2008 Legislative Session: Fourth 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, FEBRUARY 25, 2008

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 26, Number 13

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First

Reading of Bills

Reservists' Guaranteed Leave Act,

2008 (Bill M201)

Puchmayr

Statements (Standing Order

25 B )

Lydia Shum

J. Kwan

R. Lee

Guru Ravidass

Chouhan

B.C. Winter Games in East

Kootenays

Bennett

Motown High

Fleming

Danielle Walker

Rustad

Oral Questions

Cleaning services at

health care facilities

C. James

Hon. G.

Abbott

A. Dix

Staffing at Joseph Creek

residential care facility

Macdonald

Hon. G.

Abbott

Call for seniors representative

Macdonald

Hon. G.

Abbott

Health care services in Princeton

H. Lali

Hon. G.

Abbott

Funding for special needs

students

Cubberley

Hon. S.

Bond

Women's ski jumping at 2010

Olympics

H. Bains

Hon. C.

Hansen

Regulation of new home pre-sale

agreements

Thorne

Hon. C.

Taylor

Point of Privilege

L. Krog

Hon. M. de Jong

Budget Debate (continued)

Hon. L. Reid

C. Wyse

B. Bennett

Introduction and First

Reading of Bills

Reservists' Guaranteed Leave Act,

2008 (Bill M201) (continued)

C. Puchmayr

Budget Debate (continued)

H. Lali

Hon. P. Bell

J. Brar

Hon. S. Bond

C. Puchmayr

[ Page 9925 ]

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2008

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. M. Coell: In the gallery today are a number of post-secondary student groups from throughout the province. From the Alma Mater Society of the University of British Columbia, Matthew Naylor, Michael Duncan, Steph Ratjen, Tahara Bhate and Nathan Lapper are with us.

From the Student Union Society of the University College of the Fraser Valley are Mario Miniaci and Lewis Van Dyk. From Kwantlen University College Student Association are Nathan Griffiths and Ashley Fehr, and from the Langara College Student Union is Chris Vincent. They're here to meet with members on both sides of the House. Would the House please make them welcome.

R. Chouhan: Today in the gallery, under the leadership of Mr. Bill Basra, president of Sri Guru Ravidass Sabha in Burnaby, we have a delegation of 32 community leaders joining us to celebrate the 630th birthday of Guru Ravidass and the 25th anniversary of the sabha. Please join me to welcome them.

Hon. S. Hagen: We have two special guests in the gallery today. Joining us from Science World in Vancouver is Paul Geyer, chair of the board of governors, and Bryan Tisdall, president and CEO. As we all know, part of Science World's mandate is to educate young minds about the wonders of science, both in Vancouver and around the province. Paul and Bryan are in Victoria today to talk to MLAs about these regional science programs. Would the House please join me in making them feel welcome.

N. Macdonald: It's a pleasure to introduce Chanchal Mall. She's visiting from Golden and is my former neighbour. I'd just like to welcome her and have you join me in welcoming her.

[1335]

D. Hayer: It is also my pleasure to welcome Bill Basra, president of Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha in Vancouver. His society promotes the teaching of Shri Guru Ravidass Ji, the visionary from 15th-century India who taught the philosophy of universal love that led to religious revival in India. Today we join Mr. Basra in celebrating the 630th anniversary of Guru Ravidass, as well as the 25th anniversary of the Vancouver sabha.

Please also join me in welcoming the delegation of 32 — which my colleague from Burnaby also said — representatives from sabha and its sister organization, Chetna Association of Canada and Shri 108 Sant Sarwan Dass Charitable Trust. Mr. Jai Birdi and Chandra Bodalia and many other community leaders are also here today. Would the House please make them very welcome.

M. Karagianis: In the precinct today — and I expect they will join us partway through question period — are 15 grade 11 students from Esquimalt High School. They're here with their teacher Mr. Chris Chapman and a number of adults. I expect they'll join us probably when the action starts in here. Would we all please make them very welcome.

R. Hawes: In addition to the students that were introduced earlier by the Minister of Advanced Education, we have from the UBC Alma Mater Society and the Graduate Student Society of UBC Margaret Orlowski, Stephanie Ryan, Colin Simkus, Jason Penner, Natalie Swift and Emily Griffiths. In addition, I'd like to extend a special welcome to Mario Miniaci, who is from my own community and is here with the University College of the Fraser Valley. Could the House please make them all welcome.

J. Horgan: Joining us in the gallery today are 15 parents and a number of children from École Mill Bay in my constituency. The parent group is led by Sarah Malerby and Naomi Barkley. They're here to visit with members on both sides of the House to talk about the tremendous single-track French immersion program at École Mill Bay. Would the members please make them welcome.

J. Nuraney: I, too, would like to join my colleagues in welcoming the group from Ravidass Sabha. Among the members are Chandra Bodalia, a photographer par excellence. We have Jai Birdi and Bill Basra, who are all here. I look forward to joining with them in the celebration in the weeks ahead. Welcome to the Legislature. I ask all members to please make them feel welcome.

R. Fleming: I want to join with the Minister of Advanced Education in recognizing a number of students who are also with us on the trek to the Legislature, representing a number of student unions, including the Student Union Society of the University College of the Fraser Valley, Langara Students Union, Kwantlen Student Association, the Graduate Student Society of UBC and the Alma Mater Society of UBC.

The part of the delegation that hasn't been introduced, which I'll add to the minister, is…. We're joined by Sarah Lamagna, Jessica Allen, Deedee Lapper, Alex Lougheed, Jessica Jia, Melanie Boyd, Chris Diplock, Patrick Meehan, Tristan Markle, Dana Schindel, Darren Peets, Nathan Crompton, Lisa Cheng, Blake Frederick, Brittney Tyson and Auneet Johal. Will the House please make them feel welcome.

D. Cubberley: In the precincts today — indeed, in the gallery opposite me — is a group of teachers, staff and parents who are here from the Langley school district to present the Langley special education inquiry report to members of the Legislature. I had an opportunity to have a very informative meeting with them earlier, along with colleagues, and I look forward to further interactions.

[ Page 9926 ]

Joining us here today are Laurence Greeff, Mina Sangha, Terry Todd, Kelly Dussen, Linda Cadieux, Jill May, Linda Braun, Cecilia Ricci, Donna Gilbert, Bev Funk, Nancy Goldstone-Hall, Susan Seminuk, Bob Bowles, Tracy Wright, Donna Mason, Gail Chaddick-Costello, Susan Fonseca and Kevin Augren. Would the members of the House please join me in making them welcome here today.

D. Routley: I would like the members of the House to help me welcome Kirpal Sandhu. He's a constituent of mine and a very dear friend. Kirpal is a man of grace and integrity, a person I respect very much. He was a former agriculture inspector in India, part of an original green revolution 30 years ago, where they applied new technologies and brought new species to a changing ecology there.

[1340]

From my constituency are Heather Bosch and Julie Nygaard, two parents of children who struggle with the challenges of autism. These parents, along with others in my constituency, are forming an advocacy group. They're here to join us.

Can the House please help me make these three people welcome.

D. Chudnovsky: I, too, would like to welcome the group from the Langley school district and in particular two old — well, mature — and dear friends of mine, both of them longtime teacher activists committed to advocating for students and for teachers and for public education. Please welcome Susan Fonseca and Laurence Greeff.

R. Fleming: I have another group I'd like to introduce, who are with us today as well — five teachers from the Greater Victoria Teachers Association special education local specialist association. We have Donna Thompson, who is with Spectrum School, and Miila Pullan from Frank Hobbs Elementary. Debra Swain is also here. She's the president of the Greater Victoria Teachers Association and hails from Sundance Elementary. Leanne McCartney from Oak Bay high school and Tanya Brain from Hillcrest School.

With them are a number of other GVTA members. Their first vice-president, Diane McNally, is here. She's a special education teacher. Margie Ransford, who is the second vice-president of the association, is also here, and she teaches at Cedar middle school. Tara Arac is a teacher on call in the district.

Will the House please welcome these teaching professionals.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

RESERVISTS' GUARANTEED

LEAVE ACT, 2008

C. Puchmayr presented a bill intituled Reservists' Guaranteed Leave Act, 2008.

C. Puchmayr: I move introduction of the bill intituled Reservists' Guaranteed Leave Act, 2008, for first reading.

Motion approved.

C. Puchmayr: This enactment amends the Employment Standards Act to provide job protection for reservists in British Columbia. The amendments provide for an entitlement of leave of absence from an employment for members in the reserve force who take

part in certain military activities or operations inside or outside of Canada.

The amendments provide reservists in British Columbia with the right to return to their position at the end of the leave of absence that they take in relationship to their duties as a reservist or in relation to treatment, recovery or rehabilitation they undergo in respect of physical or mental health problems that result from their service as reservists.

The reservists' leave provisions apply to employers regardless of the size covered by the Employment Standards Act, 2000. Reservists must provide reasonable notice to their employers in writing before beginning and ending of leave.

With this act, British Columbia joins Ontario, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia in protecting reservists' jobs.

I move that this bill be placed on the order papers for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M201, Reservists' Guaranteed Leave Act, 2008, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) LYDIA SHUM

J. Kwan: I rise today to celebrate the life of a woman who brought joy and laughter to the homes of many in the Asian community. Lydia Shum was born in Shanghai but was brought up in Hong Kong and became a renowned entertainer there. She was often referred to as Fei-fei, or Sister Fei.

Lydia had tremendous presence. Her laughter was vibrant and contagious. As everything about her seemed to radiate happiness, the Asian community called her Happy Fruit. Shum had been an actress, TV host, emcee and singer for more than 40 years. Many of her most memorable performances were on Hong Kong TVB's long-running variety show Enjoy Yourself Tonight , which was launched in 1967 and ran for an amazing 27 years.

Both rich and poor watched the show regularly. Many of us grew up watching her. I certainly recall many fond memories as a child when my family gathered together to watch this humorous and entertaining family show.

[ Page 9927 ]

Lydia Shum was and is a legend in her own right and remains very much part of the Asian community's memory and our province's heritage. Lydia will be remembered by more than her signature hairstyle, eyeglasses, her vibrant laughter and her countless TV and movie appearances in the past four decades. She will be remembered by her many contributions to our community.

[1345]

In the 1980s, when Shum emigrated to Metro Vancouver where she got married and gave birth to her daughter Joyce, like so many new immigrants, she began to settle and find ways to contribute to the community. I've had the privilege to witness Lydia's charisma in some of our local charitable events — in particular, SUCCESS's annual gala fundraiser.

Although the community was aware that Lydia was battling illness in the past two years, it is with deep regret that we learn of her passing. I ask all members of the House to join me in expressing our deepest condolences to Lydia's family and friends and to express our gratitude to a woman who had brought so much happiness and joy to the hearts of so many.

R. Lee: I, too, would like to take a moment to recognize the life and achievements of popular Hong Kong actress and comedian, Lydia Shum Din-Ha. Very sadly, Lydia succumbed to liver cancer last week. She considered Vancouver and British Columbia to be her home, having moved here in the 1980s. In accordance with her wishes, she will be buried in our province.

