2006 Legislative Session: Second Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

MONDAY, MARCH 6, 2006

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 7, Number 2

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

Voom Credit Union

M. Polak

B.C. Winter Games

C. Wyse

Elected leaders forum in

Squamish-Lillooet area

J. McIntyre

Pete Sanford and Ruth Barnett

C. Trevena

Kelowna women's curling team

A. Horning

Strawberry Hill Public Library

H. Bains

Oral Questions

Investigation into release of

government records on personal information

C. James

Hon. M. de

Jong

M. Farnworth

Release of government records on

refugee information

J. Brar

Hon. M. de

Jong

Review of seniors care in health

facilities

K. Conroy

Hon. G. Abbott

Availability of beds at Ashcroft

hospital

C. Wyse

Hon. G. Abbott

Review of seniors care in health

facilities

C. Wyse

Hon. G. Abbott

D. Cubberley

New chief executive officer for Fraser

Health Authority

B. Ralston

Hon. G. Abbott

Uranium mining in B.C.

C. Evans

Hon. R.

Neufeld

Run-of-the-river applications in

Squamish-Lillooet regional district

S. Simpson

Hon. R.

Neufeld

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. M. Coell

S. Hammell

M. Sather

H. Bloy

M. Karagianis

K. Krueger

S. Fraser

Hon. R. Thorpe

J. Horgan

Hon. C. Hansen

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Finance

Hon. C. Taylor

J. Kwan

G. Gentner

D. Chudnovsky

Point of Order (Speaker's Ruling)

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Finance

(continued)

Hon. C. Taylor

J. Kwan

[ Page 2677 ]

MONDAY, MARCH 6, 2006

The House met at 2:04 p.m.

Introductions by Members

Hon. T. Christensen: I

rise today in the House to introduce three special guests from the Yale First

Nation, the community of approximately 150 members located along the Fraser

River 20 kilometres north of Hope. Joining us today are Yale First Nation

representatives Chief Robert Hope, treaty manager Beatrice Bonnea and Yale First

Nation legal counsel Robert Reiter. They are joined, as well, by one of the

province's chief negotiators and the chief negotiator on the Yale First Nation

treaty table, Mark Lofthouse.

Chief Robert Hope and his guests

have travelled to the Legislature today to mark a significant milestone: the

provincial ratification of an agreement-in-principle. The Yale

agreement-in-principle marks the sixth AIP completed in British Columbia. This

is a significant achievement for our province and for the Yale First Nation. I

would ask that all members of the House join me in congratulating Chief Robert

Hope and the Yale First Nation on this momentous occasion and wish them all the

best as we head towards negotiation of a final treaty. Would the House please

join me in welcoming them all.

[1405]

C. James: I have a couple of guests to introduce in the House

today. The first is Bob Penner, who is president and CEO of Strategic

Communications Inc. As well, in the gallery is a group from my riding of

Victoria–Beacon Hill, the James Bay New Horizons Current Affairs Club. This is a

group that meets weekly to discuss city, provincial, federal and international

issues. I know a number of members in the House have had the opportunity to

attend this group. It's a wonderful dialogue with very tough questions and a

wonderful group of people. Would the House please make those guests welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Minister of Health. Oh, Minister of Economic

Development. I go back in time.

Hon. C. Hansen: I've

done my time.

I have two constituents who have joined us in the

House today. Geoff Peters is a resident of Vancouver-Quilchena, but he teaches

grades one and two in Coquitlam — for the past 30 years. He is also an active

member of the Working and Learning Conditions and Bargaining Advisory Committee

of the BCTF. His wife Marion Runcie is joining him today. She is a former

teacher, having taught for 35 years in Burnaby and, as I understand it, taught

the children of the member for Burquitlam and the member for Burnaby North. I

hope the House will join me in making them very welcome today.

Mr. Speaker: My apologies. I just assume the Minister of Health

is going to stand.

N. Macdonald: Earlier today the

Leader of the Official Opposition, the Solicitor General critic, the opposition

Housing critic and I met with representatives of the Canadian Association of

Home and Property Inspectors of British Columbia. They're here in Victoria as

part of their work to secure government action to protect B.C. consumers by

putting in place standards for the B.C. home and property inspection industry.

In the gallery today are the president, from Kamloops, Bill

Sutherland; Barb Bell, the registrar, from Kelowna; Dave Ferrero,

vice-president, from Nanaimo; Owen Dickie, treasurer, from the Okanagan Valley.

We had a productive meeting this morning, and I would ask the House to make them

welcome.

V. Roddick: In the House today is Sylvia

Bishop, a constituent of Delta South. Ms. Bishop is the assistant director of

communications and campaigns with the B.C. Teachers Federation. Will the House

make her very welcome.

J. Nuraney: We have in the

gallery today some prominent citizens from Burnaby. We have Alan Emmott, a

retired mayor whose legacies in Burnaby still live on. He is accompanied by his

good wife Vivian.

We also have Harry Hardy, a distinguished

veteran and an inventor who is very well recognized around the lower mainland.

He is accompanied by Madge McDonald, a friend. Will the House please make them

all welcome.

M. Polak: Visiting in the gallery from my

riding are representatives of Voom Kids Credit Union, Envision Credit Union and

Langley Montessori School. We have Lauren Sailer, the CEO of Voom; Hanna Tontsch,

the treasurer of Voom; Alexandra Bevan-Paré, board secretary of Voom; and their

parents Shauna Sailer, Debbie Tontsch and Jacqueline Bevan-Paré. From Envision,

we have Jeff Tisdale, Anita Elstak and Kristie Campbell. From Langley Montessori

School, we have Ursula Hodgson and Mary Creed. Would the House please make them

welcome.

C. Evans: Joining us in the gallery today is a

friend of mine, Henning von Krogh. It is not the first time Henning has ever

been at the Parliament Buildings. He has been a regular visitor to the lawn

outside. This is actually, though, the first time that they let him in. I would

like all of the members to make Henning welcome and the guards to notice where

he is sitting.

[1410]

Hon. W. Oppal: In the House today are Clark and Margaret Wilkie

of Thunder Bay, Ontario. They are the parents of Maria Wilkie, who is a

communications manager at the Attorney General Ministry. Would the House make

them welcome.

J. Horgan: Joining us in the gallery today

is my constituency assistant from Langford, Terry Harrison. She's around here

somewhere. That means that my

Page 2678 ]

constituents can't find me for the next hour, and I think

that's okay. Would you make her welcome.

Hon. K. Falcon:

Today in the House we're joined by 48 students from Southridge Senior Secondary.

They're accompanied by their teacher Ms. Pednaud, and two parents, I think, have

come along with them. Would the House please join me in making them welcome.

S. Hawkins: Joining us in the gallery today is a teacher from my

riding, Michelle Davies. She's been teaching for 26 years. She teaches

languages, Spanish and French, at Rutland Senior Secondary. She is also the

social justice co-chair for the Central Okanagan Teachers Association. We had a

very nice meeting, and I would ask the House to please make her welcome.

Hon. I. Chong: I, too, would like to make an introduction to the

House today, with a constituent of mine who is a French-as-a-second-language

teacher at my former high school, Mount Douglas Secondary in Gordon Head. I hope

the House would please join me in welcoming Mr. Thierry Ponchet.

Hon. C. Richmond: Visiting us today are two gentlemen from

Kamloops, who are here to put the finishing touches on what is a marvellous

development on Kamloops Lake. They are Michael Grenier and his senior project

manager Dave Ethier. I'd like the House to please make them very welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) VOOM CREDIT

UNION

M. Polak: Today it is my pleasure to describe to this

House a community partnership that is helping elementary students understand

money management in a very practical way. In my riding of Langley, Envision

Credit Union and Langley Montessori School have partnered to establish a kids

credit union called Voom. The Voom Credit Union was established with a

contribution from Envision Credit Union.

On banking days at the

school, student tellers serve the student account holders, who have access to a

range of services similarly available in a typical Envision Credit Union. The

operations of the Voom Kids Credit Union are overseen by a student board of

directors led by a student CEO. Essentially, this is a credit union run by kids

for kids.

The student board of directors for Voom meets

regularly with representatives of Envision Credit Union to discuss policy and

governance related to the kids credit union. With the support of Envision Credit

Union, the students at Langley Montessori School are learning firsthand the

importance of careful money management and saving for the future. Voom Kids

Credit Union is an asset to Langley Montessori School and an example of an

innovative way to teach valuable life skills.

B.C. WINTER

GAMES

C. Wyse: Recently the village of 100 Mile House

sponsored the 2006 B.C. Winter Games. The opening ceremonies for the games not

only captured the spirit of the games but reflected the camaraderie that

develops during the games. Amongst the many notable guests present, our

colleague the Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts welcomed Wayne Cox, B.C.'s

weatherperson. Wayne was presented with a winter jacket that looked like one of

his famous Hawaiian shirts, and on the following Monday Wayne wore the jacket as

he presented the weather to B.C.

The minister also welcomed

Daniel Igali, an Olympic gold medallist in wrestling. At his clinic Daniel left

all these wrestlers who turned up with an individual personal memory they will

cherish for the rest of their lives. He wrestled individually all 60 of the

participants who turned up.

[1415]

The games board of directors was chaired jointly by Jeff and Bev

Kendy. The games involved 80 key volunteers; 1,100 total volunteers; 275 billet

families; 1,300 athletes, coaches and officials; 1,000 visitors; and many

numerous sponsors which made the financial contributions necessary for the games

to be present. I can assure you that the games provided for many new friendships

and memories that will last a lifetime. The venues for the games involved the

communities of 70 Mile House, Lac la Hache, 108 Mile, Canim Lake, Forest Grove,

100 Mile House.

I ask the House to join with me in not only

recognizing the people of the village of 100 Mile and surrounding communities,

having sponsored the 2006 Northern B.C. Winter Games in such a successful

fashion, but in congratulating the village of 100 Mile, the Cariboo regional

district and school district 27 for their efforts in bringing the games to the

Cariboo.

ELECTED LEADERS FORUM

IN SQUAMISH-LILLOOET AREA

J. McIntyre: I rise today to

report to the House on the elected leaders forum that, as MLA for West

Vancouver–Garibaldi, I hosted on February 2 at idyllic Brew Creek Lodge just

south of Whistler. It was a one-day workshop with recently elected municipal

officials; the school board chair of district 48, Howe Sound; the Squamish-Lillooet

regional directors; and first nations representatives.

It was

designed for these main purposes: for networking, sort of a

getting-to-know-each-other session because some of these municipal officials had

just been elected for the first time; for identifying strengths and

opportunities in our region; for discussing ways to address the challenges and

issues facing us, especially as 2010 is fast upon us; and also for looking for

opportunities to work together going forward.

Page 2679 ]

Nearly 20 attended — I was thrilled — including the

chair of the SLRD and mayors of Pemberton, Whistler, Squamish, Lions Bay and

Bowen Island. Unfortunately, just West Vancouver declined.

was facilitated and is in the process of being reported on by William Roberts of

the Whistler Forum, who specializes in dialogue and collaboration. As a preview

of results, which may be of interest to the public, the key issues that the

group identified to work on collaboratively are as follows: integrated

transportation, including the need for regional transit. I just learned this

morning that they're actually looking at doing a Sea to Sky Leadership forum on

the subject of transportation — sort of coming out of this. The other three key

issues were managing growth in the corridor, affordable housing, and minimizing

risk and maximizing opportunities for 2010.

