British Columbia Hansard — Wednesday, September 21, 2005

H0921pm-12

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

First Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Wednesday, September 21, 2005 Afternoon Sitting Volume 1, Number 12 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Iona V. Campagnolo, CM, OBC FIRST SESSION, 38TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations .......................................................................................................... Hon.

John van Dongen Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation .......................................................................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ..........................................................................................................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Bill Bennett Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon. Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services .......................................................................................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General................................................................................................................................Hon.

John Les Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Deregulation ...................................................... Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sports and the Arts........................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................Sindi Hawkins Assistant Deputy Speaker.....................................................................................................................................................................Sue Hammell Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole.................................................................................................................................................

Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .........................................................................................................................E. George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant.........................................................................................................................................................................................Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .......................................................................................................................................................Ian D.

Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees ....................................................................................................................................... Craig H. James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk ..........................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................................................................Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian ..................................................................................................................................................................................Jane Taylor Acting Legislative Comptroller..................................................................................................................................................Brent Cunningham

Party Standings: Liberal 46; New Democratic 33 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ..........................................................................Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP)...................................................................................Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP)....................................................................... Surrey-Newton Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)...............................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Hon. Pat (L) ..................................................................Prince George North Bennett, Hon.

Bill (L) .....................................................................East Kootenay Black, Iain (L) ..................................................................Port Moody–Westwood Bloy, Harry (L).....................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).......................................... Prince George–Mount Robson Brar, Jagrup (NDP)..........................................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L) ..............................................

Vancouver–Point Grey Cantelon, Ron (L)................................................................... Nanaimo-Parksville Chong, Hon. Ida (L) ......................................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Christensen, Hon. Tom (L) ...................................................... Okanagan-Vernon Chudnovsky, Dave (NDP).................................................Vancouver-Kensington Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ..........................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon.

Rich (L)................................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) ............................................... West Kootenay–Boundary Coons, Gary (NDP) .............................................................................North Coast Cubberley, David (NDP)................................................................. Saanich South de Jong, Hon.

Michael (L) ........................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Dix, Adrian (NDP) ..............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Evans, Corky (NDP)......................................................................Nelson-Creston Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) ............................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ....................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Fleming, Rob (NDP) ...................................................................Victoria-Hillside Fraser, Scott (NDP) ...................................................................Alberni-Qualicum Gentner, Guy (NDP)............................................................................ Delta North Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ......................................................................Comox Valley Hammell, Sue (NDP) ........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Hon. Colin (L) .......................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Hawes, Randy (L)............................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Sindi (L) .................................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ..................................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Gordon (L)................................................................... Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP)...........................................................

Malahat–Juan de Fuca Horning, Al (L)................................................................ Kelowna–Lake Country Ilich, Hon. Olga (L)....................................................................Richmond Centre James, Carole (NDP)............................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Jarvis, Daniel (L)........................................................North Vancouver–Seymour Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) .................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Krog, Leonard (NDP)..............................................................................

Nanaimo Krueger, Kevin (L)................................................... Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)................................ Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lali, Harry (NDP)..............................................................................Yale-Lillooet Lee, Richard T. (L).........................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................... Peace River South Les, Hon. John (L)....................................................................

Chilliwack-Sumas Macdonald, Norm (NDP)......................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke MacKay, Dennis (L)......................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine Mayencourt, Lorne (L)............................................................Vancouver-Burrard McIntyre, Joan (L)...................................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) ....................................................... Peace River North Nuraney, John (L)..................................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Oppal, Hon.

Wally, QC (L)............................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Penner, Hon. Barry (L)................................................................ Chilliwack-Kent Polak, Mary (L) ......................................................................................... Langley Puchmayr, Chuck (NDP)........................................................... New Westminster Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ...................................................................Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ..................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon.

Claude (L)...................................................................Kamloops Robertson, Gregor (NDP) .....................................................Vancouver-Fairview Roddick, Valerie (L)............................................................................ Delta South Routley, Doug (NDP).......................................................... Cowichan-Ladysmith Rustad, John (L) ..............................................................Prince George–Omineca Sather, Michael (NDP)..............................................

Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ........................................ Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (NDP).......................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ......................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Sultan, Ralph (L) .........................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Taylor, Hon. Carole (L)..........................................................

Vancouver-Langara Thorne, Diane (NDP) ......................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L)............................................................Okanagan-Westside Trevena, Claire (NDP) .......................................................................North Island van Dongen, Hon. John (L)..................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Whittred, Katherine (L).............................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wyse, Charlie (NDP) ......................................................................Cariboo South Yap, John (L)........................................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn ........................................................ Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman................................................Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum ...............................................................................

Scott Fraser Bulkley Valley–Stikine ................................................................ Dennis MacKay Burnaby North................................................................................ Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................. Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Willingdon ........................................................................John Nuraney Burquitlam............................................................................................

Harry Bloy Cariboo North....................................................................................Bob Simpson Cariboo South................................................................................... Charlie Wyse Chilliwack-Kent ....................................................................... Hon. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas ........................................................................... Hon.

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke ......................................................Norm Macdonald Comox Valley .............................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville................................................................... Diane Thorne Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................................Doug Routley Delta North........................................................................................

Guy Gentner Delta South...................................................................................Valerie Roddick East Kootenay ............................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin ............................................................. Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove....................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ......................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson..........................................................

Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country .......................................................................Al Horning Kelowna-Mission ............................................................................Sindi Hawkins Langley................................................................................................

Mary Polak Malahat–Juan de Fuca........................................................................John Horgan Maple Ridge–Mission ......................................................................Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows...........................................................Michael Sather Nanaimo ...........................................................................................Leonard Krog Nanaimo-Parksville..........................................................................

Ron Cantelon Nelson-Creston.................................................................................. Corky Evans New Westminster ........................................................................Chuck Puchmayr North Coast .........................................................................................Gary Coons North Island.................................................................................... Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ....................................................

Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................. Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head.................................................................Hon. Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon ..............................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside................................................................... Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North ...............................................................Hon.

Richard Neufeld Peace River South ..........................................................................Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley...................................................... Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain................................................. Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Westwood .........................................................................Iain Black Powell River–Sunshine Coast.....................................................Nicholas Simons Prince George North .........................................................................Hon.

Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................. Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca .....................................................................John Rustad Richmond Centre .......................................................................... Hon. Olga Ilich Richmond East ............................................................................ Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ............................................................................... John Yap Saanich North and the Islands..................................................Hon.

Murray Coell Saanich South..............................................................................David Cubberley Shuswap ................................................................................ Hon. George Abbott Skeena ...............................................................................................Robin Austin Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................................Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers.....................................................................

Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ....................................................................................Harry Bains Surrey–Panorama Ridge...................................................................... Jagrup Brar Surrey-Tynehead .............................................................................Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ............................................................................... Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock..........................................................................

Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard .................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview.................................................................. Gregor Robertson Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Vancouver-Hastings...................................................................... Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington ........................................................... David Chudnovsky Vancouver-Kingsway...........................................................................

Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara.................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey..................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena ............................................................. Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill ........................................................................Carole James Victoria-Hillside................................................................................

Rob Fleming West Kootenay–Boundary ............................................................ Katrine Conroy West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................... Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi............................................................. Joan McIntyre Yale-Lillooet ..........................................................................................Harry Lali

CONTENTS Wednesday, September 21, 2005 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ................................................ 223 Introduction and First Reading of Bills........................................................................................ ........................................... 224 Northern Development Initiative Trust Amendment Act, 2005 (Bill 6) North Island-Coast Development Initiative Trust Act (Bill 7) Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust Act (Bill 8) Hon.

C. Hansen Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2005 (Bill 9) Hon. K. Falcon Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ............... 225 Langley Family Services M. Polak First nations and mountain pine beetle strategy B. Simpson Mining industry in B.C. D. MacKay Events in Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows area M. Sather Union of B.C. Municipalities R. Hawes International Day of Peace G.

Gentner Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ........................................................... 227 Funding of aboriginal planning committees for child and family services C. James Hon. S. Hagen Funding for aboriginal child protection on Vancouver Island S. Fraser Hon. S. Hagen Review of death of Sherry Charlie J. Horgan Hon. W. Oppal M. Karagianis R. Fleming L. Krog J. Kwan Hon. S. Hagen Independence of child and youth officer D. Thorne Hon. W. Oppal M. Farnworth Aquaculture on north coast G. Coons Hon. P.

Bell Tabling Documents.............................................................................................................. ...................................................... 232 Property Assessment Appeal Board, annual report, 2004 Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ..................................................... 232 Supply Act (No. 2), 2005 (Bill 5) Hon. C. Taylor J. Kwan J. Horgan

Budget Debate (continued)............................................................................................................................... .......................... 236 J. Brar G. Robertson H. Bloy S. Fraser Hon. S. Bond

223 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 The House met at 2:02 p.m. Prayers. Introductions by Members C. James: It is my joy — no pun intended — to in- troduce our guest here in the Legislature today — a guest that, in fact, needs no introduction: a former leader of our party, a former MLA for Vancouver- Hastings, and someone whose presence will always be felt in this House. I just want to reassure the members on the other side — to let you know that I did talk to her about the new kind of tone in the Legislature be- fore she came in today. So I would like all of us to please give a warm welcome to Joy MacPhail. An Hon.

Member: Exactly. Hon. G. Campbell: Actually, that's exactly what I was going to say to the Leader of the Opposition. I recognize also that former Premier Dan Miller joins us today. It is important for both Mr. Miller and Ms. MacPhail, who when they were sitting on this side of the House were very aggressive, to know those are the quiet seats for today. I should say on behalf of this side of the House that in spite of the fact that we often had disagreements, we recognize the contributions that both of them have made, and we hope that they'll come back regularly. B.

