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)

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 14, Number 2

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Statements

Holocaust Memorial Day

Hon. G. Campbell

Vaisakhi

Hon. G. Campbell

H. Lali

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Nisga'a final agreement

C. James

Bullying

G. Hogg

Archie Browning Sports Centre

M. Karagianis

Wheelchair basketball tournament

D. Horne

Early childhood development

J. Kwan

Achievements of Vernon athletes

E. Foster

Oral Questions

Election campaign materials

M. Farnworth

Speaker's Ruling

Matters under police investigation not subject to debate

Oral Questions

Resignation and replacement of Solicitor General

M. Farnworth

Hon. G. Campbell

Forests Ministry staff reduction and forest industry in B.C

C. James

Hon. P. Bell

B. Routley

N. Macdonald

Impact of harmonized sales tax on landlords and tenants

B. Ralston

Hon. C. Hansen

Royal Inland Hospital sterilization unit

A. Dix

Hon. K. Falcon

High school child care programs for student parents

M. Karagianis

Hon. M. Polak

Petitions

Hon. M. Stilwell

S. Fraser

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

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

N. Letnick

J. Brar

Hon. M. McNeil

G. Coons

Hon. I. Black

K. Corrigan

Hon. J. Yap

S. Chandra Herbert

S. Cadieux

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Housing and Social Development (continued)

S. Simpson

Hon. R. Coleman

[ Page 4201 ]

TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2010

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Statements

holocaust memorial day

Hon. G. Campbell: Today we remember more than six million victims of the Holocaust, and as we say that number, let's remember that that's six million people who were mothers and sisters, brothers and fathers and, more importantly than all of that, 1.5 million children.

The Holocaust really did damage for generations, damage that we cannot forget. Men, women and children were victims of racism and intolerance, victims of the darkest evil. Today we honour those who have survived and pledge to them that we will shine the light of education and always remember.

[1335]

In the gallery today, Hon.

Speaker, we're honoured to be joined by survivors of the Holocaust and the family of survivors: Zev Bak, Sofia Bassina, Nikki Basuk, Bob Boekbinder, Susi Deston, Peter Gary, Benji Gorodnitsky, Janushka Jacoubovitch, Katusha Khmelnitsky, David Kirk, George Pal, David Reed, John Sitwell, Raya Sitwell, Gerald Stanford, Jacob Wardy, Anna Abramsky, Michael Abramsky, Ethel Bellows, Amalia Boe-Fishman, Rita Chapiro, Raisa Chudnovsky, Yacov Chudnovsky, Sofie Cymbalista, Arieh Engelberg, Sarah Engelberg, Izzy Fraeme, Margaret Fraeme, Jack Fraeme, Arkady Gofshtein, Asia Gofshtein, Esfira Golgher, Vladimir Hopner, Estika Hunning, Esfir Kiss, Robert Krell, Sarah Mandelbaum, Lola Mendelson, Jeffrey Milton, Greta Milton, Joseph Polisky, Alla Polisky, David Riefman, David Schaffer, Sidi Schaffer, Iackvov Sitchine, Louise Stein Sorensen, Benno Strummer, Elizabeth Vitkov, Arkavy Vitkov, Leo Vogel, Louie Adell, George Wertman and Frieda Wertman.

We honour your experience. We mourn your sacrifices and, in doing so, reaffirm our collective commitment to remember and to educate and to never waver in our condemnation of hatred and violence. We will never forget.

We live in a great country that is multicultural, that is open and that says to the people of the world: "You are welcome to join us as we build a better future for our children. You have come to us. You have joined us. You have strengthened us."

We will not forget. We will remember, and in remembering, we will temper our own actions and ensure that we are a reflection of the human spirit that's reflected in each of you and survivors around the world.

VAISAKHI

Hon. G. Campbell: I'm honoured to rise today to recognize Vaisakhi. It is my pleasure to offer greetings to the Sikh community on this holy day. More than 20 million Sikhs worldwide celebrate Vaisakhi, including 165,000 here in British Columbia. Commemorating the 311th anniversary of the Sikhs' initiation of the Khalsa, the celebration of Vaisakhi is a testament to British Columbia's rich cultural diversity.

For over a century the Sikh community has contributed to British Columbia in many ways and in all walks of life. I'd like to offer our thanks for everything that the Sikh community has done to help shape and build the province of British Columbia and our country.

I hope the coming year will be filled with prosperity, health and happiness, and I'm sure all the members of the Legislature join me in saying Lakh Lakh Vadhai .

H. Lali: I, too, would like to join the Premier in wishing all Sikhs and Punjabis all across the province a happy Vaisakhi as well.

Introductions by Members

H. Lali: Also, I have an introduction to make. I don't know if they've made their way into the galleries yet, but we have some of my constituents here touring the Legislature today. From the Lytton Kumsheen Elementary-Secondary School we have 30 students here, along with their teacher Mr. Ken Pite. Would the House please join me in giving all of my constituents who are here touring the precincts a warm Victoria welcome.

S. Simpson: I'm really pleased. Today in the precincts are a couple of my constituents, Tina Atva and Bob Heilker. They're here joining us today. We had lunch. They won a silent auction item through the community policing centre in Hastings, and the opportunity was to come over and have some lunch, visit Victoria and spend some time here watching us perform. So I would hope that people will make Tina and Bob very welcome.

[1340]

P. Pimm: It's not often I get a chance to introduce any guests from the north, but today I have the honour of introducing some constituents from my riding. Bruce Ross and his wife, Shannon, are here to join us today. Earlier their son Ryan and his wife, Dayna, along with their child Ainsley were here in the precinct. So I'd like to get the House to help me give them a warm northern welcome.

V. Huntington: It is a pleasure indeed to welcome to this chamber a group of special guests from Delta South. They are 32 of the civics 11 students from Delta Secondary

[ Page 4202 ]

School in Ladner, taught in two classes by their teacher, Mr. John Powell. In fact, Mr. Powell's classes are believed to be the largest in our entire province.

I had the wonderful opportunity of visiting their civics classes last fall when they were preparing for a mock parliamentary session. They held a question-and-answer session with me, demonstrating a keen interest in politics and politicians, with their refreshing, relevant and very probing questions.

I hope that today they enjoy witnessing our version of parliamentary democracy, and I ask this House to join with me in extending them a warm welcome.

G. Gentner: In the gallery today is Sheryl Seale, who is my CA, a shop steward, a radio producer, a program director and, on occasion, even a broadcaster. Could the House please make her welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

NISGA'A FINAL AGREEMENT

C. James: I rise today to commemorate a historic moment in B.C. history and in Canada's history. Ten years ago today the Parliament of Canada passed the Nisga'a Final Agreement Act, setting out the rights of the Nisga'a Nation. For the Nisga'a, as we know, this moment was more than a hundred years in the making and a long journey towards reconciliation and justice.

In 1887 the Nisga'a chiefs travelled to Victoria to press for treaties and self-government. They were barred from entering this Legislature. British Columbians will always remember the day that the Nisga'a leadership returned to Victoria. At the foot of this very building, where they were turned away more than a hundred years before, they were greeted by the Premier of the day and granted ceremonial entrance to these buildings — granted entrance through the doors reserved only for the representatives of Her Majesty the Queen.

On that day Chief Joe Gosnell, president of the Nisga'a Tribal Council and lead negotiator for the Nisga'a people, stood at the Bar and addressed this House. He called the Nisga'a Treaty "a triumph…for all British Columbians and a beacon of hope for aboriginal people" across the world.

"To us," he said, "a treaty is a sacred instrument. It represents an understanding between distinct cultures and shows a respect for each other's way of life. We know we are here for a long time together. A treaty stands as a symbol of high idealism in a divided world. That is why we fought so long and so hard."

He said: "I have been asked: 'Has it been worth it?' Yes, I say, a resounding yes."

I hope all members of this House will join me in celebrating this anniversary, this historic moment for the Nisga'a people and for all British Columbians.

BULLYING

G. Hogg: We live in a society where everyone has the right to be respected and the responsibility to respect others. Studies tell us that three of the most difficult challenges which we face are returning love for hate, admitting that we are wrong and including the excluded. Humankind has a history of difficulty accepting those who are different from us, of including everyone.

In our schools and in our workplaces, bullies exist. Some even thrive. We must raise awareness of their existence. Awareness alone will not mean change, but it is a step towards change, and we have made great strides forward.

Bullying occurs when a person or group repeatedly tries to harm a person who is weaker than them. April 14 is Anti-Bullying Day in British Columbia. We are asked to wear pink to raise consciousness and to remind ourselves and our province that we must take action, because up to one-third of today's youth live with daily fear of having to face a bully at school.

[1345]

Ninety percent of those who get picked on report that it affects them greatly — emotionally, mentally and physically. And 85 percent of teen bullying occurs when other teens are present. They and we can make a difference.

We can watch for bullying and for those being bullied, we can report it, and we can speak out against it. We can talk about examples of bullying and help others to understand the impact of bullying, and we can celebrate the efforts being made to build communities that foster respect, fairness, equity and compassion. Together we can make a difference with respect to bullying.

ARCHIE BROWNING SPORTS CENTRE

M. Karagianis: Archie Browning lived in Esquimalt. He was a police officer and an exceptional athlete who was inducted into the Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame. He spent many days and nights at the Esquimalt Sports Centre, which was built in 1961. Unfortunately, Archie died in 1989 at 62 years of age. Just two years later, however, the community honoured him by officially renaming the facility he so loved as the Archie Browning Sports Centre.

When the building was threatened in 2007 with closure, the community rallied, and the Friends of Archie Browning Sports Centre society was quickly formed. The friends mobilized support, made the future of the centre a municipal election issue and saved the facility. Not only that, they played a key role in the initiative to seek funding for its continued survival.

Last September the centre was chosen to receive nearly $2 million from the Building Canada fund. The money will be well used to help repair the roof and install new

[ Page 4203 ]

ventilation and heating systems, along with other architectural, structural and mechanical upgrades.

With more than 30,000 square feet of indoor floor space, the Archie Browning Sports Centre is an exceptional venue for large events. The multi-use facility includes an NHL-size ice arena, a six-sheet curling rink, a lounge and a banquet room. In the cooler months the Archie Browning is the place for hockey, curling, figure skating, speed skating and broomball. The summer is the dry-floor season with lacrosse, ball hockey and roller hockey — when roller hockey takes over.

It's a cornerstone of the community and a place of pride, more than ever before. I hope that members here will join me in recognizing the exceptional efforts of the Friends of Archie Browning Sports Centre — the best friends an endangered building ever had.

WHEELCHAIR BASKETBALL TOURNAMENT

D. Horne: During the break week, last Sunday, April 4, I had the pleasure of attending the 2010 Canadian Wheelchair Basketball open club finals hosted by the B.C. Wheelchair Basketball Society, Douglas College and the wheelchair basketball society of Canada.

During the Easter long weekend seven teams competed from across Canada in Coquitlam and New Westminster to go for gold. The gold-medal game was between Douglas College Lions and Variety Village from Ontario. It was a close and entertaining game, but ultimately Douglas College triumphed with a 58-52 victory. It was a fine finale for this team, who went through a winning streak throughout the tournament.

Congratulations to all the members of the Douglas College team — Patrick Anderson, Jaimie Borisoff, Bryan Shore, Jean-Luc Lagan, Erik Vliegenthart, Peter Colistro, Elisha Williams; their captain, Derek Lundie; and their coach, Joe Higgins.

