2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the

Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 2, Number 7

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Christina Benty

C. James

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

West End Seniors Network

S. Herbert

B.C. Seniors Games in Richmond

R. Howard

Burnaby women's soccer team at World Masters Games

K. Corrigan

Health and wellness initiatives in Kamloops

T. Lake

Solar energy development by T'Sou-ke First Nation

J. Horgan

UBC Okanagan

N. Letnick

Oral Questions

Funding for addiction services

C. James

Hon. K. Falcon

N. Simons

A. Dix

Appeal of B.C. Supreme Court ruling on election advertising legislation

L. Krog

Hon. M. de Jong

S. Simpson

Funding for arts and culture

S. Herbert

Hon. K. Krueger

N. Macdonald

Petitions

S. Fraser

R. Fleming

Routine Business

Budget Debate (continued)

K. Conroy

N. Letnick

B. Routley

Hon. K. Krueger

S. Herbert

Hon. B. Stewart

M. Elmore

R. Lee

A. Dix

Hon. C. Hansen

[ Page 499 ]

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2009

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

C. James: I have two introductions today. The first is someone who is no stranger to this House. The former MLA for Cariboo South served in a number of roles, including Minister of Forests. Would the House please make welcome Dave Zirnhelt, who's here with us today.

Tributes

christina benty

C. James: Next, Golden, B.C., had a by-election this past weekend. On all our behalf, I'd like to congratulate the new mayor of Golden, Christina Benty, who's the first woman mayor of Golden. As a longtime resident and a past city councillor, Mayor Benty's work is well recognized in the community. I know she'll serve her constituents very well. I know we all wish her well, and I also know that the late mayor, Aman Virk, and the work he did will always have a place around their table and in the community of Golden. On all our behalf, congratulations.

Introductions by Members

H. Bloy: It's my pleasure to introduce some people in the House today that, with the Minister for Small Business, Technology and Economic Development, we had the opportunity of hosting at lunchtime. It's a group of young people from Port Moody–Coquitlam area, in a program called A Chance to Choose.

What it is, is they get a chance to learn new skills so that they can go back out there in the workplace. This program has been running for about six or seven years, and I can say that I've met many incredible young people from this program over the years. I would like to introduce them to the House. We have Sasha Anlovich, Jaime Balazs, Adam Boyd, Regina Challoner, Chelsea Foley, Aaron Mayday, Jed McAlister, Kenneth Homer, Corrina Kallstrom, Ashlee Lucas, Pavel Kokar, Polina Kokar.

They are the ones that are here as part of the program. But the program has been led from day one and there is great support for these young people from Evelyn Humphries, Thomas Tam and Bob Lewis, and we have Susannah Kloegman and Aman Tatla. If the House would please make them welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Member for the Cowichan Valley.

B. Routley: Thank you, Brother Speaker — hon. Speaker.

Interjections.

B. Routley: Eighteen years as a union representative, you all look like brothers and sisters to me. We kind of fight the same too.

Anyway, it's an honour and a privilege to have a group of my family here today. My sister Willa Routley is with us; Ken and Rev. Eunice Gaglardi — by the way, Ken is the son of Phil Gaglardi, who used to grace this chamber for many, many years; Rev. Wayne and Marilyn Myrie; Beryl and Fred Heath; Gordon and Amber Routley; and Donald and Daisy Routley. Please join with me in welcoming these family members.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Juan de Fuca.

J. Horgan: Thank you, Brother Speaker. Would the House please….

Mr. Speaker: I might make you withdraw that.

J. Horgan: I withdraw it, hon. Speaker. I withdraw it. Not the first time I've withdrawn, hon. Speaker, and probably not the last.

Hon. Speaker, Members of the assembly, I'd like you to welcome three constituents of mine who are here today to raise awareness about Lyme disease: David Bottles; Christine Powell; and their daughter Nicole Bottles, who has been struggling with the disease for the past 16 months. It's been debilitating for her and for their family. They were here today in the precincts. Would the House please make them welcome and give them good wishes for the future.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

WEST END SENIORS NETWORK

I rise today to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the West End Seniors Network. The network was born of a field study by undergrads from UBC's School of Social Work into the needs of my area's seniors. In 1979 a meeting to examine their findings occurred with the Ministry of Human Resources, Vancouver Health and West End seniors.

Originally funded by a federal grant, an information and referral centre was opened in 1982, a year after I was born. Three decades later the network now has over 700 members, eight wonderful staff and over 200 active volunteers contributing over 40,000 volunteer hours a year.

[1340]

[ Page 500 ]

They run a thrift store and an information and referral centre in Denman Place Mall. Their offices are in the historic Barclay Manor, where they work cooperatively with the West End Community Centre to provide free and low-cost programs designed to promote lifelong learning and increasing friendships among the West End seniors.

Some of the incredible programs offered by the network include the Happy Hookers. That's right — the Happy Hookers of the West End. Not quite what you might think. But they're a craft group, a group that creates and sells crafts to raise money for local seniors programs and seniors homes.

The network also offers popular seniors health and wellness programs, computer classes that help my constituents learn and brush up on their computer skills.

Being a senior in the West End, I'm told, can be challenging with some of the highest living expenses in Canada, especially when you live on a fixed income. We've heard many sad stories about seniors being targeted for eviction. The West End Seniors Network stands with them and helps them speak out for themselves.

Neighbours helping neighbours. That's always been what the West End Seniors Network is about. It's what the West End is all about. The members of the West End Seniors Network represent some of the best in my community.

It's my honour to invite all members of this House to join me in congratulating the incredible staff and the hundreds of volunteers of the West End Seniors Network on their 30th anniversary. Happy birthday, West End seniors, for your 30-years-young birthday. May there be many more.

B.C. SENIORS GAMES IN RICHMOND

R. Howard: Just last evening I had the opportunity to attend the 2009 B.C. Seniors Games in Richmond and declare the games officially open.

These games, running from Wednesday through closing ceremonies on Saturday, are expected to be the most successful ever with more than 4,000 participants. The B.C. Seniors Games not only show that Richmond is ready to host the world at the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games; they also show the vibrancy of our community, the dedication of our volunteers and are yet another example of strong partnerships with this government and my city.

Those of us who live in Richmond are very proud of our city, proud of our diversity, the many outstanding attractions our city has to offer and the warmth of our people. Perhaps it is no surprise that we are so eager to roll out the welcome mat and help others discover all that Richmond has to offer.

It certainly explains why more than 1,200 Richmond residents have volunteered to help make these B.C. Seniors Games the best ever, in many cases working more than 18 months towards this goal.

The leadership behind this great effort has been provided by residents of Richmond, and I would like to mention just a few: Jim LeMonde, president of the 2009 Richmond B.C. Seniors Games; Roger Barnes, vice-president; Evelyn Lau, volunteer director; Roy Ostergo; Donna Marsland; and many others. I ask the House to join me in congratulating all those who have worked so hard to make the 2009 B.C. Seniors Games a great success.

BURNABY WOMEN'S SOCCER TEAM

AT WORLD MASTERS GAMES

K. Corrigan: Well, apparently, we're on a seniors theme. Lenore Jackson is a retired elementary school teacher from Burnaby. She and 16 teammates are heading off in a couple of weeks to participate in the 2009 World Masters Games in Sydney, Australia.

This soccer team of 45-year-old-plus women are made up of participants from Burnaby's 30-something women's soccer league which Lenore describes as a varied and vibrant group. The emphasis of the World Masters Games is participation. It's not just for elite athletes. That's also the spirit of the Burnaby 30-something women's soccer league.

This league started with just one team 15 years ago and has grown to ten teams. It's made up of a variety of women of varying skill levels from all walks of life, some who just wanted to play soccer after being soccer moms, others who came back to the sport after years and others who just wanted to learn the game.

Lenore says it's a wonderful support group — that they enjoy fun, fitness and friendship together. So it really is a great example of what amateur sport in Burnaby and across this province is and should be all about. Although the focus is participation, the team has also been training hard and fundraising for two years. So I know they'll be a force to be reckoned with in Australia.

I asked Lenore what the name of the team is and she said: "The Rocks." I said, "Oh, as in Burnaby Rocks," and she hesitated and said: "No, it's Vancouver Rocks." I said, "But you're a team from Burnaby," and she said: "Well, we talked long and hard about it but decided to call our team Vancouver Rocks in order to promote the Olympic spirit in Sydney, in recognition of the fact that Vancouver is a host city next year."

[1345]

Again, Vancouver gets all the credit, but I guess it's for a good reason this time. I hope you'll join me in recognizing this great example of the spirit of amateur sport and wish the Burnaby-based Vancouver Rocks 45-plus soccer team the best of luck for a spirited but friendly competition in Sydney.

[ Page 501 ]

HEALTH AND WELLNESS INITIATIVES

IN KAMLOOPS

T. Lake: British Columbia really is the healthiest jurisdiction in all of Canada, and Kamloops is a community that is pioneering many of our achievements in health and wellness. This is a community that takes pride in its status as Canada's tournament capital and, in partnership with this government, has invested in athletic facilities and infrastructure like the Tournament Capital Centre.

This investment has paid off, promoting active lifestyles and fostering elite athletes like Olympians Dylan Armstrong and Sultana Frizell and also by hosting the B.C. boys double-A high school basketball championships. Higher participation in sports is one thing, but a huge benefit is improved community health.

In a partnership with Interior Health and the city of Kamloops, the Kamloops health improvement network helps prevent illness and restore health through a combination of exercise, education and social support. It provides programs for individuals and families to develop the necessary skills for health, wellness and the self-management of chronic conditions.

One of the network's major initiatives is the VIP or vascular improvement program, which brings together a team of dedicated health care professionals to find ways to manage cardiovascular health problems for both patients and their families. Cardiovascular problems are a leading cause of chronic disease in Canada, and they cost the health care system billions of dollars each year. Programs like the VIP can add years of quality life by keeping patients healthy following their acute care management.

After a referral from a family physician, the combination of nurses, dieticians and exercise specialists work with patients to develop an action plan for reducing the risk of heart attack, stroke and diabetes as well as increasing the skills and education for overall awareness of health.

I want to acknowledge this great partnership, the first of its sort in the province, and supported by the city of Kamloops parks and recreation and Interior Health and key people like Clint Anderson and Jennifer Edgecombe from the city of Kamloops, who have worked so hard to develop this innovative vascular improvement program.

SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT

BY T'Sou-ke First NATION

J. Horgan: I take great privilege and pleasure rising in the House today to share with members an inspiring story of the T'Sou-ke Nation here in Sooke on southern Vancouver Island, one of the rural communities in my constituency of Juan de Fuca. It's on the wild west coast and is known for its great fishing, challenging hiking trails and very stormy weather — and the odd boisterous MLA as well.

Sooke is home to the 220-member T'Sou-ke Nation, which under the leadership of Chief Gordie Planes is quickly becoming a provincial leader in the area of solar energy. Recognizing the opportunity to be on the cutting edge of state-of-the-art technology, the T'Sou-ke Nation developed a plan, secured funding and is now the largest photovoltaic system operating here in British Columbia.

