Now That's a lot of Hansard

[Retrovision]

Here's an interesting quote courtesy of Hansard yet again

(From: www.tinyurl.com/3d2wcg)
Seeing as how the real concern of large threads is principly large image files, I didn't feel as guilty uploading this massive quote involving BC Ferries throughout

1996 Legislative Session: 1st Session, 36th Parliament
HANSARD

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 7, 1996

Afternoon

Volume 2, Number 15, Part 2

PROCEEDINGS IN
THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

The House in Committee of Supply A; W. Hartley in the chair.

The committee met at 6:41 p.m.


ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
EMPLOYMENT AND INVESTMENT
(continued)

On vote 22: minister's office, $374,615 (continued).

D. Symons: I wonder if we might ask about the vessel that is being built for the new northern run across the Queen Charlottes, and how far along that construction project is. Do you have a launching date set, and is it on time and on budget? I'll wrap them all together, and you can answer all that.

Hon. D. Miller: It's in the design stage after consultation with the stakeholders.

D. Symons: I thought the contract for the design was awarded a year ago. Is it still being designed?

Hon. D. Miller: Yes, it is. One of the issues that had to be considered is the disaster that took place in the North Sea, so that's being incorporated in the design.

D. Symons: I found what I was looking for a bit earlier in the afternoon, which has to do with the refit of vessels. I notice that the Queen of New Westminster was built in 1964 and that it had some hull modification done. The minister responsible at that time, I believe, said: "The Queen of New Westminster has at least another 30 years of service left, and therefore it is well worth the incremental investment we're making." So I guess I come back to the question I asked earlier; I said 20 years before dinnertime, and here they say 30 years. I guess the statements are by Mr. Ward, the senior vice-president, engineering and construction; he seems to be making the quotes in this particular one.

If that's the case -- and I congratulate them on being able to extend the length of service of these particular vessels -- it does seem that some of our $800 million construction program that we're now embarking on could be avoided if we were to do some upgrading on some of our current ships. I think you answered that earlier, so I don't think you'll want to respond again.

Hon. D. Miller: That vessel underwent a major modification in 1990 -- new hull, new engines -- at a total cost of $51 million, to extend that life for another 20 years.

D. Symons: I have some information here on the conversion that's being done to refit the Queen of Chilliwack. Apparently one yard gave a lower bid, yet the tender was severed between two companies, and I wonder if you could maybe give an explanation as to why that particular severing of the contract was done, when the lowest bid didn't seem to be accepted as the bid for the project.

Hon. D. Miller: That's a vessel and a service I'm particularly proud of, as it serves people on the midcoast, many of whom had not previously had any scheduled service. In fact, it's been an amazing success -- I think I had an article from the Seattle newspaper last week, which has a readership of about 700,000 people. But at the final, if you like, end price, the decision was made to split the tender in two: the steel and the passenger work. The result was a lower end price for that work.

D. Symons: I guess I'm somewhat confused, because if you put out a contract for bids and the lowest bid isn't chosen, I'm not sure how you're saving money on that. But maybe you are, on the various portions of it. You may want to explain that in a moment.

I'm wondering if you might give us an idea of the total cost of the docking improvements that must have been done to the seven stops along that particular Discovery coast route that is now in service?

Hon. D. Miller: We initially constructed the dock at Bella Bella. All the other docks at Bella Coola and Shearwater are being paid for by the communities through one means or another. So really the total capital for the docking and berthing facilities probably exceeded $4 million. As well, Klemtu paid for their own.

[6:45]

In fact -- again not to take too much time in the committee -- it's a remarkable story in terms of some of those small communities obtaining the kinds of resources necessary. I was in Klemtu prior to the inaugural sailing during the election campaign, because it is in my constituency. I want to say that for a very small aboriginal community on the coast, quite isolated, the kind of entrepreneurship and their ability to access some federal funds and some of their own and put that facility in place were truly remarkable. I think they've been very aggressive in trying to provide opportunities for tourists on that vessel. It really was a significant event in their lives to have that facility there and have that ship call in on a regular basis to their communities.

D. Symons: Prior to initiating this particular service by B.C. Ferries, I think you had Coast Ferries Ltd. operating

[ Page 1611 ]

a freight service, and to some extent maybe a passenger service, to some of those communities. I wonder, then, when B.C. Ferries moved into this, had you done a business plan or a cost-benefit analysis before you entered into the project and decided to do it? Again, like the other question I had on the fast ferries, would it be possible to get a copy of the business plan or cost-benefit analysis that was put in place, whatever information was used to make the decision to set up this particular route?

Hon. D. Miller: There is a strategy document called Go North 96, a remarkable document in that it was put together by stakeholders, people from the communities, all from the midcoast north -- some very, very able representation. I'm thinking of Russ Helberg, the mayor of Port Hardy, Percy Starr from Klemtu, people from Shearwater and all the way along who put together that strategy with B.C. Ferries. We provided the initial discussion document and more or less designed the system that suited their needs. Yes, there is a plan, and it is available.

Just for the information of the committee, to date there are reservations for about 7,500 people, 1,600 underheight vehicles and in excess of 500 overheight vehicles. It's opened up one of the most magnificent areas of the province. It appears, as we've said right from the beginning, that we're going to have to monitor that. It's only a summer service at this point. Ideally, we want to take it to year-round service, over time. It's got to prove itself.

I was delighted when I was in Bella Coola -- again, a community in my constituency -- to see that while the dock was under construction, the local hotel was undergoing a complete renovation of all the rooms. I understand from conversations I've had with people in Bella Coola that the traffic there has resulted in.... You can't find a hotel room in the summer season. It's providing new economic opportunities. It really is something that we're all very proud of at B.C. Ferries.

D. Symons: Yes, I'm sure there are many people on the highway route between there and Williams Lake that will also appreciate that. I know that the mayor of Williams Lake was quite supportive about the ferry service coming in there.

I was going to ask something on ridership, but going back to your response about the business plan that I asked about, what I didn't hear.... You talked about the various stakeholders there. Was there a financial plan in there as well? There seemed to be a lot of interest on the part of people there, but I don't know whether these people were necessarily the people who could do an appropriate business plan, from an economic viewpoint, in setting up that ferry route. Could you assure me that in this information you are going to give me, there will be the financial plan as well?

Hon. D. Miller: Yes, we will. I should say, in the early days.... The stakeholder committee is a new process, and we did have some difficulties. I recall the former mayor of Williams Lake -- I'm not sure if he's the current mayor -- aggressively demanding that we go out and spend a million and a half dollars without tendering or any other thing. It was a bit difficult. We had a few stakeholder meetings, and we had some of those things to overcome, but in the end, we did make the right decision with respect to that service.

I forgot to mention the Cariboo. When I started working on this project, I'd never even thought about the Cariboo. But in the end, some of the biggest boosters of this service are people from the Cariboo. Brian Gunn, who was formerly head of the Cariboo Tourist Association, did a lot of very good work. It's opened up a circle route potential across the Chilcotin plateau.

Mr. Rhodes advises me that he gets a lot of these forms that are filled out by customers on the vessel. Just to illustrate -- these are certainly nice to read -- here's one from some interior people from 100 Mile House: "This new service offered us the best holiday we have ever had." That's not bad, the best holiday they've ever had. "The crew was fantastic." "Thank you for great service." "The customer service rep was just the best." This is another one from 100 Mile House: "I wish to tell you how absolutely thrilled I was to travel this ferry. Staff were friendly and helpful." These are the kinds of things that, as the minister, I like to see, and I know that the administration, senior executives and others in B.C. Ferries are thrilled to get this kind of response from the public. It indicates that we are doing our job and doing it well, and that's always very gratifying.

D. Symons: Thank you. I'll wait eagerly for that business plan, then.

Hon. D. Miller: Take a trip.

D. Symons: Oh, I'd love to. If we weren't tied up here, I'd love to take a trip on it.

From what I gather, though, passenger ridership has not been that great yet. You gave me some numbers earlier. I was under the impression that it would be possible to get on the vessels at any time at all. As a matter of fact, I actually contacted the reservations and found out that, anytime I wanted to go, there would be no problem. I didn't identify myself, so it wasn't that I was getting special treatment. There seemed to be room on every sailing.

I wonder if we can just move on a little bit, because during the business of inaugurating that particular route, of course, Coast Ferries lost some of the business that they normally had given to the coast there and were in the process of litigating against the government over their loss of business. I gather that the person from Coast Ferries approached the Premier, and Mr. Kerley was asked to come in and do some mediation. I wonder what the result of that may have been.

Hon. D. Miller: Yes, with respect to the ridership, I did read the numbers earlier, and I should tell you that our projection at the end of three years is 15,000. It will be 10,000 this year. I think that is amazing. This service was put into place in a very, very quick way. It was moved very quickly. We talked about splitting the shipyard contracts. I don't think there's ever been a service that's been initiated in that hasty or speedy a manner. The opportunity for marketing was limited. Notwithstanding that, there have been feature articles in the Vancouver Sun, in the Victoria Times Colonist, in the Seattle Times, in the Washington Post. Word is spreading. I haven't talked to a single person who's familiar with the route, who either has gone on it or has heard about it who has said they don't want to go.

I would appreciate any support the opposition might give, and I would highly recommend that all MLAs take an opportunity to travel on these routes, for a couple of reasons. One is that, it seems to me, it gives MLAs an opportunity to look at various parts of our province that they may not be familiar with. As the MLA for the region, I can tell you that it's pretty tough getting around sometimes. You've got to take floatplanes, mostly. You know, I've had my experiences flying

[ Page 1612 ]

into Ocean Falls in 40-knot winds in a Beaver. You've got to think of British Columbians and what they have to experience in their normal lives. It's not what we experience down here in the lower mainland, where you hop on the freeway, and you may not like the traffic, but it's a heck of a lot different, I can tell you.

This service to the midcoast is absolutely something they've been after for so long that I know they're tickled about getting it. But I know Bill New, and I want to say he's a gentleman in Coast Ferries that I have a lot of respect for, because Bill is the second generation -- it was his father before him -- that has provided service on this coast. Bill was, quite frankly, in my view, the victim of a decision made prior to us becoming government, and that was the decision made by Ferries at the time to drop the subsidy to Coast Ferries and instead to allocate it to a tug and barge company out of Campbell River. That was really the problem that Bill had.

Notwithstanding that, we've tried to work with him, and I think we have, in extending contracts to make sure that he continues to provide that freight service that's valuable to communities up there. This service is only a summer service; there will be an ongoing need for private sector service. We have referred the issues that Mr. New is concerned about to Doug Kerley. I understand that that process is moving along, and we hope to reach some resolution that's satisfactory both to the Ferry Corporation and to Mr. New.

