2010 Legislative Session: Second Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 16, Number 5

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements

Messages for Katrine and Ed Conroy

C. James

Mr. Speaker (Hon. B. Barisoff)

Introductions by Members

Statements

International Dance Day

S. Chandra Herbert

Messages for Katrine and Ed Conroy

J. van Dongen

Tributes

Dean Edward Smith

Mr. Speaker (Hon. B. Barisoff)

Tabling Documents

Office of the Auditor General, report No. 1, 2010-2011, IT Continuity Planning in Government

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 21 — Forestry Service Providers Protection Act

Hon. P. Bell

Bill 19 — Finance Statutes Amendment Act (N o . 2), 2010

Hon. C. Hansen

Bill 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (N o . 3), 2010

Hon. M. de Jong

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Trek to Ottawa in 1935

J. Kwan

Jeans Day fundraiser for B.C. Children's Hospital

N. Letnick

Anniversary of Grappler sinking and deaths of Chinese workers

G. Gentner

Canadian role in Korean War

H. Bloy

Eleanor Gattafoni Robinson and support for Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital

K. Conroy

Make-A-Wish Foundation

D. Barnett

Oral Questions

Impact of harmonized sales tax on small business

C. James

Hon. C. Hansen

B. Ralston

Implementation of harmonized sales tax

D. Donaldson

Hon. C. Hansen

N. Macdonald

Impact of harmonized sales tax on coastal communities and ferry services

G. Coons

Hon. C. Hansen

Implementation of harmonized sales tax

J. Kwan

Elections B.C. ruling on harmonized sales tax mailout

S. Simpson

Hon. M. de Jong

Implementation of harmonized sales tax

M. Farnworth

Hon. M. de Jong

Petitions

L. Popham

M. Sather

Orders of the Day

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act (continued)

D. Donaldson

Hon. C. Hansen

B. Ralston

V. Huntington

M. Farnworth

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 11 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (N o . 2), 2010 (continued)

L. Krog

A. Dix

S. Fraser

Hon. M. de Jong

Royal Assent to Bills

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development (continued)

M. Karagianis

Hon. M. Polak

B. Routley

K. Corrigan

S. Fraser

M. Elmore

[ Page 5041 ]

THURSDAY, APRIL 29, 2010

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Abbott: Earlier this afternoon the Minister of Forests and Range and I had the opportunity to be a part of a very special celebration of the Haida reconciliation protocol. This was pursuant to a bill introduced into the House this morning.

We have in the gallery today a number of the leaders of the Haida people who were instrumental in the negotiation of that reconciliation protocol. I'd ask the House to join me in making welcome Guujaaw, the president of the Haida Nation; Chief Iljuuwaas, a Haida hereditary leader; Chief Gaahlaay; Allan Davidson; James Cowpar; Ken Rea; Carrie Carty — Carrie is not only a very talented singer and drummer but also a part of our aboriginal internship program here at the Legislature and in government; and Evan Putterill, chair of the Moresby Island management committee and electoral area director from Haida Gwaii.

Would the House please join me in welcoming all of our very special guests on this very special and historic day.

[1335]

G. Coons: I also want to echo the acknowledgment of our friends from Haida Gwaii — and acknowledge the protocol agreement and reconciliation act that was brought out today — and welcome them to the Legislature and wish them a safe journey home.

I do want to mention that Ken Rea has one of the finest coffee shops, the Haida Rose Café, in Old Massett. I would welcome everybody to visit there.

Statements

MESSAGES FOR

KATRINE AND ED CONROY

C. James: A member of the official opposition and member of this Legislature is going to be away from her duties for the next month. She's going to be away performing a much larger duty than I think anyone in this House could imagine as she goes away to give a kidney donation that is going to benefit a number of families but will also benefit a former member of this House, Ed Conroy.

On behalf of all members of the Legislature, I want to wish the member for Kootenay West and her husband and the families who are also going to be positively impacted by this donation a fast, speedy recovery. We look forward to her quick return.

Mr. Speaker: I know that all our prayers will be with the member for Kootenay West.

Introductions by Members

R. Cantelon: In the gallery today is a group of courageous and bold entrepreneurs. I refer to the directors and officers of Nanaimo Forest Products, who are visiting with us today.

Ladies and gentlemen, they were told it couldn't be done. They were discouraged, and in the courthouse it was quite a moment. They were told: "Give it up. Let it go. Let it go to the breakers." But these employees decided to put their money on the line, to put their houses on the line to save a very, very valuable industrial mill for the entire province and for Nanaimo.

Please welcome Paul Sadler, the CEO. We have Grant Brebber, the administrative manager; Kevin Kurylowich; Bob Smiley; Cam Milne; and, of course, Levi Sampson, who led the charge and was very instrumental in rescuing this mill and these jobs for the community of Nanaimo. Please make them very, very welcome today.

Hon. C. Hansen: It gives me great pleasure to introduce a group of students who are here today from the riding of Vancouver–Point Grey. On behalf of the Premier of the province, it gives me great pleasure to recognize four classes from Queen Mary Elementary School. I'll point out to those students that my wife is actually a graduate of Queen Mary Elementary School, but I won't tell you how many years ago that was.

They are joined here by four of their teachers: Maria King, Shelly Jones, Dana Aweda and Virginia Bowden. Would the House please make them all very, very welcome.

Hon. B. Stewart: It gives me great honour today to introduce to the House my son James Patrick Kildare Stewart, who is here with his grandfather Dick, who some of you will know is a longtime friend of former Premiers William Richards Bennett and W.A.C. Bennett. They're here in the gallery today with my brother Tony, who's in the precinct.

Hon. I. Chong: Today in the gallery are two longtime constituents of mine from Oak Bay–Gordon Head, Anne Mclaughlin and Gordon Ells. I would ask the House to please make them very welcome as well.

Hon. P. Bell: Before I do my formal announcement, I too want to welcome everyone from Queen Mary, my old alma mater. I spent a wonderful…. Well, I won't tell

[ Page 5042 ]

you how many years I spent there. It was a while — some of the best years of my life. Grade 6 was so much fun I had to do it a couple of times.

[1340]

With that said, I would like to welcome Wayne Lintott from the Interior Logging Association, David Lewis from the Truck Loggers Association and Jacqui Beban, who is a fourth-generation logger with Frank Beban Logging Ltd. Would the House please make all three of those guests very welcome.

Hon. S. Bond: I'm really glad to hear that my colleague the member for Prince George–Mackenzie admitted that it would have been a very long time ago that he was actually in school. He deserved that. I know the members of the opposition wanted him to withdraw, the other day, his remarks about me. Thank you for that help.

Today I'm really delighted to introduce my sister-in-law and her husband, who are here visiting from Prince George. Julia, I will get the name this time. I do know them. Julia and Bert Roberge are here from Prince George. Bert was actually born here and had never been to visit the Legislature. I know you will join me in making them very welcome after travelling from Prince George to visit here in the precinct today.

Statements

INTERNATIONAL DANCE DAY

S. Chandra Herbert: I wanted to acknowledge that today is International Dance Day. Celebrations are taking place all across the province. I see the Minister of Health trying his best dance moves — trying, I said.

International Dance Day is taking place at the Dance Centre in Vancouver. I'd like to thank Mirna Zagar and all the other people who work so hard to celebrate dance in British Columbia. Would the House please join me.

MESSAGES FOR

KATRINE AND ED CONROY

J. van Dongen: As the government caucus Whip, I would like to convey on behalf of our caucus to the member for Kootenay West our very best wishes to her and her husband Ed and wish them well as they embark on what is certainly an important issue in people's lives.

I trust that she has made suitable arrangements for the continuation of discipline in her caucus. I have enough problems maintaining discipline in my caucus, so I don't want to have to worry about hers as well. [Laughter.]

Tributes

DEAN EDWARD SMITH

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have learned that former Speaker Dean Edward Smith died yesterday morning at age 81. Speaker Smith served for four terms as a member for Peace River North. He was elected as the Speaker in 1976 and held that office until 1978.

With his wife Barbara, Ed was a resident of Fort St. John. On behalf of all members, I will send a message of condolence to Ed's family.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the Auditor General's report No. 1, 2010-2011, IT Continuity Planning in Government .

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 21 — Forestry Service

Providers Protection Act

Hon. P. Bell presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Forestry Service Providers Protection Act.

Hon. P. Bell: I move that Bill 21 be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. P. Bell: Today I introduce Bill 21, the Forestry Service Providers Protection Act, which repeals the antiquated Woodworker Lien Act and replaces it with a modern framework for logging contractors.

With this bill, we're acting on our 2009 throne speech commitment to strengthen payment protection to logging contractors. The bill enables the establishment, as well, of a forestry service providers compensation fund. Forestry service providers, including loggers, yarders and haulers, will be able to apply to the fund for payment if companies that they provide services to become insolvent.

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.

[1345]

Bill 21, Forestry Service Providers Protection 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.

[ Page 5043 ]

Bill 19 — Finance Statutes

Amendment Act (N o . 2), 2010

Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Finance Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2010.

Hon. C. Hansen: I move first reading of Bill 19, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2010.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. Hansen: Bill 19 implements two significant tax initiatives that were announced prior to Budget 2010 and a number of minor administrative and technical amendments to various tax statutes. As announced on February 3, the Income Tax Act is amended to implement the B.C. interactive digital media tax credit. This credit will provide a made-in-B.C. incentive package that recognizes the convergence taking place within the film, television and the increasingly important video game and animation sectors.

Changes to the International Financial Activity Act to expand and enhance this important program were announced on February 22. Effective July 1, 2010, the Social Service Tax Act and the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act are amended to transfer administration and enforcement of TransLink's parking tax to TransLink.

Amendments to the Land Tax Deferment Act will enable a homeowner to add their spouse to the title of their home without having to terminate their existing agreement and pay off outstanding deferred taxes. The Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2010, is amended to ensure that the longstanding requirement to pay a minimum amount of property tax under the homeowner grant program continues to apply to the new northern and rural homeowner benefit.

I move that Bill 19 be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 19, Finance Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2010, 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.

BILL 20 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT (N o . 3), 2010

Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2010.

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, I move the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon.

M. de Jong: Bill 20 amends the following statutes: the Civil Forfeiture Act, Coastal Ferry Act, Evidence Act, Forest Act, Gaming Control Act, Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act, Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements) Act, Liquor Control and Licensing Act, Mineral Tenure Act, Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 3), Police Act, Representative for Children and Youth Act, Safety Standards Act, School Act, Small Business Venture Capital Act, South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act, Tobacco Control Act, Transportation Act and the Vancouver Charter.

It also makes some consequential clarifying amendments to a number of other statutes.

I can also advise the House that, absent any extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances, today's legislation represents the balance of the government's legislative agenda. I'll be working with the Opposition House Leader to settle on a

schedule for debate through the month of May and early part of June.