The athletes were truly remarkable. Their talent and passion was evident as they battled it out for gold, not to mention that the team had a lot riding on this game, as their record for victories so far is that they won the last two championships in a row. It's six times since 1996 that the Douglas College team has won.

After the game, I handed out the silver medals to the Variety Village and had the MVP awards. I'd like to extend my congratulations to all of the skilled individuals, including the all-stars — Pat Anderson, who was named tournament MVP; Dayton Sopha, from Variety Village, the all-star; David Eng; Bo Hedges; Abdi Fatah Dini; and Jaimie Borisoff, from the Douglas College Lions, who was also named an all-star for the tournament.

EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT

J. Kwan: I rise today to inform the House of an event that I attended recently, on March 12 — the forum on early childhood education, organized by the Ray-Cam community centre at the Waldorf. Over a hundred people attended from around Metro Vancouver.

B.C. is the first jurisdiction in the world to have an established, standardized tool for assessing early childhood education at a population level over time, but nearly 30 percent of British Columbia children start school with physical, socio-emotional or cognitive vulnerabilities, according to Dr. Clyde Hertzman.

[1350]

Analysis put together by their human early learning partnership at UBC revealed that child vulnerability will cost the economy 20 percent in GDP growth over 60 years. According to the researchers at UBC, unnecessary early vulnerability in children is costing the provincial economy a sum of money that is ten times the provincial debt load.

The early development research is so compelling that there is a virtual consensus amongst economists, such as Nobel laureate James Heckman that the most cost-effective capital interventions occur among young children.

He concludes: "A major refocus of policy is required to capitalize on knowledge about the life cycle of skill and health formation and the importance of the early years in creating inequality and in producing skills for the workforce." Researchers found that "well-designed programs for disadvantaged children aged four and younger can produce economic benefits ranging from $1.26 to $17 for each $1 spent on programs."

Canada's chief public health officer has stated that investment in early childhood development will "reduce the long-term social costs associated with health care, addictions, crime, unemployment and welfare. As well, it will ensure Canadian children become better educated, well adjusted and more productive."

I want to recognize the organizers for putting together this event.

ACHIEVEMENTS OF VERNON ATHLETES

E. Foster: This has been a great winter for athletes from Vernon and the north Okanagan. Starting with Paralympic sit-skier Josh Dueck's silver medal in slalom, followed by a gold-medal performance by Canada's wheelchair curling team, who would not have brought home the gold without local athletes Sonja Gaudet and Ina Forrest. These three athletes showed their talent to the world.

Josh Dueck has been a freestyle skier competing since he was a teenager. He broke his back in a skiing accident when he was working as a coach. This life-changing event launched him back into competition, and within one year of his accident he was back on the slopes.

Sonja Gaudet led an athletic life from a young age. After she suffered a spinal cord injury, she decided to challenge herself and pursue a career in amateur sports. She tried wheelchair curling and knew it was a good

[ Page 4204 ]

fit. Her participation quickly turned into national and international championships. This is Sonja's second Paralympic gold medal in wheelchair curling, as she was on the team in Turin.

Ina Forrest began curling in 2004 after a passerby approached her and suggested she give it a try. She's never looked back. The Vernon Curling Club member quickly took to curling and became a member of the B.C. wheelchair curling team that same year. She's competed and won various world championships.

It's a great honour to have these world-class Olympic athletes in our riding, and we thank them for their contribution to our community, the province and our country.

Mr. Speaker, Vernon's streak continues. The people of Vernon are celebrating the victory of the Vernon Vipers over the Powell River Kings last night. The teams went head to head in seven games of the Doyle Cup, and the Snakes won 3 to 1. The Vipers' tournament-winning performance makes them this year's top team in the B.C. junior hockey league. They will now face the Alberta champions on their way to defending the national Royal Bank Cup that they won here in Victoria last year.

Oral Questions

ELECTION CAMPAIGN MATERIALS

M. Farnworth: The police are currently investigating a leaflet that was used as part of a smear campaign during the last provincial election. The Premier has a responsibility as leader of the Liberal Party — but, more importantly, as Premier of British Columbia — to protect the integrity of the democratic process in British Columbia. So my question is for the Premier.

When the issues around this leaflet first surfaced during the election campaign, what steps did he take to ensure that no B.C. Liberal Party officials or B.C. Liberal government officials were involved in the planning, distribution or implementation of this smear campaign?

Speaker's Ruling

MATTERS UNDER POLICE INVESTIGATION

NOT SUBJECT TO DEBATE

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Member, a matter under investigation by the police, while not sub judice in a strict sense, has by precedent not been discussed in this House. It's a matter of courtesy to the investigation to avoid debate in parliament, so I'd ask all members to observe this well-established rule.

[1355]

Debate Continued

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Member, is it a different question?

M. Farnworth: Yes, hon. Speaker. I'm not asking about a police investigation. I am asking what the Premier did during the election campaign when this issue first surfaced. What steps did he take to ensure that no B.C. Liberal government officials…?

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Member, I want to remind you that it is under police investigation, and I think that my first statement…. Out of courtesy to the RCMP, we will not continue along this line.

M. Farnworth: New question, then.

Mr. Speaker: Continue.

RESIGNATION AND REPLACEMENT

OF SOLICITOR GENERAL

Hon. G. Campbell: Hon. Speaker, I am glad to convey through you to the House the activities over the last couple of weeks. On Friday, March 26, the Deputy Minister to the Premier informed me that there was an Election Act complaint….

Mr. Speaker: Whoa, whoa, whoa. The same….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members. Hon. Members.

Hon. Members, the same rule applies to both sides of the House.

Mr. Premier, the same rule for the fact that we're not entering into this investigation by the RCMP applies to both sides of the House.

Hon. G. Campbell: I respect that. First, let me say that the acting Solicitor General is a man of impeccable credentials. He will be serving the people of British Columbia well over the next number of months, and I have every confidence in his ability to carry out this task as well as his tasks as Attorney General.

FORESTS MINISTRY STAFF REDUCTION

AND FOREST INDUSTRY IN B.C

C. James: Nearly 300 government employees got their pink slips yesterday. Almost two-thirds of them were forest workers. The minister responsible said that the reason was a reduction in harvest levels, but that same

[ Page 4205 ]

minister just the week before was saying that forestry is turning the corner, things are going well.

My question is to the Minister of Forests. How does the minister justify his claims of a turnaround when the B.C. Liberals are cutting hundreds of jobs in one single announcement?

Hon. P. Bell: Yesterday was a very difficult day for 204 people in the Ministry of Forests and Range, and I want to make sure that all of those individuals know that we're going to be working hard to find placements for each and every one of those individuals both in the ministry and in other ministries, but….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat for a second.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. P. Bell: This is against a backdrop of a deficit of $1.7 billion this year. This is against a backdrop of a time when the harvest levels in this province have been reduced by 35 percent. Just two-thirds — less than two-thirds — of the volume that we were harvesting just a few years ago is being harvested today.

I think that the people of British Columbia expect us to make the responsible decisions not to download debt to future generations, to people's children and people's grandchildren. We've made the right decisions here. I'm confident that we can deliver the services that are necessary for us to deliver in this province.

[1400]

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

C. James: What I'd like to say to the minister is: this is under the backdrop of the B.C. Liberals, who have neglected the forest industry for years in British Columbia. That's what it's under the backdrop of.

These latest cuts will once again hurt families and communities across this province. But this is what the minister responsible for mining told a gathering in Nelson recently: "We're not looking at forestry. It'll be a long time before the forest industry recovers." So it's very clear that the B.C. Liberals have given up on the forest industry.

My question is to the Minister of Forests. Why won't he stand up at cabinet and ensure that forestry and forest-dependent communities get the support they need in this province?

Hon. P. Bell: I find this very interesting from an individual that's opposed every single thing that we've tried to do to rebuild this forest industry. But you know what? I'd actually like the Leader of the Opposition to turn around and talk to her critic. Her critic, just the other day, just two weeks ago, was in the media saying that this government was doing the right thing, marketing into China. We're making headway in that market. And that's the New World opportunity.

Turn around and talk to him. Turn around and talk to him.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

C. James: Mr. Speaker, 30,000 families impacted, 71 mills closed since the B.C. Liberals started damaging our forest industry. This government's record of failure speaks for itself, and the cuts yesterday spoke louder than anything. Now even the Minister for Mining states that the B.C. Liberals have thrown in the towel when it comes to forestry.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

C. James: Again, my question is to the minister. Forest-dependent communities are tired of empty words. Words don't support families. When will this minister act?

Hon. P. Bell: I've got a question for the Leader of the Opposition. She rarely bothers to answer any. But I would ask her: what do the following companies have in common? Canfor, Conifex, Interfor Tembec. What do those companies have in common? Every single one of them is investing in British Columbia, reopening mills and putting people back to work in this province.

B. Routley: For years rural British Columbia has had to deal with the consequences of B.C. Liberal forest policy neglect — 30,000 jobs lost in British Columbia, 71 mills closed in the last nine years alone, and more cuts are now hitting families today in Kamloops, Clearwater, in Merritt, Prince Rupert, Revelstoke, Castlegar, Alexis Creek. They're just some of the communities that are now going to pay the further price.

To the Minister of Forests: rural British Columbians are fed up with this government dismantling forestry in British Columbia. We are appalled by the lack of respect for forest workers that helped build this province.

[1405]

When will this minister stop the rhetoric, and when will he finally act to protect forests and the future of British Columbia?

[ Page 4206 ]

Hon. P. Bell: You know, the members opposite are actually going to have an opportunity in the very near future to see whether or not they really care about forestry in this province. The members opposite might want to listen to this opportunity and this challenge, because there are a number of them over there who represent key communities that are forestry-dependent communities in this province.

When we're really going to know if those members opposite — the member for Skeena, the member for Cariboo North, the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast, all the members opposite — care about forestry or not is whether they stand up and support the HST. The HST — that's the kind of policy that makes sure that the men and women that work in this forest industry in all of those members' ridings over there can stay with high-paying, family-supporting jobs in this province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Routley: When you strip away the bark from this minister, all you get is more diseased forest policy. This minister should know…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

B. Routley: …that by cutting these jobs today, he's undercutting the long-term health of our forests. These are critical jobs on the ground to protect our land base, and now they're gone. There's been failure in the past, there's failure now, and there'll be failure in the future. That's this government's record on forest policy.

To the minister, my question is…. Forest communities and forest workers are no longer buying this minister's empty rhetoric. Will you commit to do your job to protect the forests of British Columbia, starting today?

Mr. Speaker: I remind the member — through the Speaker, please.

Hon. P. Bell: I don't want to understate how challenging yesterday was for 204 men and women in the public service who have committed, year after year after year, to providing service to our forest sector.

You know what? This is a different time in the world. It's a very challenging time for us. What I find interesting is the…. I'm not sure if he's the deputy critic or an assistant critic. He is contradicting the critic for Forests, because the critic for Forests is on the public record, just two weeks ago, saying that the work that we're doing building the Chinese market is what's necessary, long term, to have a sustainable forest industry.

It's not going to be far off when these members will have an opportunity to vote and make a conscious decision on whether or not they want to support one of the most important things that we can do to support the forest industry in this province.