D. Symons: I gather there are some people that aren't happy. I'm happy for the service, just to have it on record. I guess my concerns are, maybe -- looking at Victoria Line and the government seeming to move out of that particular service and get somebody else to take it over -- that now when you set something up like this, there might be a bit longer-term commitment to it, particularly making sure that at least it's not going to be another drain on the taxpayers of the province beyond what was there prior to it.

One of the owners of a store in Ocean Falls says that the cost of her freight, to get goods to her store, is going to pretty well double, because B.C. Ferries now has that particular service, which used to go by Coast Ferries. It was delivered then in a sort of consolidated delivery fashion. Now they have to take smaller amounts in, and they're going to have to pay twice as much. Unless they get a large volume of sales, it will cost them more. I suppose that will happen in the other communities as well -- that there can be costs to the community beyond the costs of putting in the docks. The cost of supplies might go up now that B.C. Ferries is doing it, rather than down.

Hon. D. Miller: I don't think that that story is exactly accurate. I don't want to get into it, necessarily.

I want to deal with the issue of Victoria Line compared to the midcoast. Victoria Line is an operation that runs to a foreign country. It provides significant benefits. I don't want to get into that, although we have people here, and that may become an issue we can canvass in these estimates.

[Retrovision]

Continued...

[7:00]

But the comparison with the midcoast is completely inappropriate. It's a service to British Columbians who have not had much service to date. They've only had a subsidized private sector carrier, with the exception of Bella Bella, which has seen the northern vessel from Port Hardy to Prince Rupert call in only at dockside, unable to off-load or load freight or vehicles. The midcoast has been ignored for well over 30 years. I can tell you that as an MLA for the last ten, I have pursued this for five years in opposition and then, to my pleasure, as a member of the government and finally am able to see some improvement in that service.

We are challenged. The corporation is challenged, obviously. We talked about the issue of the operating loss and the subsidy that's required -- in the study by Mr. Waters, I think -- for some of the routes. There's no question that some routes, the Gulf Islands routes, are subsidized very heavily. But surely the member is not arguing that British Columbians who happen to live in Ocean Falls or Klemtu or Bella Bella or Bella Coola or Namu or Shearwater aren't entitled to some consideration when it comes to having some minimal service with respect to their communities, whether it's for freight and passengers or the tremendous tourism opportunities that this service now provides.

Link Lake up behind Ocean Falls has some of the biggest trout you will ever land. I recommend to the member that if he wants to go up there, I can give him the names of some people, and they'll take him up to Link Lake, and he'll catch a fish that he'll just be thrilled with. Word will get around, and he'll tell his friends, and they'll want to take the service. The next thing you know, those communities will actually have a bit of an economic base. So you have to look at all of those factors in assessing the value of this service.

D. Symons: I'm glad. I share the minister's enthusiasm. My comment about the cost-effectiveness is simply that what B.C. Ferries is putting in is no more a cost factor to the taxpayers of British Columbia than it was before. The routes before were subsidized. So as long as B.C. Ferries can end up maintaining the service -- or improving the service, as apparently they are doing -- and we don't end up greatly going further into the red in operating that service, I'd be delighted to support it.

I wonder if we can just move to a few different topics now and away from that particular route. A year or so ago a voyage recorder was being tested on B.C. Ferries, and I haven't heard what the outcome of that was. There was one being tested on one of the ferries, I believe. Was it working? It's basically a black box for ferries. Did it work out, and is it being installed on all the ferries?

Hon. D. Miller: That's still in the development and testing stage. The theory is to develop a black box, similar to what's used in aircraft, that would record all of the information that would be required in the case of an accident. That would really, in some ways, develop international standards and might provide the opportunity to market technology developed here in British Columbia.

D. Symons: It seems that's the answer I got a year ago when I asked the questions. I thought maybe the testing had been finished, and it was.... So you're taking your time; you're doing a thorough job, I would hope.

If we can just go back about a month's time -- I think it was July 15 -- one of these Spirit-class vessels had some trouble docking at Swartz Bay. From what I gather, it couldn't do its cat walk sideways to get into the dock and then back in. There seemed to be some difficulty. I gather it circled a few times, and they got a line on it and pulled it over.

I am just wondering that we had that happen. A year before -- back in September before -- there was also a problem with the Spirit of Vancouver Island. It was out of service for, I think, two weeks. I just want to see what the problem was; I think I wrote it down here -- I didn't. Is there some

[ Page 1613 ]

inherent problem with a mechanical difficulty in the Spirit of Vancouver Island? It was a bearing in the sealed casing, apparently, a ball-bearing problem on the Spirit of Vancouver Island. Was it a similar problem that happened more recently or a different problem, and is there an inherent problem in that particular vessel?

Hon. D. Miller: No inherent problems. I believe the record of B.C. Ferries with respect to their maintenance and operation of vessels is outstanding. The two problems are unrelated. One was a bow thruster. The Spirit of Vancouver Island was a steering gear seal. It could have been run, but out of abundance of caution a decision was made not to.

D. Symons: We get into a few unpleasant little incidents here, and this is the one that involves the Bowen Island accident last November. I guess the biggest issue at that particular time was the fact that apparently the ferry captain, after he backed into the wharf nearby and damaged the boats, simply took off and headed across to stay on the run. It shows bad judgment on the part of the captain at that time, but also I wonder if the captain wasn't pressured by B.C. Ferry Corporation's insistence on being on time and keeping to schedule. That might have been one of the causes of his lack of good judgment at that particular time.

Hon. D. Miller: No, it's not because of the schedule. It was a mechanical malfunction in the steering leg. The issue's been dealt with, with respect to the actions of personnel.

D. Symons: I'm shocked at the minister's answer, hon. Chair. If there's a mechanical malfunction, then the man puts out to sea after? It would seem logical that if there was some mechanical malfunction, indeed they would not proceed. What's going to happen at the dock on the other side when they get to Horseshoe Bay? What could happen halfway across? It would seem only logical that if there was some sort of mechanical malfunction, you would end up holding back to find out what the problem was. If it's human error that's one thing, but mechanical malfunction is not predictable.

I gather that the captain was disciplined for his action there. Was that simply because he left the dock, or was that because there was some human error in what was done that led up to the accident?

Hon. D. Miller: It's not that I'm not easily shocked, but suffice to say that the issue was dealt with.

I suppose it's easy here, sitting in this room. I think the incident occurred because the feeling was that the crew.... Obviously, in a ship -- I've been a mariner myself, briefly -- the skipper has responsibility for that ship. They thought the problem was overcome. They shouldn't have done it. Appropriate action was taken with respect to dealing with the crew, and I wouldn't make too much out of it.

D. Symons: I had the joy -- it wasn't much of a joy for a young lad, when I was a very young lad -- of steering HMCS Ontario out of Esquimalt Harbour a long time ago. I didn't do a very good job of it; they took me off the helm. I had a little bit of a thing going across there. That's why the Ontario is no longer there, I suppose.

The information I had was that there was some problem in transferring control from the helm at that time. That was more of a human error, I think, than a mechanical error, on the part of the crew of the vessel.

We'll get into another incident, where the crew of the Queen of Cumberland basically failed their safety drill. There was a comment that the officer didn't adequately ensure the training of the crew in their respective duties as outlined in the "B.C. Ferry Corporation Manual of Administration" dealing with crew responsibilities. This is a summary of the findings on that particular event. I guess I have a concern that having a manual is one thing, but seeing that its requirements are followed is quite another. It seems that maybe the training process for the crews on our various vessels in the B.C. Ferry Corporation isn't what it could be.

Hon. D. Miller: No, that's not a correct characterization. The Coast Guard has an SIC-16, an annual certification. It's not uncommon for the Coast Guard to ask for a retest, and in fact we welcome that. We want to have the very highest standard. It would be improper to characterize that as a failure. The process, I think, is working, and we're working well with it.

D. Symons: I gather that one of the steps taken was that the captain of that particular vessel was demoted, and he felt that he was treated unfairly in the process. I think he's quoted in the newspaper as saying that he complained that the training department of B.C. Ferries is basically defunct. The training, especially on minor vessels, is virtually non-existent. He comments that there are hundreds of ferry workers who are sent on board without the Coast Guard marine emergency duty certificate, because B.C. Ferries has a waiver. I think those are quite serious comments by that person. One thing we know is what happened to the captain. But can you tell me what additional training the crew received? Apparently they weren't following orders or weren't sure of what to do. As a crew, there seemed to be a lot of uncertainty of what to do. Can you give us some idea of what remedial work was done with that crew to bring them into line?

Hon. D. Miller: This is just really a caution. You talk about bringing the crew into line and about a failure, and you cite an individual who apparently has some problems. This is a bit of a caution in terms of using that as an authority, whether it's a newspaper or wherever the information comes from. The fact is that the crew were retested and passed. B.C. Ferries does spend a considerable amount of money on training, about $4.6 million or $4.7 million. Really, the bottom line is that we have a very good safety record. It is the top issue with B.C. Ferries.

There was a very unfortunate incident a number of years ago in Nanaimo, and steps were taken to address the issues that were identified as a result of that review. We have a top-notch service. We have dedicated crew, right from the lowest deckhand up to the captains, and they take that responsibility extremely seriously. I don't want any aspersions cast on B.C. Ferries and the very dedicated staff in terms of their commitment to safety in the operation of the ships, with the passengers, and the rest of it.

We run a very large ferry fleet. Occasionally incidents do arise -- we talked about the Bowen Island incident -- but steps are taken to address those when they do. I can assure the member -- and I am sure that the member is not really wanting to cast any aspersions -- that safety is number one with this corporation.

[7:15]

D. Symons: We heard those words after we had an accident in Nanaimo and when we had an accident at the

[ Page 1614 ]

Tsawwassen terminal with a coal ship, as well. So it may be number one, but accidents occur. There are a number of them that have occurred. I think we should work on anything we can do to improve that, and that was the reason for my questions.

I am wondering if the minister might tell us a bit about the memorandum of understanding you have with the union for an operational senior joint safety and health committee. I wonder if the agreement with the union sets up an umpire that can be used, and if you have an umpire chosen. How many committee meetings have there been in 1995, the past operational year, and in the year before that?

Hon. D. Miller: There hasn't been the need to use an umpire. The corporation and its employees have resolved the issues they have in common. In respect to safety, there are regular meetings on a monthly basis, and I think they are doing their best with respect to safety issues.