I had the opportunity, along with the Minister of Aboriginal Relations, to be the guest of the T'Sou-ke Nation this past summer, where I saw banks of solar panels decorated with local native art, designs on the roofs of the band office, the canoe shed, the fisheries building, and 37 of the homes in the reserve. Almost all of the remaining residents on the waiting list are ready to go, and the aim is to have all 86 houses using photovoltaic energy in the very near future.

Energy consumption has dropped by 30 percent over the past six months, and the B.C. Hydro metres on the reserve are now spinning counter-clockwise, meaning that clean, surplus power is being returned to the electrical grid. Another benefit, of course, of this program has been training and certification for nine band members to be solar panel installers.

Chief Planes is excited about the venture and recently hosted a conference where the minister and I were there to share with him knowledge about both first nations and non–first nations delegates about the hope of creating similar projects in rural communities across Vancouver Island and throughout British Columbia. The Chief, at that time, compared the gathering to a traditional potlatch, where information and experience is shared for the benefit of everyone.

The T'Sou-ke Nation is finding a new way to connect to the land and to ensure that their people protect traditional ways of life while using new technologies to meet the demands of modern society, a way that is respectful, supports conservation and treads lightly. Would the House please congratulate Chief Planes and the T'Sou-ke Nation for this innovative program.

UBC OKANAGAN

N. Letnick: It's the beginning of a new academic year across the province. As students head back to their studies, I wanted to take this opportunity as an educator to recognize the beginning of the fifth year of the University of British Columbia in the Okanagan.

[1350]

In 2005 our government created this autonomous and research-focused campus of UBC for the Okanagan. UBCO, as we affectionately call it, embarked on an ambitious course, creating a full-range facility for advanced education for Okanagan students.

[ Page 502 ]

UBCO has since been expanding and developing their programs, adding the new facilities of engineering and management, graduate studies, and anticipating the arrival of the faculty of medicine in 2011. The new facilities now have full curriculum and students in all four years of study. Last June more than 750 students graduated, including UBC Okanagan's first doctoral candidate. This coming academic year more than 6,000 students have enrolled in various programs, including a record 375 graduate students.

I would like to note, in particular, the recent opening of the new University Centre. This spectacular building, energy efficient and replete with B.C. wood products, provides a tremendous facility to meet students' needs from registration to dining.

UBCO is committed to creating a learning environment in which students from across B.C. and beyond can reach their full potential. Students, faculty and staff are working together with the community to ensure that the campus is not isolated from the community but an integral part of it and, in turn, the Okanagan has shown tremendous support for this institution.

I am tremendously pleased to see our Okanagan version of UBC begin its new calendar year and wish faculty, staff and students well as they come together to build a first class institution of advanced education in the Okanagan and British Columbia.

Oral Questions

FUNDING FOR ADDICTION SERVICES

C. James: This week three agencies providing critical addiction support programs on the North Shore were served with termination notices. West Coast Alternatives, Sea to Sky Community Services and North Shore Community Services will all lose their programs. These cuts are going to do huge damage to some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

My question is to the Minister of Health. Why are the B.C. Liberals making people with addictions pay for this government's budget deception?

Hon. K. Falcon: It's important for the member to know that, in spite of the fact that we are facing one of the most challenging economic environments we've seen in a generation in British Columbia, we have increased the budget in the Ministry of Health by almost 20 percent over the next three years — almost 20 percent. That means $2.4 billion additional dollars over the next three years in operating money.

Having said that, I have been very upfront with the fact that the health authorities wanted even more, and we have asked them, in light of the fact that we are facing the most difficult, challenging economic environment in a generation, to manage 3 to 3½ percent of their costs. That's what they are doing. They are focusing dollars on health services to make sure we are helping people where they need it, when they need it.

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

C. James: Perhaps the minister would like to tell that to the people on the North Shore with addictions who are getting no services when these three programs shut down — no services.

These agencies are best at what they do. There's very clear evidence that community-based organizations save money and improve outcomes. In fact, West Coast Alternatives serves 250 clients at any given time. They have a four-month wait-list for services. Their executive director recently won an award for outstanding service. They have an incredibly important function in the community, but their programs are all being dismantled because of this government's incompetence.

Again to the minister: doesn't he realize that cutting these community-based supports is shortsighted and will leave children and families struggling and our system in crisis?

Hon. K. Falcon: The fact of the matter is that the Leader of the Opposition is wrong. We have actually increased funding for community addiction beds by 150 percent since 2003, from 874…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1355]

Hon. K. Falcon: …beds in 2001 to over 2,100 today. And we opened up what is becoming increasingly an acclaimed facility, the 100-bed Burnaby Centre for Mental Health and Addictions. We continue to invest in record levels for mental health and addictions in the province of British Columbia.

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

C. James: West Coast Alternatives, Sea to Sky Community Services, North Shore Community Services — all closing down, all losing their funding, because of this government's decision. The minister doesn't get it. Addiction services are in crisis in this province.

At a time when there's a shortage, we're seeing these effective community programs shut down. At a time when there's a shortage, what does this government do? They cut addiction services for adults, for youth, programs in schools, programs in communities — the very things that this Premier pledged he'd support.

[ Page 503 ]

My question is to the Premier. How does slashing addiction services provide support for the most vulnerable in British Columbia?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, this is a little hard to take from the leader of a party that promised a mental health care plan that didn't have a dollar in it. A little hard to take, Mr. Speaker.

What we have done is we have increased the number…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: …of community addiction beds by 150 percent. That is an increase. Health authorities are looking to make sure that every dollar they spend is going towards direct care, direct care in beds for patients to ensure they're getting the best possible care in the province of British Columbia.

N. Simons: One of these agencies is the Sea to Sky Community Services, which has been providing effective preventative programs to the community for years. These cuts will actually have an impact on not just the individuals who receive the services but their families who are concerned about them.

So to the Minister of Health: how can he explain how he's cutting these programs so severely when the exact opposite was promised to these people before the election?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm very proud of the fact that this is a government that has put enormous additional resources into mental health and addictions. One of the things we have tried to do is make sure that we can improve and increase the number of beds available for those that are suffering through mental health and addictions. That is why we have increased the number of beds, as I said, by 150 percent. That is why we opened the Burnaby Centre for Mental Health and Addictions, which is receiving rave reviews right across the province of British Columbia.

We will continue to increase the budget for mental health and addictions every year that we continue to help in this important problem.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

N. Simons: I think the minister's response illustrates his lack of understanding that if you actually put money into the prevention services, which is what we're talking about today, you wouldn't be putting as much into those residential beds that this minister is talking about.

I doubt there's anyone in British Columbia who thinks that cutting a community-based service by $500,000 a year, who have a client caseload over a hundred, with a waiting list of 80…. Just cutting that isn't going to have an impact on the community? It defies belief, and I don't think anyone in this province is believing this minister's answers today.

My question today is not about the residential care beds. It's about the programs in the communities that provide services to people with mental health and addictions problems and their families, who are going to worry very much about the cuts to the programs.

So will the minister explain to the people in the Sea to Sky corridor how they're going to be able to manage without these important, vital programs?

[1400]

Hon. K. Falcon: Part of what the health authorities are going to do is make sure that the dollars they are investing are going towards services that provide the best possible benefit for families and those that are dealing with mental health issues.

You know, I can imagine…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: …that in this House, we're probably going to have to get used to the NDP trying to figure out ways to call a $2.4 billion increase a cut. They are going to try and find every possible way to look at a budget that has gone up at record levels and try and call it a cut.

Apparently, nothing in the NDP world can ever change. No program can ever change; nothing should ever change. I am proud of the record of this government investing record amounts of dollars in mental health and addictions when they voted against every single one of those increases.

A. Dix: Well, the Minister of Health is doing precisely now what he was doing all summer — that is, trying to justify cuts to community services, cuts done with the minimum possible notice and without consultation. In this case, we're asking about three specific programs — $1.5 million in addiction services on the North Shore alone.

Can the minister explain why this is good for addiction services on the North Shore? Can he justify in any way, other than rhetoric, what his specific decision is in this case?

Hon. K. Falcon: One of the things that we are finding, as we do more research and investment into mental health and addictions, is that they're often concurrent disorders, both mental health and addictions.

What Vancouver Coastal is doing is repatriating some contracts that were providing mental health advice and support, bringing them back to Coastal Health and providing the exact same services, but recognizing that in

[ Page 504 ]

many cases they're concurrent disorders, and it is better delivered through Coastal Health. They will continue to receive services to deal with the fact that many of them have concurrent disorders.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: These are programs that were recognized recently, not just by the community but by the Ministry of Health itself, to be effective at dealing with this exact point. What he's doing is cutting services in the community, increasing wait times for addictions and not replacing those services. These are budget-related decisions.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: The minister says: "Oh, there are no cuts in health care." They're cutting surgeries. They're cutting MRIs. They're cutting seniors programs, and they're cutting programs in the community for addictions. That's what they're doing. How can the minister justify an award-winning program like West Coast Alternatives seeing its funding cut on a few months' notice?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well here you have it. The member for Vancouver-Kingsway is once again fearmongering, once again trying to suggest, Mr. Speaker….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, I can wait.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: Once again the member is fearmongering. I just explained to the member that what Vancouver Coastal is doing is repatriating certain contracts and providing the exact same service but recognizing that many of these individuals have concurrent disorders. Best practices suggest they need to receive support and advice that recognizes they have concurrent disorders. So for those….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Just a minute. If the members would listen, they might actually hear an answer here.

Every one of those clients, every one of those clients that were receiving one-to-one counselling through West Coast Alternatives will continue to receive one-on-one counselling through Vancouver Coastal.

[1405]

APPEAL OF B.C. SUPREME COURT RULING

ON ELECTION ADVERTISING LEGISLATION

L. Krog: Remarkably, in the midst of the worst economic crisis we've seen in this province in decades, this government is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars appealing the gag law. We've got cuts to legal aid, we've got cuts to autism funding for children, and we're even cutting $130,000 out of sports funding for kids. So I want to hear from this Attorney General today how he justifies this expense, this waste of taxpayers' money, in the midst of this economic crisis when British Columbians are really suffering.

Hon. M. de Jong: I actually think the principles that are at stake here are very important.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: I think the notion of asking the highest court in the province to render an opinion on the degree to which there should be regulation in a situation in which we have a set election date — by the way, the first province to have a set election date, the first province to eliminate the kind of political manipulation that used to characterize the holding of elections….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Attorney, just take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: I think that not only is it legitimate to ask the highest court in the province to render an opinion on the regulation that should or should not be in place around that set election date, but I'm glad we're doing it, and we're doing the right thing.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: Oh, it's a first, all right. It's the first law of its kind anywhere in a democracy in the western world. It stinks, and the public knows it. Justice Cole stated — and he had it right: "The right to speak out against or for the government is vital for the health of any democracy." What this bill did is restrict the right of free speech in the province of British Columbia, and no one accepted it except that government on that side of the House.

[ Page 505 ]

You don't have to be a Lady Byng winner to recognize a sore loser, and that's what we're talking about here today. Why won't this Attorney General stand up in this House today and, instead of wasting money on an esoteric legal point which has already been decided by a qualified judge in the Supreme Court, put the money back where it belongs — to maybe funding autistic children?