Simpson: On behalf of my colleague the mem- ber for Cariboo South, I would like to welcome Rob Taylor today. Rob is a grades four and five teacher from Nesika Elementary in Williams Lake, and he's also a member of the BCTF Professional Issues Advi- sory Committee. I would like the members of the House to make Rob feel welcome. [1405] Hon. B. Bennett: In the House today there are ap- proximately 95 representatives from B.C.'s mining indus- try. I won't introduce all of them. From the Mining Asso- ciation of B.C.: the chairman, Mr. Terry Lyons; the presi- dent and CEO, Mr. Michael McPhie.

We have some repre- sentatives from the mining supply companies. There's Dave Sharples from Transwest Mining, Gerry West of Molycop Canada and Penny Alms from B.C. Bearing. W e h a v e a l s o w i t h u s from mining communities Councillor Roy Grant from Campbell River, Mayor Jack Peake from Lake Cowichan and some first nations representatives: Chief Gerry Asp; Chief Robert Pollard; Jodie Dick, who's from the Campbell River band; and Chief Stan Dixon from the Se chelt Indian band. Please help me make all these folks welcome. H. Lali: Visiting us in the gallery today is Rick Fergu- son from Merritt.

Rick Ferguson is a good friend of mine. He's also been past president of the Nicola Valley Teach- ers Union there. Presently he is teaching at the directed studies school in Merritt. Would the House please give a warm Victoria welcome to my friend Rick Ferguson. Hon. G. Abbott: It's my pleasure today to introduce to the House Dr. Don Nixdorf, who is the executive director of the B.C. Chiropractic Association. I under- stand that Mr. Nixdorf has held that position for some 20 years, and I'd like the House to make him welcome. D.

Cubberley: With us today in the gallery is Ann- Louise McFarland, who is a resident of my constituency, Saanich South. She is a French immersion teacher and department head at Stelly's Secondary, which members know was recently named as one of the top ten schools in Canada on the Maclean's list. She is also a member of the BCTF Professional Issues Advisory Committee and co- chair of the provincial specialist association. Would the House join me in making her welcome today. R. Lee : Today I would like to introduce the Interna- tional Presidents and Directors of ISE Cards.

They have travelled from the U.S.A., Spain, Korea and Australia to be here with us today. ISE Cards is an international student exchange iden- tity card which maintains membership with a variety of organizations dedicated to assisting students and full-time faculty members in a variety of ways, including travel and emergency medical support. Memberships include the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, and it's a supporter of UNICEF.

Would the House please jo in me in welcoming Franz Jost, Cammi Hawker, Niles Hawker, Shawnna Wishman, Sarah Horton, Ignazio Imaz, Richard Weibelzahl, Allyson Weibelzahl, Joon Sung Han, Sunhee Kang and Andrew Piercey. N. Macdonald: It's my pleasure to introduce to you a fellow resident of Columbia River–Revelstoke and a fellow educator. Bob Wilson is here to speak with members on education issues as a representative of the BCTF. I know him as a long-time-serving member of the Golden Teachers Association Professional Development Committee. Would the House join me in making him feel welcome, please. B.

Lekstrom: It is certainly a day full of introductions. It's my pleasure today to welcome a guest from the won- derful riding of Peace River South and my hometown of Dawson Creek. Charlene Hodgson is down all the way from the beautiful Peace country. Will the House please make her welcome. D. Routley: Visiting us in the House today are mem- bers from the Cowichan Valley Red Hat Belles Society. I would like the House to join me in making them welcome. [1410] G. Hogg: We have two special guests in the House today. One is special not just because he's from Surrey, but he's celebrating his birthday today.

What better way to celebrate your birthday than to come to the

224 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 House and to bring your mother? Would the House please welcome Kevin Wilson and his mother Sherrill Wilson from Calgary. D. Chudnovsky: I've noticed a number of other teach- ers in the House today — three people who have given great service to the children of B.C. and are also very good friends of mine. Would the House please welcome Michael Schratter, Marion Runcie and Geoff Peters. Hon. P. Bell: It's such a joy to see all of our friends from the mining industry here today. It bring s bac k m any fond memories.

But of particular note, from Prince George, I'd like to welcome David Livingston to the House. Would the House please join me in making him welcome. C. Evans: On behalf of our leader and the opposition caucus, I'd like to express our welcome to the members of the Mining Association. Thanks for the visit we had ear- lier today. As a representative from towns like Kaslo, Silverton, New Denver and Nelson, which would not exist without the mining industry, I'd like to say thanks for helping me get a job. Hon. M. de Jong: In the gallery today is a friend of mine, Alice Ethier.

Some 40 years ago she had the good fortune to give birth to a son David and the misfortune to have to put up with his friends for the next 20 or 30 years. She's here with the Red Hatters group. I hope members will make her and her group feel very welcome. Also, I notice in the House today — he was here a cou- ple of days ago, and we neglected to draw that to members' attention — a certain legislative officer, Mr. H.A.D. Oliver, the Conflict-of-Interest Commissioner. He is one individual that none of us wants to offend.

I would like to welcome him here and thank him for his years of service and contin- ued service to all members of the House. J. Horgan: I realize the Premier has already made this introduction, but I didn't want to miss the opportunity to say that the first time I was in this House, I was passing notes to the former member for North Coast to make him look good. Now I see him here today, and I'm hopeful it's not for him to pass me notes for the same reason. Good to see you. Mr. Speaker: Anybody who failed to be introduced, I'd like to welcome you.

Introduction and First Reading of Bills NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE TRUST AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Northern Development Initiative Trust Amendment Act, 2005. Hon. C. Hansen: Mr. Speaker, I move that Bill 6 be introduced and read for a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. C. Hansen: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 6, the Northern Development Initiative Trust Amendment Act, 2005. With this bill the northern development ini- tiative trust legislation is being amended to improve the initiative's public accountability and governance.

Provision is made to include agriculture within the sectors eligible to receive development funding through the initiative's cross- regional account. The bill also enables $50 million in additional northern devel- opment initiative funding, which includes $30 million for recovery projects to help northern communities mitigate the effects of the mountain pine beetle infesta- tion and $20 million divided equally amongst the four northern development initiative regional accounts lo- cated in the Peace, Prince George, northwest and the Cariboo-Chilcotin-Lillooet regions for development projects.

The government has made it a priority to help di- versify the economy of northern British Columbia through the northern development initiative. The in- vestments that northern British Columbians make with the moneys will help to generate economic growth in northern B.C. for many generations to come. [1415] I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 6, Northern Development Initiative Trust Amendment Act, 2005, introd uced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for sec- ond reading at the next sitting of the House after today. NORTH ISLAND-COAST DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE TRUST ACT Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Hon- our the Administrator: a bill intituled North Island- Coast Development Initiative Trust Act. Hon. C. Hansen: I m o v e t h a t B i l l 7 b e i n t r o d u c e d and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. C.

Hansen: I am pleased to introduce Bill 7, the North Island-Coast Development Initiative Trust Act. The bill establishes a new $50 mi llion trust independent of government for communities located north of the Malahat on Vancouver Island and on the Sunshine Coast. Its purpose is to support strategic investments in regional priorities to incr ease economic growth and create more jobs for families.

Under the act the trust will function as a corporation with regional advisory committees and a trust board to manage and adminis- ter the regional account to support investment in the following areas: forestry, tr ansportation, tourism, min- ing, Olympic opportunities, small business, economic development, energy and agriculture.

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 225 The government funding provision to the north island–coast development initiative is a one-time allo- cation of $50 million. The new trust is about giving communities the resources and tools they want to pur- sue their priorities. The resi dents of Vancouver Island and the Sunshine Coast will have control of the initia- tive. They will identify the opportunities and make decisions, and they will reap the economic benefits with more jobs and a stronger sustainable economy. M r .

S p e a k e r , I m o v e t h a t t h e b i l l b e p l a c e d o n o r - ders of the day for second re ading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill 7, North Island-Coast Development Initiative Trust Act, 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. SOUTHERN INTERIOR DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE TRUST ACT Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust Act. Hon. C.

Hansen: I m o v e t h a t B i l l 8 b e i n t r o d u c e d and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. C. Hansen: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 8, which is the Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust Act. With this bill we are delivering on our commitment to establish a $50 million development initiative trust independent of government for communities located in the southern interior. This government funding provi- sion is also a one-time allocation of $50 million to help the southern interior create regional economic growth and jobs based on local priorities.

It is the southern interior communities who will invest in, manage and leverage the funds to the benefit of their region. Under the act, the trust will function free of politi- cal interference as a corporation with regional advisory committees and a trust board, as was the case in the other fund, and again, to provide support in invest- ments in the same areas: fo restry, transportation, tour- ism, mining, Olympic opportunities, small business, economic development, energy and agriculture.

The southern interior development initiative is part of a series of new measures to re-invest $300 million into oppor- tunities across British Columbia. The economic investments made by the southern interior communities through the initiative trust will generate significant economic growth throughout this region for many generations to come. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 8, Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust Act, 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. [1420] GREATER VANCOUVER TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 Hon. K. Falcon presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amend- ment Act, 2005. Hon. K. Falcon: Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. K.

Falcon: Today I'm introducing Bill 9, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amend- ment Act, 2005. Amendments contained in this act help TransLink implement its stra tegic transportation plan. TransLink was created in 1998 and is responsible for the provision of public tran sportation infrastructure and services in the Greater Vancouver Regional Dis- trict.

The Greater Vancouve r Transportation Authority Act, which is TransLink's enabling legislation, also introduced in 1998, provides for a variety of revenue sources for TransLink, including a parking-area tax, all of which support public transit operations and system improvements. In 2003 TransLink approa ched the province and asked that the parking-area tax provisions of the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Act be amended to correct deficiencies in authority, structure and process contained in the original act when enacted in 1998.