I'd like to quote Rick Jeffery, the president and CEO of Coast Forest Products Association: "Those regions that have introduced a value-added tax, like the HST, see increases in productivity and investment, and for our industry that means levelling the playing field…

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Minister.

Hon. P. Bell: …with our competitors."

We on this side of the House support high-paying industrial jobs. Clearly, that member doesn't.

[1410]

N. Macdonald: When this government, when this minister, go to the HST deceit as a defence, it just points to the desperation of this government. It has been a comprehensive failure. A solid 2 percent of British Columbians strongly agree with his position.

Mere weeks ago the minister was in Revelstoke, and he was talking about the great future of forestry in Revelstoke. Yesterday this government downgraded the district office in Revelstoke, and he laid off the district manager and five staff. The words here mean nothing. The actions speak louder. They speak louder.

Or maybe it's the Minister of Mines who speaks most accurately for this government — that they have given up on forestry and that they feel forestry has no future. Everything points to that.

Now, if the minister disagrees with that, then maybe he can tell us why he is allowing the Forest Service to be taken apart at this particular time when there is so much work that needs to be done on the land. Why is he doing that?

Hon. P. Bell: Only in an NDP world would it be appropriate to maintain full employment in the public service at a time when there's a reduction in harvest levels by over 35 percent. Only in an NDP world do they think it's appropriate to download costs, debt, from our province to future generations.

I know that that member opposite doesn't believe that, and I would challenge him to stand up and say that we need to make sure that we protect the future for our children. When we see a significant reduction in harvest levels, we have to make sure that we have a ministry that's the right size.

The member opposite doesn't have to believe me. All he has to do is listen to leaders in the forest sector — leaders like Rick Jeffery, leaders like Hank Ketcham — who are continually on the record talking about the importance of the HST in making sure we have a viable industry.

[ Page 4207 ]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

N. Macdonald: This minister talks about fiscal responsibility. We have a Minister of Forests we're paying for. We have a minister of silviculture we're paying for. We have a minister of pine beetle we're paying for. This bloated cabinet doesn't get touched. It doesn't get touched there.

The Ministry of Forests' mission is to protect and manage and conserve B.C. forests. This government may have destroyed the forest industry, but it still has responsibility for public lands that make up 95 percent of British Columbia. The jobs being cut are only peripherally involved in cutting permits. The minister knows this.

How can the minister justify the destruction of the Forest Service, a group that has proudly served B.C. for almost a century? How does the minister justify doing that?

Hon. P. Bell: I know that research has never been a long suit of the member opposite, and I'm sure that the Parliamentary Secretary for Silviculture and the Parliamentary Secretary for Pine Beetle are pleased to know that they've just been promoted to ministerial status. I'm sure they're very excited about that.

This is just reflective of this opposition. They need to be honest with the public. The member opposite just two weeks ago talked about the good work that this government was doing in China, how that was rebuilding the forest industry, starting to drive employment across the province.

There are more people working in the forest sector today than there were three or four months ago. Companies are putting people back to work, and it's a direct result of the work that this government's been doing.

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON LANDLORDS AND TENANTS

B. Ralston: Earlier this week the Premier of Ontario announced proposed changes in legislation to protect tenants in that province from rent increases resulting from the impact of the HST upon the operational costs for landlords. My question for the Finance Minister is this. What steps will the B.C. government take to protect tenants from increased rents here in British Columbia if the HST becomes law?

[1415]

Hon. C. Hansen: As I look through some of the websites that have popped up in British Columbia, I am disappointed to see the number of those websites that imply that rents are going to have an added 7 percent on top of them. That, of course, is not true. Likewise with condo fees, when I see websites implying that there's going to be an additional 7 percent on condo fees. That is not true.

In terms of rents in British Columbia, residential rents are exempt from the GST currently, and they will be exempt from the HST going forward. There is no question that there will be some very slight increases in costs that landlords will face, and those very slight increases that landlords will face can be accommodated within the rental framework increases that we have in place today.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Well, according to the Rental Owners and Managers Society of B.C., the HST will increase costs for B.C. landlords above the ordinary inflationary pressures and will put pressure on them to increase their rents. The regulation that regulates increased rents does not prohibit increased rents due to an increase in the HST. Will the minister confirm that his information is inaccurate, and will he take steps to protect tenants in this province?

Hon. C. Hansen: We have a provision in this province that allows landlords to increase rents at reasonable amounts every year. It's a system that's been in place for several years, and the very slight increases that landlords will face because of HST can be easily accommodated within the framework that is there today.

ROYAL INLAND HOSPITAL

STERILIZATION UNIT

A. Dix: Documents obtained by the opposition and the media show the extent of the failure of the B.C. Liberal government in the sterilization crisis that struck Royal Inland Hospital this February and March.

Audits and reviews in 2004, 2007 and 2008 warned the IHA and the government of the need for a new sterilization unit in the hospital, a fact acknowledged by the CEO of the IHA more than two years ago. But nothing changed. The unit was not upgraded, despite the repeated warnings of staff and surgeons.

Can the minister explain, in light of this new material, why the unit was not retrofitted and why the plans cited in the audit and again by the CEO went nowhere until Royal Inland Hospital was faced with a crisis in February?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is completely wrong in his characterization, not surprisingly. The fact of the matter is that we on this side of the House actually believe that audits are an important tool in our health care system, whether it's patient satisfaction, whether it's cleanliness audits or whether it's surgical sterilization audits.

Now, I would love in this House to be able to compare how our audit results are doing to the 1990s, but sadly there were no audits that took place under the NDP, so I'm not able to do that for the House. The audits that

[ Page 4208 ]

were undertaken in Interior Health in 2007 and 2008 made a number of recommendations. Those recommendations have either been implemented or are in the course of being implemented. That is exactly what we would expect from a system that constantly measures itself and constantly tries to improve.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: Listen. It's unbelievable what the Liberals will call innovation. It's like a bad science experiment. They were warned. The CEO of the health authority said that we'd need a new sterilization unit to keep surgical equipment sterile in Royal Inland Hospital in 2008. You know what the response of the minister was or the government was? Their response was: "Let's do nothing. Let's see what happens."

What happened was a crisis that shut down operating rooms at the hospital. Why did the minister and the successive ministers not act on their recommendations, and when are they going to get a new sterilization unit at Royal Inland Hospital?

Hon. K. Falcon: You know, the Health critic was the chief of staff for an NDP government that didn't see fit to do any audits. It's remarkable that they didn't even look at what they were doing to determine whether there was a way to improve it. It's unbelievable.

[1420]

The fact of the matter is that the member is absolutely wrong when he says that nothing was done. The fact of the matter is that additional staff were hired, different procedures were put in place, and more education was being provided right across the health authority. There were a whole range of recommendations made and a whole range of recommendations implemented. This member is dead wrong when he alleges that that is not the case.

HIGH SCHOOL CHILD CARE PROGRAMS

FOR STUDENT PARENTS

M. Karagianis: Last week we learned that the Options Child and Family day care centre in Victoria may have to close their doors because the Minister of Children and Family Development has cut their funding. Today we've learned that the Options program is not the only high school day care program that's being cut. In fact, Higgins House, the on-site day care at Vic High, has already told its parents that their program is going to be shut down.

My question is to the Minister of Children and Family Development. Where are these vulnerable young moms supposed to turn to now?

Hon. M. Polak: I want to assure the member and everyone else in this House that in the case of both Artemis Options Society and also in the case of Higgins House, the funding that is being provided for day care spaces is not being reduced.

I can further advise that in the case of Artemis Options Society, we are also not reducing their education and life skills funding. That funding remains in place. The only area being reduced is with respect to provision of teaching around feeding and diapering, basic parent skills, for which each of those facilities will still be provided part of their funding and services that are also provided at nine different family resource programs in the Victoria area.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: It's interesting, because last week on CBC radio the minister admitted that the actual day care services were being cut for Artemis — a $40,000 funding cut to them.

Interjection.

M. Karagianis: Absolutely. A $40,000 cut. It is devastating to these families. They do not have any place to turn. These young women have no alternatives for day care. They are trying to go back to high school. They are working very hard to get an education and keep their kids out of the foster care system. The minister knows this.

It is exceptionally hard to find day care in the age group that these children are looking for — the zero to three. The minister knows all of this. She knows the funding has been cut.

I would like to know: why is the minister doing this to these young children, these young teens trying to get through school, raise their children? Now they are having their support services stripped away by this minister. Why is this minister doing this?

Hon. M. Polak: Perhaps the real question is why the critic insists on exaggerating the impact of reductions to services. So I'll repeat for the member: funding for day care spaces remains in place at both Artemis and at Higgins House. That includes not only operating funding that every other day care centre in British Columbia receives, but in addition, these young ladies also receive an enhanced subsidy of $100 per child, more than anyone else receives.

The services that are being affected are not being eliminated. They relate to providing instruction around feeding and diapering and other resources that may be available in the community, and those services are being provided in nine other family resource programs around the province. But day care spaces funding is not being reduced.

[End of question period.]

N. Simons: I seek leave to make an introduction.

[ Page 4209 ]

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

N. Simons: In the House today I'd like to welcome in the gallery a friend of this House, a former Minister of Finance, a former MLA for Powell River–Sunshine Coast, a constituent and friend of mine, Gordon Wilson.

[1425]

Petitions

Hon. M. Stilwell: I rise to present a petition from my constituents regarding tuition fees and income taxes.

M. Elmore: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

M. Elmore: I'd like to welcome the executive director, Lisa Ellis from Artemis Options child care, the girls' assistance program at Lansdowne high school, as well as Heather Kay, who are here from the board, and the young mothers who are here — 16-, 17-, 18-year-old women who are doing an incredible job to complete their high school education. They're here with their babies, six months to a year and a half.

They're visiting us here. I'd like to welcome Mary Sampson and her little boy Alexander, Maria Myemba with Aalyeh, Danielle Walker with little Cayden, Kat Lucas with Carter, Aurora Goodman with Liam, and Coral Osadchy with Raleigh. As well, we have the young mother here with us, Marisa Farwell, and also Jeanne Farwell and counsellor Jennifer Meikle. I'd just like to recognize the great work they do, the tremendous commitment of these young mothers. I'd like everyone to please extend to them a very warm welcome.

S. Fraser: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

S. Fraser: Two years after my private member's bill fell off the order paper, I've got over a thousand signatures from British Columbians urging this government to bring in safe antifreeze legislation.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, I call Committee of Supply — for the information of members, the ongoing estimates of the Ministry of Housing — and, in this chamber, continued second reading debate on Bill 9.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 9 — Consumption Tax Rebate

and Transition Act

(continued)

N. Letnick: The last time I spoke to a room this full was when I announced a pop quiz for my students.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

It's a privilege to stand here on behalf of the constituents of Kelowna–Lake Country to talk about Bill 9, the act to remove the provincial sales tax from goods and services in this province. There are many ways to approach the topic of HST. In this chamber I've heard some who like to yell at the top of their voices. Quite frankly, I hope that the member for Cowichan Valley doesn't blow a gasket at some point and we have to take him out in an ambulance. I'm really concerned about his health.

Others, like my colleagues on both sides of me, like to poke a stick in the hornets' nest and provide great entertainment and great rhetoric — those who have mastered the art of rhetoric and debate to which, I think, we all aspire.