I would like to personally express to her family, friends and associates my deepest sympathies. I often saw Lydia at fundraising events held by SUCCESS. I was always touched by her professionalism and her enthusiasm for helping others.

She had strong connections to the Vancouver area, and her death will be felt among the Chinese community. Lydia's passing leaves a gulf but also a legacy in the Chinese acting community. Her contributions to the realm of film and television, which spanned the last 40 years, have reached all four corners of the earth, transcending cultural and ethnic boundaries.

Her great sense of humour endears her to all, including her fans in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. In a society such as ours where we value the rich multicultural diversity we enjoy, Lydia's influence becomes that much more important and apparent. I say with confidence and pride that the positive example Lydia set will continue to inspire and encourage us all.

Today my condolences go out to her family. I join my constituents and all British Columbians in acknowledging the loss of a great woman, a fine actress and a friend to many. I would like the House to join me for a moment of silence in tribute to Lydia Shum Din-Ha.

GURU RAVIDASS

R. Chouhan: It's a great honour to rise today and talk about a great guru. Guru Ravidass was a revolutionary saint born in 1377 in India in a community that was known as the untouchables. He spent his life speaking against the practice of segregation and inequality and proved to be a role model for communities who were victims of the caste system.

He had a vision of Begumpura, a city without any sorrows or grief where everyone had their basic needs met. He inspired and touched the lives of rich and poor, religious and secular individuals.

The first Sikh guru, Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, met with him and was inspired by his philosophy. After this meeting, Guru Nanak brought some of the scriptures of Guru Ravidass. These scriptures are now included in the Guru Granth Sahib, the holy book for Sikhs.

Many followers of Guru Ravidass now take guidance from Guru Granth Sahib. Sri Guru Ravidass Sabha, also known as the Gilley Temple in Burnaby, is celebrating the life of Guru Ravidass from March 14 to 16 and is expecting thousands of people, including people from all over Canada, U.S.A. and the U.K. and of course from Victoria and other parts of B.C., to join in those celebrations. Everyone is welcome.

At the same time, Sri Guru Ravidass Sabha is celebrating its 25th anniversary. It is a multifaith organization that provides a safe place for many members of the Ravidass community here. It also provides a place for people of all religious and cultural backgrounds to worship, socialize and exchange information on community resources and activities.

[1350]

Last Christmas the organization organized a Christmas celebration at the community centre symbolizing the importance of celebrating all religions and cultures. In 2006 sabha hosted a centennial celebration to celebrate its heritage.

Congratulations to everyone.

B.C. WINTER GAMES IN

EAST KOOTENAYS

B. Bennett: This past weekend the B.C. Winter Games were held in Cranbrook and Kimberley. I don't know if my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke will give a statement on the games. He was there on Thursday and Friday. I'm going to refer to the games as the Cranbrook-Kimberley winter games; he may refer to them as the Kimberley-Cranbrook winter games. That's up to him.

I want to congratulate all of the athletes, coaches, officials and volunteers. I had no idea what kind of undertaking this was. Kelly Mann, who is the CEO of the B.C. Games Society, was there with five staff. They were supported by 3,200 volunteers from the communities of Kimberley, Cranbrook and a few from Fernie and Sparwood.

An amazing undertaking. I couldn't help but think that it must have been a bit like the Allied army as it moved across Europe. You've got 1,500 young athletes. They've got to have someplace to eat. They have to have somewhere to shower. They have to have somewhere to go to the bathroom. They've got these buses running all over the place in all these different

[ Page 9928 ]

communities, taking them from venues back to where they sleep. It was quite an enterprise. Just the food itself for that many people — the 3,000 volunteers and the 1,500 athletes and the 200 or 300 officials and coaches…. It was quite amazing.

Our community supported the event. We had higher participation in terms of attendance than I think any time before. Over at the Marysville arena there was a boxing venue. They had to double the number of seats that they had there for attendance.

There was a biathlon competition. In the Kootenays when you combine guns with skis, we're perfect. We're happy. That particular event was extremely popular. You had to get to the event by snowmobile, and there were literally hundreds of people lining up to go in the snowmobile to look at the biathlon event.

The Premier and the Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts were there to open the event on Thursday night. I had the pleasure of…. Not really the pleasure. It was kind of sad to extinguish the flame at the end of the games.

Congratulations to all the volunteers and the athletes.

MOTOWN HIGH

R. Fleming: Earlier this month film-makers, producers and others in the international film industry attended the 14th annual Victoria Film Festival. This festival has developed a great reputation in the industry as an unpretentious and professional venue for those to premiere some of the best international films and Canadian and B.C. productions.

I'd like to take this opportunity today to recognize in particular one of the festival's films from this year. It's a truly unique made-in-Victoria production, entitled Motown High , about Victoria High School, a school that boasts programs and students with incredible musical talent. Victoria High School's renowned band program is brought to life in this documentary film that is directed by Barb Hager.

This outstanding film documents the band's growth, the key personalities of its leading singers and musicians, and follows the school students on an incredible journey to Detroit to visit the birthplace of Motown sound, where they meet and record with legendary artist Martha Reeves and her own Motown student musicians.

The film conveys very well the power that music has to bring together people of totally different backgrounds and disparate geographies. The Vic High band has built their remarkable relationship with Martha Reeves from that 2005 trip to Detroit, and it was reciprocated the following year when she visited Victoria for a show at the Royal Theatre and invited Vic High's R&B band to back her performance.

This specialized music program has a 15-year history at Vic High. In 1992 the school's musical director, Eric Emde, began to develop the concept of an R&B band for inclusion in the Victoria High School music curriculum to replace the standard stage band program that had been around for 25 years. It's been a remarkable success. Over 500 students have participated in this extracurricular school band program.

The band has performed widely and even internationally. Several students have now notably gone on to successful careers in the music industry, and they credit Vic High and the Vic High R&B band program for providing them with the discipline, the training and the onstage experience to make it as musicians and recording artists.

Would the House please congratulate the film festival and the Motown High production.

[1355]

DANIELLE WALKER

J. Rustad: It's my honour today to rise and continue a story that I brought to this House almost two years ago. It's a moving story about the courageous and selfless actions undertaken by a young woman whose incredible act of bravery saved her father's life.

Caroll Walker and his daughter Danielle, who was 16 at the time, were checking on their cows in a pasture. One of the bulls required treatment, and when they approached, the bull went into a rage and charged. Caroll tried to get out of the way but was run down by the bull, which slammed him into the ground. The bull stomped on Caroll, picked him up by the horns and flipped him into the air like a rag doll, and then used his massive head as a battering ram into Caroll's chest.

The chances of surviving a bull attack are very small, and Caroll knew that the end was at hand. That's when Danielle Walker stepped up and rescued her father. This remarkable young lady charged the bull, yelling and punching the bull in the nose. She managed to distract the bull long enough for her father to crawl away to safety. This selfless act of bravery, with no thought for her own personal safety, saved her father's life.

I am pleased to inform the House that on this coming Friday, Danielle Walker will be in Ottawa receiving the Governor General's Medal of Bravery for her courageous action. I ask this House — through you, Mr. Speaker — to write Danielle Walker a letter of congratulations and recognition for her action. I also ask the House to please join me in recognizing and congratulating Danielle Walker, a true northern hero.

Oral Questions

CLEANING SERVICES AT

HEALTH CARE FACILITIES

C. James: Last week British Columbians learned another disturbing legacy of Bill 29 and this government. Not only did the B.C. Liberals privatize hospital cleaning, but they cut back on the hours. Documents obtained through freedom of information show the B.C. Liberals reduced cleaning hours by over 150,000 hours per year. That's simply in the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. It wasn't until the freedom-of-information commissioner ordered the information

[ Page 9929 ]

released that British Columbians actually learned about what this government was really doing — putting patients at risk.

My question is to the Minister of Health. Why did he keep this information hidden, and why did his government put patient safety at risk by cutting back on cleaning hours?

Hon. G. Abbott: Well, the opposition leader is wrong. That is the short answer. She's absolutely wrong. The information in respect of cleaning is available on the websites of both Fraser Health and Vancouver Coastal, the authorities that the opposition leader has mentioned. The information with respect to the 2006 audit has been available on line since 2006.

What I'm concerned about here, though, is that we are seeing another repetition of what we saw last Wednesday, when we saw that opposition leader and that opposition Health critic get up, denigrate, criticize and condemn 11 facilities in this province for the sin of not being open yet.

Their shoddy, reprehensible homework results in them criticizing hard-working men and women who get up each and every day of the week to do the very best job they can for a great health care system in British Columbia. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

C. James: The men and women who work in our health care system do an extraordinary job, and this minister should be ashamed because it's his government who has provided no support to those people who work every single day. It's the government who has made it difficult for them to do their jobs.

We all know that cleanliness is critical to infection control and to patient safety, and by cutting back on hours, the government lowered standards and put patients at risk. British Columbians are concerned. We see people come forward with stories about hospitals and cleanliness. Now we know why they have those concerns, because this government cut back 150,000 hours each year in Vancouver alone — a deliberate decision by this government to cut costs.

Again, my question is to the minister. How does a 15 percent cut in cleaning hours possibly improve things for patients?

[1400]

Hon. G. Abbott: Again the Leader of the Opposition is absolutely wrong. Her information is entirely flawed, as it was last Wednesday when they said what they did. Our government, through the health authorities and with the Ministry of Health, has been undertaking regular audits of cleanliness in hospitals across this province since we took office. In most instances those levels of cleanliness meet benchmarks.

Now, I'd like to be able to say that we will compare that to the record in the 1990s. But not one single audit was done by the NDP in the 1990s. They may be concerned about cleanliness, because they throw mud. They condemn facilities for the sin of not being open. In fact, they condemned Ty Watson House in Port Alberni for the sin of not being open yet.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

C. James: The FOI is very clear. In the middle of the bidding process put out for the cleaning contracts, the government actually cut service levels to drive the costs down. The government actually cut the service levels in order to ensure that they got a cheaper bid. The B.C. Liberals couldn't get the same service for less, so they decided to settle for less service and put patient safety at risk.

Again, my question to the Minister of Health: will he finally admit that it was his government that decided to cut costs by making sure there was less cleanliness for patients and their families?

Hon. G. Abbott: Absolute nonsense. We have undertaken, every year and every month, comprehensive internal and external audits in respect to the cleanliness of facilities — unlike the 1990s when not a single audit was done in this area — and we are pleased with the results of those audits.

Whenever we see an occasion where there is a problem, we step in, and the health authorities address it promptly and thoroughly — unlike that former government. But again, let's go to the question of just how good they are about throwing money about.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: Last Wednesday they came out with a list of 106 alleged infractions. Do you know what? They duplicated 45 of those; 45 of those were duplicates. That gives you an idea of just how careless, how shoddy…. How little this opposition cares about the truth.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: Well, these FOIs, this information shows the truth of that. For five years this minister, this group over there, claimed that cleaning standards hadn't been cut. These documents showed in that Vancouver Coastal alone, they were cut by 150 hours. The B.C. Liberals weren't telling the truth. They've been caught, and the minister is blustering today.