To do this, certain amendments were enacted last fall creating a parking site role for B.C. Assessment. The remaining amendments contained in Bill 9 com- plete the legal framework necessary for TransLink to proceed with the implementa tion of the parking-area tax at their discretion. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 9, Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2005, introd uced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for sec- ond reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) LANGLEY FAMILY SERVICES M. Polak: Today I want to tell the members of the House about a wonderful organization in the riding of Langley, which I serve, that has had the opportunity to take a terrible tragedy in the summer, and by now, in the fall, turn it into a real triumph.

226 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 On June 23 my cell phone went off about seven in the morning and a very frazzled president of Langley Family Services advised me that the main building in their complex was, at that moment, burning to the ground.

I hopped in my car, looking a little bit dishev- e l l e d , a n d m a d e i t o u t t o f i n d a g r o u p o f u s s t a n d i n g around looking at the destruction and realizing that that morning there would be a large number of families and other people in need who would be looking for the con- tinued services that Langley Family Services provides.

In fact, for the past 24 years Langley Family Ser- vices has been providing counselling and support to families in the Langley area with a wide range of ser- vices, such as ESL and multicultural programs, drug addiction counselling and a very popular family place drop-in centre.

I'm pleased to report to the House that within a few short hours the president, the board of directors and the executive director of Langley Family Services had acted q u i c k l y e n o u g h t h a t b y t h e e n d o f t h a t d a y t h e y h a d a location where they could operate, and they were begin- ning to raise funds within the community. Working to- gether with the Ministry of Children and Family Devel- o p m e n t , t h i s g o v e r n m e n t w a s a b l e t o s t e p i n w i t h a n emergency grant of $37,928 to help with that recovery.

They have now launched a major fundraising drive for $500,000 by selling bricks that they hope to resem- ble the rebuilding that will take place on their site. I hope they have the best success possible with their fundraising efforts. I'm confident the community of Langley is behind them and that they will succeed. I hope the House would congratulate them on taking a tragedy and indeed turning it into a triumph. FIRST NATIONS AND MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE STRATEGY B.

Simpson: T h i s p a s t M o n d a y t h e h o n . m e m b e r for Alberni-Qualicum and I were privileged to attend the first nations conference on the mountain pine beetle epidemic in Prince George. The major impetus for the Carrier Sekani tribal council to convene this emergency forum was the provincial government's failure to con- sult with them on the government's plan for the spend- ing of the $100 million in federal funds.

Rather than consulting with them on what the money might be used for, the provincial government came to the tribal council with a draft plan which had little to offer first nations communities in direct assistance.

Therefore, one of the major objectives of the first nations emergency forum was to: "provide immediate recommendations on the provincial government's draft plan for the $100 million in federal aid." [1425] Unfortunately for the 69 nations and eight first na- tions organizations' representatives who gathered in good faith to develop these recommendations, the gov- ernment announced its plan for the federal $100 million on Monday morning, a mere two hours into the forum. B.C.'s first nations are deeply concerned about the spiritual, economic and community impacts of the cur- rent mountain pine beetle infestation.

They have a unique perspective with which to frame an appropriate response, a perspective steeped in history which takes a longer view of our relati onship with the ecosystems upon which we all depend, a perspective which must be heard and must be incorporated into any actions we take to address the impacts of this forest health chal- lenge. The emergency forum wrapped up yesterday with commitments from members of this government that first nations will now be listened to and supported in their endeavours to address the mountain pine beetles' impacts on their communities.

I was happy to attend this confer- ence with my colleague from Alberni-Qualicum and to be able to give those gathered our assurance that the entire opposition caucus will be hearing their voices and echo- ing them back to this government. MINING INDUSTRY IN B.C. D. MacKay: One of the five great goals of this B.C. Liberal government is to create more jobs per capita than anywhere else in Canada. We have done that. More jobs means a stronger B.C. economy to support our communities and families. Under the NDP gov- ernment during the '90s the mining industry was decimated.

During that time the number of mining jobs in the province was cut in ha lf, and for every mine that was opened in B.C., two closed. This government will not allow the mining indus- try to fall back to such a deplorable state. To help the mining industry move forward, this Liberal govern- ment unveiled the B.C. mining plan. The mining plan is based on four cornerstones: a focus on aboriginals and communities, protection of workers and the environ- ment, and increasing both global competitiveness and access to land. Mining is a $4.5 billion industry that employs 25,500 British Columbians.

For some small and rural towns the mining industry is a dominant part of the local economies. Furthermore, mining is among the safest heavy industries, having the best safety record in B.C. for eight of the past ten years. Today, Wednesday, September 21, is Mining Day. We will be meeting with industry representatives later. I urge everyone to take advantage of this opportunity to move the mining industry forward in British Columbia. Mr. Speaker: I want to remind members that we want to be as non-partisan as possible in these two- minute statements. EVENTS IN MAPLE RIDGE– PITT MEADOWS AREA M.

Sather: In a non-partisan vein, Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows are just wrapping up their 101 days of summer celebration. This celebration, which is organ- ized by Tourism Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows, fea- tures 101 events and ideas to do during June 17 to Sep- tember 25. On September 17 the Meadow Ridge Rotary

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 227 Club held their tenth annual wine festival, featuring over 60 fine wines, paired with cuisine from top local chefs. Included were wines from our very own Blue Heron Winery. Also on September 17 the Pitt Meadows Family Recreation Centre, which is celebrating its fifth anni- versary this year, held the first annual spin relay for athletes in kind. This fundra iser goes to support fami- lies battling cancer. Like many communities ar ound the nation, we, too, held our annual Terry Fox Run on September 18.

Ac- cording to organizers, this year's run was the most suc- cessful to date in terms of runners registered and money raised. B.C. Rivers Day is a big celebration in our community. There are celebrations taking place on September 25 at Elko and Kanaka Creek regional parks. That day will also mark the official start of the Whonnock Fall Fair. [1430] Cranberry Day will be celebrated on October 8 at the Meadows Maze. This celebration marks the gather- ing of the last berries of the season. The Meadows M a z e i s a c o r n m a z e o u t i n P i t t M e a d o w s . I t ' s a b i g tourist attraction.

Please do come out and see it. Finally, fall would not be the same in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows without our traditional pumpkin patch. The Laity pumpkin patch will be open from Oc- tober 1 to 31, and Heather and Don Laity do a great job. It's a wonderful rural event that you can take advan- t a g e o f , e v e n i f y o u l i v e i n t h e c i t y o f V a n c o u v e r . W e welcome you to all come out and get your pumpkin. UNION OF B.C. MUNICIPALITIES R. Hawes: This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

There are many mem- bers on both sides of the House who have served at the municipal level as mayors, councillors, regional district chairs and regional district directors. Every single one of us knows the value of UBCM to the people of this prov- ince. Our Premier served as the president of UBCM in 1992-1993 and, along with all former presidents, has been honoured with a lifetime membership. Each year UBCM holds its annual convention, bringing together elected officials from across the prov- ince to debate resolutions and share ideas.

Local issues are discussed in meetings between members of cabinet and municipal officials, an d there is a much broader exchange and discussion of ideas and policy between provincial and municipal governments. This year's convention will be held in Vancouver next week, during which the 100th anniversary will be celebrated. For me personally, this is my 14th conven- tion, and after attending from both the municipal and provincial perspective, I understand firsthand the value of UBCM to both levels of government.

Just a few of the achievements of UBCM are recog- nition of local government as an order of government, a first in Canada; the Community Charter; a variable tax rate system; MIA, or the Municipal Insurance Asso- ciation of B.C., which was founded under UBCM; three-year election cycles; the Premier's directive that Crown corporations will respect local zoning and land use bylaws; and a 20-year RCMP contract renewal. Those are just a few of the many accomplishments of UBCM.

I want to congratulate UBCM on its 100th anniver- sary, and I look forward to meeting next week with many of my former municipal colleagues and friends, just as many members in this House are. I know that this year, like other years, will yield great progress in building a better British Columbia for all the citizens of this province. INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEACE G. Gentner: Today has been identified by the United Nations as International Day of Peace. United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan is calling for the worldwide observance of a 24-hour ceasefire and a day of non-violence.

The International Day of Peace was first established in 1981 by the UN to coincide with its opening session every September. Today observances are being con- ducted by United Nations offices, general government and non-governmental agencies worldwide, civil socie- ties and religious groups to promote the ideals of peace and non-violence. In British Columbia we are somewhat detached from the horrors of global violence. Yes, TV has brought home hostilities from abroad to our living rooms, but we observe only a tiny broadcast of what really is happening.

For example, Africa, the forgotten continent, is undergoing atrocities of nightmarish pro- portions. The Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia, Northern Uganda, Mozambique, Malawi and Congo — one of the richest resource nations on earth, I may add — all wit- ness daily the carnage of villages, rapes, terrorized chil- dren forced into camps and into battle, torture, unspeak- able human rights violations and yes, even western- supported assassinations.

I ask the members to indulge for just one moment in acknowledging today as the International Day of Peace. [1435] Oral Questions FUNDING OF ABORIGINAL PLANNING COMMITTEES FOR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES C. James: Can the Minister of Children and Family Development tell us what impact a 66-percent reduc- tion for the aboriginal planning committees has had on their ability to oversee and plan for child welfare in their communities? Hon. S.

Hagen: I'm very thankful that I have an excellent aboriginal planning committee that offers me advice on all issues that we deal with involving abo- riginal children and their families. I can tell you that we

228 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 are working very closely with the regional authorities to make sure that they have the resources they need. My deputy is in contact, as we speak, with the author- ity that I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition is refer- ring to, to see if we can work out the differences that we have. But having said that, I me t just within the last two weeks with a very senior level of advisory folks from the aboriginal community. I would like to tell the House and the province of British Columbia that the relationship has never been better. C.