D. Symons: This is a difficult one, since no issues have been referred to that particular joint committee. That seems to be what the minister was saying, because they haven't had to have an umpire chosen. Could you give us an idea how many issues might come up over a year, when the committee, minus the umpire, meets? You say they have been resolved, but could you give me just a rough figure of the type and number of safety issues that might be discussed in a year?

Hon. D. Miller: We do have in Capt. Harry Martin, vice-president, one of the very best people with respect to marine safety; he has extensive experience in the Coast Guard. I think our program is second to none. The issues that are discussed with the employees are really ongoing issues that in some degree reflect my own experience in an industrial background, where there were monthly meetings. Current issues -- or issues that we on the union side felt had not been addressed properly -- were brought up at those meetings, and there was a process to try to resolve them. So it's pretty difficult to catalogue or itemize the issues, the numbers, or that kind of thing; safety is an ongoing, dynamic process that really requires full involvement. Anybody, particularly in industry, understands this. It only works if both management and unionized workers feel that they have common goals and mutual interests in respect to these questions -- and they do. When they realize that, and dedicate themselves, it works.

D. Symons: Would some of the difficulties in dealing with safety issues relate to the union contract you have? Some of the safety issues that management would perhaps prefer to deal with might involve more flexible hours or sailing arrangements than the union is willing to accept. Will those be discussed during those meetings?

Hon. D. Miller: No. Safety is not at all compromised by trade union agreements.

D. Symons: I want to move on to a slightly different, but related, topic. A little more than a month ago, I noticed a headline of a newspaper article in the Times Colonist that said: "Top Skippers Promised for Fast Ferries." The article said that you were going to use the best skippers on your fast ferries. I thought I would just make the comment that I would hope that all your skippers are the best possible and that you wouldn't have a problem in choosing the best ones, because you have them already. I don't know if you want to respond to that, so I'll just carry on.

I wonder if the workforce has been hired, because you've started cutting material and so forth for the construction of the ferries, I believe. That's going to come up fairly shortly. I believe someone indicated that if the Liberals were elected, it would mean termination notices on that project, and 350 people would soon be out of work. I'm trying to find out who made that comment; it was one of your members. It looks like it might have been Mr. Ward who made that comment, as he's the only one quoted in this paper. Maybe Mr. Ward would care to respond. What I want to know is: did you have 350 people on your workforce who would have been out of a job if the Liberals had been elected and they had terminated the fast-ferry project?

Hon. D. Miller: With respect to the headline, I can say with complete candour that we didn't write it. But I believe the article does talk about our very high standard of training, and obviously all of our people are top-calibre in that respect.

I've been known to indulge in a bit of politics from time to time. I think I recall that even I said that once -- or maybe two, three or even four times -- but I think it was quite appropriate. To put the member's mind at ease, the Liberals didn't get elected, so the crisis is past.

D. Symons: In that case, maybe we can all breathe easier -- I never said that, mind you.

I wonder if we can just look again at a comment made a year ago about the results of that rather tragic accident in Nanaimo. Apparently, the conclusion of the hearings was that the rushing ferry and this business of keeping to schedule actually led to the deaths. Basically, the captain pulled out a little too early, before the full loading procedure had been done. I've mentioned this before, and in past estimates too. I see that you're bringing in fast ferries and that you're still very time-conscious, so I wonder what you've done. I think that people appreciate the fact that ferries are basically ready to go -- on the hour in the summer or on odd hours in the winter. But are schedules so tight that there isn't enough flexibility in your time, such that if something untoward happened or if a full load was there, then it would put pressure on the captain to somehow make up the time? They may end up, as seems to have been the case here, putting lives in jeopardy by trying to keep to schedule.

Hon. D. Miller: This is a very, very serious issue. That was not, I repeat not, the conclusion of the investigators -- the Coast Guard and others, in that instance. It's very, very important that this is on the record and that we be absolutely clear. Those reports are public, I assume. The schedule was completely exonerated with respect to that incident. I think that that should be absolutely crystal-clear. The fundamental cause was the lack of adherence to the clearance procedures required prior to embarkation. So let nobody make any mistake that somehow we are driving these ferries to maintain a schedule and that that is compromising safety. Again, I don't want to overstate this. It's very easy to say, but it is fundamentally and absolutely not true.

D. Symons: That particular concern, though, seems to raise its head quite frequently when accidents occur, so I think there may be some concern, whether it's founded or not. It's certainly an issue that seems to come up almost every time an accident occurs, that there was that particular aspect involved in it.

In that particular incident, there was a lawsuit involved. I believe the minister responsible at the time indicated that they

[ Page 1615 ]

would be settling.... I don't think he used the word "generously"; I forget the word he used at the time. It was certainly indicated that there would be a substantial indemnity paid to the victims that remained. You did reach an out-of-court settlement a few years later with the person. Would you be able to tell us what the figure of that was?

Hon. D. Miller: That issue was settled, Mr. Chairman. There was no litigation, and there is a confidentiality issue with respect to the families which we will respect.

D. Symons: I have some concerns about the last phrase there -- the confidentiality agreement -- because I'm aware that when a good number of the people who left the upper echelons in B.C. Transit were ushered out the door with a golden handshake, basically part of the agreement of the golden handshake was that you would not disclose what particular figure they were given. So my question here is whether the confidentiality is because of the Askew family seeking it, or whether this was part of the agreement that B.C. Ferries made with them, to make a settlement of that case. Where did the initiation for keeping it confidential come from?

Hon. D. Miller: I think it's somewhat offensive to try to put those two issues together: the issues around senior management at B.C. Transit and the very tragic events that occurred in Nanaimo, and the commitment of B.C. Ferries and this government to reach a settlement that was appropriate and to respect the confidentiality of family members with respect to that settlement. I find that, quite frankly, offensive, and I don't know why the member would want to put those two issues together. He may want to take the opportunity to clarify that he wasn't trying to compare the two. It really is.... Well, perhaps the member may want to try to clarify it.

D. Symons: I guess my question -- and it wasn't answered in your response -- was about where the desire for confidentiality originated. If it was from the Askew family, I can quite see the reasoning there. If it originated with B.C. Ferries, I think there's quite another story to it. That was the reason for my question, and you very nicely danced around giving an answer to it.

Hon. D. Miller: I never danced around anything. I said, "With respect to confidentiality to the families, at their request," so let's be clear. I think it's quite offensive to try to compare issues around senior management in another corporation with a tragic accident.

P. Reitsma: I'm going to ask a friendly question, so relax. I too have been a mariner, by the way -- about three and a half years or a little bit longer on the nice ships, the cruise ships. One of them, the old Rotterdam.... I think they're making Datsuns out of them now, actually. She's been retired -- 37,000 tonnes. I've traversed, in fact, all the oceans.

On what my colleague mentioned, in terms of the ferry service, I've been on many of the ferry services in Scandinavia and Russia and through the Channel, when I was hosting tours. I do think we have a good system and a good crew. But I would like a statement of comfort. Although I think my business is the best and I've got the best staff, I do send them to training seminars and upgrading courses. I want them to be on top, in terms of their business approach and marketing, as much as possible. I certainly would like a statement of comfort from the minister that staff and crew stay on top in terms of safety and that they're vigilant. Keep in mind, of course, that although things may be good, there's always room for improvement. I think a statement of comfort is not only good for us but for the employees as well.

Hon. D. Miller: I appreciate the member's remarks, and we do. I don't think any operation should rest on its laurels or think: "We've been doing a good job; therefore we are continuing to do a good job." There has to be an internal process. I talked about the money we spent on training, the independent audits we do and the review teams. I was really quite pleased, actually, to read the comments of a couple of British Columbians from the interior on the new service, the Queen of Chilliwack, on the midcoast. I've been mostly connected with the northern run. I don't take the Vancouver-Vancouver Island run very much, but rather the northern vessel from Port Hardy to Prince Rupert. I must say that in the times I've been on there, the passengers, I think, are always very pleased with the efficiency of the operation, whether that's on the food service side or the general relationship between staff and mostly, but not exclusively, foreign visitors. I think the testimonials the corporation gets are proof of that.

It is an important service. We realize that in addition to providing service to British Columbians, it also provides important tourist opportunities in this province. We think that's a very vital role in contributing to the economy of this province, and one we take seriously.

P. Reitsma: I think there ought to be only one aim or one goal, and that's no accidents.

I ask the minister: are any layoffs anticipated, or a reduction in staff?

Hon. D. Miller: No. There are obviously the seasonal complements that change as the summer season ends and we go on reduced sailing times on some of our runs, but nothing major.

[Retrovision]

Continued...

[7:30]

P. Reitsma: I live on the Island, obviously, and many of us on the Island see, of course, B.C. Ferries as an extension of the Trans-Canada Highway. I was not here earlier when my colleague might have asked some questions with regard to subsidies. If I'm repetitive, I hope the minister bears with me. Are there are some subsidies to us? Are there any ongoing negotiations between the B.C. government and the federal government in terms of perhaps seeing the extension of the Trans-Canada Highway onto the ferry system?

Hon. D. Miller: No. We are in receipt of a federal subsidy that has a long history. I think I did detail that previously, going back to the time the federal government arbitrarily removed the subsidy for Northland Navigation back in the early 1970s, around 1974. As a result of that, we have a subsidy that's indexed to Vancouver's CPI, I think, which was originally $4 million and now is in the $21 million range. Quite frankly, our primary effort is to ensure that the federal government, which has already tried to cut this -- we fought them successfully on that -- does not eliminate this subsidy. It's there for a specific purpose. It's an agreement between the federal government and the provincial government, and it's obviously important to our operations.

P. Reitsma: I understand that in terms of the cost recovery, there is a net loss per year of $3.4 million and a net depreciation of $40 million.

[ Page 1616 ]

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Chairman, I've answered that.

P. Reitsma: How does that compare with the subsidies per head, per ride, with, say, the light rapid transit system?

Hon. D. Miller: Any particular system?

P. Reitsma: Fair enough.

Are rate increases anticipated? If so, how much and why?

Hon. D. Miller: With all due respect to the member, I have covered this fairly extensively.

D. Symons: I wonder if we might go to the auditor general's report to do with the B.C. Ferry Corporation and its fleet and terminal maintenance management operations. I just have a couple of questions on that particular report. It seems that in their overall conclusions, which I'm reading from on page 14.... In spite of itself, the maintenance program has been very good. When you read through here, that seems to be the case: "The corporation's maintenance program lacks several elements required to enable the corporation to ensure that vessels and terminals are being maintained in a cost-effective manner." It goes on later to indicate that that, indeed, is happening, but not because the Ferry Corporation seems to have anything in place to do it. Further down, it says: "...the corporation does not currently have an adequate information system by which the costs and results of maintenance activities can be measured."