With that, I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 20, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2010, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

TREK TO OTTAWA IN 1935

J. Kwan: The On to Ottawa Trek was a 1935 social movement of thousands of unemployed men. They were protesting the terrible conditions in federal relief camps during the height of the Great Depression. Their demands included work and wages, adequate first aid at camps, the extension of workers' compensation and the right to vote.

After a two-month protest in Vancouver, Mayor Gerry McGeer read the Riot Act across the street from Victory Square. Not satisfied with the federal government's actions, the protesters jumped atop boxcars and rode the rails across the country to Ottawa to make their demands in person. As they stopped through towns and cities, hundreds of others joined them in places like Kamloops, Golden and Calgary, but they were stopped when they arrived in Regina by the RCMP. They were only allowed to send a delegation of eight to Ottawa. In spite of that, a thousand people were waiting to join them on the trek in Winnipeg.

[ Page 5044 ]

When the delegation arrived in Ottawa to meet with the then Prime Minister R.B. Bennett, he called the protest leader, Arthur "Slim" Evans, a "radical extortionist." In turn, Evans called him a liar, and the delegation was escorted out of the building. By the time they got back to Regina, a peaceful Dominion Day rally was brutally attacked by the police. Though the trek was over, a few months later R.B. Bennett was swept from office.

We know today that those brave protesters from B.C. were some of the early pioneers that brought social programs to the country. One of the organizers charged with treason was George Black, the father-in-law of the member for New Westminster.

[1350]

This year is the 75th anniversary of the On to Ottawa Trek, and the On to Ottawa Historical Society will be placing a plaque on the Main Street overpass in Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, where the trek began. This celebration will be held on August 6 at 1 p.m. at Crab Park.

As a symbolic trek, a delegation from the 2010 Homelessness Hunger Strike will be boarding the train to Ottawa to demand a national housing strategy, and they will be ending their year-and-a-half-long rolling strike on the steps of Parliament. I ask everyone to help celebrate this fabulous history.

JEANS DAY FUNDRAISER FOR

B.C. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

N. Letnick: I rise today in recognition of Jeans Day. Today, April 29, 2010, is the 20th anniversary of this event created to show support and raise funds for B.C. Children's Hospital Foundation All across British Columbia employees in small businesses and large corporations alike are wearing denim to show their support for the foundation's goal of improving the lives of sick and injured children.

The foundation's goal for raising funds this year is $1.4 million. British Columbians are supporting this cause by donating $5 for a Jeans Day button or $20 for a pin. The funds raised are a lifeline to the province's only full-service acute care hospital dedicated to the care and treatment of children across British Columbia. With the continued support of donations, B.C. Children's Hospital treated over 72,000 children last year.

The B.C. Children's Hospital does more than just diagnose, treat and care for children battling illness and injury. They provide an environment where children can feel safe while removed from the familiarities and comforts of their homes. Healing is a big part of the process at the B.C. Children's Hospital, but the fun, laughter and strength the children get is very valuable.

I urge any member who is able to support this foundation to do so. When the focus of any cause is the well-being of a seriously ill or injured child, I think we can all agree it is a worthy one.

ANNIVERSARY OF GRAPPLER SINKING

AND DEATHS OF CHINESE WORKERS

G. Gentner: Today is the anniversary of the sinking of the Grappler , a steam gunboat dispatched by the admiralty to B.C. in order to secure law and order in 1858. After some military work, including the deplorable shelling of a First Nation village on Kuper Island, the Grappler was refitted as a tug and coastal trader.

On April 28, 1883, the Grappler departed Victoria, heading up-coast with a cargo of supplies and over 100 passengers, most of whom were Chinese cannery workers. It was 127 years ago tonight, about four miles from Seymour Narrows, that a fire was discovered beneath the boiler. It quickly burned through the hemp ropes connecting the wheel to the rudder, rendering the steamer unmanageable. One of only two lifeboats and a small skiff were successfully launched.

Of those that survived, 21 were white. Surprisingly, Captain Jagers gallantly tried to stay with his flaming ship but somehow made it out alive, along with the cannery owner, John McCallister, who heroically saved himself by pulling himself onto one of the boats. He escaped, to describe the inferno steamer as "going forward and backwards while passengers were shrieking and yelling for assistance."

We hear much of the loss of the 29 on the Edmund Fitzgerald , but when do we in B.C. intone the loss of 90 Chinese canners? Their names were never recorded. Somewhere below the frigid waters and treacherous currents of Discovery Passage lies evidence of a legacy of exploitation of those who came to B.C. to find a better life, those who helped build this province, those whose story must be told.

Somewhere out there, 30 fathoms or more, lies the Grappler untouched and almost forgotten in troubled waters, where we are fearful to disturb.

CANADIAN ROLE IN KOREAN WAR

H. Bloy: I rise today to acknowledge the sacrifices of 26,000 Canadian soldiers who fought in the Korean War. I will be travelling to Korea this June as a guest of the Korean government to recognize the 60th anniversary of the Korean War.

This anniversary often goes unnoticed, and this war is often referred to as the forgotten war. These 26,000 brave Canadian soldiers travelled across the world to help protect a country that they'd never dreamed of visiting and a people that they had never met before. Canada quickly began playing a major role in the war and was instrumental on nearly every major battlefront.

[1355]

These actions will never be forgotten by the Korean people, and they are forever grateful. The Korean people

[ Page 5045 ]

are extremely fond of Canadians because of the role we played in securing their freedom.

The Korean community in Burnaby raised over $250,000 towards a peace memorial at Burnaby Central Park. This government and the Korean government each donated $100,000 towards this memorial. Along with true Canadian war heroes, I dedicated this memorial for future generations.

Today in Ottawa, as we speak, Senator Yonah Martin is proposing that the Canadian government recognize July 27 as our national Korean veterans day. I am proposing that our government proclaim July 27 each year to be British Columbia's Korean War veterans day. I would ask that all members of the House take time to remember this war and the Canadians who were part of it, and recognize July 27 and its significance.

ELEANOR GATTAFONI ROBINSON

AND SUPPORT FOR

KOOTENAY BOUNDARY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

K. Conroy: There are so many amazing people in my constituency, people who work together to ensure that good things happen in the Kootenays. That couldn't have been more obvious than in the last few months as people from all walks of life and political stripes collaborated together to save the operating room at the Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital.

Seeing doctors working with nurses, with support staff and with thousands of residents from throughout the region made me proud to be from such an incredibly caring and active community. When it comes to health care, we have had our differences in the Kootenays. But when the regional hospital was threatened, voices were heard across the entire region from Nelson and Kaslo to Nakusp, Grand Forks and of course Castlegar and Trail.

Thousands signed petitions and publicly rallied, and they were successful, because not only did they voice their opposition to the closure; they worked together to offer solutions for a positive outcome.

I do want to thank the doctors who showed their true compassion and concern and worked with whoever they could, including local, provincial and federal politicians, community activists and the Interior Health Authority to ensure that services continued to be provided. Again, amazing people in Kootenay West — so many that it often makes the job of choosing the citizen of the year in different communities a really difficult one.

I do want to acknowledge one of those people, who was the choice as the Trail-Warfield citizen of the year. Eleanor Gattafoni Robinson is one of those incredible people who make our communities so good. Eleanor has lived her entire life in the area and has always been involved in one way or another. The list of communities, organizations and events she has been involved with starts in the early '80s and involves over 30 different groups. She is well known and well liked by people of all ages and is thoroughly committed to the area.

Today as a city councillor for Trail, one can find her continuing to advocate on behalf of the citizens of Trail. Eleanor is indeed a truly deserving candidate for this recognition. I want to finish by quoting her nominator, Chris Piva. "It is people like Eleanor that make our city a great place to live."

MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION

D. Barnett: Today is World Wish Day in honour of the first wish ever granted by the Make-A-Wish Foundation. As the largest wish-granting organization in the world, in 35 countries celebrations will be taking place honouring the magic of a wish.

For 27 years Make-A-Wish B.C. and Yukon has shared the power of a wish with over 1,300 special children across the province. The Make-A-Wish Foundation believes that all children should be free to dream, and we know that some children need their dreams to come true today.

Last year 129 wishes were granted, the most ever and the most ever in Canada. This year we are on target to surpass this. Again, at any moment Make-A-Wish B.C. has over 200 wishes on their docket.

I ask the members of the House to join me in thanking the Make-A-Wish

chapter and their supporters, partners and volunteers for helping them share the power of a wish.

Oral Questions

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON SMALL BUSINESS

C. James: Mr. Speaker, a survey of small businesses shows that over 70 percent of the respondents believe that the HST will increase the price of goods and services. Only 5 percent think it will help.

[1400]

For decades B.C.'s small businesses have been the lifeblood of our economy. As we know, after the recession, small businesses' success is critical to our recovery. But the HST will hurt small businesses. It will hurt consumers.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. When will he listen to small businesses, listen to the public and get rid of the HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: The member is wrong. Actually, the elimination of the provincial sales tax, which we will do pursuant to Bill 9 in this province, and the adoption of the harmonized sales tax will be a significant net benefit for the vast majority of small businesses in British

[ Page 5046 ]

Columbia. That is exactly why the B.C. Chamber of Commerce has been encouraging the provincial governments to adopt a harmonized sales tax going back into the mid-1990s.

I know that in small business workshops around British Columbia, the chamber of commerce has been endeavouring to make sure that the small business community gets access to factual information about how the HST will impact on them and their consumers. But the bottom line is that the HST will be a benefit to the small business community in British Columbia.

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

C. James: Let's look at the facts. Restaurants, tourism industry, bike stores, wedding planners, veterinarians, newspaper and magazine stores, car washes, safety equipment, energy-saving appliance stores, yoga classes, accounting services, food supplement stores — these are just some of the businesses who have stood together and said they're against the HST.

Business after business has come forward to say no, and so have B.C. families in every community in this province. Again, my question is to the minister. When will the B.C. Liberals do the right thing and scrap the HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: The HST is actually a big benefit for the vast majority of small businesses in British Columbia. That's why the Institute of Chartered Accountants is 100 percent in support of the harmonized sales tax. That's why the Certified General Accountants of British Columbia is in support of the harmonized sales tax. That's why the Retail Council of Canada, B.C. branch, is in support of the harmonized sales tax. That's why Shelfspace British Columbia, representing literally tens of thousands of small business retailers in British Columbia, is in favour.

I would add that one of the things that this government has done…. This government has done more to support the small business community than any government in the last 20 years. While under the NDP government of the 1990s they saw their tax burden go up, saw their regulatory burden go up. Under this government they saw their small business tax rate go from 4.5 percent down to 2.5 percent, and next year it's going down to zero.

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

C. James: The Finance Minister and every other member on that side of the House can close their ears, but the public is speaking loud and clear and saying no to the HST.

I want to quote a small business owner in my own community. Legends Comics and Books store in my community has said they'll see half of their annual sales hurt by the HST. Here's what the owners say: "Our store has just experienced the worst six months of sales in five years. The people who shop in my store are already struggling because of the recession. The HST is going to have a significant percentage of sales lost to my annual income. It could cause my doors to close."

