Surrey. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Brar: I will put that on the record. I appreciate what the minister read. As for my understanding, there are two places where the outreach workers who are specifically to reach out to the homeless population in the city are. One is at Highland House, which is a shelter place. The other one is called the Front Room, where homeless people come, and they can have a cup of tea, take a shower, change and all that kind of stuff. Those are the two which I know from the activists and which are specifically for outreach work. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Having said that, I would like to move on — keeping in mind the time — to a new topic, which is Child in the Home of a Relative. That's a program which was, and probably still is, part of the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. I know the program is moving to MCFD, but the question I would like to ask the minister is: will that impact in any way the funding of this ministry, and is there any transition plan for that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: As with any program, it's prudent to review its operations and benefit to clients. We are working with the Ministry of Children and Family Development to determine how Child in the Home of a Relative fits into government's continuum of services and programs for children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1615]
This Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance will continue to hold responsibility for the program CIHR. The Ministry of Children and Families will provide child welfare services to those CIHR applicants who are identified through screening as benefiting from child welfare services. The program will transfer to that ministry. We don't have a date yet as to when, and when the transfer is made, the funding for the program will go with it. The funding at the moment is $19.5 million a year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: Thank you to the minister and his staff for being here to answer questions. I'd like to just follow up on the CIHR question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My understanding was that the entire program was going to be transferred to the Ministry of Children and Families, and I understood that there was, in fact, a time line. Are there any individuals specifically charged with ensuring that that transfer occurs? Does the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance have any FTEs working specifically on that transfer? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: To answer the member's question as best I can, there is no specific date for when the program will transfer. It is being worked on, on a continuing basis, and the only two dedicated staff working on this are the two deputy ministers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: Can the minister explain what services — apart from those services available to any child in the province — he means when he's talking about child welfare services? Are there any special services that the ministry is offering children in the home of a relative that other children in the province are automatically eligible for anyway? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1620]
Hon. C. Richmond: Sounds like a relatively simple question, but it's fairly complex. Children in the home of relatives may apply. This is over and above what we pay — the maximum monthly rate. It's a table that goes from birth to five years to 18 years. So it starts at $257.46 and goes to $454.32, and all rates in between. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A child in the home of a relative may apply for the Canada child tax benefit through the Canada Revenue Agency, which automatically generates entitlement to the B.C. family bonus program and the B.C. earned income benefit. A child in the home of a relative may be eligible for child tax benefits of up to $272.59 per month for each child, plus an additional $100 a month under the universal child care benefit if the child is under the age of six. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
These payments are in addition to the rates for a child in the home of a relative, which I just quoted. Besides that, a child in the home of a relative receives the same benefits as any other child on income assistance in the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: Are some of those benefits that families receive for the care of their children…? Are some of those benefits just mentioned also clawed back in the calculation of the monthly allowance for parents looking after relatives? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The child tax credits are income-tested, they're income-based, and that's federal taxation. We don't claw anything back. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: In fact, the amounts mentioned may not be everything that those families receive. The federal government may put their hands into their pockets. Fair enough. I understand that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The question I have is with respect to the transfer of programs that go with a child in the home of a relative. Was that a statement the ministry made — that they would be transferring the entire program to the Ministry of Children and Family Development? If so, while I'm still on my feet, was there a date when that announcement was made? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1625]
Hon. C. Richmond: The best I can find out about a date is that it was reported to the standing committee of the Legislature that we're working towards a date. I can't tell you the date that was said. We did not pin down a date that the program would be transferred, and as I said earlier, the two deputies are still working on that and trying to iron out the details. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: Well, that's fair enough. I think partly the question is motivated by the fact that the representative is interested in allowing those children who are under the Child in the Home of a Relative to be under her purview as receiving designated services, I believe it's called. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So with that, just to get an idea, how many children…? If you can give me just a brief, historical…. What's the trend in the number of children in the home of a relative — maybe this year compared to last year, a couple of years? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I can give the member some numbers here starting in 2001 and coming up to 2008, which will be an estimate. In 2001 there were 4,381; the next year, 4,510; the next year, 4,170; the next year, 4,368; 4,459; 4,577; 4,719; and an estimate for this year of 4,767. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: It appears that there's a growing trend of children being placed under that program. Well, we can account for some outliers, I suppose, but there seems to be a general trend that we've stayed above the 4,400 number since 2004 or perhaps 2005. My concern is whether that's a reflection of something that's happened, maybe, in other ministries. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I've heard from social workers that they're being asked to consider this as a less disruptive measure when dealing with child welfare issues, and I'm not sure of the intelligence or whatever — the reasoning behind that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1630]
I'm wondering if the ministry has any projections for how this number may increase if the alternatives in the Ministry of Children and Families continue to decline. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[B. Lekstrom in the chair.] [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: It's very hard to predict the trends, but according to our senior staff, the trend, they feel, is for it to remain flat or to grow very slightly. There doesn't seem to be any indication that it's going to grow, other than what's indicated in the numbers that I gave you — growing slightly. Other than that, I don't think there's much more I can add that is going to help you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: All of it's helpful. I wonder if the number you gave — the 4,000-and-some — includes those first nations children living on reserve under the guardianship financial assistance program? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer is no. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