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm trying to think back to that Latin term we learned in law school, which I think accurately describes the nature of the member's submission. What is it again? Oh yeah — crapola. That was it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: The hon. member may describe these principles as esoteric legal points. I actually think asking a court to consider the degree to which there should be regulation covering the period immediately prior to a set election date, regulating the nature of the….

The Supreme Court of Canada, the member already knows, has said that not only is it advisable or permissible to do that during a writ period; it is probably advisable. The member can dismiss that as being insignificant or esoteric. We think, on this side of the House, the principles are worth defending, and they are worth asking the Court of Appeal about. That's why we've done it.

[1410]

S. Simpson: Hon. Speaker, the Attorney General seems to be saying: "Give me another crack at seeing if I can muzzle free speech, maybe during the budget period heading up to 2013, like I tried to do during this past election."

This is disregard for British Columbians' priorities, and it's a total disregard for common sense. This government has said that they're cutting a billion and a half dollars in what they call discretionary spending, and at the same time they're prepared to spend tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars on a discredited gag law.

Will the minister tell British Columbians where the priority is to do this when kids, families and communities are facing millions of dollars in cuts?

Hon. M. de Jong: The priority, as it has always been, is to ensure that an election law and election regulations are in place, which properly balance the fundamental right that all British Columbians and citizens have to participate in that process against the possibility that agencies or deep-pocketed groups might come forward and try to overwhelm their voice.

If the members and the party opposite's position is that it should be a free-for-all, let him have the courage to stand up, make that point, and call for the elimination of regulations during the writ period and any period prior to a campaign with a set election date. I'll be very interested to hear that from the member.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: If the minister would like to bring in a new law around elections, he could start with one that says the government has to tell the truth before the election.

The courts rightly threw this out. It was a discredited law. They said it didn't make sense. They said it would have breached the free speech during the period of the budget and the throne speech, among other things — not just the election period. They threw it out, and they threw it out for good reason. But this Attorney General is prepared to go back and try to create a law that will muzzle British Columbians again, because that's how this government works.

Hon. Speaker, spend the money. Spend the money on kids, on families and communities and not on trying to defend a discredited law. Will the minister withdraw this case today?

Hon. M. de Jong: I will repeat again for the benefit of the member who hasn't heard, but I dare say he is not interested in hearing either the rationale or the argument for asking….

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. M. de Jong: I don't know why the members ask the questions when it is abundantly clear they are not interested in hearing an answer.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: The member makes it abundantly clear by his question and submission that he believes it is inappropriate for the Court of Appeal of the province of British Columbia to render an opinion on something as important as the election laws that govern elections in this province. I disagree fundamentally with that point of view.

If I have been unclear about that, let me say it again. I believe it is appropriate to ask the highest court in British Columbia to render an opinion on something as important as the election laws that govern elections in British Columbia.

[ Page 506 ]

FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE

S. Herbert: Yesterday the Minister of Culture and the Arts said: "We've actually put more money into arts grants this year than we did last year." He went on to tell the columnist to check his facts and tell the truth instead of a lot of hysterical talk.

[1415]

Can the minister tell me how eliminating nearly 50 percent of the investment this year through gaming and planning on cutting 90 percent next year is more money? Or is it actually the B.C. Liberals who are not telling the truth and engaging in hysterical talk?

Hon. K. Krueger: This government's commitment to the arts is abundantly clear and….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat, Minister.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: For example, in 2008 in a single grant of $150 million, which put that money in a cultural legacy fund under the care of the B.C. Arts Council…. We provided more funding on that one occasion — triple the funding that the NDP provided in their last four years as government in the '90s.

We have had to make tough choices this year. Everyone knows why, and that is the dramatic reduction in revenues. Nevertheless, we have flowed a million dollars more to the B.C. Arts Council than we did last year. In fact, a total of almost $26 million is flowing from the province to arts organizations this year.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Herbert: I think we can see, based on this government's remarks, that the minister says there are no cuts. But then we see that we go from $47.8 million down to $26 million, according to the minister. That sounds like a 50 percent cut to me.

The Minister of Culture and the Arts also said this summer that the arts community wasn't…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

S. Herbert: …"lighting their hair on fire" over the cuts to the arts, when they actually had been angrily protesting for months. Now he also says there are no cuts to arts and culture investment, when this budget clearly shows a 50 percent cut this year and a 90 percent cut next year.

So if the minister doesn't believe artists are lighting their hair on fire over these cuts, would it be more truthful to say that the minister's pants are on fire when he claims arts funding isn't being massively cut?

Hon. K. Krueger: The largest amount that the NDP government ever flowed to the B.C. Arts Council was $14.8 million.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: The largest amount that the NDP ever flowed in a budget year to the B.C. Arts Council was $14.8 million. Since we've been government, the B.C. Liberal government has flowed $124 million to the B.C. Arts Council. That's in addition to the $150 million cultural legacy fund and $25 million in a renaissance fund to encourage arts groups to form their own foundations with matching money. They did that, and the result is $55 million in funds that arts groups have for permanent endowments for themselves — $55 million.

N. Macdonald: Kim Cattrall, an award-winning B.C. actor, recently spoke out against the B.C. Liberals' cuts to arts and culture, saying that she likely would not have made it to where she is in her career if it had not been for government investment in the arts.

Kim Cattrall said it's a cut. The minister says she doesn't know what she's talking about. But when you look at the minister's own documents, it goes from 2008-09 at $47 million; pre-election, it's $42 million; 2009, after the election, it's $23 million; next year it's less than $4 million.

Will the minister admit that he is wrong about the cuts and that Kim Cattrall is absolutely right?

[1420]

Hon. K. Krueger: I can tell the member and his caucus that the arts groups say to me that it is galling to them to hear the NDP challenge our government with its vastly superior record of funding the arts and culture communities — a $150 million cultural fund for BC150, a $25 million renaissance fund, $124 million in grants since we've been government.

The B.C. Liberals are delivering far better funding to the arts community during a worldwide recession than the NDP did during a North American economic boom, and it is absolutely preposterous for them to speak this way.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[ Page 507 ]

N. Macdonald: You must be kidding. The documents are right here — the documents that the minister signs off on. It goes from $47 million to $42 million pre-election. After the election it's $23 million, next year it's $4 million, and the minister stands up and tries to convince anybody that that's accurate. It's not.

Sarah McLachlan calls the B.C. government cuts — cuts — a tragedy. It's not just Kim Cattrall. It's Douglas Coupland, Brian Jungen. They all are speaking out against the government. These are cuts.

How does the minister, supposedly of culture and the arts, justify a 90 percent cut to arts funding?

Hon. K. Krueger: During the toughest economic times that we have seen in our lifetime, we were able this year to flow $26 million to arts and culture. The arts community expresses…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Krueger: …appreciation for our ability to fund them over the eight-plus years that we've been government, and we'll put our record up against the NDP's any day of the week.

[End of question period.]

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

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

S. Fraser: I have petitions signed by over 600 residents of Vancouver Island and commuters to Vancouver Island supporting local airline K.D. Air, which faces extreme hardship due to unreasonable Olympic security measures.

R. Fleming: I present a petition to the House signed by 120 citizens of Salmon Valley, Silver Creek and Yankee Flats, all constituents of Shuswap, that oppose, due to health concerns, a proposed animal waste composting facility in their watershed.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, continued debate on the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

K. Conroy: I believe I have a few minutes left to finish the response that I started this morning. I was just about to start talking about the environment and the cuts to the Ministry of Environment.

This caused a ripple of concerns throughout our region. The one cut that was actually announced during the election — the one cut, I say — was the laying off of park rangers in the province. It had a direct effect in our beautiful parks.

[1425]

[L. Reid in the chair]

In fact, the ranger who had worked in the Valhalla Park area was gone after 20 years of commitment to the area. It wasn't just a job; it was a life's passion. He did an amazing job of ensuring that the park was kept in the pristine condition it should be. The Valhalla Society, the internationally recognized organization that has kept environmental issues front and centre in our province and region, supported me in this election.

They expressed their anger at the damage this government was inflicting on the environment, and that was before the cuts announced in this budget. Did we have some differences? Sure, we did. But we all agreed that for the sake of the environmental health of our province, we needed to work together to ensure there is a healthy planet we can pass on to our children and grandchildren. I was humbled by that support and will work in every way possible to ensure that our collective efforts are not forgotten.

We are actively speaking out against the cuts to the on-the-ground environmental protection positions and the increase of money for executive services in the ministry, by over 60 percent, to pay for a new political position created for a B.C. Liberal MLA. Do we really need a Minister of State for Climate Action and all the support that goes with that, when the minister of state does not even know when we need to have actions in place by?

What does that say to the people actually working out there on the ground, doing the actual work to protect our environment? What does that say to them? That's where that money should be going.

I think the answer is easy and just another example of political will gone wrong. Do we care for our environment and for our children's future? Or do we just give lip service and make sure one of the Liberal MLAs gets a bigger office, a raise and staff, which will do little to ensure climate change is really on the agenda?

I understand that the member for Boundary-Similkameen actually sits on a government environmental committee. I do hope this means he will actually stand with his constituents of Christina Lake and that area and strongly oppose a toxic waste dump that the Aquilini family would like to build in Christina Lake, one of the most pristine lakes in our province — a facility that would have far-reaching environmental effects for the area and for the entire region for years to come.

[ Page 508 ]

He also talked glowingly about the work of the Boundary Woodlot Association, a group I worked with when I was MLA for that region. They are an amazing group who truly believe in good stewardship and managed forests for a sustainable future. They have been asking for this government to recognize the work they do and to release some of the woodlots in their area to members of their association. This would create not only stability for the individual woodlot owners but stability for the future of forestry in the area.

I actually look forward to working with the new member to ensure these issues are addressed in a positive manner for the people of the Boundary country. There are, of course, many more issues I have with this budget and how it affects the constituency of Kootenay West.

However, there is one that truly bothers us in the greater Trail area. The people in our area do actually support the concept of the Olympics. We are a big supporter of sports in our region and have had Olympians come from our area. However, never did we think that our area would actually be penalized directly due to the Olympics.

And how is that? Well, our local airport, supported by the regional district of Kootenay Boundary, the municipalities, the people in the area…. They have all been told that that airport will have to be closed because there isn't any security. Now, other airports are in the same position, and do they have to close? No. There are very few airports in the province that will actually have to close during the Olympics.

Why? Because VANOC and the federal government, not the provincial government, has come up with ways of supporting those airports. Are they supporting the airport in Trail? No. Why? This government has no initiative, no support to ensure that the people of that area get to keep their airport open. It's wrong.

Again, I have to repeat that when half a million dollars is spent on a couple of hours for a party for the Premier and we have an airport that's going to get shut down for six weeks…. For six weeks people will not be able to utilize that airport. That will hurt the community and hurt the economy of the region.

It's a matter of priorities. I think these priorities are just screwed. Skewed.

Pardon me, Madam Speaker. I withdraw. Skewed.

