British Columbia Hansard — Wednesday, February 27, 2013

H0227pm-07

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fift h Session, 39th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF , SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Wednesday, February 27, 2013 Aft ernoon Sitting Volume 42, Number 7

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Fifth Session, 39th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas and Minister Responsible for Housing .............Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ............................................................................................................ Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Advanced Education, Innovation and Technology and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism ............Hon. John Yap Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Citizens' Services and Open Government ........................................................................................................Hon. Ben Stewart Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ................................................................................................Hon.

Bill Bennett Minister of Education ............................................................................................................................................................. Hon. Don McRae Minister of Environment .................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health .......................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid Minister of State for Seniors .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Ralph Sultan Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ............................................................ Hon. Pat Bell Minister of State for Small Business ............................................................................................................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto Minister of Justice ...................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Minister of Social Development ...................................................................................................................................Hon. Dr. Moira Stilwell Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

Mary Polak LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ......................................................................................................................................................Adrian Dix Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................

Linda Reid Assistant Deputy Speaker ..................................................................................................................................................................Dawn Black Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole .......................................................................................................................................... Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...................................................................................................................................................

Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees ................................................................................................................................. Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Clerk Consultant ..............................................................................................................................................E.

George MacMinn, OBC, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, George (BC Liberal) ................................................................. Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barisoff , Hon. Bill (BC Liberal) ...........................................................Penticton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bell, Hon. Pat (BC Liberal) ....................................

Prince George–Mackenzie Bennett, Hon. Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Black, Dawn (NDP) ................................................................New Westminster Bloy, Harry (BC Liberal) .....................................................Burnaby-Lougheed Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Brar, Jagrup (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Fleetwood Cadieux, Hon.

Stephanie (BC Liberal) .................................Surrey-Panorama Cantelon, Ron (BC Liberal) ............................................. Parksville-Qualicum Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chong, Hon. Ida (BC Liberal) .................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ........................................................... Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) .................................Vancouver–Point Grey Coell, Murray (BC Liberal) ..............................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon.

Rich (BC Liberal) .......................... Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Coons, Gary (NDP) .........................................................................North Coast Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ............................................. Maple Ridge–Mission de Jong, Hon. Michael, QC (BC Liberal) ..............................

Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP) ............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Falcon, Kevin (BC Liberal) ...................................................Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fleming, Rob (NDP) ..........................................................

Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gentner, Guy (NDP) .........................................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Colin (BC Liberal) ........................................... Vancouver-Quilchena Hawes, Randy (BC Liberal) ..............................................

Abbotsford-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (BC Liberal) ................................................... Surrey-Tynehead Heed, Kash (BC Liberal) ............................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP) ....................................................................... Juan de Fuca Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ..............................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Howard, Rob (BC Liberal) ....................................................

Richmond Centre Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard (NDP) ........................................................................... Nanaimo Krueger, Kevin (BC Liberal) .............................. Kamloops–South Th ompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lake, Hon. Dr.

Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Lali, Harry (NDP) ..........................................................................Fraser-Nicola Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (BC Liberal) ................................................ Peace River South Les, John (BC Liberal) ........................................................................Chilliwack Letnick, Hon. Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country MacDiarmid, Hon. Dr. Margaret (BC Liberal) ..............

Vancouver-Fairview Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McIntyre, Joan (BC Liberal) .................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky McNeil, Mary (BC Liberal) ..........................................Vancouver–False Creek McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) ..................................................

Comox Valley Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston O'Mahony, Gwen (NDP) .........................................................Chilliwack-Hope Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................

Surrey-Whalley Reid, Linda (BC Liberal) ............................................................Richmond East Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, John (BC Liberal) .......................................................... Nechako Lakes Sather, Michael (NDP) ......................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...................................

Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (Ind.) .....................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Slater, John (Ind.) .........................................................Boundary-Similkameen Stewart, Hon. Ben (BC Liberal) .......................................... Westside-Kelowna Stilwell, Hon. Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Langara Sultan, Hon. Ralph (BC Liberal) ........................... West Vancouver–Capilano Th omson, Hon.

Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th orne, Diane (NDP) .................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) .......................... North Vancouver–Seymour Trasolini, Joe (NDP).................................................... Port Moody–Coquitlam Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island van Dongen, John (Ind.).........................................................Abbotsford South Y amamoto, Hon. Naomi (BC Liberal) ................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, Hon. John (BC Liberal) ............................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission .......................................................................Randy Hawes Abbotsford South .....................................................................John van Dongen Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen .....................................................................John Slater Burnaby–Deer Lake ................................................................... Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ......................................................................... Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed ............................................................................ Harry Bloy Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T.

Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North ................................................................................ Bob Simpson Chilliwack ............................................................................................... John Les Chilliwack-Hope ......................................................................Gwen O'Mahony Columbia River–Revelstoke .................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley...........................................................................Hon.

Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville............................................................... Diane Th orne Cowichan Valley ................................................................................

Bill Routley Delta North ......................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola........................................................................................

Harry Lali Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ...................................................... Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon.

Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................Michael Sather Nanaimo ......................................................................................... Leonard Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan .........................................................

Doug Routley Nechako Lakes .................................................................................. John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ..............................................................................Dawn Black North Coast....................................................................................... Gary Coons North Island ..................................................................................

Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ................................................. Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ............................................................ Hon. Ida Chong Parksville-Qualicum ..................................................................... Ron Cantelon Peace River North ................................................................................

Pat Pimm Peace River South .........................................................................Blair Lekstrom Penticton................................................................................... Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ..................................................................Joe Trasolini Powell River–Sunshine Coast ................................................. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie .............................................................Hon.

Pat Bell Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ............................................................................ Rob Howard Richmond East ................................................................................... Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston .................................................................... Hon. John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands ..................................................... Murray Coell Saanich South ................................................................................

Lana Popham Shuswap .........................................................................................George Abbott Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine .......................................................................................

Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ...........................................................................Kevin Falcon Surrey-Fleetwood ...............................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................ Hon.

Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Tynehead ........................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley.............................................................................. Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview .......................................Hon. Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid Vancouver–False Creek ..................................................................

Mary McNeil Vancouver-Fraserview ........................................................................Kash Heed Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .......................................................Hon. Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................

Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................................... Colin Hansen Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ................................................... Hon. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ........................................................ Joan McIntyre Westside-Kelowna ...................................................................Hon.

Ben Stewart Party Standings: BC Liberal 45; New Democratic 36; Independent 4

CONTENTS Wednesday, February 27, 2013 Aft ernoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ................................................................................................................................................... 13121 Introduction and First Reading of Bills .............................................................................................................................. 13122 Bill 17 — Senate Nominee Election Act Hon. S.

Bond Statements (Standing Order 25B) ....................................................................................................................................... 13123 Prevention of bullying D. Barnett Prevention of bullying and democratic process S. Chandra Herbert Rotary International M. Dalton Bullying prevention initiative at Senator Reid School S. Hammell B.C. Creative Futures J. Th ornthwaite Energy conservation initiatives in Colwood M.

Karagianis Oral Questions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 13125 Multicultural outreach strategy and partisan activities by government staff J. Horgan Hon. J. Y ap C. James J. Kwan Waste incinerator proposal for Fraser Valley J. van Dongen Hon. T. Lake Multicultural outreach strategy and partisan activities by government staff M. Farnworth Hon. J. Y ap H.

Bains Petitions .................................................................................................................................................................................. 13129 Hon. R. Sultan Tabling Documents ............................................................................................................................................................... 13129 B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Annual Report 2011-2012 B.C.

Ferry Commission, Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2012 Ministerial Statements .......................................................................................................................................................... 13129 Pink Shirt Day and prevention of bullying in schools Hon. D. McRae R. Austin Orders of the Day Budget Debate (continued) .................................................................................................................................................. 13130 Hon. I. Chong D. Routley B. Simpson Hon. B. Stewart K. Corrigan

Point of Privilege (Reservation of Right) ........................................................................................................................... 13146 Hon. R. Coleman Budget Debate (continued) ................................................................................................................................................... 13146 Hon. D. McRae H. Bains K. Krueger M. Mungall R. Lee

WEDNESDAY , FEBRUARY 27, 2013 Th e House met at 1:34 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. [1335] Introductions by Members Hon. M. de Jong: I look behind me and fi nd a friend that I have come to know over the years — Doug McKay, who is a leader within the IBEW and commits himself to working on behalf of the women and men that are accounted among his members. It is great for me to see Doug here. I know all members will make him feel very welcome today. M. Farnworth: We're in politics. Politics is about elec- tions every now and then. We have our own on the 14th of May.

But in the run-up to that monumental contest, another election has taken place — a very, very import- ant election — and that is for who will head up the press gallery for the next several years. I am pleased to tell the House that, beating back a strong challenge, Tom Fletcher has won his fourth term, showing that it can be done. But I'm also reminded, for my friends across the way, that lightning rarely strikes twice. Hon. P . Bell: It was my honour today to host Donald McInnes down in the dining room and to present him with his Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal.

Many of the members in this Legislature will know Donald from the good work that he has done over the years. Donald, of course, is the executive vice-chairman of Alterra Power Corp. and the founder and former CEO of Plutonic energy. I also got to know Donald in my role as Minister of State for Mining about nine years ago. He did a tremen- dous amount of work on the Highway 37 power line. I would argue strongly that that came to fruition as a result of his hard work, along with many, many other projects.

Donald's most recent endeavour has been in the aqua- culture industry with the founding of a facility up the coast targeting shellfi sh, which I think will be helpful for First Nations. Th at has been a trademark in Donald's life, working collaboratively with First Nations across the province of British Columbia. I know many in the First Nations community call Donald a very, very good friend. Finally, Donald has focused his life on prostate cancer. I know many people in this Legislature have been pro- vided with the wonderful trademark blue tie that Donald is wearing again today .

He tells me that he is going to continue to wear it until he is no longer the president of the board of Prostate Cancer Canada, which will be some time. W e very much appreciate all the work that Donald has done. He's joined today by his wife, Amy, and his three children, Angus, Charlotte and Finley. We had a wonderful lunch today. Congratulations to the entire McInnes family. Donald, thank you so much for everything that you do. Would the House please make them very, very wel- come. R.