[ Page 9930 ]

But I'm going to be fair to the minister. He has one defender: the private firm hired to conduct cleanliness audits. What does he say in defence of the minister's position? He says there is no correlation between cleanliness and the spread of infection. That's the government's position. That's why they cut 150,000 hours.

I want to ask the minister if he agrees with the president of Westech and if he can explain specifically why his government deliberately and with great care cut cleaning standards in British Columbia.

[1405]

Hon. G. Abbott: Again, we have made no such cuts. That is a bunch of absolute nonsense coming from the same Health critic who last week disparaged facilities for not yet being open. He condemned them for not yet being open. He said there were 106 cases when, in fact, in his own little way he had managed to duplicate 45 of those. That is typical of the kind of homework that we get from the opposition Health critic.

All of the health authorities do regular internal and external housekeeping audits. For example, Vancouver Coastal….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: If one goes to their website currently, one will see that in 29 out of 30 cases the hospital facilities met the benchmark standard of 85 points out of 100. Do we want to improve that? Yes, we do. We want to see continuous improvement. Will we do it by duplicating what the NDP did in the 1990s of no audits at all? No, we will not.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: The minister apparently agrees. It is astonishing when the government's position is crystallized so clearly here — and the minister seems to agree — that there is no correlation between cleanliness and the spread of infection. "Oh, throw out those 30 evidence-based studies. Throw out everything we learned from our moms and dads. This government knows better. Dirty is good for this government." That's their position. That's their policy.

It's 150,000 hours in one health authority alone. You do less cleaning; things are less clean. How can the minister justify, first of all, cutting those 150,000 hours in hospitals that need to be clean for public safety? How can he justify that? And then how can he justify covering it up for the last five years?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: It's always richly ironic to hear from this member, who was the chief adviser to the NDP government in the 1990s that didn't care enough to even audit cleanliness in the 1990s. They didn't care enough to even audit. If the member wants to know….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat.

Start again.

Hon. G. Abbott: Ours is a government that has not cut cleaning hours. That is a lot of nonsense. Anytime the member pulls up an FOI, he assumes that it must have been something that was enacted. They sometimes confuse proposals with reality. But in terms of infection control, our government has done more around infection control than was ever done in the 1990s.

If the member wants to get advice around infection control, he should engage the health professional that we engaged. Dr. Doug Cochrane, one of the leading neurosurgeons in this province, led our provincial infection control network work.

We are making progress on infection control, notwithstanding what these members over here say in their usual unconstructive manner.

STAFFING AT JOSEPH CREEK

RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY

N. Macdonald: Jacquie Clinton and Lori Drew had parents at Joseph Creek, which is a residential care facility in Cranbrook. They recognized that the staff work hard to care for people at the facility, but what they have said is that there is a consistently low level of staffing and that the low level of staffing creates problems that would be unacceptable to anyone here who witnessed them. It is a problem that needs to be addressed.

The minister has told this House that the existing system of inspecting and reporting on residential care facilities is, he says, excellent. Does the minister think that the situation at Joseph Creek represents an excellent standard of care? Or is the minister's excellent inspection and reporting system leaving seniors in this province at risk?

Hon. G. Abbott: One thing I have never suggested is that…. In a system which is operated by human beings for human beings, occasionally mistakes might be made. That having been said, if it comes down to me depending on the information I receive from that opposition or the information I receive from a licensing officer, I'm going to go with the licensing officers every time.

[1410]

The licensing officers don't duplicate 45 times records that were supposed to show and condemn the residential care system in the province. The licensing officers don't rush to conclusions without looking at the evidence, unlike this opposition over here as well.

One of the problems with throwing dirt all the time is that sometimes you get it on yourself, and that's what has happened with this opposition. They created an issue last week. Their homework was faulty. They should get up and apologize for it.

[ Page 9931 ]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

CALL FOR SENIORS REPRESENTATIVE

N. Macdonald: Okay, part of the problem with this system is that every time something is raised and put in front of this minister, we get that sort of answer. It is dismissive. It is arrogant. It gives no satisfaction to the people who raise issues.

The part of the problem that Jacquie and Lori have been faced with is that there is no effective way in this province to bring problems forward. It is the reason why local government in the East Kootenay — and that's Golden, Fernie, Revelstoke, Elkford and Kimberley — has endorsed the opposition's idea of a seniors representative, because people know that they cannot bring issues forward and have them dealt with in an acceptable way.

The minister has recently agreed, on Wednesday, to releasing inspection reports on the safety of seniors care homes. That's something we've been pushing for, and I will get those tomorrow and see if the minister's words here match with those inspection reports.

Will he agree to support the idea of an independent seniors representative so that people like Jacquie Clinton and Lori Drew have access to an effective and fair complaint process, something they should automatically have in this province and do not?

Hon. G. Abbott: Joseph Creek is a great new facility for the East Kootenay. It is a very, very fine facility. I had the opportunity to visit that facility when it was being constructed and understand that it is a splendid facility.

Now, I suppose that creates a problem, because when you open a new facility, you need to find staff to work there. I know this wasn't a problem for the NDP in the 1990s. They didn't open any great new facilities. We have opened thousands of units of residential care and assisted living in this province, and it is the finest residential care and assisted living.

This member and virtually every other member of this opposition caucus have taken the occasion to come into my office to raise issues with me. On every occasion I have welcomed that member and every other member of the opposition into my office. If the member wants to raise an issue, he should bring it to me. I will ensure that we follow up duly and appropriately with it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES IN PRINCETON

H. Lali: Why is the Minister of Health trying to close the emergency room at the Princeton Hospital?

Hon. G. Abbott: We are not. That is absolute nonsense. The member knows full well that the challenge for Princeton right now is ensuring that we have a sufficient number of physicians in order to have 24-7 care at the Princeton Hospital.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Lali: From Princeton, the other nearest hospitals…. Merritt is over an hour way. Penticton general is an hour and 15. Hope is almost another hour and a half away. So I would like to point out to the minister that….

According to the Similkameen Spotlight on January 31: "On a recent trip to Penticton for blood work and MRI scans a young 16-year-old girl was met in the emergency room at Penticton Regional Hospital. The waiting room was spilling over with patients, causing at least a two-hour wait to see a physician, even with a booked appointment. With the backup in that ER, any Princeton resident with a major emergency would face the possibility of a long wait time, being turned away or, worse, death."

[1415]

Again, I would ask the Minister of Health: why is it that the Minister of Health is abandoning the health care needs of rural British Columbians, and will he commit today that he will not allow the emergency room at the Princeton Hospital to close?

Hon. G. Abbott: While it is refreshing to see the opposition use a research source other than The Vancouver Sun in order to ask a question here in question period, nevertheless, the suggestion which the member has made is absolutely false. It is absolutely false.

The mayor of Princeton knows full well how hard we are working as a government to find new physicians for his community. I think the mayor of Princeton was delighted with the initiatives that were outlined in the throne speech, which aim at attracting more family and other physicians to communities like Princeton. That is the core of the problem.

We are each and every day working hard, and I hope members of the opposition might even support this. I hope they will support all of the efforts we are undertaking to bring more physicians to the province of British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

FUNDING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS

D. Cubberley: Another year, another budget that does nothing to help children with special needs. Consider the reality of many families across B.C. fighting for supports for their kids at local schools.

Here's how one Langley family puts it: unfair, undemocratic, traumatizing. That's a description of a family's experience.

Under this government, things are going downhill. There's a lack of services that are required. There's a

[ Page 9932 ]

lack of individual attention for students. There's a lack of special ed assistance, and teachers are suffering from burnout from unbearable workloads.

Will the minister acknowledge…? I know she's seen the Langley special ed report; she's had a chance to digest it. Will she acknowledge today the crisis in special education, and will she agree to take action immediately to begin fixing the problems?

Hon. S. Bond: First of all, I want to just begin by clarifying one thing for the record. Education funding in the province of British Columbia is at….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Bond: You know, the members opposite may not want to hear this because, in fact, they voted against every single budget increase to education since we were here.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Bond: To the member opposite: in fact, you have an opportunity to change that, because in the budget recently tabled we see that over the next three years we will see an increase of $792 million as we look across the education funding.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Cubberley: Well, what I saw in the budget was an increase in funding for private schools, but I didn't see anything for special ed that was new.

This minister is in control of the….

Interjection.

D. Cubberley: You're not expanding funding for private schools? I believe you are.

This minister controls the purse strings, and she's failed to make special needs a priority in this province. It's special needs students and their families that are paying the price.

Talk to the families. According to the special ed report, which I hope members will read, there's a historic funding shortfall that was made dramatically worse by funding cuts in '02 and '03, and it's never been recovered.

Will the minister acknowledge that the conditions for special ed are deteriorating across B.C. and commit here and now, today, to provide adequate funding so that every special needs kid in the province gets the attention they deserve?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Bond: Well, let's be clear about one thing — and perfectly clear. The members on this side of the House actually support choice in education, and of course we believe in the role of independent schools in British Columbia. They provide an important option for families across this province.

[1420]

Once again, NDP math. How in the world could anyone describe a $122 million increase alone to school districts in this budget year as a cut? In fact, last year $116 million — and the members opposite voted against it. And the year before, the highest single increase ever in education funding — $470 million — and they voted against it.

WOMEN'S SKI JUMPING

AT 2010 OLYMPICS

H. Bains: The IOC has made a decision not to include women's ski jumping in the 2010 games. The minister surely knows that this is a discriminatory decision. If not overturned, it will leave a black mark on our image as a nation that believes in inequality, and it'll tarnish our games in 2010.

So my question to the minister is this. When will he take some concrete actions — insist that the IOC meet with him, insist that we as a host nation expect that the ski jumping team will be included in 2010?

Hon. C. Hansen: I find the member's comments both in this House and outside of this House to be quite distressing. I'll tell you why. He knows darn well that we have fully supported the women's ski jumping team in Canada. His desire to turn this into some kind of political issue, a political slagging match, is reprehensible.

We have been fully in support of the women's ski jumping team. We have made that known, and we have urged the IOC to reconsider their decision.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

H. Bains: This is not a political issue. This goes to the bottom of our core values as a nation — that we believe in equality. What have you done so far?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

H. Bains: These venues were built and paid for by the taxpayers of this province, and over 50 percent of them happen to be women. The minister can't, on one hand, tell British Columbians that these are our games and then not allow women to participate in these games.

I ask this minister one more time: how can the minister and his government take money from women and allow the IOC to put a "No women allowed" sign on their facility?

Hon. C. Hansen: Actually, if political opportunism was an Olympic sport, they'd be getting a gold medal.

If the Leader of the Opposition had her way in this province….

[ Page 9933 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, listen to the answer, please.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: If the Leader of the Opposition had her way, there wouldn't be any women competing in the Olympic Games in British Columbia in 2010. She opposed it from day one. She didn't want it. She's out of sync with the rest of British Columbians.

