April 30, 2008 - Estimates Debates:  Ministry of Community Services
On Vote 22: ministry operations, $285,688,000 (continued).            

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that. I'll certainly take her up on that and get something together as quickly as I can.

            I'd like to now move to an issue that I know will be a sensitive one for the minister and me. I regret that very much, but I'm compelled again to represent my constituents, and I'll be doing that in the next 15 or 20 minutes.  

            Is the minister familiar with the regional growth strategy in the capital regional district?  

            Hon. I. Chong: I am familiar with the regional growth strategy, although perhaps not in detail as to more recent changes, if there have been recent changes to it - not in terms of amendments but the strategy as a whole. I was involved with the regional growth strategy some years ago when I was in the CRD, so I'm familiar with the intent and the direction they were headed in a number of years ago.  

          J. Horgan: Is the minister aware that as of January 2007, the regional growth strategy contemplated the resource lands on the west coast of Vancouver Island as being just that - resource lands, and not available for residential or commercial development?  

            Hon. I. Chong: I wanted to check again with staff for clarification about the last time when the regional growth strategy had been amended. I know that the CRD adopted its regional growth strategy bylaw on August 13, 2003. I'm advised that there have not been amendments to that since the date in 2003. The resource lands that he spoke of, identified in the regional growth strategy.... If they were identified as resource lands, there were also, at that time, residential units and sites within some of those lands, as I understand it.  

            J. Horgan: Well, I'll stop beating around the bush because the bush doesn't have much more time left. I'll just get right to the point, and that is the Western Forest Products lands. I know that the minister would be seized of that question in my constituency

            I'm curious. When the proposal came forward to remove private lands from Western Forest Products TFL 25, bringing some 1,200 hectares of land into potential development, did the minister advise her colleague the Minister of Forests that zoning issues and the absence of any coherent governance structure...?  

            Again, the minister would be quite aware of that. We touched upon that briefly. And the fact is that OPSRRA - a vibrant ratepayers organization representing people in Shirley, Otter Point and Jordan River - had been spending about 15 months trying to develop a strategic visioning process so that they could better deal with potential growth in the community.  

            Did she take the opportunity to advise the Minister of Forests that it was a really bad idea to allow those lands to come onto the real estate market?  

            Hon. I. Chong: The member will know, and if he's not aware, the decision that was made by the Ministry of Forests and Range did not come to cabinet. It was a decision that the Minister of Forests and Range was able to make.  

            Generally, what occurs is that the minister is aware that if there are to be rezoning issues taking place, they will be under the purview of local government. So there's no automatic change in use, other than what is available. There will be a requirement, as I say, to apply for any changes, but it did not come forward to cabinet and did not come forward to me directly.  

            J. Horgan: Was there any consultation with your ministry prior to the lands being deleted?

            Hon. I. Chong: We're not aware of any consultation with our ministry.  

            J. Horgan: The minister is the MLA for the capital regional district. She will have been aware of comments in the local press, certainly - commentary on the various talk shows, whether it be public radio, private radio.  

           The overwhelming position of the majority of those who have expressed a view on this matter has been opposition to it. The result has been, as the minister will know, zoning bylaws that came to her in February. I'm wondering: prior to those zoning bylaws arriving, did she or her staff ever have any meetings with Western Forest Products about those lands?  

            Hon. I. Chong: I was just checking dates with my deputy.  

            I will say that I had met with representatives of Western Forest Products who wanted to understand how the process for the adoption of land use bylaws occurred in general. At the time - I want to be clear - we had not received bylaws for approval or for review. I certainly know, through the media and through comments that were made, that the CRD was going to be preparing bylaws for me to look at and amend.  

            At the time, when I had received a request, I did entertain that request. It was a very brief meeting, very clear, and only spoke to process of land use bylaws. I just want to let the member know that - very mindful, I think, of where he wishes to ask his questions - but I want to give him the facts so that he's fully aware.

            I think the meeting occurred some time in early February. The bylaws came to the ministry's office on February 29. That was the date that we date-stamped them in our office.  