Again, my question is to the minister. Why are the B.C. Liberals hitting small businesses when they can afford it the least, and why won't they scrap the HST?

[1405]

Hon. C. Hansen: It's interesting that the member should use an example of a book store. Book stores today are exempt from PST, and they will be exempt from the 7 percent provincial share of the HST come July 1.

I can tell the member that every book store in British Columbia is going to wind up being better off. Why? Because all of the PST that they have to pay on all of the costs of operating that book store will be…. Today they have to eat that and pass it on in the cost of their books. After July 1 they will actually wind up being able to get rebated on all of that amount. Their costs are coming down. Therefore, they should be able to pass on even better prices to their customers.

B. Ralston: In addition to the direct and negative impact that the HST will have upon small business, small business retailers will also lose thousands of dollars when they lose the right to collect PST commissions after July 1. Those are commissions that small business receives for collecting PST sales tax on behalf of the government.

Here's what Mark Startup of Shelfspace, the Association for Retail Entrepreneurs, had to say at a recent conference: "Loss of PST commission is serious for many small retailers. Small retailers rely on those funds."

My question is to the minister. Will the B.C. Liberals do the right thing for B.C.'s small business retailers and stop the HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: It's interesting that the Finance critic should raise this particular subject. We do provide a commission now for retailers to collect and remit the provincial sales tax. We will not be doing that after July 1 because there will be no more provincial sales tax.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: It's interesting to watch the contortions that the official opposition are going through as they oppose a bill that will eliminate the provincial sales

[ Page 5047 ]

tax. Even this morning we saw the official opposition vote against a clause in the bill that would actually allow the director to give a rebate if a tax was inappropriately charged. I noticed the member for Delta South actually read the clause and voted in favour of it, because it's appropriate. The official opposition voted against it.

We also know that in British Columbia today there is $150 million of compliance costs that small businesses and businesses alike pay in compliance cost, with the existing provincial sales tax. As of July 1 that is $150 million that the small business community and the rest of the business community will enjoy in terms of reduced costs as a result of getting rid of the provincial sales tax.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Well, the minister can make light of PST commissions, but it was sufficiently important for the government back in October 2008 to include doubling those PST commissions as one of its ten points, so-called points, in a recovery plan. That's how important it was back then. Now 20 months later — wiped aside.

Mr. Startup is very clear…

[1410]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

B. Ralston: …in his presentation entitled "HST Impacts for B.C. Retailers." He says that small retailers will "be particularly disadvantaged by the cancellation of PST commissions" — again during a time when, he says — "it's widely recognized by consumers that their costs are going up." HST is going to hurt business. It's going to hurt retail small business because of the cancellation of the PST commission.

My question is to the minister. How many more reasons does he need to cancel the HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: The reason we doubled the commission is in recognition of the $150 million of compliance cost that the business community was facing to comply with a very onerous, complex and outdated provincial sales tax that we have in place today. As of July 1 that provincial sales tax will be eliminated in British Columbia, and that will reduce the compliance costs to the business community by $150 million.

IMPLEMENTATION OF

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

D. Donaldson: This is a tax that was conceived in secret by the B.C. Liberals, and now it's being delivered in a deceitful way. They snuck it in, in the middle of the summer.

Mr. Speaker: I just remind the member to be careful with his language, please.

D. Donaldson: Noted, hon. Speaker.

They snuck it in the in the middle of the summer. Now they want B.C. businesses and consumers to simply accept it and move on, but I can tell you that that is not going to happen.

Here's what Bruce Cran of the consumers association had to say about that. "This tax was spoken of during the election. We were told it wasn't coming in under any circumstances, and then what? Forty-eight hours later they're off on a tangent, implementing it as fast as they can go."

Again to the Finance Minister: will the B.C. Liberals finally stand up for the people of this province and put an end to the HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: Perhaps I can share with the member some quotes from the forest sector, which I know is so vitally important to his constituency. This is actually a memo that the president of the Council of Forest Industries put out to forest workers around British Columbia.

He says: "We must be cost-competitive if we are to maintain and grow market share. If we can do so, then the industry will continue to provide employment and incomes for thousands of workers in dozens of communities." He goes on to say: "Will it greatly assist economic prosperity, job creation and wages? Absolutely."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member has a supplemental.

D. Donaldson: Well, the legacy of this government is mill closures around the entire province, and Stikine included. The people in the province and small business experts have made it clear, and the minister has ignored them over and over again. The HST will drive business away.

He's heard it from the restaurant industry. He's heard it from the tourism industry. He's heard it from consumer associations. Just recently he even heard it from this government's own former Finance Minister, Carole Taylor, who said that the HST will be bad for consumers. That's just a few of the people he's heard it from.

My question is to the Finance Minister. Why won't he and the B.C. Liberals stand up in the House today and say no to the HST?

[1415]

Hon. C. Hansen: The question I would put back to the member is: why doesn't he stand up for his constituents who are looking for job security and jobs in the

[ Page 5048 ]

forest sector? Why doesn't he stand up for his constituents who are looking for jobs in the mining sector and ask the question of why it is that the Mining Association of British Columbia is such a big proponent of HST? It's because it's going to create jobs in the northwestern part of British Columbia.

N. Macdonald: Well, answers like this explain exactly why all of 2 percent of British Columbians agree with that minister's position, and he speaks like people in the communities don't understand what's going on. Will restaurant meals cost 7 percent more? Yes. Will tickets to the Kimberley Dynamiters cost 7 percent more? Yes. Will a round of golf at Greywolf cost 7 percent more? Yes. Will a haircut cost 7 percent more? Yes. Will a trip to the museum cost 7 percent more? Yes.

Will all those increases come to almost $2 billion? Yes. Do over 85 percent of British Columbians not want the HST? Yes.

Did the B.C. Liberals deceive the people of British Columbia to get elected? Yes. So why doesn't the minister do the right thing, listen to the people of British Columbia and scrap the HST?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Hansen: And will more British Columbians have jobs as a result of HST? Yes. And will low-income British Columbians have access to HST tax credits to offset income tax? Yes. Will families have more money in their pockets as a result of the income tax reductions that we brought in? Yes.

There is a wide range of benefits to the harmonized sales tax. We have every leading economist in Canada of any note supportive of the harmonized sales tax. It is absolutely the right public policy for us to pursue at this time in the history of British Columbia, and it will be a net increase in the amount of jobs that British Columbians will have available to them.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON COASTAL COMMUNITIES

AND FERRY SERVICES

G. Coons: It is obvious that this HST is a truth-or-consequences moment for this government. They haven't told the truth, and they will suffer the consequences.

This government is forcing the HST on a province that has clearly rejected it. What's worse, they announced it without first studying the full impact it would have on families, on First Nations and industries in British Columbia.

At B.C. Ferries alone, the HST will add $6 million on to the government-owned corporation's operational budget, and guess who will pay for this spike? B.C. coastal communities through higher fares and reduced service.

My question is to the Finance Minister. Why should residents up and down the coast pay for this government's dreaded HST?

[1420]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Hansen: Coastal communities in British Columbia will benefit from the jobs that'll be created. A lot of coastal communities have been suffering because of the competition that they're facing in terms of international markets for products that are produced from coastal communities.

That's why the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association is such a big supporter of the harmonized sales tax. It's going to mean that our products that we are shipping overseas…. Whether it's fisheries products that are going into Asia or whether it's forest products that are going into Asia or into the United States, those products will be more competitive. That means more jobs for that member's constituents.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: It's pretty embarrassing if this is all that this minister has to offer to the 82 percent of British Columbians who reject this government's HST.

A few weeks back we heard about a huge privacy breach at B.C. Ferries for people who pay with credit cards. It hasn't been fixed yet, but it's expected to cost almost $600,000. Right there on the budget document for the project is almost $60,000 for the HST alone. Add to this the $6 million I just talked about, and again, coastal communities will have to pay for it through higher fares.

Again to the Finance Minister: why should coastal B.C. residents pay even more for ferries because of this government's ill-conceived HST?

Hon. C. Hansen: Ferry fares in British Columbia are today exempt from GST, and they will be exempt from HST.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: I think the member is making exactly the point of the kind of taxes, like PST, that com-

[ Page 5049 ]

panies are facing today, under a PST system today, that they have to pass on to their ultimate consumers.

Because B.C. Ferries is exempt from GST and they will be exempt from the harmonized sales tax, they don't get to actually get the input credits that all companies that are not exempt will get.

If the member took the time to understand how a value-added tax system works for those companies and those services that are not exempt, he would realize the great benefit that HST will bring to the vast majority of companies in B.C.

IMPLEMENTATION OF

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

J. Kwan: The point is this. The B.C. Liberals deceived British Columbians during the election about the HST, and overwhelmingly, they don't want to have the HST. The Premier won't admit it — that British Columbians are against the HST…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Kwan: …but government members know very well that their constituents are against the HST. They know in their hearts, and they see it in the community, and then they hear it from their constituents. Referring to the blowback from the HST, the MLA for Kelowna–Lake Country said: "I have never been called so many names in my life, and I don't like it."

On this day….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1425]

J. Kwan: The government members have a chance to stand up for their constituents for a change and to say no to the HST and stop ramming the HST down their throats. Does anybody on that side of the House have the courage to do just that?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat, Member.

ELECTIONS B.C. RULING ON

HARMONIZED SALES TAX MAILOUT

S. Simpson: Now we've learned that Elections B.C. has said no to the desperate Liberal scheme to put out campaign literature at taxpayers' expense to oppose the citizens' initiative. It was a desperate and irresponsible act when the minister suggested it, and we're pleased that Elections B.C. at least put this government back in its place.

Will the minister tell us: is he going to respect the ruling of Elections B.C., and if so, will he tell us how much money he wasted on this desperate scheme?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: The government will fill two obligations. One, we will obviously respect the law. We will respect rulings that are handed down, and we'll do what we can within the ambit of the law to ensure that British Columbians have accurate information upon which to….

But this might be my chance to ask something that I've been dying to ask. What's it like to be an NDPer working for Bill Vander Zalm? I just want to know how lifelong members of the NDP feel….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just a minute, Attorney. Take your seat for a second.

Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: There seems to be a sensitivity around the fact that NDPers are working for Bill Vander Zalm. Maybe he's not a very good boss. I don't know. What's he like to work for? Is there an incentive program? Are members of the NDP going to tell us? Can you earn a Faye Leung hat if you're at all…? Are they going to get a shovel? I just want to know, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Attorney.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just wait, Member.

Members.

IMPLEMENTATION OF

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

M. Farnworth: What's it like to work with British Columbians in every corner of this province to fight to defeat the HST? It's fantastic, hon. Speaker.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Member.