James: I'd just like to provide more information to the minister in case he's not aware of this. In March of last year your government wrote to the aboriginal planning committee chairs and informed them that their transition budget in 2004 would be "significantly reduced." How does that build a good relationship? The effect was a 66-percent reduction for those plan- ning committees. So again, I would like to ask the minister: was he aware that the aboriginal planning committees had had their budgets cut by 66 percent? Hon. S. Hagen: The budget increa se for the family accord is $105,000 for the year '05-06. Mr.

Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a fur- ther supplemental. C. James: That doesn't make up for the cuts that that minister, from his ministry, included in a letter to the aboriginal chairs. So I'd like to try a different ap- proach then. In 2002 in September the Premier signed a memoran- dum of understanding with aboriginal communities on child welfare. I certainly remember that meeting, having been there. I'm sure the Premier remembers that meeting as well.

I'd like to quote from that agreement: "Aboriginal communities require support, including the necessary capacity and resources to en able them to develop and deliver a full range of child and family services." As we heard in the letter to aboriginal planning committees, the Premier has reneged on that commit- ment. So I'd like to ask the Premier: how can he have confidence that the children won't be put at risk be- cause of his government's budget cuts? Hon. S. Hagen: The accord that the Leader of the Opposition is speaking about is one that we're now looking at renewing. But you know what?

We have a new relationship with first nations now and the abo- riginal community around the province, and that's what's driving us. We're totally committed to working with the aboriginal community with regard to children and families and all other issues — education, health care. We are working more closely with that commu- nity than ever before. We just announced a huge amount of money in the new budget for working with first nations to help them build capacity. So that work is ongoing. It's a work in progress; it's not a light switch you turn on and off.

We're working together with the aboriginal community to get to the goals that we've set. FUNDING FOR ABORIGINAL CHILD PROTECTION ON VANCOUVER ISLAND S. Fraser: Again to the minister. The budget for the aboriginal transition committee on Vancouver Island has been cut by two-thirds. What evidence can the min- ister provide that shows the cuts won't hurt aboriginal child welfare on Vancouver Island? Hon. S. Hagen: As I've said previously, we're working together with all of the regions to make sure that we have a plan and to make sure that we have the resources to carry out that plan. Mr.

Speaker: The member has a supplemental. [1440] S. Fraser: Maybe I was not clear, Mr. Speaker. To the minister: there is no evidence shown, because quality child welfare is not a priority. On Vancouver Island the ministry's own budget, including child protection, was hit very hard. Overall, a $90 million budget was cut over the three years. We've just found out that on Vancouver Island we're going to suffer another million-dollar loss in the next few months. That's creating chaos. There are too few front-line workers, and there are too many files.

Will the minister get his priorities straight and al- low an investigation into the impact that these cuts are having on the people in my communities? Hon. S. Hagen: I want to assure the people of Brit- ish Columbia that the item that's the top of mind for me and at the top of my agen da is child protection for the children who I'm responsible for. This ministry's budget over the next three years is being increased by $138 million. I would draw the member's attention to our three-year moving servic e plan. We have a plan in place. We have the resources to carry out that plan. REVIEW OF DEATH OF SHERRY CHARLIE J.

Horgan: Yesterday the Attorney General said in question period: "I'm comp letely satisfied that the terms of reference here are exhaustive, they're thor- ough, and they will provid e the appropriate answers and recommendations." The Attorney General made that comment despite the fact that the key question that was removed from the review investigation is not con- tained in these terms of reference. My question is to the Attorney General. Would he agree that this review is more about political expedi- ency than getting to the bo ttom of why this system failed Sherry Charlie? Hon. W.

Oppal: I have, in addition to the letter — the remarks, the directions th at were given to the child

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 229 and youth officer — added another paragraph, and I did that after listening to the debate here. I want to a s s u r e t h e h o n . m e m b e r t h a t I ' m i n t e r e s t e d h e r e i n a full disclosure. This is a terrible tragedy that's taken place. I think all members of this House have to be interested in en- suring that something like this doesn't happen again.

I could assure the hon. member that as the chief law officer of the province I want to make sure there is a full and comprehensive study, and a review and rec- ommendations by the officer. What I've done, in addition to the remarks that you heard yesterday, is included the following in the letter to the child and youth office.

That is: "If, in the course of conducting your investigation, you determine that the time lines and the change in the terms of reference materially affected the outcome of the director's case review, I would ask you to review how the outcome was materially affected and make recommendations to address any such impacts." The import of that is to give full and comprehensive authority to the officer to give us a full report as to what took place so that an incident of this proportion does not take place again. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. J. Horgan: Again to the Attorney General.

I'm pleased that he, after listening ad nauseam to the min- ister repeat his three-line message box, has added some substance to the letter. We'd like to see that. I look for- ward to reading the document. My question is to the Attorney General. Was it after question period yesterday that you resolved to get in- volved in this file? Did you take the initiative on estab- lishing this review, or were you taking direction from somewhere else? Hon. W. Oppal: I listened to all of the advice that I received here in the House. I don't think, with the great- est of respect, that this is a partisan issue.

I think this is an issue that all of us ought to be concerned with. Based on that, I took it upon myself, in full consultation with the minister and with other members of my caucus, to include this in my directions to the officer. M. Karagianis: I think the previous member's ques- tion was quite simple. It is the Attorney General's respon- sibility to take the initiative under

section 6 of the act. My question is: who wrote the terms of reference? Was it the Minister of Children and Family Development? Was it the Attorney General? Or was it the Premier's office? [1445] Hon. W. Oppal:

Section 6 of the act empowers me to write the letter and to give directions and ask for further clarifications. Pursuant that statute, I have done that. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. M. Karagianis: If this review is about more than politics, the child and family youth officer could be tasked with asking the question that was removed from the investigation in the first place: the role of the ministry and the budget cuts. Yesterday the Minister of Children and Family Development told the media that he wrote the terms of reference for the new review.

If the Attorney General is the one with the legislative authority over the children and youth officer, why did he, then, not set the terms of reference for this review? Hon. W. Oppal: The statute empowers me to set the terms of reference. The hon. member's point is well taken about political issues involved, and that's why we've taken the unprecedented step here of inviting a member of the opposition to take

part in the review. R. Fleming: Let's go back to yesterday. I have a question for the Attorney Ge neral, who was a guest on the Rafe Mair Show. Mr. Mair asked the Attorney Gen- eral about the Sherry Char lie case, and the Attorney General said: "I'm sorry. You'll have to refresh my memory on that again." That was his answer. The At- torney then apologized fo r avoiding questions about the case because they were not in his area of responsi- bility. That was his answer. That was yesterday at 9:30 in the morning, but by 2 p.m. the Attorney General had ordered a review.

My question is: what time of day did the Attorney General get briefed on the proposed review? And who told him what the questions would be? Hon. W. Oppal: N o b o d y t o l d m e w h a t t h e q u e s - tions would be. As a matter of fact, to be quite frank, I didn't hear Mr. Mair's question when he first asked me that, and then I asked for a cl arification. I didn't know the full ambit of what was going on. Then I briefed myself, and no one told me what to say. I'm fully capa- ble of deciding these issues on my own. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. R.

Fleming: The Minister of Children and Family Development told this House yesterday several times that he wrote the guidelines for the review. It's clear that the Attorney General di d not create the guidelines for the review — as is his responsibility. Did the Attor- ney General meet with the Premier's issues manage- ment team, and what was their direction? Hon. W. Oppal: I would suggest to the hon. mem- ber that he read the act. If you read the act, it's the At- torney General who makes these directions. L.

Krog: The Attorney General in British Columbia should function with comp lete detachment and inde- pendence in matters of this nature. What I've heard today is that there has been a great deal of consultation around this issue. I woul d commend to the Attorney General a lecture given by a predecessor, Brian Smith, QC, the former Attorney General and member from Oak Bay. In this case it is evident that this review was created for political purpos es only. Where was the At-

230 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 torney General's detachment and independence when he took instructions from a minister under political heat and the Premier's issues management team? Hon. W. Oppal: I reviewed the file. I was asked, and as a law enforcement officer I took the necessary steps. That was done in an independent manner. I'll reiterate: this is not a partisan political issue. The opposition may want to turn it into that to make points, but this is about a child who died tragically. I want to get some of the an- swers, and I'm sure the opposition does as well. Mr.

Speaker: The member has a supplemental. [1450] L. Krog: Everyone on this side of the House agrees with the Attorney General. This is a non- partisan issue when it comes to the death of a child. However, it is a serious issue as to how this gov- ernment handled it and what those budget cuts had to do with that issue. It is even more important that the child and youth officer should have complete independence from the Attorney General, without any interference from any ministry.

How can we have confidence in the words of the Attorney General when the Attor- ney General himself wasn't free from political inter- ference in this matter? Why was this review created by an issues management team and a minister under political heat and not by the detached and inde- pendent Attorney General? Hon. W. Oppal: I would recommend to the hon. member that he read the act. If he read the terms and the workings of the child and youth officer, the hon. member would know that that office is completely independent. There is no suggestion at all of any type of interference.

In fa ct, she has a full and unfet- tered right to subpoena witnesses, to make recom- mendations and to conduct any investigations that she so wishes. Ms. Morley is a highly respected person in this field, well known for her integrity and her inde- pendence. There is nothing anywhere in the evi- dence to suggest that she is not independent or that her independence was compromised in any way during this investigation or in any other investiga- tion. J. Kwan: It is not the case that the opposition is questioning the integrity of Ms. Morley. The opposi- tion is, however, questioning the integrity of this government.

If the Attorney General believes that we need to get to the bottom of this issue and that it is a non-partisan issue, then expand the scope of the review. We have just lear ned that the civil servant who wrote the original terms of reference, and had altered the terms of reference, had spoken to the media outlet. He and the current assistant deputy minister may disagree on whether the original terms of reference were broad enough to encompass ministry cuts and their impact. But one thing is clear: he says a review of cuts is critical for the prot ection of children in this province.