[1430]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

K. Conroy: It's close — skewed.

Although I do want to share a wee anecdote with the group. My husband, Ed, and I have a farm. For a retirement gift, we actually delivered a load of cow manure to Corky Evans and his partner, Helen. Corky is now engaging in farming. It was a wonderful retirement gift for him. He was very happy with his load of cow manure, and he said that it was the best load of b.s. he ever got from a politician. He said it's not like the stuff — or should I say the crapola — coming from the government to this day.

So I want to congratulate Corky for his hindsight in acknowledging what, obviously, the minister has acknowledged.

Deputy Speaker: Recognizing the member for Kelowna–Lake Country. [Applause.]

N. Letnick: Thank you to my colleagues for the rousing sound of applause.

I was asked to prepare a speech in response to the budget not too long ago, so if you don't mind, I'm going to do a little bit of notes and a little bit of winging it just to get the few ideas off my chest.

An Hon. Member: We're all ears.

N. Letnick: Oh, are you all ears?

Well, the first question is one of integrity. As you know, Madam Speaker, I'm new to this to chamber. But for the life of me, I just can't understand why the opposition keeps harping on the issue of integrity. I look back on all of the things that the NDP have done over the years as politicians, the hard decisions that they had to make. In the '90s when they were in power, they increased funding to health care in the late '90s by zero percent a year for five years straight. Then, they made difficult decisions.

To say integrity…. To call us here, that we lack integrity, I think is going back onto themselves a little bit. I would just like to say that the more they challenge the integrity of my good colleagues — good colleagues like the member for Shuswap or the member for Kelowna-Mission or the member for Westside-Kelowna — it just comes right back on all of the members of this House. Quite frankly, I did not go into political life to be lumped into the kind of people that they're talking about.

I think all of the members on both sides of this House go into this job for the right reasons. I wish that the people on the other side of the House would move on to a different topic, be opposition, hold us accountable for the decisions that we make and make sure that the esteem of the people in this House is kept high so that our children have something to aspire to.

But underlining all of that, there is obviously a difference in philosophy between the members of the NDP and the members of the B.C. Liberals. If there wasn't, we would all be B.C. Liberals — right?

We all want to do what's good for our province. We all want to do what's good for individuals, for people that are feeling the crunch of tough economic times. We all

[ Page 509 ]

want to provide a lot of grants. We all want to make sure that those who fall between the cracks....

People in my riding, for example. There are a lot of people there who would like to have better homing, people that are in transitional homes who are looking forward to another transitional home that actually I'll be helping to announce tomorrow — with the aid of Air Canada to get back to Kelowna.

There are all kinds of opportunities. We all want to do it, but at the end of the day, there's just so much money. No matter where we spend that money, wherever we invest that money, and whoever we invest the money with, the opposition will always find a reason, a person, a business, an issue where we didn't spend enough. I respect that. That's their job, but our job on the government side is to make those tough decisions, to make those choices.

Do we spend a lot of money now that later we have to pay back? Or do we maybe cut back a little bit on our spending — even more than we were doing before, but still cut back a little bit — and then save some of the hardship from future generations so they don't have to pay our bills back today? I think our particular approach to this is the farsighted one, the appropriate one, the responsible one. And just to come out in opposition and say, "Hey, let's spend more money on all these things," and to not have to come through and provide the funds to do so out of our current pocket and force future generations to pay for it, I think, is the irresponsible way of doing it.

[1435]

So every time that somebody in the opposition stands up and says, "Hey, we need to spend more money on this and that," I want to also hear where you would cut back. If you don't want to tell me where they would cut back, then at least be honest….

Interjection.

N. Letnick: I'll take that back.

At least be clear as to how long the deficits that they're proposing to have will go on for. I don't want my children, who are in their early 20s, to have to pay off the debts that I incur today for taking care of my mom or my other siblings that maybe are in health care.

Households, businesses, governments, during these tough economic times, all have to watch what they're spending. You know, I have an organization in my area called Campion Boats, and when times were good, Campion Boats had hundreds of employees. Now, with the economy the way it is, they've decided to cut back. But they're still building boats.

They're probably the only manufacturer of fibreglass-hull boats in the country, right in my riding, and they're hanging on. They're doing everything they can to hang on so that when the economy turns around, they're going to be the only ones, and therefore, they're going to have a competitive advantage over the rest of the country and over a lot of part of the world.

That is what we need to do as a government. We need to make sure that every penny that we invest, every penny that we put into infrastructure, into services, allows us to position ourselves as a government better, as a province better, so that when the economy turns around, and it sounds like it'll be turning around soon, we are there to compete — compete internationally, not only nationally.

I think we are making the right decisions; I know we're making the right decisions. People like Brock Elliott at Campion Boats says that we are making the right decisions. I think we have to continue to take the far look and make sure as we proceed with this budget, we do so with integrity and understanding that whatever we spend now, we have to pay back at some point.

Now, as I sat in the Legislature on September 1, keenly listening to our Finance Minister deliver his speech, I was taking some notes, thinking: "How does this work for the people back home? What are they going get from this budget speech?" I took down ten points I'd like to share with you at this point.

Point No. 1: hundreds of millions of dollars invested in youth program expansions at Okanagan College. I talked about that today — at UBCO and Okanagan College, looking at new buildings, looking at more students coming to Okanagan College. As you know, when we have a downturn in the economy, that's usually a signal for young people to go back to school, for people who are in businesses or in jobs who might look for training so that they can have an opportunity, as well, to move back into a better job once the economy turns around. They come back to school. So we've seen enrolments at Okanagan College and UBC Okanagan go up.

This government, through this budget, has shown commitment to those two institutions and institutions throughout this province, providing more funds for post-secondary education.

Over $430 million for Kelowna General Hospital and Vernon Jubilee Hospital. Now, Vernon Jubilee isn't in my riding. However, the two hospitals provide very good care for people from the whole central region, including down into the south, and we are looking very gleefully at the expansions that are happening at both. We're going to see a new wing of the Kelowna General Hospital that's going to be providing opportunities for our young people to learn how to be physicians right at home, and of course, that will help to maintain those people in the Okanagan area in the future.

We're also hoping that as we move forward with this, not only will we be able to provide stents for heart ailments in the near future but also, in time, we're going to be able to find a way of doing full cardiac surgery at

[ Page 510 ]

Kelowna General Hospital. That's only because this government has taken the right measures over the last eight years, now 8½, to make sure we have a strong economy.

Without a strong economy, we can't spend any money on anything. We have to make sure that we continue to reinvest in that economy, and that's what I saw as one of the major things out of this budget.

Our communities are also benefiting from Highway 97 and Highway 33 expansions. Just in the next week or so, we're going to be seeing the sixth lane of Highway 97 go through Kelowna. As anybody who's ever travelled through Kelowna knows, Highway 97 gets pretty congested at certain times of the day going through Kelowna, so the sixth lane will be an added feature.

[1440]

It's also going to be an HOV system. So both outside lanes in either direction and down in the central area of Kelowna will be HOV. We're going to do something not only good for the highway but also good for our environment to make sure that we reduce the amount of cars on the highway but increase the amount of carrying capacity by making it easier for bus rapid transit and for multipeople vehicles.

Highway 33 is expanding right in my riding — again a function of this budget. Highway 33 is going to four-laning on a very steep hill and also a truck passing lane going up another hill on the way to Big White — again, opportunities for millions of dollars invested because of this budget.

Our communities have also benefited from two new grade schools, supportive housing projects, new parks, multipurpose pathways, expansions to Kelowna International Airport, and the list goes on and on and on. That's only made possible because this government over the last eight years has seen fit to continue to lower business taxes and to lower personal income taxes to the point where if you're making under $118,000, we have the lowest taxes in the country; to continue to attract investment in our province; to continue to attract people with capital into our province.

I can tell you that when I moved or was thinking of moving to British Columbia some 11 years ago with some of my friends, they looked at B.C. and said: "Why are you moving there? The taxes are so high." Of course, then that was the NDP government. "The taxes are so high. Why are you moving there?" I said: "Because it's one of the most beautiful places on this planet."

I've travelled a little bit, and I've found that B.C. is one of the most beautiful places. The people here are wonderful, and I want to continue with my family in British Columbia and especially the Okanagan.

Some of my friends said: "Well, we're not coming with you because of the tax situation." These people were well-heeled, and they would've created a lot of jobs in the Okanagan specifically and, of course, in British Columbia.

As soon as I moved here — shortly after — the people of British Columbia elected a B.C. Liberal government. In 2001 one of the first promises they made they kept, which was to lower personal income taxes by 25 percent.

Then I called my friends back home, and I told them: "See, who made the right move now? Here I'm now living in paradise, and I also have a 25 percent cut in my personal income tax." After that, I can tell you that my friends were thinking: "Okay, now it's time to go to British Columbia." I can't tell you how many times that story gets repeated over and over again.

Capital moves around, and unless you have the right conditions, it'll move somewhere else. That comes right to the HST. One of the fundamental keys, one of the fundamental reasons that the Finance Minister in this budget said, "We have to move towards an HST," is because capital knows no borders. If we did not bring in the HST at this point, I know there'll be a few people on the opposite side of the House — and a few people back home, I must admit — that would be happy.

However, in the long term what would happen is that investment would dry up. People would decide to go elsewhere. Businesses would decide to go elsewhere because it would be cheaper to invest their dollars in other jurisdictions than to come to British Columbia and pay an unrefundable provincial sales tax.

Look at Bell Canada, for example. They announced just this year that they decided to invest over a billion and a half dollars into Ontario. One of the major reasons they did that is because they said Ontario was moving to an HST system. You're not going to get a whole bunch of people or a whole bunch of businesses being as upfront as Bell Canada. You won't get a whole bunch of businesses that say: "We're moving from British Columbia. We're going to Ontario."

What you'll get is, slowly over time, a cumulative impact of all these people making all these individual decisions not to move here because of the high taxes, not to move here because of the provincial sales tax. Over time we will not be able to afford the great health care that we have — the Conference Board of Canada says we have the best health care system in the country — the great education system that we have, the great ability to live long lives.

If you look at the whole world, we have probably the No. 1 and No. 2 life spans in the world in British Columbia. That's because of our investment in people, in health care, in active living. All these things that we're doing here in British Columbia will benefit everyone and our children and grandchildren over the long term.

I have to say again that it's not decisions that we make today that will impact people today. It's decisions that

[ Page 511 ]

we make today that will impact the people tomorrow and the day after. I'm really happy that this budget is courageous and takes the long-term view and really, at the end of the day, we make tough decisions here so that our children won't have to make the same tough decisions down the road.

[1445]

The province will run deficits to maintain key services like health care and education, before returning to balanced budgets in 2013-2014. Our projected deficit for 2009-2010 is $2.8 billion. I won't belabour the point about how Alberta's going to $6.9 billion and Ontario's deficit and Canada's deficit and the trillions of dollars deficit in the United States. Competitively speaking, we're doing fairly well, and I think that obviously will pay dividends as soon as the economy turns around.