I'm looking forward

to sharing the final report with the participants and facilitating some

made-in-Sea-to-Sky solutions to address the diversity of interests in our

region.

PETE SANFORD AND RUTH BARNETT

Trevena: Today I rise to mark the deaths of two great B.C. citizens, two

lifelong NDPers whose loss we mourn but whose contribution to the building of

B.C. we celebrate — a celebration that transcends party lines because it

addresses a vision of how to make our province stronger and better.

Pete Sanford and Ruth Barnett died within a day of each other. A

celebration of Pete's life was held yesterday in Courtenay, and today in

Campbell River, Ruth's family and friends are marking her long life.

Pete Sanford was a fighter for social justice — a teacher. He was

married to former MLA Karen Sanford. Pete wanted to make the world a better

place. He quietly stood up for causes here in B.C. from the environment through

to workers' rights and internationally with a commitment to Amnesty

International and Oxfam, among others. His last major political task was

organizing the signs for the federal election, and he had just finished putting

up, taking down and storing 1,100 lawn signs for NDP candidate and now-MP

Catherine Bell. Peter died suddenly of a heart attack at the age of 74.

Ruth Barnett was married to the former MP for Comox-Alberni, mayor of

Campbell River Tom Barnett. Ruth, too, was involved in environmental, social and

of course political issues. A historian, Ruth was proud to research and write

the history of her pioneering family, the Pidcocks. Her interests ranged from

being president of the parliamentary wives club to starting the Middlenatch

field naturalists society, through to being an active lobbyist on behalf of

seniors. Through her long life, Ruth, too, strived to make the world a better

place. She died at the age of 92 in Sunshine Lodge in Campbell River.

[1420]

I hope the House will join me in celebrating the lives of these two

B.C.ers who each had a vision for a better society.

KELOWNA

WOMEN'S CURLING TEAM

A. Horning: It's a pleasure to rise

today to pay tribute to a team of true champions. Yesterday Kelowna's Kelly

Scott won the Canadian Women's Curling Championship in London, Ontario. Millions

of fans from throughout B.C. and across Canada watched the fantastic final as

Kelly and her team fought to the finish to edge Team Canada 8-6.

In winning our country's highest honour, the team had to defeat past

Canadian and world champions. Along with skip Kelly Scott, I would also like to

congratulate third Jeanna Schraeder, second Sasha Carter, lead Renee Simons,

fifth player Michelle Allen and coach Gerry Richard.

Their road

to victory wasn't easy. After two near misses in the past 12 months, the Kelowna

rink can now call themselves Canadian champions. After qualifying for the

national championships on their first try last year, the team finished third.

Last December we all remember the team's dramatic play at the Olympic trials. In

dramatic fashion the Kelowna rink made it to the final game, only to lose on the

last rock of the tenth end. The Scott team was determined to not let that happen

again, and like all true champions, they didn't. Success didn't come overnight.

It took determination, dedication and hard work.

Kelly has been

on a mission for several years. She is a former Canadian junior champion, and

the Kelowna foursome also won the B.C. championship for the second year in a row

in January. I also want to wish them well as they represent Canada at the World

Women's Curling Championship in Grande Prairie on March 18.

Kelly said after her victory: "We're ready to wear the maple leaf." Good luck,

Kelly, Jeanna, Sasha, Renee, Michelle and Gerry. I invite the House to join me

in congratulating the Kelly Scott rink for their victory.

STRAWBERRY HILL PUBLIC LIBRARY

H. Bains: I would like to

take this opportunity to talk about a facility in my community, Strawberry Hill

public library. It was opened in the spring of 2000. It is an 11,000-square-foot

stand-alone building on the corner of 73rd Avenue and 122 Street in Surrey, just

a few blocks from where I live.

Some of the many programs they

offer are a 12-seat electronic classroom; an eight-seat computer-based language

learning centre; multilingual collections in Punjabi, Hindi, Urdu, Chinese and

Arabic; Microsoft office centre; subscriptions to over 80 different newspapers

and magazines. They have programs for all walks of life, from the many seniors

that come to read the newspaper in different languages to the tiny babies that

come to enjoy story time.

I had the opportunity to visit the

Strawberry Hill library in Surrey on January 20 to read a story to the children

at story time. The children, with their parents, started to file in just before

11 a.m. I took a seat on the floor.

The library staff was

exceptional. Jan Parker, the coordinator for story time, began by getting the

children on their feet to have a stretch. The children were

[ Page 2680 ]

most excited when Jan brought out

the puppet Herbert. They laughed, giggled and talked with this puppet. It was

such a rewarding experience to watch the faces of young citizens as they sat and

listened to the stories. I believe it is such an important part of a child's

life to introduce them to reading and interacting as early as possible.

Surinder Boghal, the library manager, showed us around the library,

and I was really impressed with the diverse representation this library offered

to our community.

I would ask everyone in this House to join

with me to thank the library staff for providing an exceptional service to the

residents of Surrey.

Oral Questions

INVESTIGATION INTO

RELEASE OF GOVERNMENT RECORDS

ON PERSONAL INFORMATION

C. James: The Minister of Labour

this weekend apologized to anyone who was affected by the serious breach of

privacy reported this weekend by the Vancouver Sun . But the only reason

for the minister's public apology is that private information was sold at an

auction to an individual who then took it to the media.

That

begs a very simple question to the Minister of Labour. Why didn't the government

tell the public about this breach of privacy?

Hon. M. de

Jong: Thanks to the Leader of the Opposition for the question. I hope the

Leader of the Opposition will give me the moment to explain what we do know at

this stage of the investigation that's taking place.

[1425]

We know this. We know that tapes containing information, we believe

from the period '96 to '01, made their way to the asset disposal yard in Surrey

and that sometime around May of 2005 those assets were sold. Sold, as it turns

out, contrary to a policy and guidelines that have been in place for some period

of time requiring that any computer equipment — or tapes, for that matter — that

is offered for public sale through the asset disposal process is completely

scrubbed and clean of any of the information.

I want to say

this in the House because I've said it outside of the House. The release of this

incredibly sensitive personal information is inappropriate and unacceptable. I

will repeat in this House what I said on Friday when I learned of what had taken

place as a result of a call that a reporter had made to the Privacy

Commissioner, and that is an unconditional apology. There's no room for error

here. People deserve an apology, and they'll get one.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

C. James: I'm certain the public appreciates the fact that the

minister has apologized to the public. But that doesn't take away from the

facts, which are that the public does not expect to read about their personal

information — HIV status, refugee claims, personal medical information — in the

headlines of the newspaper that they get Saturday morning with their breakfast

coffee. They expect the government to inform them if their personal information

in the hands of the government is released.

So again I ask the

minister: while I appreciate the apology, why did not the government let the

public know about this breach, rather than reading it in their morning paper the

next morning?

Hon. M. de Jong: To pick up the

chronology, upon receipt of the information that this had taken place,

recognizing that we were dealing at this point with questions from the media

outlet, we did two things. We immediately contacted the Privacy Commissioner and

his office — the irony being that they had already, of course, received

information from the media outlet — with a view to doing two things: (1) working

as quickly as we can to re-secure the data from the media outlet where it

presently still rests; and (2) to initiate a comprehensive and exhaustive

investigation to determine how this happened, why it happened and how we ensure

that it never happens again.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of

the Opposition has a further supplemental.

C. James:

There's no question that the public had raised concerns previously about

personal information with this government. The public had raised concerns about

the transfer of our medical services program and had raised concerns about the

Patriot Act and personal information. Well, it turns out that it wasn't the

Patriot Act and the FBI that the public needed to worry about. It was the

government that the public needed to worry about.

My question

to the Minister of Labour: how many other times that the public didn't know

about have records been released, and were there concerns about personal

information going out? How many other times?

Hon. M. de

Jong: It is proper for the Leader of the Opposition to pursue this, and I

hope she will derive some comfort, if not from my words, from what the Office of

the Privacy Commissioner has said and what they are doing.

[1430]

We have a comprehensive set of guidelines in place to govern how this

material is supposed to be secured and how it is supposed to be disposed of. The

best guidelines in the world don't work when there's a screwup. I don't need an

investigation to tell me that when, at the auction yard, material containing

sensitive personal information was sold, there was a screwup. What we are

endeavouring to ascertain now is how we ensure that it doesn't happen again —

what happened

[ Page 2681 ]

and how, with the best regulatory framework and protocols in place, this was

allowed to happen.

M. Farnworth: Will the Minister of

Labour agree to table in this House the results of his investigation into this

matter, including the question as to how many times previously mistakes of this

type have occurred?

Hon. M. de Jong: I can assure

members of the House that my intention, our intention is to ensure that British

Columbians, and therefore members of this assembly, have all of the information

that we have as quickly as possible. I'm hoping that's within a week to ten

days.

RELEASE OF GOVERNMENT RECORDS

ON REFUGEE INFORMATION

J. Brar: This is not a provincial

issue anymore. It also involves the federal government. The Immigration Minister

of Canada is also concerned about the breach of security that has allowed

potentially life-threatening information of thousands of refugees to be sold at

a B.C. government auction. The Immigration Minister is launching his own

investigation because the sold tapes contained a listing of names, social

insurance numbers and internal government file numbers for more than 30,000

refugees. Can the Attorney General tell this House what steps he is taking to

cooperate with the federal government investigation?

Hon. M.

de Jong: Thanks to the member for his question. The federal minister,

insofar as there is apparently information relevant to his areas of

responsibility, is justified in his concern. That's why our office, the chief

information officer for the province, the deputy and ultimately, I suspect, the

Privacy Commissioner's office have been in direct communication with the federal

minister.

Our first priority today is to re-secure the

information. We will continue to work with all agencies and do what we can. I

should say this, as well, to the member, because I think there is a question

that has yet to be asked, and I'm asking it. Why sell the stuff? Why sell tapes?

I think the information is that we got a hundred bucks for it. So insofar as

this investigation is looking at all aspects of this, I can assure the hon.

member that one of the questions I have and an inclination I have is to extend

the present moratorium and put a permanent ban on the sale of this material.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge has a supplemental.

J. Brar: It's interesting to know that the minister has questions

for himself now. That's good to know. I hope the Attorney General understands

that the disclosure of information available on refugee files is dangerous and

potentially life-threatening. So again to the Attorney General: can the Attorney

General confirm how many refugee families have been affected by this, and what

step is he taking to assure them that their private records are being protected?

Hon. M. de Jong: I guess the short answer to the member is that

until we have re-secured the data, we're not in a conclusive position to provide

conclusive information. That's why our first priority is to re-secure the

material. Once we've done that, we'll be able to ascertain with certainty….

Officials think they've narrowed down what the information is. They're working

with the federal authorities. They're working all through the weekend with the

officials at the Privacy Commissioner's office. We're doing what we can. British

Columbians deserve to know that the private information that rests with

government is properly secured, and that's what we aim for — to re-establish

that confidence in their minds despite what has just happened.

[1435]

REVIEW OF SENIORS CARE

IN HEALTH FACILITIES

K. Conroy: Over the last week the

Minister of Health has said on a number of occasions that the circumstances

surrounding the tragic death of Fanny Albo are isolated and not linked to this

government's cuts to residential care and acute care beds. Last week I provided

the minister's office with four cases that should prove this is not the case.

My question to the Minister of Health is straightforward. Will the

minister stand up today and acknowledge that seniors care in this province is

being compromised because of this government's cuts, and agree to an expanded

review?

Hon. G. Abbott: The review of the four cases

which she presented to me in letter, I think close to two weeks ago now,

continues. I think in large measure we have the answers to the question that the

member does pose in the letter, and I look forward to advising the House of

that.

The final piece that we have been attempting to put in

place now for close to two weeks is to ensure that we have informed consent from

all four of the families that are involved in respect of the cases that are

raised by the member's letter.

It is vitally important that we

have that informed consent. I want to remind members opposite that there was a

case last week that was raised in the House where apparently the member had

direction from a child of the patients involved, but not the patients

themselves. We need to be very careful so that we do not breach the privacy

rights of people in this House. It is critically important that we do not do

that. When we have the informed consent of the four parties — and I gather from

my officials we're close to that — we will be looking forward to releasing the

report to the House.

Mr. Speaker: Member for West

Kootenay–Boundary has a supplemental.

Page 2682 ]

K. Conroy: Well, I'm hoping that the

minister will expand his review from beyond the West Kootenays, because it's not

just a crisis in the West Kootenays.

Doris LeClair lived in

Cranbrook, not in Trail. But like Trail, Cranbrook has seen many cuts to acute

care and residential care beds. Mrs. LeClair was in hospital in Cranbrook, but

unfortunately, when she needed a residential care bed, there was none in the

area, and she had to travel over 100 kilometres away to Creston. Her family

struggled to visit her, and on February 2 at midnight they were called to come

at once. A severe winter storm kept them from arriving in time, and Mrs. LeClair

died alone.

Mrs. LeClair's family deserves answers, as do all

the families of people who have lost loved ones. Will the minister now agree to

widen the review?

Hon. G. Abbott: I do at the outset

here want to express my condolences to the LeClair family. The hon. member

provided me with a letter, I believe yesterday or earlier today, in respect of

the LeClair case. We are following up on that. We are attempting to secure,

again, informed consent from the LeClair family around that. I do know that I

should not discuss the specifics of this case until we have the consent of the

family to do that.

I can tell the House, though, as I did the

other day, that what we attempt to do is keep couples together. In August 2001,

615 married couples in residential care were separated by medical necessity. By

November 2005 we had reduced that to 73 married couples in residential care

facilities. In every event, the policy is that as soon as a bed opens in the

facility of choice, we attempt to reunite those couples. It's very, very

important to us.

AVAILABILITY OF BEDS

AT ASHCROFT HOSPITAL

C. Wyse: On February 23, Cheryl MacNeil

was advised that her terminally ill loved one would be sent from Kamloops Royal

Inland Hospital to Ashcroft, as the bed was required in Kamloops. Her loved one

was admitted to the Ashcroft hospital, where he was twice bumped from the

palliative care bed — ending up in a closet. During one of these bumps he was

sent home, where Cheryl was required to modify the home, at her expense, to care

for her loved one.

[1440]

On March 3 he has been returned to the Ashcroft hospital. IHA

downsized the Ashcroft hospital by 100 percent of its acute care beds. IHA

reduced acute care beds by 24 percent and senior beds by 20 percent across its

region. IHA also reduced home support services.

My question:

will the Minister of Health acknowledge that the local hospital in Ashcroft is

not able to provide adequate health care services to the people of the south

Cariboo as a result of IHA's decisions?

Hon. G. Abbott:

I won't comment on the specific case. I'm not sure if the member has brought the

case to my office or not. I don't believe he has. I don't have any recollection

of the member bringing it forward. When he does — and I hope he is able to

provide the informed consent of the family — I would be very pleased to look

into this specific case.

The member has wrapped a broader theme

around the specific case. I can say this in respect of acute care beds.

Nationally and internationally, the number of acute care beds per capita has

been in decline for now close to 20 years. In British Columbia, for example,

between 1993 and the year 2000 the number of acute care beds in B.C. fell by

3,334 — a 16-percent decline. That was reflective, actually, of a broader trend.

What we are seeing with respect to the use of acute care beds is that things

like laparoscopic surgery have moved what used to be complex surgeries involving

several days stay into ambulatory or day surgeries.

Mr.

Speaker: Thank you, minister.

Hon. G. Abbott: The

same is true of cataracts and a number of others.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Cariboo South has a supplemental.

REVIEW OF SENIORS CARE

IN HEALTH FACILITIES

C. Wyse: I do. Returning to the issue

of appropriate care beds in general, the House has heard of cases involving

shortage of the appropriate care beds in the Kootenays, in Kamloops, in

Ashcroft, in Penticton and in Williams Lake. Certainly, a bed in a hospital's

closet is not an appropriate location to provide palliative care on a continuing

basis, as is required in Ashcroft.

Will the Minister of Health

explain to the House: who is ultimately responsible for the decisions made by

the health authority? And then, will he expand his review into seniors care to

include areas other than the Kootenays?

Hon. G. Abbott:

Again, I want to be fair to this member, because I know he is a sincere member

of this House who is trying to do his best for his constituents. But I do want

the member to think about this. To present a case in the House without giving us

the opportunity to review that case and to try to determine what the facts are

around it — to determine whether in fact appropriate care has been extended,

whether there was medical necessity, whether there was medical decision-making

around it — I think, is not constructive.

I do welcome members

bringing these issues to me and to my office. I now have major binders with over

500 of these kinds of issues that have been raised. I am always happy to follow

up on those to form appropriate conclusions in respect of those, but I don't

think it is appropriate for members to ask me to do a full-scale provincial

review based on a case that I have never even had presented to me to review.

Interjection.

[ Page

2683 ]

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Cubberley: I find it interesting that the Minister of Health simply does not

want to own the fact that his government closed nearly one in five acute care

beds in their first term in office. That's what's behind the problems we're

dealing with today.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Members.

D. Cubberley: Earlier today the

Minister of Health portrayed the tragic Albo case as a series of bad staff

decisions leading to an unacceptable outcome — staff decisions, not the series

of bad government decisions that led to the bed crunch across the entire region.

This continuing denial is alarming, especially considering Martin McMahon's

frank admission that Fanny Albo was quickly discharged in order to free up an

acute care bed that was needed at the hospital for another patient.

My question is: why does the minister continue to blame staff for the

tragic death of Fanny Albo, but refuse to expand the scope of the inquiry to

include systemic factors?

[1445]

Hon. G. Abbott: The members opposite seem somehow disappointed or

perplexed that on encountering the unfortunate case of Mrs. Albo, I asked my

deputy to go to Trail to review with all of the appropriate officials what had

occurred in that case — why it happened and how it happened — and to recommend

steps we could undertake to ensure that it never happened again. I know the

members opposite may want to take the comments of particular officials out of

context. I know it is their wont to do that, Mr. Speaker, but I think it's very

clear. We understand what happened, and we are taking appropriate steps to

ensure that it never happens again.

Mr. Speaker: The

member for Saanich South has a supplemental.

D. Cubberley:

Well, that response wasn't just beside the point; that response was nowhere near

the point. You know, instead of saying it's a problem with staff

decision-making, the minister should be directing his deputy to contact staff so

that he can find out about what's actually going on, what the circumstances are

that predisposed the bad choices.

Front-line workers have lots

to say about problems, but they feel muzzled. I've got a letter here dated

yesterday from a Dr. Perrier and other front-line care providers who've worked

at Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital. In here they say that staff who

challenge the status quo risk professional suicide due to breaking the unwritten

gag order.

I think the Minister of Health needs to be concerned

about that. Any challenge to the status quo risks professional suicide? The

minister knows that people feel muzzled now, so will he agree to interview the

front-line workers, will he stop blaming them, and will he agree to expand the

inquiry into the crisis across Interior Health?

Hon. G.

Abbott: As we have made very clear a number of times, the review of the Albo

case was not aimed at laying blame. It was aimed at understanding what happened,

why it happened, how it happened, and ensuring that it does not happen again.

There has not been any laying of blame, and now the member cites the case of a

doctor saying it would be professional suicide to speak out. The other day

another member of the House cited a case of a nurse saying the same thing.

In light of that, it seems interesting that we are hearing all kinds

of people raise complaints, when apparently it is professional suicide to do so.

We do know this. The culture of care that exists in the Trail area needs to be

improved. In fact, that is a point that was very much made by my deputy in her

report. I believe it's an issue, as well, in the Interior Health report. What we

intend to do is undertake some of the recommendations suggested so that we can

build a more positive climate of team-building in the Kootenay area.

NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR

FRASER HEALTH AUTHORITY

B. Ralston: My question is for the

Minister of Health. On February 22, 2005, the permanent CEO of the Fraser Health

Authority was fired. It's over a year later. Can the minister confirm that he

has yet to hire a new permanent CEO for this largest health region in the

province?

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm happy to confirm to the

member that Keith Anderson continues to act in an interim role as CEO at Fraser

Health.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey-Whalley has a

supplemental.

B. Ralston: I'm hoping the minister wasn't

answering that as the acting Health Minister instead of the permanent Health

Minister. I'm not sure.

Obviously, the government likes to look

to the private sector for analogies. But would the minister agree that by any

acceptable business standard, waiting over a year to hire a CEO is unacceptable?

And will the minister confirm that the failure to act to hire a new CEO is an

indictment of his leadership as Minister of Health?

[1450]

Hon. G. Abbott: I think Keith Anderson has done a remarkable,

outstanding job as the interim CEO at the Fraser Health Authority. I think he is

warmly regarded by members on all sides of the House. Would I like the…?

Interjections.

Page 2684 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue.

Hon. G. Abbott: Would I like the

issue of a permanent CEO to be resolved more quickly than not? Yes. I'm glad,

again, to advise the member that the board of the Fraser Health Authority is

looking at this matter and will be bringing forward recommendations at an

appropriate time.

URANIUM MINING IN B.C.

Evans: You know, Mr. Speaker, when the price of commodities goes up, that

tends to drive increased exploration to find that commodity. In the part of the

world where you and I live, and the member from Kootenay-Boundary, people are

beginning, in increasing numbers, to explore for uranium. Those companies that

are exploring for uranium need to raise capital. People are wondering, if they

find uranium, whether they can actually mine it.

So to the

Minister of Energy and Mines: to bring some comfort to those people that are

thinking of investing in the uranium mining business, would this government

actually license a uranium mine should the exploration prove successful?

Hon. R. Neufeld: Firstly, to my knowledge, there has been no

application for a permit across the province of British Columbia to mine

uranium. Secondly, our geology branch tells us that the possibilities of having

uranium in the province are pretty slim. The member should know, or maybe he

does know, that the federal government actually regulates that, not the

provincial government.

Mr. Speaker: The member for

Nelson-Creston has a supplemental.

C. Evans: You know,

the way we speak here in the Legislature is a bit arcane to the people on the

outside. In the interest of helping investors understand what the minister just

said, I'm pretty sure….

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Members. Members.

C. Evans: Ah, let 'em

rip. It doesn't matter.

Mr. Speaker: Member. Member,

just wait.

C. Evans: What the minister said to potential

investors is no. He isn't going to let them mine uranium in British Columbia

even if they find it. I wonder if the minister would now commit, before he makes

that statement public, to going across British Columbia — and especially the

communities where the Speaker and I live, and the member from Kootenay-Boundary

— and having a public consultation on whether or not the exploration of uranium

will ever be allowed to produce product above ground.

Hon.

R. Neufeld: Well, interesting question — that an NDP member would be worried

about an investor. That's a little hard for me to understand when they actually

drove the investment in the mining industry all the way to South America in the

ten years that they were there. There was no one left to invest in British

Columbia.

But again, it's an interesting question and one that

I'm sure the member had when he was in government through those ten years — who

held no public meetings, who didn't listen to anyone, who didn't continue a

moratorium, who didn't do anything, and just allowed it to stay. But the answer

is plain and simple. The federal government actually has the responsibility for

the mining of uranium in any jurisdiction in Canada.

RUN-OF-THE-RIVER APPLICATIONS IN

SQUAMISH-LILLOOET REGIONAL DISTRICT

S. Simpson: My question

is also to the Minister of Energy. He'll know that the Ledcor corporation last

year made application for run of the river on the Ashlu Creek, and he'll also

know that application was turned down by the Squamish-Lillooet regional

district through refusal on a rezoning. Following that, the deputy minister,

among others, put incredible pressure on that regional district — and we have

that correspondence — to in fact get them to reverse that decision.

[1455]

At a meeting earlier this year they refused to reverse their

position, but what they did say is that they asked the minister to participate

in a comprehensive plan around run-of-the-river projects for all of the

applications in the Squamish-Lillooet regional district. Will the minister

commit today to partner with the Squamish-Lillooet regional district on a

comprehensive plan for run of the river in that area?

Hon.

R. Neufeld: My understanding is that Ledcor has reapplied for rezoning to

the SLRD and is waiting for the SLRD to make a decision on the rezoning. We'll

wait for that decision to come forward.

[End of question

period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call, in Committee A, Committee of Supply. For

the information of members, we'll be discussing the estimates of the Ministry of

Finance, and in this chamber, continued debate on the throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. M. Coell: It's an honour

today, as Minister of Advanced Education, to rise and respond to the Speech

[ Page 2685 ]

from the Throne and to say that

advanced education, research and technology and all British Columbians will be

the winners as a result of the changes our government has signalled.

The measures announced in the throne speech will go a long way

towards determining the future of this province. Research, technology, health

care, life sciences and our place in the knowledge-based economy will all take

giant steps forward as a result. These advantages will build on our government's

accomplishments in leading our province towards fulfilling its rich potential.

Since 2001 we've been working to put a foundation in place that will

support our goals and dreams for the future. A huge component of that foundation

is higher education. Making sure all British Columbians have access to advanced

education is one of the most important things our government can do in this era

of transformative change.

As our economy grows and develops, we

need more skilled people to fill the record number of new jobs we are creating.

Those skilled people earn more and thus contribute more tax revenues, which

provide services like health care. Because better educated people are also

healthier, they make fewer demands on our health care and other services, and

they have a strong sense of social responsibility which they can channel into

making a difference in their own lives and in the wider world.

Those are some of the reasons we have focused on opening the doors of

advanced education to more British Columbians. We promised to create 25,000

student spaces by 2010, and we've already funded almost 11,000 of them. We've

established university campuses in both Kelowna and Kamloops, and we've

committed more than a billion dollars to improve and expand campuses across the

province. We've also put hundreds of millions of dollars into research and

technology to help build the kind of world-class research community our province

wants and needs.

[1500]

Those of you who listened to the throne speech know we intend to do

much more. The new global economy is ultimately driven not just by mastering

what we have learned but by pursuing new knowledge. Our government has always

been committed to investing in research and development and is supporting the

wealth of research talent, ability and creativity in this province. We led the

world in fighting SARS, and we continue to lead in genome research. Both are

critical tools in the effort to prepare for the next global influenza pandemic.

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

Genome B.C. is producing

groundbreaking discoveries in areas as diverse as agriculture, resource, health

and the environment. Far from the brain drain Canada has suffered in the past,

we are enjoying a brain gain as more and more scientists are attracted to the

renewed vitality of British Columbia's research climate. We are building on that

momentum by making new research investments in everything from life sciences to

natural resources.

In the months ahead we will announce a major

commitment to Genome B.C., which has already received $64 million from the

province. Another funding announcement will accelerate the spinal cord research

done by the Rick Hansen Man in Motion Foundation. We also work with the B.C. and

Yukon Division of the Canadian Cancer Society to establish a research chair in

primary prevention of cancer. We will also collaborate with the Pacific

Alzheimer Research Foundation to help establish a national collaborative that

will increase the efforts across Canada to find a cure for this destructive and

heartbreaking disease. We are committed to finding the cause and the ways to

prevent and treat not only dementia but also cancer and other illnesses.

In the technology field a B.C. Hub network will bring together

business and research to promote innovation based on our province's technical

strengths. The end result will be a faster rate of commercialization and more

globally competitive industries. As well, this year we will create a natural

resources and applied sciences research endowment. Its purpose will be to

support advanced training, research and development; technology transfer and

commercialization in natural resources; engineering and applied sciences.

Our goal is to keep our resource sector competitive and sustainable.

At the same time, we want to strengthen our high-tech industries, encourage new

sectors, fuel economic growth and create jobs. We'll be working with industry,

other levels of government and people in the various regions of the province to

ensure the success of this new foundation. These new investments will complement

our other research commitments, like the leading-edge endowment fund and the

British Columbia knowledge development fund. LEEF is helping our post-secondary

institutions attract and retain world-class researchers.

Twenty

British Columbia leadership chairs and nine regional innovation chairs support

innovation in health care, environmental stewardship, technology and other

public services. Our B.C. knowledge development fund is available to

post-secondary institutions, teaching hospitals and affiliated non-profit

agencies when they need research equipment or facilities. It could be about

$30,000 for a workstation in the Okanagan to study watershed management, or it

could be $30 million to develop NEPTUNE, the world's largest cable-length sea

floor observatory off North America's west coast.

Since we

assumed office, grants from the B.C. knowledge development fund, plus other

funding, has helped leverage $600 million from other sources throughout the

country. We have also enhanced and expanded BCNET, British Columbia's advanced

network of research and education. BCNET is vital to projects like NEPTUNE and

Grid West.

Working together as governments, businesses,

post-secondary institutions and students, we can create an environment that

nurtures and supports our grow-

Page 2686 ]

ing research community, and every British Columbian will

benefit in the long run. As we ramp up our support for research, we continue

towards making British Columbia the most highly educated and literate place in

North America.

[1505]

Today we live in a brave new world with abundant opportunities. Our

knowledge-based economy requires highly educated and motivated people who

understand that what you earn depends on what you learn. Creating that workforce

requires more access to post-secondary education, which we are providing through

the largest strategic expansion of our public system in 40 years. We are almost

halfway into our plan to add 25,000 new student spaces to our public system.

Some of those spaces are for educating more nurses and doctors. In fact, we're

leading the nation in the creation of new nurse and physician training.

When we took office in 2001, UBC's school of medicine was well

regarded, but it was also very small, considering our population. It offered 120

first-year training spaces for student doctors — unchanged over the previous 20

years. In the same 20 years, however, B.C.'s population had increased by 50

percent. Not only that, the average age was rising and still is. In fact, as a

population ages, the demand for health care grows exponentially.

We looked at the numbers, and we took action. We announced that we

would nearly double the number of student spaces for doctors at UBC's medical

school and would provide part of their education at the University of Victoria

and the University of Northern B.C. in Prince George.

You ask

why. Because we know that many doctors set up their practices close to where

they've been trained, and we want our new doctors spread around the province,

especially in unserviced areas. So we did something brand-new in Canada —

something being watched closely by other medical schools around the world: we

built new facilities at all three universities. Then we linked them with

high-tech video conferencing so students could all attend the same lectures,

interact with each other and their professors all at the same time.

The first two classes of students in the northern and Island medical

programs are already studying in Prince George and in Victoria. By 2009 the

graduating class will be nearly doubled, and the number of doctors educated in

B.C. in 2001…. But we're not stopping there. Our intention is to add still more

seats to those three medical programs so that we'll have doubled the number of

doctors graduating in B.C.

I'd also like to call your attention

to other medical professionals that we're educating who can help us with our

goal of leading North America in healthy living. We've created B.C.'s first

programs to educate midwives and nurse practitioners, who are now playing

important roles in our health care system. We are now training hundreds of more

nurses every year. To date our government has increased the number of nursing

seats by more than 60 percent, and that's just one example of how our seat

expansion is unfolding.

It is also targeted towards fulfilling

the skill shortages anticipated as baby-boomers leave the workforce. Our plan

was built on a balanced approach to train more people with the skill sets we

need to keep our province firing on all cylinders. But the demand for skilled

workers in energy, construction and in the related trades of forestry, mining,

agriculture, engineering and technology goes well beyond B.C.'s borders. We will

work with the other provinces and the federal government on a national plan for

skills development, because there is no room for parochialism in approaching

this nationwide challenge.

At home our industrial training

authority will expand its programs in trades and training of apprenticeships.

New initiatives will be launched to encourage employers to renew their efforts

and investments in skills training.

Our government is also

moving to capitalize on our province's emerging strengths such as digital media.

B.C. has the largest digital media cluster in Canada, with over 800 companies.

Our province is the third-largest film and TV production centre in North

America. Vancouver is the largest game development centre in the world. That's

why we will provide funding to create a leading-edge digital media centre at the

Great Northern Way campus in Vancouver.

UBC, SFU, BCIT, the

Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design and the private sector will all

collaborate to create this graduate program, which will be unlike any other in

Canada. It will solidify our global reputation as a leader in digital media and

will stimulate further opportunities for growth in digital entertainment.

[1510]

British Columbia has also been leading by opening new universities to

reinvigorate our post-secondary system. Last year Thompson Rivers University in

Kamloops and UBC Okanagan in Kelowna expanded choices for students in the

province's interior. Now we're looking forward to the opening of a private,

not-for-profit World Trade University in Chilliwack.

The World

Trade University was launched as a United Nations global education partnership

and will offer graduate programs in trade-related fields and development

programs for working international executives. It will help to build the

government's new Asia-Pacific gateway strategy, which will open up every part of

our province to new opportunities.

B.C. has enormous potential

as the world's crucial crossroad to Asia-Pacific commerce. Partly that's due to

the happy circumstances of our geography. We must capitalize on the

circumstances by understanding the cultures, speaking the languages and meeting

the needs of the Pacific Rim. New Pacific studies programs will be developed and

offered at key post-secondary institutions across British Columbia. Training

will be expanded in Mandarin, Japanese, Punjabi and Korean, and incentives will

be developed for students to take these courses and complete them successfully.

We must also continue to improve access to public post-secondary

education through BCcampus and our world-class transfer system. BCcampus is a

web-based

[ Page 2687 ]

gateway to open learning — to on-line learning that offers one-stop access to

on-line courses, programs and services to every post-secondary institution in

the province. It brings higher education to towns and villages that are far from

the nearest college or university. It is also tailor-made for people who want to

fit their education around their families and their jobs, and it is clearly

meeting those needs.

The number of enrolments through BCcampus

is almost five times what it was three years ago, topping 12,000 today. It's a

collaborative venture that builds on the existing on-line offerings, and the new

cyberschool concept announced in the throne speech for the K-to-12 education

system will build on this success. Through BCcampus, students apply for

admission at just one institution, and then they are able to take on-line

courses and have library access at any other institution offering the program in

the public system. As a result, students in areas with small populations have

access to the greater choices of programming offered in the larger centres.

Students facing full courses in urban centres are often able to enrol in courses

offered at institutions where seats are available.

One of the

reasons for the success of BCcampus is our internationally recognized transfer

system. It allows students to combine credits earned at different public

post-secondary institutions and to transfer from one to another to complete

their credentials. A student living in an area served by a community college can

take the first two years of a degree program close to home, where the tuition

and living costs are less expensive. Then he or she can transfer to a

university, a university college, a provincial institute or sometimes even

another college where courses are available to complete a degree.

This year we intend to improve our transfer system even further by

allowing new transferability of credits for students attending accredited

private post-secondary institutions. By leading the way with a highly evolved

transfer system, we've put a huge range of educational options at the grasp of

every post-secondary student in this province.

For exceptional

students who are taking advantage of the transfer system to finish their

degrees, we've created a new $15 million scholarship program. Applications are

being accepted for the Irving K. Barber B.C. Scholarship, which provides $5,000

for up to 150 students each year who must move within the post-secondary system

to get their bachelor's degrees. We've also tripled the value of the Premier's

Excellence Awards, which go to the top high school graduates in each of our 15

college regions who are staying in B.C. for their post-secondary education.

This year we will follow through on our commitment to help

post-secondary students pursue their studies in other countries through a One

World scholarship. We'll announce details of this exciting opportunity in the

coming months.

[1515]

Meanwhile, we've taken action to keep higher education affordable for

year, after tuition in B.C. reached the national average, we limited further

increases to the rate of inflation. The majority of students graduating from

post-secondary programs in B.C. report: "Finished with no debt." For those who

need to borrow, we offer a comprehensive, flexible student assistance program so

that every student can choose to invest in their future.

also have a loan reduction program to help students most in need to keep their

debts down. Last year nearly 25,000 students benefited from this program and had

more than $65 million in B.C. student loans forgiven.

We want

all British Columbians to be able to participate in the transformative growth

and prosperity of this province. We are encouraging people who haven't

traditionally made up much of the skilled force to consider going boldly where

few have gone before.

That includes aboriginal students. We're

encouraging that — that more are going on to higher education — in part because

the number of aboriginal students who finish grade 12 is up 6 percent since

2001, but we still have a lot of work to do at education levels. For instance,

most of our post-secondary institutions are in urban areas, while aboriginal

people make up a large proportion of B.C.'s rural areas. So we are bringing

education to rural and remote communities through BCcampus, regional college

campuses and courses delivered right to the door of aboriginal communities.

We're also working to increase the number of aboriginal faculty and

staff at post-secondary institutions. That way we'll improve understanding of

the cultural differences in learning styles and needs and give aboriginal

students more role models. We've established the ministers advisory council on

post-secondary education, which includes aboriginal representation. We have also

been discussing aboriginal post-secondary education issues with our

institutions, which are looking for ways to develop accountable measures for

aboriginal student participation and success.

We've signed an

agreement with the federal government and aboriginal groups to demonstrate our

intention to improve levels of participation and success in advanced education

and training in British Columbia. We've increased funding for special projects

that help our institutions promote culturally sensitive educational programs and

support activities of aboriginal learners. We've reviewed the aboriginal

programs, services and strategies in our post-secondary system, identifying

innovative practices in this province.

Choice for everyone is

one of our government's most basic tenets as we expand our post-secondary

education system. Private post-secondary institutions, which have offered

excellent programs in this province for the last hundred years, are part of

providing that choice. Because private institutions operate at no cost to

government, they allow us to maintain funding levels for the public

post-secondary system. We expect them to offer quality comparable with the

public counterparts in degree-level education.

Page 2688 ]

Our Degree Authorization Act extends

degree-granting privileges to private and out-of-province public institutions,

but only after they undergo a thorough and rigorous review by the Degree Quality

Assessment Board. Under this government, British Columbia became the first

province in Canada to have an independent board review new degree programs for

both public and private institutions. New degrees must meet established criteria

for standards before they are given the green light. To date more than 70 new

degrees from B.C. public and private and out-of-province institutions have been

approved, giving students 70 more educational choices in this province.

Changes in legislation have also allowed public colleges to grant

applied bachelor's degrees and university colleges and institutes to grant

applied master's degrees. This contributes to the dynamic education system that

ensures that new degrees meet the emerging needs in our society and our

workplaces. We are proud to be the Canadian leader in applying common quality

assessment standards for degree programs at public and private institutions that

will give our students greater access to quality education.

[1520]

We are proud to be working with the private training institutions to

ensure that students preparing for careers have excellent consumer protection as

well as the option of choosing accredited schools for quality assurance. Private

institutions offering career training programs must register with the Private

Career Training Institutions Agency, which administers a student training

completion fund. That fund provides consumer protection by offering students

100-percent compensation for their unearned tuition fees should the school

unexpectedly close.

Registered training institutions also have

the option of undergoing accreditation. This assures students choosing those

schools that they have the facilities needed for the programs offered and

instructors with the right blend of education and expertise.

Our goals as government are to enhance both public and private

post-secondary education and training systems and to make sure that no

unnecessary barriers stand in the way of any student in this province or in any

way the future prosperity of this province as a whole.

One of

the barriers we're very serious about eliminating is low literacy levels that

prevent some British Columbians from doing essential tasks of daily living. Most

of us take for granted that we can fill out a job application, balance our

chequebook, read instructions on a medical label and understand our children's

report cards, but for some, these tasks are difficult or even impossible.

The Ministry of Advanced Education has doubled the funding for adult

literacy programs around the province. We're building on the adult literacy

strategy to complement the many other literacy initiatives moving forward under

the Ministry of Education. B.C. will host a pan-Canadian forum on adult literacy

in June of this year — sponsored by the Council of Ministers of Education in

Canada.

I also welcome the work being done by the Select

Standing Committee on Education focusing specifically on the challenge of adult

literacy. We have a top-notch post-secondary education system in this province,

and that is the foundation for our success. We also have a strong, vibrant

research community that's about to become even stronger as a result of the

announcements you can expect over the next few months. Both are critical drivers

of the transformative change needed to achieve the Premier's great goals in this

province.

We're investing in new seats, new facilities, new

approaches to make our system even better, and we're already seeing the results.

Our researchers are opening doors to discoveries that will improve the quality

of our lives in ways we can hardly imagine. More British Columbians are getting

the education they need to fulfil their hopes and dreams. We can be sure that

those hopes and dreams will translate into benefits for everyone in our province

and for the people well beyond our borders.

S. Hammell:

As many have said before me, it is a great honour to stand in this House and

respond to the throne speech on behalf of my constituents.

First, though, I will digress because I'd like to talk a little about

my constituency of Surrey–Green Timbers and my city of Surrey. We have all

experienced three elections in the past year, but in Surrey there have been

significant changes, even though much has stayed the same. When the longest

federal election was finally over — and if it wasn't the longest election, it

certainly felt like it — the political landscape had changed. Surrey was unique

in its response to the issues of the campaign. We elected a New Democrat, a

Liberal and two Conservatives. We were a microcosm of the nation.

In my part of the city we elected Penny Priddy — a good friend, a

former member of this House, a former school trustee and a former city

councillor. She is now the Health critic of the NDP caucus and, as a former

Health Minister, an excellent fit. She certainly has the experience to handle

the tough politics of the capital city, and she will represent her community

well.

We also elected Sukh Dhaliwal, a South Asian and Member

of Parliament in the Surrey riding of Newton–North Delta, just south of my

constituency. Sukh ran in the previous election and came a close second to

Gurmant Grewal. This time he was successful, and with the experience he has

gained in his community, I know he will also serve his constituents well. These

are our two newcomers.

[1525]

We also returned two incumbents, both Conservatives. Nina Grewal and

Russ Hiebert were in the last parliament. Although they have not been chosen for

cabinet, they were returned with significant majorities and have the strong

support of their communities. They will learn the role of the backbencher in a

government which has, as many of us know, its rewards and its challenges.

Surrey added the only new Liberal seat to parliament, added to the

ranks of the New Democrats and

Page 2689 ]

returned two Conservatives — a microcosm of the national

results, with no clear winner but something for everyone.

Much

has changed, but again, much has stayed the same. We still have a minority

government, even though it is a different government. We still need a national

government to have significant support across the land, and Quebec still plays a

vital role in creating a national voice. This irony cannot be overlooked as we

face a future of another Quebec referendum. We wish the new Conservative

government well as it faces the challenges of governing our country in the next

few years.

We also had changes after the municipal elections

this fall. We have a new mayor. Dianne Watts is the first female to be elected

to the position of mayor in the city of Surrey's history. While we wish the

retiring mayor, Doug McCallum, well, we have now turned our attention to the new

face of Surrey and wonder whether that means a kinder, gentler Surrey council.

Of the eight council members and mayor, six of them are women. Mary

Martin and Linda Hepner join the incumbents Judy Villeneuve, Judy Higginbotham

and Barbara Steele. Surrey has a history of electing women — Rita Johnston was

the only woman Premier of British Columbia, and she was from Surrey-Newton — but

I do not think we've had a council with a concentration of as many women as this

before.

The face of council changed in another way. We elected

our first South Asian councillor, Tom Gill. Many members of the South Asian

community have run before, and others ran this time, but only Tom was

successful. I know the expectations of him are high, and we are all pleased with

his breakthrough. So things have changed on Surrey council, but they have also

stayed the same. The majority of members on council still belong to the same

team. Only the mayor and two others come from a different place. This will make

it interesting for the next three years.

The other election

worth mentioning is the provincial election. Again, there were significant

changes, but much has remained the same. In the previous election the governing

party won 77 out of 79 seats. A bit of a rout, one might conclude, and as a

participant, I certainly did. However, four years later the voters of the

province rectified that imbalance. The results of the last provincial election

in percentages were 41 to 45 percent — not another rout. In fact, a very close

election — closer than what was expected by most, I believe. Although the

government was returned, the majority was seriously diminished — the same

Premier and many same cabinet ministers, but a strong and robust opposition. I

believe the voters of this province are generally pleased with the results.

That brings me to another point. Every day that I come to this House,

I am amazed. Who would, in their wildest imagination, consciously design our

distinct and unique form of government? It is archaic, tradition-bound and

adversarial and, I believe, challenging to any member who has ever taken a seat

in this chamber. When people ask me about being elected to this marvellous

place, I tell them it is challenging emotionally, physically, intellectually and

socially. An incredible character test, this place is.

The

voters choose us to come to this place to speak on their behalf and to speak of

the things that they feel are important. It is a challenge for any of us to

represent our voters, as none of us — not one — represents a community with a

monolithic point of view.

[1530]

There is a wide variety of thought within any party, let alone any

community. But the mistake we often make in this adversarial place is to view

with contempt another point of view and to treat disparagingly the person

expressing that point of view. My viewpoints have legitimacy because the voters

of my constituency have given them life, as does the point of view opposing my

positions by other members elected here.

We all have a

right to express our points of view vigorously, and in fact, we must. But we

must expect to be challenged with equal vigour. I understand that the strategy

of the government is to paint the opposition as black as it can and to hark back

to other points in time to draw on examples. The responsibility of the

opposition is to do likewise. So with your permission, I will indulge myself.

The government has been in power almost five years, and the

government is responsible for the decisions it has made or not made during those

years. The government is, in the end, responsible for its own behaviour, and

blaming out won't work forever.

Let me describe some of the

decisions that have resulted in me, again, representing the constituency of

Surrey–Green Timbers. I can say unequivocally that the majority of my

constituents believe a deal is a deal; with the power of government you do not

tear up contracts, take money out of working people's pockets or, worse,

contract out their work at significantly less today than what they were making

yesterday. The voters in my community have given me the voice to say that this

is not how you treat the working people of this province. In fact, it's not how

you treat anyone in this province, be it the president of a corporation or an

operating engineer working in a hospital.

This government has

money for the people who have chosen to work in the public sector, although

there is no reference to this in the throne speech. There are negotiations

underway. My constituents do not expect the government to behave as poorly as it

did in the past years but to negotiate in good faith and respectfully.

In the throne speech there is no reference to relief from high

tuition fees for post-secondary students. The fees have doubled at B.C.'s

colleges and universities. For the average student at UBC the increase is

$10,000 more to complete a degree than it was four and a half years ago. There

are new fees for apprenticeships, for apprentices and for adults completing

their high school education.

I live in and represent a

community populated with working people who want the best for their families.

They want their children, if they are able, to receive a

Page 2690 ]

post-secondary education, be it in the trades, in technology

or in the professions. Many of the families in my community have chosen to live

in Canada, and they believe passionately that their children's futures lie in

having a good education. They have sacrificed to make a better life for their

children and have often taken entry-level jobs themselves to provide for their

families. The doubling of the tuition fees has made the dream of an education

for their children more difficult, if not impossible. We as a community should

be making a post-secondary education as affordable as possible and including

everyone in the opportunities of a good education. I know this point of view is

supported by my community, and it is a point of view they want expressed in this

House.

There are a lot of references in the throne speech to

the transformational changes that have been taking place over the past years.

There have been changes. I want to express my community's concerns about the

health care system and, in particular, Surrey Memorial Hospital, which happens

to be in my constituency.

[1535]

Having been on the government benches for a decade and holding this

file, I understand intimately the challenges we as a government face providing

health care to our growing population and aging citizenry. But again, blaming

out or blaming others is not a credible strategy or a valid defence for the

consequences of actions or inactions of this government.

The

problem in the South Fraser region is clear: 600 long-term care beds were

closed, along with 450 acute care beds, in a region facing both population

growth and aging — as a matter of fact, one with the highest growth of

population and aging in the entire province. This is what the Fraser region

faces. Planning, building and redesigning of health services were all put on the

back burner by the government in late 2001, while the focus turned to meeting

budget targets at the cost of frail seniors languishing in acute care beds,

cancelled surgeries, and long waits in the emergency department.

I have heard a member from the government benches say that nothing

was done in the ten years of the NDP government and that all the problems at

Surrey Memorial were the previous government's. Well, I can tell the member, as

I assume he has forgotten, that during the time of the previous government we

saw a new south tower built and opened at Surrey Memorial that included a

state-of-the-art operating theatre, expanded surgical services such as thoracic

surgery, a new children's health centre, a new state-of-the-art single-room

maternity unit, a new adolescent psychiatric unit, a new special care nursery, a

new central processing department and underground parking. The government

funding included both capital costs and additional operating dollars to support

the new and expanded programs.

We saw the opening of the

cancer clinic. We saw increased services for seniors, with additional funding

for long-term care beds, increased funding for community mental health services,

the first MRI for Surrey Memorial Hospital and expanded renal dialysis services

— just to name a few.

In September 2000 a document was produced

by the then South Fraser health region that looked into the next decade to

determine what health services would be required to meet the needs of a rapidly

growing and aging population. Progress was being made with the opening of the

new south tower, as I had previously mentioned. In addition, other short-term

and medium-term priorities were identified, such as an emergency department

expansion at Delta Hospital and the relocation of the emergency at Surrey

Memorial. There was a clear indication that additional acute care bed capacity

would be required in all four hospitals in the South Fraser region.

Yes, this was in 2000, and here we are in 2006 with the government

finally waking up and recognizing those needs. We are waiting for another study

on acute care beds in the region, and I can provide you the answer. There are

just not enough. The South Fraser program and service plan developed in 2000,

Building a Healthy Future, identified a campus-of-care model that could be

considered, encompassing a range of ambulatory and day programs and a range of

residential care — including restorative care — and supportive housing elements,

potentially involving a variety of partners. Yes, back in 2000 under the watch

of the previous government, this document was produced, widely distributed and

supported.

Little if any planning, building or redesigning took

place from 2001 until the eve of 2005, when the Premier woke up and asked Fraser

Health to fast-track plans to meet the immediate and future care requirements.

Unless one was to consider bed closures as part of the redesign efforts, we've

had nothing. We certainly have had a transformation of our health care services,

but it certainly hasn't been a positive transformation.

[1540]

What did happen? What has our transformed world looked like over the

past four and a half years? Hospital bed closures — more than 450, including the

closure of St. Mary's Hospital; services for seniors slashed, including the

closure of 600 long-term care beds; and shelving the plans, building and

redesigning for the future. In our region: a system in chaos reacting to crisis.

That is what we have seen in our transformation.

All of this is

happening in a region with the largest population, a region that stretches from

Burnaby to Boston Bar. It's the fastest-growing region in the province, with 50

percent of every new person to B.C. settling in the Fraser Health region — a

health region where you would have had to run to keep up with the population

growth. A disaster was in the making when the government decided to contract the

system in a region that needed capacity added. It was inevitable that the crisis

would occur. To see the government react only during the run-up to an election

was tragic.

The constituents of Surrey–Green Timbers want a

health care system that is there for them when they need it, and they have sent

me here to say so. The current capacity is as follows. Surrey has 412 acute care

beds, according to the Surrey capacity initiative report — 50 acute care beds

less than what is needed to meet

Page 2691 ]

existing demands. Of those 412 beds, at least 20 percent are

occupied by long-term care patients or residential care patients or complex care

patients. All those terms describe a patient that needs 24-hour care. So let me

repeat: approximately 20 percent, or 80, of the acute care beds in Surrey

Memorial Hospital are occupied inappropriately by long-term care patients.

How can that be? The genesis can be traced back to the government not

fulfilling the commitment to the citizens of this province to build 5,000

long-term care beds and to force Fraser Health Authority to close acute care

beds and long-term care beds to meet government budgets.

Let's

look at the interconnected consequences. In the Fraser region, 600 long-term

care beds were closed in 2001. Now, I know the position of the government is to

blame out across the election years and to say it was the previous government's

fault: "They made us do it." Can it be considered responsible and accountable to

close beds without having alternative facilities available to meet the needs of

our frail seniors population? We can look across our vast country for examples

in Newfoundland, where there are many, many examples of aging facilities where

excellent care is provided to frail seniors, despite the fact the facilities are

old and may not have washrooms in every room.

No accountable

and caring government would close facilities without assuring that other

alternatives were available. It simply doesn't make sense. The government is

responsible to ensure that the needs of frail seniors are met, and that is the

bottom line. It is obvious these cuts were the consequences of actions taken to

meet budget targets. To suggest these cuts were made to improve services is

beyond comprehension when you consider the fact that the frail seniors are

denied access to appropriate care.

Let me quote from a document

from the Fraser Health Authority:

South Fraser is far below provincial targets for access to and use

of residential and home care services. Patients often remain in hospital

beds when a different type of care would better meet their needs. About 400,

or 20 percent, of Fraser Health's hospital beds are used for people who

require an alternate level of care. This is not only an expensive way to

provide care, but these patients often do not receive the right kind of care

for these needs, which may include services such as rehabilitation or

palliative care.

[1545]

This is a document written and produced by the Fraser Health

Authority. In the largest health region, a health region that encompasses

one-third of the population of the province, in the fastest-growing health

region…. It's a health region that receives 50 percent of every new person to

B.C. It's a region that has a hospital, Surrey Memorial, which has the busiest

ER in the province, with 65,000 visits per year — more than VGH and St. Paul's

combined. It's a hospital that handles 134,000 out-patient clinic visits each

year and provides 94,000 out-patient diagnostic procedures. You could not reduce

the capacity of this region and not precipitate a crisis.

What

was the government thinking when they closed 450 acute care beds, imploded an

entire hospital, closed long-term care beds and cut community care support,

leaving many seniors chronically and mentally ill with little or no care in

their homes? What the health authorities are committed to, so they say, is

building a high-quality, patient-centred and sustainable health care system —

one that is equitable, effective and efficient, governed by strong leaders and

accountable.

It has been a year since the CEO of Fraser health

region was fired by this government, and there has been no permanent replacement

— hardly the execution of strong leadership. What has the government's response

been? Once the crisis reached the potential to derail the upcoming election, the

Premier ordered in May 2005 a report to fast-track plans to meet Surrey's

immediate and future health services requirements — another report. Yet we had a

report from 2000-2001 that was not acted on.

What was the

government thinking? It defies logic. We are still short acute care beds to meet

the needs of the population served by Surrey Memorial Hospital. The new minor

treatment centre has relieved much of the pressure on the ER but does nothing to

solve the problem of the acute care capacity, which is at the heart of the

matter.

We still do not have enough beds to meet the needs of

our population; thus, we see surgeries cancelled, the continuation of congestion

in the ER and long-term care patients in scarce acute care beds. There is simply

not enough acute care capacity to accommodate the needs of the rapidly growing

population experienced in Fraser Health.

To date we have a plan

to plan on the acute care side, while Surrey Memorial remains congested, with

pressure points in critical care, acute care, renal care and ambulatory care. We

see little, if any, immediate relief in sight. We know we have 412 acute care

beds in Surrey hospital, we know that we are short 50 beds to meet current

requirements, and we know that we have over 80 beds occupied by long-term care

patients. Is there any wonder the hospital is forced to operate in crisis

management mode on a daily basis?

[1550]

According to the plan, which needs further planning for final

decisions — the plan most recently put forward by the government — construction

on a new ER will not commence until 2008, with completion in 2010. Construction

on a new ambulatory care facility will not commence until 2007, with completion

in 2009. The new minor treatment centre is very welcome, but it does little to

relieve the pressure in acute care, medical care or the long-term care system.

The solution and construction need to be genuinely fast-tracked. The time lines

need to be contracted and shortened, and a clear understanding that the crisis

this government has precipitated has not gone away because it 's no longer in

the headlines….

It has been proven in various jurisdictions

throughout the world that a public health care system can re-

[ Page 2692 ]

spond to the needs of the

population if the government demands efficiency and effectiveness in the

delivery of the system. If a government does not manage the system effectively

and chooses to contract the system when additional capacity is needed,

opportunities are created by the government to justify the privatization of

health care. I did not hear the government, in the election, promote a private

health care system, yet in this chamber, members opposite have repeatedly

referred to a private system.

Throughout the debate on this

throne speech we see clear differences in the points of view of the government

and the opposition when it comes to the issue of private versus public health

care. So be it. We on this side will argue vociferously that the health care of

our citizens is a place where the government can create a level playing field

and where we can all contribute to the care of each other, where no one's life

is threatened because they do not have sufficient funds for appropriate medical

care and a person will not be reassigned to the front of the line because they

can pay extra.

I would just like to highlight a comment made by

the manager of the Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency. She commented that often

there will be a couple of homeless people sleeping in the ER — yes, in

the ER — because this is a safe, warm place. Is it any wonder that the Premier's

Task Force on Homelessness has identified Surrey as one of the seven communities

with out-of-control homelessness issues?

Shelters are not a

home or a cure for the homeless, just a slightly better temporary place.

Actually, many homeless people prefer to sleep outside, as there is less theft,

violence and exposure to drugs, so is there any wonder that they seek refuge in

the ER at Surrey Memorial?

The throne speech does acknowledge

the growing problems of homelessness that lead to despair, which leads to

addiction, which too often leads to crime. We all agree there needs to be

something done. There has been $8 million attached to this problem, and my worry

is that this is insufficient because of the great need in this area.

In closing, the life expectancy in Canada is significantly longer

than in the United States. In British Columbia we have had one of the best

health care outcomes for a decade.

M. Sather: It's my

pleasure to respond to the throne speech. One of the things I would like to

comment on is one of the great goals this government has set for themselves, and

that is to lead the world in sustainable environmental management.

That is, I agree, a very noble goal, a worthy goal, and it's one I

subscribe to strongly. Having an environmental and conservation background

myself, I fully appreciate the value and the need for us to conserve the

environmental values and environmental assets we have in this province.

Mentioned in the throne speech was the issue of the Great Bear rain forest and

the fact that an agreement has been reached with regard to that exceedingly

important ecosystem on our central coast.

[1555]

We know there are some outstanding issues with regard to

implementation of that agreement, but I want to congratulate the government as

well as the previous government, who got the initiative started. I want to

congratulate them for the work they did in preserving the Great Bear rain

forest.

I have to mention, though, with regard to the spirit

bear, or the kermode bear, that there is a phylogenetic inconsistency with

regard to the naming of that noble beast as the provincial animal. The reason

for that is we already have a provincial animal, that being the Steller's jay.

That aside, nevertheless it certainly is — correctly speaking, biologically, it

would be the provincial mammal — a very worthy animal to be named to that lofty

goal. It's one that I haven't seen but have a beautiful picture of in my office,

as a friend of mine was up there and did get a good picture of one.

Speaking of sustainable environmental management, there was no

mention in the throne speech about B.C. parks. I don't think we can possibly

talk about sustainable environmental management without reference to the

fabulous system that this province has set aside in our B.C. parks. Why have we

done that? Why have we set aside these lands as parks? Quite simply, the reason

there has been a need to do that is because of the burgeoning human population

that we have throughout this world and the footprint that that population has

upon the landscape.

Although British Columbia has a small

population relative to the world at large, our footprint is large. If you go

into the back country throughout this province, you will see that we do have a

large footprint and that there is a great deal of industrial development taking

place. All of this has a tremendous effect on nature. It has a tremendous effect

on the natural assets of this province with regard to wildlife, plants and the

like.

My concern is that we are not protecting this heritage,

that this government is not acting in a way that will preserve our B.C. parks

system. We do need these parks in a major way. Many of the species of wildlife

depend on our park system as the last refuge. If you look at the mountain

caribou, for example, that we have discussed, wildlife doesn't conform

absolutely to park boundaries, by any means.

Although a lot of

work was done in the 1990s to set aside parks and protected areas, not all of

that is necessarily enough to preserve and protect our natural heritage and our

wildlife in particular. But we do need the parks desperately to be that refuge

for animals, that refuge for species diversity, for ecosystem diversity. It has

to be there. That is the outstanding and overriding reason why we have B.C.

parks.

[1600]

Of course, there's a secondary, very important reason for parks as

well, and that is for the enjoyment of nature by us human beings. We go to parks

to enjoy nature in its natural state, for lack of another term. We go there to

recreate and to get away from the busyness of our lives; from the crowding that

we have, one beside each other, and from the man-made apparatuses

[ Page 2693 ]

that we are surrounded by. In order

to go there and recreate, by and large, the people of this province have said

that they want to see our parks remain in their natural state as much as

possible. So far — with some exceptions, I think, but not many — over the years

we've done a good job of that. B.C. parks certainly are the pride of British

Columbia, and we must do everything we can to maintain them.

What I am most concerned about at this particular time is a policy

that's being developed by this government that started back some number of years

ago — we understand, through FOI requests and through a leaked document about a

year ago. That's a policy on park resort or park lodge development.

The whole idea of commercial development in parks is the absolute

antithesis of why we have parks in the first place. I'm sure that the Minister

of Environment…. Both the Minister of Environment and I have previously been

employees of B.C. Parks. I know that he would have wandered those wild places as

I have done. I can't imagine why the Minister of Environment would want to see

us lose or diminish the very values that make our parks so great.

I'm hoping that in caucus and in cabinet the minister is speaking up

for B.C. parks, that he's speaking up for the real reason we have B.C. parks —

not for the reason that's being espoused with this park resort policy. Clearly,

this policy is about one thing and one thing only, when you break it down to its

essential features. It's about taking a public resource, our beloved B.C. parks,

and handing it over to the private sector.

Madam Speaker, that

is just not acceptable. The people of this province won't accept it. I hope that

this government will reconsider this strategy. I hope that they will come to

their senses, quite frankly, and think better of it.

There have

been some statements with regard to our B.C. parks that I find quite troubling.

One of them goes back to four years or so ago — I think it was about 2002 — when

a former Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection called B.C. parks a goldmine

that could be extracting more money from users.

That is not

what B.C. parks are about. They're not a goldmine to be extracting more money

from users. They're a natural resource that we need to protect for the future of

this province and for all British Columbians and, also, for wildlife and the

plants that depend on those sanctuaries. We simply cannot have commercial and

private interests overriding the greater good that B.C. parks provide to all

citizens of British Columbia.

There are some equally disturbing

reasons that this government has given for pursuing this policy. When questioned

the other day in this House, the Minister of Environment made it pretty clear

that they are, indeed, pursuing the park lodge–park resort strategy, putting in

resorts of up to 100 beds in our parks.

[S. Hammell in the

chair.]

It is of great concern that they are doing this, and

some of the reasons that they are using to justify it. It is said, for example,

that it's about access.

[1605]

They said: "The reason we're doing this is about access. We want more

people to be able to go into our parks and enjoy our parks." That simply does

not bear scrutiny. If this government was really interested in more people

accessing our B.C. parks, they would never have put the parking tax in that they

put in. That tax is a direct disincentive for people to visit our parks and to

use our parks. Statistics show that in fact, it has driven down visitation in

this park by some 26 percent in recent years. If the government is interested in

increasing visitation to our B.C. parks — and I think it's a good goal to

increase visitation — the first thing they should do is remove that parking tax.

It's not really a parking tax; it's a park entrance tax.

The

idea that a resort in itself is going to make it more accessible is not very

believable. I mean, these resorts are not going to be available to many of our

people on fixed incomes or to many seniors who won't have the financial

resources to be there.

No, the whole reason for this policy is

a business decision — a decision to mine the parks for money. It amounts to

turning over the management, in fact, of our parks to the private sector.

I was shocked when I made an application, an inquiry, to our local

park, Golden Ears Park, about use of that park. I wanted to know if a party that

I had in mind could visit that park and if there were any restrictions or

requirements around that. So I did what I thought would be the normal thing to

do. I phoned — knowing, by the way, that there was no longer any manager in

Golden Ears Park — the park's office in North Vancouver. I was astounded to

discover that no, my inquiry should not be forwarded to the management — or what

I have always thought was continuing to be the management of our parks. My

request was forwarded to the park facility operator.

Even the

management of our parks is being eroded, is being turned over to the private

sector. There is no reason. There is no way that private interests should be

determining who and who cannot use our parks and under what circumstances they

can use them.

The government, as we understand it from the

documents that have been released, has an active taxpayer-funded and -supported

strategy to market "opportunities," as they call it, around the world — in

Japan, other areas — for commercial interests to move in and bring in these

resorts to our parks. We know that should this happen, God forbid, then there

will be leases that these operators will have on our parks. How long will these

leases be? If the history of this government in other areas is any guide, we can

expect them to be long — 99 years, 990 years. Who knows?

They

de facto become ownership. Then the motivation is there for further development

— maybe a McDonald's down the road. Who knows? It's completely at odds with the

legacy and the heritage of B.C. Parks.

[1610]

We know that increasing visitation by a large extent to any park is

not good for wildlife. One needs to only look at what's happening in some of the

Rocky Moun-

[ Page 2694 ]

tain parks. Banff Park, for example, is threatened. The wildlife there are

threatened. The grizzly are threatened. The wolves are threatened by human use.

This is not what we want to see in our parks — not at all. As I said, I can only

hope that the government will reconsider this ill-fated decision to increase

commercialization of our parks.

The government uses a

rationale, the access question, and they also talk about: "Oh, the parks aren't

making enough money, so we've got to boost economic production of our parks."

This doesn't bear scrutiny either. A study this government did in 2001 or 2002

by the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection on the economic benefits of

parks and protected areas in British Columbia — and by the way, you won't find

this any longer on the B.C. Parks website, surprise, surprise — showed that for

every dollar invested in our B.C. parks by government, $10 is returned in terms

of economic benefits to surrounding communities — a 10-to-1 factor. It's not the

case that our parks are not doing their part for the economy.

They're doing that despite some severe cutbacks — some of which, I

acknowledge, began in the late '90s. But they have become much, much worse since

this government has been elected. It's difficult to find a public servant in our

B.C. parks anymore. The maintenance of trails in Golden Ears Park has gone down

badly. The government abandoned natural history services in our parks. That was

a big attraction for people to come. The mismanagement of the parks has been

profound and disturbing, and this park lodge policy will make things worse.

Finally, Madam Speaker, about the issue of B.C. parks, before the

government would consider anything like this in any park, I would hope and ask

that they would embark upon a full public consultation with the communities

affected in that area. So far there has been an advisory board, but the results

of those discussions have been limited.

We aren't getting much

information at all from the government about this policy, and the public need to

be able to have their say. It's beginning to look like the modus operandi of

this government is to bring in the policy, get the contract signed, have

everything set up, and then maybe talk to the public about it. Well, that's not

acceptable. That's way too late.

What I would call upon this

government to do is to encourage resort economic development if they wish, but

to do it outside of our B.C. parks, not inside. For example, there is an area

near Golden Ears Park called Silver Valley. It's going through development plans

and official community plans. People there — some of them, anyway; it hasn't

been fully canvassed — have said they would be interested in a properly located

resort. It would be right there on the bounds of the park. I hope the government

will look at those kinds of economic opportunities rather than the misguided

park resort policy that they appear to be pursuing.

[1615]

Another thing I would like to talk about that's not mentioned in the

throne speech is global warming. Global warming is possibly, quite probably, the

most significant issue that this globe, this country and this province will face

in this century. It is so overwhelming that it seems that in many cases, there's

been almost a blind eye turned toward it. Certainly, with this government, I see

no evidence that the government is taking a serious stand towards the very, very

difficult issue that's facing us with global warming.

We hear a

lot in the papers about…. Well, we hear some things the Fraser Institute brings

in — some scientists from Sweden or somewhere else to dispute whether, in fact,

global warming is (

a) occurring or (

b) man-made. Lest there be any doubt, let's

be clear that both sides of this House, as near as I can understand, don't

subscribe to any views that global warming is not happening or that it's not

man-made.

The government came out with a document in 2004

called Weather, Climate and the Future , and I would like to quote briefly

what it says in there. It says: "Most climate change scientists have concluded

that global temperatures are rising and that most of the warming in the past 50

years is due to human activities that release greenhouse gases." So far, so

good. There is a recognition in the government's documentation that global

warming is definitely happening and that it's man-made.