I'll start my 30 minutes with a little story. The little story has to do with why I'm here. When I was running for city council some four years ago, I took the pleasure of knocking on a lot of doors — some 5,000, 6,000 doors. But one door really comes to mind. One door always comes to mind whenever I'm thinking of public service.

I knocked on this one door. It was a basement suite. This lady opened the door. She looked frail. She looked sick. We had a nice talk for about 20 minutes about her life and the difficulties that she's had. I vowed to her that as I went through public office, I would continue to work for her and people like her: people who needed housing, people who needed social assistance, people who needed help with health care, people who needed jobs.

Over my course, my experience on council and my experience here so far, I've always kept that top of mind. What can I do — what can we do — to help those who have the least in our society? By helping those, we are helping all of British Columbia.

So with that, I was thinking of Bill 9 and the HST, which is to replace the provincial sales tax; the HST, which will create jobs; the HST, which will drive the economy; the HST, which will allow for people like Mary in this story to have a better life because we're going to be increasing the pie.

[1430]

Just last week, as we all went back to our ridings, I had the opportunity to meet with a number of people, different groups. We talked about all kinds of issues including,

[ Page 4210 ]

of course, the HST. I spoke with seniors on the need for health care. We went and looked through the financial statement of this province, and through the financial statement we identified a few things.

If I may, Madam Speaker, one of the things we identified is that the MSP or medical services premiums are only 10 percent of our total health care costs — just over 10 percent of our total health care costs.

When I was discussing the need for a better approach to taxation in this province, I brought that forward and said that we need to find a way to expand the economy. We need to find a way to create those jobs because without the expansion of the economy, without investment in British Columbia, we don't have the jobs that pay the taxes that go towards paying for our health care.

They understood that. Nobody had ever sat down to explain it to them, explain the link between our growing economy and the ability to provide for the thing they value most as a senior, and that is good, sustainable health care.

I also had the opportunity to speak to a businessman, a young businessman starting out in business. He said to me in my office: "I wish you would lower taxes. This tax burden that we have in this province is too high."

I had to take some time to explain to this young businessman how this government, over the last nine years now, has consistently lowered taxes. Over 100 tax reductions have made it so this particular province has the lowest taxes for individuals under $118,000 and have made it so we have one of the lowest small business taxes. Soon, over the next few years, we'll eliminate small business tax in this province.

I said to him: "That is not enough. What we need to do is also shift the taxes from an income-generating tax to a consumption tax." That way, that will invest in more jobs. It will give more people money that they can spend on their business, and in turn, the multiplier effect of that will move towards making him a much more successful businessperson.

Again, he understood because we took the time to explain to him. I took the time to explain to him, and once again I pulled out the financial statements and looked at the financial statements of the province for this year. As it turns out, personal income tax over total expenses is only 14 percent. So that's 86 percent of our roughly $40 billion in this province that is financed through means other than personal income tax.

So we went through the financial statements. We went through his needs. When he left my office, he was supporting the HST.

A day later I had the opportunity to talk to some business students at Okanagan College. They wanted to talk about the difference between being an elected city councillor and being elected to provincial office. I told them that the difference is that in both cases you get to make an impact, but in provincial office you get to make an impact on larger issues like health care, the economy, education, social services, transportation and a number of others.

In municipal politics you get to make an impact on local issues like: should you allow for a building to be built? Should you take sides with one neighbour versus another regarding a fence? Where would you invest taxpayer dollars in fire versus policing? Important issues as well.

But the one question they asked me, which I knew was going to come, was: what's your position on the HST — or the repeal of the provincial sales tax? These were business students, so I had an affiliation with them, having taught at the college for nine years before coming here.

What we talked about was the benefits of the HST as a value-added tax over the problems with the PST. A lot of times that's what I don't hear out in the public. Of course there are a lot of people saying they are opposed to the HST. They're signing the petitions, and I respect that. That's democracy. What I don't hear is: what is the alternative? I don't hear that from the opposition. I don't hear that from the general public as to what the alternative is.

[1435]

The alternative, I guess, is to not pass this bill repealing the PST and to keep a provincial sales tax. As we discussed with these college students, the problem with keeping the provincial sales tax is that it has an adverse impact on jobs. It has an adverse impact on investment. It will move people and companies away from British Columbia to other jurisdictions.

Twenty-nine out of the 30 OECD countries have moved from a PST to a value-added tax. Over 130 countries in the world have moved from a PST to a value-added tax. Most of this country has moved from a PST to a value-added tax.

So I gave them the story of Bell Canada. This is one I heard a few months ago. Bell Canada announced that they planned to invest over a billion and a half dollars in new infrastructure in Ontario, and one of the major reasons they gave to invest that money in Ontario was because they were moving to a harmonized sales tax. That harmonized sales tax would shave about 3 percent off their bottom line — 3 percent on that investment.

I had the privilege of touring the province last year with colleagues on both sides of the House, listening to people and their priorities and issues for the Finance Committee. One representative was from TELUS, and I asked the representative from TELUS…. I said: "Bell Canada has made it known that they are going to invest a billion and a half dollars in Ontario, and one of the reasons they gave was because they were moving towards an HST. What would happen if we did move towards an HST as well?"

The representative from TELUS was very careful in her words, but basically, what she was saying was that if

[ Page 4211 ]

we didn't move to an HST, they would have to consider that in their calculations as to where they would locate their investment. In between the lines what they were saying was that if we don't move towards an HST and have a level playing field with Bell Canada, with Ontario and with other jurisdictions, then that will adversely impact the amount of investment we see.

I thought that was very honest of the representative from TELUS to say so. I thought it was very honest, because you don't usually hear people in the business community say: "I'm not moving there because of a certain tax policy." What they usually do is quietly move away from the jurisdiction and set up in other jurisdictions. They usually take their jobs to another province or another country. When they're making investment decisions, they usually avoid those jurisdictions that have the higher tax regimes.

We wouldn't hear a big sucking sound of jobs away from B.C., but over time if we don't move over to the HST, a value-added tax, from the PST, that's exactly what would happen. We would lose investment, and we would lose jobs. All those people out there that have concerns about their particular piece of the pie, whether it's the restaurants or students or seniors or anybody else who believes they're adversely impacted, would actually be worse off in the long term by this government not taking the decision that it has to move towards a value-added tax.

I sat down with those students, and after explaining that and looking once again at the financial statements, in this case for students, I said: "Well, the statements show that tuition fees over post-secondary education expense are 25 percent." So we discussed that. We discussed that the money collected by government for tuition fees — in this case it is $1.135 billion for 2010-2011 — is only 25 percent of the amount of money that government spends on post-secondary education, which is $4.5 billion.

Now, I know that students want lower tuition fees, and I'd like to give them lower tuition fees. But to be able to do that, to have the choice to do that, you have to have a larger pie. The economy has to grow. The economy has to see jobs grow.

Once again, that is the major reason why this government is moving forward with a value-added tax and away from the provincial sales tax — so we can encourage more investment into British Columbia, more jobs so we have more taxes to put towards things like health care for seniors, tuition for students and tax policy reductions for young business people.

Those were three of the places I visited last week. One more that came up was the Salvation Army. I had the privilege of doing some tax returns at the Salvation Army for some people on social assistance. Before I got into politics, I owned an H&R Block franchise, so I knew a little about personal income tax, having done probably about 10,000 returns over the 12 years.

When the Salvation Army put out the call for volunteers, I put up my hand. I said: "Sure, I'd like to be there. I've got a week away from Victoria." I miss this place, of course, but I love home too.

[1440]

I sat down with a few people and helped them with their tax returns, pulled out the laptop. For the most part, the people that came to the Salvation Army to get help with their tax returns were low-income people living on social assistance or some kind of disability.

We had a talk as I was doing the return saying: "Do you understand the HST, and are you getting GST credits now?" And they said, "Yes, we are getting GST," whatever the amount is. I just said, without them knowing who I was, most likely: "You know what? With the HST, because of your income, you're going to be actually getting $230 more a year." They didn't know that.

Part of the problem, I believe, or part of the challenge for us on the government side is to communicate to the whole province all the benefits that the HST will have for them — not just at a macro level, not just that it's good for the economy, and it's good for jobs, but to really communicate to every individual as much as we can. I know people on this side of the House…. I could say both sides, but I meant the people on the B.C. Liberal side, on that side. The people on both sides of the House have been trying to communicate the benefits and challenges of the HST.

We have to continue to work towards reaching every British Columbian so that they understand how it will benefit them, whether it's health care for the seniors or young families, whether it's jobs for young families or middle-aged people who have lost their jobs, whether it's for people in agriculture. We have a lot of B.C. fruit growers right now who are working with our Minister of Agriculture and all of the government to find ways to have sustainable profits in agriculture.

One way is to get rid of the PST. That will give them more money, whether it's in agriculture, in wood products like Tolko or Gorman Bros. in my riding or whether it is exporters like Kelowna Flightcraft, who have over a thousand employees. Somewhere near half are in Ontario and are moving towards HST.

There are many, many examples that I can give you right in my riding as to how it impacts on a macro level. But we have to whittle that down to how it impacts every individual so that they know it's not just somebody else. It's not just that this is good for business and good for corporations, but that this is good for them.

I think we have to work so that we can reach the person on social assistance, reach the person who is struggling with health care issues, reach the student who really wants to know what's in it for them, so that they can have an appreciation of the benefits of the HST.

I think we're making great strides getting there. We're doing that through public campaigns. We're getting

[ Page 4212 ]

there with our website. Over the next few months as we continue to roll it out and starting, of course, on July 1 when it becomes law, I believe that once people start paying it and understanding how it really impacts them and the little amount that it's going to increase their consumption, they'll really realize the benefits of the extra jobs and how it is good not only for B.C. but for them in particular.

The students also brought home an issue for me that I just want to touch on, and that is the issue of our budget deficits. The budget deficits are projected over the next few years to 2013-2014 to be cumulative of what will be $2.7 billion in '09-10, $1.7 billion in '10-11, $945 million in '11-12 and $145 million in '12-13. That's a total of $5.58 billion in deficits until we return to a balanced budget.

The whole world has gone through a major economic crisis over the last few years, and it's only because of good tax policies and progressive initiatives over the last eight years by previous governments — B.C. Liberal governments — that we were able to pay down the deficit left us in 2001. So when the economy did turn to the negative, we had some room that we can move forward on.

So we have $5.58 billion in total deficits that we project over the next few years that we're going to have to pay off. I told those students that one of the things that bothers me the most out of everything we're doing is those deficits. We have to make sure that we pay down those deficits as fast as we can once we go through the 2013-2014 cycle and that we continue to expand the economy, expand jobs and attract investment so that we can pay down the deficit.

I would say that since 41 percent of our costs are in health care, a lot of the deficit is to finance health care for people like me and my parents. I don't think it's right to have these young students come into their economy with a debt hanging over them for services that basically I and my parents have incurred.

[1445]

I want to make sure that any policy that's taken by this government is supportive of expanding the pie, expanding the economy, expanding those jobs and making sure that we pay off that deficit as much as possible.

B.C. Stats in 2009 shows that there are approximately 857,000 people under the age of 18 in B.C. When you take the accumulated deficit and divide by the number of people under 18, that's over $6,000 per child in this province.