Also in this budget the Finance Minister says that after returning to surplus budgets, the province is committed to dedicating every dollar of surplus cash to eliminate the debt we incur as a result of running deficits — again, the responsible thing to do.

It means we're going to have to watch what we spend our money on. It means that over the next four years and beyond, it's not going to be like it was perhaps over the last eight years, where we had strong economic times and we had maybe deeper pockets than what we're going to have over the next few years. We have to pay down the debt that we incur as soon as we have an opportunity to do so.

Social services spending is going to go up. Budget Update provides an additional $455 million for priorities, social services and programs, including $420 million over the next three years to support individuals and families in income assistance.

I know in my area there are people that require income assistance, just like all around the province. This will be good for them.

There will be an increase in the basic personal exemption to $11,000. This should save the average single person $72 a year, a family of two $147 a year and will eliminate the provincial personal income tax for an additional 75,000 British Columbians.

People will have more money in their pockets to invest in more consumable goods so that they can continue to keep the economy going. Even after HST, B.C. will still have the second-lowest tax burden overall in this country.

There will be an increase in the small business threshold to $500,000 and planned elimination of the small business corporate income tax rate by April 1, 2012. Of course, by doing that, we'll attract more investment. Small businesses will have more money they can put into jobs, job creation and purchase goods and services that will be provided by local businesses, for the most part, in British Columbia.

In the budget update the minister announced there will be no HST on residential energy. That was something new. Cost for oil, electricity, natural gas or propane used to heat or power our homes will not have any HST on it.

I can tell you after speaking to many people back home, either by phone or in person or by e-mail, that this was a major issue for them, especially those on a fixed income who thought that if they were on a low fixed income, they would actually see a benefit from the HST because they were going to get $230 a year in a rebate. But most of the money that they're spending their money on goes to non-taxable items like food, grocery stores and rent. They're actually looking forward to the HST for the most part but were concerned about their utility costs.

So the fact that utility costs like costs for oil, electricity, natural gas and propane to heat or power homes won't be taxable from the HST perspective is actually good news for those people that I represent.

Please allow me also to shed some light on the proposed HST. As I said before, low-income families and individuals will receive an annual B.C. HST credit of $230 for individuals with income up to $20,000 and $230 per family member for families with incomes up to $25,000. That will be paid quarterly with the GST credit. This will benefit over 1.1 million British Columbians and when combined with the recently introduced climate action credit, low-income British Columbians will now be able to look forward to $340 a year in provincial credits alone in addition to the existing GST credit.

The introduction of the HST follows more than 120 tax cuts introduced since 2001. Of course, the major one I talked about before — the 25 percent right away. As a result, B.C. has the lowest provincial personal income taxes in Canada for those earning up to $118,000.

For most taxpayers, B.C. personal income taxes have been reduced by 37 percent or more since 2001. An additional 325,000 low-income British Columbians now pay no income tax whatsoever.

Number 8 on the list that I heard and took note of was health spending. Spending on health care over the next three years will receive the largest share of funding increases in government spending. By 2011-2012 the Ministry of Health Services budget will increase by 18 percent, reaching a total goal of $15.7 billion.

[1450]

To help keep health care funding sustainable, however, MSP rates will increase by about 6 percent in 2010 — a maximum of $3 a month for a single person or $6 per month for a family.

Number 9 out of the ten is K-to-12 education spending. The budget update protects core K-to-12 education by maintaining per-pupil funding at an average of over $8,200 per student. Total K-to-12 education spending

[ Page 512 ]

will exceed $5.7 billion in '09-10, and $151 million for full-day kindergarten will also be added starting in 2010, to be fully in place by September 2011. That will help a lot of people who are struggling in finding child care. If they have kindergarten-aged students, they can now go to school and get educated prior to going to grade one.

The last one, No. 10, I had briefly touched on before, which is post-secondary education funding. Support for post-secondary education in B.C. will increase by $93 million in '09-10 from the 2008-2009 budget. Total post-secondary education spending will exceed $4.7 billion in '09-10.

I wish at this point to talk about the Olympics. The Olympics was mentioned in the budget. When I was living in Banff, I actually had the pleasure of living through an Olympic season in 1988 when the Olympics came to Canada.

It was hosted, as you know, in Calgary and in Canmore. I was living in Banff at the time, and I could tell you that it was a boon for tourism for Alberta, for Canada and especially for the area that had anything to do with tourism in the area. So Banff, Canmore, the valley between Calgary and Edmonton, Red Deer — all these areas that were attracting tourists. Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump down in the south, if you're familiar with that, Madam Speaker — a great place to visit. I am sure that the same thing will happen in British Columbia and for the Okanagan after the Olympics have come and gone.

So while it's the norm that there's a drop in visitors in the year of the Olympics, the following year is when the visitation usually climbs. Just as an example, Alberta posted average annual gains in international tourists of 3.2 percent for the first five years after the Olympic Games compared with an average annual loss for the rest of the country, excluding British Columbia.

Tracey Grindal, manager of market research for Tourism Calgary, said: "The most obvious effect of a city hosting the Olympic Games is the increase in international importance." "It will put us on the world map," she said. It will set us apart. "It will broaden your image."

I can tell you, from business, that you can have the best product in the world, but unless people know about it, nobody's going to buy it. That really applies here in British Columbia. I firmly believe we have the best place in the world to visit, but we have to get the message out and those three billion viewers are certainly going to get the message from us.

Tourism Kelowna has identified that the main opportunity to leverage the Olympics for tourism growth to our area is by ensuring that Kelowna and the Okanagan are given as much international media coverage as possible and therefore are completely connected to the B.C. brand. This exposure will build a greater understanding with future visitors as to what experience they can receive and expect to get in British Columbia — one being ours in the Okanagan.

So we're ready. We're doing video. We're doing photography. We're putting story lines for media. We're getting ready for the Olympics in the Okanagan just like they are in the Lower Mainland and up to Whistler. We want to be part of the games. We're going to have a torch relay run ourselves. We're going to be there. We're going to be visiting.

Interjection.

N. Letnick: Yes, we are. That's right. And I don't feel one bit that this Olympic experience will be any less than what we saw in Alberta back in 1988.

I actually believe that this will surpass what happened in Alberta. It's going to be good for tourism. It'll be good for British Columbia. I'm so proud to be part of this government that has the foresight to continue with that investment.

So in closing, because I think I only have a couple of minutes left, what I want to say is, you know, British Columbia has been hit by a global downturn. We've heard it over and over and over again, by members on both sides of the House. We all recognize that. Projected revenues from corporate and personal income taxes have fallen off dramatically.

We really have a fundamental choice to make. The choice that this government has made is to protect our vital services in health care, education, social services. Yes, that does mean some people will get funding and some won't, but you know, this government has shown clearly that it's able to make those tough decisions, that it cares.

[1455]

You look around the House, Madam Speaker, and I know individual stories of everybody here that really cares, that contributes back home to some non-profit group, food bank — you name it. I know everyone cares. But at the end of the day, this government cares enough that it's going to spend those funds in very important places like health care, like education and social services, so we can come out of this economic downturn stronger than we went into it, so that we can continue to fund all the wonderful things that the people of British Columbia look to us to fund with their tax dollars.

Thank you very much for an opportunity to speak to the budget, and thank you to the people of Kelowna–Lake Country for allowing me to represent them.

B. Routley: It is indeed a privilege to get up today and represent the people of the Cowichan Valley. You know, I spoke earlier about brothers and sisters. I'm proud of the legacy I have of working on behalf of sawmill workers, good union people, loggers, all kinds of remanufacturers

[ Page 513 ]

and other labourers in the community — everything. In Lake Cowichan, for example, it was union members that helped at the arena and drove the Zamboni. It was union members that helped take care of the water

I am not ashamed at all. In fact, I'm quite proud of the heritage I have of representing union people. And the fact that we're just after a Labour Day…. I want to acknowledge that it is indeed labour throughout British Columbia, through their blood, sweat and tears, that helped build this wonderful province. We should all be proud of the work that labour does throughout British Columbia.

Hon. Speaker, when I think about the people, the workers, I also think about the amazing people that I have encountered in my first few months here at the Legislature. I want to acknowledge the amazing work that they all do — the wonderful people that work in the dining room, the custodial cleaners. I've met some of them out cleaning the hall, and they believe it's indeed a labour of love to work in this great building. They're incredible people that do a wonderful job.

The security folks. I've got to tell you when they first gave me the key, I couldn't get used to the idea that I was going to actually have the key to this place. I thought maybe I'd have to report in. The security fellow said: "No, no, this is your place, Mr. Routley." I said: "Well, you know, the 'Mr.' you can do without too. I'm just good old Bill." I'll tell you, loggers and sawmill workers call you a lot of things, but I'm not used to "Mr."

When I was told I was "Mr." and he said: "No, no, that's the way it works here at the Legislature, and we're not going to change our ways, Mr. Routley...." So I got used to that. I have to say that everybody, including the security guard and right down to the folks that clean the floors and take care of the waste-paper baskets, do an amazing job. They're all friendly, courteous and make this a wonderful place to be. So I want to acknowledge all of them and thank them for the work that they do on behalf of all of the MLAs, certainly, in this Legislature.

I have to say, when I was wandering around and was told that I was given the keys to the Legislature, I thought: "You know, this government has a lot of different ministries, and you can find them on the doors." You go around and you see the door — the ministry of this and the ministry of that.

When you really get down into the basement of this building, there are a few places where the doors are locked, but I really expected I was going to find on a door, the ministry of jiggery-pokery and bafflegab. I thought that might be next door to the deputy of omissions and deletions because of all of the things that have been going on in terms of telling the people of British Columbia that the debt was going to be $495 million — that was it.

Then everything changed after the election. Boy, in just absolute ballistic speed, there was suddenly all this desperate news.

[1500]

I'd like to remind you, Madam Speaker, that this Liberal government told tourism operators in B.C. that the HST was not on during the election. I want to remind this House that the tourism operators specifically asked the question of both or all the political parties: "Would you be interested in the HST?" The Liberal government and the representatives that were running for election at the time made it perfectly clear to the tourism operators that an HST was not on, and they even responded with details on why it wouldn't be on.

Those are the facts. They said before the election that an HST tax was not going to happen, and then…. Now this government seems to have had some kind of collective amnesia. It really is a sorry day for British Columbians that this government says one thing before the election and something totally different after this election.

You know, it's a bit of a pattern. I recall this government saying: "We're not going to rip up B.C. Rail. No, that's not going to happen. We're not going to destroy or sell B.C. Rail." And they sold B.C. Rail. Then they said to health care workers, "We're not going to rip up your collective agreement," and those workers…. This government oversaw the largest mass firing of health care workers in the history of British Columbia. Shame on them that they had that kind of attitude towards health care workers.

While we're at it, I want to talk about what's going on currently with paramedics. You know, the paramedics throughout British Columbia…. I'm sure it doesn't matter what your political stripe is, if you had an accident, you'd be real glad to see one of those paramedics show up on the scene. You know, we all bleed the same, and we all can get hurt the same, and tomorrow it could happen to any one of the folks in this room. I hope that doesn't happen, but I'm awful glad those paramedics are there.