We are actually putting on a first-class Winter Games in 2010 in spite of the negativity that's coming from the NDP.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

REGULATION OF NEW HOME

PRE-SALE AGREEMENTS

D. Thorne: People were shocked over the weekend to find that the developer of their prepurchased homes at the Sophia condominiums in Vancouver has gone into receivership. They may never be able to move in.

I have a simple question for the minister responsible for consumer protection in British Columbia, the Solicitor General. My question is: when will this government finally step in to protect consumers who prepurchase their homes?

[1425]

Hon. C. Taylor: This situation did reveal itself this weekend. The superintendent of real estate is looking into it. A receiver has been appointed in this particular situation, and the receiver has asked the superintendent of real estate not to, at this point, make any cease-and-desist orders, but to wait in fact until March 10, which is when the receiver will release his report.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: I think I got the same answer about a year ago when I questioned the Riverbend development, which was the first one of this kind — a pre-sale financial fiasco — to really hit the press.

We've heard it all from this government before. This is just the very last financial episode in a long, long line of condominium pre-sale agreements. I think it's time for this government to step in. The people who purchased their homes in the Sophia condominium development need help now. They don't want to hear any more rhetoric from this government. They brought in some namby-pamby disclosure efforts, policy statements a year ago, and they've done nothing to help the situation.

This is turning into a crisis. When will this government step in and help these homeowners? Will they do it today?

Hon. C. Taylor: In fact, this government has brought in new rules that ensure that the deposits that those individuals have placed are held in trust and are protected. At this point the receiver will do a risk analysis assessment.

We don't know exactly what will happen with this particular development, but when that report comes out, we will look at it carefully to see if there are specific suggestions for what government can do. It is a balance that I'm sure the members opposite must be thinking about, in terms of how you can build in consumer protection but, at the same time, not completely ban pre-sales.

Our efforts have included requiring developers, from last fall forward…. This, of course, was started in 2005, so it was before this. From this fall forward, these developers will be required to give a ten-year history of all the developments that they have done, if there have been any problems with them, if there have been any bankruptcies or receiverships or any issues that have come before the courts.

As well, instead of being at the back pages talking about what a pre-sale actually means and what the vulnerabilities are, the superintendent has required that this be put up front in bold so that everyone does understand what a pre-sale is all about.

[End of question period.]

Point of Privilege

L. Krog: I rise to speak to my point of privilege first raised in this House on Monday, February 18, 2008, and then again reserved this morning. I wish to outline the factual support for my contention that this House should find that the Premier has misled this House and that he be directed by the House to apologize.

The matters which consolidated this point of privilege were brought to my attention on Monday, February 18, 2008, and so I rose in the House on that day to register my point of privilege. In addition, new matters came to light on Friday, February 22, 2008, which raise an additional point of privilege, which I will also address in my remarks. I rose this morning at first opportunity to reserve my right to speak to this point of privilege.

The following outlines the factual basis for my points of privilege. During Committee of Supply, spring session 2007, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Premier questions about the process regarding the disclosure of documents in Regina v. Dave Basi, Bobby Singh Virk and Aneal Basi. The Premier responded on numerous occasions that the Premier's office was not consulted nor involved in the determination of which documents should be disclosed.

I quote the Premier: "There is a special prosecutor involved in this. The Premier's office does not have a direct input into that, certainly not with this government." That's Hansard , May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting.

The Premier again: "I can tell you this right now, hon. Chair. This Premier's office is not involved directly in that." Hansard , May 28, 2007, afternoon sitting.

[1430]

Again the Premier: "The Deputy Attorney General will determine who in fact and what kind of documen-

[ Page 9934 ]

tation will be made available within the confines of the law as it currently exists, and he will not consult with the Premier's office with regard to that." Again, Hansard , May 28, 2007.

Last week it came to my attention that an entirely different protocol was developed and implemented in January 2004. According to an

article authored by a Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and published in the Parliamentarian, after consultation with the Speaker in December 2003 the government developed a five-stage protocol to handle these potentially sensitive cabinet documents.

That's contained in "The execution of search warrants in the British Columbia Parliament Buildings," Kate Ryan-Lloyd, the Parliamentarian , 2004, issue 2, page 158.

According to the article, four of the five stages were: (1) a lawyer selected by the government must sever any documents that contain deliberations of the province's executive council; (2) the associate chief justice reviews these documents and decides if they are relevant to the police investigation; (3) if confidential cabinet documents were found to be relevant to the criminal investigation, those documents would be sent to the deputy cabinet secretary to confirm that the material is to remain confidential; (4) if the documents in question are considered to be confidential, the associate chief justice asks the special prosecutor and other prosecutors to argue in closed court whether the information is to remain confidential in law.

That's at page 160.

Further to this, I located an

article dated January 15, 2004, in The Vancouver Sun , which describes a fifth step that would take place after the documents were sent to the deputy cabinet secretary, who was at that time Ms. Joy Illington: "If Illington requires the assistance of the executive council, she must appear before Dohm in a closed courtroom and ask permission to discuss the confidential matter with the executive council." "Charges expected soon in drug probe," Lori Culbert and Jim Beatty, The Vancouver Sun , January 15, 2004, page A01.

The authors of the story summed up the situation in this way: "The documents considered privileged will go through a longer vetting process that can involve the provincial government's executive council."

In addition, in December 2007 the government counsel George Copley advised the court that he did not begin to receive advice from the Deputy Attorney General on matters of privilege until July 2007. "Basi-Virk defence alleges solicitor-client privilege claim instructions in case came from B.C. cabinet," Bill Tieleman, December 14, 2007 — Tieleman blogspot, etc.

Finally, on February 22, 2008, The Province columnist Michael Smyth reported on an interview with Deputy Attorney General Allan Seckel. Smyth noted: "In the immediate aftermath of the raid, the government established a protocol for reviewing internal records to see if they should be released or deemed privileged and kept under wraps. Two bureaucrats from Campbell's office" — that's the way the quote reads — "Joy Illington and, later, Elizabeth MacMillan, were assigned the task, but that changed last year over concerns that the process looked too cozy." "Premier should stay clear of B.C. Rail," Michael Smyth, The Province , February 22, 2008, page A04.

Michael Smyth then quoted Allan Seckel as saying: "There was a concern, as this appeared to be getting a political life to it, that it would be prudent to not have the Premier's office involved in any way in these decisions."

Therefore, I have raised my matters of privilege, reserved on two occasions, in that the Premier knowingly misled the House on May 28, 2007, by stating that the Premier's office was not involved in the review of documents when he knew that a process that included the Premier's office was in place since 2004 and continued until at least 2007.

I am also submitting, hon. Speaker, the required accompanying motion.

Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks, Mr. Speaker, and to the member for the submissions. I reserve the right to respond more fully in due course.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued debate on the budget.

[1435]

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. L. Reid: It is my honour to rise today and respond to Balanced Budget 2008. I want to begin by extending a heartfelt thank-you to my staff, Christine Lewis and Jonathan Barry here in Victoria and Kelly Rietveld in the constituency office; to all constituents in Richmond East at whose pleasure I serve; to the staff in the child care branch, who seem to have boundless energy for working on the issues that matter to B.C. families; and to Loreen O'Byrne who heads up the early years team and is a sensational support to me.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

I am grateful to all of them for their insight. My sincere thanks for the work they do to contribute to making British Columbia the best place to raise a family.

Richmond East is an enormously successful riding in terms of the kinds of community supports that individuals put in place as they go forward. Richmond Family Place, under the very dedicated leadership of Maureen McDermid, has just recently found a home in DeBeck House. They had outgrown their previous premises, and they indeed are doing a wonderful job of supporting families in British Columbia as they go forward.

Richmond Farmers Institute is a group of very dedicated farmers who continue to farm. Frankly, urban farmers continue to farm in east Richmond, ten minutes from the city of Vancouver — with a myriad of issues around individuals who reside in the riding, around buffer zones, around viability of farmland — and continue to do an amazing job. On behalf of the

[ Page 9935 ]

citizens who frankly…. In the words of our hon. colleague from Delta, you need to eat to live.

Developmental Disabilities Association, a group that continues to provide supports and is headquartered in Richmond, provides supports for individuals with disabilities across British Columbia in terms of how they go forward. It's my pleasure to be involved with them as they continue to do some very fine work across the province of British Columbia.

On March 8 Richmond Chinatown Lions Club will host an event in support of the food bank. It's hugely important that we stand together to look out for others in community. That's under the dedicated leadership of Thurman So, who is a member of the Richmond Chinatown Lions Club.

The chamber of commerce continues to provide supports to businesses who daily open up new premises in Richmond and continue to go forward. My accolades to the city of Richmond for their recent Richmond Winter Festival and certainly to the Salvation Army Rotary Hospice House, which continues to ensure that Richmondites and folks from lower mainland families have a place where their very loved family member can pass from this earth with dignity and respect — hugely important.

I rise today in support of Budget 2008. This government is committed to keeping our children safe, secure and healthy. It is about encouraging children to be physically, mentally and emotionally healthy, and about preparing them to be effective learners. There is no question that access to good-quality child care makes a significant difference to a child's success in school and in life.

The child care sector in British Columbia is complex. The Ministry of Children and Family Development is one of the many contributors to B.C.'s early learning and child care system, acknowledging that parents are hugely vital to the success, the self-reliance, the resilience and the emotional and social development of a child.

How we support parents to be the best parents they can possibly be is equally important. The province's strategy for the delivery of child care includes leadership and support for new and existing child care partnerships. Hon. Speaker, you will know that we are a government of partnership. We continue to bring individuals into partnership with us to deliver services and opportunities for the greater good. We are certainly committed to increasing the number of high-quality child care spaces in British Columbia.

I am delighted to say that there are 86,000 funded, licensed, child care spaces in the province of British Columbia — an enormous achievement. I can tell you that I do tremendous research when it comes to what transpired on behalf of the opposition during the '90s, and there is very little paper to suggest child care construction. There is very little paper.

[1440]

There is one piece that talks about 157 spaces. I'd be delighted to have individuals opposite confirm the creation of child care spaces around the province during those ten years. It was pretty much absent on the landscape, and the members opposite who are looking intrigued by that notion, I trust, will be able to find me that paper as we go forward.

Ongoing support for vulnerable children and their families — hugely important.

Professional recruitment and retention and development. Members in this chamber will know that the government has recently launched retention strategies and certainly ways to incent individuals to come back into the sector. I'll speak more about that as we go through.

Providing families with easily accessible child care information resources and working with our partners in the Ministries of Education and Health on development and implementation of a long-term, early-years strategy for British Columbia — always a work-in-progress, always new children to come into this sector and always ways for the province to respond.

We have been making substantial investments in the child care sector in the past several years despite significant challenges with the federal-provincial funding relationship in support of child care over the past year or so. British Columbia, as you will know, suffered a three-year net loss of $356 million to child care and early learning funding.

Clearly, this loss has had an impact. We have needed to refocus our resources and examine our priorities. Under the new federal child care spaces funding established in 2007-08, British Columbia received approximately $33 million and will receive the same amount in each of the ensuing five years to support child care.