            J. Horgan: The minister said publicly that after the bylaws arrived in her office, her staff conducted due diligence. Can she describe what that due diligence was? Did that due diligence include meeting again with Western Forest Products?  

            Hon. I. Chong: When bylaws such as these are received in our office for review, our staff review them from a provincial interest perspective. They ensure that there are no adverse effects on areas like environment and public health. They generally take four to six weeks for staff to do their due diligence and review, and this is the process they follow

            In terms of the question the member asked - whether part of that process was a meeting with Western Forest Products - I assure him that there was no meeting by myself or by staff once the bylaw was received.  

            J. Horgan: Did the minister or her staff ever meet with Ender Ilkay, either before or after the bylaws were received?  

            Hon. I. Chong: No.

            J. Horgan: During the course of conducting due diligence, does staff engage with CRD staff? Does it engage with members of the public? What exactly takes place that takes four to six weeks to approve bylaws that were approved by a public hearing?  

            Hon. I. Chong: I'm advised that staff do in fact engage with CRD to sometimes seek additional information if that is required. Staff also will receive phone calls, concerns they hear from the public, if the public felt that their concerns had not been heard. We will also receive e-mails from the public.  

            In this particular case, staff advised me that they received quite a significant number of letters, primarily from the small-parcel homeowners. So they were coming in very continuously for, I believe, a number of weeks. There were, as I say, a number of them received, which is perhaps one of the reasons why staff did contact the CRD for additional information.  

            J. Horgan: There were four bylaws. Two, I believe, had an effect on the Western Forest Products lands. I also have received correspondence and phone calls from my constituents, concerned that they were captured - the unintended consequences of an action by the CRD. I will be working with those constituents and, potentially, ministry staff to see if we can find some way to resolve some of the unintended consequences, as I say, of the downzoning.  

            But again, the challenge as I see it, as a member of the Legislature trying to represent my constituents.... The Minister of Forests told me.... I know that I'm taking us down a road that may not necessarily appear to sound relevant, but I know that the minister has the fact pattern fairly clear in her mind. I'm certain of that.  

            The Minister of Forests took an action without any consultation with the capital regional district - an entity that is her responsibility - took action without any consultation or dialogue with people in the community. The end result has been individuals, community members, pitted against each other as a result of a provincial policy decision.  

            The end result of that.... The Minister of Forests said to me in the Legislature that zoning was a municipal responsibility, and he washed his hands of it. The result is that those lands are now in the hands of a provincial public servant, the approving officer within the Ministry of Transportation.  

            Now we have a phenomenon where we had a dysfunctional governance process on the west coast of Vancouver Island. I raised it with the minister in 2005, '06 and '07. We've had very good relations on this question, trying to move the ball down the path that all of us want to get to. Along the way, the Minister of Forests inadvertently opened Pandora's box in my constituency, and it has now led to people who are neighbours fighting amongst themselves as a result of a provincial policy, and many are looking to this minister for some form of resolution.  

            I put to the minister: how is it that we can have municipal entities responsible for land use in most situations in British Columbia but not in my community when it comes to these forest lands? Why is it that now, as a result of the delays - perceived delays - that have been qualified by the minister and her staff with respect to due diligence...?  

            These perceived delays have now led to the land use decisions being taken away from regional government and put back to the provincial government. How do I explain to my constituents that this is a fair and just process?

            Hon. I. Chong: I want to confirm that land use zoning is still the responsibility of local government, and they have the ability to do that. While I can appreciate the member's frustration - I guess, to be polite - in regards to this matter, the fact is that the authority the Minister of Forests and Range had in terms of approving the removal of private land from these tree farm licences was certainly his authority. He had the ability to do that.

            He was also correct, though, to say that just because of its removal, that did not automatically change the land use. In fact, that land use was still the purview of local government, which is rightfully what.... The CRD then stepped up to make some changes to land use.

            It is difficult and, as I say, I appreciate his frustration because in rural and remote resource areas, in particular, there are a number of decision-makers. Each one respects each other's role. Can that be better coordinated? Perhaps, but that has been the way it's existed for a number of years - in particular, in these rural areas.  