[1430]

[ Page 5050 ]

M. Farnworth: You know, I'm a caring person. I'm really concerned about some of the members opposite, hon. Speaker, and I think the Finance Minister really needs to help them out. You know, it's bad enough watching Gordon Brown insult a pensioner, but when I hear some of the members opposite say that they're getting many, many e-mails, more than they can tell you, about the HST and that all of them are extremely emotional and that all of them lack any substance whatsoever, I think it's high time that the Minister of Finance stepped in and stopped his colleagues from insulting their constituents.

If he doesn't want to scrap the HST because British Columbian families know it's going to cost them more, at least scrap the HST so his colleagues stop insulting their constituents.

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, I have a prediction. I predict that that question is going to earn the member a gold shovel from Bill Vander Zalm.

The member did mention e-mails, and my point, actually, in asking the question, related to some e-mail traffic that the boss — the other boss, or the real boss — Mr. Vander Zalm….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: Twenty-five members that I'm aware of have signed up to work for Bill Vander Zalm, and they may want to know the kinds of things that Mr. Vander Zalm is saying in e-mails. In this particular e-mail he's criticizing social workers promoting safe sex, and he's saying: "The province needs to degrade itself more and sink further into a mindless, immoral state with its sad and dire consequences."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: There seems to be a genuine sensitivity around answering for what the boss is saying. The boss….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: The head of the campaign that the vast majority of the members of the opposition have signed on to work for is telling people that…. He is saying: "The province needs to degrade itself more and sink further into a mindless, immoral state with its sad and dire consequences for the people."

Now, I'm not entirely sure what that means, but then again, I haven't signed up to work for Bill Vander Zalm and disseminate false information to the people of British Columbia. We'll give them the facts, and we'll create a policy that creates jobs for British Columbians, as we always have.

[End of question period.]

L. Popham: I rise to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

L. Popham: I have a petition signed by 916 strata owners in British Columbia who, with this petition, hereby notify this government of their reasoned opposition to the HST and their anger over the heavy-handed way in which it's being introduced.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

M. Sather: I seek leave to present a petition.

[1435]

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

M. Sather: I have here a petition signed by 1,220 people in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows calling on this government to scrap the HST.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, Committee of Supply — for the information of members, the estimates of the Ministry of Children and Families — and, in this chamber, continued committee stage debate on Bill 9.

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate

and Transition Act

(continued)

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 9; L. Reid in the chair.

The committee met at 2:37 p.m.

Section 30 approved on division.

section 31.

[ Page 5051 ]

D. Donaldson: This section's topic is "Refund in accordance with Nisga'a Nation Taxation Agreement." I have a number of questions on this

section for the minister. First off, subsection 31(1) talks about the taxation agreement between the Nisga'a First Nation and the province of B.C.

If the minister could elaborate on the intent of

section 31(1), which says that the Nisga'a Nation taxation agreement tabled in the Legislature on November 30, 1998, is represented here "but does not include any amendments made to that agreement after that date." Could the minister elaborate on the intent of why no amendments since 1998 are included?

Hon. C. Hansen: What this

section does is actually put in place the exact same wording that was in the social service tax. The intention is that we continue with the same benefits and privileges that existed under the provincial sales tax.

D. Donaldson: Could the minister describe the amendments made since 1998 that this

section would not apply to?

Hon. C. Hansen: We don't have that with us. The intent on having this wording in this legislation in this way is to make sure that the exact same wording continues as is applicable under the Social Service Tax Act.

D. Donaldson: I have a number of questions for this

section because it relates to the Nisga'a Nation as well as First Nations in general. It goes back to some of the discussion my colleague from Surrey-Whalley was initiating around used vehicles.

[1440]

Could the minister describe the situation, as he sees it…? If a used vehicle was bought off reserve by a First Nations person and then registered on reserve, would it be subject to the provincial portion of the HST — which is a new 7 percent tax, as he knows, on the sale of a used vehicle?

Hon. C. Hansen: If a vehicle was purchased on reserve or if the seller delivered the vehicle to the reserve — so therefore, it would be purchased on the reserve — then the purchaser would not be subject to this transfer tax.

D. Donaldson: Thank you for that answer. To add some clarity here, because where I live, there are many First Nations reserves and as well…. The village of Hazelton, actually, was carved out of one of the First Nations reserves, so we have lots of transactions back and forth between Gitanmaax, for instance, and Hazelton, as well as the Gitxsan Nation in general. I'm sure the situation applies elsewhere.

If there was a used vehicle being transferred through a sale between two people on reserve, would the new provincial portion of the HST apply to the sale of that vehicle?

Hon. C. Hansen: There would be no change in the application of this tax between the way it is dealt with today or the way it would be dealt with in July. If two individuals both lived on reserve and one was a purchaser and one was a seller, they would be able to transfer the vehicle to the purchaser without the application of this tax.

D. Donaldson: Thank you for that. The next series of questions revolve around….

Well, the Nisga'a Nation, for one, is one of eight First Nations in B.C. who have implemented a First Nations GST. There are some concerns there and concerns amongst the other seven First Nations, as well, including the Tsawout, the Akisqnuk, the Lower Kootenay Indian band, the Shuswap First Nation, St. Mary's Indian band, Tobacco Plains Indian band and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation — as well as the Nisga'a. These are all First Nations who've implemented the First Nations GST.

The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs is very, very concerned about how the HST will impact this First Nations GST, for instance. They've asked for meetings with the minister and have not been able to get a meeting with him about their concerns.

They've said in news releases: "Consumption taxes such as the HST are regressive as they disproportionately affect lower-income households, and proposed HST rebates for low-income individuals and families will not offset the increased taxes." That's their view.

In regards to

section 31, again, they have some major concerns around the consultation that they believe is required, especially when it comes to First Nations GST. They — being the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs — passed a resolution at their annual AGM in November. The resolution called for meetings with both levels of government — they haven't, as I said, been successful in their request to have a meeting with the minister — and time-specific commitments to develop appropriate information packages regarding the application of the HST to first nations.

[1445]

Again, this resolution had inclusion of specific non-derogation language regarding the preservation of

section 87 of the Indian Act tax exemption and continuing rights of First Nations taxation rights under the First Nations Goods and Services Tax Act and the First Nations sales tax.

My question in regards to this is to the minister, and it is: is there a B.C.-Canada technical working group that is in place or established yet that First Nations have

[ Page 5052 ]

been invited to have a presence on in regards to some of the issues we see in

section 31 and the First Nations GST?

Hon. C. Hansen: I would just start by pointing out to the member that his question is not in any way related to the

section that we're debating. This

section is solely about the vehicle transfer tax that would be applied for the private sale of vehicles.

But I will elaborate a little bit just to inform the member that there was a letter that was sent by the First Nations leadership addressed jointly to myself and to the federal Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty. Minister Flaherty responded on behalf of both of us, as the application and the administration of the HST is a federal responsibility. But as I understand it, all of the benefits that First Nations have today with regard to the GST agreements continue to be in place and will apply to HST in the way that they apply to the GST.

I have no doubt that the CRA has working groups within the Canada Revenue Agency that would be tasked with looking specifically at implications for First Nations, but because it is CRA that's responsible for that administration, it does not directly involve us.

I would also point out to the member that I saw some income numbers recently for First Nations individuals in British Columbia. The vast majority of First Nations in British Columbia will be eligible for the HST tax rebate that an estimated 1.1 million British Columbians would be eligible for. Certainly, even for First Nations individuals who were living off reserve, that would more than cover any incremental costs that HST may cause them — any incremental impact on their household budgets that the HST may cause.

D. Donaldson: Well, I appreciate the minister's comments, but the intro to this

section references the Nisga'a Nation taxation agreement, and the Nisga'a Nation is one of the First Nations in B.C. with a First Nations GST, along with seven others. You know, this is a place, within this section, to have a discussion around that. They haven't been able to have that discussion.

I'll ask another question in these regards. The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs has said that the First Nations GST has the same basic operating rules as the GST-HST. On lands where the First Nations GST applies, the rate of tax imposed on taxable goods and services is the federal portion of the HST, which everyone has to pay regardless of Indian status.

But what they say is that it's unclear what will happen with the provincial portion of the HST. In fact, they've said the Canada Revenue Agency has stated publicly that the details have not yet been worked out.

Could the minister elaborate on the details so that there will be some more certainty for these First Nations in this situation?

Hon. C. Hansen: Again, I will emphasize that this

section has nothing to do with the question that the member just asked. This

section pertains to the 12 percent transfer tax that applies for the private sale of used vehicles in British Columbia.

The administration of the harmonized sales tax, whether it's the provincial portion or the federal portion, will be administered by the Canada Revenue Agency, and they will be responsible for developing those rules and processes. My understanding is that the privileges and the benefits that First Nations have in British Columbia today with regards to the goods and services tax will continue for both the federal and the provincial portions of the harmonized sales tax.

[1450]

D. Donaldson: Well, I appreciate what the minister is saying. Perhaps if the HST had been introduced in a more transparent manner, these questions could have been addressed in a public forum. I'm going to ask one more along these lines, because I do believe that it relates to the taxation issues in

section 31.

That's the First Nations sales tax. There are actually a number of First Nations in B.C. — nine — that have implemented a First Nations sales tax. What they've said is that they're wondering, from this government, and they've been told…. The Canada Revenue Agency has advised that the Ministry of Finance in British Columbia is currently working through the issues and will be advising them shortly of the rules for application of the First Nations GST and First Nations sales tax in an HST environment.

No other First Nations and provinces that have HST have chosen to implement the First Nations sales tax or the First Nations GST. They're saying that the Ministry of Finance is working through the implications of this. Could the minister describe what his staff in the Ministry of Finance are discovering, so that these First Nations have some understanding of what situation they're going to be facing?

Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned, this

section pertains to the transfer of vehicles. The staff with me are fully up to speed on all the implications of what this

section is about. I can't address that member's specific question, because it is not relevant to this

section or any other

section of the act.

Section 31 approved on division.

section 32.

B. Ralston: The minister has said that in accordance with

section 3, the Social Service Tax Act is being repealed, but it appears that it's going to live on in a number of sections in this bill. Will the minister con-

[ Page 5053 ]

firm that

section 32 is in the Social Service Tax Act as

section 82.11? We appear to have life after death. The Social Service Tax Act continues on in various forms.

Hon. C. Hansen: The member is correct.

D. Donaldson:

Section 32 says that a tax treatment agreement means an agreement among a treaty First Nation and British Columbia and Canada. The previous

section referenced one specific First Nation. Would the minister be able to tell us what the other treaty First Nations are that would be subject to

section 32?

Hon. C. Hansen: This would include all of the First Nations treaties that have been signed and implemented subsequent to the Nisga'a agreement. It would include Tsawwassen and Maa-nulth. I'm not sure if there are others that I'm missing.

D. Donaldson: Thank you for that answer. Would there be a difference between some of the treaties that you've just referenced — a difference between what would apply under

section 32 and the fact that they don't have a Nisga'a-style taxation agreement under

section 31?

[1455]

Would there be any differences between what applies to the Nisga'a Nation under the previous

section and what applies to the First Nations that would come under

section 32?