I believe this government is on the right path to make sure we bring that down to zero as quickly as possible, that we pay off this debt, that we expand the pie to afford the best health care, education and social programs with the least emphasis on job-killing taxes — and not adopt policies that drive this province into the ground like we did in the '90s and become a have-not status.

I know that all members want what is best, and I don't doubt that members on both sides want that, but we obviously have different perspectives on how to get there. Some believe that we should tax wealth and investment. We don't believe that.

We believe we should reduce taxes on wealth and investment so people will continue to move here and create those jobs and take risks with their capital. We believe we should tax consumption and move towards the consumption tax that Bill 9 will do. Bill 9 will remove the PST and allow the HST, at the lowest rate in this country, to take effect.

It's interesting, I think, Madam Speaker. Was it New Brunswick that just announced they were moving to a 15 percent value-added tax? The NDP government in New Brunswick announced that they're moving to a 15 percent.

Interjection.

N. Letnick: Nova Scotia. Thank you. Madam Speaker, I've been corrected. The NDP government in Nova Scotia is moving to a value-added tax of 15 percent. Ours is just going to be 12 percent.

I think it's important to see that this is not a decision that was taken in isolation from the rest of the world. We are trying to catch up right now to the competitiveness that our key competitors like Ontario, Nova Scotia and other provinces have, which 29 of the 30 OECD countries have.

At the end of the day, once we implement this and people have a chance to see the jobs that are forecast to be created from this and the expansion in the economy, I think we will see…. Once we take the corner on the economy, I think people will appreciate that this government had the foresight to move forward on the HST, even though it was not very popular at the time.

I just want to talk a little bit about what happens in my particular riding regarding the HST. In my particular riding we've had enormous success in investment. We've had a new bridge — an over-$144-million bridge, the W.R. Bennett Bridge — invested. We had a new highway — Highway 97 expansion.

We have Highway 33 that's expanding now to four lanes with a passing lane up Walker Hill, which will help enormously for the people in Joe Rich, the people in Black Mountain, the people in Toovey and all the people in Rutland and everyone going back and forth to Big White. That's going to be a major improvement in safety in our area. We also have improvements in Highway 97 in Lake Country. Highway 97 will be moving away from Wood Lake, and it will be moving into a higher aspect. In that way, it will be safer as well.

We have the investment in Kelowna General Hospital — just recently announced, another $430 million in Kelowna General Hospital; investments like the new cardiac care centre, the cardiac surgery centre. We have investments in Vernon Jubilee Hospital. We have investments down in

[ Page 4213 ]

Penticton. Over a billion dollars in investments in health care in our area alone.

The list goes on and on: UBC Okanagan expansion, Okanagan College — two new schools. All this is being done because of good tax policies, which allow investment in our province and therefore people moving to our province creating those jobs which pay the taxes that will allow us to reinvest back into the services that people need and demand in our province and right in my local riding.

I want that to continue not only in my riding but in the ridings of everyone in the Okanagan and in the ridings of everyone across the province on both sides of the House, because I believe that every British Columbian deserves to have the best in health care, the best in education, the best in social services and the best in transportation that we can afford.

I think the best way of getting there is to continue with the tax policies that this government has put forward over the last eight and nine years, policies which remove taxes away from investors and will move taxes away from income and allow taxation and service fees to be at the consumption level.

[1450]

I'd much rather, if somebody is going to be buying a big expensive boat, that they pay taxes on it. I would much rather, when someone goes in to speak to their accountant and say…. We all do that, I would assume. You know, I want to pay my fair share in taxes, but no more than my fair share in taxes. I'd much rather we keep those taxes as low as possible and have them make the choice of buying the big cars or the boats or the big houses — whatever it is — and then pay the taxes at that point.

I think that's what this repeal of the PST will do. It will move taxes towards consumption, and it will allow people to pay the taxes but at a different place, still allowing for investment into our province and allowing for people to make those difficult decisions to use their capital, which will give the Finance Minister the ability to say to all his ministers: "I have more money. I've got more money because the economy is larger. I have more money that you can use to invest in the priorities that British Columbians have." I'd like to see that day come as soon as possible, and with the move to an HST, I see that coming.

Now, the opposition takes great delight in listing products and services that will be taxed with the HST. Sometimes some of the members of the opposition get emotional when they talk about it. It's interesting to see, you know, taxing….

Interjection.

N. Letnick: Yeah. Well, it's okay to get emotional. This is the place — right?

But at the end of the day when they get emotional and then all of a sudden when the camera is off, some of the members just start laughing, I wonder whether they really believe in their soul, in their gut, that what they're saying is true. Or is it just because the camera is on them?

It's an interesting conundrum, because they want to get the point across. They want to talk about all of the great things we're going to be taxing with the HST that we weren't taxing before, but at the same time I don't hear in the same breath the other option.

I guess I have to conclude that the other option that the opposition members would like is to continue with the provincial sales tax, to continue to force people to pay a tax which moves jobs out of British Columbia — which in the short term might be politically attractive, given all the polling that you see and what's going on in the general community. But in the long term it's not in the best interests of British Columbians, not in the best interests of those who need health care, those who need social services, those who need jobs, those who need education.

We're not about short-term political gain. We're about making the right decisions, even though that might be tough.

I had the pleasure to work with the Select Standing Committee on Finance over the last few years, and I worked with some of our colleagues on both sides of the House. One of the things that we heard when we were on the road was that the B.C. Agriculture Council favoured harmonization, saying that adoption of the HST would realize significant cost savings for them.

We heard from the Chartered Accountants of British Columbia, saying: "A harmonized system would improve the competitiveness of our businesses, particularly small business, and would save the provincial government significant administrative costs." Of course, it would create jobs and would assess "discrepancies in the application of the two sales taxes."

We heard from the Retail Council, who said: "We've not yet heard anyone in government provide a thoughtful analysis of the economic and revenue-generation reasons for considering harmonization." They urged us, the committee, to urge the Finance Minister to look beyond the PST and to harmonize.

We heard from Grant Thornton LLP: "Now, perhaps, focus should be on reducing the inefficiency of administration by moving to a harmonized tax. For many years we can continue to look towards harmonization."

"Important economic benefits to harmonization" — the Retail Council of Canada again. Chartered accountants, again, supporting in 2008.

In 2009 we heard from the B.C. Chamber of Commerce. "The opposition to HST must answer the question: if we do not harmonize, how do we expect our resource industries, our technology sectors and our manufacturing

[ Page 4214 ]

industries to compete in the global marketplace — or in the Canadian marketplace, for that matter — let alone attract investment?"

Mining Association of B.C.: "We estimate the HST is going to reduce operating costs for most mines anywhere between half a million dollars to a million and a half a year. It should reduce the cost of new mines by some $10 million."

[1455]

It goes on with Coast Forest Products Association, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, Initiatives Prince George, Insurance Bureau of Canada, TELUS — as I spoke about before at a Vancouver public hearing — and on and on.

Clearly, the business community has for many, many years, through successive Finance committees touring this province, articulated a need for us to move away from the PST to the HST. But we haven't done it. We didn't do it, except for this year. The reasons why we did it this year are many. For one, the rules changed this year. The federal government allowed us to exempt up to 5 percent, and we used most of that 5 percent to exempt tax on gasoline.

The federal government allows us to set our own rate, which we couldn't before, and we all have the lowest rate in the country at 12 percent, combined with the HST. The federal government offered us an incentive for transition of $1.6 billion, and that's going to go a long way to help those students not have to pay for the budget deficits that we're incurring right now because of the global economic crisis.

There are many reasons why the rules, the reasons for bringing in the HST, changed from before the election to after the election. I have no qualms at all to go through that with anyone who comes to my office and asks me about the HST. Once they leave my office, not only do they understand why we're doing it — and they believe in it — but they also understand that the difference between before and after was huge, and they are supportive.

The problem is that it's very hard for me to talk to 54,000 people in my riding. So we have to, and we are moving towards communicating as well as we can with those people.

As I move towards conclusion, I still have to take an opportunity to join my two colleagues on both sides here and just try to prod the hornets nest a little bit. What I'm going to say is a little tongue-in-cheek, but it's also very serious.

What is the difference between the members on the opposite side and ourselves? And what I was thinking about during QP …. I just took some notes down, off the cuff. The difference for me as I see it is: B.C. Liberals — jobs, NDP — no jobs; B.C. Liberals — lower taxes, NDP — higher taxes; B.C. Liberals — real world….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Brar: I rise to speak against Bill 9. Let me tell you why.

I oppose this bill because the HST is the single most powerful bombshell of betrayal thrown on the people of British Columbia by the Liberal Party. I oppose this bill because the B.C. Liberals did not tell the truth to the people of British Columbia during the election regarding the HST, when they said they will not impose the HST on the people of British Columbia.

I oppose this bill because the HST is an unfair tax hike on the people of British Columbia, because this is a tax shift of $1.9 billion from corporations to average folks. In other words, big business will pay less, and the people of British Columbia will pay more.

I oppose this bill because the HST will hurt small businesses and cost thousands of jobs to the people of British Columbia. I oppose this bill because 87 percent of the people in British Columbia don't like this tax — 87 percent of the people.

I oppose this bill because the people of Surrey-Fleetwood, from all walks of life, have been calling my office and sending e-mails to fight to stop the HST to the end.

I also oppose this bill because all the arguments given by this government to support this bill are baseless and laughable. The HST will pay for health care. That's the biggest joke I have ever heard about the budget in this House. So I would like to go into detail about those reasons I have just listed to oppose this bill.

[1500]

During the last election the B.C. Liberals made two key promises, which are related to the HST, with the people of British Columbia. The first one was that they promised that the total deficit in this province will be $495 million, not a penny more. The second promise they made during the last election was that they would not impose HST on the people of British Columbia. That was before the election. The reality after the election was completely different, and I will come to that a little later as to what is different now.

This is not the first time they have made a promise to the people of British Columbia before the election and have done completely the opposite after the election. If we look back, we know that once upon a time the Premier of this province made the promise to the people of British Columbia that they will provide the best education system to the people so that no child is left behind. But as soon as the elections were over, they started closing schools. They have closed 175 schools in the province of British Columbia.

Once upon a time the Premier of this province made the promise to the seniors of this province that they will build 5,000 new long-term care beds for seniors. But once the election was over, they refused to build those 5,000 long-term care beds for seniors.

[ Page 4215 ]

Once upon a time they promised not to sell B.C. Rail, and they put that on the election platform. But as soon as the election was over, they sold B.C. Rail. They did sell B.C. Rail. Again, that list of those broken promises goes on and on, and this is not a new thing when we talk about the HST.

I will come to those two key promises they made when it comes to the HST. The first one, as I said earlier, was that they made the promise to the people of British Columbia that the total deficit will be $495 million and not a penny more. That was before the election. But after the election the reality was completely different. The deficit, in fact, after the election was hitting almost $3.5 billion — much bigger than what was told to the people of British Columbia during the election. That was the reality.

The second promise they made during the election, as we all know, was that they would not impose HST on the people of British Columbia. That promise was not only a verbal promise, by the way. They gave that in writing. They gave that commitment in writing to the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association — in writing. They gave that in writing to the Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association — that they would not impose HST on the people of British Columbia.

The member for Kelowna–Lake Country who spoke before me was talking about options. The option is very simple. The people of British Columbia want honesty, and this government was not honest before the election with the people. That is the option.