            I do want to say this for the record and, also, for the benefit of the member, because he mentioned a delay or perceived delay. I want to be clear that the staff did their due diligence in the normal and routine practice that they normally take. Given the fact that the member had concerns, maybe he would have asked us to speed it up. But they did receive the bylaws and proceeded in the normal process by which they conduct their work in looking at these bylaws.  

            They did take about four to five weeks, and as I say, at the time there was a substantial number of letters that the staff was receiving. So there was contact made with the CRD which, again, I advised. Through this process of due diligence, we did contact the CRD.

            They indicated that they would be sending a letter to us. We did not know what that letter would be. So, of course, staff waited for that letter to arrive.  

            I can tell you that when the letter did not arrive within that first week, we contacted them again and asked whether they were going to send the letter that they had said they were going to send - again, not knowing what the content of that letter would be. They did subsequently send a letter to me, which arrived on the 11th of April at 5:05 p.m., as noted on our fax machine. When I came in on Monday morning, I was given that letter that we received, and I immediately signed off on the bylaw.  

            I can assure the member that there was no delay on our part. He may wish to say that there was a perceived delay, but I want to be clear that I was following the advice of my staff. I was also trying to be complete in the work that I feel responsible in doing. I just want to give him that time frame. It may not ease his frustration, but I just want to let him know that that is the process that was followed and the chain of events that took place.  

            J. Horgan: Unfortunately, I have to wrap up. I will say that I hold the minister's staff in very high regard, and this comedy of errors that has been brought upon them was certainly not of their making nor of your making. I think that's very important for the record.  

            But the challenge for all of us when we hear pronouncements, glorious pronouncements, of a new world order where climate change will be our primary focus and then have a developer go to Jordan River and say, "I want to put 10,000 people in this community...." It's the worst kind of urban sprawl.  

            When the minister is bringing forward bills to try and capture some of these positive initiatives to reduce urban sprawl, to make whole communities where infrastructure exists.... We have a misguided policy by the Minister of Forests - who has put this minister, her staff, myself and numerous other people behind an eight ball without any regard, in my opinion, for how it makes us all look. It's not just the government of the day but myself, other members of this Legislature and the member for Saanich North as well.

            We're trying to do good things here. That's why we all came here. And what do we get? We get a stupid idea from one minister that has unintended consequences throughout government. I can't go back and sell any of this to my community. The minister knows that. Her staff knows that. The member for Saanich North knows that. Nonetheless, that's the position I'm put in.

            In that process, if I end up having to take shots at bad public policy, regrettably, I will do that. But the challenge we all have, I think.... Every time I get a chance to talk to the minister and her staff about the many, many communities in Malahat-Juan de Fuca.... I don't need to enumerate them; she knows them full well.

            How do I go back and say to them that government has a plan, that somehow we're trying to make the regional growth strategy work, when out of the blue, a gift to a corporation...? It's an entity that's not even housed in British Columbia, that's worth hundreds of millions of dollars and will have a profound impact on our region for decades and potentially for generations.

            I'm gobsmacked, dumbstruck. For someone who talks a lot, to find myself in a position where I'm virtually speechless is a tragedy - maybe not for the members on the other side but certainly for me and my constituents.

            I very, very much regret that I have to have this disappointment with the Ministry of Community Services. It wasn't of their making. They have been brought into this vortex. Had there been consultation at the beginning, perhaps we could have avoided all of this. I am hopeful that if the minister has not taken the opportunity to remind her cabinet colleague of that, she'd do that now, on my behalf if not for herself.

            Hon. I. Chong: I'll take the member's comments to be heartfelt. I know he's passionate about this issue. But I do want to say that the decision the Minister of Forests and Range made was one that he was authorized to make. While I can appreciate the frustration the member has, I also want to say that sometimes it is important that we learn from items such as this. If this is one of these areas that we can learn from and do better, then that is something that we can certainly work towards and have better cross-government cooperation.

            I didn't want to leave it unspoken, with the member's comments, that the Minister of Forests and Range was not entitled to make this decision. He was. As I say, we can learn, we should learn, and we can always do better. With that, I will certainly work with my colleagues to ensure that we have a better understanding on how we can make this process one that is of benefit to all British Columbians.