This government even goes so far as to say they're so important that they're an essential service. They're so essential that they can't take any action as far as a labour dispute. They are putting stickers up all over town and putting stickers on their trucks, and I bet the folks that are responsible for essential services think it's just wonderful that they can just ignore these paramedics. It's absolutely and totally irresponsible.

One of the freedoms that we enjoy in this country is that people can organize into unions, and they can take action to defend themselves and to get a fair collective agreement. If you believe in rights and obligations, when the day comes that government decides that you're an essential service, there ought to be a responding obligation to sit down with them and negotiate in good faith. If they're not prepared to do that, they ought to be providing final and binding arbitration mediation so that these folks can get a fair collective agreement.

What kind of government just ignores their plight and says that it's fine for them to sit out there with no kind of

[ Page 514 ]

collective agreement whatsoever? It's simply unacceptable in a democratic society.

They're too essential to go on strike, but not essential enough to sit down and bargain with under free collective bargaining, one of the democratic things that we have in Canada and certainly I thought we had in British Columbia. But apparently, sitting down and doing the right thing by the working class is not in any interest of this government. You know, back to before the election — no HST and they were going to do all the wonderful things — they were going to take care of health care and education.

[1505]

When we look at hospital care deteriorating under this government…. I've got to pause for a minute and talk about back in 1985, when my father died. This government's been around since 2001. I went with my own dad to the hospital right here in Victoria, and we were lined up with all those seniors and people that were injured. We were lined up in the hall like a bunch of planes taxiing for takeoff and not going anywhere.

I'm glad I was able to be there as a dutiful son to get my dad a glass of water and make sure he got to the bathroom, because he spent hours in that hall, and it's totally unacceptable in the province of British Columbia that that kind of stuff is going on.

I saw a young man come into that hospital who had cut his finger off, and they brought it to the hospital, and they put it in the fridge, and this young man was sitting in the hospital waiting room, writhing in pain after getting his finger lopped off in this motorcycle. He kept moaning over and over again: "My finger is cut off. I've got to get help right away, or I'm going to lose it." It was hours. I was shocked. I did not believe that British Columbia had deteriorated to such a state that that young man would sit there for hours.

Now, I finally got in after, like, five hours with my dad out in the hall, to a room. I never did find out what happened to that young man, but I'll tell you, it made my blood boil to think that people in British Columbia are

arriving in hospitals and that's a scene repeated all over British Columbia.

It's not good enough.

We've got $105 million for a bobsled run. We've got more than $880 million for a convention centre. We've got hundreds of millions of dollars to build all kinds of asphalt and roads to a ski resort. There's no problem with all of that stuff. But boy, when it comes to the stuff that really matters, they're not there.

Now I want to talk about Joanna Neilson. She's a speech pathologist who deals with autistic kids. I have a grandson, Gabriel. He's nine years old, and I'm very proud of him, but he has autism, and he needs the support of people like speech pathologists.

The speech pathologists are concerned right now in British Columbia. They're saying to me that 75 percent of their workload right now is dealing with autism spectrum disorder, and the other percentage, dealing with seniors who have had heart attacks and that kind of thing. She's understaffed. They could use ten speech pathologists. She is the only full-time speech pathologist in the Cowichan Valley, and she's got 45 people waiting on her waiting list.

She wondered out loud the other day when I was talking to her. She said, "How do I tell families that are already stretched to the limit that they're going to pay 12 percent?" — maybe even on her services. They are going to pay 12 percent for sure on all of the devices and tools that they need. That's the kind of government that we've got across here. They take away tax from the biggest business and corporations and load it on to folks with special needs that really need the help and are already at the bottom of the pay scale.

Let's look at what workers in British Columbia reported just on September 15, just a few days ago, in the Vancouver Sun . "The 2009 National Payroll Week employee survey, conducted by the Canadian Payroll Association, concluded, amongst other things, that 60 percent" — let me camp there for a minute; 60 percent — "of B.C. residents are so cash-strapped that they would have trouble paying their bills."

[1510]

This government's going to load another 7 percent on just about everything. "The big surprise," they say, "is that so many people were so close to the line that they'd have trouble if their paycheque was delayed even a week." The numbers jump to 64 percent of those that are aged 18 to 34.

Now we're going to transfer tax from big corporations in oil and gas, Madam Speaker — oil and gas — and we're expected to believe that somehow the gas companies are going to say: "You know, a gigajoule is just a little bit too expensive for the seniors, so we're going to give them maybe a month off."

Give me a break. As if that's going to happen. It's not likely. I hear all this stuff about how it's going to trickle down to the consumers. It's not going to happen.

The claim is that even though everybody in North America knows that there was a recession that started in 2008…. The lumber business. I was dealing with bankruptcies — lots of them — and mill closures. This government claims that just after the election, right after May 12, there was some kind of economic tsunami that swept through the province of British Columbia. They had no idea of the difficulties we were having in this province, and speaker after speaker gets up and explains how that's the case.

I suspect it's all from the folks at public affairs putting their spin on things, suggesting that there was some kind of bolt of lightning right out of the blue. One of them said it was at ballistic speed. It's amazing that just days after the election, they now claim they were caught totally unaware — just totally unaware.

[ Page 515 ]

It was a shock-and-awe kind of thing for them. In fact, the economic blast was so powerful that they were caught totally flatfooted. They were there, lost in a sea of red ink, looking for a lifeline. There through the fog — I suggest it was kind of a pink fog — they saw the federal government handing out a cheque for $1.6 billion. "Oh boy, oh boy, a lifeline. A lifeline of $1.6 billion. All we have to do is sell out the people of British Columbia, and we can cash in on $1.6 billion. Almost free," I'm sure they thought.

Have you ever been to Mexico? On every street corner they say, "It's almost free," and I'm sure the federal government was telling them it's almost free. Believe me, there is nothing free about the federal government's offer. You can be sure the taxpayers of British Columbia are going to pay and pay, and pay some more.

You know, they didn't want to look this gift horse in the mouth. And hold for this, Madam Speaker. They crafted a secret deal in just a few days after…. Apparently they learned about this in May, and here they were making announcements.

Just one small problem. This government forgot that they represent and are supposed to represent all British Columbians, not just their rich business friends. The plan now includes the elimination of B.C. jobs. They want the public to believe — just one more time they want the public to believe — that big business is going to hand down these huge savings to consumers. "That's what's going to happen." We've heard it repeated over and over again: "Just trust us, and it's going to trickle down to all the good consumers."

I can just see it. Let's talk about a big log exporting company that's been busy shutting down mills. I can just hear TimberWest and Paul McElligott phoning up one of his log-buying customers, and he's going to say: "Over the weekend we've been thinking about it. With all these tax savings, we're going to hand that on, so we're going to do a buy-one-log, get-one-free deal." Does anybody in this House honestly believe stuff like that is going to happen? Absolutely ridiculous. It's not on. It's not going to trickle down, and those are the facts.

[1515]

I don't often talk about the Fraser Institute, because they're not a fountain of information that we're interested in. But in the Vancouver Sun lately they talked about corporate welfare. Corporate begging in Canada has become even more blatant this year. They say corporate welfare is now a $182 billion addiction for these corporations. Business subsidies, bailouts and loans are all forms of corporate welfare, and now we're going to transfer tax dollars.

The Fraser Institute, a right-wing think tank, says that transferring tax dollars and employment from healthy businesses — like tourism and restaurants, by the way — to risky business is not smart. Research has found that corporate welfare may not have a demonstrable beneficial impact on the economy, employment and tax revenues because no new net investment or employment is created.

Now we're asked to believe that there is going to be all this investment because of these actions. Well, I'm just not buying it. We didn't see investment after softwood lumber. We haven't seen renewed investment.

The lumber industry is going to come back, by the way, but it's got nothing to do with the HST. When the lumber industry comes back, it's going to be because global markets have responded, and there's been help of some kind. Somebody's got to be doing something to get more customers going and to look at alternative products — value-added products and not the kind of thing this government is doing. They have no interest in a value-type forest or even value-added business. They've pretty well chopped that off at the knees.

You know, along with Paul and his two-for-one deal, maybe we can go to the barber, and he'll say: "We'll cut 7 percent more hair for less, and we're going to pass on the savings." There are some ideas for you. I know the people of British Columbia know that this is just more smoke and mirrors from this government's public affairs bureau, and there's no real substance to what they're talking about.

I want to talk about a growth industry that this government should be aware of, and it's a sad thing indeed in communities like the Cowichan Valley. I talked to Betty Anne DeVitt, who runs our Cowichan Valley Basket Society, the food bank and soup kitchen. She tells me that there have been over a hundred new families since January 1 of this year. That's what's going on out there — real families really in pain and hurting — and this government just wants to load on more tax to those same people. When they go to buy a cup of coffee, they're going to get to pay more tax.

This is the same kind of economic thinking that got the world into this economic crisis. "Just trust us," they said. "Trust us." Groups like Enron: "Trust us with your money." The big banks in the United States said, "Trust us with your money," and look at what they did.

People in three-piece suits saying all the right things, spinning all the right stuff, and everybody knows. It's transparent to the world that it was the big financial groups and all of these so-called spin doctors that destroyed the economy of this nation.

Not just this nation. The United States of America, the largest single engine in economic wealth, was destroyed by wealth and greed. That's what it was destroyed by, and by people who didn't understand that you've got to manufacture something and you've got to create jobs for real people. That's how you take care of the country — to create employment with real jobs, family-supporting jobs, not the kind of McJobs that this government seems to have in their future.

[ Page 516 ]

Madam Speaker, I don't know if you've seen the bank commercial with the guy running around. It's been on TV quite a bit, and it's one that I've always kind of liked. I always get a laugh out of it.

[1520]

We've got a new one for British Columbia. You know the one with the banker with his hand in your pocket? Well now, as of July 1, when the HST comes on, I suggest that we have a new version, with the Liberals with their hands in the pockets of every British Columbian, because no matter where we go, whether it's for a haircut or whether we go for a meal at a restaurant, we get HST to remind us.

When we go to a tourist destination, even when the kids save up their own money to buy a bike, when they buy a bike with their paper money, they're going to have the Liberals there with their hand in their pocket — those poor little kids with a Liberal with their hand in their pocket, if you can imagine that. It's an awful sight to think about.

Even when we die, down at the funeral home, there they are going to be with their hand in our pocket looking for the loose change to get the extra 7 percent, and they're going to wring it out of us right before we go to the grave.

That's the kind of government we've got. A secret deal done with no consultation, no debate, signed off by the government with absolutely no discussion. In fact, I'm sure some of the folks that belong to that side of the House had no idea. I've heard that some of them have said that maybe there was a bit of shock and awe for them too, in discovering all of this. It's kind of hushed tones, but some of them are indicated…. Their body language. You can look over there. They're not happy, not happy at all. Not all of them. Some of them are happy. Some of them are having a good time.

Meanwhile, this government has worked hard at giving $2 billion. I can hardly imagine that much money. They have given away $2 billion to their rich business friends, to the biggest, and they gave the list. They proudly stand here and say they're going to give an $880 million tax cut to the construction firms. Well, do you really think that in this economy that's going to work?