Chouhan: Th ere are a couple of friends in the gal- lery today — Mike Flynn, the business manager of IBEW 213, and Doug McKay, business manager of IBEW 258. Please join me to give them a warm welcome. L. Reid: My daughter's grade 7 class — you'll remem- ber, many of you, Olivia when she spent her early years here — is with us today . Th ey're in the gallery. Th eir teacher is Mrs. Blumel. Th ey have three parents with them — Ms. Bhandal, Mrs. Chhibbar and Mrs. Wen. I'd ask the House to please make them very welcome. [1340] G.

Coons: In the gallery today are two friends, two constituents — Nelson Kinney and Jennifer Rice. Th ey are both city councillors from Prince Rupert. I do have to add that Jennifer last month won the nomination as the NDP candidate for North Coast. If things fall where they should, Jennifer will be the next North Coast MLA. Would you please make them welcome. R. Hawes: Th is morning members of our caucus met with the B.C. and Yukon Catholic Women's League. In the gallery today are the four women that came and pre- sented a number of resolutions to us.

Th ere is President Doreen Gowans, President-elect Pat Deppiesse, legis- lation chair Agnes Geiger and resolutions chair Gisela Montague. Could the House please make these hard- working women welcome. V . Huntington: I notice that we're graced in the House today by Dr. Paddy Smith, who is known so well to so many of us and who is a very active participant in the legislative intern program. Please make him welcome. N. Simons: What a surprise.

Today I would like to introduce to the House a couple of constituents from Roberts Creek — Caitlin Hicks, a writer and artist, and her husband, Gordon Halloran, best known as the "Iceman," the creator of the Ice Gate for the Olympics. Th ey've joined us here in the House today, and I would ask my colleagues from both sides to make them most welcome. 13121

British Columbia Debates13122 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 M. Dalton: In the gallery today is the love of my life — my beautiful wife, Marlene. We've been married coming on 28 years. She's accompanied by Grace Dunn, a very good friend of ours. We've spent many a vacation togeth- er at Th etis Island or on Christmas Eves, along with her husband, Kevin, and sons Paul and Adam. Would the House please make them feel welcome. J.

Trasolini: It's my pleasure today to introduce a couple of visitors — Paul Harris, who is the president of the Port Moody–Coquitlam NDP Riding Association executive, and his wife, Yvonne Harris, who is the secre- tary of the executive. Yvonne is a very accomplished au- thor of several books for adults and children. She's also a marathon canoeist and enjoys the waterfront community of Port Moody very much. I'd like to thank Paul and Yvonne for their hard work and dedication. Th ey are community leaders. Can the House please join me in making them welcome. C. Trevena: Mr.

Speaker, I hope the House will make welcome two constituents of mine — Mark Zimmerman and Kathryn Manry, who've come down from Quadra Island for a visit. Mark and Kathryn were the successful bidders on a lunch here at the Legislature in the dining room. We had a pleasant lunch that I off ered at a fund- raiser for Save the Heart of Quadra Parks. I mentioned this to the House before — Save the Heart of Quadra Parks bringing people from across the com- munity together to raise the money that the province couldn't put forward for completing a provincial park.

I hope the House will make both Mark and Kathryn very welcome. I'd like to join my colleague across the House who wel- comed the members from the Catholic Women's League, who addressed the opposition yesterday. We had a very good discussion. I'd also like to thank them for their hard work and for the information they shared with us. N. Simons: I'm not sure if they're here. Th ey might be in sound check. But the Abbie Hoff man Society is in Victoria playing tonight at Club 9one9. Th ey're a Powell River band featuring Meg Hoff man, Jennye Hoff man, Laura Hoffman, Lisa Hoffman and Suzy Hoffman.

Th ey're accompanied by none other than Tony Colton, a roadie extraordinaire and spiritual adviser, as well as "Bad" Karen Skadsheim, a part-owner of Townsite brew- ery. They're playing in Nanaimo tomorrow and at the Waverley on Saturday. So would the House please — whether they're here or not — go see them tonight or make them welcome today. Mr. Speaker: Surrey-Cloverdale. I think you have an announcement to make. [1345] K. Falcon: Forgive me, Mr. Speaker. I thought I had an opportunity to answer a question, and I got very excited there. [Laughter.] But no, Mr. Speaker, I do….

I am really honoured to be here today and be back with all my colleagues on both sides of the House and to be able to announce that my wife and I…. My wife, actually. I had very little to do with it, I can assure you. But my wife had a beautiful baby girl, Jacqueline Rose, who was born a week ago Tuesday — on budget day, actually. We're just thrilled to be able to announce our latest addition. She joins our three-year-old, Josephine, and they wish all of you in the House their very best. Introduction and First Reading of Bills BILL 17 — SENATE NOMINEE ELECTION ACT Hon. S.

Bond presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Senate Nominee Election Act. Hon. S. Bond: Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be introduced and read a fi rst time now. Motion approved. Hon. S. Bond: I'm very pleased to introduce the Senate Nominee Election Act. Our government made a commitment to bring forward Senate nominee election legislation, and that is what this bill represents. It would create a statutory framework for British Columbians to elect nominees to fi ll vacancies for our province in the Senate of Canada.

Th e bill provides for Senate nominee elections to be held either in conjunction with provincial elections or as stand-alone events. Nominee elections would be ad- ministered by Elections B.C. Th e bill includes a number of stand-alone provisions and applies relevant sections of the Election Act. I want to advise the House that it is government's in- tention to bring this bill forward as an exposure bill. We do not intend pass the bill during the current session.

Instead, the purpose in bringing it forward today is to help generate debate and discussion about Senate re- form and, in particular, to show in detailed legislation how Senate nominee elections would be conducted in our province. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House aft er today. Bill 17, Senate Nominee Election Act, introduced, read a fi rst time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House aft er today.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13123 Statements (Standing Order 25B) PREVENTION OF BULLYING D. Barnett: Today is B.C.'s sixth bullying awareness day, coinciding with Pink Shirt Day. As we proudly wear pink shirts to represent our stance against bullying, we are also standing in solidarity with those who get bullied. Many of them suff er in silence, regardless of age, profes- sion or gender. Th at being said, bullying aff ects our children the most, since they are still fi guring out who they are, and words can be very harmful.

As a community, we need to reach out to our children and young people and remind them that they are not alone and encourage them to reach out to parents, teachers or other adults around them. Aft er all, adults have also experienced bullying and can talk to them about this issue. Although bullying can occur anywhere, we have to pay extra attention to our schools. For that reason, our gov- ernment launched the ERASE Bullying strategy.

ERASE brings awareness to bullying, but it also provides tools, for adults and youth alike, to handle diffi cult situations and recognize bullying when it happens, especially at school. All children deserve to get an education in a place that is safe for them to learn and grow. Th at is why the strat- egy is a step in the right direction to stop bullying and keep our children safe. Be it Pink Shirt Day or not, all of us together need to continue to stand up against bullying. PREVENTION OF BULLYING AND DEMOCRATIC PROCESS S.

Chandra Herbert: Jeering, sneering, calling each other names, personal attacks — all are behaviours that take place in school yards and workplaces and, I'm sorry to say, sometimes in this House. [1350] Today is the Day of Pink, a day where British Columbians take a stand against bullying, where we stand as leaders in our communities to say: "Bullying stops here." We encourage everyone to do more to make welcoming communities. Th e Day of Pink, of course, started when two young men stood up for another, who had been bullied for wearing a pink shirt.

Th e next day they came to school and, in solidarity, brought pink shirts for everyone. Th ey were standing against homophobia and for the right of their classmate to be who he wanted to be. Th ey put ac- tion behind their values. Like them, we stand in this House wearing pink. We speak words against bullying, too, but if we are to be true to the day and true elected leaders, we must do more than mouth the words and wear the shirts. Th e recent U.S. presidential election should give us pause.

Upwards of $1 billion was spent on TV ads that were 90 percent negative and largely used to try and destroy the other person's character. Is that how we create a healthy democracy? I think not. I know that we all care passionately about our com- munities. We may diff er somehow on ways that we can grow a better province, but we all want what's best for B.C. We must create a more positive culture in our demo- cracy so people want to get involved, if we want to be true to this day. Th e election campaign is approaching closer.

I know sometimes anger can get the better of us, but when those moments happen, please think of today and the words that we've said. Let's make "Bullying stops here" more than just a slogan. Let's make it a way of life. ROTARY INTERNATIONAL M. Dalton: I rise today to pay tribute to one of the world's most successful philanthropic organizations — Rotary International. Th is year marks the 100th anniver- sary of Rotary in British Columbia. Rotary club members are a global network of community volunteers.

Th ey are business, professional and community leaders who pro- vide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical stan- dards and help deal with goodwill and peace everywhere. More than 34,000 clubs and 1.2 million members con- duct projects to address today's challenges, including il- literacy, disease, hunger, poverty, lack of clean water and environmental concerns. A great example of the positive work Rotarians do on an international level is their project to eradicate polio from the face of the earth. Since 1988 polio cases have been reduced 99 percent worldwide, from 350,000 cases to less than 2,000.

An estimated fi ve million children have been spared disability, and over a quarter of a mil- lion deaths have been averted. In my constituency four Rotary clubs hold weekly meetings — Meadow Ridge Rotary Club, Rotary Club of Haney, Rotary Club of Mission Midday and Rotary Club of Mission Sunrise. Th ey take on many projects. In Mission these include the Rotary heritage park walk, the seniors busy bus and the wetlands project. In Maple Ridge their work has included all-weather sports fi elds, community playgrounds and the ShelterBox project for disaster relief.

All four of these Rotary clubs have made a lasting impact in both communities. Rotarians judge themselves by the four-way test:

(1) Is it the truth?

(2) Is it fair to all concerned?

(3) Will it build goodwill and better friendships?

(4) Will it be benefi cial for all concerned? British Columbia — indeed, the whole world — is a better place because of Rotary.

British Columbia Debates13124 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 BULLYING PREVENTION INITIATIVE AT SENATOR REID SCHOOL S. Hammell: We in this chamber are very aware that today is Pink Shirt Day. All of us know concerns about bullying should not be limited to one particular day but deserve attention daily. We see bullying in schools, at home, in the workplace and in the media. Occasionally I hear my CA playing songs of Lady Gaga in the offi ce, and in one she says: "No matter gay, straight or bi, no matter black, white or beige." Ending bullying starts by loving who you are and by being kind to those around you.