Hon. C. Hansen: I'm certainly aware that there are different tax measures in the various treaty agreements that have been ratified. What this does is simply continue the existing language that we see in the Social Service Tax Act in exactly the same form and exactly the same words.

Section 32 approved on division.

section 33.

B. Ralston: Can the minister briefly explain the purpose of this section? It appears to be a mirror image of previous sections about claims for refund, and it doesn't appear there's anything unusual about it in relation to when a comparison is made to other similar sections. But if there is, could the minister advise?

Hon. C. Hansen: There is nothing unusual about this particular section. It is standard language that's used in consumption tax acts, and it is simply a provision that sets out the process for claiming a refund.

Sections 33 and 34 approved on division.

section 35.

B. Ralston:

Section 35 initiates a new

part in the bill entitled "Administration." These appear to confer rather broad powers on provincial authorities to inspect, to audit, to assess and to order penalties and notices of assessment. Can the minister explain the purpose for these broad powers and how they relate to the provincial aspect of the HST, which he has said repeatedly is a federal statute?

Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, this has nothing to do with the administration of the harmonized sales tax. The collection of that tax and the administration of it is 100 percent the responsibility of the Canada Revenue Agency pursuant to federal statutes.

This particular

section pertains to the other issues — for example, the vehicle transfer tax we've talked about earlier but also with regard to the point-of-sale rebate that would apply on home energy, which is a provincially administered rebate program and not administered by the CRA. This language that is in

section 35 is the exact same language that appears in the Social Service Tax Act, with the exception of subsection (3).

Subsection (3) is new to reflect the fact that the transfer tax for boats and airplanes changes slightly in that in the past we had required that vendors be responsible for collecting this. We are now actually saying that it is the Ministry of Finance that will take responsibility. It relieves a compliance and paper burden workload from vendors of cars and boats.

B. Ralston:

Section 35(5) appears to authorize the issuance of a warrant to enter a business premise and, I suppose, if the place of business is also one's home, a warrant to enter one's home.

[1500]

Can the minister advise, since he says this exists in the present Social Service Tax Act? In the case of someone not paying the transfer fee, the additional 7 percent on a used car, would it be within the realm of possibility that that person, if they didn't agree to have their business premise or their home searched, could be the subject of a warrant and have their house or business searched under the authority of a warrant?

Hon. C. Hansen: This language is identical to the language that currently exists in the Social Service Tax Act, and it does not allow for a residence to be entered without the consent of the owner or an appropriate warrant.

B. Ralston: I'm looking at subsection (5). That appears to be the exception to the consent set out in section (4). Section (4) is: "The power to enter a place under subsection (1) must not be used to enter a dwelling occupied as a residence without the consent…except under the authority of a warrant under subsection (5)." The reading seems to be that if a person doesn't consent

[ Page 5054 ]

to a search of their residence, then a warrant could be applied for.

So if you don't remit your tax on a used car, you could, at the end of a chain of events, be the subject of a search by warrant of your residence. Would the minister confirm that that's an accurate reading of the section?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes.

B. Ralston:

Section 35(2) refers to…. There's a reference in sub (1) about a business premise. It says: "…the premises where the records of the person are kept," and this person must produce all records, as required by the director — this is before taking the step of applying for a warrant, presumably — and "answer all questions of the director regarding the matters referred to in that subsection."

Can the minister confirm or perhaps provide an answer that would suggest that this has been vetted by lawyers in the Attorney General Ministry and passes the usual tests of concerns that some people might have about providing answers under compulsion? A clear reading of the statute would suggest that that's what's required — a mandatory answering of all questions of the director. Sometimes courts rule against and strike down sections like that.

Can the minister just advise: what's the legal opinion that he's received on the authority of the province to pass this legislation, and has the similar or identical legislation in the Social Service Tax Act ever been tested in a court?

Hon. C. Hansen: This is language that has been in the Social Service Tax Act for a long time. There have been no successful challenges to the language, but as we develop Bill 9, we work closely with staff in the Attorney General's ministry.

B. Ralston: Can the minister advise, then — and perhaps staff would have this knowledge: how many cases in the recent past, say in the last five years, has the director, in pursuit of answers under the inspection and audit powers that are in the Social Service Tax Act, which are going to apparently live on, despite

section 3 that repeals the act…? These powers under the Social Services Tax Act are going to live on. How many times has there been an application for a warrant in these circumstances?

[1505]

Hon. C. Hansen: I can add that this language that has existed in the Social Service Tax Act is common language that is there in other consumption tax acts that we have, as well, in the province. It is certainly a power that, if it has been used, would be used in a very limited way. I don't have precise information as to whether there has been a case where a warrant has been requested and, if so, how many.

B. Ralston: Obviously, there's a purpose in having this, presumably. I mean, one can, according to the ordinary rules of statutory

interpretation, assume that this is necessary.

Is it something that's not used at all and is merely included here in the statute as pro forma, just for the sake of appearance, or is there a history of having to resort to these powers and an intention to use them in the future if necessary? I think that's the question. Otherwise, one would wonder why the

section was necessary.

Hon. C. Hansen: Having these provisions in the consumption tax acts certainly is an important power. The objective, obviously, on the part of the director would be to not have to use it. But having this language as backup certainly would result in more voluntary compliance with the need for inspections, and if necessary — if there was an egregious violation or egregious withholding of access to the information necessary to enforce tax collection — the director would have this tool at his or her disposal.

B. Ralston: Just to perhaps retreat, then, from the more extreme power of seeking a warrant and entering a premise under the power of a warrant or under the authority of a warrant, can the minister advise: in the recent past, given that this is an identical

section to the Social Service Tax Act, how many times, say, in the previous five years has the director had to use the provisions in

section 35(1) or 35(2), the equivalent sections and the old Social Service Tax Act, which is living on in this

section after it's been repealed?

Hon. C. Hansen: In terms of what I think the member's specific question is with regards to subsections (1) and (2), these are the audit powers always used by the director in an investigation, and they would be used on a regular basis.

B. Ralston: Certainly, my experiences operating a business would be that the social services tax authorities might direct a letter — particularly if you're so unfortunate as to be late in filing, even by a day — and assess a penalty, usually beginning at 25 percent of the value of the tax owed. But the instances that I am personally acquainted with where the director entered, at a reasonable time, the business premises occupied by a person where the records are kept to inspect, to audit and to examine records or inspect and examine designated property…. I haven't heard of that.

If they're used all the time, is there no publicity given to the entry of those people employed to enforce the act, or are there no statistics kept of entries on premises

[ Page 5055 ]

under these fairly strong powers to enter into business premises to take and inspect records? There's subsection (7). It prohibits…. "A person must not (

a) hinder, molest or interfere with a person doing anything that the person is authorized to do under this section, or (

b) prevent or attempt to prevent a person from doing anything that the person is authorized…."

[1510]

Presumably, a violation of that would constitute an offence under the Offence Act. So these are pretty strong powers. I'm not necessarily disagreeing that one needs those as backup, but I think, given that they are there, that the minister has, in his wisdom, decided that this is necessary to include in the statute for the purposes of administering this transfer tax.

I'm wondering if the minister can advise us, to get a sense of how these powers have been used in the past, of how frequently that's taken place in, say, the last five years. I think that's a reasonable period of time, and I think that's a reasonable question that deserves an answer.

Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned, these powers are used all the time. When a PST auditor goes out today to engage in an audit, the first thing they do is enter the business premises.

I know that in my previous life as a small business owner, the PST auditors were welcomed and treated very kindly, given access to the coffee machine and everything else, and they did a very comprehensive and thorough audit. This was way back before my days as an elected official, but they were certainly treated with all the courtesies. I think that is the experience that the auditors have in a vast majority of cases. In fact, at the end of the audit they found virtually no discrepancies. They were actually extremely minor — the things that they were able to identify.

That being said, there are certainly other times when PST auditors are not welcomed into a business, and it does become a rather tense relationship in some cases. It is important that these powers be there to allow the auditors to do their job and at the same time to have the assurances that they can fulfil their job without undue interference.

B. Ralston: Well, I'm really not disputing anything the minister is saying. I'm just interested in some statistical overview, just to get a sense of how frequently this takes place. Certainly, my experience and my understanding are that it's relatively rare for social service tax personnel to enter the premises and formally audit it. Usually they function on voluntary compliance, self-disclosure and the occasional stern letter if you're late in remitting.

I'm interested in a sense of…. I'm sure those people who may be subject to this might like to get a sense of it. It may even have a salutary effect in terms of encouraging compliance. If the minister is able to produce some statistics to show that this is used frequently and effectively, others may be encouraged to comply. So I don't think it's an unreasonable question.

If the minister doesn't have that answer available here, then I think that's regrettable, but perhaps he can furnish it at a later time, although as he well knows, the guillotine is coming down here at five o'clock. All debate on this bill will cease at that point, as he knows. But given electronic technology, perhaps the advisers there have some means of communicating with someone back in the office who could provide that information in very short order.

Hon. C. Hansen: I do not have that statistical information with me about the social service tax, nor would that kind of statistical information be relevant to this particular section, because we're talking about a totally different environment.

When you look at the audits that are being performed on the provincial sales tax, that is obviously on a great range of goods and services to which the PST applies today. This

section only pertains to those elements, those things that the province will continue to have responsibility for administering. It is just the private sale of used vehicles and the point-of-purchase rebate for home energy. Those are two of the provincially administered things that will continue after July 1.

[1515]

The audit provisions that are there today under the Social Service Tax Act would not be relevant to what we would anticipate or to the experience that we will undoubtedly see and the stats that we will see under this particular section. Having said that, I will certainly see if we can get the member some of that information today. If not today, I would be pleased to share it with the member when we get to estimates.

B. Ralston: I have a question about

section 35(3). The minister mentioned that this wording was new, in contrast to what was in the Social Service Tax Act, so although it's being repealed, it appears to be living on in slightly new forms. It refers to the power to enter a place. It must not be used "to determine whether an unnamed third party has complied with this Act" unless the place is…. And then there are a number of business premises: "…a person who operates a marina, shipyard…or other premises…."

Now, is this intended? Sometimes that kind of information or those kinds of inspections are referred to as fishing expeditions, in the sense that authorities may receive some information confidentially — a tip, as it's sometimes known. It's not certain who may be failing to remit the tax, but this would authorize that kind of entry to a marina, a shipyard, an airport or other premises. So is that what this

section is intended to empower?

Hon. C. Hansen: These are really powers just to make sure that everybody who should be paying a tax pays a tax.

[ Page 5056 ]

This ensures that the auditors, inspectors, can actually get access to the information they need to ensure that everyone has paid the taxes that they are obligated to pay.

If I can just read a bit about the reason for this amendment. "The specific authority with respect to compliance of unnamed third parties is necessary to ensure efficient and effective use of audit resources, given that tax payable in respect of boats, aircraft and unregistered vehicles is self-assessed and there are no obligations on the vendors under this act."