N. Simons: I suppose that sort of leads to the question as to how those services are going to be transferred. Will they become, in fact, child welfare services? Because children who are living in the home of relatives, not always but in many cases, are there because of something that prevents them from being able to live at home. There could be a number of factors. We all know that extended family helps raise children in all communities. It's not specific to any one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is whether or not the minister might be able to announce at some point when the target date for that transfer is occurring, simply because as a community…. I think it's important to recognize that some of those children do have some higher needs, in terms of resources and plans and services. If the minister could perhaps give a projected target date for those transfers to occur. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1635]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer is no; I can't give you a date. Like I say, it's being worked on and being discussed very thoroughly by the two deputies at the top level of government. I can tell the member this: as soon as we have a date, you will know. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: My question relates to, first of all, the issue that I raised with the minister in the Legislature during question period. That is regarding Darrell Mickasko. The minister took the question on notice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The question, to refresh the minister's memory, is around whether or not Darrell Mickasko was denied a damage deposit from the ministry. I wonder if the minister has that answer now. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: Yes, I do. But again, it's a specific case which I would rather not comment on in public. I don't think it's fair to the family, etc. I will tell the member this, that we have written you a letter with the details in it, and it's in that letter. You should have it by now or by the end of today. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: That is good, because I had written the minister a letter inquiring about that on behalf of the family prior to me raising the question in question period. It was such a long time since the letter was sent, and I didn't receive a response. I had met with the family again, who really wanted to know. Therefore, I took the opportunity in the Legislature to raise it during question period one day. So I'm glad. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'll wait until the end of the week. Hopefully, the answer is forthcoming, as the family has been in contact with me around this issue and they continue to be concerned, obviously. The last time I saw the family was at Darrell's memorial service in my community. So I thank the minister for that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On the same kind of track, if you will, on damage deposits more generally, I also wrote a letter to the minister some time ago, to which the minister did respond, which I appreciate. I have the response in front of me right now, where the minister advises the number of people who only get support with two or more damage deposits outstanding. Then the minister had broken down the regions and what those numbers looked like for me. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm wondering. Does the minister or, within the ministry, does anybody actually take the initiative to ask these individuals who have been turned down for a damage deposit for the second time…? I know that certainly in my community many folks are not able to get the damage deposit back because the landlord is not returning it to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Does anybody from the ministry ever initiate that process for the recipient? If they don't get the damage deposit back, does anybody in the ministry inquire about what they're going to do around their living situations? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1640]
Hon. C. Richmond: It's a fairly complex answer, so I'll do my best. I might not get it in exactly the right order. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Our people are working and training with the residential tenancy people, because ultimately it is their responsibility. But we are endeavouring to train our staff with the RTO people to help clients, and we make every effort to make sure that clients don't get evicted. That's the last thing we want. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have cases on file, just so the member knows, where people have been issued multi-multidamage deposits — in fact, ranging 20 and beyond; 20 times people have come for damage deposits. So it's really extenuating circumstances when we turn someone down for a damage deposit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There are exceptions: additional security deposits are issued if a person is fleeing an abusive relationship or they're required to move due to health and safety concerns; have to move because their rental premises are being sold, demolished or condemned; or they are homeless and require a security deposit to secure accommodation. So we go to all lengths possible to see that someone does not get evicted or does not lose their damage deposit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We also have a team that we work with, and it includes housing. HITT, it's called, for a slang term. It's our HIT team. We work with people to combat unscrupulous landlords. There are some out there, as we all know. Most landlords are pretty good, but there are some out there who are unscrupulous. We do work with our team, which includes the city of Vancouver and the police and our workers to make sure that clients are not unfairly treated. I hope that answers the question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Sort of, but not really. Let me maybe break down the questions, then, in this way. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First of all, on the question around damage deposits, the minister mentioned that his staff is working with the folks at the residential tenancy branch to try and deal with the matter, particularly where eviction comes into play. The issue with damage deposit is not so much that you get evicted if you don't pay a damage deposit; it's more that if you don't pay a damage deposit, you actually can't get a unit. Therefore, it renders somebody homeless. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On that first question, whether or not the ministry staff is working with anyone to assist people, in terms of what other alternatives they have…. So if a client comes to the ministry and asks for another damage deposit and, under the government's policy, they have reached their maximum threshold of two and they're rejected for a damage deposit, what happens to that client? Does the ministry follow up to say, "Okay, now what is your housing option, given that you now don't have a damage deposit?" [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1645]
Hon. C. Richmond: I'll be as clear as I can on this. Clients are limited to a maximum of two outstanding security deposits, unless they are exempt from this requirement. I read off a list of exemptions — like if they're fleeing abusive relationships or health and safety concerns, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They have the option of either repaying the security deposit in a lump sum when returned by the landlord or through a monthly cheque reduction of $20 per month. We have several people doing that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Clients can receive a third security deposit once at least one has been repaid or they've made arrangements to repay it at so much per month. I don't know if I can be any more clear than that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Yes, I understand all of that. I understand what the policy is, and that's what the minister is doing, reading me the policy. I know what they are. That's not my question, what the policy is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is: when the ministry turns down a client's request for a damage deposit because they have reached their maximum threshold of getting a damage deposit under hardship or otherwise, does the ministry staff — the caseworker, in that instance — follow up with the client and ask this question: "What is your housing option now, given that you're refused a damage deposit"? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1650]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer to the question is yes, our staff does work with people to find them an alternative or to find them accommodation. We collaborate with a number of stakeholders — CHMC, B.C. Housing — to provide outreach services in order to connect homeless or at-risk individuals with ministry supports, which include conducting intake interviews, helping to complete application forms, connecting clients with community services for housing information. And yes, additional security deposits may be provided in situations where a client is homeless and requires a security deposit to secure accommodation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We do require clients to bring in an intent-to-rent form to receive a damage deposit. Sometimes we give them the form, they don't come back, and we don't see them again. Some have come back multiple times and received damage deposits. All they have to do is complete a simple form from a landlord to show their intent to rent at a specific address. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: I just want to clarify the answer to my question. Is the minister saying that every time a client comes into the ministry's office asking for a damage deposit, which they have reached the maximum threshold of, and the answer from the ministry is, "No, you're not qualified for a damage deposit," then the ministry staff follows up and refers the person to some housing person in the non-profit sector or within the municipal government to find them housing accommodation to make sure that they're not left homeless? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Did I hear, essentially, what the minister's answer is to my question, and that's what the practice is? Wow. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: It is expected that our staff take on this responsibility and do everything possible to point them in the right direction and to make sure that they secure housing. It's not our responsibility to find people housing, but it is our responsibility to make sure as best we can that they are pointed in the right direction and are given every chance to find accommodation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The one form that we do insist they bring in is an intent-to-rent form that they have found a place where they're going to stay, signed by the landlord. They bring this form in, and then usually they are given a damage deposit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Let me have another stab at this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If a client comes in and brings an intent-to-rent form to the ministry and asks for an additional damage deposit…. They have exhausted the number of damage deposits that they're allowed, they are not paying the overpayment deductions — the $20 or lump sum payment or whatever the case may be — they're not fleeing from an abusive relationship, and they are not being evicted from accommodations being sold or condemned. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They're just not able to get their damage deposit back from the previous landlord for whatever reason, and they show up. They need new accommodations at that point, and they have an intent-to-rent form. The worker then turns around and says: "Sorry. You're not qualified. Our policy says that you're not qualified." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1655]
Is the minister saying to me that the staff will then proceed to try and assist that person though will not guarantee that that person will find alternative accommodation? Is this what the minister is telling me that the ministry staff will endeavour to do? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I'll answer the member's question as best I can. We do expect our staff to work with people the best they can to provide accommodation for them. We have a policy in the ministry that we try never to turn anyone away. In most cases it works. We don't like to turn anyone away. If they need accommodation, we will try and find a way to make it work. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If you have a specific situation, let us know, and we can deal with it. There are some — what would I call them? — bad actors out there, who I've run into in my own constituency and who seem to trash every apartment they rent. The landlords won't give back the damage deposit, and in a case like that, we just can't keep on giving damage deposits when someone may be…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the one case I recall, it was drug addiction and drug parties in the suite. The place gets wrecked, and it costs the landlord $10,000 to repair the suite. This happens over and over. So we've said: "If it happens twice, you're not going to get another damage deposit." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's rare. Mostly we try to accommodate people, and if they have reached the limit of two, we will even suggest to them: "You will start now paying at the rate of $20 a month, and we'll give you another damage deposit." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do reiterate that we try never to turn anyone away. Secondly, if you have a specific case, please let us know, and we'll look at it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Yes, there are a number of specific cases that are going on in my riding, but I'll save that for another day in terms of raising those issues with the minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
More specifically, the minister is saying they'll do everything they can to prevent someone from being homeless. So if a person comes to the ministry office and asks for a damage deposit with the intent-to-rent information, and so on, and they've reached their maximum threshold — I won't go through all the categories of maximum threshold — and the ministry staff says, "No, sorry, you're not qualified," and the person then says, "that would mean that I'm homeless," does that then change the government's position, and that person will then be issued a damage deposit? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: I guess the best way I can answer the question is that we cannot give an ironclad guarantee that every person in the situation you described would receive another damage deposit. I think it would depend on their history. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1700]
If it was really bad, they may be turned down, or they may be pointed towards a shelter, especially until we can iron out the situation. If this person is genuinely homeless and they haven't a bad record, as I said, of damaging suites, the staff do have the flexibility to say: "We're not going to see you homeless. We will give you a damage deposit." But to make an ironclad guarantee that everybody who comes in and asks for one is going to get one…. I can't do that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I said, some have had up to 20 and more damage deposits, because they do bring in the required form, and they have been paying it off. They tend to move an awful lot, I guess, so we do have some with multiple damage deposits. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: When the minister says that they would determine that on a case-by-case basis and that only people with a bad record would then be rejected because they had trashed previous places before…. If that's the case, let me ask this question. How does the minister go about determining that the person has a bad record and that the place prior to them leaving has been damaged to such an extent that they could not get a damage deposit back? Does the ministry proactively undertake that work to find out? How do they determine a bad record? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1705]
Hon. C. Richmond: Mr. Chairman, I will do my best to answer the member's question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First of all, we don't go out proactively looking for the bad tenants, if you like, but we do have their record. We know what their record of damage deposits is. As I said, many have had ten, 15, 20 damage deposits, but they're paying them back on a $20-a-month basis. We also know, by their record, whether they fall into the category of people who habitually trash rental accommodations. Beyond that, I don't know if I can answer any further. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In our outreach programs, as I gave the previous questioner, we have gone to great lengths through that program to find people housing, people who have had difficulties. So 77 percent of the clients that we have taken in have shelter and are receiving assistance. We do our best to find them shelter, get them into shelter, get them shelter assistance. I have to reiterate that it's really not our responsibility to find people housing. That's not our responsibility. We pay them a shelter allowance. It's up to them to go and find their accommodation, but we do everything we can to assist them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: I get it that it's not the ministry's responsibility to provide or find the housing. Sorry, I should rephrase that, to be very clear. It's not the ministry's responsibility to find the client housing, but it is the ministry's responsibility to ensure, under income assistance support for the individual, that they get the support portion and the shelter portion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The shelter portion they could not get access to under the government's policy…. If they reach a maximum threshold of damage deposits, it could potentially jeopardize the individual's shelter portion. That is my point. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the minister says they don't proactively work to find out which client is a "bad actor" — the minister's words — on damage deposit issues now, how is it that the minister would know from previously that they have a bad record, that they have not gotten their damage deposit back because they have trashed their previous premises? If the minister can't find that out today, how would they have that record, and where would that record come from? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That doesn't make sense to me at all, and that is my issue. There are people who may have more than two or three or five or six, whatever, number of damage deposits outstanding — not a fault of their own but because the bad actor happens to be the landlord who wouldn't return the damage deposits. That happens, quite frankly, often in my riding, in the downtown east side. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that the minister will say that it's the responsibility of the client to go after these landlords and then to go to the residential tenancy branch to recover that. Mr. Chair, I've been an advocate in the community before, and I've got to tell you how difficult it is for the client to go through that process and be successful. Many of them don't know the laws. They don't know where to actually go about trying to get their damage deposit back. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now that the advocacy provision of many agencies, including legal aid, for administrative law has been eliminated by way of funding by the government, there are very few people out there in the community that could assist such an individual to go through that process. Of course, with the closure of the residential tenancy offices, that makes it even more onerous. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know the minister says that you can actually go and do the phone-in. I can tell you the litany of problems with phone-ins with residential tenant complaints and how unsuccessful those attempts are for many clients — not, of course, accounting for the notion that many of these clients that I'm talking about don't even have a phone. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I won't belabour those points. I'm just making the point here that there are people in the province of British Columbia who I believe are made homeless as a result of the fact that they can't access a damage deposit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister sent me information around the questions that I asked on how many people are not getting damage deposits because they're not eligible. The minister gave me information on the number of cases, the number of recipients and how many of those are on the overdue payment deduction. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1710]
By my calculation, when you work out all of these, in the Vancouver Island region there are 24 people who are not getting a damage deposit, who are only receiving the support portion. I wonder how many of those 24 are homeless because they don't have a damage deposit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the Vancouver coastal region the number is 65. How many of those are made homeless because they can't get a damage deposit? In the Fraser region the number is 62. In the Interior it's eight. In the north it's four. I think these numbers contribute, to an extent, to the homelessness rate in the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Let me just go to this question. The minister had written to me, and it says in this document: "Ministry workers can now issue up to two additional security deposits for clients who are involved in homeless outreach pilots." For those individuals who are involved in the homeless outreach pilots…. Presumably, then, they issue additional security deposits, at least an additional two, which the minister says they qualify for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For those individuals who get those two additional security deposits, do they have to pay them back? Are they on an overpayment deduction program with the ministry, and do they have to be agreeable to that program before they get any assistance from the homeless outreach workers? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer to the last part of the question is, yes, they would have to go on accounts receivable and pay off uncollected damage deposits. I should add that one of the reasons we're doing this program with the residential tenancy office is to assist our staff to find ways for people to tackle the residential tenancy office. We want to have people who are experienced, in every part of the province, to assist people to go through the residential tenancy maze, if you like, for want of a better word, and assist them in every way to do that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's quite rare that we turn someone down for a damage deposit. It doesn't happen very often. I think the numbers that the member had was 163 people of 100,000 clients. So 163 out of 100,000 are not very many. It is very rare that it happens. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: From my good colleague's instructions, I'm only allowed to ask one more question, so I'm going to ask this one last question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A Voice: A short question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: A short question at that, I'm told. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On the damage deposit issue. It's a serious issue in my riding, where many people are not able to get the damage deposit back. I would venture to say that while there may be some who are damaging suites — so legitimately, they're not getting the damage deposit back — there are many, I've got to tell you, who are not getting the damage deposit back because the landlord is refusing to return them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Has the minister contemplated a program where the damage deposit is actually held in trust by a third party? It could be a non-profit association, or whatever the case may be, so that unless there is proof of damage, those moneys would go back to the ministry automatically. Therefore, it would not penalize the clients, and more to the point, it would ensure that the clients would be able to get their damage deposit back should they want to move on to a next residence. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: Well, I thank the member for her thought on this, and it's a good thought. Maybe we should put a damage deposit in trust, perhaps with the Ministry for Housing or with the residential tenancy branch — a third party other than our ministry. It's maybe not a bad idea and something we should pursue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Really my last question. Will the minister endeavour to take that up with the Minister for Housing? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. C. Richmond: The answer is yes. How's that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Okay. I will now leave. They're going to throw stones at me if I don't, so I'll stop asking questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1715]
J. Brar: I just want to conclude by saying thanks to the minister and thanks, particularly, to the staff members for their hard work in helping us out over the last two days and for their patience with all the questions. Thank you very much for that, too, before we conclude the debate on the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Vote 26: ministry operations, $1,527,012,000 — approved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: We will now stand recessed until the Minister of Transportation arrives, at which time we will reconvene with Ministry of Transportation estimates. Committee A is in recess. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee recessed from 5:16 p.m. to 5:20 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[B. Lekstrom in the chair.] [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On Vote 43: ministry operations, $970,553,000 (continued). [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Thanks again for coming in. You can sort of see we're mishmashing here. A couple of us, my colleague and I, will hopefully get some questions out to the minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just want to clarify something that the minister has said recently. "We increase our subsidy to the ferry corporation every year." I'm just wondering, over the last four years — in 2003, '04, '05 and '06 — the provincial subsidy has been constant, stagnant, at $91.8 million. The only increase has been the federal subsidy and when the Queen of the North sank and money went into that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I believe there needs to be some clarification that the service fee has remained stagnant until the Queen of the North sank. And of course there's the social program that puts money in. But there has not been any increase in the provincial subsidy except for when the Queen of the North sank. Is that correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: Member, in the last couple of years, what you'll see every year increasing is…. There are social programs that go into the ferries. As you know, we subsidize the cost of seniors, those with medical issues, students, etc. That has increased every year as part of the overall increase. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1725]