Does the Minister of Children and Family Development disagree with David Young, or will he now, in light of this revelation, agree to expand the scope of the review? It was the Minister of Children and Family Development yesterday who said he drew up the terms of reference for this new review. Hon. W. Oppal: The act is clear as to what the authority of the Attorney General is. I have ex- panded the terms of reference so much that we have included a member of the opposition. The opposi- tion critic is involved, as well as a member of the aboriginal community.

If you look carefully at the additional paragraph, one can easily see that the child and youth officer ha s extremely wide parame- ters and a very wide discretion to do what she thinks ought to be done for a full, proper and fair investigation. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. J. Kwan: Yes, the act is clear. But you know what? The action taken by this government to date is as clear as mud.

Let us be clear, and let me quote David Young: "Should one do a review of the impact of all the changes going on in the ministry and the budget reductions we were facing and the impact that had on practice in general? I think that would be an excellent idea." Again, to the Minister of Children and Family Development: will he just stop this charade, accept responsibility for the chaos in his ministry and expand the terms of reference like he should have done the first time around? Hon. S. Hagen: First of all, I need to correct the Finance critic from the other side of the House.

In the year in question the budget for child protection actu- ally went up. We actually spent $57.4 million more than we did the year before. What we've set out to do here is to find the answers to the questions… [1455] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. S. Hagen: …that are going to be asked. The role of the child and youth officer has been ex- panded, as the Attorney General has pointed out. It has been fully expanded to look at all aspects of this. We're looking for the answers to the question. We're not afraid of asking the tough questions, because we're not afraid of the answers.

That's what the At- torney General has asked the child and youth officer to do. Let's not forget what we're talking about here. We're talking about the tragic death of a child. I would

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 231 echo the Attorney General: please don't make this into a partisan issue just to score political points. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. S. Hagen: This is a serious issue. We don't want to have these things happening in British Co- lumbia. Even though this happened three years ago, we're still now engaged in it. We're still improving the practices of the ministry.

I might add that even though the terms of reference were changed by a staff member in the Ministry of Children and Family Development, of the 12 recommendations brought forward in the director's review, nine of them per- tained to improvements that needed to be made in the ministry. INDEPENDENCE OF CHILD AND YOUTH OFFICER D. Thorne: Everything the Minister of Children and Family Development and the Attorney General have said so far today highlights the need for the restoration of an independent children's commissioner with a mandate to act independently.

The child and youth officer of British Columbia is bound by the instructions of the Attorney General. We know that she does not have the mandate to answer any questions except those that the minister writes for her. This review is not independent. If it was, it would let this child and youth officer define the scope of the review her- self and address any issues in this case, including budget cuts to the ministry. Why does this government refuse to reinstate the fully independent Children's Commission of British Columbia? Hon. W. Oppal: I can assure the hon. member that the officer is independent.

She operates com- pletely independently. She has her own powers of investigation. She can subpoena records; she can subpoena witnesses. She ha s an unfettered right to do that. No one interferes in what she says, what her recommendations are. She has that right. Her objective is to find the truth. How can we make the system better? That's what her objective is. I can assure the hon. member that nobody from this side of the House has interfered in her investigation. Because of the questions that were raised, we will order this expanded review. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. D.

Thorne: Here's the reality. The former children's commissioner would have done a truly independent investigation into Sherry Charlie's death. The terms of reference would never have been changed. This second review would never have been needed. If the child and youth officer of British Columbia has an independent mandate, as the minister claims, why did he set this narrow scope for this new review? Hon. W. Oppal: Again I reiterate: the scope is not narrow. If the hon. member would take the time to read the additional paragraph that I read to the House today, one could easily see that it's not nar- row.

It has a very wide scope. It gives the officer complete discretion to do practically what she wants. You speak of a lack of independence. There's no interference. I also want to assure th e member that there's go- ing to be a coroner's review in this as well. A coroner will have an independent outlook and an independ- ent recommendation after conducting whatever re- view he or she will do. We are interested in finding out what happened. I can tell you that I am pa ssionately concerned about what happened in this particular case. [1500] M. Farnworth: The Attorney General has said some interesting things.

He says: "Practically any- thing that she wants." Earlier, he said: "I want to get some of the answ ers." Well, the people of British Columbia want all of the answers. We have seen how yesterday the Minister of Children and Family Development could not answer the questions directed at him. We have seen how the Attorney General has said that there is independ- ence but it deals with prac tically anything. We have heard how he has said that they want some of the answers. We have seen how the Premier's damage control unit stepped in to try and get some control of the situation. So our question is to the Premier.

There is one way to resolve this, and that is to restore a fully in- dependent children's commissioner. Will the Pre- mier commit to that to this House today? Hon. W. Oppal: I thought when I'd left the legal profession that I'd left all the nitpickers behind. When I meant the word "practically," I mean that within the ambit of the statute. Nobody can do whatever they want. This is not a full royal commis- sion. What I mean by "pra ctically" is those things that are feasible within the statute and within the meaning of our law.

When I said "some of the answers," what I meant by that — and I would have thought any person would have logically construed it that way — is that we have a lot of the answers. But there are certain issues that are obviousl y unresolved and certain issues that need to be dealt with, and that's the pur- pose of the review. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental? M. Farnworth: Yes, hon. Speaker, I do. To the Attorney General: I'm no lawyer, but I know law is about language. It's about the specifics of lan-

232 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 guage, and words have specific meanings. "Practically" has a specific meaning, and "some of the answers" has a specific meaning, and that is not "all of the answers." So my question again is: will the Premier restore a fully independent child ren's commissioner that does not need to operate only under the authority that is granted under the AG's direction? Hon. W. Oppal: I think my words are clear, and a reasonable

interpretation of my words is clear. We do want all the answers. We want a full review of it. That's why we put this extra paragraph in, so that the child and youth officer can look at those words and decide what she wants in the fairne ss of the investigation. I think that's quite clear in any logical

interpretation of the words that I've sent to her. AQUACULTURE ON NORTH COAST G. Coons: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture. Can the minister tell this House if there is a decision pending approval of a finfish aquaculture site at the Strouts Point on the Ogden Channel on the North Coast in the approaches of the Skeena River? Hon. P. Bell: The member should know that there is a decision pending. It is currently with the statutory decision-maker. It is a fairly lengthy process that we go through.

I can tell you that this government is very proud of the role that we're taking in trying to be mo re innovative with finfish aquaculture. We've previously committed to the $5 million Pacific Salmon Forum — a real innovation — with the hon. John Fraser. We'v e actually asked the op- position to chair a special legislative committee to ensure that this aquaculture file has a real thorough look and to bring forward innovative approaches. This is unprecedented. This is with a statutory decision-maker. We should be very clear with that.

It is a very lengthy process that we have to go through, and we think we'll get the right decision at the end of it. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. [1505] G. Coons: The vast majority of the residents of the North Coast are strongly opposed to open-net farms be- cause of the threats they pose to our wild stocks. I'd like to ask the minister: why would he approve fish-farm sites when so many people have valid concerns about the wild stocks? Hon. P. Bell: The member should know that there are many varied opinions on aquaculture in this province.

In fact, his house leader, the member for Port Coquitlam– Burke Mountain, said just a few days ago on CKNW that he thinks the committee should do its work and report out before any final decisions are made. I would suggest the member talk to his house leader. [End of question period.] Tabling Documents Hon. R. Thorpe: As the Minister of Small Business and Revenue, I'm pleased to table the 2004 annual re- port for the Property Assessment Appeal Board. Orders of the Day Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading of Bill 5. Mr.

Speaker: If the minister would just wait a sec- ond while some other members attend to other busi- ness. Second Reading of Bills SUPPLY ACT (No. 2), 2005 Hon. C. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill now be read a second time. This supply bill is in the general form of previous supply bills. The first

section of the bill requests ²⁄₁₂ of the voted expenses as presented in the estimates to provide for the general programs of the government. The sum requested is in addition to the amount author- ized under

section 1 of the Supply Act (No. 1), 2005, as we anticipate that the auth ority under the existing in- terim supply will be exhausted before the estimates debate has been completed.

Section 2 of the supply bill requests two-thirds of the financing transaction requirements set out in schedules C, D and E of the estimates. The first interim supply also sought supply for two-thirds of the year's financing transaction requirements for capital asset expenditures and loans and investments. However, this bill seeks two-thirds of the requirements based on the estimates tabled on September 14, 2005. This re- quest also includes the am ount authorized under sec- tion 2 of the Supply Act (No. 1), 2005. The third

section repeals

section 3 of the Supply Act (No. 1), 2005, which authorized 100 percent of the dis- bursements related to reve nue collected for and trans- ferred to other entities and replaces it with 100 percent of the year's disbursements, which will appear in

schedule F of the September 14, 2005, estimates. Be- cause we're repealing the authorization under Supply Act (No. 1), 2005, this request includes any amounts paid under that section. J. Kwan: I rise today to speak to Bill 5, the Supply Act. As the Minister of Fi nance noted yesterday, this act will allow the government to continue spending on government programs while the budget estimates are debated and voted upon by this House. What the Min- ister of Finance neglected to mention, however, is that

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 233 this is a significant departure from the way this House normally conducts its business. Now, I'll have to say this, and I will recognize that this process was initiated by the former Minister of Finance, who is now the Minister of Economic Devel- opment. It was the government prior to the election, many of whom are sitting here today, who had every opportunity to debate the budget line by line before the election. But that didn't happen. They simply chose not to do that. We would not be debating this bill today.

This bill would be completely unnecessary, and we would not have interim su pply for an unprecedented eight months into the fiscal year had the government allowed for a full debate on the budget before the pro- vincial election. [1510] As members are no doubt aware, interim supply is traditionally introduced prior to the end of the fiscal year so that government can carry out its operations for the first two or three months of the coming fiscal year. We're doing this backwards.