Do you really think that $140 million in manufacturing and $140 million in the forest industry and $80 million for oil and gas…? I don't believe it, and British Columbians don't believe it. The transfer in tax from the very, very wealthy, most of the time…. If they are having a bad time right now, what did they do with all the cash when they were having a good time, when things were going well?

Any family knows that when times are good, you save a little cash away, and when things get bad, you spend that cash. Well no, not these big businesses. They run off to their Liberal friends, give a little at the jar there for the political campaign, and the next thing…. I'm sure they can't believe their good fortune that all the wonderful things…. It's all very coincidental that these same industries provide huge sums for this government during the election.

We've got to take from the poor and give to the rich. It is shameful. We're picking on seniors, the little kids and the children, the kids and their sports program. No consultation, no transparency for the people of British Columbia. We had no debate. We get to have a debate now. The deal was inked. They were already planning on spending the money — no debate before a deal signed with the federal government.

You know, in any democracy, justice must be seen to be done. Where is the justice or the democracy in leading people to believe that the debt was going to be $495 million and basically no more? That was the line, and they clung to the line, even though other folks, other economists…. I mean, you go back and look at the newspapers all throughout even 2008-2009. You couldn't miss it, Madam Speaker. You'd have to be on the cartoon channel to miss it.

[1525]

You would have to ignore every news program, every Globe and Mail , every Vancouver Sun and every Province to claim that you had no idea that there was a major problem going on and that some of the promises that we thought we had, we couldn't rely on. Then the government says that, well, maybe they did know a little bit before, but they could handle that.

The real plan, when they reveal a $2.8 billion — really $3.5 billion — is not to mention the pre-existing debt that…. Let's talk about that for a minute.

This government has embarked on what they think is a wonderful plan. It's a philosophical divide between this group and theirs on the issue of having all these P3s, then selling off the resources of British Columbia to the highest bidder. It is very, very dangerous economics, because that side of the House knows that they have all kinds of money hidden….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Recognizing the Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts. [Applause.]

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, my friends.

Madam Speaker, it's a real joy to see you in that chair. It looks very good on you.

I've been listening to the NDP opposition members for days now. That was a remarkable speech that we just heard from the new member for Cowichan Valley. It's hard to believe that people still think that way and talk that way. That sounded like a speech from the Dirty '30s. [Applause.] Little applause there again.

It's clear to me that even the members who have spent four years in this wonderful place with all its traditions — all the great things that have been done here and can be done, the things that they should be learning how to

[ Page 517 ]

deliver to their constituents — haven't really cottoned on to their responsibilities or how to fulfil them here.

The new members have clearly not been well briefed. They don't know the NDP's past. They talk about the '90s as if they weren't the dismal decade, but everybody who lived through them must know how bad it was. What a travesty it was that our province was bombed down from the best economy in Canada to the worst and held there under their miserable incompetence for a full ten years.

They're not doing their jobs. They're not doing their jobs. They don't understand their responsibilities, having been elected to this assembly, and they're not…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. K. Krueger: …representing their constituents well.

This is my 14th year in this chamber. I was in opposition to that NDP government from 1996 to 2001, and they were such unhappy years.

The member sounded as though he didn't understand the difference between deficits and debt. Deficits, I'd like to point out to him, are how much a government spends over and above its revenues in a year. When they accumulate, that is debt. The NDP doubled the debt of the province in ten years: 125 years of government at a certain level of debt, and the NDP doubled it in ten years.

The member for Cowichan Valley was talking about how governments ought to save up or businesses ought to save up money in their good years. We spent five surplus budgets paying off NDP debt. That's what that party left this province with, and everybody knows it. Those were grim years, and the NDP Premiers of that day, of the '90s, knew that their prospects of re-election were grim. So they ran out the full five years both times until they had to call an election.

There was a fudge-it budget in 1996. That's how Glen Clark was re-elected. He showed up in the Legislature and immediately said he needed what he called wriggle room. It became a famous statement quoted many times — wriggle room. It was deliberate.

That was a government that had to be sued by one of the entrepreneurs that the member for Cowichan Valley just scorned. Carrier Lumber from Prince George, a family-built company, developed a technology for portable sawmills — took them out in the bush and set them up, air-dried the lumber, made a big success of it.

[1530]

Then the NDP burnt them in a really cruel move. It ended up in a lawsuit, which the NDP only settled when they finally had to reluctantly disclose that they had found, I believe it was, 47 boxes of evidence stashed away that they had not released to the court.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Krueger: The member reminds me of the NDP donation to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the NDP think tank, on their way out the door in 2001. I believe it was a quarter-million dollars gifted to that propaganda organization to continue to advance the causes of the NDP.

We were very well-briefed when we started out as members. We had Gary Collins as the Finance Minister, and we had the same leader in those days that we do now as Premier. It's been a government that has stuck to its principles, stuck to its plan, done the things that it said it would do and done them faster — for example, income tax cuts.

I heard the members opposite and their predecessors in their ranks railing away for eight years that income tax cuts were giveaways. You know, Members opposite, people just can't understand how you can think it's a giveaway when the government doesn't take as much of people's own money out of their pockets and bank accounts as the government before did.

We fulfilled that promise our very first day in office, the day our cabinet was sworn in, in 2001. We cut income taxes to the lowest in Canada in the bottom two tax brackets, and we've kept cutting them. Now with this budget, $118,000 — anyone who makes that amount or less in British Columbia is paying the lowest income taxes in Canada, and that is a very good thing.

Over the eight years that we've been government, we have seen the number of people drawing paycheques in British Columbia go past two million people for the first time in history and hundreds of thousands of new jobs created. We hear the members opposite talk about jobs that have disappeared during the worldwide recession. We're nowhere near down to the much lower level of employment that British Columbia had when the NDP were government.

I don't think it's clear to the members opposite that they have responsibilities in a number of areas. They should be representing their constituents well, and one of the ways they do that is by also representing the communities they live in well and being credible members who can bring forward the requests of their constituents, the dreams and hopes of the communities they represent, in a way that is credible so that government can address those for them.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

But instead of that, we just hear this desk-pounding, socialist rhetoric, a throwback to the '30s, a throwback, probably, to socialist eastern Europe in its bad days. It's

[ Page 518 ]

very unproductive. It's not something that facilitates the causes of the constituents or the communities.

When I was an opposition member, I went to the NDP cabinet ministers about issues for my constituency, saying: "We want to have a university in Kamloops. We don't want it to be a college. We want to have a university for these reasons." Wouldn't listen; wouldn't do it.

The Coquihalla tollbooth. I went to the NDP Transportation Minister when there had been an avalanche across the Trans-Canada Highway, through the Fraser Canyon — people had to use the Coquihalla — and said: "Couldn't you at least suspend the tolls for a couple of days?" No, wouldn't hear of it; couldn't do it.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: They had a number of major scandals, my friend.

In a very short time after we became government, our government decided to provide that university to Kamloops — Thompson Rivers University — and people tell me the sun has risen in a different way over the community ever since that day. There are almost 2,000 people on the payroll, and Kamloops is tremendously proud of being a university town.

The Premier, driving a large excavator, knocked down the tollbooth in the fall of 2008, wiped out the tolls, because we're a government that keeps its commitments. We prepared a tolling policy which said that tolls will be eliminated when the infrastructure is paid for, and that's what we did.

[1535]

My colleague Claude Richmond, who served in this House as a Social Credit cabinet minister and then as a B.C. Liberal cabinet minister, was there the day the Coquihalla opened, was there at the toll booth. He was there the day the Premier knocked it down.

That's the sort of thing you can get down as a constituency MLA, but you're not going to get much done if people don't respect you or find you credible because you come in here and rant and rave, say things you know are preposterous.

Everybody knows why the revenues are down. It's a worldwide recession. It affected British Columbia as one of the last jurisdictions….

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: This is something I wanted to get to. Powell River–Sunshine Coast wants to talk about gambling.

In the '90s the NDP began to flirt with expanding gambling, and we asked them not to do it. I was the critic, and I researched the consequences of expanding gambling, and I pleaded with them not to do it, told them what the consequences would be. I also told them all of the research says that once you do it, once you expand gambling in a jurisdiction, there's no going back. You can't fix what you've done with that Pandora's box. There will be addiction consequences, and they'll be severe.

So when Joy MacPhail, who had more horsepower….

Deputy Speaker: Members, you will please allow courtesy to the person that has the floor. Everyone will have an opportunity, including the member from Victoria–Swan Lake, and will show respect to this House.

Please continue, Member.

Hon. K. Krueger: Joy MacPhail, who had more intellectual horsepower than a lot of members over there put together, as Health Minister, said of me that "this critic has impressed upon the government the need to start to fund gambling addiction" and put the first-ever funds aside for that purpose.

None of the NDP cabinet ministers had researched the consequences of gambling expansion. They wanted it. They did it. And there's no going back. So when people over there selectively quote the research that was read into the record in those days, they're not doing themselves a favour. And they're being dishonest, because all of that research hangs together.

If you expand gambling, you face consequences, and there's no going back. I think it's really important not to compromise yourselves in this House. In our caucus we have free voice and free votes. The member for Peace River South has voted against government legislation a number of times. It didn't stop him from becoming a cabinet minister. He was always free to speak his mind, and he exercised those rights.

It doesn't have to be politics at any price in this place. You can fulfil your roles honourably, and you can fulfil them respectfully, and you should always tell the truth. I have heard a lot of people not doing that. We know that you're actually excited about the Olympics, yet the member for Cowichan Valley, like many other members on that side of the House, was decrying the Olympics, decrying the expenditure of building the venues.

We could not possibly be staging an Olympics at a better time than this. It is the most wonderful economic generating event that we're going to see in our lifetimes. Members opposite have not been shy at all to apply for a share — that is, the communities that they represent apply for a share — of the grants available for the torch run, for example. The member for Cowichan Valley, who just spoke — $64,500 in grants applied for out of his constituency. Does he not respect those constituents and the communities that they live in who have put in six different applications?

The member for Fraser-Nicola, who is always ranting and raving about our government — seven communities in his constituency have applied for $98,150. The

[ Page 519 ]

member for North Coast, who was also carrying on in classic class-warfare style the other day — five communities have applied for $95,000.

What do those people and those communities think of their Members of the Legislative Assembly speaking negatively about these events and about the Olympics? It's surprising to us over here. It's not good representation of your constituents, Members. We are tremendously excited about the Olympics, looking forward to hosting the biggest event in the world next year and seeing the economic benefits flow.

[1540]

I was just at a conference last week in Toronto, a federal-provincial-territorial conference of Tourism ministers. They're excited, right across the country. They're building Olympic pavilions here. They're going to be showcasing their provinces' talents and resources here.

The people of Maillardville, here in British Columbia, have a francophone festival every year. They're expanding it to, I believe, more than two weeks, and they're connecting it and its activities with the pavilion from Quebec.

This is going to be a great event, and we'd love to see the members opposite celebrate it, get enthused about it, build the excitement in their constituencies. It is actually palpable, when you go to an NDP-represented constituency often, the difference in mood, the way people feel about their present and their future. It's no wonder, because of the negative rhetoric that these members are always pumping out.