The base amount. The member is right. For a couple of years the base amount was static, even though the social program component continues to increase every year. For example, last year, '07-08, it was $11½ million. The year before it was $11 million. You'll see that tick up every year. The base amount last year went up by, I believe, about $13 million. That was to reflect the increase that the member correctly referred to for the new vessel on the northern routes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The other thing, last year, that the member would be well aware of is that on top of all those increases, we provided an additional $7 million to help keep future fuel increases down — it actually went toward the fuel deferral account — for the northern and minor routes, in an attempt by government to make additional contributions to try to keep down fuel increases. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: I just wanted to confirm that since 2003, '04, '05 and '06 the base amount for the provincial subsidy remained at $91.8 million. There have been other areas that have gone up, but the base amount for, say, the minor routes has remained the same. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The second thing I want to talk about is route 40 and the importance of route 40. There are many concerns with not extending the season for route 40. The Cariboo regional district, the Cariboo Chilcotin Coast Tourism Association, both Cariboo MLAs — North and South — have had concerns about the economic need and the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars in businesses, restaurants and hotels. It affects Highways 19, 20, 27 and 99. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ferry advisory committee for the north and regions…. The people on the central coast have been trying to get information about the Queen of Chilliwack. The minister, unfortunately, the day the Queen of the North sank, in his press release said that the funding was approved for the three new ferries. The minister said it was "several hundreds of millions of dollars." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm wondering how much was allocated on that day. What is in the budget as far as hundreds of millions of dollars, and what is the status of the Queen of Chilliwack and the replacement? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: The member will know that the province, in making an additional $13 million annual investment each and every year towards putting into place the new Adventure, which is now sailing on the waters…. The member will know that was about a $100 million cost. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Expedition, of course, will increase our annual subsidy by another $22 million — again, demonstrating, I believe, the strength of our commitment to northern, remote communities. That Expedition will come on stream just prior to the summer of 2009. It represents a total investment value of about $200 million, so that's $300 million just between those two vessels. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1730]
In terms of the third vessel to replace the Queen of Chilliwack, we're still in discussions with the ferry corporation with respect to what that replacement would look like. Those discussions haven't been finalized at this point, so I don't have a nailed-down value on that one for the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: I guess that also included in there somewhere is the $68 million that for insurance purposes B.C. Ferries got for the sinking. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.] [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, the concern with route 40 is the Chilliwack. As the minister knows, by 2012 it can't be sailing. There was documentation by Capt. Trafford Taylor, who is the vice-president for B.C. Ferries for new vessel construction. He indicated that if you don't have…. "There's a huge competition for yard slots. If you want a ship today, you're not going to get one until 2012 at the earliest, and every year it's going to increase more." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm just wondering if the minister is going to commit to having a new vessel by 2012. Some of the documents that I've received here through the core review indicated that route 40 was a candidate to be abandoned. Actually, it says: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, B.C. Ferries may at any time after the first two years of the term abandon route 40 if it's unable to find alternate service." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I
realize that they've changed that from two years to the five-year term, but I'm
wondering if the minister can commit to two things: a new vessel for route 40
to replace the
Hon. K. Falcon: Look, Member. There's no question in my mind. I've seen nothing that would suggest that there wouldn't be continued service on route 40. I have no doubt that there will continue to be service on route 40. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of what the vessel will look like, as I said, that's part of the discussions we're having with B.C. Ferries right now. All the options are on the table in terms of how that service would best be provided. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, the member is correct to point out that there is an expiry date in terms of the vessel's eligibility under the SOLAS federal regulations in terms of how long it can operate. This, unfortunately, was a legacy that we were left with. The average age of the ferry fleet is 42 years old. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ferry corporation has done, I think, a pretty exceptional job of trying to rejuvenate and replace the vessels on this route — right across the ferry fleet, in fact. But it does take time. The member is correct to point that out. We're working hard. We're negotiating with Ferries, and we'll do the best we can to come to an agreement that makes sense for the public, makes sense for route 40 and makes sense for taxpayers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Again, I go back to the press release. It says that the government approved funding for three new vessels. I want to highlight the concern of getting it out in the tendering line so that it's ready by 2012. The concern up and down the coast is that this route will not have a new vessel by 2012 and that it's a candidate for abandonment, so I'm glad the minister has made the commitment that there will be a vessel out there by 2012. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1735]
I have a couple of questions about fuel surcharges. I'm just wondering if the minister could explain how fuel surcharges are now going to be put into the realm of public notice and with ferry users and how fuel surcharges will be applied in the coming years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: The commissioner has set up a process for part of performance term contract 2, the second term, for how the commissioner is going to be looking at fuel increases. That, apparently, according to my staff, is available on the website; I don't have the details with me. I do know that it will include continued requirements by the ferry corporation to demonstrate what tangible steps they're taking in terms of improving their fuel efficiency on their vessels and the fuel utilization that's being undertaken by the vessels. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So all aspects of the ferry corporation — how they operate their vessels, the speed at which they operate their vessels, all of those kinds of things — will also be examined by the ferry commissioner to ensure that they're doing everything they can do to try to reduce their fuel consumption. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Yes, and it's under memorandum 24, I think, that B.C. Ferries and the minister or the government has agreed to. Basically, it changes the method of applying for fuel surcharges away from section 42 of the Coastal Ferry Act where there were strict guidelines and legislation, to enact a fuel surcharge. Right now, and this is a quote from the ferry commissioner: "Changes to the fuel surcharge may not be made more frequently than quarterly, and B.C. Ferries must give 15 days public notice of the change. An application under section 42 of the Coastal Ferry Act…will not be required." The method of adjustment may result in changes to the fuel surcharges or rebates by route group occurring at different times. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In other words, we have gone to a set procedure — legislation — that requires public input, requires B.C. Ferries to justify what they're doing, to now in a year — not more than quarterly…. Four times a year they can request a fuel surcharge, with 15 days' notice — no public input. Over the length of this term they can request 16 fuel surcharges with no public input. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is: why did the minister allow and ignore legislation in the Coastal Ferry Act to let fuel surcharges be enacted with no public input? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1740]