Members can then get on with their constitutional responsibility of scrutiniz ing the spending plans of government; that is, they get on with the very basis of our democratic system. Not a dime is to be collected through taxation or spent through appropriation with- out the approval of the Legislature. But this is not the first time some of the members sitting opposite have avoided scrutiny of their budget by bringing in months — months, I would say — of interim supply before an election. A couple of members opposite will recall the end of the Social Credit gov- ernment in 1991.

No debate on the budget, and months of an interim supply bill. In fact, they have the record on it, and that's clear. Some of them have returned to this Legislature with a different name, wearing a different hat. They were there last spring as we ll. Sure enough, no debate, and six months of an interim supply bill. Here we are now. If you add up all of those months together, that's eight months. Eight months of interim supply bill with no scrutiny from British Columbians of the spending priorities of this government.

The first time an interim supply bill was introduced this year, as members of this House well know, was before the provincial election and well before the end of the previous fiscal year. It allowed for government spending of public moneys for six months from April 1, 2005, until September 30, 2005, a total amount of $13 billion. Not a small sum — and not just change in peo- ple's pockets, I might add. This happened despite there being ample time, between the budget being intro- duced on February 15 and the dissolution of parlia- m e n t o n A p r i l 1 8 , t o f u l l y scrutinize the budget esti- mates.

Indeed, the opposition members offered not once but twice to ensure that the estimates pass before the election. We even offered to debate the estimates and pass the budget by the end of the fiscal year on March 31, completely eliminating the need to even have in- terim supply. The offer was made time and again by this side of the House. That would have allowed British Columbians to have full and complete scrutiny of the 2005-2006 budget before the election.

Now we're in the situation of being six months into the fiscal year with no scrutiny of government spend- ing and no debate on what British Columbians' priori- ties are. But I must say that 's exactly what this govern- ment wanted. They wanted to go into an election cam- paign with no scrutiny around their spending. Perhaps close scrutiny of the budget prior to the election would have revealed that their election prom- ise to build 5,000 new long-term care beds was not fully funded in the budget .

Perhaps a debate on the b u d g e t w o u l d h a v e f o r c e d t h i s g o v e r n m e n t t o a d m i t that they're not doing well enough, that they're not doing enough to combat homelessness in our province, and that there's no housing being built to help commu- nities cope with staggering increases — a doubling of homelessness in the Greater Vancouver area since 2002 alone. [1515] Perhaps during the esti mates process, where mem- bers of this House get an opportunity to ask questions of the ministers about spending in the previous fiscal year, it would have been revealed that the government had overspent its advertising budget by some $7 mil- lion in the lead-up to a provincial election.

A pre- election campaign paid for by the taxpayers, and goodness forbid that that information should be re- viewed by British Columbians prior to the election. This government would have none of that. That's why they shut down debate. Th at's why there was an in- terim supply bill that was introduced. That's why we're here again with another interim supply bill.

Instead, British Columbians were told about mas- sive government overspendi ng on pre-election adver- tising a full two months after the election, in the middle of summer — exactly, I would say, what the govern- ment had hoped for, what the government had planned for. They wanted to cover that up. They don't want to shine the light on that. They don't want British Columbians to know that th eir spending priority is their pre-election campaign paid for by taxpayers.

By not allowing the members of this House to ex- amine the budget line by lin e, item by item, the gov- ernment also got to keep go odies in the amount of a $237 million pre-election slush fund, a secret until the dozen or so press conferences that they held two weeks before the election writ was dropped. How timely was that? Do you think there was planning in there? You bet. You bet, hon. Speaker. I bet the crisis management people, the issue management people, the spin doctors from the Premier's office where the budget was over- spent, some $7 million of advertising funds….

They hovered in a corner and talk ed about it and actually came up with that scheme. Make no mistake about that. What about debate on government spending priori- ties? If British Columbians were given an opportunity to get the full details of the budget before the election, they would have had a greater understanding of what

234 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 this Liberal government was really up to before the election. Of course, they still wouldn't have known that a big tax cut for corporations was on the way. But then again, nobody knew about th e big election secret. The business community didn't know that they were going to get a big bonus in the middle of the year. Here we are today being asked to extend interim supply until the end of November, a full eight months into the fiscal year. That's tw o-thirds of the fiscal year on interim supply.

In plain language, that's two-thirds of the government's budget, those dollars having been spent before taxpayers had the opportunity to actually look, see, and ask questions on where those dollars were spent, so that this government could avoid scru- tiny on its budget during an election campaign. We're here today to debate a bill that would be completely unnecessary had the government allowed the budget to be debated before the election, had the Premier and the government decided that they wanted to honour their commitment on openness and account- ability.

Every time any government tries to hide from British Columbians, it always raises questions. I have to say that it is an issue that does get me all riled up. I was here in the last four years. I was here when the House shut down and disallowed debate. There were three of us: my former colleague Joy MacPhail, my colleague sitting next to me right now, the member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge…. There were three of us working hard to hold the government to account. [S. Hawkins in the chair.] This government ignored the opposition and shut down debate.

The previous Minister of Finance also told us before the election — and that was his rationale — that they would change th e budget after the election campaign once they heard from British Columbians. That was his rationale for why debate could not be completed on the budget, why we could not debate the budget prior to the election. [1520] Now, notwithstanding, there's nothing that would prevent the government from bringing in a new budget. But set that aside for one moment. Indeed, the budget has been updated. We have an updated budget, the first budget since the election.

Unfortunately, there's little evidence in th is budget update that the Minister of Finance, the Premier or any of the other members of the Liberal caucus have actually heard the message from British Columbians. British Columbians did not tell us that a corporate tax cut was their first priority. For that matter, the gov- ernment did not campaign on the notion that a corpo- rate tax cut was their number-one priority. Nonethe- less, in this minibudget they took the lion's share of what was newly introduced in this budget. British Columbians told us what they want the government to do.

They told us they want ordinary British Columbians to have an opportunity to share in the benefits of our growing ec onomy. Citizens living in regions of British Columbia told us very clearly that they, too, want to be part of our province's success and that they want to share in the great wealth of our natu- ral resource sector that contributes to the economy. T h e y t o l d u s t h a t t h e y w a n t g o v e r n m e n t t o b e m o r e caring and compassionate, that too many vulnerable people are being left behind — seniors, children at risk, the homeless and the poor.

A s w e s a w i n q u e s t i o n p e r i o d a s t h e i s s u e s h a v e been raised by our critic on the Children and Family Development file, the children who need protection are not getting the services they need. The Minister of Children and Family Development seems to be oblivi- ous to the notion that an ab original authority actually got a 66-percent cut in their budget. He seems to think that's okay. He seems to th ink that the Ministry of Children and Family Development is doing just fine and that the ministry has done nothing wrong.

So far to date, all the evidence that we see before us tells a different story — and a compelling different story. The Minister of Finance had an opportunity, with the budget update, to show that they actually heard British Columbians. But unfortunately, that did not happen. Seniors are still waiting for long-term care beds. The Liberals made th is promise in 2001. Today, more than four years and fi ve budgets and one budget update later, they are still waiting.

The minister says that this budget is doing more to help low-income seniors and has admitted that life has been very hard for them over the last four years, that the seniors supplement they included in their budget was cut in 2002, when it could have helped those same seniors — the same seniors that the Minister of Finance has referred to — to have the resources they need. The minister herself said that seniors had to choose between buying chicken or paying rent. Let me say this, hon. Speaker.

The sm all amount of seniors sup- plement being put back by the government, which the government took away in 2002, will not even cover the rising costs of heating bills come this winter. The gov- ernment should have, in this budget and in this interim supply bill, made sure that there was some relief for British Columbians — average British Columbians who desperately need the government to respond.

Despite Surrey residents asking over and over again for the government to deal with the growing concerns about health care delivery at Surrey Memorial Hospital, there is nothing in this budget to improve health care in Surrey and in many other communities across British Columbia. [1525] The minister's budget update also doesn't respond to the concerns of communi ties throughout the north- ern and interior regions of this province who are cop- ing with the pine beetle epidemic and want to prepare for the future, once the cut decreases and jobs are lost.

It's great that the federal government finally came through with some dollars, but the province's com- mitment is lacking. B.C.'s funding for the pine beetle next year is budgeted today at a very small $7 million, keeping in mind that the Premier has asked for federal

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 235 help to the tune of $1 billio n. You got to talk the talk; then you better walk the walk. You better be there working with our partners to address the issue and not just point a finger to someone else to say it's their re- sponsibility. The government champions its commitment to pre- paring young people for the future, but there is no commitment to making education more affordable. Too many British Columbians have lost access to higher edu- cation because they cannot afford the tuition fees.

The Minister of Finance tells us her government is listening to B.C.'s industries when they tell us they are in the midst of a worsening skills shortage. Even the government- appointed independent economic advisory council has told them that the skills shor tage is one of the greatest risks facing our economy today and in the future. Yet there is no commitment to skills training in this budget, no action to deal with the skills shortage, and nothing for young people who want opportunities to benefit from our growing economy — young people who are on wait-lists for training and apprenticeship programs.

Today we have received the final count for the Greater Vancouver homeless survey, a report that was first re- leased during the provincial election. The government was told five months before the election and before the budget update that homelessness in the GVRD has dou- bled, yet there is no commitment to bringing housing for these people and no commitment to helping communities deal with this growing social problem. We're heading off to the UBCM next week.

I won- der if the government will hear the messages from local leaders — councillors and mayors who are seeing the people who are homeless on their streets, who are see- ing the rise in people heading towards food banks be- cause they can't make ends meet. The government did not take the time between th e budget being introduced in February and the budget update that was intro- duced last week to really reflect on British Columbians' priorities for spending and bringing in a budget that responds to their concerns.