So unlike cars…. In fact, I think earlier I might have made reference to cars and boats. I should have said boats and planes. It is easy for us to ensure compliance in the transfer of a registered vehicle, which is a car, which is registered through ICBC. It is more difficult for us to ensure compliance in terms of boats and planes, and these powers will ensure that those who should be paying the tax in fact pay the tax.

B. Ralston: Was there a specific decision, then, made not to burden, if I can put it that way, those who sell boats retail? I mean, there are a number of recognized dealers who sell boats along the coast and in various cities and towns in British Columbia, whether it's on lakes or on the salt water.

Why, if that's the requirement…? It seems that there may be just some objection taken by some to the fact that those businesses, unlike others, aren't obliged to do that. In the case of those who are not registrants I can see some need for that, but it would seem that this gives fairly sweeping powers to enter, on the basis of a tip or confidential information, onto a wide number of business premises in the province, which seems to be a fairly sweeping power, at first blush.

[1520]

Hon. C. Hansen: Because the brokers, for example, of planes or boats are currently GST registrants — and they will be HST registrants — anyone that buys a boat, used or otherwise, through a GST registrant will in fact be paying the HST. It will be collected through Canada Revenue Agency. They will in turn send the province our respective 7 percent share of that. This pertains to the private sale of boats and the private sale of airplanes, for which having that relationship with dealers would not be of benefit to us.

Under the existing system, where there is in fact a PST charged…. That made a difference today, and it was important for us to have that requirement and that relationship with brokers to collect that tax. That will no longer be the case because this only applies to the private sale of boats and planes.

B. Ralston: Are this section, then, and its fairly wide powers motivated by information that's available to the branch that there is a huge or a sizeable market in the sale of boats or planes in this particular manner that aren't sold through registrants or dealers? Is there likely a sizeable return of tax to the provincial treasury? I'm wondering what motivates this section. Is it just a matter of administrative tidiness?

Hon. C. Hansen: There are a significant number of private transfers of boats and planes in British Columbia. It's estimated that it would be in the millions of dollars of tax that will be collected under this — certainly not something that the province would want to forgo. We obviously need those millions of dollars of revenue.

V. Huntington: You may wish to guide me on whether the question is in order. It certainly has to do with Bill 9, but with how the Social Service Tax Act is presently and how your staff are presently treating audits prior to the introduction of Bill 9.

I've been advised by seven small businesses now that they are presently undergoing unexpectedly aggressive audits. The question is whether or not there is a program or a feeling underway within the province that there can be an aggressive audit on existing PST compliance prior to the introduction of the HST. Is there any indication, from your point of view? Certainly, there is from the business point of view — that there is an aggressive audit going on in that regard.

[1525]

Hon. C. Hansen: While not directly pertaining to this section, certainly there is no change of policy with regard to audits that I'm aware of. What this provides for, really, is that those audits can continue. It's not like suddenly on June 30 there's going to be some magical thing happen to curtail the ability of the auditors to audit for PST compliance, for the PST that should be collected and remitted up to and including March 30 of this year.

So those audits will go on, possibly for as long as four years. It does actually have a hard end to it after four years, but there's nothing in this transitioning from PST to HST that would require any more aggressive audit process than has been the case in the past.

Section 35 approved on division.

section 36.

B. Ralston: Well, this relates to the general theme of

part 7, which is administration. Perhaps this would be a useful place just for the minister to confirm, as I understand it, that the power to audit, to assess penalties will continue under the Social Service Tax Act until these provisions expire — in 2014, I believe.

If anyone should think that, in the transition to the HST, their obligations under the PST are going to end,

[ Page 5057 ]

there's a lengthy period for that compliance to be ensured and pursued by the Ministry of Finance until the ultimate expiry of most of the sections, although we've learned today that some of them will continue on in Bill 9. They're too good to let go, apparently.

Hon. C. Hansen: These sections that we are dealing with right now do not deal in any way with PST audits or PST compliance. I think the question the member is asking should more properly be posed when we get to

part 17.

B. Ralston: Let's have a look at

section 36(4). "Subject to subsection (5), in making an assessment under this

section the director must not consider or include a period longer than 4 years before the date of the first notice of assessment." That gives a power infinitely in the future to authorize assessments over that period.

I gather that the minister is not going to respond to the general question, which is really too bad, because I think the public might be assisted by that. But the guillotine will come down at five o'clock, and this debate will have to cease, however important those questions might be. I suppose we'll have to wait until after July, when the minister puts out his brochure at public expense, perhaps, to get some answers for the public then.

Perhaps the minister could confirm that

section 36(4) mirrors provisions in the Social Service Tax Act.

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes, that's correct.

B. Ralston: Will this power to assess…? Perhaps the minister could just enumerate the programs that it will be directed to, other than the automobile, boat and aircraft transfer tax and the energy tax credit. In what other programs would these powers be available to be used in assessing?

[1530]

Hon. C. Hansen: This would only apply to the energy rebates for residential home energy and the transfer of private vehicles.

D. Donaldson: I wonder if the minister could elaborate on the difference between 36(4) and 36(5). This has to do with the director making an assessment on a rebate or reimbursement that was in excess of the amount due to the person. In subsection (4) the period that the director has goes four years back before the first notice of assessment, and in subsection (5) that's limited to two years on an energy allowance. What's the difference between those four years and two years?

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

Hon. C. Hansen: In sub (5) this actually allows for a circumstance where someone received an energy rebate who was not entitled to it. It means that we have two years to actually issue an assessment to recoup that money. Section (4) actually pertains to the other issues where we have an obligation or a right to collect, and that would be four years.

The two years is only for a situation where someone has received an energy credit, an energy allowance that they were not entitled to. We have only two years to issue that assessment.

D. Donaldson: Thanks for that answer. So subsection (4) doesn't deal with any rebates. The only kind of rebate that this

section deals with is in regards to energy allowance. Is that correct?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes.

B. Ralston: The minister has mentioned that this

section is copied directly from a

section in the Social Service Tax Act. I think that's

section 115. What also is contained in the Social Service Tax Act is the power to assess against a director of a corporation. That doesn't appear in this

section nor in any subsequent sections in this part, unless I'm mistaken.

Is it the expectation that there will never be a need to pursue the director of a corporation because they would not be a person conducting either the sale or receiving an energy rebate, and it's only individuals who would fall into that category? Or is there some other reason?

Hon. C. Hansen: The director's liability that is in the Social Service Tax Act actually only applies to the provincial sales tax that a company was obligated to collect. In these cases, as we're talking about the private transfer of vehicles and the home residential energy rebate, that would not be applicable.

[1535]

B. Ralston: Well, I'm looking at

section 115.1 of the Social Service Tax Act. It says that the commissioner — and I take it that's the equivalent of the director in this legislation — may assess the director of a corporation for "the amount assessed under

section 115…for the corporation's failure to collect or remit…as required during the term of the director, including penalties." The minister said it was a failure to collect. It also appears to encompass the failure to remit. I wonder if that makes any difference to the minister's previous answer.

Hon. C. Hansen: In the cases that we're talking about — the point-of-sale rebate for home energy and the tax on the private sale of vehicles between individuals — there would not be a case where there would be a tax collected. Therefore, there would not be a tax remitted.

Section 36 approved on division.

[ Page 5058 ]

section 37.

B. Ralston: This is entitled "Penalties." I'm looking at the penalties

section in

section 117 of the Social Service Tax Act. That

section is entitled "Penalty and Interest." Is there any particular reason why? I don't see, in my review of this section, any reference to interest. Can the minister explain why that might be?

Hon. C. Hansen: The same wording exists, but it's just been separated into two separate sections. Where you'll find that wording now is in

section

Section 37 approved on division.

section 38.

B. Ralston: Can the minister explain…? I'm again looking at the Social Service Tax Act because it's rather striking how this Social Service Tax Act is going to live on in this bill, although the minister claims it's going to disappear. It seems that it's going to live on in a number of sections here. Looking at what I take to be the same section, "Notice of assessment," is that the same as

section 116.1 in the Social Service Tax Act?

Hon. C. Hansen: I think the most important part of this

section is the requirement for the director to issue a notice of assessment on making an assessment or imposing a penalty. This language is slightly different from the Social Service Tax Act. I think the member said…. There is certainly language or wording from the Social Service Tax Act that lives on. What's really important is that the social service tax or the provincial sales tax itself does not live on.

This is language that actually is used through a variety of pieces of legislation regarding consumption tax. In this case, in this particular wording of this section, we've been able to take advantage of some of the updated wording that appears in some of the more recently written consumption tax acts.

[1540-1545]

Section 38 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 45

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Reid

Thomson

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

NAYS — 33

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

B. Simpson

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Conroy

Sather

The Chair: Can I ask all members, please, to keep their voices down.

section 39.

B. Ralston: Can the minister advise just which

section in the Social Service Tax Act this is copied from?

Hon. C. Hansen: It is similar to subsection 116.1(2), but it is actually language that is drawn from several different consumption acts, so it's not the identical language that was in place in the Social Service Tax Act.

B. Ralston: Well, I'm looking at that

section in the Social Service Tax Act. That appears to be wording that's identical to subsection 38(3). It doesn't appear to mirror the wording in

section 39 at all. Perhaps the minister could just check that.

Hon. C. Hansen: My error. I should have actually referenced

section 116(7), which reads in the Social Service Tax Act: "An estimate made by the commissioner under this

section must not be varied or disallowed because of any irregularity, informality, omission or error on the part of any person in the observation of any directory provision up to the date of the issuing of the notice of the estimate."

As I say, it's not exactly identical but actually reflects language in other consumption acts as well.

[1550]

[ Page 5059 ]

The Chair: Can we have silence when the division is read, please.

Section 39 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 45

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Reid

Thomson

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

NAYS — 33

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

B. Simpson

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Coons

Sather

[1555]

The Chair: Would members please either stay and be quiet for the committee or take their business outside.

J. Les: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

J. Les: It's my pleasure this afternoon to welcome to the precincts 30 grade 11 students from Highroad Academy in my riding in Chilliwack. They are here this afternoon watching the proceedings in the House. They are accompanied by their teacher Mrs. Julie Lade, and five of their parents are here with them as well, volunteering to look after them and chaperone them around Victoria. On behalf of everyone in the House, I'd like to make the students from Highroad Academy very welcome in the precincts.

Debate Continued

Section 40 approved on division.

section 41.

B. Ralston: This

section initiates a new

part called "Appeals," and the scheme of appeals is set out. Can the minister advise whether or not this differs in any way from the appeal process that's set out in the Social Service Tax Act? It appears to be the same, but perhaps the minister could confirm that.

Hon. C. Hansen: The structure of this

section is roughly the same. The process is the same. What is unique is simply the specific application of it.