Maybe I can finish off the whole thing all at once here, and then the minister only has to get up once. If we skip down a little further on that same page, it says:

"The corporation has determined that most equipment on vessels should be subject to preventive maintenance. Over time, engineers on each vessel have developed adequate maintenance procedures...."
"We noted, however, that preventive maintenance procedures are not consistent throughout the fleet, or even between vessels of the same type."

"Much of the maintenance is scheduled on the basis of individual memory and informal records rather than through a systematic approach."

At the bottom of page 15, it goes on:

"The corporation lacks assurance that the optimum amount of maintenance is being done in a cost-effective manner. Until recently, cost-effectiveness of maintenance has not been a major issue for the corporation. However, we found evidence of a growing awareness of the importance of cost-effectiveness."
I think that's the part that I want some reassurance on -- that besides the awareness, you are moving in that direction.

They make a recommendation at the end. Can the minister tell us what steps have now been taken in that regard since this has been brought to your attention?

Hon. D. Miller: That's very interesting. We at the corporation try to address the issues raised by the auditor general. It's apparently a fairly new field -- having auditors determine whether or not you have a good maintenance or safety or other program. Quite frankly, I wouldn't count myself a skeptic, but I think we should always be cautious about sort of blindly accepting any findings that we receive. I think the obligation of any prudent corporation is to analyze and to be critical where they think that's appropriate. Certainly the corporation has tried to do that in working with the auditor general. I think it's clear that the report concludes that the vessels and terminals are well maintained, that adequate preventive maintenance is carried out and that in every respect we do an outstanding job. We will continue to work with the auditor, in terms of the kinds of findings and conclusions that he might come up with, to ensure that we are fulfilling our mandate of having a very safe, efficient operation to serve the travelling public in British Columbia.

D. Symons: I just would have been a little more reassured by the minister's answers if he had indicated that they were putting in something more than the memory of some of the particular maintenance staff on ferries. Indeed, if a man who has a good memory is away ill or retires or something, maybe a lot of that recordkeeping might go with him, if it's only in the head. I think we do want some sort of regular scheduled maintenance procedures in place that everybody would know about, so that we do not depend upon individuals doing a good job. Indeed, I agree with the minister that we have been very fortunate and that you've had some good individuals looking after that. But I think the auditor general's comments probably are germane to the issue: we can't depend entirely upon the calibre of the people we have. We must have other systems in place to make sure that it carries on. So you might want to respond.

Hon. D. Miller: I think we have an adequate system. That's why we have the computerized maintenance management project.

Perhaps it's my blind faith in my fellow man, if I can use that term. I and other members have mentioned that we've been at sea. I wasn't way out there in the ocean, but I was on the coast of B.C. in a tugboat. I've got to tell you that the corporate memory of the people who were running those tugboats was quite valuable to me. In fact, the corporate memory of some of those people saved people's lives. So don't ever discount that factor. If we think that computers and systems are going to solve all our problems, then I think it's a pretty sorry day. It's human beings, using systems. That corporate memory and that experience that people accumulate over time are pretty important and should never, ever be sold short.

D. Symons: I'm not at all differing with the member -- except the one thing I would say is that you mentioned that it's human beings using a system. Indeed, the auditor general implied that there wasn't too much of a system there for them to be working with. That was my concern.

Just moving on a bit, I referred earlier to, and asked the minister if he could supply me with, the business plan for.... I notice in the Howe Sound-Sunshine Coast advisory committee minutes of April 29, 1995, this action item: "B.C. Ferries will provide to the advisory committee an executive summary of the fast ferry cost-benefit analysis." If we skip ahead to the next monthly meeting, we find: "Len Roueche explained that the corporation does not yet have a suitable executive summary of the fast ferry cost-benefit analysis." I was asking for something similar to that, and it still was in the works. This was as of May 27, 1995. Has the particular one they were asking for been supplied to the Howe Sound-Sunshine Coast advisory committee?

Hon. D. Miller: I was just checking to see whether the summary was too long, but.... No, I understand it's been sent. We'll provide a copy to the member.

D. Symons: I thank the minister for that.

I wonder if we can go on to the fast ferries now, since I'm asking a question on that. I'm reading various articles and

[ Page 1617 ]

releases and so forth dealing with it, and there seems to be some confusion in my mind over the horsepower involved in the fast ferries. I read something where Mr. Ward is quoted as talking about 33,000 horsepower, and somewhere else the minister responsible at the time was talking about 37,500 horsepower. You've made a deal with Detroit Diesel. I wonder which horsepower these ferries will be powered by.

Hon. D. Miller: It's a question of how you tune them up. The maximum is 37,000 horsepower; we're going to take 33,500.

D. Symons: It's the same engine, but by fine-tuning it you can do something of that sort. At what percentage of its output capacity would you be operating those engines to get to 37 knots?

Hon. D. Miller: The low 90s.

D. Symons: I wonder if you might give us an idea of what happens to fuel consumption when you operate an engine at that degree of its output, because I gather that in automobile engines when you get much past 60 miles an hour -- that is 100 kilometres per hour -- and you go up another ten, your fuel consumption begins to climb quite rapidly, and you get a logarithmic-type graph. What would happen with these diesel engines involved in the fast ferries as you get up to 90 percent output?

Hon. D. Miller: Fuel use is directly proportional to the horsepower used.

D. Symons: If you were operating at 80 percent capacity of the engine, and you upped it to 90 percent, by what percentage would your fuel consumption increase?

Hon. D. Miller: I did say directly proportional.

D. Symons: The minister seems to be implying to me, if you're saying it's directly proportional, that diesel engines operate differently from gasoline engines, as far as output goes.

Hon. D. Miller: From 80 to 90 is ten, so that's....

D. Symons: It would be just another ten to get up to 100 percent, if you had it going flat out; that's what you're saying. So obviously diesel engines operate differently from gasoline engines. I'll have to check that out with my experts in that particular field. That's not what I believed to be the case.

Anyway, I wonder if the minister might tell me how you can get by with either 33,500 or 37,500 when there seem to be similar vessels built recently that require considerably more -- up to 20 percent more horsepower -- in order to get them up to even a lower speed than you anticipate that these ferries will be operating at. I believe there was one constructed just recently in Norway. It's 88 metres, and it's going to carry 900 passengers and 165 vehicles. That's a smaller capacity than our ferry is going to have. It has a cruising speed of 40 knots, slightly higher, but it will require 44,000 horsepower. Have you got some magic hull design that's going to give it that increase?

Hon. D. Miller: A different hull design is the answer to that question. It's a semi-SWATH and requires more horsepower. Hull form is really the issue, and the catamaran is really much lower than the SWATH.

D. Symons: I gather that Incat has been in the forefront of design. What you're saying about the fast ferries that are now being designed for B.C. Ferries is that they have made some further breakthroughs in hull design that are going to allow them to operate at that lower horsepower.

[7:45]

Hon. D. Miller: I think the answer to that, to some degree, is yes. There have been various modifications to hull design, obviously looking at trying to reach.... I guess I could use the term "optimum" with respect to horsepower requirements, fuel use, speed -- all those kinds of things. The answer to the question is that this hull design is one that requires far less horsepower.

D. Symons: When B.C. Ferries first gave the contract, I guess, partnered with Incat, we were told that this was a world leader and the most experienced leader in the building of fast ferries. That's why we did a partnering with Incat. I wonder now why we're bringing in what appeared at that time to be an also-ran, Finnyard, as an adviser to B.C. Ferries. Indeed, you took the top person already, yet Finnyard seem to be the people that built the very ferry I was talking about a moment ago that requires more horsepower than B.C. Ferries is putting into theirs.

Hon. D. Miller: It's Incat's design and Finnyard's construction. That's the simple answer.

D. Symons: I wonder if the minister might tell me whether the tank test done on the design model tested those models at the equivalent of the 37 knots in a fully loaded fashion?

Hon. D. Miller: I think they did even better than that, but the answer is yes.

D. Symons: Therefore, when we get on the water, we're going to see that indeed it's going to perform as we've been told. I wonder if we might take a look at the shed that's being built. I think I've asked elsewhere.... During the estimates for Environment it was discovered that that particular property had some contamination on it. I gather that the Vancouver Port Corporation is responsible for cleaning that up. The shed is costing $9 million. I wonder if you might be able to tell me whether that $9 million includes the equipment needed to build the ships, the welding equipment for aluminum-welding and other special equipment, scaffolds, cranes, etc. Is that going to be a fully operational shed when it's finished, for the $9 million?

Hon. D. Miller: We've completed, I think, most of the contaminated-material removal. It was a former asbestos loading dock for Cassiar Asbestos. The cost is between $9 million and $10 million, and it will be a fully equipped dock for construction.

D. Symons: Have you a tentative date when that will be in operation? Because right now I gather they're simply putting the foundations in.

[ Page 1618 ]

Hon. D. Miller: The end of construction is the end of September, and it will be fully operational at the end of October.

D. Symons: When the cost of the fast ferries was put at $210 million -- $70 million per ship -- was that $9 million incorporated into the overall cost, so that it's being basically amortized over the three ships?

Hon. D. Miller: Yes.

D. Symons: We have a capital freeze on right now, and apparently only one of the three vessels is going ahead for the time being, until there is a review done on all capital projects. I gather it was said recently that there has been $150 million already spent on or committed to the ferry program. If you stop at only the first ferry.... If, by chance, in this freeze we have a problem, in that you've already spent twice what one ferry should cost.... You're halfway through your total already, and you haven't got any ferries built yet.

Hon. D. Miller: Some of those costs were to prepurchase machinery and materiel -- for the second and, I think, the third as well. Notwithstanding that, I do believe we did canvass this issue reasonably well the other night.

D. Symons: Not this particular issue. If you've spent $150 million already, and you don't have any ship even started, with the keel laid and so forth.... You know you've only got roughly $60 million to go for the actual construction of those ships, outfitting and all the rest, and you've used up the total amount that's been set for building these ferries. Are you going to be able to build three ferries for $60 million?

Hon. D. Miller: We're on budget.

D. Symons: I guess we'll have more fodder for questions next year, then, when we go through this.

Hon. D. Miller: Perhaps, or we might get a lot of the same.

D. Symons: I guess the next question -- and I did canvass this a little before.... The time that's going to be saved in crossing the straits is, I believe, slightly less than half an hour. The problem is: are the costs of this whole program of putting the fast ferries in there worth the few minutes we're going to shave off that particular route?