In the face of this change to federal funding, we have made thoughtful decisions to protect provincial child care programs and enhancements we made to programs that serve our most vulnerable children and families. The child care overall budget in this year is $289.8 million — $290 million. The careful targeting of provincial investments in quality child care programs and services expands access and helps child-centred programs reach more British Columbia communities.

The province has allocated $290 million for child care programs and services this year. I am glad of this opportunity to lay out to members all these dollars linked to our priorities and what they mean for children and families.

Operating funding: $64 million. I want to start with the direct funding to support the sustainability of child care spaces, child care operating. Today provincial operating funds are supporting more than 4,600 child care facilities across British Columbia. We're talking about more than 86,000 spaces. Operating funding for the year ahead has been pegged at just over $64 million, up from $62 million in '07-08.

Although the federal enhancements to B.C.'s child care operating funding were eliminated, we have ensured that the provincial portion of the operating funding rate structure remains intact. We also took a number of steps to cushion the impact of the loss of federal dollars. Effective July 1, 2007, the province increased the provincial per-day, per-space funding rate for licensed child care providers for children under

[ Page 9936 ]

three — hugely important, because that is a category of care that, frankly, is the most expensive.

In 2007-2008 the province committed $40 million for government-funded licensed providers for investments in professional development and training, minor capital improvements, equipment and supplies — particularly in the area of learning resources. So $20 million has already been distributed by the ministry. Again, the next $10 million is due out in February-March of this year, and the last $10 million in February-March of 2009.

The council has been tasked with administering these grants in a way which is open, transparent and accountable to child care providers, governments and all British Columbians. Again, that is the B.C. Council for the Family.

Capital funding — a key way in which this government is helping create new child care spaces. Since 2001 provincial capital funding has created more than 3,300 new child care spaces, 1,443 of them through a major capital investment in '05-06 alone.

Now, in the current fiscal year we put another $12.5 million on the table in terms of supporting the creation of new licensed spaces across British Columbia. We did this with the goal of creating an additional 2,000 spaces over the next two years. I'm absolutely delighted to inform the members that meeting that goal is already within arm's reach. We had tremendous interest in the latest major capital funding round, and I think that bodes well for the child care sector in British Columbia.

[1445]

A particular passion has been around co-located integrated service because it's the kindest to families. Anyone who has families in their constituency will know that if there are two or three or four children under the age of five, oftentimes that family will go to two or three or four different places on the way to work or school in the morning. That is not the best way for those families to receive service. Any time that agencies, governments, partnerships, can come together to allow families to receive service in co-located areas makes much more sense for that family. At the end of the day, it is about the families of British Columbia. It is about the babies of British Columbia.

I want to point out that by forging partnerships with agencies such as B.C. Housing, school districts and neighbourhood associations, government capital funding is creating more spaces than ever before — hugely important.

The subsidy program in British Columbia. The child care subsidy — $131 million, almost $132 million — I believe is another success story for the sector. The subsidy program supports an average of 24,000 children from low- and middle-income families each month. An enormous number of youngsters receive support. In September of 2006 this government committed to maintaining the child care subsidy program on an ongoing basis. This preserved a program which supports our most vulnerable children, despite the loss of significant federal funding.

Moreover, this government exempted the $100-a-month universal child care benefit that parents received from the federal government from the income test for subsidy — again, a significant decision. We did not allow that $100 to be included in the determination around eligibility for subsidy — hugely important. Had we not taken that decision, many families today would not be eligible.

Since those tough decisions of 2006 and early '07, we've been able to move forward with reframed priorities and new initiatives designed to reflect pressures in the child care sector. As of December 1, 2007, the province decided to extend subsidy rates to families with children in kindergarten who have their sixth birthday between January and June of their kindergarten year. Previous rates were reduced once the child turned six — hugely problematic for families. All their child did was actually have a birthday, and their level of support dropped dramatically if that child was still in kindergarten while they had their sixth birthday.

The reality is that January to June…. The majority of children in the kindergarten year have their birthdays in that six-month period, and to disenfranchise those families was never considered prudent. We heard the concern raised, and frankly, we responded as a government, and I'm very proud of that piece of public policy.

As of September 1, 2007, the child care subsidy rate for children receiving care surrounding the school day increased for both licensed and unlicensed care types. This has benefited an estimated 10,000 B.C. families. So significant public policy shifts that benefit thousands upon thousands of British Columbia families.

I might add that these enhancements follow significant expansion of the subsidy program that took place in 2005 when subsidy rates were increased, and the subsidy threshold rose from $21,000 to $38,000 for children six and under — a significant lift, capturing thousands more British Columbia families. Those October 2005 enhancements made subsidy available to approximately 6,500 additional children, while an additional 6,000 saw an increase in their existing subsidy.

In terms of supported child development, supporting vulnerable families and those in need of extra supports is important to us. Supported child development is the component of B.C.'s child care system which provides consultation and support for children with special needs and their families to allow their inclusion in regular child care settings.

In January of '07, and despite the loss of federal ELCC funding, this government committed to maintaining an annual investment of $54 million in the supported child development program. That's a huge

[ Page 9937 ]

support to families in British Columbia and a huge support to those who work in the early childhood education development sector. Those youngsters oftentimes would not be welcome in child care centres without that level of support, would not necessarily be successful in child care centres without that level of support. So a hugely important contribution, a hugely important priority of government.

This portion of the budget is rising to $57 million in the coming year to maintain continuity for the care of about 5,800 special needs children. That program is absolutely designed to support youngsters in community. Hugely important, not just in preschools and child care centres but in community, where the family needs support at the swimming pool, where the family needs support to take the child into a community activity for the very first time. How is it we support parents to support their youngsters as they go forward?

Child care resource and referral centres — an annual expenditure of $9 million, lifting to $9.3 million. The provincial share of the budget for child care resource and referral centres has been protected. The centres offer information to assist parents to make quality child care choices in 41 B.C. communities. The centres also support child care providers by offering toy and equipment lending libraries, professional development opportunities, information and resources in communities across the province.

[1450]

Provincial funding for CCRR centres is now up to $9.3 million annually to reflect increased operating costs and will be maintained on an ongoing basis.

In the first three-quarters of 2007-2008 more than 23,000 families were provided consultations; 458 workshops and 137 courses were delivered. In fact, it is important that we carry forward around regional professional development. Thirteen different regional conferences were held, with the goal being professional development opportunities in local communities as a kindness to early childhood educators.

There has often been glorious professional development, but frankly, folks couldn't attend. They didn't have supports in their communities. They often weren't able to leave their families overnight. Taking the training closer to home is what the current initiative is all about, and I am pleased to tell you that 13 different communities across the regions of British Columbia rose to the challenge and are delivering spectacular professional development.

Just to give you an example, the Early Years Conference was hosted in Smithers. They had the Brain Gym in Prince Rupert; Safe Spaces in Prince George; Caring for Children Age Six to 12: the In-Between Years, in Campbell River and Langford; Caring for Children Birth to Three, the Beginning Years, in Duncan; Exploring and Discovery, child care and parenting issues, held on the Sunshine Coast; To Learn, To Wonder, held in North Vancouver; the early childhood conference, held in Richmond; Communities Nurturing Children, in Rossland; Children in the Media, in Rock Creek; and Partnerships with Parents, in Kelowna.

Those are just the most recent 13 conferences held and a lovely cross-section — opportunities for early childhood educators to improve their skill sets, to maintain their practice and, frankly, to deliver some of the best programs available anywhere in British Columbia.

In terms of supporting early childhood educators, we recognize the importance of recruiting early childhood educators to support the availability of quality child care spaces. To address the shortage of ECEs in the province, MCFD has launched an ECE incentive grant program. This will provide early childhood educators who have not worked in a licensed child care facility for at least two years with a grant to encourage them to return to the sector.

Very important that we're getting some nice dialogue around this issue because often early childhood educators have left the delivery of the service to have their own children. Can we entice them back after an absence of two years? We trust that we can, and we're trusting that they will indeed come back and deliver some excellent early childhood education to our youngest citizens.

The province is also piloting a student loan assistance program for new early childhood educators. The reason for the pilot: if we don't get the result we're looking for, we're absolutely prepared to make some changes as we go forward. The loan assistance program will provide up to $2,500 toward new graduates' outstanding student loans. In some instances, that will be 40 percent of the costs of acquiring that certification. Those who graduate in 2007 or will graduate in 2008 will be eligible for loan assistance of up to $1,250 after each of the first and second years of employment in the licensed child care sector. This initiative is in collaboration with the Ministry of Advanced Education.

Enhancing professional development opportunities in the child care sector is also a priority. The Vancity Community Foundation partnered with Early Childhood Educators of British Columbia to improve professional development options. The two organizations are now working together to deliver the early childhood educator bursary program, a program that started in this fiscal year and to which the province contributed $1.5 million. The program is now available to support students currently enrolled in an approved ECE training program with the cost of tuition. There's lots of interest. There are lots of applications.

There's lots of movement in that program, and we're delighted to see individuals taking that training.

There are in excess of 10,000 licensed early childhood educators in the province of today; 350 to 400 graduate each year. Those folks will be welcomed to deliver their services in British Columbia.

In terms of early childhood development and research, copious research makes it clear that quality child care and preschool experiences enhance early learning, school experience and school readiness. Targeted investments started in the '06-07 fiscal year are continuing to benefit children. MCFD funding in '06-07 helped to support the Ministry of Education's

[ Page 9938 ]

StrongStart early years action plan through funding for StrongStart centres, early learning and innovation grants and the early learning framework.

We have to acknowledge that we share the same children in the province of British Columbia — 42,000 babies born each year. How we support them across government is the important piece.

In addition, MCFD provided funding for the physical activity and skill development of young children, public awareness campaigns and early language and culture development opportunities for young aboriginal children as well. The ministry has provided the B.C. Aboriginal Child Care Society with funding to update their child care administration manuals for centre-based child care and to offer first nations family child care training — all things that were requested, and this government has indeed listened and delivered.

[1455]

The province has dedicated over $7 million to support 43 aboriginal early childhood development initiatives — up from 37, so six additional programs — in urban and rural on- and off-reserve communities throughout British Columbia.

The ministry's approach to early childhood development is to complement services already available in communities and, certainly, to integrate and co-locate as we go forward. MCFD also provides significant funding for a number of other initiatives, including Success By 6, Children First, the early development instrument and community asset mapping. It's all work that has been vitally important in terms of how we place programs, how we structure funding. Whether it's Ready, Set, Learn or it's ongoing evaluations of programs in schools, the work of the early development indicator has been very helpful to us.

Last year the ministry committed an additional $5 million to support Success By 6. This latest funding brings the ministry's overall contribution to Success By 6 to $18 million. Those of you who had the privilege of visiting these programs, operational across British Columbia, will know that they're collections of concerned, committed individuals — consortiums, if you will — who have banded together.