Hon. K. Falcon: This is a decision that was made by the independent ferries commissioner. The independent ferries commissioner, of course, being independent from government and from elected officials, including myself, makes decisions on how best to move forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Though the member could ask the commissioner directly if he wishes, I think that the likely rationale was that in an era of fuel increases becoming less extraordinary in the sense that you've got continual upward pressure on oil prices, going through that very lengthy process almost became a moot point. They'd be going through that process, and already you'd seen fuel prices increase even more. I think that the public recognizes now, sadly but realistically, that we're in an era where it is likely that fuel increases are probably more the norm than the exception. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What I suspect the independent ferries commissioner was likely doing was saying: "Look, rather than pretend we have to have a process here that will always be behind the times in terms of how long it takes to go through this process of public consultation and input and everything…." Recognizing that much of the input he hears, presumably, is probably the same as what he heard last time, he said: "Let's have no more than four times a year when the rates and the fuel surcharge decisions will be analyzed and deal with it that way." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's what I'm speculating, Member, but again, you'd have to ask the independent ferries commissioner directly, because that was his decision. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: I would expect the minister to take more responsibility for the legislation in the Coastal Ferry Act and ensure that section 42 was followed or that there were some amendments to section 42 to allow this to happen, which I don't believe the minister has followed through on. I find it pretty ludicrous that the minister would follow through on this commitment with B.C. Ferries behind the scenes and put the onus on the commissioner that he made a good recommendation in contradiction to legislation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But thank you for that, Minister, and I hope that there will be legislation coming forward to amend the Coastal Ferry Act and section 42. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The next questions I have are about — and thank you for your letters — the duty remission. It was about $13.9 million for the Northern Adventure to offset increases for the non-major routes. The letter the minister sent to me about that…. He said it was to offset fee increases for the non-major routes, but the remission order from the federal government had specific direction, as indicated in their press releases and three comments from federal ministers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They basically indicated…. This is Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty: "By remitting these duties to B.C. Ferries, our government is recognizing the challenges faced by those living in northern B.C." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The other minister was the hon. Chuck Strahl, who basically said, "many coastal communities that the ferry served" — meaning those on the north coast. And David Emerson looked at the link between northern B.C. and the rest of the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So I'm wondering why the minister and B.C. Ferries indicated that the duty remission would go to all the minor routes and not go to the northern routes, as directed by the remission order? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1745]
Hon. K. Falcon: Well, first of all, I thank the member for the question, because I think this was an important point. Candidly, Member, it would have been nice to have the opposition…. When we were lobbying for that duty remission — not to have to have taxpayers pay that — it would have been nice to hear some support from the opposition benches, which I didn't recall hearing at all. In fact, I believe that the opposition was in lockstep with the shipyard union workers, saying that that should be paid. I think that that wasn't a good decision. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we could have done, and what initially the federal government was going to wish to require us to do, would have in effect allowed us to apply that toward the capital costs of the new Northern Adventure. We didn't want to do that, although it would have benefited us, frankly. It would have reduced the annual subsidy requirement that we have in place, the $13 million a year. It would have actually resulted in government having to pay less had we applied it toward the capital cost of the vessel. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we instead did, first of all, is we went to the federal government and we said: "It would be lunacy to force B.C. Ferries to pay a $13.9 million penalty for the crime of going out and seeking a replacement vessel after searching around the world, recognizing the dramatic impact that the sinking of the Queen of the North had on northwest coastal communities — that it would be lunacy to punish them for going out and doing the right thing and finding the only available vessel they could find after searching the world, retrofitting it and investing a hundred million dollars so we could restore service and to then penalize them for that." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we said is: "Instead of penalizing for that, which would make absolutely no sense, give us back those dollars, and we will apply it towards reducing fee increases on all the minor routes," so that there would be a benefit for all the minor routes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You add that on the $7 million contribution that I made reference to earlier, and we're talking very significant dollars that the province, the government, lobbied hard to bring about. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I am pleased to say that the federal government…. I want to take this opportunity to thank them and to thank Minister Emerson and Minister Flaherty in particular for working with us in this regard, because what it did is essentially provide a benefit for the minor routes in that those dollars, that $13.9 million, would go towards reducing fees on the minor routes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think that's something that should be celebrated, and I thank the member for bringing that to the attention of the public, because it was a very important contribution. It was a very significant policy fight. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I say, I would have liked to have had the opposition and all of us speaking in unison in one voice, calling for that. We weren't able to achieve that, but at least the government was successful in lobbying the federal government to listen to the concerns so that we could provide further assistance on trying to keep fees down on the minor routes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1750]