They gave that commitment in writing to both the business associations. After the election was over, they didn't wait for long. They dropped the bombshell of betrayal on the people of British Columbia by doing just the opposite. Just six weeks after the election, the B.C. Liberals betrayed the people of British Columbia by imposing HST on the people.

[1505]

Guess what. They have done it now. The bill is here, and they want to force the people to pay HST. It's very clear that they were not honest with the people of British Columbia during the election. It's very clear that they did not tell the truth to the people of British Columbia during the election when it comes to HST.

That's why we always read the news or hear the news that people of British Columbia don't believe politicians. Why would they? The two key promises they made during the election were both broken just six weeks after the election. That's what happened this time, that's why the people of British Columbia are very, very upset, and that's why they're opposing HST.

Madam Speaker, 87 percent of people in British Columbia are opposing the HST. Survey after survey has confirmed that. Members on the other side all know that. They know that very well, I'm sure. The people are writing e-mails to them. People are calling their offices. People are meeting them and saying that this is a bad policy, that this is a broken policy and that this is betrayal. People are telling them.

They hear that from the people of British Columbia every day. That's why British Columbians from all walks of life and all parts of the province are joining together to stop the HST. Thousands have signed petitions, joined Facebook groups, held rallies, and the fight continues. I welcome these members to go out in their own ridings to stop that…. That fight will continue for the next 90 days, and people will show them the reality. People will show them that people don't like HST.

The message from the people I have spoken to is very clear. It's very clear that B.C. Liberals cannot continue deceiving the people of British Columbia. The B.C. Liberals cannot continue betraying the people of British Columbia. Enough is enough. We must stop the HST.

The reality is that the HST is an unfair tax hike on the people of British Columbia. The HST is a transfer of $1.9 billion in taxes paid by big corporations at this point in time, and it will be moved onto the consumers. In other words, the big businesses will pay less, and the people of British Columbia will pay more. This is a favour to their business friends in the province of British Columbia.

The question we need to ask is: how much greed is enough? How much greed is enough? Tax cut after tax cut after tax cut has been given to wealthy people. When it comes to minimum wage, this government has continuously refused to raise minimum wage, when every province in the country has raised the minimum wage — every province.

They talk about competition. Think about the minimum wage. They don't even talk about the minimum wage when we talk about competitiveness. Every province in this country has raised the minimum wage, not only once. Many provinces have done that more than once during the last nine years since they have been in power.

But tax cut after tax cut after tax cut has been given to wealthy people. When it comes to the average folks, this government doesn't care about them. They don't care about those people at all. Minimum wage in this province has not been raised since they took over in 2001. In fact, they introduced what they call a training wage, which is $6, $6.50. When we ask about the minimum wage, these members have been silent. Time and again, they have been silent.

[ Page 4216 ]

The other reality about this new tax, the HST, is that it will drive the cost of many things up, and I am going to list that. I challenge the members to tell me that that's wrong.

[1510]

Many small businesses will be forced to charge 7 percent more for a range of goods and services. If we look at the TD Bank, it estimated that 21.4 percent of the goods and services that British Columbians buy will be newly subject to the HST and that, on average, consumer price will rise by 1.5 percent, even if businesses reduce their prices. B.C.'s PST applies to a smaller base of goods and services than the sales tax of other provinces, so the effect on consumers will be larger here. That's the report from TD Bank.

Items that will no longer be exempt from the PST include most services and many goods that were specifically exempt from the PST for reasons of public policy. People will now pay 7 percent more on many of those items, and I would like to say that the bottom line is this: that the HST is going to drive up the cost of many things which are very important to average people. The cost of restaurant meals will go up. When you go after July 1, you will face it yourself, Madam Speaker. The cost of many grocery items — such as snack foods and other prepared foods like salad and sandwiches, and heated food like a muffin and a coffee — will go up.

The cost of school supplies is going to go up. School supplies. Even the kids of this province will not be spared. The cost of taxi fares is going to go up. The cost of live theatre, movie tickets, amusement parks, campground fees, museum admissions and whale-watching tours will go up. The cost of accounting services is going to go up, and the costs of many other services like architects and real estate agents are going to go up.

The cost of classes for yoga…. I like yoga, by the way. The cost of even yoga classes is going to go up. Spare, at least, the yoga class. Yoga, dance, cooking, martial arts — the costs of all those things are going to go up.

The cost of membership fees for clubs and gyms and player fees for team sports is going up. What about the healthy living and sports? The Minister of Healthy Living and Sport is here. This is going to cost those kids more. The people who are going to participate in physical activity — it's going to cost them more. The cost of facilities and ice rinks is going to go very high.

The cost of haircuts is going to go up, and the cost for personal care services like a beauty salon and spa is going to go up. The cost of vitamins, dietary supplements and other non-prescription products is going to go up. The cost of magazines, newspapers, newsletters and student yearbooks is going to go up. The cost of bicycles, bike repairs and parts is going to go up.

The cost of wedding planners and even funerals is going to go up. I remember that my fellow member spoke this morning about this. It will cost you — everything from birth to death. The HST is going to be applied on many things, the services that people use at this point in time.

The cost to repair home appliances is going to go up. The cost of energy-efficient home appliances is going to go up. The cost of laundry and dry cleaning is going to go up. The cost of basic residential telephone services is going to go up. The cost of basic cable TV service is going to go up. The cost of work-related safety equipment is going to go up, and the cost of automobile towing and emergency roadside services is going to go up.

This is not a complete list. The list goes on. This is going to cost the people of British Columbia almost every day in everything they are doing and every service they need. That is the reality of HST, and that's why 87 percent of the people of British Columbia are opposed to this tax.

[1515]

I have heard a lot from the other side that the HST is good for business. Let me tell you, the HST is going to hurt small businesses and cost thousands of jobs. It may be good for big corporations, friends of the Liberal Party, but for small business people out there, this is going to cost a lot. It's going to hurt a lot of the small business industries, and I would like to just list a few.

This is going to hurt big-time the restaurant and food service industry. This is going to hurt the construction and real estate industry. This is going to hurt the tourism industry, taxi industry, veterinarians, and many other small businesses are going to pay a high price when the HST is introduced.

Thousands of people in British Columbia are going to lose jobs. I'm going to repeat again to the members that thousands of people in British Columbia are going to lose jobs. It's not me saying that. The restaurant industry forecasts that the HST will cost them up to almost 12,000 jobs — 12,000 jobs in the restaurant industry alone. Go and speak to them.

The tourism industry predicts that the HST will cost them up to 10,000 jobs — 10,000 jobs in the tourism industry alone. That's why lots of businesses don't like the HST, like 87 percent of the people in British Columbia don't like the HST. Lots of businesses don't like the HST as well, and I'm going to list them.

Interjections.

J. Brar: The member is saying that I must say what I think. I think that this government should have told the truth to the people of British Columbia before the election. I think that this government should have been honest with the people of British Columbia before the election. That's what I think.

I stand with the people of British Columbia. Some 87 percent of people oppose this tax, and you know that. If you really believe the people of British Columbia, you should stand up and oppose the HST.

[ Page 4217 ]

There are a number of businesses opposing the HST. Madam Speaker, 87 percent of people oppose the HST, and I'm going to list the businesses. Businesses oppose the HST. The first one is B.C. Restaurant and Foodservices Association. They oppose it. The Council of Tourism Associations of B.C. opposes it. The B.C. Care Providers Association opposes the HST. The Federation of Community Social Services of B.C. opposes the HST. I hope members will pay attention to me now.

The Rental Owners and Managers Society of B.C. opposes the HST, and the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs opposes the HST as well. It's very clear that there is no winner. There is no winner among the people of British Columbia when it comes to the HST. There's only one group of winners, and that is a group of big corporations and friends of B.C. Liberals.

This is a tax shift from big corporations to the people of British Columbia. As we all know, the HST is going to transfer $1.9 billion in taxes paid by big businesses onto the people of British Columbia. That's the reality, Member. You should just accept that. That's the reality. Big business will pay less, and the people of British Columbia will pay more when this will be introduced.

Deputy Speaker: Member, you will direct your comments through the Chair.

[1520]

J. Brar: I respectfully, Madam Speaker, through you….

The other thing I want to say is this. The B.C. Liberals do not have the mandate to impose the HST. They do not have the mandate to impose the HST because they said very clearly before the election that they will not impose HST on the people of British Columbia.

If they were honest…. If they would have been honest, if they would have been bold, if this is a good policy, they should have put it in front of the people of British Columbia before the election. They do not have the mandate to impose the HST. They chose not to tell about this before the election because they knew that they would lose the election. They knew about that.

That's why they betrayed the people of British Columbia. They clearly betrayed the people of British Columbia on this, and you cannot continue betraying the people of British Columbia. It will stop, and people are going to teach you a lesson.

Watch what happens in your riding, Madam Speaker, in the next 90 days.

I oppose. I oppose this bill, once again. I oppose this bill because many people have approached me on almost every day, and the people of British Columbia don't like this tax.

Keeping in mind the time, Madam Speaker, I would like to probably move on very quickly to the points I want to make.

The HST has been a very hard sell for them. The first spin was that the HST will bring in the same tax as the current system — in other words, that it will be revenue-neutral. But the people of British Columbia didn't believe the government on that.

Then the spin doctors started finding another excuse, and the other excuse was that the HST is going to pay for health care. That is the biggest joke in the budget debate that I have ever heard. Biggest joke — the HST will pay for health care, when we know that all the money coming from the HST is going to go to general revenue. That was the joke they tried to make on the people of British Columbia, and that was the height of desperation to sell this tax to the people of British Columbia.

I would like to make my concluding comments and say this: that I oppose this tax with my fellow members because I stand with the people of British Columbia. And I will do that.

I oppose this tax because the B.C. Liberals…. This is a big bombshell of betrayal by B.C. Liberals on the people of British Columbia, because they did not tell the people of British Columbia the truth before the election.

I think I have time to quickly read a few e-mails I got in my office so that the members know that people are approaching members. This is a letter written by Pacific Community Resources. They are saying:

"The Pacific Community Resources deliver over 50 different programs — including education, housing, employment counselling, life skills and addictions services — from Vancouver to Hope. Our programs serve people of all backgrounds and cultures, designed for youth, family, children and adults with multiple needs. We serve over 15,000 individuals annually and employ 2,000 diverse staff at 25 different sites."

They continue to say:

"We are a large agency, and we have significant concern over the potential harm the HST could have on B.C.'s non-profit community social services agencies."

I would conclude that letter. That letter was signed, by the way, by Ian Mass, the executive director of Pacific Community Resources.

The other e-mail I got from Coach Reg, and it reads:

"I recently had a second meeting with the facility manager, and it seems that we will be charged for the HST. My understanding is that regardless of any previous agreement or contract, this will become the law, and facilities are having to enforce the HST tax collection. The impact will be dramatic, as it will now add additional costs to pool and room rental. The cost is now on top of the B.C. direct-access grant money, which has been reduced."

[1525]

This was signed by Coach Reg from the Surrey Knights.

The other e-mail I have, which I would like to read into the record, says:

"Surrey White Rock Ringette is a small sports association with predominantly female players from the age of five to 25. We compete directly with female hockey for players and try to keep our registration low and reasonable so that we are a viable option for those families of limited or exhausted discretionary income. For the previous season our early-bird registration was $340, compared to hockey's $525."