The government's reasons for not debating the budget before the election, quite frankly, are wearing thin. The rationale that the former Minister of Finance used simply reflects that th is government chose not to listen again. With the full cooperation of the opposi- tion, we could have had a full and complete debate. Their claim that they wanted to hear from British Co- lumbians before passing a final budget rings very hol- low in light of this budget update released last week.

To conclude, the bill we're debating today to extend interim supply for an unprecedented eight months into the fiscal year could have been avoided. It is not the way this House should be conducting its business. De- laying the budget debate until now has not produced any different results for British Columbians. This government should know that British Colum- bians deserve better. They deserve scrutiny on the budget. They deserve a response from the government.

They deserve, after this election, some indication from the government that they really actually heard the message and that they want to make sure economic successes are being shared with everyone. Because as we said during the campaign, everyone matters. [1530] J. Horgan: It's a pleasure to stand and participate in the debate on Bill 5. I'm a bit of a history buff. I enjoy historic moments.

I'm sure that the spin doctors over at the public affairs bureau will be checking this for me, but I don't believe there has been a time in this Legisla- ture where we've debated two interim supply bills in the course of eight months. It's staggering that a gov- ernment that had a majority of 70-plus members could not get their affairs together, with a fixed election date and a fixed parliamentary calendar, well enough to pass a budget with three opposition members.

Those members, of course, were the current mem- ber for Surrey–Panorama Ridg e; the irrepressible and unstoppable member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant — who, even with a touch of a cold, was able to con- tinue debate; and lastly, our friend who joined us today on the floor, the former hon. member for Vancouver- Hastings. Three members frightened a government of 70-plus. They tabled the budget in February. They said: "Look what we've done. What good boys and girls are we." Then they ran to thei r constituencies and said: "Look what we're going to give you, voters.

We're go- ing to give you a slush fund of $238 million. We're not going to tell you what's in it until closer to the election date, because we don't want to give any indication to the opposition members what exactly our plan is." [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Seventy-plus members against three, and they ran away. So where we are today, hon. Speaker and hon. friends around me, is we're having a debate on a second interim supply bill. I remember well…. It's a shame I can't see the Government House Leader at the moment; I know he's monitoring the debates.

He was the most vo- ciferous opponent of our government during the 1990s. He attacked, and he attacked, and he attacked. "How dare you spend money without debate?" he would say. He would stand in his place, and he was quite eloquent, quite enjoyable, quite entertaining. Three members — the member for Surrey– Panorama Ridge, the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and the former member for Vancouver- Hastings — frightened a government of 70-plus — ab- solutely staggering. What did that government do? They went to the polls. They ignored the parliamentary calendar. They focused on the fixed election date.

They had a desire to have a legacy of parliamentary reform, but what they ended up doing is using the fixed election date to circumvent a parliamentary cal- endar that they put in place on the argument that this sort of thing will never happen again — the dark dec- ade of the '90s. I've heard the members talk about the dark decade of the '90s. "Never again will we have a debate…." "Not a dime will be spent without debate." That's what they said. That's what they planned to do.

236 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 They said a fixed election date and a fixed parliamen- tary calendar would solve that. Yet here we find our- selves at the end of September with a second interim supply bill. I know that the Finance Mini ster was put in this situa- tion by her colleagues. I certainly don't expect her to an- swer for that. She's doing a capable job. She said, as others did during the campaign, that she was going to listen to British Columbians. I don't recall — certainly in Malahat– Juan de Fuca — one soul saying to me: "You know what we need in this province?

We need another 500 million bucks for corporations. That's what's going to turn things around for me. That's what's going to help with transpor- tation in my community. That's what's going to help with health care in my community. That's what's going to help with education in my community. Another 500 million bucks to the richest people in this province — that's going to make the big difference for me." The Finance Minister stood in her place, and she said that the centrepiece of her budget was going to be seniors — $248 million.

We've heard that message box several times since the budget was tabled — $248 million for sen- iors. That's good news. I applaud her in particular on amendments to the SAFER program, particularly for rental fees for pads in mobi le home parks. That's very good news in my community, up and down the Island and across British Columbia. However, it's very difficult to have any credibility when you stand and say: "The centre of my budget is sen- iors — $248 million.

Oh, by the way, 500 million bucks for my buddies — 500 million bucks for the people who fi- nanced our election campaign, 500 million bucks for the people who financed the campaign in 1996 and 1991 and back all the way through history and the Social Credit parties before them." I wanted to participate in this debate because it's his- toric, as I said — two interim supply bills in one year. It speaks to incompetence, if you ask me. If 70-plus mem- bers could not pass a budget against three opposition members, what are you going to do now?

That's the ques- tion people in British Columbia are asking: "What are they going to do now?" Thirty-three on this side, and we're all armed, loaded and ready to go. We've demonstrated last week and demonstrated again this week. Over the coming weeks the members on the opposite side are going to hear a lot of noise — 33, not three. Good luck to you. [1535] Mr. Speaker: The Minister of Finance closes debate. Hon. C. Taylor: I move second reading of Bill 5. Motion approved. Hon. C. Taylor: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting after today.

Bill 5, Supply Act (No. 2), 2005, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after to- day. Hon. B. Penner: That debate went quicker than I anticipated. I now call continued debate on the budget. Budget Debate (continued) Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge continues where he left off. J. Brar: My response to the budget speech is a bit unique. Half of my speech was yesterday, and the re- maining part of the speech is today, because, as you know, I had to stop because of the adjournment of the House last evening.

Yesterday I talked about the important issues re- lated to the budget in my community. Just briefly, to touch upon what I said on the issue of Surrey Memo- rial — there was no funding for it in this budget. I also spoke about the gateway plan, about transportation, about the promise made by this government that was not delivered on in this budget. The third important factor or issue in my commu- nity is education. As you know, Surrey is the fastest- growing community in the country. We receive almost a thousand people every month. The majority of the people we have in the city are average families.

A sig- nificant number of people in the city are new immi- grants. They want affordable, accessible education for their children, and this government made a promise to the people of British Columbia during the last election that they would provide the best education system so that no child is left behind . But, in fact, they did the opposite. They cut grant programs , and the tuition fee has gone up 300 percent in some cases. Subsequently, in the last election this government made another prom- ise on education, and that was to cap the tuition fee,

whereas we were saying that we should freeze the tui- tion fee right away because it's too high for average families. This budget does not offer any money for those students and parents of Surrey and British Co- lumbia. The other issue which is very important is gas prices. As we know, the gas price has been going up very fast during the last few years. It has gone up to the extent that it has impacted the budget of each and every family, and particularly average families, in every city of this province as well as in my city.

Not only that, it has also impacted, big time, the small busi- ness industry, particularly the taxi industry and the trucking industry. We have seen during the last few months a couple of strikes related to business . This government is very big when teachers talk about strikes. But we have seen strikes of small business people here in this province just a few months ago — that was the container truck- ers, and then it was dump truckers — because of oil and gas prices. This budget does not offer anything to

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 237 those small business people. It only offered support to corporations, when 60 percent of job creation is actu- ally created by small business people. [1540] There are a few things I want to mention from my portfolio, and one of them is gambling. In 2001 during the election this government made a promise to the people of British Columbia that they were going to stop expansion of gambling as soon as they came into power. But in fact they did the opposite. The number of slot machines has gone up.

There used to be a cap on the number of slot machines in the past in every casino, and that was 300 machines per casino to the maximum. But in one casino in Richmond the number of slot machin es is now 1,000. When the former Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General was asked whether this was an expansion or not, his answer was: "It is not expansion. It is just adjustment." That's the language this government has been using about the expansion of gambling.

Now, the new minis- ter came in, and he decided to install 500 new ma- chines, electronic horse race tracks, in pubs and bars, and when the minister was asked the question whether this was an expansion or not, he said: "No, it's not ex- pansion. It is modernization of gambling." British Columbians want accurate and right an- swers. As a Time reporter stated ju st recently: British Columbians are getting tired of the government's ver- bal gymnastics on gambling. What will it take to get someone in the government party to admit that they love the money from gambling?

For them it is the profit, not the people of British Columbia, which is the priority. They don't care about average families, aver- age people in this province. The revenue from gambling has gone up $260 mil- lion since the Liberal government took over in 2001. It is shocking to know that the B.C. Lottery Corporation spent $14 million on advert isements, but they spent only $4 million on treating people who have addictions in gambling. This budget does not provide any finan- cial support and hope to the families of those people who are troubled gamblers.

The other very important issue in my community is youth gang violence. The South Asian community has lost over 70 young men during the last six or seven years who became targets of youth gang violence. This government, after constant pressure from the commu- nity, finally came and established a B.C. Integrated Youth Gang Task Force, which, in my opinion, is probably a step in a positive direction. But the task force is mainly responsible for investigations, arrests and prosecution. It doesn't do much for educating the community and for prevention .

This budget does not offer any additional money or hope to my community. I'm talking about 70 murders during the last six, seven years. [1545] The other issue is crystal meth. During the last few days I've seen statements from members on the other side as to how dangerous crystal meth is, how it has taken over all the other serious drugs, whether it's co- caine or other things. I have also heard that they are very serious about it.

I also heard from the other side that something needs to be done, but the answer which I h e a r f r o m t h e o t h e r s i d e i s t h a t i t i s t h e c o m m u n i t y which should look after this very serious issue that the community is facing. I agree, to the extent that we have to involve the community to deal with crystal meth because the community is part of the solution. At the same time, we cannot leave this very challenging, very fast-growing drug — which is making our youth vulnerable — just to the people. We need to provide leadership.

We need to provide resources to the people who are coming forward to deal with this issue. I just met yesterday with people who are part of the task force in Victoria, and they're looking for support. They want a place where they can do their volunteer work. They want telephone lines. They need help. But this government is saying that the community should take a lead. You have to take your responsibility, pro- viding leadership and resources to the people to deal with this very serious, fast-growing disease in the community. Mr. Speaker, every day I hear….