They're not just the traditional folk who normally attend early childhood development meetings but a cross-section of community — chambers of commerce, business leaders, all kinds of folks — who have said that the quality of the experience that a child receives birth to six is important to the future of our business, is important to the future of our community, is important to the success of that youngster as an educated citizen. Hugely important. We welcome all players to come to the table to acknowledge that the survival of communities, the health and safety of communities is based on the care that young children receive.

We are strengthening community in the province by strengthening family. Success By 6 supports and strengthens existing community services and helps establish new ECD programs, providing children with support they need to be physically, socially and emotionally ready to start school.

Over the past five years this provincial partnership has grown from two initiatives to 20 which reach out to more than 200 communities across British Columbia — a very expansive framework doing some amazing work in terms of honouring partnership in terms of how we go forward.

The Children First initiative across British Columbia. Children First began in the year 2000 with three early learning sites. MCFD regions currently provide funding for 45 distinct Children First initiatives across British Columbia. Children First initiatives are community-based coalitions that support communities in identifying and developing an integrated, comprehensive model of early childhood development service delivery for children birth to six and their families, fully acknowledging that children reside in families in British Columbia and that children receive service in a family context.

To understand that piece of work means that we better understand secure attachment, the relationships the parent has with a child and then the relationships that that child has with his or her community — hugely important.

With this year's budget we will realize the creation of hundreds of new licensed child care spaces across the province, and we will see the operating funding in child care subsidy enhancements needed to support those new child care spaces. We will continue to fund what we build — hugely important.

In the year ahead we will be working with our partners in the Ministry of Education to examine new options for families of young children. That work will look at the feasibility of a full-day kindergarten for five-year-olds, the option of full-day kindergarten for four-year-olds by 2010 and the possibility of full-day services for three-year-olds by 2012. Many families have told us that they want more options. Those options will be play-based. They will understand and honour the work of early childhood development as a sector as we go forward.

We have a tremendous opportunity to be informed by the best thinkers today in early childhood development anywhere in the land. Frankly, we have often had conversations across the globe in terms of the best programs that are available for youngsters that honour their learning needs, their learning desires, their learning styles — again, acknowledging that one size does not fit all. The work we will do in the coming months is about being responsive in exploring those options.

The B.C. government recognizes that investment in a child's early years is critical to their success. Many families have told us that they want more options. We are exploring that conversation on a daily basis. Certainly I spend a great deal of my time travelling the province, meeting directly with families and care providers in terms of what they believe the system needs to do in terms of responding to families as they go forward.

[1500]

Many families have difficulties in terms of the kindergarten year. Many difficulties are experienced by families in terms of the length of day for children. Many children leave a program of five, six or seven

[ Page 9939 ]

hours and end up in a program of two or two and a half hours. That's problematic for parents who are in the workforce. Their children have difficulties making some of those adjustments.

How we go forward is hugely important. How we fold families into that discussion, into that partnership, into that problem-solving is hugely important. Early learning opportunities — huge. Learning happens from the moment of conception. Learning readiness is a lifelong endeavour. Certainly there are formative years — birth to six. They're our shared responsibility. Government is happy to play its part as we go forward. The notion that learning doesn't begin until a child enters school — nothing could be more foreign from the thinkers on early childhood development today.

Learning begins at the moment of conception and takes us through the life course. How we respond to that collectively as a government, as a Legislature, as a community, as a province, will determine the level of educated citizen we have in British Columbia as we go forward.

I too want to explore every possible option, every possible opportunity — whether or not that includes full-day kindergarten, full-day four-year-old programming or full-day three-year-old programming. The challenge will be to ensure that that is play-based, experiential learning based on problem-solving as we go forward.

The new agency will look at whether or not this is feasible and whether it's a choice parents want for their children. A report on the feasibility of full-day kindergarten is expected within the year. Certainly, there are all kinds of studies, Vancouver Board of Trade and others, that have talked about how important that investment is in terms of the return we have.

I'm happy to share with the House that Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Yukon and Nunavut already have full-day kindergarten. We can learn from those jurisdictions as we go forward. Ontario has half-day kindergarten and also funds half-day K for four-year-olds. They are phasing in a full-day kindergarten program for all four- and five-year-olds by 2010.

We can benefit from that research they're using to guide their policy shift. Prince Edward Island funds kindergarteners that follow the provincial standards and curriculum run by communities.

There are lots of good examples: England, full-day kindergarten for all five-year-olds; Finland and Sweden, well-known for the universal preschools for children four to six. In New Zealand, families can access up to 20 hours per week of free kindergarten for three-to five-year-olds.

So there are many examples across the globe and many responses to that level of care and service across the globe. Certainly, we will continue to have those discussions. We invite the dialogue, and I can assure members that the dialogue has begun. Many individuals have made contact with us and will continue to involve themselves in this discussion as we go forward.

We provide funding for a number of initiatives — certainly very, very important. I'm happy to share with the House the province's commitment to the children of our province who suffer from autism. We've allocated over $47 million in assessment diagnosis, intervention and support this year — a more than tenfold increase since the year 2000.

Currently, there are about 4,700 children and youth on the autism spectrum receiving services from MCFD. Only a few hundred children were being served prior to the year 2000. Again, an enormously important contribution for families who are raising very challenging children. How we support them to be the best parents they can be — hugely important.

Many members of this House will know I have a personal passion around fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, care and prevention. How it is we care for those currently afflicted, how it is we pull together as community, as a province, to ensure we reduce the number of babies born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder — hugely important.

In 2005-06 we were spending $2.7 million. That is lifting to $5.4 million with this budget. It is hugely important that we continue to support the key workers we have in place and that we continue to support families as they parent some of the most challenging children as we go forward.

From the throne speech, we heard about the new LiveSmart B.C. initiative that will address urban sprawl and reward developments that create more affordable housing, more green spaces and more people-friendly neighbourhoods. All of that is part and parcel of this discussion.

Can we create the neighbourhoods we'd wish to live in and that we would wish to raise our children in? Hugely important. Certainly, there is work to be done as we go forward in terms of what the future looks like.

I've had the absolute privilege to visit StrongStart centres across British Columbia and to be involved in the opening of many of them. The welcome that families receive, the welcome they feel…. Whether they have a brand-new baby or a four-year-old, they're anticipating creating opportunities to ensure their child becomes familiar with that school setting. They're wonderful programs.

The evaluation has certainly been very, very positive as we've gone forward. We have said that as a government, we will institute programs that are measurable, where there's evidence to support their continuation. With StrongStart British Columbia, that evidence is abundantly clear that the programs are very, very important to all as we go forward. There are 84 centres today, 116 anticipated, an additional 200 anticipated in the final year. Hugely important that families feel a sense of welcome in schools.

[1505]

Many of you will know that families and parents have oftentimes had an unsatisfactory school experience themselves. How they are able to put that aside and create a positive environment to bring their child into the school system means that they're beginning a relationship with that child and that school that's going to extend for 12 years. Hugely important that we

[ Page 9940 ]

ensure that those relationships are thoughtful as we go forward.

Everyone who has a child knows the joy of seeing them grow, of having the privilege to bear witness to their growth and their activity. I have two young souls in my life — frankly, both of them almost born in this building as we go forward. My little daughter is eight years old; my son is three. The notion that I would wish for them what I wish for every child in the province of British Columbia — heartfelt. I absolutely want us to have opportunities, that we learn as we go forward how to care not just for our own children but for the children of our neighbours.

A dear mentor of mine, Dan Offord, said: "We will only ever become a civilized society if we learn to care for children other than our own." That means we do have responsibility for the children of our neighbours and communities. The fact that many councils, mayors, school districts are stepping up and paying attention to the issues as we go forward — hugely important, because we are absolutely a government of partnership. I look forward to this partnership evolving across British Columbia.

C. Wyse: It is indeed my pleasure to get up here today on behalf of the riding that I have the privilege to represent, Cariboo South, to analyze the budget as the budget has affected Cariboo South, an interior rural riding. I want to acknowledge my colleague opposite the member for Richmond East, who has given me a very great opportunity to actually introduce my riding to the House by describing the effects of the child care decisions that have been made in this House across the geographical area.

The Chilcotin, for example, which had served out of the Williams Lake office with five first nations groups in it, as a result of funding cuts had to reduce the first nations programs, with their child care, out in that part of the area affecting those five communities as well as the communities of Bella Coola and Bella Bella, which are beyond my riding. So I am not speaking on behalf of the effect of that part.

Then, when I go down to the south end of my riding, which I'm equally proud to represent, with Savona, Cache Creek, Clinton and Ashcroft in it…. They were served out of the Kamloops office. With funding cuts that happened to them, the limited service they received in child care likewise had to be retracted and pulled back in. When I go up to the other part of my riding, the 100 Mile area, which I am also equally responsible for looking after the interests of the budget and the effect upon it…. The service area around greater 100 Mile for child care likewise has been retracted.

When I have looked through the budget and the throne speech, I have looked upon that particular document as it has effect upon my riding. I look forward to discussing with you the effect of that budget upon my riding and the service that is delivered to it.

One of the overriding factors that I would ask all the colleagues here in the House…. In my analysis, I had a budget cut of $220 million that was extended to the oil companies, and I had $328 million of tax that was extended to the oil and gas companies. That's in this year, contained within the budget. That's somewhere in excess of half a billion dollars — $550 million in closer round figures — of service funds that would have been available for the provision of services, all in Cariboo South, if I was doing my job on behalf of that area.

However, in returning to the budget, there is somewhat of an urban focus in it with many of its announcements. Once more, discussions around the expansion of public transit for the lower mainland — good for that. The new Port Mann Bridge again has been mentioned. We've had many previous budgets and announcements around the Olympics that again, from the rural part of the province, we hold no hardships to. However, we do wonder about overruns on convention centres in the hundreds of millions of dollars and whether those funds could not have come back and provided some services in our area.

[1510]

Now, any particular document that is literally tens to hundreds of pages long contains things in it that are worth mentioning and recognizing, and I do wish to start in that area with two or three things that did catch my eye.

One is Jordan's principle. Jordan's principle says that the interests of aboriginal children must always be paramount and that no child on or off reserve should be put at risk due to jurisdictional disputes. I wish to acknowledge and recognize the significance of the government for pursuing that principle. I encourage the government not to talk about it but to actually get on and implement it, to put it in place.

As I have mentioned, I have many first nations communities in my riding that have suffered the effect not only of Jordan's principle but of other reductions in services. So implement the policy. I do recognize the government for bringing it forward. Please get on and implement it.

Likewise, I want to acknowledge the government for dealing with the issue of trans fat by 2010. It's something, for example, that the federal NDP have been attempting to do for a number of years. Good on the government.

Likewise, I recognize the expansion of the responsibility of some health care providers by giving them more tasks to be able to do. That in itself is laudable, but where I'm from, we're dealing with shortages. So giving people more jobs to do when their days are already full begs that side of the argument. But again, recognizing the efforts.

Now, to return to a theme that I have mentioned within the budget: the taxation to banks — credits — and millions of dollars to the oil and gas companies. Cariboo South has two industries that it's quite dependent upon: forestry and agriculture. When I look through the budget, I do not find an awful lot of support for the industries, the communities and the affected workers.