B. Ralston: We may get to this. I think this is probably dealt with more properly in

section 43, but in terms of this part, the general rule in PST litigation is that the person who's disputing the assessment or owes the money is still obliged to pay. The obligation to pay doesn't cease even though an appeal is ongoing. This is to be distinguished from Canada Revenue Agency where, as I understand it, if there's a litigation or a dispute about an amount owing, the obligation to pay is frozen at that point while the litigation continues.

This would appear to continue the same in

section 43. As well as in the general legislative scheme, it would appear to follow the precedent of the Social Service Tax Act. Can the minister confirm that?

Hon. C. Hansen: That is true in

section 43, not in 41.

[1600]

B. Ralston: Sorry, I didn't hear the minister's entire answer. Perhaps he could just repeat it.

Hon. C. Hansen: It's true in

section 43, not in

Section 41 approved on division.

section 42.

B. Ralston: Perhaps the minister can just advise, if the staff there has this available…. In the Social Service Tax Act, can he advise of the number of appeals, approximately, on an annual basis? I take it this is relatively

[ Page 5060 ]

rare. But can the minister give some sense of the…? I appreciate this is a much diminished range of possible subjects of appeal, so obviously it would be prospectively fewer. Can the minister advise what the present volume is?

Hon. C. Hansen: We don't have that information with us as it would pertain to the old PST. I think the member is correct. It was similar to the discussion we had around the number of warrants issued under this new act. The scope is so much more limited that these would be few and far between.

B. Ralston: I suppose the motivation for the question is that the minister has said, in part of his presentation on the PST, that it's outmoded and difficult to interpret. Therefore, one might have expected, if it were lacking in transparency and unclear, that that would have given rise to disputes that might have been resolved in court. Generally, if there's badly drafted legislation, sometimes that's what results.

I'd be curious to know whether those assertions are supported by any objective evidence of a large number of people resorting to the courts to get solutions to their interpretive problems in their dealings with the branch.

I'm wondering if the minister will agree to…. Obviously, the guillotine is going to come down here at five o'clock, and all debate will cease on this bill. If the minister could make a commitment to provide that, notwithstanding that debate on these sections will end at that time.

Hon. C. Hansen: As was the case with regard to search warrants, we will certainly endeavour to see if we can get those stats before the end of the session. If we can't get it today, I will undertake to provide it to him at the time of the estimates, as I did with the stats on search warrants.

Section 42 approved on division.

section 43.

B. Ralston: The minister, in an earlier response, made a distinction between the subject matters of

section 41 and those subject matters of

section 43, the principle being that it was a requirement, notwithstanding that there was an ongoing appeal, to nonetheless satisfy the payment, interest and penalties or any liability for payment that might exist. Can the minister set out those points or those issues that would be affected by

section 43?

Hon. C. Hansen: This is a standard provision in provincial legislation. The member is correct, that if someone files an appeal, it does not, in itself, affect their responsibility for paying what is due.

Sections 43 and 44 approved on division.

section 45.

B. Ralston: Can the minister advise the circumstances when the director might issue the certificate that's referred to in

section 45?

[1605]

Hon. C. Hansen: The issuance of a certificate is just one of the tools that the director would have at his or her disposal. There is not a circumstance that would dictate that a certificate must be or should be issued. It's simply one of the collection tools that could be used. This language that's in here is essentially the same as exists in the existing social service tax and the other consumption tax statutes that we have.

Section 45 approved on division.

section 46.

B. Ralston: This

section is entitled "Alternate remedies," and it refers to remedies available to the government that may be exercised "separately, concurrently or cumulatively." Can the minister explain what that is intended to mean?

Hon. C. Hansen: All this

section does is…. If the director or the government has pursued one collection action, it doesn't preclude them from pursuing other ones as well. For example, if there is a lien that is put on a piece of property, that does not preclude the director from also pursuing, for example, a garnishee. This is language that is common to all of the consumption tax statutes.

Section 46 approved on division.

section 47.

B. Ralston: This

section is entitled "Attachment of funds," and it appears to give authority to the director to collect funds from a taxpayer. It makes no reference to corporations or directors of corporations that I have noted in this section. Can the minister, then, explain briefly the purpose of the authority that's granted to the director by virtue of this section?

Hon. C. Hansen: This is essentially a garnishee and, therefore, would have to be applied to an individual. In this case, because we are talking about payments that would be required with regard to those subject

[ Page 5061 ]

areas we discussed earlier that actually fall under the scope of this act, this would not apply to directors of corporations.

[1610-1615]

Section 47 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 45

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Reid

Thomson

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

NAYS — 34

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

Sather

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Conroy

Huntington

Coons

Hon. C. Hansen: I just want to clarify the comment I made prior to the division being taken. What I should have made clear is that while we don't have the ability to garnishee a director, we do have the ability to garnishee a corporation if that is required.

section 48.

B. Ralston: I thank the minister for that clarification.

This

section is entitled "Lien," and it appears to authorize registering a lien against real property. That is land and personal property — which would be chattels, I guess. But my question is related to subsection (7). It appears to be an exception to the confidentiality provision set out in

section 55, which we may or may not get to, given that debate will cease.

The guillotine cutting off debate in this chamber comes down at five o'clock, and any further debate will end at that point, notwithstanding that there may be a number of outstanding questions and a number of sections in this bill to give the scrutiny that this kind of statute deserves.

Can the minister explain the motivation for

section 48(7)? It would appear to be an exception to the confidentiality proceedings. I'm not sure that it's not reasonable, but perhaps the minister could explain the motivation for that.

[1620]

Hon. C. Hansen: If a taxpayer has a lien put against their house, for example, then that taxpayer — in other words, the homeowner — can make a request to the director to release this information. It would be an example of where the homeowner may be trying to renew a mortgage or extend a mortgage on the house and there is a requirement for the disclosure of liens. The homeowner would have the option of requesting the director to supply that information.

B. Ralston: Well, my grasp of property law may be slightly rusty, but if a lien were filed in the property registry against the title of a property, surely in a search the lien itself and the dollar value of the lien and the amount owing would be disclosed in that search.

I may be wrong, but that's certainly my understanding of it. I'm happy to be corrected if that's the case. That's why I find this provision a bit unusual and requiring explanation. Perhaps the minister could just confirm whether that's an accurate description of a lien against real property in this circumstance or not.

Hon. C. Hansen: Basically, a search of the registries would reveal the fact that there was a lien in place and that the lien was initially of a certain value. It may be that the taxpayer, the homeowner, has already made certain payments to draw down the debt owing. This would allow the director to disclose the amount, the balance that would be still owing under that particular lien.

B. Ralston: I appreciate the minister's answer, and that seems very logical, although the wording of the

section is that "the director must disclose in writing whether a lien is registered against the personal or real property of the named person." So it appears as though there's some kind of confidentiality provision that prevails over the simple fact that a lien is filed. Then it goes

[ Page 5062 ]

on to talk about the amount of the lien and the date of its registration.

Again, could the minister clarify the meaning of that particular part of the subsection?

Hon. C. Hansen: These liens would be registered pursuant to subsection (2). Those are, of course, publicly accessible. What is not accessible would be the amount still owing on a lien, and this is what gives the director the authority to release that information in spite of the confidentiality provisions of

section 55.

[1625]

Sections 48 to 50 inclusive approved on division.

section 51.

Hon. C. Hansen: There is power under regulation for the CITCA agreement to be signed, which is the sales tax agreement referenced in this section. That requires an order-in-council and direct approval by cabinet.

In the case of administrative matters, those would be…. This provision here actually allows for the minister to enter into those agreements and would mean that they would not have to go to Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council.

B. Ralston: It's really, then, more a matter of administrative convenience because the authority is already there. It's simply the way in which that authority has to be confirmed by order-in-council. This would enable the minister to make a delegation within the ministry to carry out and execute any administrative agreements that might be required along the way.

Is that a fair

summary of the authority that this statute or this

section is granting? It seems to me that if the authority's already there, this is almost unnecessary. But perhaps…. It certainly gives greater clarity to the delegation of that power.

Hon. C. Hansen: The member is correct.

Section 51 approved on division.

section 52.

B. Ralston: This

section is entitled "Appropriations," and it's under this

part 10, which is simply two sections. Can the minister explain the purpose of this section? It makes reference to the provincial government and payments from the consolidated revenue fund, but perhaps he could explain the authority that would be conferred by the passing of this section.

[1630]

Hon. C. Hansen: What currently exists is that government ministries have exemption certificates so that they can purchase goods and services exempt from the goods and services tax.

What we're saying is that starting July 1…. For administrative simplicity and, really, to take some of the paper burden and compliance costs off of suppliers to government, what government ministries will do after July 1 is be subject to the same HST provisions as everybody else and the same federal and provincial shares of this.

What this appropriation allows us to do, in part, is to ensure that those ministries are then kept whole. Yes, it is charged. Yes, we collect it back from the CRA as our share of the provincial portion of the HST collections. This gives us the power to actually ensure that the ministries can be kept whole, at the end of the day.

Also with subsection (3), that actually provides for the ability to pay for charges that may flow pursuant to, for example, the administrative agreements that we just talked about in the previous section. It may be a Stats Canada data run or something like that for which the province would be obligated to pay. This gives us the authority to pay those bills.

B. Ralston: Subsection (2) of

section 52 and subsection (3) make reference to the Financial Administration Act. The Financial Administration Act basically sets out that no payment out of the consolidated revenue fund is authorized without authority.

Section 21(3) says that if the Supply Act or any other act "contain an appropriation for the same purpose, money must not be paid out under the other Act unless the amount appropriated by the Supply Act has been exhausted."

This would appear to circumvent the need for a specific appropriation before making payment out of the consolidated revenue fund. If that's correct, can the minister confirm that?

Hon. C. Hansen: The member is essentially correct. What will appear, for example, in the spending authority in the estimates as they are presented to the House on budget day will be the appropriation, ministry by ministry, for the base cost of those ministries. What would not be reflected in the appropriation to the ministry is

[ Page 5063 ]

the cost of the HST on things that would be subject to HST, like anybody else would be.

The ministries will be paying that. They will recoup it. This gives them the authority to spend that money over and above what would be in their appropriation, knowing that there is this vehicle for them to be reimbursed.

Section 52 approved on division.

section 53.

B. Ralston: This

section initiates the new part which gives general powers. The

section that we're dealing with authorizes the minister to appoint a person as director for the purpose of administering this act.

Would that person be analogous to the commissioner under the Social Service Tax Act? I think we've had some previous discussion earlier in consideration in the definition section. First, I want to confirm that. Second, what would be the powers and the scope of the duties of the director?

[1635]

Hon. C. Hansen: The position and role of the director is certainly analogous to the role of the director currently under the Social Service Tax Act, and the powers of this director really are set out throughout this act. I think, as the member knows, the powers of the director have been referenced in many of the sections that we've already covered.

Section 53 approved on division.

section 54.