It goes on to say:

"We have been informed that the city of Surrey and White Rock will be increasing their costs for ice and room rental by a minimum of 10 percent to offset HST and other anticipated

[ Page 4218 ]

administrative costs. Our association, in turn, will have to pass this increase on to our membership with our registration costs to ensure we are able to balance our books. HST and lost gaming funds have been factored into our 2010-11 season, which realistically should be resulting in a 30 percent increase in players' registration costs."

A quote from the letter.

Person after person is approaching us through e-mails and by phone, and people don't like this tax.

I would like to conclude that I will stand firm. I will fight to the end to stop HST. I will oppose this tax, and I urge the members from the other side. We just need seven people. We just need seven members to stop HST, and I would appreciate it if the members will listen to the people of British Columbia and stand up in this House for the people of British Columbia rather than somebody else.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, for your time, and thanks to all the members for listening to my speech.

Hon. M. McNeil: It's my pleasure to speak to Bill 9, the Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act. I'd like to speak to the facts and not to the fear. I want to talk about reality. The people of B.C. need the facts. They don't need myths.

My colleague from Kelowna–Lake Country was absolutely correct when he spoke just a little while ago. He said that he spoke with folks that came into his constituency office, and when he talked to them about the facts, dismissed the myths and explained exactly what this HST would mean, it made all the difference. I'm finding the same thing.

Over 130 countries around the world have already made this shift to the value-added tax system, and British Columbia will be one of six Canadian provinces with a similar tax system. Every leading economist in Canada is saying that the HST is the right thing to do, but apparently, the members opposite aren't as impressed by the economists.

Let's talk jobs. The HST is about job creation, attracting investment to British Columbia so that we can build a lasting legacy for our children and grandchildren. We want families to have more money in their pockets, and the easiest way to ensure that happens is to ensure there are jobs being created in this province.

B.C. families are paying less in total taxes compared to what they paid ten years ago under the previous government. In every single income category every single family in British Columbia is paying less today under this government than they would have paid for the same amount of income ten years ago.

In fact, under the proposed HST, a tax credit will support low-income families and seniors, and when this tax credit is combined with the recently introduced climate action credit, low-income British Columbians will be eligible for upwards of $340 a year in provincial credits, in addition to the existing GST credit.

[1530]

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

The HST follows more than 120 tax cuts introduced by this government since 2001. As a result, B.C. has the lowest provincial personal income taxes in Canada for those earning upwards of $118,000 a year. For most taxpayers, B.C. personal income taxes have been reduced by 37 percent or more since 2001, and an additional 325,000 British Columbians now pay no provincial income tax.

The HST builds on significant tax relief since 2001 — the 44 percent reduction in small business corporate income tax rate and a 39 percent reduction in general corporate income tax rate by 2011.

HST will apply to the same goods and services that were taxable under the GST. If there's no GST on a product or a service, there is no HST. Any item that presently has GST and PST in the total cost will not change due to the HST.

HST opponents are circulating an e-mail which outlines an estimated $2,100 impact of the HST on a hypothetical senior couple earning $41,000 after tax. Those claims are completely incorrect. The e-mail claims that they will add $2,100 to your yearly costs, but in reality, you would need to spend an additional $30,000 on currently PST-exempt items to reach that amount.

Another false claim is that you'll pay more for car insurance, home insurance, home heating, gasoline, electricity, and more. The reality is that the HST won't change the price of any of those items, because they are either exempt, will be rebated or are currently already subject to PST and GST.

Support for the HST isn't confined to this side of the chamber. The B.C. Chamber of Commerce is 100 percent in favour of implementing the HST. The Retail Council of Canada is in favour of the harmonized sales tax because it's better for the consumers. The B.C. Agriculture Council is 100 percent in favour of the harmonized sales tax because it's good for farmers. It actually makes them more competitive, and it means more British Columbians buying British Columbia agricultural products rather than imported products.

The forest industry, as my colleague mentioned today, is in favour of the HST because it's good for forestry workers and will ensure that mills stay open in regions around this province that have been hard hit by the economic downturn. The B.C. Construction Association is also in favour of the HST. Their industry will see about $880 million of costs removed because of all that embedded PST they currently pay today.

The mining industry is 100 percent in favour of the HST because they know it will help attract more investment to this province and keep us competitive with our global jurisdictions.

These groups are in favour of the HST because it's good for the economy. Anything good for the economy creates

[ Page 4219 ]

jobs, and jobs are good for British Columbians. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, not typically supportive of the policy positions of this government, itself sees the value-added tax, or an HST model of tax, as the right driver of economic activity and actually believes that it's the right model.

We've all heard about the report done by Dr. Jack Mintz from the University of Calgary, where he states that the shift to the harmonized sales tax will result in a net increase of $11.5 billion of investment and a net increase of 113,000 jobs in British Columbia. I see some of my colleagues from across the way smiling, and it's the same smile we saw during the discussion on the carbon tax and how that was going to be bad.

Dr. Mintz's report confirms that the HST, along with federal and provincial corporate tax reductions, will dramatically improve the competitiveness of B.C. businesses, both here at home and abroad. He goes on to state that "all industrial sectors in British Columbia will benefit from sales tax harmonization. The largest beneficiaries will be…construction, communications, business and household services sectors, which will see their effective tax rates on new investment drop by…more than a third."

A shift to the harmonized sales tax takes those embedded costs out. The consumer only has to pay the consumption tax once, and that is only at the point of purchase, at the ultimate consumption level. In fact, over 80 percent of all goods and services will not be impacted at all or, if anything, will wind up costing less as a result of the shift to the value-added tax.

[1535]

I want to come back to the specific provisions that are in this legislation. As I mentioned earlier, Bill 9 provides for the winding down of the provincial sales tax system that we have in British Columbia today, and that means that 7 percent comes off. Also in this bill are mitigation measures that are going to be so important.

An HST credit is going to be available to 1.1 million British Columbians, so one in four British Columbians is going to benefit from a cheque in the mail once every three months. The other thing that's important here is the point-of-purchase rebates that we're putting in place.

This, again, is because of the flexibility that the federal government has provided. It's allowed us to exempt all motor fuels in British Columbia. That is different from the approach that's been taken in Ontario, where they will see an added 8 percent cost on the price of gasoline in Ontario as of July 1. That is not the case here in British Columbia.

This legislation also provides for a point-of-purchase rebate for home energy costs, and again, that is unique in British Columbia. In all other HST provinces they actually have that additional provincial portion of the tax applied. In British Columbia, because of the unique structures that we have, we actually have the ability to do a provincially administered rebate for that. To the customer, it will seem like an exemption from the 7 percent portion of the HST.

There are also provisions for a rebate structure for our SUCH sectors. Those are our schools, universities, colleges and hospitals, where the charities and various others will get a rebate that will totally offset the incremental cost of what their HST would be on average.

This move that we are making is one that is vitally important to the economy in British Columbia. It is one that will actually set the stage for economic growth for decades to come. It is a move that will ensure that British Columbia is an attractive destination for businesses and investors that want to come in here and create jobs — jobs for British Columbians. It does mean that the industries around British Columbia that are coming through difficult times will be able to retain the employees they have, possibly even bring back laid-off workers that otherwise would have been unemployed.

It means that new industries — whether it's the forest sector that's going to come back in different ways, whether it's the bioenergy sector or other areas of new opportunities, whether it's the mining sector that has great opportunities for growth or whether it's the film industry that is extremely competitive….

This is a bill that will provide for the elimination of the PST. It will also enable us to make sure that the HST comes in on July 1 of this year and that we'll be able to take full advantage of the great economic opportunities that will flow as a direct result. More importantly, this means jobs.

G. Coons: I rise to take my place opposing the bill in front of us, Bill 9, this government's HST bill. This bill, the Consumption Tax Rebate and Transition Act, highlights the hypocrisy of this government. This bill is actually a truth-or-consequences bill.

We come to this Legislature with the realm behind us, representing our constituents, representing the province with integrity, with truth, with honesty. We wear a pin in this House, in this Legislature. We're all given this pin, which we hope — which I hope, which our constituents hope — reflects the integrity, the honesty, the truthfulness of this Legislature and of its members.

This bill, being a truth-or-consequences bill, will have severe consequences for those members on the other side who merrily skip to the beat of deception, as they're all complicit in the election deception that we saw prior to May 12 in getting them in this Legislature.

[1540]

This bill, the truth-or-consequences bill, even though each government member speaks to this bill and bleats out the same mantra, "The greatest thing since sliced bread…." But in this bill, at 82 pages, 213 sections and over 29,000 words, HST is only mentioned three times —

[ Page 4220 ]

on page 69, in sections 181 and 182. This government's own HST bill skirts the whole issue of bringing what they want to bring to the constituents in their ridings — the HST.

Again, this bill highlights the hypocrisy, the misrepresentations that this government is known for — in its truth-or-consequences bill.

Before I get to some components of the bill itself, I'd like to read this letter that was sent to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services in November of 2009. It's from Beat Steiner, the Bella Coola Heli Sports operator.

"The HST is going to have a huge negative impact on tourism numbers in the province. The government should be looking into ways of attracting tourists, not discouraging them with this new tax. There are many small, isolated B.C. communities that have made a big effort in recent years to transition from a resource-based economy to a more diversified economy that includes tourism. The introduction of this new tax is completely undermining those efforts and will greatly speed up the dying out of these small communities."

That's what this tax is going to do to rural British Columbia and to British Columbians.

Now, in the bill, this truth-or-consequences bill, we look at…. The member is talking about

part 3, on page 5,

section 4, the point-of-sale rebates. They list the six exemptions, and the six exemptions that we've heard prescribe books, children's clothing and footwear, children's diapers, children's car seats and car booster seats, hygiene products, motor fuels. But this is not a true, factual analysis of what this B.C. Liberal deception bill is actually going to do to British Columbians.

When the members on the other side talk about the reality — and British Columbians need facts — they are failing to do their job. They are not putting the facts on the table, and they never did with this bill. This bill actually is a tax transfer of $1.9 billion, a shift of taxes from big business to B.C. consumers — an average of about $430 extra HST cost per person, close to $1,700 for a family of four.

The TD Bank estimated that over 21 percent of the goods and services that British Columbians buy will be newly subject to the 7 percent HST — over 21 percent of the goods and products. And consumer prices will rise by 1.5 percent even if businesses reduce their prices. We haven't heard that from the government. We haven't heard that in their reports.

This government had no mandate at all for the 7 percent HST. During the election they said that they were not contemplating adopting the HST. Before the election they turned it down numerous times on the grounds that it would hurt consumers. That's what British Columbians believed, and now British Columbians do not believe this government at all. This tax is an increase for consumers, a tax cut for business and will increase the deficit and further threaten essential services like health care and education.

The member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky, in her debate — and I've been trying to listen to the debates and hear the discussion on both sides of the House — talked about the hodgepodge of goods that are going to be taxed. If you want to look at reality, if you want to look at the facts, you don't go to a deception method of referring to the items as a hodgepodge of goods.

Let's look at some of the items that will no longer be exempt from PST. People will now pay 7 percent more for restaurant meals and catered foods. The restaurant industry basically said that it's going to be a devastating impact.

[1545]

Over 75 percent of respondents to their poll oppose the HST. They want meals exempt from it, and this government did not listen. Many groceries and snack foods and other prepared foods — salads, sandwiches, heated food, muffins and a coffee…. From this government's own September '09 budget, on page 131, it's going to be an extra $991 million.