Some of the senior teammates in that opposition caucus speak as if they hate the Olympics, but I notice nobody over there has gotten up to question the $2.86 million expense of the torch run, because I think the members know that their constituents would react to that. Their constituents know they've got the B.C. spirit, they've got the spirit of the Olympics, and they know that the Olympics are a good thing.

The constant negativity from that side of the House is bad for local economies, bad for the province. Kamloops in the '90s had two NDP MLAs and an NDP Member of Parliament, and the climate there, the way people felt, was like the climate I see in those members' constituencies. It was negative. The community couldn't pull itself out of the mire. These were very, very tough times for Kamloops.

You know, it's completely different now, and our economic statistics are really good. Our flight numbers are way up at the airport. Our stays in hotels are way up as well. In Kamloops it's not nearly as obvious that there's a worldwide recession as it is in some of those members' communities. A totally different feel.

I hope the members realize that their negativity actually affects people's health. There are vulnerable people, seniors in particular, who, when they hear their elected people saying these negative and false things, it worries them to the point that it makes them sick. That is a frightening thing — that members would deliberately fearmonger and frighten elderly people, vulnerable people, make them anxious, make them sick.

I speak to the constituents that those members represent. I suggest to them that they call those members to account because they are so fantastically negative. It is bad for the constituents and their communities. Winston Churchill, I believe, referred to socialism as the equal distribution of misery, and you see that at the micro level in constituencies, and we saw it all around the province in the '90s.

The member for North Coast spoke of the dismal conditions in Prince Rupert. Hardly a good marketing move. Hardly reason people would want to go to Prince Rupert as tourists or as people considering living there. He referred to Prince Rupert as one of the neediest districts.

When Bill Belsey was the member for North Coast — Bill Belsey from Prince Rupert — he constantly raised issues in our caucus, and people listened. Prince Rupert got a new college. Prince Rupert got a new container terminal. Bill Belsey worked for his constituency, brought money home, and Prince Rupert was a much happier place than it is today.

Bill Belsey talked about Highway 37. Roger Harris talked about Highway 37, the electrification of Highway 37, in order to facilitate a whole new economy up there. Yesterday there was a federal announcement. Our government had already expressed its commitment. That's going to be happening. Some of the things that we work on as members in this House take a long time to deliver, but there's no member on that side of the House that can take credit for any of those investments.

That container port is going to prosper Prince Rupert for decades and decades to come. I was there not long ago, and it is something that the people of Prince Rupert are fortunate to have and happy that they have — a great investment. I wish that Herb Pond could sit in this House and deliver the kind of positive constituent service that Bill Belsey delivered, because folks who talk the way the members opposite do are pretty hard to work with.

[1545]

The member for Fraser-Nicola already has members lining up for constituent service from me. I had to do this all last term, had to represent him because his constituents said that they didn't find he could get anything done. The day after the election, people from Merritt were calling me to see if I would continue handling their files.

Donny van Dyk, Roger Harris, Ella Brown, Bill Belsey — positive people. I'd like to see the members try to emulate their behaviour in order to bring about a more positive atmosphere in their constituencies and begin to bring home benefits from their representation of those people in communities here in the House.

[ Page 520 ]

Instead, we hear this constant revisionist history, various little dodges about the '90s. "Oh, that was the last century." Or one member: "I was in school when the NDP were doing those things in the '90s." All sorts of false news, name-calling, offensive behaviour. How can anybody work with that? How can anybody find those members credible?

The Cowichan Valley member was just raving against the convention centre. That convention centre has already attracted more than $2 billion in economic activity for Vancouver, more than 60 conventions that we would never have had in British Columbia because we had no facility large enough. I don't believe any one of those members could tell me, if they've walked through that convention centre, that they didn't feel a lot of pride in British Columbia having a facility like that. It's beautiful, it's very well done, and the B.C. Liberals built it.

An Hon. Member: No, construction workers built it.

Hon. K. Krueger: The member opposite says that construction workers built it. Yeah, of course, that's the truth. It's got….

Deputy Speaker: Member, please direct all your comments through the Chair, and if all members would allow respect for the House so that we can all hear the speaker. Thank you, Member.

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The windows in that convention centre were built in Kamloops. It's full of components from British Columbia. It employed people in many areas throughout British Columbia, and that's how we try to do things. We're encouraging all public buildings to be built with wood, because wood is the ultimate sequesterer of carbon dioxide, and wood is a wonderful renewable resource. It has been and will be again one of the major economic drivers in British Columbia.

For decades the forest industry paid for ¹⁄₆ of everything that the governments of British Columbia were able to fund — one of every six doctors, one of every six nurses, one of every six teachers — and I believe it'll get back to that. It's a sunrise industry, and we're doing many things, including expanding the markets for B.C. wood worldwide to make sure that it does come back.

The members opposite don't seem to know the statements that their leader has made about policy. I have seen her say that she is no longer campaigning against carbon tax. I've heard her say that the NDP is no longer negative to independent power production. But the member for Cowichan Valley was just ranting against IPPs. Got to get up to speed. Got to form more of a team and present yourselves as a team if you're going to have any credibility.

I heard a member today — or maybe it was yesterday — attacking shareholders. Shareholders in corporations are not your enemies. In fact, union funds are often substantial shareholders in corporations. The member doesn't appear to know that.

In the '90s I was the Labour critic when the NDP brought in the pension suspension bill. They had decided to punish union pensioners who went back and worked in their trade. For example, if their children couldn't find a job, couldn't go to university, the pensioner would supplement his meagre pension by going back and working at least part time. The NDP decided this was offensive, and they actually brought in a piece of legislation to suspend those workers' pensions if they were working somewhere else.

Mr. Speaker, if these members don't believe it, they should read the Hansard record. It's there. It's shocking, but it's there — the pension suspension bill.

I asked Brad Zubyk at the time: "Why in the world would your government do this?" He said: "I don't know. I keep telling them not to bring in legislation that the people don't want." We all know where it led to, and that was an almost wipe-out. A Corvette party in opposition from 2001 to 2005 — two members, a two-seater party.

[1550]

The leader of the NDP continually talks about their positive message. I haven't heard it. I hear nothing about the NDP's positive message. Any policy that they're contemplating, any changes that they think would be a good idea — it's unknown to us.

The NDP has a long history of shrinking economies, and I don't hear any new ideas. They shrink economies locally, and they shrink economies in the big picture.

So where is the positive message? Could we see some of that instead of the sandbox behaviour that we see, like mean little children over there. Where are the ideas? Will it be four years of this insulting behaviour devoid of policy, devoid of ideas, bad for the constituents? I'm urging the constituents of the members opposite to read the Hansard for the things they say. Read it and weep, because it's pathetic representation.

The Finance Minister, as he made his speech, talked about the greatest economic crisis of our generation. Surely all the members opposite know that this is the greatest economic crisis of their lifetime. But, no, they've got to continue to talk as if somehow a B.C. Liberal government caused the recession, somehow find someone in B.C. to blame it on.

We did have a made-in-B.C. recession in the 1990s. We were the only place that was going backwards, that was running huge deficits, that was suffering such high unemployment, between here and Chiapas, Mexico. That was the only other jurisdiction. We were the bookends of the continent, and it was a very pathetic thing — a made-in-B.C. recession.

It exported our children. Our school district….

[ Page 521 ]

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: The NDP exported our children. That's right. Like a pied piper, except the NDP didn't go with them.

An Hon. Member: Unfortunately.

Hon. K. Krueger: That was unfortunate.

Eventually they left, of course. But the young people went away. They moved to Alberta, and they've been raising their families there.

Just this week the school board in Kamloops, school district 73, was asked about enrolment, and they said: "It actually isn't going down as much as we thought, and we've learned the reason is that the young people are coming back to British Columbia." It's taken three elections to give them the confidence that they won't be suffering through an NDP government, but they're back, and that's very good to see. We've been longing for them to come back.

We've had five balanced budgets, billions of dollars in surpluses, and our Finance Minister was continually reproached by the members opposite as to: "Surely he must have known that he was going to have such large surpluses." Now they've turned on a dime, and it's: "Surely you must have known that you would have this size of a deficit." You can't really have it both ways, can you, Mr. Speaker. If the banks believed and if the rating companies believed anything that the NDP is saying about B.C. Liberals and our economic policies, we wouldn't have a triple-A credit rating, but we do, and we surely didn't have one in the '90s.

The spending for health services that this budget sets out will rise to $15.7 billion by 2011. It was $8.7 billion in 2000 to 2001. That is a $7 billion lift, and the folks opposite talk about B.C. Liberal health care cuts. What baloney. A $7 billion lift. We'll have gotten very close to doubling in not very long. It will be $16.4 billion by 2011-2012.

This government has put the money where it promised it would. We always have patients first in our considerations of health care. We always have students first in our consideration of education. We have put huge amounts of additional funding, annual funding, into those key areas.

The members opposite decry P3s, but they wouldn't build a hospital in Abbotsford. We built it as a public-private partnership. We've doubled the number of doctors in training. We've doubled the number of nurses in training. We're good stewards of the public purse, and that's why people had the confidence to re-elect us as government this year.

[1555]

Surely we're going to see some more creative opposition, some more generation of policy and ideas that we can work with from these members in the four years stretching out before us — a lot more, hopefully, than we saw last term, a lot more than we've heard since this term started.

The statements that the members make opposite about the HST, the things that they say about giveaways to employers…. We've had 25 different employer groups at a time on a platform saying, "This will generate jobs. This is the best thing that could possibly be done for British Columbia's economy," and it will, Mr. Speaker. You know that. I know that. The members will have to see it to believe it, and they'll believe it after the next trip to the polls.

So 130 other countries have a value-added tax. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and pretty much everybody else in the know say that this is a far more progressive method of taxation than income tax. I know that British Columbians are very much enjoying paying the lowest income taxes in Canada. We never hear anybody ask us to change that.

Employers are not the enemy that the NDP class warriors profess them to be, and as long as the folks….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

S. Herbert: I just must respond to the previous member's comments. It was pretty interesting to be saying we on this side of the House are negative, negative, negative, when the only thing that he added to the discussion was how negative he was. It was a little hypocritical, I believe, and hopefully, we can turn the page on that.

So I wanted to start off my first full speech in this House, the first MLA for the new riding of Vancouver–West End, by thanking my constituents. It's an honour to serve the residents of the West End and Coal Harbour. It's a community with great dreams and great care for one another, a community of entrepreneurial spirit and a belief in everyone having the opportunity to benefit from our province's great wealth. It's a community with a strong history of standing up for one another.

I'm honoured to serve the Vancouver–West End. I've always said that my commitment is to every member of our community, no matter what political background. So thank you to the voters of Vancouver–West End for their commitment to me, their trust in me, and I will continue to work for you and with you every day of the year.

I want to thank a special constituent of mine, a special partner of mine, my love of my life Romi Chandra.

Thank you, Romi. I would not be here without you.

As all the members here will know, none of us would be here without our partners, although sometimes our partners are o