B. Ralston: Can the minister advise when this

section comes into force? My reading of the

section at the end of the act is that it comes into effect on May 1, 2010. Can the minister confirm that? If that's so, is it anticipated that the minister will be appointing a director either, I suppose, tomorrow or…? When might the director be appointed in order to administer the act?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes. The individual has been identified and will be appointed tomorrow.

B. Ralston: Can the minister advise if that's a position that has gone through the Public Service Commission and that there's been a competition for? Or is that simply taking the existing commissioner and merely changing the title?

Hon. C. Hansen: The person that will be appointed is the executive director of the consumer tax acts, and this individual is currently responsible for the administration of the hotel tax act, the Carbon Tax Act, the Motor Fuel Tax Act and the Tobacco Tax Act.

B. Ralston: Then it seems as though this is a person who is in place, administering a number of acts, and this responsibility for this act will be just be merely added to their existing duties. It's not a new position in that sense. Is that correct?

Hon. C. Hansen: Yes.

B. Ralston: In the administrative scheme of things, obviously, this person, given what the minister has said, is responsible for administering a number of other acts. How much of that person's duties will administering this act occupy? Is there any sense of that at this point? Or is that something that will only become apparent when the duties are assumed and we're some time further in, assuming the legislation passes, as it seems likely as time approaches five o'clock, when this debate will be forced to end.

Hon. C. Hansen: There would be a slight increase in workload, but a lot of the activities that this individual, the director, would have to oversee are already part of the day-to-day operations of this person's office.

[1640]

For example, the administration of the point-of-purchase rebates for home energy is dealing with the same set of suppliers that we're currently dealing with under the carbon tax, so it would be some increase in responsibility but, certainly, part and parcel of existing responsibilities. As the member will note from

section 54, this person, of course, has the ability to delegate workload as required.

Section 54 approved on division.

section 55.

D. Donaldson: This

section deals with confidentiality and how, especially in

section 55(d), there can be government-to-government agreements regarding control of information and confidentiality.

My question to the minister is…. Under the new relationship that there's been with First Nations, there's been recognition and reconciliation wording, and I know that there's been talk at the negotiations table of government-to-government basis in dealing with First Nations. Subsection (d)(

i) alludes to a government-to-government agreement. Would First Nations be considered under this

section as a government?

Hon. C. Hansen: There is, in the various agreements that we have with First Nations…. For example, with regard to the sales tax act collection agreements that we

[ Page 5064 ]

have with First Nations, there are provisions in some of those agreements for information-sharing.

That's what would actually drive that information-sharing, depending on the various agreements that would currently be in place. It would be set out in those agreements — what the powers and the ability would be for the sharing of information that would otherwise be kept confidential.

D. Donaldson: Thanks for that answer.

Section 55 is about the sharing or not sharing of information, except as follows. It says: "under an agreement…between the government and another government." Just to be clear, does this government consider First Nations another government in this province?

Hon. C. Hansen: There are certainly recognition agreements that are in place that would provide for the recognition of First Nations governments in the circumstances that would be set out in those agreements. This actually allows, where there are those agreements in place, for this information-sharing to take place.

[1645]

B. Ralston: It's now quarter to five, and as the Chair knows, the debate will be forced to end. The government members have decreed that it will end at five o'clock, and if there's another division — which I sense there may be — prior to five o'clock, I may not be able to ask any further questions.

At the outset of my speech on second reading, I did suggest that this act was misnamed. Since then, I've been provided by a number of citizens with some likely names for this act, rather than the rather very modest Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act, which really doesn't describe very accurately what this bill did. If I might just offer a few of the names that have been suggested: the hard-to-swallow sales tax act, the highly suspect tax act….

The Chair: Member, one moment.

Hon. C. Hansen: There is a

section that pertains to the name of the bill. There is a vote that gets put on the title of the bill. That would be put at the end, and that would be the appropriate time for the member to raise this.

The Chair: Member, we are discussing

section 55 at the moment.

B. Ralston: As the minister well knows, in the next 15 minutes or ten minutes, we won't get through the remaining hundred and fifty sections, so that's….

The Chair: But Member, we are discussing

section 55 at the moment. If the member has a question on

section 55, please could he…?

B. Ralston: No, I don't.

[1650]

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Section 55 approved on the following division:

YEAS — 46

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Thomson

Falcon

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

Huntington

NAYS — 35

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

B. Simpson

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Conroy

Coons

Sather

Trevena

Hon. C. Hansen: I had endeavoured to try to obtain information for the Finance critic in one of his questions earlier and promised that I would report it to the House if I could secure it before five o'clock. I did get one element of that, and that was with regard to the number of PST appeals.

There are 385 PST appeals to the minister per year. About ten to 12 of those are further appealed to a court. There were 4,108 PST audits performed last year, and we have an audit staff currently of about 240.

[1655]

[ Page 5065 ]

section 56.

B. Ralston: I thank the minister for that assistance, and with that, Madam Chair, I'm assuming we're moving to

section 56, then?

This

section is entitled "Demand for information." Can the minister explain the purpose of this particular section?

Before he answers, given that it's five to five and debate will end at five o'clock, I'd note that we're on

section 56. There are a total of 213 sections in the bill, leaving 157 sections to go. It's regrettable that the government has chosen to proceed in this manner, because there are a further 157 sections, and while not all of them merit questions, certainly there is more work to do. That, I think, is an important part of the legislative process.

The opposition's duty is to scrutinize legislation that comes before the House. Given the rather capricious decision that's been taken by the government to end debate at five o'clock, the public and those who might seek to interpret this legislation in the future, either in the course of their professional duties as business people or in the courts, won't be able to have the benefit of the minister's

interpretation of those 157 sections.

It's regrettable, indeed, that the government is proceeding in this manner. They seem bound and determined. I won't engage in any more political rhetoric or invective at this time, because I'm certain that in their heart of hearts, particularly the backbench government members, they know just what this bill — and the manner in which they've treated the public in this endeavour — is doing to the political support for their party and for their future political prospects.

Hon. C. Hansen: Noting that we are on

section 56, we actually…. When you look at the time that we would have to be able to fully debate

section 56 and all of the subsequent sections of this bill, this is a piece of legislation that has been before the House longer than any other piece of legislation in the last decade. I think we have certainly seen the entire month of April being devoted to the consideration of this bill.

Quite frankly, we would have had more time to deal with

section 56 in this chamber if the opposition members had sought to utilize the second reading debate in a more expeditious manner, to allow for a more fulsome consideration under the committee stage of this bill.

Even today we've actually got through 55 sections of this bill. We're now on

section 56. Given the amount of time that was consumed by divisions that were called throughout the day yesterday and today, we probably would have had more time to devote to the consideration of

section 56.

M. Farnworth: Speaking to the

section and noting the hour — that we only do have a few more minutes on this

section — I couldn't let the minister's remarks go without commenting that yes, we have spent a lot of time on this particular bill and on key sections because this is a bill that will impact British Columbians.

The government made this a cornerstone of its Speech from the Throne, yet for such an important bill, we did wait and wait before it was introduced into the House. Even though we started at the beginning of April, we were actually back here in mid-March. Had we been here debating it in mid-March, when the government was back after the budget, we could probably have gotten through a lot more of this particular piece of legislation.

Had we followed this bill till the session ends, the third of June, or had we stayed and had the implementation perhaps been made June 1 as opposed to May 1, we could have gotten through even more sections and had an even more thorough and exhaustive debate on how this particular bill and its sections will impact upon British Columbians.

[1700]

That aside, we have worked diligently, and the opposition…. The member claimed he's concerned about the fact that division bells have rung. Well, I believe and the public believes it is important, on this bill that impacts British Columbians, that it is on the record.

Sometimes that is time-consuming, and I just wish that perhaps the government had taken that into account when looking at how much time we're spending on this. We did not have to be in the situation where we are right now, where debate is about to, in a sense, be guillotined on an important piece of legislation that many British Columbians oppose and have an awful lot of questions on.

The Chair: Hon. Members, pursuant to the order of the House adopted Monday, April 26, 2010, and the agreement announced by the Speaker on Wednesday, April 28, 2010, all necessary questions for the disposal of committee stage of Bill 9 will now be put.

Shall sections 56 through 213 and the title pass?

An Hon. Member: Division.

The Chair: Division has been called.

[1705]

Sections 56 to 213 inclusive and the title approved on the following division:

[ Page 5066 ]

YEAS — 45

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Thomson

Falcon

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

NAYS — 36

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

B. Simpson

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Conroy

Huntington

Coons

Sather

Trevena

Hon. C. Hansen: Hon. Chair, I move that the committee rise, report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 5:07 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[1710]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate

and Transition Act

Bill 9, Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed on the following division:

YEAS — 46

Horne

Letnick

McRae

Stewart

I. Black

Coell

McNeil

Chong

Polak

Yamamoto

Bell

Krueger

Bennett

Stilwell

Hawes

Hogg

Thornthwaite

Hayer

Lee

Barnett

Bloy

Reid

Thomson

Falcon

Penner

de Jong

Hansen

Bond

MacDiarmid

Abbott

Lekstrom

Coleman

Yap

Cantelon

Les

Sultan

McIntyre

Rustad

Cadieux

van Dongen

Howard

Lake

Foster

Slater

Dalton

Pimm

NAYS — 36

S. Simpson

D. Black

Fleming

Farnworth

James

Kwan

Ralston

Popham

B. Simpson

Austin

Karagianis

Brar

Hammell

Lali

Thorne

D. Routley

Horgan

Bains

Dix

Mungall

Chouhan

Macdonald

Corrigan

Chandra Herbert

Krog

Simons

Gentner

Elmore

Donaldson

Fraser

B. Routley

Conroy

Huntington

Coons

Sather

Trevena

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued second reading debate on Bill 11.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 11 — Miscellaneous Statutes

Amendment Act (N o . 2), 2010

(continued)

Mr. Speaker: Member for Nanaimo. [Applause.]

L. Krog: I had no idea my popularity amongst my colleagues was so high.

[1715]

[ Page 5067 ]

Going back to where I was the other day, in dealing in particular with

section 148, this particular provision, again, transfers a regulation-making power from Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to the minister and provides the minister with additional regulation-making powers.

As I mentioned the other day, this continues a very disturbing trend, particularly under this government, where more and more authority is not given simply to cabinet under regulatory powers but is now being given to the ministers themselves. I cannot imagine that the efficiency of modern government requires this continuous transfer.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, it's difficult to hear the member for Nanaimo. If you've got other duties to attend to, please do so quietly.

Hon. Member, continue.

L. Krog: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

I cannot believe that modern government requires this continuous transfer of authority from not just cabinet now but to the actual minister responsible for various statutes.

There are a number of other sections in this bill that raise great concern. In particular, I make reference to

section 166, which falls under the Ministry of Health Act, which will now authorize the collection, use and disclosure of personal information; authorize information-sharing agreements in relation to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information; and provide regulation-making powers consequential to the enactment of sections 9 to 11 of the bill.

It provides in

section 10, for instance, that "if the minister" — not cabinet — "is satisfied that the collection, use or disclos