That's

where the good news ends, I'm afraid, because the government is not taking a

proactive stand — the kind of stand that we need to really seriously address the

issue. And it is a serious issue. Global economic losses from weather-related

disasters increased more than ten times between 1950 and 1999. That's a serious

issue. During the 1990s alone, worldwide, there were economic losses of $450

billion due to global warming and the effects of global warming. Between 1950

and 2000 the number of weather-related disasters in Canada increased from less

than 30 to almost 120 per decade. That's a fourfold increase in the number of

weather-related disasters that we've been facing.

Health

officials know that when there's an elevated smog level — and unfortunately,

those are becoming more and more common — the hospital emergency wards are

inundated with breathing-related problems like asthma. Huge human suffering is

involved, and tremendous economic costs as well.

We're faced

with droughts as a result. We're noticing that here in British Columbia, in

fact, in recent summers. They're becoming hotter and drier. Yes, we will have

anomalies, because weather is not consistent, and this summer could be a very

rainy summer. But the fact of the matter is that the stats are there and the

facts are there that these adverse events are happening more and more

frequently.

Forest fires. We know that in recent years we've

had some significant forest fire problems in British Columbia. Part of that is

related to global warming; part of it is related to practices like forest fire

suppression.

[1620]

Flooding. In my constituency, two winters ago we had severe flooding,

in our agricultural areas in par-

Page 2695 ]

ticular. It wasn't that we had a particularly excessive amount

of rain for the course of the winter, but the rainfall that we did have, which

caused this event, fell in a very short period of time. Severe weather-related

events are becoming more common.

Of course, we all know about

the pine beetle problem. The only thing that's acknowledged that could have

stopped — I don't suppose it could now, but initially; I don't know — the pine

beetle event would be a sustained period of very cold weather. We're not getting

those sustained periods of cold weather, and we know the devastation that's

being caused by the pine beetle.

With regard to sustainable

environmental management, people that are out looking at what's happening in our

forests where the pine beetle harvest is taking place are reporting that it's

not just pine that's being harvested, that other species are being harvested

along with them and that it's beginning to look more and more like some of the

clearcut moonscapes that were photographed from space a while back. Just

recently some members might have noticed that there was a story in the

Vancouver Sun about the loss of hundreds, if not thousands, of birds on the

west coast right from California to British Columbia.

Hon. Member: It wasn't abnormal.

M. Sather: The

member opposite says it wasn't abnormal. I can assure the member that the loss

of hundreds, thousands, of ancient murrelets and red phalaropes is abnormal. It

is not completely known what the reason for this is. However, it's been noted

that a probable cause….

D. Jarvis: It must be the

government.

M. Sather: Not the government. A probable

cause is warming of the waters off our coast, and we know that that's happening.

It's interesting that members opposite would find that controversial. We know

that the waters off our coast have warmed and that this is causing profound

effects on our salmon and on our wildlife.

We need to have a

response by government that acknowledges the problem. But what is this

government's response? This government's response with regard to global warming

is to say: "Well, the one thing we don't want to do is set any targets. We don't

want any targets that are measurable." It's kind of ironic, because in other

respects this government talks quite a bit about measurement. They talk about

science-based…. They talk about accountability. But what the 2004 document says

instead is that the government will support large industrial emitters as the

federal government sets greenhouse gas–reduction targets and will not impose any

further regulatory burden on these emitters. Lord forbid that we should impose

any burden of regulation upon emitters of the pollution.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, member.

M. Sather:

So it is a huge problem. This government is not addressing it. Thank you very

much for allowing me to speak.

H. Bloy: Thank you very

much, Madam Speaker, for allowing me to stand and reply to the throne speech. I

won't have to yell today. The member for Nelson-Creston isn't in the precinct

that I'm aware of.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

H. Bloy: I do want to respond. As I continue to listen to the

members of the opposition come forward, I want to repeat what I said the other

day: that it is their job to bring suggestions to government, to go out and to

hear that opinion. But the members stand…. The member for Maple Ridge–Pitt

Meadows continues to say: "What's not in the throne speech?" Well, you can't put

everything in the throne speech. If they understood how business operated, they

would know that. They say that this isn't in the throne speech or that that

isn't in the throne speech or that now we're consulting too much. On the other

hand, we don't consult enough. It's hard to follow the thought process of how

much they want us to consult.

[1625]

What I've found from some of the special interest groups is that it

doesn't matter how much you consult. It doesn't matter how much time you give

them to think about the process. They don't care about anything except the

answer they want to hear, and until they hear that answer, you have done

absolutely nothing.

Getting back to the throne speech, which

sets out the great goals for a golden decade ahead, we've been consistent at

moving ahead for four years. I'm proud to be part of this government that has

moved British Columbia back up to first place in most economic indicators in

Canada. The work we do in all areas of government has been measured and is

working.

The Premier set out in a five-point plan called

Great Goals for a Golden Decade to make B.C. the best-educated and most

literate place in North America, and we're working on that. One of the things I

do to help it along is that I give a book to every kindergarten child in my

riding. I physically go into the class and present them with a book, and I want

them to go home with this book and read it with a family member. It's not for me

to read to them. I want them to read it with a family member.

The best part of my job is with children and seniors. You know, the

kids are just great when you talk to them, with their questions: "Is it my book?

Can I keep it? Can I write my name in it?" It's a small step, hopefully, and the

province is doing many big steps to make us the most literate province in all of

Canada.

Make B.C. a model for healthy living and physical

fitness. Well, we're starting on that. With that, there are lots of areas where

we're promoting physical fitness and health care. As a matter of fact, the

Premier has just been doing more consulting in Europe. One of the

[ Page 2696 ]

things I find about the members of

the opposition is that they don't care about the rest of the world. They don't

care about the rest of Canada.

They say: "What happens here?

Why can't we be the best here? Why can't we do that?" And I say: "Why do we

limit our thinking and our potential to be the best to a limited and narrow

scope of mind? Why can't we be the best in the world?" As a Liberal government,

that is what we're trying to do. Our focus is not limited but is reaching out to

be the best in the world.

Part of our task is to build the best

system of support in Canada for persons with disabilities, with special needs,

for children at risk and seniors, and we're working on that. You know, I was

really thanked for the…. On Saturday night I was at a reception, and there was a

person there that had been at Riverview for some time and was back out, is

controlled with his medications and is doing quite well. He's able to work on a

part-time basis. He thanked us — that was the first thing he said — for

increasing the amount of money he could earn so that he and his wife could

continue living with dignity.

We want to lead the world in

sustainable environmental management. I think we're doing that, especially under

the leadership of our Environment Minister.

Our fifth part was

to lead Canada in job creation, and we have done that. It's just amazing the

number of jobs that have been created in British Columbia. And you know when you

create jobs and you have people working…. There are about 270,000 or 280,000

jobs, and over half of those are union jobs, but from the opposition, you would

think they were all part-time jobs.

They're not part-time jobs.

We're looking for people. We're looking for nurses. We've added 2,000 new

training spaces in British Columbia since we came to government in 2001. In the

late '90s they eliminated 2,000 training spaces for nurses in British Columbia.

There was no vision. The vision is coming from our Premier, so we are creating

jobs. We've doubled the number of doctor spaces, which hadn't been touched since

the early 1980s.

We need tradespeople. We had to dismantle the

old trades system because the money didn't go into training. The money went into

a bureaucracy in this group. Millions of dollars weren't going to jobs. For the

last two years in the ITA, we've reached our quota of training before the end of

the year, and we're growing every day. Our goal, said the Premier of this

province, is to help B.C. realize its full potential as the best place on earth

to raise a family, to live and play, and to work and invest and get ahead.

[1630]

I just want to name a few things that we've outlined in the throne

speech: an Asia-Pacific gateway strategy that includes an Asia-Pacific Trade

Council, and a network of B.C. trade and cultural centres in key international

markets that will work to make B.C.'s products available around the world. Well,

we are going to do that. We're doing that with the Minister of Economic

Development and Asia-Pacific strategies.

You know, in the lower

mainland and just in my riding alone, I've a vibrant Korean community. Their

retail population — it's quite large on North Road in the centre of my riding. I

work with the Korean group of businesses. There are a number of associations

that I'm a member of. I've travelled to Korea a couple of times, and they're

excited about this government's plan for the Asia-Pacific gateway — so that they

can participate fully.

We're looking at a World Trade

University in Chilliwack and a One World scholarship fund to build new

relationships with the world; a B.C. Competition Council; a Pacific centre for

disease control that builds on the success and expertise of our B.C. Centre for

Disease Control; supporting the Michael Smith Foundation with $100 million in

2007 to help it continue leading the world in health research; and launching

ActNow, a new health and fitness promotion program to help focus new energy and

resources on preventative health care. As part of ActNow, I've made a commitment

to try and walk every day at lunchtime for half an hour. I'm getting one day a

week. I haven't been that successful yet, but I'm going to keep working on it.

We're limiting increases in tuition fees to the rate of inflation,

while providing universities and colleges with increased funding. Simon Fraser

University is in my riding. Before I was elected, students up there were telling

me about having to spend five, six, even longer years to complete a degree at

university because they couldn't get the courses that they wanted.

We have these young minds that are so eager to learn and to move

ahead, yet there was a government that had frozen tuition and didn't even keep

post-secondary education up with inflation. We lost a number of good professors

because there was no money in the university system — based on the actions in

the '90s by the former government in this province. They were destroying the

advanced education system in British Columbia.

You know, the

cost of tuition is a small part of the total cost of an education. Having to

spend two extra years on living — on paying room, board, food, entertainment,

clothing, insurance and cell phone — is where the costs were driven up by this

government, by not respecting the individual and allowing them to grow at a

pace. We allowed universities, colleges and institutions to set their own

tuition rates, which they've done, and now we've allowed them to grow at the

rate of inflation so that they can keep growing. We made a number of

announcements, but the announcements are becoming facts now as we grow. The new

spaces at Simon Fraser University on Burnaby Mountain — we're building the

buildings that house the seats. They are not some of the empty promises that

have been made in the past.

A Premier's Council on Aging and

Seniors Issues to identify needs and opportunities in seniors housing. To review

the issue of mandatory retirement and recommend ways of improving seniors'

quality of life. A B.C. conservation corps and up to 50 more park rangers to

create new generations of conservation. An alternative

Page 2697 ]

energy and power task force reporting directly to cabinet to

find new ways of encouraging green power projects.

This is one

part of the government that I find so fascinating. We have so many opportunities

in British Columbia to create alternate energy. The last call for alternate

energy went out, and they were looking for 2,500 kilowatt hours. They had, in

fact, over 13,000 hours that came in. You know, as a general rule, maybe only

half of these will be able to be used, but I can't wait for them to put out a

call for 10,000. Does that mean we'll get 80,000 kilowatt hours coming back in

so that B.C. can continue to grow?

[1635]

When you talk about energy, you know, there was the vision of W.A.C.

Bennett, a former Premier of this province, who built the dams, so now we have

these dams. Can you imagine what British Columbia would be like if we had never

had the dams, or if we didn't have the vision that was taken back many years ago

to build these dams? I believe, under the leadership of our Premier today, we

have that vision for the next 50 years to make British Columbia continue to

grow.

Being a member of the Legislature is an honour, and

still, every time I walk into the House, I'm amazed at the building and the

structure. Tomorrow I look forward to the visit of the Governor General of

Canada. But being a member, I'm only here because of the constituents in the

riding of Burquitlam, and I thank all of them — whether they voted for me or not

— for allowing me the opportunity and participating in the electoral debate that

allows me to come here to this House.

When I'm in my riding, I

get the opportunity to meet the gre