G. Coons: Again, I find it a bit interesting that on one hand he says that the ferries commissioner has the right to lobby the legislation and to start to enact rules and memorandums, as the automatic adjustment mechanism with fuel surcharges, and then on the other hand says he doesn't have a say in how fare caps are going to be directed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In July '07 the ferries commissioner said: "The province is in a position to determine how the rebate is applied. If it is applied to reduce fare caps, it will be reflected in our final decision. We estimate that it would reduce the growth of the fare cap on the non-major routes from 6.7…to 6.3…per year in performance term 2…." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, the remission order clearly, in my mind and the mind of us on the north coast, was directed for those on the northern routes and not all the non-major routes. That was July '07. In September '07 the commissioner, in his final decision order on the performance term 2 price cap, says: "An adjustment to the price cap shall be made if the provincial government decides to direct the federal government rebate of import duty and related GST on the vessel Northern Adventure to the benefit of ferry customers." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is, again: has the minister contacted the ferries commissioner to see about his adjustments for the fare caps? And will they go down, not for the minor routes…? Obviously, they haven't gone down for any of the routes, but will the minister direct it to be put towards the northern routes, as the remission order from the federal government directed? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: It seems to me, Member, that the important issue here is that this government — unfortunately, without any support from the opposition — made it a position of the government that we were going to go to the federal government and fight to make sure that GST would not be payable on a ferry corporation vessel that was needed to restore service to the northern coastal communities. It seems to me that the important issue is that all of those dollars — that $13.9 million or $13.8 million; whatever the number was — will go towards helping to prevent future fee increases on the minor routes, the subsidized routes, in the system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That seems to me to be exactly what we want to be trying to achieve. I would have thought I would hear some recognition or some thanks that at least we fought the fight to bring that about. We certainly got no assistance from the NDP. It was this government that fought this fight. While you were hanging out hiding in the bushes, I was up there making the argument publicly and taking on all the critics, like your friends over in the ferry workers' union there, your friends over in the shipyard workers' union, and saying: "No, no, no. There is a broader public interest here to help to keep down future fee increases for subsidized routes, for all the minor routes." And we achieved that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That was actually something that was positive. It builds on the $7 million contribution we made last year to again try to keep the fee increases on the northern and minor routes reduced as much as possible. That's an over $20 million commitment right there alone, in addition to the new vessels that they're getting — the Northern Adventure; the Northern Expedition, which will be coming out next year; and of course a third vessel, ultimately, to replace the Queen of Chilliwack. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1755]
That's progress. That's a significant benefit. That is a huge departure from the decade where, unfortunately, we saw virtually no investment in the fleet or the terminals. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I mentioned to the member in our last discussion that we had, $837 million worth of capital investment has been made since we've turned the ferry corporation into an independent authority — on new vessels, terminal upgrades, vessel upgrades, etc. That's pretty significant. And the fact is that over the next 15 years, $2.4 billion will be invested by the corporation to continue that fleet renewal. I think that this effort at reducing future fuel increases has been very significant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: I realize the time. I think that there's a fine line between hiding in the bushes and having your head buried in the sand, as most ferry-dependent communities believe that the minister has been placed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm going to pass it on. I do want to give some written questions, Minister, because of the time frame of our estimates being cut back. I would like to talk about the B.C. Ferry Authority — I'll put this in writing — and some more stuff about the Transportation Safety Board and the sinking of the Queen of the North, the regulators and the alternate service providers and the progress of that, along with the debt, apparently, of $1.2 billion that B.C. Ferries has. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We didn't get to inland ports. I'd like to talk about some stuff about inland ferries and whether or not the inland ferries will fall under the carbon-neutral proponents that this government is putting forward and, obviously, about eight or nine questions with ports, dealing with the transportation partnerships program; the strategic B.C. port development; the Gateway project; phase 2 of Prince Rupert and first nations consultation; the Asia-Pacific gateway and corridor initiative report that came out; the B.C. green ports initiative; and the small ports strategy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
These are issues that I think are very important, that we need to get out. I wouldn't mind putting them in writing for the minister in the next week or so, so that we can proceed on that. With that, I would like to pass it to my colleague. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Gentner: I'm going to quickly move into discussion of the South Fraser perimeter road, and I'll let staff get their heads over it. I'll quickly ask the minister a question relative to Highway 91. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This weekend we had a wonderful fish release program; 25,000 chum fingerlings were released. However, I have to bring it to the attention of the minister that Highway 91 is quite a mess. It's turned into, unfortunately, a truck stop. There's a pullout there. I counted 24 four-litre containers of motor oil and 21 large containers of antifreeze. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that Mainland has a contract with a subcontractor who's cleaning it up and, I think, is doing a terrible job — on the record. This is leaching materials into a water stream that provides fish. We're talking diapers; we're talking mattresses. It's really quite a mess. I bring that to the minister's attention. Hopefully, he can properly address it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, relative to the situation of the South Fraser perimeter road, as it keeps moving along…. Let's have a quick, generic question. Can the minister tell us what the truck capacity is once this South Fraser perimeter road is completed? How many more trucks will this route provide us with upon completion? Can he give us a percentage? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1800]
Hon.
K. Falcon: The
member will know, coming from Delta — as I do, coming from
If
the member goes on the website, he will know that more trucks are coming —
probably a 30 percent increase by the 2031 planning horizon. Right now those
trucks are going through residential neighbourhoods in Delta and
What this South Fraser perimeter road will do — and that's why it has been called for as part of all the regional planning processes for the last 20-plus years — is provide a dedicated express route which gets them off local roads and puts them on a connector. That will be a huge and important relief to neighbourhoods and certainly have a big benefit to the economy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's why I think it's unfortunate that the member continues to oppose it when there has been widespread support at the local level and the regional level for two decades now. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G.
Gentner: Well, 30
percent is a remarkable increase by 2031. I will agree. But the minister is
aware of Mr. Chris Badger's position on the new merging of the two ports. He
suggested on record that he believes the
He has gone on to say that the cost of transferring containers more than once from deep-sea vessels to short-haul vessels and then to trucks or rail in their trip from port to market will be a cost saving with the increase of gas, etc. We're looking at a very different world than what was planned 20 years ago on the South Fraser perimeter road — from what many years ago was proposed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question, therefore, is: with the increased gas prices, can the minister explain to us what role the Fraser Highway will play, as the two ports are merged, as a new highway between the Deltaport and the facilities in Surrey, whereby it is estimated that it is only at a 10 percent to 15 percent capacity in the Fraser docks areas for Surrey? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon.