I recently met with Faizel Rawji, a principal in my con- stituency at Senator Reid Elementary School. In the fall the school launched a program called Th ree Th ings. To quote Mr. Rawji: "Th e program is the antithesis of bully- ing programs in that it promotes positive behaviours and a new norm in the school. It has taught the students to be three things: kind to themselves, kind to the environ- ment and kind to each other." [1355] Last year the school had 480 referrals to the offi ce, and as of today, aft er the school embraced Th ree Th ings, there have been 11 referrals. Amazing. Why?

Because Senator Reid has become a school of kindness. Once the students have documented their three acts of kindness, they become part of the Th ree Th ings club and receive a purple T-shirt. If the student continues to do three acts of kindness, they wear their purple shirts on Th ree Th ings Th ursday. Students are proud to share their acts of kind- ness, and on Th ursdays there is a sea of purple T-shirts. If we remember to govern ourselves by these three things here in the Legislature, I know we will create change for the better, three practical steps at a time. B.C. CREATIVE FUTURES J.

Th ornthwaite: B.C. is richly blessed with natural resources, but the one I want to talk about today is the creativity of our people. Creativity — it's human, social, powerful, but it's also economic. Th e creative industries in B.C. employ an estimated 85,000 people, the second highest amongst B.C.'s industries. Recently the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development an- nounced the creation of B.C. Creative Futures strategy, which includes six new and expanded programs for youth to engage in creativity.

Artists in the Classroom is a program for artist residen- cies, providing funding to support hands-on projects for over 8,000 students. Th e aft er-school sport and arts initiative is a youth- at-risk program of activities, including dancing, singing and music, story writing, acting, playwriting, painting, drawing and sculpture activities. It reaches 65 schools and 1,300 students. Artists in education is a program that supports school districts in presenting professional touring artists and groups in B.C. schools, reaching 600,000 students each year.

Th e scholarship program supports post-secondary school students, and the co-op placement program as- sists arts and culture organizations in hiring students in the creative sector. Lastly, the creative youth initiatives supports new and innovative approaches to youth engagement in the arts. These programs will be delivered by the B.C. Arts Council through $6.25 million in new funding, giving the B.C. Arts Council over $24 million, the highest level of funding in its history.

In addition, non-profi t organizations like the Seymour Art Gallery, which shares fantastic works of art with members of the community on the North Shore, has re- ceived almost $400,000 in gaming grants over the last decade. I'm confi dent that the B.C. Creative Futures strategy and the record levels of provincial support for the B.C. Arts Council will help ensure the success of creative British Columbians and the creative industries. ENERGY CONSERV ATION INITIATIVES IN COLWOOD M. Karagianis: Colwood is a city with a lot of bright thinking, and I'm proud to say that now all of Canada knows it.

Colwood was recently named an official Canadian solar city by the Canadian Solar Cities project. Not only that, but it has been selected as one of 17 cities worldwide as a fi nalist in the Earth Hour city challenge. I encourage everyone to vote for Colwood at ehcitychal- lenge.org before March 15 so that they can win. Colwood is a forward-thinking city that is harnessing the power of the sun and renewable energy technologies. More residents are becoming energy champions by in- vesting in home improvements, including solar hot water panels and heat pumps.

Th e city has put into service its fi rst electric public works truck, and that saves more than $3,500 a year in fuel. Colwood now has an electric vehicle charging station at the park-and-ride area near the city library and at city hall. Th e Colwood fi re hall has installed solar hot water and electric panels as well. It's all been made possible through the Solar Colwood program, which works to raise awareness about clean energy options. Th e program was utilized by using funding from the Natural Resources Canada project and support from partners, including B.C.

Hydro, to make it easier for residents and business to benefi t from energy savings. Last Saturday Colwood hosted its Here Comes the Sun event, a fun and interactive community gathering to celebrate the offi cial Canadian Solar Cities designation. Residents checked out how the electric vehicle charging stations work and got more information on solar instal-

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13125 lations for their homes. [1400] Colwood has seen the light. Here's hoping that other communities will too. Congratulations to Colwood on the award, and thank you to those community leaders who are showing the way forward to a cleaner, better energy future. Oral Questions MULTICULTURAL OUTREACH STRATEGY AND PARTISAN ACTIVITIES BY GOVERNMENT STAFF J.

Horgan: A new round of partisan ads began last night — taxpayer-funded ads to promote the govern- ment's bogus budget and to address the government's credibility gap, which was identifi ed in a leaked docu- ment not long ago. Another leaked document last fall highlighted the political manipulation of the Burnaby Hospital consultation process — again, supported by taxpayers dollars. Today another leaked Liberal document details a plan to target ethnic voters across British Columbia, blurring the line between partisan activity and public service.

Th e document demonstrates the folding together of govern- ment services and resources into the election machinery of the B.C. Liberal Party. A central objective of the plan is "making sure that government, caucus and the party are all working together…in a coordinated…manner." Can I put this question to the Minister for Multiculturalism? How does he justify using public re- sources to advance his partisan political purposes? Hon. J. Y ap: Multiculturalism is a bedrock of British Columbia. Th is government…. I'm sure all members of the House support multiculturalism.

We have a robust program that includes outreach to multicultural com- munities, including a great program called EmbraceBC, where we reach out to communities throughout British Columbia, providing support for multicultural commun- ities. It's important as a province to continue to support multiculturalism, and that's what we will do. Mr. Speaker: The Opposition House Leader has a supplementary. J. Horgan: Certainly, this side of the House supports multiculturalism in British Columbia. What we don't support, however, is the blurring of lines between parti- san activity and public service.

Again referring to the document that was leaked today, it's a document that's sent out by the Premier's deputy chief of staff , and it states on seven separate occasions that the objective of the plan is to facilitate coordination between the party, government and caucus — the party, government and caucus, hon. Speaker — ministerial staff , minister's offi ce staff working outside of the public ser- vice to a particular partisan end. It goes on to say, further, that the plan will break down government silos in sharing information with the party.

Another quote: "…creating a contact database…via co- ordination between constituency assistants, the party, the ministry of state for multiculturalism, Intergovernmental Relations Secretariat and GCPE." My question is to the Minister for Multiculturalism. Again, how do you justify taking your partisan political ends and trumping public service in British Columbia? How does that do any service to the multicultural com- munity in this province? Hon. J. Y ap: Th is side of the House doesn't have to take advice from the NDP on partisan advertising.

Perhaps the House Leader for the NDP should talk to the member for Fraser-Nicola about partisan advertising, where the member admitted to using constituency funds for parti- san advertising. Th e NDP should refl ect on what they're doing, as mentioned — the member for Fraser-Nicola and what he had done. Mr. Speaker: Th e Opposition House Leader has a fur- ther supplemental. J. Horgan: With respect to the member for Fraser- Nicola, the political party he's a member of, the NDP , paid for those ads.

I'm wanting to know now if the Minister for Multiculturalism is going to start paying back the taxpayers for the hundreds of thousands of dollars that have been put into this coordinated eff ort to bridge government work with party work. [1405] Th e minister will know…. Th e Public Service Act is quite clear.

Political staff may not "engage in political ac- tivities during working hours or use government facili- ties, equipment or resources to support…these activities." Y et Brian Bonney, the same Liberal operative involved in the Burnaby Hospital aff air, was directly involved in co- ordinating the activities of party hacks, political opera- tives and public servants. Again, my question is to the Minister for Multiculturalism. How can he possibly justify using public resources, the people of British Columbia's re- sources, for pure partisan political purposes? How do you justify that? Hon. J.

Y ap: Well, I'll tell you what we're not doing. We're not placing partisan ads using taxpayers' funds, as the member for Fraser-Nicola has admitted to. I'll tell you what we're doing to support multiculturalism. We've supported, funded, 85 community groups, en- gaging more than 12,000 participants around British Columbia — nearly $1.3 million to 34 organizations to

British Columbia Debates13126 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 support projects that celebrate diversity, address racism and help build inclusive communities. We also deliv- ered the Safe Harbour: Respect for All program to over 900 locations across British Columbia. Th is is an award- winning program that supports people from the multi- cultural communities who may need support throughout British Columbia. We have a great multicultural program, one that we continue to invest in. C. James: Th is is a very serious issue. Th ese documents show that an entire strategy was developed by the B.C.

Liberals based on using taxpayer dollars for their own partisan purposes. Th e then communication director for multiculturalism was assigned to develop comprehensive lists that would help the B.C. Liberal Party — and I quote from the document — "bypass the media to get our mes- sage out. Be very well prepared when the writ is dropped." This is a clear violation of the rules, and accord- ing to this leaked Liberal document, the Minister for Multiculturalism has full responsibility for implementa- tion of this plan. So my question is to the minister.

Will the minister tell us how many names of individuals and organizations have been passed on by government staff directly to the Liberal Party to feed into its election data- base? Hon. J. Y ap: I'll tell the member and members of the House what we are doing in multiculturalism. We hosted, this past fall, the most successful fourth annual provincial Nesika multiculturalism awards. A record number, 165 nominees from throughout the province, were nominat- ed for the provincial Nesika multiculturalism awards, and over 400 attendees came to attend this awards ceremony.

We also had 2,700 people who participated in the 2012 Celebrate Y our Roots interactive campaign, which was held to celebrate multiculturalism during Multiculturalism Week in November last year. It was a great success. Th is side of the House continues to sup- port multiculturalism in British Columbia. Mr. Speaker: Th e member has a supplemental. C. James: I'd like to say to the minister that what the public is concerned about is once again the B.C. Liberals using taxpayer dollars for partisan purposes. Th at is the issue here.

Th is scheme also outlines clearly hiring partisan out- reach staff with public dollars. Mr. Bonney, the former director of communications for multiculturalism, wrote the job descriptions. Mr. Bonney directed who would be hired. Mr. Bonney directed those individuals to do partisan work. All this was done using taxpayer dollars — 100,000 taxpayer dollars. [1410] So my question is again to the Minister for Multiculturalism. How can he justify this direct use of taxpayer dollars for partisan activities? Hon. J.

Y ap: One of the programs we're very proud of that we implemented as part of our multicultural program is our multiculturalism grants program. Over $324,000 was granted to 40 diff erent community organ- izations in the fi rst phase of the multiculturalism grant program. Let me share with members of the House which com- munity groups received these funds, these multicultur- alism grants. We have the African Canadian Soccer and Cultural Association, located in the riding of Burnaby– Deer Lake.