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Chairman, I was about to feel my wrists, because the whole issue is summed up in one word: pulse. Really, it's the question of trying to deliver traffic, or traffic management, that's at the heart of this strategic decision. As opposed to having a huge slug of traffic arriving in a very short time and having absolute chaos and congestion, the fast ferries will take a slightly different approach and deliver traffic in a much more manageable way. In conjunction, particularly on the Vancouver Island side, with the developments at Duke Point, which will allow for better management of the conventional traffic.... Things should improve significantly both on the Vancouver Island side and on the Horseshoe Bay side, where anybody who has travelled in either place knows that there are some very, very horrendous traffic management problems.

I certainly know from my recent trip up Vancouver Island that there are certain times when you don't want to hit Nanaimo. Anybody who has to drive, and I see the member for Parksville.... I don't do it that often. I do it because I've got a grandson up there, but I now know that there are certain times and certain days when you just don't want to even try it. It's a nightmare.

An Hon. Member: You're too young to have a grandson.

Hon. D. Miller: I appreciate the member over there who says that I'm too young to have a grandson, but I won't get into that.

But just remember that word: pulse.

D. Symons: I can appreciate the minister's answer, as far as it goes, for the fast ferries. A small, conventional ferry would do the same thing. Maybe it's not quite as fast across, but you could end up staggering out the loads that are going to be dumped on either shore at the same time, so there are other ways of addressing that problem. I suspect, then, that when I get the business plan that you're going to supply me, in it will be some discussion on this issue of the time saved versus the cost of putting the ferry in.

Also on the cost, I wonder if you might be able to give me some sort of breakdown of where that $150 million that's either committed or whatever has gone. I know I don't want you to read off a whole pile of figures now, but if you could supply that to me in the next little while, I'd appreciate that -- not tonight.

The shipping journal Fairplay had some comments about our fast-ferry program and indicated that we couldn't possibly put these three ferries in the water for the price that B.C. Ferries is saying they're going to do it. This seems to be a reputable magazine, so I'm just wondering why there is a discrepancy between what this particular industry magazine is saying and what B.C. Ferries is saying.

Hon. D. Miller: I was kind of curious about the title of the magazine Fairplay. It sounds interesting. I don't know how much applicability it would have in British Columbia, but.... There was some question about whether or not the detailed information that the member has.... I don't think we have it here, but I appreciate the member's interest. I was a bit concerned. I thought we had it stored on the sixth floor of Fort Street over here, but I gather we've got copies. The article in question was submitted by a B.C. writer. It's not an opinion of the magazine, as I understand it.

D. Symons: Then I can suspect who the writer might be.

I wonder about one other thing to do with the fast ferries, or with ferries in general. It seems that B.C. Ferries opened an information office last fall in Nanaimo. I wonder if you might give us an idea of the costs per year that you are budgeting for the operation of that particular office, and whether you're doing it only in Nanaimo, and why you're opening an office there when the program probably speaks for itself.

Hon. D. Miller: We don't have the dollar.... It's rent for the office, and one person. I go back and reflect on the time that I went up to participate in the groundbreaking on the terminal, or on the road, at Duke Point. It's obvious from my conversation with the mayor that the office has not really worked very well. But I think there is a lot of curiosity in Nanaimo about this, both the new terminal and the.... Obviously we've tried to design it in a way that's appropriate to the setting. I think if anybody's been in my office lately,

[ Page 1619 ]

you've seen the conceptual design and the kind of park.... I'm not sure how much, but we put a fair amount of money into park areas adjacent to the terminal. So we tried to do a really nice job, and I'm sure the citizens of Nanaimo are just going to be thrilled when we have both the conventional ferries running to Duke Point and the fast ferries running into Nanaimo. I look forward to that day.

D. Symons: Next time I am in Nanaimo I will visit your office there and meet the one person that's operating it.

I've got a news release from B.C. Ferries dated June 19 of this year, and it talks about the fast-ferries training as being underway. It seems you're rather a long way off from having crews operate these ships. Are these people now on staff, or are you training them but they're going to be on unemployment after the training process? How are you managing to have people train now, and to hang on to them for the time when those ferries are finally floating?

Hon. D. Miller: It kind of makes you have second thoughts about the auditor general's report. But I gather one master and two chief engineers are engaged in some appropriate training; I'm not sure if it's full-time. We obviously want to be ready for this new vessel.

D. Symons: When I look at a news release like this: "Fast Ferry Training Underway at B.C. Ferries...." I was surprised to hear now that it's only two people -- that you put out a news release to indicate that two people are...

Hon. D. Miller: Three people.

D. Symons: Three people. I'm sorry, I stand corrected. I can see why you put it out if there are three people involved.

Anyway, another aspect of the fast ferries -- and I'm coming to the end of the fast ferries in a moment -- was the anticipation of selling fast ferries offshore. This is certainly something I remember as being one of the big selling points for the superferries. You know, we find that the same players are involved in telling us.... One was going to be a great success, and people from offshore were going to beat a path to our door, and we were going to be building superferries for Hong Kong and other places around the world.

That didn't happen, and I wonder why, with the competition in building fast ferries.... Indeed, there are shipyards that are already up, built, and that have built fast ferries and that are waiting for jobs to come their way. I wonder why you have this great faith that we're going to put this amount of money into training and all the rest of it, in a facility where we're going to compete against the world, and we're going to win out. I wish us luck on this, but I wonder where you're getting your information that indeed we're going to be able to pull it off from.

[Retrovision]

Continued

[8:00]

Hon. D. Miller: I think you have to proceed with more than just blind faith. I think faith is a necessary ingredient, but not blind faith, and I think we've made a very solid business case. Earlier this evening I talked about my faith in the ability of British Columbians, corporation workers, etc., to carry this off. Certainly it would be nothing ventured, nothing gained. Obviously, we have enjoyed -- I did canvass this in the mini-estimates some time ago -- the kinds of benefits that have been realized for the consortium we put together on the superferry, and the marketing that was done. Considerable benefits were realized. I can't recall the exact dollar figure, but it is in the tens of millions of dollars, and work has been spread around to the private sector in British Columbia. I think, all in all, any economic analysis of that will show that we did exactly the right thing, and we have confidence in our ability to succeed at this venture.

D. Symons: I'll move off the fast ferries. I think the minister has answered quite well.

I wonder if we can just take a look at some of the more difficult routes to service as far as B.C. Ferries go, because of the costs involved and the number of riders involved. One that doesn't have the best of riders versus revenue -- costs versus revenue, anyway -- is the Gulf Islands service, and other minor routes. I guess the people in those communities are very concerned that they are going to suffer in the process. There seems to be a renewal of shipbuilding, and they are concerned that their ferries are going to have to absorb the costs of building fast ferries but that they will remain with the same service they have -- only with higher costs because of the overall higher costs for the building program the Ferry Corporation has taken on.

I wonder if we might look at that. I have some information from a Galiano group that have been meeting with the government and have made some recommendations. They have a joint transportation committee. I can't agree with some of their arguments -- I gather this is something that has been passed on to the minister, and I am sure you can't either. What we do have are people who have moved onto these islands and have concerns about their ferry service. What assurances can you give these people that their ferry service will remain the same or increase as their communities grow, and that they won't see, in the near future, huge increases in their fares?

Hon. D. Miller: There have been new ships deployed. I think of the Queen of Cumberland. Did we talk about that earlier? I think we did -- a brand-new ship in the southern Gulf Islands. The issue is somewhat challenging, and I don't think there is any reason why the people in the Gulf Islands should feel that their service is jeopardized by capital programs to improve service generally in the fleet. In fact, the more efficient we become, I would assume the more comfort they may take.

I don't think the issue is necessarily the sparsely populated regions and low ridership. It seems to me that the more pressing issue is the heavily populated, high-ridership, low- return areas. You know yourself what will happen there: start talking about fares and I can predict what the reaction will be. I have a fair amount of sympathy for the extremely low-populated, remote and isolated communities who have none of the benefits, none of the weather, none of the amenities. They pay huge freight costs for ordinary goods that you and I get relatively cheaply.

It seems to me that we have to concentrate on where there is a reasonable population but where the return for the corporation is. Well, there is no return; it is heavily subsidized.

D. Symons: I'd like to move onto various topics here. I think we could put a few of these under the area of complaints -- maybe not the specific one I'll read here -- about how the Ferry Corporation responds, how things went awry in this particular case, and whether they are trying to adjust procedures so that these types of complaints won't happen again.

This involves a senior citizen who is writing from the Ashcroft area and is on one of these oxygen tanks. When they

[ Page 1620 ]

got on the ferry, the ferry person noticed that they were using an oxygen apparatus and the ticket taker asked if they would like to be next to the elevator. They replied that they would, but that they would really rather stay in their vehicle. The ticket taker made a phone call and apparently assured the person that they could stay in their vehicle. The problem was that the vehicle was put on the lower deck along with a lot of trucks with refrigeration units that were apparently operating. This person was very ill from the fumes on that deck and had to get out of their car with difficulty and up to the upper deck to get away.

Having had that experience, the girl attending the tickets asked again when they came back, and they said that they did not want to be placed in the hold again. They were told that would be fine, and they were put in a line that, lo and behold, put them back in the hold.

Somewhere the communications broke down. I am wondering if there is some explanation as to how a procedure that would normally work didn't work this time. What would the procedure be for a person who has those special needs when they go to the ticket booth? Is that when they are supposed to announce what their needs are? Then they are put into a certain lane? How is the person directing traffic onto the ferry aware of which car has what needs?

Hon. D. Miller: It is extremely difficult, based on the circumstances outlined by the member.... Certainly if there was correspondence.... I don't know if that correspondence has gone to the corporation. We certainly endeavour to meet customer needs, particularly in the circumstances outlined by the member, where people have disabilities and require some special attention. I can't tell you why certain things happened on that particular sailing and why people never got to that position. I really don't know. When anything like that comes, we take it seriously. If the member wants to relay that information, we can certainly see if there are individual circumstances relating to that particular incident. But we do value our customers, and we want to treat them well and pay attention of any special circumstances they have.

D. Symons: It was a letter apparently to the Minister of Transportation and Highways and to the Tourism minister. They were the carbons, and it was addressed to the then Premier. But my question wasn't quite on that specific instance. If you noted the end of my comment on that, I asked: "What are the procedures that one would go through if they had special needs?" So it wasn't this particular special need. Do they notify the person who sells them the ticket at the booth? Then what are the procedures B.C. Ferries goes through from that point on? In this case, they had an oxygen requirement and wanted to stay in their car, in a reasonable atmosphere. How is this information conveyed along the lines so that a need is taken care of -- and not this particular need?