K. Falcon: I want
to clarify the member's question. He mentioned
G.
Gentner: No, I was
referring to the
[1805]
Hon. K. Falcon: I am aware of Chris Badger's comments. In fact, I know Chris. I think he does an exceptional job on behalf of the old VPA, now the new VFPA — the Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority. I agree with him wholeheartedly. We have actually — this government and me in particular — encouraged the VFPA, and have for some time, to look at short sea shipping options. We think that's one way that you can help deal with the issue of traffic. We do not lose sight of one of the original purposes for trying to…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One of the reasons why they've been talking about this express route for the last 20 years is because what was needed was a route that would provide easy access from the port, which everyone anticipated was always going to grow in terms of traffic — perhaps not as much as they realized in terms of the global shift taking place and the emergence of Asia as a major manufacturing hub. Nevertheless, it was always anticipated that you still needed to have a better route to get from the Deltaport to markets either south of the border on Highway 15 or east on Highway 1. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That is what is so important here, because we know that there's going to be a growth in commercial traffic as the economy grows, as the population grows, and we know that the local roads, in Delta in particular, are totally incapable of handling the increases that are being forecast. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So
although short sea shipping and the
I would hope that the member opposite and the opposition will support the VFPA as they more concretely try to identify locations in which short sea shipping would work and will no doubt deal with the kind of local opposition that you will often see when you undertake a major project. It's very easy to throw your lot in with critics of any major program or any major undertaking that is happening. As government, it takes a little more leadership to support some of these efforts, as I will be doing on the short sea shipping front. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G.
Gentner: Captain
Badger is responsible for operations, transportation, logistics and marketing
and leads the development of the Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority's reputation
as a driving force in the advancement of
He also goes on to suggest that each barge could take 200 trucks off the road in one tug. "Doesn't produce as much pollution as 200 trucks," he said, and "it's not hard to imagine the impact that would have on local roads and air quality." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, that's ten barges; that's 2,000 trucks taken off the road. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Has the ministry taken into account this new Fraser River highway in its $1-billion-plus project, the South Fraser perimeter road? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: We're very excited about the opportunities in short sea shipping, and Mr. Badger is well aware of some of the benefits of short sea shipping. The member should also know that Mr. Badger is also a very, very strong proponent of the South Fraser perimeter road. There are repackaging facilities. There are shorter trips. There's a local economy, both in Surrey and Delta, that needs to be served and addressed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Short sea shipping is one piece of the puzzle of dealing with a growing economy and growing congestion, particularly the truck congestion, but it is not the only answer. It can help you on some of the traffic that is not going to be localized in nature, but we still have to deal with the fact that we've got local roads — as the member should know; River Road in his own area being chief among them — that are tremendously congested today and that are going to continue to get worse. We hear pleas from the populations along corridors like River Road that are asking for relief from this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That is why short sea shipping will form one part of the solution, but it is not the only part. It is an integral part and it will be perhaps even a growing important part, but it won't be the only part. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1810]
G. Gentner: Can the minister tell me if he believes that the new policy or legislation coming forward relative to cap-and-trade will encourage more short sea barging up and down the river, as opposed to the need to use trucks, up and down freeways? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: I can't speculate on cap-and-trade. That's a process that's under development right now, and so I won't even try to. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What I can tell the member is that the member should be aware that short sea shipping also involves more terminal handling, so there are emission challenges around the extra terminal handling that's involved and the movement of the containers in and around the ports. That's a challenge that has to be dealt with. Of course, the member would know that there are marine emission issues, too, that have to be looked at. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One thing we should point out, though, with respect to the trucking sector and emissions, is that we are working very closely with the trucking sector. We don't for a second think that they are going to be, nor do they wish to be, eliminated from doing their bit to reduce emissions and greenhouse gases. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There are lots of new technologies that are coming on stream. There are aerodynamic technologies. There are the new super single tires that we discussed at the most recent meeting of the transportation ministers from across Canada back in Ottawa. There's engine technology, including companies located in British Columbia that have made significant progress for reducing what they call NOx and SOx along with greenhouse gases. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
All of those are being explored by this government. We are going to do everything we can to ensure that from an environmental point of view we will improve what we currently have in Delta today and in Surrey today. We're going to do that by making sure that we can work with the industry to utilize the latest technologies to bring about some of the best possible improvements. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Gentner: I understand that the minister has admitted he doesn't quite know — and I appreciate that — what the impacts of cap-and-trade and the gas tax will be on the viability of South Fraser perimeter road. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is now directed towards the loss of the context of heritage from my community, North Delta — particularly that of River Road. Years ago, of course, the Vancouver Port Authority expanded, and Delta received $3.4 million in a cultural amenity fund. My question to the minister is: how much will Delta receive for the loss of heritage from a similar fund? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1815]
Hon. K. Falcon: We're working very closely with the heritage society in archiving and also doing inventory work of heritage attributes. We have made sure we do that outside of the area that will be specific to the actual South Fraser perimeter road, so we'll continue to work closely with them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know we've identified some heritage assets — like heritage houses, etc. — where we're going to make sure that they've got appropriate access, etc. We'll continue to do that as we go forward. I thank the member for the questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Vote 43: ministry operations, $970,553,000 — approved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. K. Falcon: I move that the committee now rise and report resolutions of the Ministry of Transportation and the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance and ask leave to sit again. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Motion approved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee rose at 6:16 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]
Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the
Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.
TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule
Copyright (c) 2008: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada