B.C. Government sends confused signals on job creation The British Columbia government continues to send mixed messages on job creation to its provincial land-use panels. In the March 14 Speech from the Throne, for instance, the govern- ment signals its clear intent not to im- plement the recent report of Commission on Resources and Envi- ronment chief Stephen Owen for Van- couver Island without a fully worked-out transitional plan in place. “The Premier has indicated land use changes will not proceed until eco- nomic and social impacts can be dealt with satisfactorily. Your government will ensure that workers and their families have a real opportunity to stay in their communities and pursue their life hopes and opportunities,” says the Speech, read by Lt. Governor David Lam at the opening of the provincial Legislature. As well, the government promises Job and community stability will re- sult from its Forest Sector Strategy, likely to be announced during the spring session of the new Legislature. “It's a first glimmer of hope,” says IWA-CANADA third vice-president War- ren Ulley; who represented forest workers on Vancouver Island and now heads the forest employment sector in West Kootenay.“But govern- ment has to get its message straight. What they’re saying in the Throne Speech is not: what they're telling peo- ple at the CORE tables.” Indeed, it’s a far different story at CORE's negotiating tables. There, the government clings to the view that there will be “no new money” for job creation or adjustment assistance to forest workers or their communities. West Kootenay government negotia- tor Ken Baker, for instance, says in a February 25/94 letter to the West Kootenay CORE transition committee that: “As I have previously indicated, there are considerable public re- sources directed toward transition is- sues and no new funding will be available.” Workers who lose their jobs will have to rely on existing programs like ~ unemployment insurance and welfare, eAt Victoria rally on March 21, Local 1-8! job losses. Baker adds: “An existing social safety net exists and society does not have the capacity to expand this support network.” Baker took a similar mes- sage to an East Kootenay transition committee meeting the following week. Although he told CORE reps at a meeting in Kimberley that he hopes the government will change its policy and announce measures to create for- est sector jobs and assist those im- pacted by CORE land-use choices, as things currently stand no programs or initiatives have been approved. “That's not acceptable,” warned Ulley. “There is no way we can agree to a land-use plan or even assess the op- tions presented until we know what kind of job creation programs and training assistance are in place to help our people adjust. Without that, we cannot agree to any plan that dis- places even one job.” The government's negotiating posi- tion, as outlined in Baker’s letter, risks a repeat of what happened on Vancouver Island, where the province also failed to commit to job-creation or transition measures, Ulley noted. As a result of the failure of the Van- couver Island talks, commissioner Owen brought in his own report. It recommends protection of 13 percent of the total area of Vancouver Island, including seven key watersheds. As well, Owen's report suggests creation of “Regionally Significant Lands” that 5 president Dave Haggard said that rural communities have had enough cover another 8 percent of the Island. Owen calculates the job impact of his plan at nearly 1500, including more than 700 harvesting and pro- cessing jobs on Vancouver Island and on the Coast. Research by IWA-CANA- DA estimates that the likely total job loss would be much greater, possibly as high as 2800. Owen recommends that a transi- tional program consisting of job cre- ation measures, training opportunities and income support should be in place before his plan is enacted. But, warns Ulley, “no transition strategy could deal with that level of job loss — it’s not realistic. For that, you’d need a disaster plan.” -Kim Pollock IWA submits changes to upcoming forest code The provincial government should require intensive silviculture through- out British Columbia, says IWA-CANA- DA. “Basie silviculture is no longer enough,” says the union’s brief on the proposed new Forest Practices Code. ‘Even though important gains have been made recently in the field of re- forestation, British Columbia still lags far behind in the application of ad- vanced silviculture techniques.” INTENSIVE SILVICULTURE A MUST IWA-CANADA calls for regulations intensive silviculture over a area in each licence area in province and the creation of per- manent trained crews of silvicultural workers. harvested forest land is commercially thinned each year. NETDOWNS As well, the union brief questions the government's suggestion that net- downs resulting from the proposed Code will only total 2 or 3 percent. Citing evidence from a study pre- pared recently for the Biodiversity Im- pact Committee, IWA-CANADA points out that management for biodiversity and “visual quality” alone” will almost certainly have impacts in excess of 2-3 percent. PRIVATE FOREST LANDS The union also calls for the inclu- sion of private forest lands under the new Code and urges the creation of a Forest Land Reserve similar to the ex- isting Agricultural Land Reserve. “ As with the ALR, “the brief argues, “lands could not be removed from forestry unless the owner could demonstrate ..... that the proposed use would prove more valuable to the Pe iticipating the objections of forest companies, the union notes that “we ful- ¢Making the unio: 's submission at January hearing were Kim Pollock, di- rector of the union's land use and environment department,(right) and Local 1-85's first v.p. Larry Rewakowsky. ly expect that forest companies .... would object to the creation of an FLR just as many owners of agricultural land objected to when the ALR was created in the early 1970s. But we also expect. that the FLR would prove as effective as has the ALR in realizing its objective: the preservation of forest land for the practice of sustainable forestry.” The brief also calls for the creation of a sector council under joint juris- diction as the vehicle for delivery of training required as the Code is imple- mented. This would provide “an excel- lent opportunity to advance toward an industry-wide certification program for forestry workers.” IWA-CANADA third vice-president. Warren Ulley noted that the brief was developed through consultation with B.C. Locals. “Our position is the result of sug- gestions and comments from Locals and we appreciate their involvement,” said Ulley. -Kim Pollock LUMBERWORKER/APRIL, 1994/9