We also saw a grant go to DIVERSEcity Community Resources Society, located in the riding of Surrey-Newton; and a whole bunch in the riding of the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, includ- ing Immigrant Services Society of British Columbia, Canadian Club of Vancouver and NEC, Native Education College. We have a great program in multiculturalism, sup- porting communities around the province. J. Kwan: What we are talking about is the Liberal gov- ernment's program using taxpayers' money to do parti- san work.

Th e Liberals are consumed with any and all activities that they perceive to be able to enhance their political fortunes. We saw it in the $17 million taxpayer- supported advertising plan that was just recently leaked. We now have it again — another Liberal leaked docu- ment. On page 3 of that document it says: "Quick wins." Mr. Speaker, I can't tell you how dismayed I was when I read it. It involves the Premier's offi ce staff defi ning apologies for wrongful treatment based on race as "quick wins." Eleven weeks to an election, and the B.C.

Liberal gov- ernment is now attempting an apology to the Chinese community for historical wrongs. To the minister again: why is the Liberal government using apologies for historical injustices experienced by the ethnic community as quick wins for political gain? Hon. J. Y ap: I hope she is not suggesting that this House should not consider making an historic apology to a community in our province, in our country, that was wronged 100 years ago, during the early years of the province of British Columbia.

I hope that's not what the member is suggesting — that we should not work to- wards reaching out and apologizing to a community that was discriminated against. Let me tell you what we are doing in multicultur- alism, for the benefit of all members. We hosted the fi rst-ever Embracing Diff erence, Engaging Community Symposium, with 25 diverse sessions held in the Lower Mainland, encouraging multiculturalism, challenging racism. It was attended by over 230 delegates — a great success.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13127 We also, as I mentioned, have a great program of multi- culturalism grants that are provided to communities throughout the province, throughout British Columbia. Again, for the benefi t of the member, we provided grants to the NEC, Native Education College; Association of Neighbourhood Houses, Mount Pleasant; Chinese Cultural Centre, greater Vancouver. Th e list goes on — all of these located in that member's riding, Vancouver– Mount Pleasant. Mr. Speaker: Th e member has a supplemental. J.

Kwan: What I'm suggesting is that the acknowledg- ment of historical wrongs for the Chinese community or any other community should be done because it's the right thing to do, not because it's politically expedient. [1415] Th is leaked document — and I refer the minister to it — lays out very clearly that the real motivation for why the Liberals are now talking about issuing an apology to the Chinese community, aft er 11 years in offi ce, is because it is a "quick win" for election purposes. It is not about ac- knowledging historical wrongs. Again, my question to the minister is this.

Why is the minister allowing his government to use partisan polit- ical opportunism, trump signifi cant historical injustice issues, for a quick political win? Why is he doing that? Hon. J. Y ap: Again, we should not take advice from the NDP on that side of the House. I've just been hand- ed a publication, what appears to be a Korean-Canadian community publication, where no less than the Leader of the Opposition has placed a full-colour ad where he talks about the New Democrat offi cial opposition change for the better, etc.

Th e Leader of the Opposition in this partisan ad lists, as the address, the address here, in Room 201, Parliament Buildings, Victoria, British Columbia. We should not take advice from that side of the House. What we will continue to do is support multicultural communities through programs like the multicultural- ism grant.

I can go on and on talking about what great community groups have received these multiculturalism grants, including la Société francophone de Victoria in Victoria–Beacon Hill; Kaleidoscope Th eatre Productions Society, Victoria–Swan Lake; Nikkei National Museum and Cultural Centre, Burnaby-Edmonds. Th e list goes on and on — great support for multicultural groups.

W ASTE INCINERATOR PROPOSAL FOR FRASER V ALLEY J. van Dongen: In July 2011 the Minister of Environment made a very controversial decision when he approved a solid waste management plan that opened the door for a large garbage-burning incinerator in the Lower Mainland.

Th e minister approved this controver- sial plan over the strong objections of the citizens in the Fraser Valley; the objections of local and regional repre- sentatives; the objections of MLAs such as myself; and even the objections of the member for Chilliwack, the minister's own colleague, when that member correctly said: "Th e minister's approval is regrettable and wrong." Despite the minister's naive assurances, it is abun- dantly clear that Metro Vancouver is thumbing its nose at everyone, from the minister on down.

When is the minister going to face the fact that Metro Vancouver has absolutely no intention of living up to his conditions, es- pecially the requirement for real and meaningful consul- tation with the FVRD, the Fraser Valley regional district, as the minister promised during the desperate days of the Chilliwack-Hope by-election? Mr. Speaker: Just before I recognize the minister, I want to remind members not to be using BlackBerrys during question period. Hon. T. Lake: First of all, I have to say that the mem- ber is absolutely wrong. I did not approve any incinerator waste-to-energy proposal in Metro Vancouver.

We were abundantly clear when we approved the sol- id waste management plan for Metro Vancouver. Th ey were instructed that if they were to consider in-region waste-to-energy, they would have to consult fully with the Fraser Valley regional district. Th e Premier and I made a commitment, too, that if such a proposal was put forward, it would be subject to a full environmental assessment review. [1420] Mr. Speaker: Th e member has a supplemental. J. van Dongen: I repeat what I stated. Th e minister approved a solid waste management plan with an op- tion for a large incinerator.

The facts are that Metro Vancouver has repeatedly defi ed the minister's stated requirements, and they have dismissed democratically elected representatives, such as Mayor Sharon Gaetz and Coun. Patricia Ross. Metro Vancouver recently denied a Fraser Valley regional district seat on a third-party expert review panel that is supposed to discuss scientifi c and technic- al issues. Last month the chair of the Metro Vancouver waste committee, Malcolm Brodie, summed it up this way, "Whether people like it or not, the decision has been made" — referring to the incinerator proposal.

Again, Metro Vancouver shows no respect for the cit- izens of the Fraser Valley and no respect for the condi- tions in the minister's letter of August 2011. When will the minister act decisively on this serious threat to air quality in the Fraser Valley and just say no to a $400 million garbage-burning incinerator by remov-

British Columbia Debates13128 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 ing that option from Metro Vancouver's solid waste man- agement plan on the basis of their non-performance on consultation with the FVRD? Hon. T. Lake: I'm surprised that the member has adopted the NDP method of environmental assessment, which is just say no before any process occurs at all. We've made it very clear that if an in-region waste- to-energy facility is considered by Metro Vancouver, it will undergo a full B.C. environmental assessment pro- cess and full consultation with the Fraser Valley region- al district.

MULTICULTURAL OUTREACH STRATEGY AND PARTISAN ACTIVITIES BY GOVERNMENT STAFF M. Farnworth: I listened intently to the non-answers from the Minister for Multiculturalism. I felt…. Y ou know what? We really have to go back and ask some more questions. I think it is really important, because I've come to understand why the minister doesn't get what has been going on in his own ministry: because it was run out of the Premier's offi ce. Th e tenth of January, 2012.

Th e Premier's deputy chief of staff , Kim Haakstad, sends a draft version of the multi- cultural strategic outreach plan to Liberal staff ers in the Offi ce of the Premier, to the minister of state for multi- culturalism, to the caucus and to the B.C. Liberal Party. What becomes clear when you go through the documents is an eff ort to subvert the public service and make it a wing of the B.C. Liberal Party for its own partisan polit- ical purposes. Th e problem is that we've seen this before. Th ey keep getting caught, and they still don't learn.

Just think back to the smear attack website against the Leader of the Opposition that was developed by taxpayer- funded staff ers, launched by the Liberal Party, in this very building. Who can forget the Burnaby Hospital — their so- called community consultation committee, led by the members for Burnaby-Lougheed and Burnaby North, a committee which used good-minded people who thought they were doing the right job. Th ey were used by this government for their own partisan political aims.

Again, to the Minister for Multiculturalism: does he not understand that telling people to forward names to list for the Liberal Party is not the role of a public ser- vant — that subverting the public service is wrong? Will he stand and at least acknowledge that? Hon. J. Y ap: Th is question from the NDP , whose leader was recently called out by the Vancouver school board for handing out partisan red-packet lucky money to stu- dents in Vancouver…. [1425] As I have said, we have a great program in multicultur- alism. We are supporting multiculturalism.

Th e member talks about: what are we doing to support multiculturalism in diff erent communities? Well, let me share once again what we are doing. Th rough the B.C. multiculturalism grant program, we are continuing to provide support to societies like the Visible Art Society in Vancouver–Mount Pleasant; the W2 Community Media Arts Society, also Vancouver–Mount Pleasant; the Belfry Th eatre Society, Victoria–Beacon Hill; and also the Kaleidoscope Th eatre Productions Society in Victoria–Swan Lake. We continue to support multiculturalism. It's very important to promote multiculturalism.

Th is side of the House will continue to do this, providing support to com- munity groups to fi ght racism, to encourage inclusiveness and to promote multiculturalism in the province of B.C. Mr. Speaker: Th e member has a supplemental. M. Farnworth: Everybody in this House, in this prov- ince, supports multiculturalism. What they don't support is a government that uses public taxpayer dollars to pur- sue a private partisan agenda by the Liberal government of this province and using the public service to do it. So my question to the minister is this.

What part of using the public service to pursue their political agen- da doesn't he get? Does he not understand that that is wrong? Hon. J. Y ap: Once again, the member should ask his own colleague, the member for Fraser-Nicola, why he placed partisan attack ads using taxpayers' funds. Th at's what he should do. H. Bains: Nine questions have been put to this minis- ter today by the opposition about government breaking the rules, using taxpayer dollars for political personal uses. Not a single answer is coming from their side.

Th e leaked document clearly shows that the Liberals are breaking the rules meant to ensure that taxpayer money isn't being used for political partisan reasons. In fact, the document sets out rule-breaking as a primary goal. Crossing the lines between government, caucus and the party is mentioned seven times in this document. For example, on page 3: "Explain and break down govern- ment silos, and share info with the party." How does this minister justify just blatant instructions to break the rules by instructing staff to use taxpayers' re- sources for political partisan purposes? Hon. J.

Y ap: I appreciate this opportunity to continue to talk about the great work we're doing in supporting multiculturalism. EmbraceBC, the signature program of the government of British Columbia, as I said, funded over 85 community projects, engaging more than 12,000 participants throughout the province of B.C. It's import-

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13129 ant to promote multiculturalism, and this side of the House will continue to do that. Mr. Speaker: Th e member has a supplemental. H. Bains: Let's look at the pattern of behaviour of this Liberal government. Mr. Speaker, $17 million in taxpayer-funded partisan pre-election ads in the lead- up to the election, a new set of taxpayer-supported ads that started yesterday and will ramp up as we get close to the election, an $11 million taxpayer-supported awards show to give Liberals more photo ops before the elec- tion, Liberal operatives… Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Members. H. Bains: …gaming the Burnaby Hospital consulta- tion process for political gain and a multicultural out- reach strategy with the express purpose of breaking the rules to spend taxpayer money for partisan political gain. [1430] The Liberals have no shame. That's clearly what is shown in their…. Interjections. H. Bains: Can the minister off er any justifi cation for so blatantly spending taxpayer resources on their elec- tion campaign? Hon. J. Y ap: Once again, through to the member. I'll tell you what we are doing, Member. We are supporting programs like the B.C.

Hate Crimes Team and organ- izing against racism and hate, and the Safe Harbour: Respect for All programs. These were all recognized by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation Award of Excellence in 2012. We also will be soon publishing the annual report on multiculturalism, which will show the great programs throughout the province, including the public sector, in supporting multiculturalism. [End of question period.] Hon. R. Sultan: I would like to present a petition. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. Petitions Hon. R.

Sultan: I am pleased to present to this House a petition signed by 100 North Shore seniors asking the government to revisit the SAFER rental subsidy program. Tabling Documents Hon. S. Bond: I have the honour to present the fol- lowing reports: the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal Annual Report 2011-2012 and the B.C. Ferry Commission Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2012. Hon. D. McRae: I seek leave to make a ministerial statement. Leave granted. Ministerial Statements PINK SHIRT DAY AND PREVENTION OF BULLYING IN SCHOOLS Hon. D.

McRae: Today is Bullying Awareness Day in British Columbia, or as you can see from the fashion choices on both sides of the House, it is also known as Pink Shirt Day. It's a day for all of us to get together and take a stand together to erase bullying for good. It's a day to teach our children about how they can prevent bully- ing and how they can help others from being bullied. Today, as we recognize Pink Shirt Day, we're also en- couraging youth to stand up against all kinds of bullying, including cyberbullying.

We've seen all too clearly that bullying can happen anywhere, whether it's on line, at school or at the mall. Over lunch hour today I was joined by the MLA for Oak Bay–Gordon Head and the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. We visited Hillside Mall, with mall employees and construction workers who wore pink shirts. Middle school students from Lansdowne Middle School also joined us. Th e message we heard loud and clear from everyone was that to stop bullying in its tracks, we need to involve the whole community.

It's the kind of message that is get- ting through to people in towns and cities across British Columbia — that we're all in this together. Bullying is an issue that has been close to the Premier's heart for a long period of time. In fact, for six years Pink Shirt Day has successfully raised awareness about bully- ing in schools and homes and on line, and this year is no exception. Last year the Premier announced the ERASE Bullying strategy and is putting tools in the hands of edu- cators, parents and students to help make schools safer and a more positive place to learn.

As a teacher and as a parent, I can tell you emphatic- ally that bullying has no place in our schools, and par- ents deserve to know that their children are safe when they go off to class. Th at's why we're working hard to encourage students to be helpful bystanders and to intervene or speak out when they see bullying happening. It is one of the keys to creating safe learning environments, because there is a

British Columbia Debates13130 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 strong connection between feelings of safety and belong- ing and student learning. I want to thank everyone in the House today and everyone across B.C. for wearing pink today. Thank you for your eff orts to raise awareness. We're all in this together. We need to send the message together that bullying will not be tolerated. R. Austin: Following on the remarks by the Minister of Education, I would like to say that on this day we all make great eff orts to raise awareness of bullying in our school system.

Th is year in particular we have witnessed im- mense tragedies that have taken their course in the pub- lic realm via social media, which in turn, of course, has brought even greater attention to the scourge of bullying. So awareness of bullying is perhaps less of an issue. We must now, as legislators and leaders in our communities, all try our utmost to take us beyond the stage of aware- ness of a social ill and ramp up to direct actions — includ- ing legislation, if that will help to address this problem.

Some must be watching this event each year and ask- ing themselves why we seem unable to raise our kids to simply treat one another with respect, and there's no easy answer or single solution. [1435] Certainly, one area that must be addressed is the rec- ognition that we are still failing kids who are dealing with their own sexual orientation and the way in which kids treat this at an adolescent stage of development.

I hope that the measures the government has taken this year with the ERASE Bullying program alleviate this scourge, but I suspect that we all have a lot more to do in the coming months and years ahead to make our schools a truly safe and welcoming environment. Orders of the Day Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued debate on the budget. Mr. Speaker: If members could attend to their other duties so we can get on with the budget debate. Budget Debate (continued) Hon. I. Chong: I will take what few moments remain- ing I have with respect to the budget speech to off er some closing remarks.

I want to begin by saying what I mentioned yesterday about how budgets are composed or how they are ar- rived at, and that is to take a look at revenues, to take a look at expenditures. [L. Reid in the chair.] On the expenditures side, we know that we have a good track record of controlling spending. Th e revenue side is a little more diffi cult, because it can fl uctuate. Y ou do depend on what you believe are going to be market prices, your ability to export, the trade opportunities that are out there. So it's not easy always to determine what those are.

Th is year more than any year, though, it was import- ant to ensure that the forecast assumptions for revenue were going to be accurate, were going to be credible, and for that, they needed validation. For that, we were able to ask a very well-respected economist, Dr. Tim O'Neill, to provide that information. Dr. Tim O'Neill, a highly regarded Canadian econo- mist, reviewed the Ministry of Finance process for fore- casting provincial revenues.

He concluded — this is coming from a well-regarded, highly regarded economist — that overall, the ministry's methodologies and assump- tions are transparent and well founded. So I fi nd it interesting that the NDP opposition are making assertions that the revenue forecasts are inaccur- ate. I'd like to know where they're getting their informa- tion from. I'd like to know who it is that is providing them this data. Who are their validators? Every credible person or organization that has looked at our budget, as boring as it is…. It was not meant to be an election-year budget.

It was meant to be a balanced budget, as we promised we would deliver on. Every cred- ible organization or person has validated what is in that budget, in that the revenue forecasts are believable, they are truthful, and they are conservative. With that, a number of areas and characteristics were provided for three levels of prudence, Madam Speaker. An economic forecast based on a panel of forecasters, where we did at the end of the day take the lowest, not even the average, wanting to make sure that we were be- ing as conservative as possible. Another level of prudence, and that is to provide for contingencies.

It would have been very easy not to have contingencies, but these are the dollar amounts that are provided for each and every year. So we had to ensure that the amount for contingency was real and was simi- lar and consistent with past years. Another level of prudence, and that is the forecast al- lowance. Th at, too, had to be in place because of past, historical records showing that a forecast allowance was provided for. [1440] What is clear is that our economy indeed will grow. It will not grow as much as we would like it to grow , be- cause it is still very fragile out there.

Th ere is still instabil- ity in the global marketplace. But it has been recognized by everyone that our economy will indeed grow — not a large amount. What we have done to ensure that we have a budget that is credible is we have said we will maintain our

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13131 spending at lower levels or at the same levels, fi nding sav- ings where we can. We will ensure that we do not spend more than what we will be bringing in. Th at is what con- tributes to a balanced budget. I want to say that the Premier and the Minister of Finance deserve praise for this budget. It is a sober budget. It doesn't attempt to buy voters with their money. What it does is provide a very real budget, a balanced budget. Th e numbers in this budget appear to be solid, as was quoted by the Vancouver Board of Trade.

Th ey found the $1.1 billion savings in government departments to be plausible. Th ey also found — and this is the board of trade — that projected natural gas revenues were revised downward by $379 million, at the insistence or advice of that independent economist, Dr. Tim O'Neill. With that, as I say, I would like to challenge the NDP to tell us where they're getting their fi gures from. Th ey say they're going to reveal their budget. Well, I fi nd that hard to believe, because all they're talking about is more and more spending. I've done some quick calculations.

From what I've heard so far, the additional spending that the NDP pro- pose is anywhere from $6 billion to $8 billion. We cur- rently have a spending budget of around $40 billion. So $6 billion to $8 billion represents anywhere from a 15 to 20 percent increase in spending. So my question to the NDP , and I'd like one of them to get up and answer this: are they going to raise taxes by 15 to 20 percent? Taxpayers deserve to know. Now, if they don't raise taxes, where else are they go- ing to fi nd these dollars?

My understanding is that, at last count, the provincial sales tax brings in roughly about $500 million to $550 million. But let's say, for the sake of argument, $600 million, because things have changed over the course of the last number of years. If we were to take a look at that, and we need to bridge that $6 billion gap of extra spending, it means you would have to raise the provincial sales tax by 10 points. Is that what we're going to see? Y ou're going to have to tell us.

Th e NDP opposition, you're going to have to tell us where you're getting these revenues, because you seem to not want to look at the liquefi ed natural gas revenues. Y ou seem not to be wanting to take a look at that generational opportunity, because your policies that we've heard thus far are about delaying that opportunity. So we know the spending is there — unless you're go- ing to cut spending. We've already said we're protecting spending in a variety of ministries — in fact, increasing spending still in health care. With that, I encourage the NDP to tell us where they're going to fi nd the money. D.

Routley: I'm continuing my response to the speech, the budget speech of 2013. I'm going to return to the be- ginning of my speech. I think that aft er this budget speech, and should there be a change in government, one of the most diffi cult things facing any new government would be what to do with all of the acrobats and gymnasts and magicians that must be employed in the government at the cur- rent moment. Of course, it takes an enormous acrobatic fl exibility and considerable gymnastic skill to be able to interpret what has happened in this province this year as a bal- anced budget.

In fact, I was reassured by the news from the member from Cloverdale that something real was de- livered on budget day, and that was a baby. Certainly, the budget speech was something less than real. [1445] What the budget speech was, in fact, was not a budget, but it was a political narrative. It is indeed an election budget in that it is a political narrative. It seeks to allow an escape for the B.C. Liberal government from its past. Its past is one of seven out of 12 years being defi cit — the two largest defi cits in the history of British Columbia.

In fact, in the past four years, the term of this current Liberal government, all of their budgets have been defi cits. In 2009-2010 the budget defi cit was $495 million. Oh no, that's what we were told. We were told that it would be $495 million before the 2009 election. H. Bains: Maximum. D. Routley: Y es, maximum — not a penny more. But in fact, the defi cit in 2009-2010 was $1.8 billion, from a government that would seek through this budget to create a narrative that would tell the people of British Columbia that no, they don't spend more than the gov- ernment takes in. Th ey're so prudent.

Th ey're so prudent that they had a $1.8 billion defi cit in 2009-2010 aft er promising repeatedly in this House and throughout this province and on the campaign trail that they would have no greater than a $495 million defi cit. Th ey were told throughout the province by everyone who had any notion of what was happening in the world that it would be a bigger defi cit than $495 million. But no, they promised the voters going to an election that they would have a $495 million defi cit. Th ey knew better, and yet they told the voters that that was the case. Th ey knew better, and that was not the truth.

Well, what happened the next year, 2010-2011? Surprise — another defi cit. So each time there's a defi - cit under their much-vaunted anti-deficit legislation, their balanced-budget legislation, we as members repre- senting the province are trotted in to this place. Th is fa- cade is ripped down and ripped apart, as we are asked to amend that balanced-budget legislation year in and year out, coming in here in a farce, really, to allow this gov- ernment its defi cit. In 2010-2011 that happened again, and it was $300 million — $300 million in that year. In 2011-2012, the

British Columbia Debates13132 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 third year of this current government's mandate, what happened? What was the surplus that year? It was zero. In fact, it was negative $1.8 billion again. So in 2010-2011 it was $300 million. In 2011-2012 it was $1.8 billion in defi cit. Surely the next year from this government, with its narrative that tells the province that, no, they're prudent money managers…. Th ey're so op- posed to defi cits, in fact, that they've ruled them out by law, and they're telling us in this current election narra- tive that they've balanced a budget. Well, what happened?

What happened? In 2012-2013, the Minister of Environment will cheer that it was a $1.4 billion defi cit — $400 million less than the year before. Th at is worth cheering, of course, because it is a bit of an improvement. But over those four years this enormously competent government, the B.C. Liberal government, had a cumu- lative defi cit of $5.3 billion — over those four years. Now they lurch towards an election, bleeding all the way to the fi nish line and telling the people of the province that they've balanced the budget. How did they do that?

Well, for the third year in a row they've claimed the benefi t of the sale of the Little Mountain lands — $300 million brought forward from last year. What else do they plan? Th ey plan to sell $600 million, roughly, of public assets, and they've booked in this year $475 million of that money. Now, those assets aren't sold — so counting the chick- ens before they're hatched. So $300 million was booked last year. Now it's being brought forward to this year.

Th at $475 million is being counted that hasn't even been sold yet. [1450] When Don Drummond, noted economist, made recommendations to the Ontario government about how to balance its books, he said, "Don't do two things. Don't cut from skills training" — skills and apprentice- ships, which the government just did. He said: "If you're counting on asset sales to help balance the books, don't count your chickens before they're hatched." Th at's what this government has done. Th at's, together, $775 million that really has nothing to do with the government's in- come this year. So much for a balanced budget.

Th is government now prides itself as being so vali- antly opposed to defi cits — which it has created seven out of the past 12 years — and constantly criticizes the years of governance of the NDP as having been a time of a have-not province. Well, Madam Speaker, let's look at that claim. One year under NDP governance the province was considered a have-not province and received transfers on that basis. Under this B.C. Liberal government in the past 12 years, fi ve times this province has been con- sidered have-not. So everything that B.C.

Liberals have told the people of British Columbia in the past fi ve years has essentially been untrue — from: "We will not har- monize the sales tax…." Well, that certainly wasn't true. Go further back. Interjection. D. Routley: Y ou said that to the restaurant…. In writ- ing, you said: "Oh, it wasn't on the radar." Th ey said it wasn't on their radar. Interjection. D. Routley: Right. Okay, now they didn't say any of that. I suppose the government didn't actually say it wouldn't run defi cits, but it did. Th e government has less of a quarrel with me than with the people of B.C.

It's the people of B.C. who have lost faith. It's the people of B.C. who have clearly lost faith and trust in the govern- ment. Why should they have any faith when what they've been told has been so patently untrue and so patently not the case? Not only has the government run all these defi cits, but let's look at the debt. Th e debt in '01-02 was $36 billion. It was 27 percent of GDP , the total debt. Th e total debt pro- jected for '13-14 will be $62.5 billion, 27 percent of GDP — the same.

Y et there's a little wrinkle there, because this government, through its many off –balance sheet agree- ments — called contractual obligations and pointed to by the Auditor General of this province as, in many cases, constituting debt to the province…. Th at has increased by over $80 billion — more than the provincial debt, al- most double the current debt of the province. Th is is what these gymnasts of fi nancial wizardry, these magicians of fi scal prudence, these Cirque du Soleil per- formers of public policy have managed to accomplish over the last 12 years, the last four years being particu- larly dismal.

Not only has it been dismally incorrect that they should claim that they are currently running a bal- anced budget, which is patently not the case — 12 percent of British Columbians believe, according to a recent poll, that this budget is balanced, that lack of faith obviously founded well in recent experience — but considerably more tragic is the fact that we're left in a situation where our province, in a broad way, is losing faith in the pro- cess, is losing faith in politics. We know that liquefi ed natural gas is the future hope of the government.

We heard in the papers just today that perhaps it's hit the bottom, the basement price, the lowest price possible. So it's not a booming commodity. [1455] Th ere is a booming commodity in British Columbia. Th e booming commodity in British Columbia is cyni- cism, and it booms because of promises that have been made to the people that have not been kept. It booms be- cause of a place like this — where we're expected to rep- resent people with dignity, integrity and honour — being so badly mistreated by the performance of a government

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13133 that has not been faithful to the people who have elected us, all of us, as members. Th at is considerably more disastrous than a defi cit or a debt because, as British Columbians face the challenges of the coming years, we need to be able to work together, and any government in this province will need to have the faith of the people in order to accomplish anything.

So it is with an absolutely heartfelt expectation and de- sire that I would say to the government, and to everyone who represents people in this province in the democratic process, that we need to do better. We need to do better than telling the people simply what needs to be heard in order to achieve a seat in the House or a seat at a council. We need to do better by tell- ing people — having the courage to tell people — the truth about what we face. When people do that….

If this government had had the courage to do that over the last four years, they would not be in the place that they are now, so thoroughly discredited in the eyes of British Columbians. If we are able to, in fact, generate the courage to face people and tell them what the true facts are about the challenges that we face and how we can overcome them and work together — not simply create narratives for elections that we call budgets, but actually face the prob- lems of our communities and our province — then we will be better people, this will be a better place, and we will live in a better province again. B.

Simpson: Before I get into the substance of my comments on the budget, I want to say hello to my mom, who's watching this aft ernoon, and ask her not to call me this time while I'm standing and speaking. We can chat aft erwards. I hope that you're feeling well, and I'm glad that you're watching. I also want to add my congratulations, personal con- gratulations, to the member for Surrey-Cloverdale on the birth of his child. It is a privilege, as the member who spoke before me said, to stand in this place and to give comment on the budget that is before us. But I have to say that I feel that this time….

I mean, I think budget debate in general, throne speech debate in general, is a partisan back-and- forth. In front of an election, it feels much more like shadowboxing in advance of the main event — in this case, on May 14. I had to laugh as I was refl ecting on my response to the budget today. Listening to question period about partisan ads and spending taxpayer money on parti- san ads, it feels like pretty much every day in this place. Th e taxpayers are paying us to engage in partisan debate when we should be engaging in parliamentary debate.

We should be engaging in debate about what matters to British Columbians, not what matters to B.C.'s two main political parties. It is crystal-clear that in advance of an election we do not get a real budget. Th at's just the fact. Th at's just what happens because of where the fi xed election date is set. It's not a real budget, because we as parliamentarians will never have an opportunity to actually dissect the budget and take it apart ministry by ministry, which is the nor- mal budgetary debate cycle if we were not facing an elec- tion on May 14.

We would fi nish these political speeches, we would say yea to second reading of the budget, and we would go into committee stage of the budget. Th en for hours on end over a period of months parliamentarians, legis- lators in this place — with the exclusion of backbench government members, unless they get special allowance — get to dissect the ministerial estimates and take the budget apart. [1500] It's not a real budget, and that's not going to happen, because we don't have enough time in this session. We'll probably rise on March 14, and then we're into an elec- tion in May.

If there is, in fact, a change of government, this budget completely disappears. It's not a real budget in the sense that it has to with- stand the scrutiny of implementation. So when the gov- ernment puts a budget together every fourth year with a fi xed spring election date, there isn't the discipline to actually put a budget together that you have to live with. We saw that crystal clear before the 2009 election.

Th e 2008 meltdown had occurred, and yet the fi scal discipline required to address that wasn't driven into the budget because it was in advance of the election and wouldn't have to withstand any scrutiny other than some political speechifying. Th e third reason that it's not a real budget and British Columbians shouldn't regard it as a real budget is that the Auditor General and the comptroller general won't get to comment before the government takes us to the polls.

I've stood with the members from Delta South and Abbotsford South, two other independent members in this House, and we have put forward what we believe is a practical series of reforms for this Legislative Assembly, to make this Legislative Assembly work better, to realize what the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan was saying are some of our obligations in this House.

We've said that the election date must change, not for this election — this election is too close; we should go to the polls on May 14 and let British Columbians decide who is to form government next — but in order to avoid the diffi cult situation that a government faces in changing the election date aft er they've got power. Do you put it ahead six months? Do you pull it back six months? Let's make a date change now. Editorial aft er editorial, individual aft er individual, group aft er group have said we should not have any more spring elections on the fi xed election cycle. We should go to the fall.

Th ere's a bill in front of the House that would be very simple for the government to take, to put in front

British Columbia Debates13134 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 of us. Th e opposition members have already indicated they support moving the fi xed election date. Th e Finance Minister has indicated he thinks it's a good idea. Let's just do it now. Let's be done with it. I challenge every member of this House to take that back to their caucus, to act as free agents. If you believe that that is the right thing to do, go to your caucuses and demand that we bring a bill, government bill or other- wise, to this House to fi x this problem now. It is the most opportune time to do it.