School supplies — an extra $55 million. We look at airlines within Canada. They're going to be going up — air fares.

Ferry fares. Even though the fares may have some exemptions, the ferry service requires a whole bunch of goods that will be increased by 7 percent. B.C. Ferries actually said it's going to increase their costs by $6 million a year.

Recreation services like theatre, movie tickets, amusement parks, campground fees, whale-watching tours — all up by 7 percent. The Council of Tourism Associations basically said that there'll be over 5,000 jobs lost, and visitor spending is dropping by close to half a billion dollars. "It's significant," said COTA Chair Jim Storie in an interview.

We look at tax preparation, mutual funds. We start looking at nest eggs, retirement services, all falling under the realm of this government.

We look at veterinary care, farm animals, domestic animals. Bob the Pug — another 7 percent to get him fixed up. Outrageous, hon. Speaker.

Now, when we look at investment counsellors…. I talked about nest eggs. Investment counsellors warn that the HST will make it harder to save for retirement. They say that the harmonized sales tax in British Columbia is going to raise the cost of investment counselling fees from 5 to 12 percent. This is from the Investment Counsel Association of Canada: "The looming HST will affect people's retirements and their nest eggs."

Other professional services — architects, real estate agents, appraisers, yoga classes, dancing, cooking, martial arts, memberships for clubs, gyms, player fees for team sports. We've talked about facility rentals and ice rentals, whether it's minor hockey, figure skating, karate, judo, minor basketball, archery, kids' summer camps. In Prince Rupert ice fees are going to be going up significantly — thousands of dollars for figure skating and minor hockey. We look at massage therapy, acupuncture,

[ Page 4221 ]

alternative medicines. We look at dietary supplements. They're all going up.

Magazines, periodicals, newspapers, newsletters, student yearbooks. Even though books are exempt, these are going to be going up 7 percent.

All types of bicycles, despite the member for Comox Valley — I believe it was Comox Valley — that talked about the little old lady in Kelowna and the one bicycle shop owner in Nelson…. There are hundreds of thousands of people just like those little old ladies in Kelowna and just like that one shopkeeper in Kelowna, and this side had better listen to those facts. Equipment for bicycles, whether it's tricycles, helmets, any supplies needed — all going up 7 percent.

Wedding planners, caterers, funerals, energy-efficient home appliances, car washes, telephone services and basic cable TV service — going up, from the government's own records, $82 million. Residential smoke and fire alarms — again, up 7 percent. Towing and emergency roadside services. Hybrid cars.

The list goes on and on. It's not a hodgepodge of items or goods. It's on a significant part of people's daily lives that this government is ramming down their throats an extra 7 percent, and that's unconscionable.

[1550]

Now, as we move along, looking at where this government is going with the HST, we look at First Nations and the impact on First Nations. The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs sent a message in their opposition. They strongly oppose the HST because it stands to "increase the poverty of our people and all poor British Columbians."

There was no consultation with First Nations, and the burden of the HST will be felt by consumers. They are 100 percent against this as they've had no consultation. It's going to impact them significantly, especially lower-income households, as there are some proposed rebates, but they will not offset all of the increased taxes.

As we move along with this bill, another

section of this truth-or-consequences bill looks at

section 66, on page 31, the 12 percent imposed tax on used vehicles, boats and aircraft, which includes snowmobiles, Sea-Doos and ATVs. It's just another gouging of those wanting or needing to sell a used vehicle or marine vessel.

To set the record straight, in the September 2009 budget documents this government indicated that the 7 percent PST will still apply but not be subject to their HST. The quote in here is: "The province will retain a provincial sales tax on the private sale of used vehicles, aircraft and boats." They are "currently subject to PST but not subject to GST and will therefore not be subject to HST." So another commitment, another promise about used vehicles and boats and ATVs and off-road vehicles and snowmobiles and Sea-Doos.

In the 2010 budget, on page 80, it tells a totally different story, a gouging of an extra 5 percent on used vehicles and boats. On page 88 it says: "The application of the 12 percent tax provides comparable treatment between the private sale of vehicles, boats and aircraft."

In other words, there will be another 5 percent increase on used vehicles, boats and aircraft, a gouging of close to $100 million over two years. The government's own forecast in September '09 forecasted that the revenues in 2010-2011 would be $75 million and in 2011-2012 would be $101 million. But the September 2010 documents indicate that the extra 5 percent will be gouged after that — a difference of $125 million and $171 million. So the difference is in the 2010-2011 of $50 million and a difference of $70 million in the 2011-2012. So $120 million is being gouged from those trying to sell used vehicles.

Again, another fly-by-night policy written on the back of a napkin. No input, no consultation, except the new-car guys like it — their friends and donators, the New Car Dealers Association, whose donations since 2005 were greater than $536,000 to this Liberal government.

An Hon. Member: What a coincidence.

G. Coons: Yeah, a real coincidence — including, in the last election cycle, more than $259,000 donated to this government. No wonder there's a huge break for new-car dealers and another hit on those that are….

Hon. P. Bell: Madam Speaker, I hate to break the member's stride, but I seek leave to do an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. P. Bell: I see we're joined in the House by Mike Kennedy and Tim Ryan of Ainsworth Lumber, a British Columbia–based forest company that's investing, building great oriented strand board panel products in the province and employing people all over. Would the House please make them very welcome.

[1555]

Debate Continued

G. Coons: No problems with breaking the stride, Minister.

Last week in this House, listening to the debate, the member for Nechako Lakes said this in the House. This is a quote from the member: "Leadership is about being able to stand up. It's about being able to take positions. It's about being able to bring forward facts, being open to straightforward, honest debate and making sure that when you bring stuff forward, you bring it forward based on sheer fact with backing."

Now, that's laughable. That's laughable coming from this side of the House and again highlights the contempt that this government has for being open, honest, transparent and accountable.

[ Page 4222 ]

Referring to that statement, what was the basis? What justification did this Premier have, did this Finance Minister have, did this government have to deceptively, with no input, no consultation, no assessments, no credible reports, no reviews, no analysis, no impact studies as far as implications on small business, on tourism, the restaurant sector or on British Columbians in general…?

This government had an obligation. The Minister of State for the Olympics and ActNow B.C. said that the reality is that British Columbians need facts, and they never got them from this government, and they still aren't getting them from this government. Nothing — no facts, no openness, no honest debate, no straightforwardness, no sheer facts without backing. They promised they would not bring this in, and they broke their promise, and British Columbians don't believe them.

It's not just British Columbians. It's not just the little old ladies from Kelowna or that one bike shop owner in Nelson. It's thousands of British Columbians all over this province that want action from this government. They want answers, and they want to stop the HST.

Now, the Vancouver real estate board, on their website, tried. They did. They brought forward the facts, the reality. They did a comparison on their website — the B.C. HST versus the maritime HST. In it they said that the maritime HST reduced their combined tax rate upon introduction. Newfoundland went from 19 to 15 to 13. Nova Scotia went from about 19 to 13. The B.C. HST does not reduce the combined tax rates, making consumer goods and services more expensive as most items were not previously taxed at 7 percent.

Just look at that. On the maritime side they lowered their taxes from 19 to 13 percent. They lowered them 6 percent. That's about a 30 percent reduction in taxes, and what's happening in British Columbia? On a whole — I hate to quote the member — hodgepodge of goods, significant goods that are going to impact families, that are going to impact First Nations, that are going to impact British Columbians, they are putting the tax from 5 percent to 7 percent, which is 140 percent increase.

There's no comparison with the Maritimes. This government uses shabby information to try to push forward their agenda.

The real estate board also says that the Atlantic Canada HST has increased capital investment. Any increase in capital investment has yet to be determined in B.C. It's a question mark, because there's been no analysis, no impact studies, no reviews, no assessments, no credible reports put on the table by this government or this minister.

The last point as far as the maritime HST. The maritime provinces consulted with business and other industries prior to the introduction. B.C. did not consult with any industry or consumer group prior to their announcement. This is a quote from them: "The B.C. Liberal government also broke their election promise." Now, no matter what mantra we hear on the other side, this government broke their promise, and British Columbians don't believe what they're saying.

[1600]

Now, the real estate board also looked at the B.C. HST versus Ontario. The Ontario government sought the advice from business and other industries back in January before doing it. No such consultation was done by this government. This is from the Vancouver board.

Again, as far as Ontario, there are no comparisons. The Ontario government is giving….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member.

Continue, Member.

G. Coons: It is nice to try to get debate across the House, but I wish the debate would have come prior to the election from the members on the other side.

Now, we look at a timeline of this B.C. Liberal deception about the HST, about this truth-or-consequences bill before us today, Bill 9. You know, the timeline…. The Premier, back in August '09 says: "The fact of the matter — it wasn't on our radar. We didn't engage in any discussions. I wasn't thinking about it until after the election."

He also said: "After the election I mentioned to the Deputy Minister of Finance and said: 'Let's find out what's going on in Ontario and how that's working.' We said: 'Yes, go have a look.'"

He had a look, came back, and reported to us. That's how this Premier runs this province. That's how this government runs this province. They run off to some place and, on the back of a napkin, they come back with their notes, and they try to present something with no study, no analysis and no reports.

Barbara Yaffe said about the Minister of Finance, in the Vancouver Sun : "If the minister indeed was oblivious to Ontario's actions for more than a month, campaign or no campaign, British Columbians have a good reason to question his fitness as a Finance Minister." And British Columbians are questioning not only his fitness but the fitness of this government.

Vaughn Palmer said: "Well, if this HST idea is such a humdinger for the future of the economy, why didn't they do it before the election?" Why didn't they do it?

Well, it's hard to figure out. It's hard to figure out. You know, when we look at in January of 2009, the federal government announces some flexibility for provinces that want to adopt it. In the same month the Ontario Premier says his government is considering it.

You would have thought in January that the brain trust of the Liberal Party would have figured out that maybe we should start thinking about it and talking about it

[ Page 4223 ]

and put it on our radar. But they failed not only themselves; they failed British Columbians.

Then two months later, Ontario announces it will adopt the HST in March. March, April, May — a couple of months before our election, still not on the radar. Then, finally, a month and a half after our election, it's announced with great fanfare just six weeks after the election that this government is going to implement the HST. If that isn't an election by deception, I don't know what is. It's shameful.

Now, many of the members on the other side, many of their supporters talk about a bunch of reports that they were referring to — the C.D. Howe report, the Mintz report. But I want to look at Saskatchewan right now.

You know, Saskatchewan — who this government wants to tie in with on other initiatives. The Finance Minister of Saskatchewan just said recently: "We do not support harmonization because of the $400 million burden of taxes that is going to go from business to consumers in this province, and we think it's entirely inappropriate."

Interjection.

G. Coons: Oh, okay. There you go. At least there's some honesty. Honesty — from this side of the House.

We look at Brad Wall. You know, an election campaign in 2007. "I was asked about harmonization, and I said we wouldn't be going in that direction, because we don't think it's right." He kept his word.

[1605]

This government and this Finance Minister basically threw his trust in the garbage can with the deceitful actions by implementing this HST. Manitoba ruled out the HST for the same reasons. They researched it before making a decision — something, basically, that's unheard of in this province, where we saw no input. We saw or heard of no consultation, no assessments, no credible reports.

I mentioned the three Atlantic p