In bringing this forward, this point also needs to be put in context when I'm talking about forestry, because there have been some decisions made by the govern-

[ Page 9941 ]

ment over the last several years that have worsened the situation in forestry. A situation that affects many, many families in Cariboo South.

We had the removal of appurtenancy, which tied the fibre to the area where it was milled. We had the removal of cut control. We've had tenure becoming a tradeable commodity. We've had the removal of the requirement for mill closure review or the 5 percent takeback of tenure and changes in corporate ownership, and the replacement of the Forest Practices Code with the self-policing FRPA. The 20 percent of the annual allowable cut was taken back, and huge compensation was paid to the companies. Log exports have increased.

At the end of that day, with all of those policy changes, where have we ended up? We've ended up with a forest industry that is concentrated corporately in a few dimension lumber producers who are more dependent on the U.S. market.

Last year I was in touch with some communities, with locally elected people, to see what their reaction was to announced mill closures in their area and what assistance they were receiving to have their communities deal with that transition. I spoke, for example, with people from Burns Lake, Okanagan Falls, Fort St. James and Kamloops. There was limited to no support available for these communities going through transition.

[1515]

Once more, there is limited support for transition for those communities, and they are increasing. In Cariboo South we have had announcements of mill closures on a short-term basis and no assurances on when the mills will reopen. But at least there are some assurances that they will be reopened — not like some of these other communities that I've mentioned, where the closure is of a permanent nature.

The budget is silent in this area. It's silent upon an industry that is crucial to the interior of the province and crucial to the Island, and it has been overlooked. When a budget is produced, it is the responsibility to ensure that services are provided across the entire province — geographically, demographically and socially.

As I go through the budget, I will be drawing attention to some of those areas where the budget in actual fact, in my evaluation, falls short.

In the forest industry, what was promised? Trees for Tomorrow. Go into the various communities that are being subjected to these mill closures, where their families are being subjected to that loss, and try and explain to them that what I have to bring back from here in Victoria are Trees for Tomorrow. That leaves me short in defending Balanced Budget 2008.

I've also been advised that the shortage of railcars in my riding being provided — more accurately put, not being provided — by CN is further threatening the closure of other mills that exist here in Cariboo South.

West Chilcotin Forest Products can remain in operation if there is transportation available for them. CN is not providing them cars. They have had three cars provided for their reload this month. Those mills will be shut down. There was no due diligence done when B.C. Rail was sold to ensure that the interests of the communities along the track were looked after.

When we get into an economic situation…. Where normally in forestry there are the steep ups and downs, with these policy changes they have become dramatically steeper, and survival becomes more difficult. But enough on forestry.

I would like to move to agriculture — ranching and farming — which also is a key industry in my area, and talk here in the House of what Balanced Budget 2008 promised them. What was the agriculture industry promised in the budget? Not much. Not much at all. As a matter of fact, when you go through it, you'd almost think that it didn't exist.

[1520]

I've had meetings with ranchers in my riding. They are turning out by the tens, and they are telling me to bring this back to the House — that the situation in ranching and in other farm-producing areas has never been this serious. It has never been this challenged.

We have herds being reduced by 30 percent in order to try and maintain a cash flow. We have meat regulations that are challenging the small-herd raisers — the raisers of lambs, the raisers of poultry — to try and stay alive. There are no places for them in Cariboo South relatively close to be able to take their product in order for them to stay alive — take their product and convert it into the market. The prices are low.

We had my colleagues opposite tour the province for months and put together a report for the agriculture industry that contains some beautiful words. But it contains limited to no support for what matters, and the budget contains no support.

Therefore, we have our neighbours right next door in Alberta, which is in actual fact providing cash support on an interim basis to the ranching industry to try and keep them afloat. I can't tell them that that is coming. It is exceptionally limited, what I am able to tell them is coming, but I would like to share with the House a motion from the B.C. Fruit Growers Association that they have under consideration just so that my colleagues are aware of it.

It says, in paraphrasing it, that the government of B.C. spends approximately 5 percent of the GNP on the support of the agriculture industry. The rest of the province here in British Columbia spends closer to 16 percent. What the agriculture industry is asking me to convey to this House is that support be provided to the agriculture industry at a time of their great need.

Before I leave the agriculture industry with the list of concerns, the aspect of predator and foraging animal control…. The number of conservation officers has been reduced drastically. The issues of predators are of great concern in the Cariboo and the Chilcotin. When they phone to see how to have this problem addressed, personnel is not available. Security of range leases, the pine beetle and the electricity costs are also all having an effect.

Having raised those issues around forestry, the third point in Cariboo South I wish to talk about that is having an effect is first nations and the new relation-

[ Page 9942 ]

ship. The Auditor General has warned the House about concentrating upon few tables. To be on the record, issues in the area of mining and its development in Cariboo South require not the words of the new relationship. It requires moving from the words of the new relationship, which in practice is dealing with the old relationship.

[1525]

In the Chilcotin area there's potential for mining, oil and gas development. But until those issues are in actual fact addressed around first nations and we move beyond the words, the first nations communities say it is not going to happen.

In the area of forestry there needs to be translation from the words of the new relationship into actual practice, moving away from the old relationship, which is still what is being felt in Cariboo South.

Finally, an issue that connects Cariboo South with the lower mainland, and that is solid waste — the dump, the sanitary landfill in Cache Creek. As members of this House are aware, discussions around the possible interior sites being considered for solid waste extensions were removed because first nations would not step forward and say that the issues they have around their sites had in actual fact been addressed in a satisfactory manner. So Metro Vancouver has implemented something else, another plan.

In going through the budget, I come back around and have a look at $220 million given to the banks. I look at $328 million being given to oil and gas. When I see what's going on in Cariboo South, I see other decisions that could have been made and should have been made.

When I look at seniors, the promise of long-term care beds and the fact that it's still not in place…. In my area the oversight for the care for seniors needs to be put into place so that my office is not continually needed to look into providing for that care.

What I did find in the throne speech was: save for your own. We will look into that. We will look for the equivalent of an RRSP plan. So for your care, your home support, save for it so that it will be there should you need it. That leaves lacking those individuals who are not in a financial situation in order to be able to save and be prepared. Nor does it look after our seniors who are already at that point in their life and already require that type of support.

When I looked through the budget, I could not find anything that deals with the issue around minimum wage. Again, when I looked back, there were many examples contained in Balanced Budget 2008 where large corporations were given tax benefits to tens, to hundreds of millions of dollars. But nowhere in the budget could I find money or reference to dealing with issues with the working poor, such as with minimum wage.

Likewise, as I've mentioned in this House on a number of occasions, the provision of paramedics in the rural areas, particularly those with a remote designation, continues to remain understaffed. I continue to get inquiries and reports brought into my office. The effect upon a family that an ambulance was not available in an area covered by a remote because there were not paramedics available for the ambulance to go out….

[1530]

Everyone here in the House knows that when the ambulance arrives at the scene with the two paramedics in it, that situation is a better hospital than you will find in many countries in the world. For a few million dollars…. The training is not in place so that we have the trained paramedics necessary in rural British Columbia to be there in order to take that ambulance out to answer the call.

Again, I compare that to Balanced Budget 2008 with hundreds of millions of dollars going to the banks, going to the oil and gas industry, and I see this shortfall.

In the budget the heavy lifting for the carbon tax has been left to the ordinary Joe and Josephine taxpayers. That is who the heavy lifting has been left to.

Hon. B. Penner: Seventy percent will be paid by business — 30 percent by the individual, 70 percent by business.

C. Wyse: My colleague opposite makes my point. The individual corporations and industries have been given taxation benefits in other parts contained in Budget 2008. I do not disagree with those points, but the heavy lifting is on the backs of those that are financially less able to do such. When you get to the interior of the province, you also find that the options that are available to those individuals for choice within transit and other types of items do not exist.

[K. Whittred in the chair.]

This budget in 2008 has got aspects contained in it that are of importance to rural British Columbia. They are important to interior British Columbia. Balanced Budget 2008 has got gaping holes in it. I guess you'd use the old expression: "You could drive a truck through it."

However, we don't want to mix up a carbon tax with an effective environmental policy. When I go to Budget 2008, I find on page 13 that there are some exemptions to the carbon tax. What do I find? I find oil and gas and I find aluminum as some examples.

The point about the budget is the discrepancy. As I mentioned earlier, a budget, a government, has the responsibility to provide for the entire demographic of the province. It has the responsibility to look after all of the communities contained in it. Budget 2008 is selective, in my judgment. It drives further wedges between British Columbia. It drives further discrepancies of the availability of services being available.

It raises a question. When I look at policies…. It's an item that I will be looking at further in discussion and debate: what possible effect the trade, investment and labour mobility agreement may have upon our ability here in British Columbia to implement a true environment program that is fair to all and actually gets the job done.

[1535]

[ Page 9943 ]

There are organizations that are in actual fact concerned. They are legal organizations — for example, the environmental law society with the University of Victoria, and Ecojustice. Only two examples, but they raise the concerns that government — underneath the trade, investment and labour mobility agreement — in actual fact has lost the ability to implement policies that would effect a true climate change here in British Columbia. Further debate is necessary on that. But I do mention that on page 13 there are industries that are given an exemption.

It raises the question of whether that exemption was philosophically driven or whether it was TILMA-hindered. Further debate will help us determine that.

As I have mentioned, there are parts contained within this budget, where I started off from, that I recognized and gave credit for. But an overlying principle of hundreds of millions of dollars being granted to industry and oil and gas, and with the banks…. It left a large number of issues here in Cariboo South that go wanting — services that would be well appreciated.

With that, Madam Speaker, I thank you for your time, for listening to me. I now eagerly look forward to hear my colleagues on the other side jump up and tell me how much they are in agreement with me.

B. Bennett: Although I maybe didn't jump up, I'm certainly happy to be on my feet in support of the 2008-2009 budget. For the life of me, I can't understand how anybody would be against a budget that increases health care funding, that increases education funding, that increases social services funding, that puts a price on carbon and that reduces taxes for people and businesses. That sounds like almost a perfect budget to me. It's unfortunate that the member who just spoke left, but perhaps he'll have his radio on in his office.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

B. Bennett: I apologize for that. I forgot that I'm not supposed to do that.

The fact that this budget does seem to cover all of the bases. In fact, I described it in my local media as the Premier and the Finance Minister pulling a rabbit out of a hat. It is an amazingly successful and intelligent budget.

That may explain why the opposition didn't ask any questions on it the next day at question period. It was probably a first, I would have to think, in this House — as long as this Legislative Assembly has been here — for the opposition to not even ask a question on the budget in question period the day after. That certainly must be a sign of something.

This was the sixth consecutive balanced budget. Although the members opposite don't seem to care very much whether budgets are balanced or whether governments are fiscally prudent or not, this side of the House does care about that sort of thing.

I'll tell you why we care about that. I'll tell you why we care whether budgets are balanced or not and why we're proud of the fact that this is our sixth consecutive balanced budget: because we have children. The other side has children as well. But they're really not thinking about their children or their grandchildren.