It doesn't advantage or disadvantage any of the polit- ical parties. It simply fi xes the next election date 4½ years from now — four years and fi ve months, actually — and makes sure that we never repeat this business of bringing in a budget that can be claimed to be false, that will prove to be false and that the electorate of British Columbia doesn't have confi dence in, and rightly so. Th e other aspects of the reform agenda that we put forth…. We are calling for election finance reform. British Columbians should not have to question whether or not money buys public policy.

British Columbia is one of the few jurisdictions that has absolutely no restrictions — none — on corporate, union and individual donations. We have no restrictions on residency requirements for individual donations or company donations, as we saw recently when the Liberal Party held a fundraiser in Alberta because Albertans want to infl uence the outcome of the B.C. election. Th e opposition party's response to that was that they get do- nations from outside of British Columbia as well. So we believe that you need to get rid of corporate and union donations.

Y ou need to cap individual donations, and you need to institute a residency requirement so that British Columbia's one-person, one-vote principle is sup- ported by only British Columbians giving money to the provincial political parties. We also believe that it's necessary that there is over- sight, public oversight, of the political party leadership process.

It's been interesting to watch the push-back and the counter-arguments to that, because the only counter- argument that we've been given on that is that political parties are private entities and there's no business in hav- ing public oversight. [1505] Well, that's a ridiculous argument because the only purpose of political parties is to gain public power. And because, as we've seen on this occasion and other occa- sions, the NDP had the same thing happen…. Y ou hold a leadership convention, and the individual who wins the leadership convention from a political party ends up becoming Premier right away.

Because of that, we need the public to feel confi dent that the members who have a right to vote in those leadership contests and the vote count in those leadership contests are aboveboard and beyond any question so that the individuals who win political party leaderships win them fairly and in a transparent manner, and then win the right to become the Premier of the province. Quite frankly, the Leader of the Opposition has a great degree of infl uence in this province too. So two of the key people in this province are elected through that process.

Right now that process is not without its problems and, I would say, actually lacks a great deal of integrity. From a legislative perspective, we have also said that we need to go back to secret ballot votes for the Speaker. Th e Speaker, according to the standing orders, is sup- posed to be elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly, and yet for some reason, over the last three parliaments we've slid into a habit of a speaker-designate by the Premier when he or she sets their cabinet.

Th at really makes the Speaker a function of the Premier's of- fi ce and government and not a function of the Legislative Assembly, and for people who do listen to this, that's a vital diff erence. Th e Speaker has to be given his mandate or her man- date by all the members of the House. Every member of the House has a right to stand for nomination. Every member of the House should have the right to vote for the Speaker. By doing it that way, the Speaker becomes a function of the MLAs in this House and, I believe, is then free to make sure that we do some of the reforms that we need in here as well.

Now, that does not — and I've spoken to our current Speaker — have anything to do with how the current Speaker has acted. He has acted above reproach, and I have found him absolutely supportive of us as independ- ents. Th at's not the issue. Th e issue is a matter of process, and we need to return to that.

I guess what the independent MLAs are doing is put- ting both political parties on notice that if there are in- dependent MLAs, if there are Green Party MLAs or, potentially, Conservative MLAs in this House in the next election, we will be making sure that there is a secret bal- lot held for the Speaker's position. We have the right to do that because you can only change those rules by leave of the House, and we simply won't give that leave. So we can guarantee that that will occur. Th e next piece on the legislative front is to move to permanent standing committees. We don't have a good committee structure.

In fact, Madam Speaker, you have written on this yourself. We don't have a good commit- tee structure in British Columbia. Th ey are sessional committees. Th ey rise and fall with the sitting of the Legislature. Th ey have to be restruck. Th ey have to be reappointed. In fact, unless they're given a mandate by government, they don't meet at all, and they don't serve a function. Most jurisdictions have permanent committees. Th e minute a new parliament is formed aft er an election, the committees are formed. Th ey have permanent status.

They can operate independently of the sitting of the Legislature, and they can operate independently of the

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13135 government giving them a mandate to act. Permanent committees will give every MLA in this Legislature a meaningful, productive and constructive role in the governing of the province, and that's what I be- lieve all of us come here to do. We all come here to play a productive and constructive role, and yet our committee structure in British Columbia does not allow us to do that, so we're forced to come into this chamber and play parti- san politics instead of being constructive and productive members of the governing of the province.

Finally — and it's a longstanding debate of how you do this; we didn't get into that as independents — we do need to move in the direction of more free votes in this House. It is not necessary for the political parties to whip every vote. It is not necessary for political parties to exercise the degree of discipline that they do over the individual members of their caucus. It is absolutely not necessary. What it does is it diminishes the role of MLAs. [1510] Th e political parties need to fi gure that out. Th ere are very few votes in this House that are confi dence votes.

Th ere are many opportunities for us to be able to have more free votes and for caucus MLAs to have more free- dom to act in the interest of their constituents and to act in the interests of public policy in British Columbia. It's not a real budget. It is a pre-election budget. It will be seen to be such. Even if this government gets back into power again, I can guarantee that. Th e second point is that it's not a credible budget. Now, the Minister of Aboriginal Relations made the point that it has been vetted and validated by an economist who has a very strong track record.

I guess my challenge back is: how oft en are economists wrong? I would actually argue that if you gave a batting average to economists, they wouldn't get hired by any baseball team. How many times do we hear in the newspaper and on the radio that the economists are surprised by this month's job numbers, the economists are surprised by how soft the economy went, or the economists are sur- prised how big the rebound was? Economists seem to be walking around always surprised — caught off -guard by the reality that's out there that their models don't give them. Economists use models. Th ey look at process.

Th ey look at procedure. Th at's all Dr. O'Neill did. He said that based on current practice, the practices used by this gov- ernment are, in fact, valid. Th at's all he said — that it's a valid way to do forecasting. Does that mean the forecast is real? Not at all. Does it mean we will actually achieve the numbers in the budget? Not at all. It's not what Dr. O'Neill was signing off on. He just simply said that there's some prudence in there and that the forecast follows a reasonable process, an accepted process. It doesn't mean the numbers are real.

I also struggle these days with the dependence that we have on third-party auditors. One of my pet peeves is the Pacifi c Carbon Trust. I think that's a distortion of tax policy, where we claw back operating money from the public sector to benefi t private sector agencies for pro- jects that, quite frankly, would have happened without any public money going into them.

The argument I get back from the Pacific Carbon Trust and others, including the Minister of Environment, is: "Well, all the projects are third-party validat- ed." Well, just do a scan of KPMG, Ernst and Y oung, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Moody's, all of the banks. How many of them are now in court? How many of them have court challenges against them for not validating in a way that is ethical?

Th ese are the same third-party validators that said the Icelandic banks were fi ne three days prior to the Icelandic banks collapsing and subsequent criminal and civil court cases proceeding against both the banks and the third-party validators. We have a special obligation as legislators to question third-party validators. An economist signing off only on the revenue projections and only saying, "Y ep, that looks like proper process," doesn't give British Columbians any comfort. In fact, the whole exercise was a failure.

It was a $25,000 taxpayer failure because the explicit reason for doing that, as articulated by the Finance Minister, was to build confi dence in the budget, and the poll that came out aft erwards showed that no confi dence was built. It was a waste of money. Again, the only way to avoid this truly is not by hiring third-party validators but by changing the election date. I would suggest that we should revisit the concept of a parliamentary budget offi cer.

Th at should be something that we should get an exposure bill on, like we saw in the Senate bill today, to fl oat out to British Columbians whether they have enough trust in us to allow us to continue to manage our own books or whether we need a third-party validator, independent of even the Auditor General's offi ce, along the lines of the federal Parliamentary Budget Offi cer. [1515] So change the fi xed election date, potentially at least for a short period of time, put in a parliamentary budget offi cer, and then we can get back to some credibility on the budget.

Th en the fi nal point I want to make on this budget, in particular: it's not a balanced budget. Th at issue has been canvassed. If the government wasn't already liv- ing on gaming and lottery money, I'd throw some of my money on the table and guarantee that this budget would not be balanced if the government was forced to actually live by it. It's just too thin. It does not have a suffi cient amount of leeway in it in order to accommodate even a reason- able fi re season. Th at would eat up the contingency all on its own. We have the nurses, the doctors, the teachers all go- ing to go into contract negotiations.

We have a very, very

British Columbia Debates13136 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 lowball expectation on the expense side that — oh, by the way — the external, independent accountant, econo- mist, did not look at. Th e independent economist only looked at the revenue side, not the expense side. I'd have liked to have seen what he had to say about the projec- tions for expenses. It's not a balanced budget, but quite frankly, this is one of the areas that the NDP doesn't have any credibility on.

Th at is, they cannot say that the government's budget is not credible when they have not stood with their own courage, the courage of their convictions, to say what an alternative budget is. I believe, to be fair, they're in political mode. Th ey're in election mode. Th ey want to hold their powder dry until closer to the election. Th at's the way elections work. Th at's the way politics work.

But I think it's maybe time for us to consider manda- tory alternative budgets by opposition parties, regardless of who they are — that in order for them to gain credibil- ity year over year with the electorate, that instead of just simply criticizing the government's budget, they should be compelled to table a budget of their own each year so they can build a track record and so they can com- municate to the citizens what their intentions would be and how they would govern diff erently with each year's budget and fi scal situation. It's interesting that for the NDP , they seem to be of mixed minds on LNG.

But on balance, the person who seems to be the one that will be designated to lead that for the NDP buys into the big lie of "LNG is going to save British Columbia." Again, if I was a betting man, I'd bet that we're not go- ing to get one plant or one pipeline. Th e numbers are just simply not there. We're too late in the game. But what that means is that we need an alternative strategy. We need an alternative that gives us a sense of what British Columbia's future holds with respect to our natural re- sources. Th ere are some interesting and telling aspects to this budget.

One of the things I note that is quite intriguing is that the budget projections forward are a budget pro- jection on PST. Now, when we were sold the bill of goods of HST, one of the members of the government said: "If we don't do HST, we'll see investment bleeding away, employment bleeding away, the diminution of muni- cipal and provincial taxes and the consequences there." Another said the PST is "ineffi cient and job-killing." What's interesting is — and British Columbians should pay attention to this — the three-year forecast in this budget shows none of that.

In fact, the government is out there saying we're going to have 100 million vacan- cies. Sorry — a million vacancies. I got caught up in the trillion on the LNG and all that stuff , so I'm exaggerat- ing a little. Okay. So a million potential vacancies in a PST world — that we're going to attract all of this investment to LNG in mines, etc., in a PST world. One of the problems we have is that political par- ties use economic fearmongering to justify social or tax policy and yet don't hold themselves accountable when that doesn't prove to be true. We need to stop that.

It's not fair to British Columbians to do that. In a PST world what this budget shows is that we con- tinue to create jobs, we continue to attract investment, and our economy continues to grow GDP . [1520] Th e second thing it shows that's interesting is that the government, even with increases in taxes….

Now, this is a government that has lived on lowest tax regime in the country — getting taxes down, getting regulations down — and that in advance of an election, which the polls do not indicate they win, takes a risk with their base vot- ers — conservatives, former Reformers, Liberals and the business community — by raising business taxes and corporate taxes. Y et it's not enough. Even with holding expenses as tight as possible, razor-thin, and raising the revenue, it's not enough. Th e government is still living on MSP increases, tuition and lotteries, and it's not enough. Why?

Because the real story is that, like jurisdictions everywhere, we're all living on borrowed money. The true story of Canada is hidden, and the Parliamentary Budget Offi cer has pointed this out. It's hidden in the fact that we only take the federal debt against the Canadian GDP and we say we're okay. But Canada has only one GDP and multiple layers of debt and deficits. Every province, with the exception of Saskatchewan, is posting a defi cit and adding to their debt. If you roll up the Canadian GDP , it's $1.7 trillion. If you add the provincial debts into the federal debt, it's $1.2 trillion.

Y ou need to roll it up because what the federal government does to download to the provinces impacts their debt, and their debt is relative to Canada's GDP . So if we do that — the GDP numbers — the fact that we're living on borrowed money becomes clear. Th en if you add into that the municipal infrastructure defi cit, which, as of today, in things that must be dealt with just now, is $200 billion. Th at's an accrued debt. Th at takes the debt to $1.4 billion against a $1.7 tril- lion GDP . Y ou take student debt, which is $22 billion ac- crued, about $27,000 a student.

Y ou take the household debt that the Bank of Canada governor has been warn- ing us about — the average Canadian household debt, $27,500; the average B.C. household debt, $37,200. Y ou add to that fi nancial debt, the social debt, the child pov- erty, the homelessness. Y ou add to that the ecological debt that's accruing. We saw last week the Forest Practices Board and the Auditor General saying that we have cumulative impacts on the land base that we don't even understand the implications of. Th at's the ecological debt that we are accruing and

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, February 27, 2013 13137 passing on to future generations. We are living on borrowed money — all across the board. Th e argument of balanced or not balanced is a moot point. Th e bottom line is we have an imbalance between revenue and expectations of delivery of pub- lic services. Now, it's interesting to go back to the Drummond re- port. It's the Ontario budget review process which came into this House prior to this budget. It was in the con- text of the last budget. One thing that was not reported and under-reported in the Drummond report….

Th ey were given a mandate to try and fi gure out how to fi x the Ontario budget cycle, which just goes deeper and deeper into the hole. But they were told they could not advise raising taxes. Th ey could not advise on the revenue side; they could only advise on the expense side. What Drummond did…. He said, "I can't advise you on the revenue side," but he did say: "I'm not going to talk to you about whether or not you should raise taxes." Th e advice he gave to government is that they and all govern- ments need to look at taxes or revenue relative to GDP .

Are their taxes and revenue relative to GDP coming up, just as the expenses are? What he points out is we're so myopically focused on expense-to-GDP . We hear that all the time with health. Health as a percentage of GDP is unsustainable. What Drummond points out and others have pointed out is revenue as a percentage of GDP is unsustainable. Revenue is declining as GDP goes up, and expenses are coming up. That's unsustainable. That's the problem.

Th at's called a structural defi cit, and every economy — with maybe the exception of China, although that's a question now — is living in a structural defi cit because there's an imbalance between revenue and expense. [1525] Drummond pointed out there's not much room on the expense side in Ontario. I would argue the same is the case here. Y ou have to look at the revenue side of the equation. Th is government did some of that. Th e next government has a huge problem because they've built up entitlements for fi xing some of the health care, education, etc., problems that are out there.

We need to talk about revenue and expense, and I would suggest that what we need is a conversation with British Columbians — a real conversation with British Columbians — on that. I note that my time is almost up. In closing, what I'd say is that we have a situation here where we're just shadow- boxing in front of an election. We need to stop that. We need to change that. Again, I challenge all of the MLAs to stand for something in this session. Let's together change the election date so we don't get into this shadowboxing aft er the next election.

I would also challenge the political parties to take the choke collars off their MLAs and allow MLAs to become more parliamentarians than politicians. I think that aft er this election, whoever forms gov- ernment, I wish them well because the challenges con- fronting them are going to be phenomenal. But I think British Columbians are ready for a conversation about balancing revenue with their expectations for public services. I think we can rebalance that. We can get out of struc- tural defi cit.

British Columbians need to moderate their expectations of government, but they also need to be willing to pay more if they want more. Th at's a conversa- tion that's worth having. It's a conversation that would allow us to come into this House and put real budgets forward that actually deliver good public services with the right tax balance. Hon. B. Stewart: It's a pleasure to rise today and speak in support of the 2013 balanced budget, which I know is supported by members on this side of the House. I strongly support this balanced budget's family-first agenda.

Th e budget refl ects the reality that our province has not been immune to the economic challenges of recent years. But I think it's important to recognize that despite these challenging times, which many of our members and the members opposite have spoken of, this government is still strongly committed to rebuilding a strong econ- omy, creating jobs and providing all families in British Columbia with safe communities, top-quality health care, a solid education and an exceptional standard of living. Th is budget fulfi ls the government's promise to bal- ance the budget in fi scal 2013-2014.

Th e plan contains key elements that will enable the government to move to a surplus of $197 million from a projected defi cit of $1.2 billion in fi scal 2012-13. Revenues are projected to grow by an average of 3 per- cent per year, while expenses have been contained and are expected to grow at about half that rate, resulting in surpluses, as I mentioned — $197 million in the coming year, $211 million in the following year and $416 million in the fi scal year '15-16. Prudent debt management. We've got to talk about that for a minute here.

One of the benefi ts that this govern- ment in the past 12 years has provided is literally billions of dollars in savings by making certain that they execut- ed and delivered on their expense controls and making certain that we delivered balanced budgets in the times when things were much better than they have been in the last 3½ years. What has happened is that the government has worked on its restraint program.

B.C. government ministries have freed up over a billion dollars, about half of which has been allocated in this coming year or this budget cycle to increase program funding and refundable tax credits for the government's family-fi rst initiative. Over a decade of prudent fi scal management has worked in B.C.'s favour, as I mentioned.

British Columbia Debates13138 Wednesday, February 27, 2013 I can't help but think about the record of the oppos- ition. When I look back on some of the things that…. Y ou know, eight consecutive defi cits. Th at contributed to a defi cit that this government took over in 2001. We are still paying interest.

Th e bottom line is that the govern- ment is sitting down, and it's hamstrung by the fact that the interest cost is something that doesn't go into ser- vices; it goes into interest and debt-servicing. [1530] For the member opposite that's talking about the defi - cits, I can read them out to him if he'd like to know: $2.3 billion in '91-92; in '92-93, $1.5 billion; in '93-94, $900 million; in '94-95, $230 million; in '95-96, $320 million; in '96-97, $385 million; in '97-98, $170 million; '98-99, $1 billion. Honestly, the defi cit that we are still servicing is some of that overspending.

Th at's really all that this govern- ment has tried to do. It has tried to live within its means. An integral part of prudent fi scal management is know- ing that we must fi nd ways to fi nd the revenue to pay for the services that we expect as British Columbians. Th at's why I know that the modest increases to things like the corporate income tax rate and MSP are necessary to keep our economic books balanced. Y ou know, we talk about MSP . Almost a million British Columbians either have it reduced or pay nothing for their MSP .

Th at's something that this government is re- sponsible for making certain of — that for the people that are least able to aff ord those premiums, it is not a hard- ship. So 800,000 of those British Columbians will pay nothing for their MSP premiums. I think it's also worth mentioning that the economic and revenue projections contained in this budget have re- ceived a strong endorsement from a former chief econo- mist at the Bank of Montreal, Dr. Tim O'Neill. One of the things that I mentioned briefl y a minute ago is this government's record on spending.

It brought in balanced-budget and accountability legislation to make certain that government was incentifi ed to make certain that ministries not only brought their budgets in on tar- get but, the fact is, were encouraged to deliver savings and return that back to the treasury. On the revenue side we've seen the volatility. I'll quote in a minute here about some problems that are happen- ing in a neighbouring jurisdiction — about revenue forecasts and some of the challenges they face. But Mr.

O'Neill has reviewed the budget and has concluded that it is built on sound processes and the eff ective use of pri- vate sector outlooks and incorporates prudence by adopt- ing a cautious economic forecast that refl ects the global uncertainty and risk. Now, while other jurisdictions are postponing bal- anced budgets to later years, we are in the enviable pos- ition of having a balanced budget and are in a much better place than most to manage the ongoing global volatility and uncertainty.

I mentioned about other jurisdictions, and I read to you from a recent press release put out on budget day in the province of Alberta: "'Alberta is dealing with rapidly falling resource revenues, and it means we're making some tough decisions,' said President of Treasury Board and Minister of Finance Doug Horner. 'Our gov- ernment is leading by example, with a slimmed-down cabinet, an 8 percent MLA pay cut'" — on their $156,000 that they currently get paid, slightly more than in B.C., by a third — "'and a pay freeze for MLAs.

Today we are taking action on management salaries.' "Th e management salary freeze covers opted and excluded gov- ernment employees. In addition, the province has identifi ed nearly

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0227pm-07
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0227pm 07
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	1743f29dc0cc49adb514b35389212dff7494b979

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