Hon. D. Miller: The ticket agent would relay that information to the tower. I had occasion to go into the tower out at Swartz Bay a couple of weeks ago, and I was truly impressed. The technological capability out there is truly amazing. Again, I would recommend it to members who have talked about safety and efficiency issues. I forget the young gentleman's name who showed me up there, but he's a very able person. A couple of women were manning the computers, and believe me, they were working extremely hard, not stopping for a minute. They just managed to say hello to me, while keeping count of the traffic. They can monitor the vehicles going on the ferry and count them at any moment. It's a very sophisticated operation; I was really impressed.

Let them tell the ticket agent. We'll get it to the tower. If it's on a smaller, more informal route, I'm sure it's probably sometimes easier to handle in a personal way. But we want to do our best by the travelling public, particularly people with certain needs. If they've got certain disabilities and we can accommodate them, we want to do that.

D. Symons: The minister's answer, then, is that it goes from the ticket agent to the tower, and the tower coordinates that, obviously. I would maybe let the minister know that I'm glad to see that he went up in the tower. I had an offer from the CEO of B.C. Ferries a year and a half ago, when I made the request to go there. He was more than enthusiastic in responding: "Certainly. If you'd like to, just let me know any time." You know, it always seems that after a long week in the environs of the Legislature, I want to get home to my wife and family. When I get to that terminal at the last moment, I don't have time to, or else I decide not to, take the extra hour to spend in the tower there. But one of these days, when we aren't in session, I will take him up on that offer, because I'd be most delighted to watch how that operations works.

Another one deals with the same sort of issue, but it's a little different. It deals with hand baggage. I gather that this person, if he had hand baggage, was a pedestrian on the ferry. He had a golf bag, actually, and found out that B.C. Ferries doesn't handle golf bags. He got a little notice stuck on there as a courtesy: "We have carried this item; however, we cannot guarantee that it will be carried in future." Then they have four little items down there, and one was checked off. It said: "Baggage carrier driver does not carry golf clubs." I'm just wondering. You know, airlines and other organizations carry golf clubs. As a way of discouraging people from taking their cars and encouraging them to ride as foot passengers.... It's much more economical that way for both B.C. Ferries and the public. Maybe I could put in a plug for golfers. I'm not one, but maybe you could make some accommodation for people wanting to check golf clubs.

Hon. D. Miller: That certainly got my hackles up! You can't put your golf bag on the ferry? I mean, what's going on?

There are some issues around liability and baggage. If you start to throw people's fairly expensive golf bags on a baggage cart and the next thing you know a toolbox lands on top of them, there may be some liability issues. But fair enough.

Mr. Chairman, I'm just curious. I know these estimates are an important occasion. We want to canvass fully these kinds of issues. But, this is not the complaints department for B.C. Ferries. I'm not treating the issues the member raises lightly. I think I've tried to respond, but surely there are more appropriate venues. We could just get a list of letters from people who may have had some problems with B.C. Ferries, read them and say to ourselves: "That's the estimates." Surely it's not. While I don't mind responding to questions, I just don't know that it's really appropriate here. If it's filling time, that's one thing, and I understand that; time occasionally has to be filled. If it's not, then surely we could move to more productive discussions.

D. Symons: I don't want to go back and discuss B.C. Hydro, so we'll move along. This question is a little more philosophical in nature than the previous questions, but it deals with the lawsuit that involved B.C. Ferries and the firing of a gentleman who had been with B.C. Ferries for quite a long time. It involved the purchase of some drapery material or something, and it was thought that the bill had gone the

[ Page 1621 ]

wrong way. What seems to be the case, because the courts decided in their favour.... Maybe we could get into a little discussion of how corporations can use their very deep pockets to basically stonewall somebody who feels that they have a grievance against a large corporation like B.C. Ferries. B.C. Ferries has much deeper pockets for keeping the case going in the courts, and for going to appeal and so forth, and the other person will eventually run out of funds to fight them. It seems that that may be what was going on in this particular instance.

Hon. D. Miller: I understand that the issue may be before the courts. But surely the philosophy.... That's a wonderful topic. I've whiled away many hours, mostly in places that were far more relaxed than this, talking philosophy. I don't mind doing that, but I don't know that I really want to do it here. It's such a wide-open topic that we may end up offending the rules.

The Chair: Yes, we have had cautions about talking about philosophy; we've had lots of philosophy. So I would hope that we could stay within the estimates.

D. Symons: I just have concerns, because apparently these people won the first trial and B.C. Ferries basically challenged it. My concern is that if the courts decided, why should you challenge, when you have that ability to go on and on?

I have a couple of final questions. One involves Duke Point again. Will the Duke Point-Tsawwassen traffic be for commercial vehicles only, or is it going to be mixed, as it currently is?

[8:15]

Hon. D. Miller: I really have dealt with that question, as I think the member should well know. He's the critic for B.C. Ferries; he knows the answer to that question. He knows we're attempting to move the commercial traffic. It's not exclusive, but we want to move the commercial traffic. He knows that. I've responded to that question here.

D. Symons: I was asking whether it is exclusively commercial, and I really didn't get an answer; I don't know the answer to that question.

My next question, so you can answer that as well: what provision is being made for foot passengers, assuming that foot passengers will be there along with private vehicles? Is that not the case? What provision is made at the Nanaimo end? Duke Point is outside of town for them. Are you coordinating with B.C. Transit?

Hon. D. Miller: Yes, we are. I apologize if I'm showing some impatience, but I really think that there is an obligation here. We have been at this for some time. If it's an exercise in spinning wheels and filling time, fair enough. But let's not go through a charade here. These are questions that are so routine, it's baffling. I'd be ashamed to ask these questions if I were a critic.

Interjection.

Hon. D. Miller: We had a pretty rough go-around for four days on Hydro issues; that's fair enough. Nobody is quarrelling with that, but surely there's some desire by members to make progress and not just deal with customer complaints or those kinds of questions. This is a two-way street we're on, not a one-way street. So I would simply ask that we try to make some progress. Surely other members.... There's a huge list of topics yet to be debated in my estimates. The member indicated the other night that he had about another hour or an hour and a half. We've done it. So I really ask for some assistance from the Chair with respect to what appears to be a bit of a charade.

D. Symons: Thank you for that tirade. We'll just carry on, thank you.

I wonder if you might give me some information about the apprentice programs that are in place at B.C. Ferries. There's a joint apprenticeship advisory committee, I gather, and the program operates for the operating engineers and deck officers. Can you give an idea of how many people are involved in that particular program currently and how many have gone through that program in the last year?

Hon. D. Miller: We have a trades apprenticeship both for engineers and conventional trades. I don't have the number.

D. Symons: Would the minister be willing to share that number with me when he gets it?

Hon. D. Miller: You can get it any day of the week, my friend.

D. Symons: How many summer students are hired under the government's various summer programs with B.C. Ferries?

Hon. D. Miller: We'll have to get the number. If the members want to ask questions, staff will write them down. I have to excuse myself for a minute.

Interjections.

D. Symons: We're very near the end. It's too bad he got angry at the end, but that's fine. Just dealing with the summer student program, then, if one of the gentlemen could note these down and get the information to me, I'd appreciate it. How many summer students have they under the government's various summer job programs for B.C. Ferries? What was their original target that was set? Has the target been increased in the last few months through various other policies that the government has initiated?

The other one just involves, I think, some innovative marketing procedures that B.C. Ferries has used, and I'm just wondering if you can give me the flavour of some of the other ones that might be a consideration. I gather you are trying to run what may have been called the "Bear Boat," to get people to the Vancouver Grizzlies game from Vancouver Island. I'm just curious as to how these programs work. Do you contract out with somebody to buy so many places on the ship beforehand? Or could they just approach B.C. Ferries and say they would like you to run one, and if they try to convince you, you have numbers? Or do you have to have a guarantee of so many numbers before you would put on an extra sailing?

Interjections.

D. Symons: I'd be happy to have Mr. Rhodes respond to the question if that's acceptable to the people here.

[ Page 1622 ]

Interjection.

D. Symons: Not acceptable?

Interjection.

D. Symons: Not without the minister. Well, you see, that was our problem before, so he can keep taking notes. I think we can leave that one.

I just have a note from somebody in Powell River who's a critic of B.C. Ferries, and if I were to name the person, I'm sure the minister would.... This particular person feels that B.C. Ferries is spending good money at the Westview terminal on an old facility, when years ago there was talk of moving the terminal closer to the MacMillan Bloedel site there. This person felt that rather than spending more money on a terminal that isn't in the best location and is run-down, it might be better to open a new terminal in a better location. Is there any thought of doing that? I don't know if those can be answered now.

Hon. D. Miller: I'll ask Mr. Rhodes, the deputy minister, to respond to those penetrating questions.

F. Rhodes: With respect to Orca Bay, we have been approached by a number of organizations that have sought to either joint-venture with us or to charter with us, and we do both. We have run promotional sailings for our own commercial purposes, as well as trying to provide charter revenue to the fleet. So it's been done on both bases, and we will continue to do that.

The Powell River terminal relocation was a question that was asked. We have no plans to relocate that. It is under discussion as part of the Powell River stakeholder process.

With respect to the summer jobs, I will return with that information through the minister, Mr. Chair.

F. Gingell: Hon. Chair, I wonder if the minister could respond to the concerns that I have expressed to the president of B.C. Ferries with respect to public access to the north and south sides of the ferry causeway in Tsawwassen -- a big issue, locally.

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Rhodes will respond.

F. Rhodes: Mr. Chairman, the question relates to public access to our terminal, both on the north and south sides. The south side of the terminal has been used for a number of years for camping and boat-launching purposes, and the north side is now largely used for windsurfing. One of the problems we're encountering is with pedestrian safety and vehicle safety, and also vandalism. I talked as late as this afternoon with the mayor of Delta, and I will be meeting with the mayor, her manager, the director of parks and the police to discuss the issue of providing public access while maintaining security.

D. Symons: I'm prepared to go on to the next topic, which would be the Victoria Line. I wonder if we might run through a history of the Victoria service. I believe the Princess Marguerite had the run for quite a long time. Stena Line abandoned its run in 1990, and we had proposals soon after, when asked by the government, from Sea Containers and Gokstad. Both had different proposals that were not acceptable to the government. Then we found that B.C. Ferries eventually took on that particular task.

It seems at the time there were different opinions expressed. Certainly the Victoria Chamber of Commerce was a very strong proponent of reinstituting the connection to Seattle, because it brought business to Victoria. But at the same time, I notice that the Times Colonist, on November 25, 1993, said that "in B.C., perversely, our government is turning back the clock with a highly questionable piece of marketplace meddling," in their reference to the Seattle service from Victoria.

In a further article -- and again, it's an editorial -- on November 16, 1993, they say that, "the 'unless' qualification above is this: if the tourist industry will take care of the annual operating losses, most British Columbians would probably support a ferry-to-Seattle refit of up to $4 million," which I believe is approximately what B.C. Ferries paid for the refit. So there was not wholehearted support for this. The Times Colonist, being a local paper, seemed to at least highlight some concerns that might have been held by some people regarding that particular ferry.

I'll just skip ahead very quickly to the minutes of the B.C. Ferries board meeting of May 25, 1994. I'm reading from page 2, where it says:"Concerns were raised as to the appropriateness of this venture. It is noted that the new effort would absorb managerial time and expertise out of proportion to its revenue impact or potential. It was also noted that the service will probably incur additional administrative costs which will not be readily identified or allocated. Notwithstanding that fact, the current proposal is reasonable, and the corporation could position itself satisfactorily by obtaining a subsidy guarantee from the government."

I'm just wondering, on the basis of those cautions, if the government did have a business plan for operating the Victoria Line and a cost-benefit analysis, and again, like with the fast ferries, whether that would be available.

Hon. D. Miller: The answer is yes. I don't know if the Liberals ever took a position, but it certainly shows that when you do anything in this life you get a variety of opinions.

D. Symons: You would be passing that business plan along to me, I would assume, then, from that answer.

There were comments from the tourist bureau that the revised service would bring in $8 million of tourist revenue to British Columbia, and particularly Victoria, each year. The Employment and Investment minister at that time said that service was expected to break even by the third year and turn a profit in subsequent years, yet we find that B.C. Stena Line lost $10 million during two years of operation. You seem to be in a position now where, for one reason or another, you've decided to extricate yourself from the operation of this particular service. So maybe the minister could give us some flavour as to what decision the government has made in regard to this. Why do you now seem to be looking for a purchaser for this particular ferry service?

Hon. D. Miller: We aren't looking for a purchaser.

[8:30]

D. Symons: That's interesting, because obviously there is some difference of opinion between what the press says and what the minister is saying. Not that we can always believe the press.

There seemed to be a commitment on the part of the minister at the time, now the Premier, that there would be a five-year commitment to this. As a matter of fact, again, in an

[Retrovision]

Continued

[ Page 1623 ]

article on January 18, 1994, the Employment minister responsible for the new ferry said that the government was prepared to underwrite costs for five years. It seems that after year two there may be a change in the ownership of that particular run, although the minister basically has denied that. Would the minister care to deny that there is any possibility of the B.C. government moving out of the Victoria Line service?

Hon. D. Miller: No. I've been quite forthright publicly. We did not look for buyers. We received unsolicited requests from the private sector who are interested in purchasing the operation. I've said, as the minister -- and I can confirm it -- that we are interested in looking at those if we can find a private sector operator to take that over, run it and provide significant benefits to the lower Island -- about $11 million annually and climbing -- and eliminate any subsidy over the remaining two years of the original commitment. It seems to me that that is something that every member of this House would wholeheartedly support. Certainly, Mayor Cross, Mark Scott and Lorne Whyte of Tourism Victoria and I had an excellent meeting where they fully supported and will be involved on an ongoing basis in exploring these private sector initiatives.

D. Symons: In the 1994 year, I think, the ferry operation lost, according to their figures, $717,000. I don't believe that included the debt charges on it. When you added those in, it was over a million dollars. I wonder if you might give us those same figures, including debt-servicing charges, the vessel upgrade, and all the rest for the succeeding year, '95, and also what is projected for '96?

Hon. D. Miller: Projected for '96 is $386,000; for '95, $1.4 million. Does the member read $750,000 for '94?

Interjection.

Hon. D. Miller: That was restated to $1.4 million.

D. Symons: The projected figure for this year, which seems to be roughly a third of the previous two years.... Is it calculated in the same way, including the same costs, operating and capital? There's a huge drop. I wonder if the ridership has increased so much that there can be that huge drop in your operating expenses.

Hon. D. Miller: The 1995 $1.4 million figure includes about $400,000 for collision costs, which were around $400,000. So it's about a million, realistically, for '95, had it not been for that.

Revenues are up, particularly on bus tour ridership. It's growing. Our commitment was to review it at the end of three years. We're still living by that commitment, but if it's possible -- given this expression of interest, which I think is very promising -- to have the private sector operate that service, I think that's highly desirable, and we will proceed with that.

D. Symons: The news report at the end of the previous month talked about four parties interested in Victoria Line Ltd., which the ferry chief said. This would be an indication that somebody's interested in looking at the line, anyway.

It was Mr. Peel who said business is up substantially, particularly over last summer, and the minister seemed to indicate that now. Mr. Peel said tour buses will number 600 this year. He forecast that the operating loss to B.C. Ferries, including payments on the vessel, the former Queen of Burnaby, will be under $500,000 this year. The minister has indicated slightly under $400,000, so that would indicate that. The capacity of the vessel is approximately 900 passengers and, I believe, 193 vehicles. If you have, during your operating period, about 120 days -- as I figured it out -- between the May and September dates, and you take the number of vehicles that this vessel carried last year and divide it by that 120 in the past years, and so forth, you get almost capacity. I guess that's half-capacity, because that's each round trip. You get about 400 passengers on average per trip and about 100 vehicles on average per trip. Would that be approximately correct?

Hon. D. Miller: Passengers to July 29 are up. In '94 it was about 44,000, and this period was 48,000. This year automobiles are about the same, but RVs are down slightly. I indicated buses. We had about 39,000 at this point, and 60,000 for the full year in '94. We will be around 600,000 by the end of this year. So there has been a substantive increase in ridership. Obviously, we said at the outset that it takes time to develop the marketing and the ridership.

There are some interesting numbers with respect to where people are coming from in the United States: California, 13 percent; Washington, 11 percent; the rest of the U.S., 30 percent. There are some good numbers there. It's obviously attracting riders from across the United States. The origin of most riders here is the greater Victoria area, but others are from Vancouver Island, the rest of B.C., Alberta, the rest of Canada, as well as a smaller portion from Europe and Asia. So it appears to be growing and fulfilling the mandate originally given to it.

Notwithstanding any of that, I have said that we will act on any legitimate offers from the private sector to keep the ferry going, and we have involved local Victoria people from tourism and civic areas to assist us in that process.

D. Symons: Figures I would like to have, if the minister could get them for me -- probably not tonight, because it will involve a little calculation.... What is the daily average of passengers and vehicles for last year? At the beginning of the season and at the tail end, I suspect, your ridership is going to be fairly low. But in the high season, it will be high. If you average it out, what would the average be? Could you work that out for what it is until now? Those are not figures that I think you're likely to have.

The other figure I'd like you to get me at the same time would be.... What percentage of people purchase round trips compared to one-way trips. I'm curious how many people might be making a circle route, because I gather that the circle route is something the competition that operates the fast ferry out of Seattle is managing to market very well. I'm just wondering if Victoria Line is doing the same type of thing, where people are using a round trip, using a ferry as that source of transportation. I'll leave those questions, because I don't expect you to have those answers with you.

I'm going on now to a news release of July 24 of this year. It says: "Miller Meets with Victoria Mayor and Tourism Officials Regarding the Future of Victoria Line." In it he is quoted as saying: " 'We have said from day one that Victoria Line had a five-year business plan' " -- and that's the plan you're going to share with me, you said -- " 'but that its performance would be evaluated against that plan in year three, this year,' said [the minister]." I'm curious.

Hon. D. Miller: "Said Miller."

[ Page 1624 ]

D. Symons: That's what it says here; I wasn't going to say that. The minister's name is mentioned there, and we're not allowed to say that.

Hon. D. Miller: I did say that.

D. Symons: You did say that.

I'm just curious. Looking back at all the records and information I have from when this ferry was announced, I didn't see anything about re-evaluating it in year three. So I wonder if the minister might have his staff go back through the various documents they put out and just find that statement back then about re-evaluating the situation in year three against the business plan. I didn't notice that, and I'd just like to have a copy of that.

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Chairman, I suggest the member read Hansard from about two minutes ago. I think I just said those very words.

D. Symons: I was asking to see the news release, the documents from two years ago, that indicated that it was going to be re-evaluated in year three. I know you said that now, but when people say they were going to do it in year three and they say that that was the case at the beginning.... I want some evidence that indeed that was said at the beginning and not just dreamt up as a way of excusing what they're currently doing.

You had some difficulties with the labour union, I gather, over salaries, particularly in operating the Victoria Line. I wonder if the minister might be able to give us some indication as to how the wages for the Victoria Line operation compare to the wages for comparable job descriptions on B.C. Ferries. Are they on a par now?

Hon. D. Miller: Less.

D. Symons: Would it be fair to say that on average it's about $5 per hour less?

Hon. D. Miller: I don't know. They're less. We can try to get that information.

D. Symons: It's a question of a government that seems very stuck on fair wages. It seems that when it comes to operating a ferry service, they can have different wages for similar types of service. It's just an interesting comment.

Hon. D. Miller: They are union collective agreements, Mr. Chairman. This is ridiculous. I mean, we signed a collective agreement with a trade union.

D. Symons: The minister gets upset at that. But when it comes to building the Island Highway, they put in a fixed wage. We didn't negotiate wages in that at all.

Hon. D. Miller: Yes, we did.

D. Symons: Not union by union. It was a fixed agreement on the whole project and for the length of the project.

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Chairman, the member doesn't know what he's talking about. It's patent nonsense. Do I have to do the research for the member? He's asking me for press clippings from three years ago. This is not a serious exercise.

The Chair: On the minister's estimates, member.

D. Symons: The minister is getting testy. Indeed, the minister said something that was supposedly decided three years ago, and I simply asked if I could see something that indicated that was the case. He's testy about answering that, and maybe there's a reason.

I wonder if we might look at one last topic here, because I was winding up with the Victoria ferries before he went off again. It happens to involve booze on the ferry. I'm just curious: I thought the ferry to Seattle had a bar arrangement on it. Were there plans for using it as a conference centre and for charter services, as Mr. Rhodes was saying earlier, for B.C. Ferries in local waters? Is there a problem?

Hon. D. Miller: Three bars. Yes, we do charters -- catered charters -- and we've got licences for on the water and dockside.

R. Coleman: Hon. Chair, are we in a position to move on to BCBC at this time?

Interjections.

R. Coleman: The first place I'll start out, then, with BCBC....

Interjections.

R. Coleman: Shall we wait a minute?

Hon. D. Miller: Let's try it.

[8:45]

R. Coleman: Actually, I have a systematic level of questioning I'd like to go through this evening to basically take us through BCBC. First of all, I've done a review of the corporation with the private sector; I've done a review of the corporation with previous members of the board of directors. Frankly, the corporation comes up smelling very good as far as its operation and the way the corporation conducts itself are concerned. Rather than get into discussions of little things, I'll do an overview of the corporation and deal with its future and its present.

In the beginning of its 1995 annual report, the corporation outlined what are referred to as major projects. Basically, that was about six or seven projects. There was a law courts building in Kelowna, the perimeter security for eight regional correctional centres, the health centre in Creston, a youth custody centre on Vancouver Island, courthouse renovations in Vancouver, a new courthouse in Delta, a Highways sign shop in Kamloops, a regional forests office in Nanaimo and property rezoning in Victoria. I'm just wondering what major projects the corporation undertook in 1995-96 that would be relevant to these.

[ Page 1625 ]

Hon. D. Miller: With respect to the member's question, I understand Mr. Truss is on his way here, and he would have that detailed information. I don't have it with me, so we could just stand down for a few minutes.

The Chair: We'll just have a short recess.

The committee recessed from 8:47 p.m. to 8:58 p.m.

[C. McGregor in the chair.]

R. Coleman: Maybe I can open up by just reposing the question, because the president of BCBC wasn't present when I asked it. In the last annual report, which is the 1995 annual report, you referred to the '94-95 fiscal year. You completed a number of major projects representing a total of $66.5 million, and you listed the projects on page 15 of the annual report. I'm just wondering what major projects you did in 1996.

Hon. D. Miller: I have with me to my right Dennis Truss, the president and CEO of the B.C. Buildings Corporation; Sharon Halkett is to my left, VP of human resources and corporate services; and behind me is Denis Racine, director of corporate communications. I ask Mr. Truss to respond to the member's question.

D. Truss: The major projects that we completed in the 1995-96 fiscal year were an expansion to the Kutenai Place office building in Nelson, a regional correctional centre in Prince George, a new courthouse in Port Coquitlam, a replacement of the veterinary laboratory in Abbotsford, a new courthouse in Masset, a new health centre in Penticton, and a motor vehicle office in Burnaby.

[9:00]

R. Coleman: In your annual report of '95, there was some mention of the Oaklands project in Burnaby, which is a 29.5 hectare redevelopment of a former regional correctional centre. The project was going to ultimately contain 560 townhomes. In last year's estimate, in June 1995, the total revenue expected to be realized from the Oaklands site in the last two phases was about $45 million, and the net revenue to the government would be somewhere in the range of $25 million. Could you just tell me the status of the Oaklands project?

D. Truss: The total proceeds last year might have been mentioned at $45 million; it's actually $35.6 million. The total costs of the development were $17.1 million. The net proceeds -- the gain to the government through the corporation -- were $18.5 million.

R. Coleman: Just to continue on that line of questioning, is the project now complete? There was mention of the other two phases to be done. They were going to be done in '95-96. Have they been completed? Are those the phases you're referring to?

D. Truss: No, the figures I gave you were for the total project, for the total redevelopment of the Oakalla lands. The total gross revenues received were $35.6 million, and the net proceeds were $18.5 million.

R. Coleman: Would I be safe in assuming that this total project was done in a joint venture, in some sort of public relationship with the development community?

Hon. D. Miller: Essentially, the corporation did the site prep -- servicing and invited proposals from the private sector for the development.

R. Coleman: So then, basically, once we did the site prep and got it ready, we made it available by piece in some sort of public process -- a presentation, a public proposal call or tender. Was it a tender or a proposal call?

Hon. D. Miller: A proposal call.

R. Coleman: I want to move on briefly now to Riverview. You were proceeding last year with the planning process and with full public participation in the coming year on 98.7 hectares of property. Could you tell me the status of the Riverview process?

Hon. D. Miller: Mr. Truss will respond.

D. Truss: The Riverview project is proceeding through the preliminary stages of the public consultation process. There have been a good number of meetings and public forums held, and we expect to be continuing that further during the current year.

R. Coleman: Could the minister please tell me what you are trying to accomplish, in general terms, on the Riverview property?

Hon. D. Miller: Well, as the member alluded to, it's the kind of downsizing, in terms of the health plan, to move people closer to home. It's a 244-acre site. The facility, as I said, is downsized. The long-range plan of the society is to concentrate the special services in a new 340-bed hospital, with more on-site residential facilities. I think we have indicated that the planning process has commenced. The plan for the future of the review site has always been intended to be multidimensional, with a range of social, environmental and economic benefits for the local community and the provincial taxpayer. We expect that in '96 we will see the planning process gear up.

R. Coleman: Could the minister maybe tell me who they anticipate will be the end user of the first portion of the project? He mentioned a smaller residential component in there.

Hon. D. Miller: That's under the Ministry of Health, and I believe it's psychiatric.

R. Coleman: I wonder if the minister could tell me whether the transfer of the 230.7-hectare site formerly known as Colony Farm to the greater Vancouver regional district, as part of the Lower Mainland Nature Legacy, has actually taken place.

Hon. D. Miller: It's very close, but apparently it's not finalized at this point.

R. Coleman: Would I be safe in assuming that this transfer is to take place in order to create a green space on the lower mainland that the greater Vancouver regional district will use for a nature legacy, as it states, rather than for any other type of development?

Hon. D. Miller: The proper use is in the ALR. A land use plan has been signed by all committee members except the

[ Page 1626 ]

Kwayhquitlum Indian band, which apparently has indicated it will not sign because of some treaty rights or aboriginal rights. Their view is that they don't want to participate. A land use plan has been approved by both the Coquitlam and the Port Coquitlam councils, as well as by the Agricultural Land Commission.

R. Coleman: Could I get a copy of that report?
...

Now that's how our province's Legislative Assembly operates; if you have a problem with anything that the government is responsible for, it is your duty to communicate that to you MLA / MP in Canada.

[Low Light Mike]

Thanks for posting that, Retro. I'll read through it tonight, and post some comments.

However I did glance through quickly and I saw MLA Paul Reitsma's name....which made me feel a bit ill. Mr. Reitsma was once my MLA, and he forever changed the way that I will vote for my MLA or MP or City Councillor.

You might recall that he was the first MLA subjected to the Recall process, and it (the citizens' recall) was for legitimate reasons, not political foolishness. He resigned just before the recall process ended.

You might also recall that one of his blunders was demanding free food in the BC Ferry cafeteria, thinking it to be his MLA privilege.

You might also recall his good friend Warren Betanko.....a very good letter-writer, if I recall....

[Low Light Mike]

Here are my Hansard comments:

- The time is August 1996, right in the middle of the NDP's Gov'ts 2 mandates. Glen Clark recently won a majority Gov't. But it's interesting for me that no matter which party is in Gov't, there always seems to be issues and criticisms.

- Oh my, how nice it is to see real debate, in the public record, re ferry issues. We've gone from 1996 with the Legislature as the setting and Dale Lovick as the Speaker, to 2007 with the Ferries-of-BC-forum as the setting, and Flugel Horn as the Moderator. Me thinks that the old setting and system were more effective.

- re the then-new Discovery Coast Service, it's interesting how there wasn't a "financial plan" for starting the route. However, there were lots of "stakeholders" consulted and satisfied with the new service....but no mentions of costs. I can see a gulf of political ideology played out there.

- This exchange is pretty amusing, re the FastCat engine, and fuel consumption:

Hon. D. Miller: It's a question of how you tune them up. The maximum is 37,000 horsepower; we're going to take 33,500.

D. Symons: It's the same engine, but by fine-tuning it you can do something of that sort. At what percentage of its output capacity would you be operating those engines to get to 37 knots?

Hon. D. Miller: The low 90s.

D. Symons: I wonder if you might give us an idea of what happens to fuel consumption when you operate an engine at that degree of its output, because I gather that in automobile engines when you get much past 60 miles an hour -- that is 100 kilometres per hour -- and you go up another ten, your fuel consumption begins to climb quite rapidly, and you get a logarithmic-type graph. What would happen with these diesel engines involved in the fast ferries as you get up to 90 percent output?

Hon. D. Miller: Fuel use is directly proportional to the horsepower used.

D. Symons: If you were operating at 80 percent capacity of the engine, and you upped it to 90 percent, by what percentage would your fuel consumption increase?

Hon. D. Miller: I did say directly proportional.

D. Symons: The minister seems to be implying to me, if you're saying it's directly proportional, that diesel engines operate differently from gasoline engines, as far as output goes.

Hon. D. Miller: From 80 to 90 is ten, so that's....

D. Symons: It would be just another ten to get up to 100 percent, if you had it going flat out; that's what you're saying. So obviously diesel engines operate differently from gasoline engines. I'll have to check that out with my experts in that particular field. That's not what I believed to be the case.

-------------------

Graham, thanks for posting that. It's too bad that you, me and Neil are the only 3 who will ever read this (assuming that Neil passes by this way)....

Edited to increase quote font size

[Queen of Nanaimo Teen]

I'll have to disagree Fluge. I actually read it this time! I started reading it, and then I got in to it. Thank you very much for posting that Graham!

[Neil]

Legislative committee meetings such as this one, provide a good opportunity for a well-briefed opposition member to skewer a government minister on details. Unfortunately, these meetings aren't terribly high profile, so in terms of publicity, a member's work can go for naught.

This one was interesting for the change in tone that occured. At the beginning, you would almost think that Doug Symons and Dan Miller were members of the same party- everything was fairly genial and non-confrontational. ("Take a ride some time." "Love to...") By the end, it was more the daggers drawn dynamic we've come to know and love in Victoria.

Retro- was there something in particular about this exchange that caught your attention, or were you just posting it for the wide ranging topics?

[Retrovision]

I wish that I could say that I've reviewed most hansard out there but as we all know that's darn near impossible; though some of the exchanges and the obvious focus on our ferries caught my attention, it was more a matter of revealing exactly what you just mentioned, the changing tones, as well as a different aspect of our province's parliament that has so little public attention and is seemingly redundant and a waste of polititians' energy because of it, especially the opposition.