When they added $20 billion to the provincial debt in their ten years of mismanagement….

Interjections.

B. Bennett: Their kids and their grandkids are going to have to pay that debt off. They don't like talking about it. You can hear them from the other side. That really bothers them to hear that because, deep down, they know it's true. They know they blew it for ten years. We're proud that we've been able to balance the budget after a lot of work between 2001 and 2003 by British Columbians. Now it's six years in a row.

We're also proud of the fact that this budget is fiscally responsible. You look around the world, and British Columbia is a beautiful place. It is the best place on earth. That's something I think members on both sides of the House can agree on. But we're a relatively small jurisdiction, and we are subject to the ebbs and flows of what happens elsewhere in the world.

[1540]

Of course, you look south of the border and you see what's happening in the U.S. You've got the sub-prime mortgage market — the worst housing market probably in a hundred years in the U.S. There are signs that they're perhaps going into recession, and there's always an impact on Canada.

In this particular budget our Finance Minister and our Premier did the right thing. They planned for a rainy day. Again, that's not something that members on the other side of the House are particularly familiar with. They don't really plan for a rainy day. They're the kind of government that, you know, whatever cash happens to be in their pocket, it's gone, just like that. But not us. We don't operate that way.

We think about the future, because we know that the economy can change. It goes in cycles. So in this budget there's a forecast allowance of $750 million and a contingency fund of $375 million. That's the way that you should budget.

I think the people of British Columbia are very, very pleased with this government for the way we manage the economy. If the economy happens to take a dip, like it does from time to time, we're going to be okay in this province. We're not going to slide into a deficit the way they did in the 1990s. We're going to be all right. We'll get through it, because we're planning. We're being prudent. We're actually being responsible.

I want to address the climate action portion of the budget. It is groundbreaking, without a doubt. I want to start off by just making a comment in relation to what the member before me said about…. I'm not sure if I can quote him, but I can paraphrase him. I think he said something to the effect that rural British Columbians, somehow or other, are going to be hurt more by the 2.4 cents per litre in carbon tax than folks in the lower mainland.

What I would say in response to that, for that member's benefit, is that he's obviously forgotten that

[ Page 9944 ]

our constituents in rural British Columbia…. Of course, I'm a rural British Columbian, the same as that member for Cariboo South is. Our folks, including us, already pay six cents per litre less for gasoline than the people in the lower mainland do.

I think it's important. I hear some of my colleagues from the lower mainland complaining about that, but I think that's only fair, because we do drive more. We have larger vehicles. We need those larger vehicles. We need the big trucks, and we've got larger distances to go. So I think that's the right thing.

Now, in terms of this revenue-neutral carbon tax and the climate action…. When the legislative Committee on Finance and Government Services travelled the province, we went to 14 different communities. We heard a variety of submissions from people who thought we absolutely had to have a carbon tax in order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. We heard from people that said: "No, we don't need a carbon tax."

But there were some commonalities. There were some things we heard that most people said. One of the things that we heard that came from most people was: "If you are going to levy a carbon tax, try and make it revenue-neutral. Try and make it so that no one sector, whether it be individuals or companies, is penalized more than any other sector. Try and make it revenue-neutral."

Of course, we all know now that this carbon tax is in fact revenue-neutral. I'm very proud of that fact, and I laud the Finance Minister and the Premier for that part of it.

The other thing that we heard in the Finance Committee's travels was to look for other ways to discourage people from activities that cause the emission of greenhouse gases before you levy a carbon tax.

I should say that this government first announced our goals for the reduction of greenhouse gases a year ago, in the throne speech from 2007. Over the course of this past year our government has looked very, very closely at what the best way is to encourage British Columbians, to incent British Columbians to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases.

Frankly, after a year of looking at that and talking to some people that know a lot more about it than I do, the choice was to levy this relatively modest carbon tax but to make it revenue-neutral. So I'm very, very pleased about that, and I support it completely.

[1545]

Health. We've raised the budget for health seven years in a row — seven budgets in a row. I consistently hear from the other side of this House the word "cuts." I know the Health Minister must get awfully tired of hearing this kind of nonsense from the other side in question period. We've raised the budget for Health seven years in a row.

In fact, this year we're putting $2.9 billion, almost $3 billion, of new funding over the next three years on top of $5 billion of new health funding that was already there. Two-thirds of all the new spending in British Columbia by this government will be for Health. That's pretty amazing.

I think the people of British Columbia generally, when they come into contact with the health care system…. If they have surgery or if they have a family member that gets involved with the health care system in this province, in the vast, vast majority of cases I think every member of this House knows they get excellent service and excellent care.

But that does lead to a question. If you're going to put two-thirds of all of the new revenue into health care over the next three years and you're already spending — I don't know if I know the percentage exactly — 44 or 45 percent of our total provincial budget on health care…. If you're going to do that and you're going to keep adding money to the health care budget every year, as we have for seven years in a row, what's that going to lead to?

You have the cost of pharmaceuticals, which is just going through the roof. It seems like every week there's a brand-new drug that is invented somewhere that shows promise of helping people. There isn't a member here that wouldn't want to have that drug listed. Very, very expensive. Sometimes some of these drugs cost tens of thousands of dollars a year for one patient.

Technology. Technology is doing all kinds of marvellous things. Whoever thought that a place the size of Cranbrook would have an MRI, the size of Trail would have access to an MRI? But we do. It's amazing. We have a travelling MRI that we get at the East Kootenay Regional Hospital about three or four months of the year. Whoever would have ever thought that? It's wonderful, but it's expensive.

We never had it at all, of course, during the 1990s. We didn't have much. In fact, the so-called regional hospital located in Cranbrook was actually an embarrassment. If the members on the other side knew how bad health care services were in the East Kootenay during the 1990s, they would be embarrassed.

I remember when I first got elected, and I took a tour of the hospital in Cranbrook. The first place they took me was down into the basement where they have the heating, the air-conditioning, the air circulation, the wiring and that sort of thing. The fellow who was taking me around said that it hadn't been changed — nothing had been updated or modernized — for about 20 years.

Frankly, they didn't even have a standby generator that would be able to run the equipment in the hospital. If they had a power outage in this hospital that the former government was calling a regional hospital, they actually wouldn't have had enough electricity to operate the hospital.

The first thing that our government did right off the bat was put $8 million into, basically, the basement of the hospital in Cranbrook just so we could keep the doors open — so they would have electricity and have air-conditioning and just the very basics. There are a lot of stories like that about how badly our health infrastructure had deteriorated in the 1990s.

Back to the sustainability issue. No government has really wanted to take on the issue of how you make a health care system sustainable. It's fraught with political time bombs, minefields.

[ Page 9945 ]

I know that the minute we start to talk about the need to have a sustainable health care system, which means that we want a health care system that we can afford today and a health care system that our children can afford and our grandchildren will be able to afford…. The minute that we start to talk about sustainability, the other side of the House will start shouting out things like: "Oh, that's privatization. That's a terrible thing. It's privatization, and we can't talk about that. We just have to keep plowing more and more new money in there."

They don't care whether that's going to bankrupt their kids. They don't care whether their kids are going to be able to afford that or not.

[1550]

In this budget we put $300 million into a transformation fund. We've listened to people through the….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Members, I have been extremely patient, acknowledging that a certain degree of banter is part of the culture of this institution. However, each member deserves the right to have his remarks heard and listened to by all other members in the House.

Continue, Member.

B. Bennett: You know, when I was a kid, there was always a kid on the playground that liked to push you around, liked to poke you, liked to crack jokes about you and all that sort of thing. But often those kids couldn't take it if you pushed back. They couldn't take it if you maybe played a little joke on them. I'm afraid, Madam Speaker, there's a certain amount of that mentality on the other side of this House. They really don't like hearing the truth about their record.

We're headed into an election. It's not that far off. I'll tell you, for one, I'm really looking forward to it. I can hardly wait. It's going to be a good election. I'm going to fight hard, and we're going to win.

I think the people of the province want to know what it would be like…. And dare I say this on the record, in Hansard ? I'll probably be struck down. Dare I say it? What would happen if the opposition was elected to government?

Well, I think the best way to determine what that would be like would be to look at their history, to look at their record. How did they do in the 1990s? So occasionally people like myself will stand up, and other members, other colleagues on this side will stand up and we'll refer back to the record of the NDP in the 1990s.

I know they don't like it, and I really don't mean to be personal. I really don't. I like several of the members on the other side. It's not personal. But, you know, I worry about the people of the province. I worry about the kids, and I worry about the future of this province. We can't let people forget just how badly they mismanaged this province for ten years.

Now, the previous speaker from Cariboo South mentioned forestry. I think he said something about "nothing in the budget for forestry." I would remind that member and other members on the other side of the House that this government has invested an awful lot of money in rural areas of the province that do depend on forestry.

In my region, Southern interior trust — $50 million out there is being spent in our local communities. The north coast trust has $50 million. They're doing the same thing there. The Northern Trust — $185 million that they're investing in communities in the north, exactly in the centre of the pine beetle.

Geoscience B.C. got another $12 million in this budget that we're debating here today. That will be added….

Interjection.

B. Bennett: Another member just reminded me that the new $12 million that's going into Geoscience B.C. will be focused on the pine beetle area in the province, and that runs right through the Cariboo region and up towards and past Prince George. So the member for Cariboo South should take some hope, I think, from that. If indeed he supports mining, mining will definitely be able to supply some new jobs, good jobs for people in his region in the future.

In this budget we also reduced the school tax rate, which will make a big difference for pulp mills. It will make a big difference for sawmills and for some mines.

The Premier and the Forests Minister have also created the working round table on forestry.

You know, actually about a week ago, I think, we debated in this House whether or not the softwood agreement should be terminated. The NDP has suggested that they might like to terminate the softwood agreement.

With all due respect, forest-dependent communities right now are suffering from a triple whammy. They've got the highest Canadian dollar we've had in decades and decades. They've got the worst housing market in the U.S., which is our largest traditional customer for softwood lumber — a terrible housing market in the U.S. Then, of course, they've got this 15 percent duty under the softwood agreement.

The NDP seems to be suggesting…. Perhaps I don't understand their point here, but they seem to be suggesting that we should terminate that softwood agreement and go back to 30 percent duty.

[1555]

So we would terminate the agreement that was negotiated by Canada, because of course, this is a national treaty. We'd terminate that, based on what the opposition is suggesting, and go from a 15 percent duty to a 30 percent duty. I just can't for the life of me understand how that's going to help communities like Cranbrook and Mackenzie and other forest-dependent communities.

The member for Cariboo South also mentioned agriculture. I want, particularly for that member…. I know he's very sincere, and I know that he has a lot of agriculture in his riding. So for his benefit and the benefit of anyone else who has agriculture in their

[ Page 9946 ]

riding, the ministry under the leadership of the member for Prince George North has an agricultural plan that has a wildlife mitigation and compensation program.

This government is putting $4 million of provincial public money into that wildlife mitigation and compensation program, and that's going to be leveraged up to $10 million by federal money. Apparently the member for Carib