Although, I appre- ciate that you indicated toda y that statements should be non-political, non-partisan. I hope it will be that way. Every day until today I have heard statement after statement talking about the five great goals of this government. I appreciate a positive vision, and I wish this government well for those very ambitious five goals. Well, let me tell you about the five great holes that the budget of this government has created in my com- munity. I hope the members sitting on the other side of the House are going to listen to it and pay attention to it.

Let's compare the five great goals versus five great holes which I'm talking about in this budget and the four other budgets presented by this government. The first hole. There's no funding for the expansion of Surrey Memorial emergency room or for a new hos- pital. That's a huge, huge hole in that community, in the heart of the community. Number two, there's no funding for the improve- ment of transportation. Pa rticularly, we're talking about the south perimeter road, where we and the gov- ernment agree that this needs to be done. But there's no money in this budget for that commitment.

That cre- ates a serious traffic challenge to us. That's the second hole we have in the community. Third, there's no funding to stop or reduce post- secondary tuition fees, and that is the third big hole we have in the hearts of young people in my community, whose future probably is under question because of that. Number four, there's no funding for assisting trou- bled gamblers, and there's no stop to the expansion of gambling. Number five, and the fifth hole, is that there's no funding for detox beds, particularly for youth who are addicted by crystal meth. We see a lot of talk.

238 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES W EDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 I would like to conclude by saying: yes, we appre- ciate the five great goals, bu t please, look into the five great holes that my community tells us about every day. Listen to them. Talk to them. Go to Surrey. Mr. Speaker: Time is up, member. [1550] J. Brar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. G. Robertson: Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour to be here on behalf of the people of Vancouver-Fairview, and I salute you and all of our colleagues here for serv- ing the citizens of B.C.

I recognize and honour, first and foremost, the Songhees Nation, whose traditional territory we stand on, and just across the Salish Sea, the Musqueam, Squamish, Tsleil-Waututh, Stó:lô and Hul'qumi'num nations who have lived along the south shore of False Creek and up the slopes risi ng to Little Mountain, in what is now the riding I represent, Vancouver- Fairview. I want to express my deepest gratitude to my wife Amy and my kids Hanna, Satchel and Terra for all their love and their support, and the rest of my family and my many close friends who really made it possible for me to stand here today.

I want to thank the people of Vancouver-Fairview for their incredible support, for wanting to see balance in this Legislature, for wanting meaningful representation. I thank my many volun- teers in the community and beyond, whose dedication and moxie made the difference in a hard-fought elec- tion campaign. I am here to represent the people of my commu- nity. I am here to work for the people of B.C. I am here for my children and, I hope, my grandchildren and the future generations that our decisions in this House must respect.

I didn't have great expectations that this govern- ment would have the vision and backbone to dramati- c a l l y c h a n g e c o u r s e a n d m a k e t h e p e o p l e o f B . C . a n d the abundance of this province that sustains us their number one priority. This has very clearly not been their priority over the past four and a half years. I felt a glimmer of hope from some of the new members across the floor who bring valuable experi- ence and new perspective to their party, and I suggest that they are the reason the government was re-elected by a narrow margin.

I had sincere hopes that the elec- tion campaign and close result would mean that the Liberal government would wake up to the resounding voice of B.C. citizens. The status quo was not accept- able. A strong majority of British Columbians voted against this government, voted against the four years of broken promises, of severe cuts to our schools, health care and social serv ices. We voted against four years of selling off public assets, deregulating envi- ronmental standards and cateri ng first and foremost to the corporations that funded their election campaigns.

I am terribly disappointed in this budget and its primary focus on a corporate income tax break. I'm not surprised, with almost $8 million in corporate dona- tions to the B.C. Liberals in this last election, but this piece of corporate welfare is beyond belief — $8 mil- lion in donations, somewhere between $400 million and $500 million in tax breaks over the next three years. That is an 1,810 percen t return on investment for those big corporate funders — this, from a Premier who relentlessly called for an end to corporate subsi- dies when he was in opposition.

This corporate welfare smacks of deceit and abso- lute disregard for the people of B.C. who sent a mes- sage for more balance; more action on health care, the environment and education; and more support for the people of this province who need it most.

Another sur- prise tax break for big corporations didn't even make the Liberals' own campaign platform, which should have been titled: "Five great tax breaks for those who don't need them." I stand here on behalf of democracy and for the people of this province and our common wealth and firmly against the special interests that play this gov- ernment like a puppet show, liquidating public assets and mismanaging the public service.

This is why I now move the motion standing in my name and seconded by the hon. member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain. [Be it resolved that the motion "That the Speaker do now leave the Chair" for the House to go into Committee of Supply be amended by adding the following: "But the House regrets that the Finance Minister's choice to pro- vide a significant tax cut to large corporations at a time when corporate savings are at historically high levels and at the same time families are spending more than they earn to simply get by and

whereas the government could have made the choice to provide more relief to families through fee reductions and program enhancements."] [1555] On the amendment. G. Robertson: Mr. Speaker, I now want to speak to this motion. I want to talk about the big picture, some- thing we human beings don't spend enough time do- ing. We all know what happens when you stickhandle up the ice in the big leagues with your head down. Do we live in a just and sustainable province? Do the priorities of this government focus on what's really most important?

I stand here because I believe the an- swer to both of those questi ons is no. We can and must do far better than this. In this budget, we didn't hear a peep about home- lessness or the care and education of our kids. Nothing about sustainable new forest and agricultural practices, waiting list reductions, emergency rooms, clean air and clean water — nada. What we heard first and foremost was more rhetoric about co mpetitiveness and putting business first. Where's the financial secu rity in a world grappling with climate change?

Where in the throne speech and budget was a mention or one word about the problem that has rapidly emerged as the most perilous issue that we face on this planet? If this government doesn't yet understand the direct connection between climate

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 239 change and the mountain pine beetle epidemic or with the increasing frequency of natural disasters, those members opposite should have gone back to school this fall, not come here to manage our province. Let's talk big picture. We human beings have veered out of balance with our natural world since developing the means to harvest resources and con- centrate wealth. It's been a while.

The migration of people across this planet with our commerce and our consumptive ways has meant, unfortunately, that almost all intact ecosystems have been signifi- cantly impacted or destroyed. Like a two-legged tsunami, we have levelled the most productive for- ests, prairies, estuaries, savannahs and vast marine habitats. This past century has been literally explosive. Our population has grown exponentially. There are 4.8 billion more people on earth than there were 100 years ago. Every day the global economy burns an amount of energy on our planet that required 10,000 days to create.

We burn it into the air we breathe. Every natural system on the planet today is in de- cline. In just the past 20 years, another 120 million hectares of the world's fo rests have been cleared. According to the UN environment program, we've been losing 108 million acres of productive agricul- tural land a year to degradation and development, and 25 billion tonnes of topsoil. A few problems are racking up here. We're losing upwards of 30,000 species a year, which is one every 20 minutes. We're likely to lose 20 percent of the species on the planet within this next generation.

Inequities on our planet are staggering. The 20 per- cent of the population that we have the privilege of being part of consumes almost 90 percent of the re- sources. Billions go hungry each day. Tens of thou- sands die every week because they don't have access to clean drinking water. All this is to say that we have a staggering set of challenges on this planet, and there are very real limits to growth. We are the first generation to have a very clear understanding of all this, thanks to our own inge- nuity. The real test is doing something about it.

If we aren't prioritizing this, we are in a whole heap of trouble. As optimistic and hopeful as I am, deep in my bones, we face challenges that boggle our collective brains and call into questi on the future that our chil- dren and their children will face. But wait; all is not lost.

As the rising tide of humanity's exponential growth and insatiable consumption floods in and threatens to wipe out all of our sources of life and prosperity, there is a glimme r of hope, a patch of high ground that stands tall and resilient right here in B.C. [1600] We are blessed to live on this ground, blessed to have a wealth of resources that haven't quite collapsed under extractive pressure. We are blessed to have a society that is peaceful, that had the foresight to invest i n t a k i n g c a r e o f e a c h o t h e r , i n e d u c a t i o n , i n c r e a t i n g good jobs and labour standards.

We live in a place that the rest of the world looks at and thinks: "If they can't figu re out how to live in bal- ance, then it must not be possible." This may be the last place on earth where human ingenuity, combined with the wisdom to focus it on social and environmental challenges, can turn the tide. My vision of B.C.

It's the place where people figure out how to live in balance with each other and the planet and cause a ripple effect outward, back across the continents to the lands of our earliest civilizations, restoring the natural systems that provide for us, de- veloping evermore innovative and efficient ways of stewarding precious resources, figuring out how to take care of all people in our societies, and reversing the crash course of our civilization. If anyone wants to discuss that later, feel free. D o w e h a v e t h e c o u r a g e a n d w i s d o m t o t u r n t h e tide here? Do we have our priorities straight?

Do we recognize that this is also the biggest economic oppor- tunity going? Mr. Speaker, speaking to the motion, I want to talk about business and economic opportunity — some- thing I've spent a good chunk of my life immersed in and something that the government has again made its first priority in this budget .

Beyond the words of both my colleagues and the business community, who have all been surprised by the go vernment's largesse, I want to question the unswerving ideology that the taxpayers of B.C. should not only will ingly give up some of our most valuable public assets but also subsidize large corporations. Yes to business. No to corporate welfare. Small business around this province has fought tooth and nail to compete, without any help from this government. Big business and industry must adapt to meet the people of B.C.'s needs, not the other way around. Yes, we are open to business, but not at any cost.

Big business believes that if it doesn't continue to grow robustly, it will be destroyed. Ecologists, on the other hand, believe that if big business continues on its robust gro

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0921pm-12
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0921pm 12
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	0733e045d9a5c1eaae213bef372d83f42fe86ebe

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).