2008 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 38th 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, FEBRUARY 14, 2008

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 26, Number 4

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Tabling Documents

British Columbia Electoral

Boundaries Commission, preliminary report amendments

Statements (Standing Order

25 B )

Spirit of B.C. in Richmond

J. Yap

Scotties Tournament of Hearts

Conroy

Multiculturalism Week

D. Hayer

Community event in Gold

River

Trevena

Electronic devices and youth

Nuraney

Women's Memorial March

J. Kwan

Oral Questions

Government action on mental

health beds

Chudnovsky

Hon. G.

Abbott

Report on decommissioning of

Riverview Hospital

Chudnovsky

Hon. G.

Abbott

Proposed TransLink routes in

Coquitlam

Thorne

Hon. K.

Falcon

Farnworth

TransLink board remuneration

Karagianis

Hon. K.

Falcon

Availability of beds at Royal

Columbian Hospital

Puchmayr

Hon. G.

Abbott

Government action on forest

worker safety

Trevena

Hon. O.

Ilich

Safety of Bamfield road

Fraser

Hon. K.

Falcon

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

D. Jarvis

G. Gentner

J. Nuraney

C. Puchmayr

Hon. J. van Dongen

N. Macdonald

Hon. R. Thorpe

[ Page 9681 ]

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2008

The House met at 2:02 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Abbott: It's a pleasure to rise and introduce some guests here today, who hosted a wonderfully informative breakfast this morning. These are people from across the province who do just wonderful work in relation to the palliative care sector in the province. They are the B.C. Hospice Palliative Care Association. I'd like to introduce to the House today Jody Smiling, who is the executive director; Nancy Kilpatrick, who is the president-elect; Wendy Pratt, who is president; and Terry Odeneal, who is a board member for the B.C. Hospice Palliative Care Association.

While I'm on my feet, Mr. Speaker, I see in the gallery up here an old friend of mine. I use "old" in the kindest sense of that word. He's an old friend and former political science professor of mine — well, it's a few years ago now — at the University of Victoria, Dr. Patty Smith. Patty is now at Simon Fraser University. Patty has also been doing a remarkable job for a few years now of leading that wonderful program that is such a benefit to both sides of the Legislature every year, the legislative internship program.

Given that he is surrounded by young people, I suspect that we can at this moment celebrate the moment, thank Patty and welcome the class-of-2008 legislative interns to the Legislature here in British Columbia.

R. Fleming: With us in the gallery today is a wonderful group of school children who are at the Legislature for their first time. They're from Cloverdale Traditional School, grade 5 students with their teacher, Ms. Marijka Westbroek. This group of school children…. Last year around this time, their school was faced with closure.

[1405]

Students worked with parents, trustees and their teachers and learned a valuable lesson in local democracy, which is to make your case and to make it forcefully. The good news is that a year later, that school is not only open, but enrolment has grown by 15 percent, and it has a bright future ahead of it. They're now here to see democracy at the provincial level at work. Will the House please make these students from Cloverdale Traditional School welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Just to remind members, two-minute statements start in a while.

S. Fraser: I'm going to be in trouble here.

I'd like to recognize a benefit event being held at eight o'clock tonight at the lecture theatre in the Victoria Convention Centre, and this is an introduction also. Appropriate for Valentine's Day, a one-act play entitled The Return of Sex — the Return of Love , produced and directed by our own Mur Meadows from the legislative dining room downstairs. If I may, hon. Speaker, the proceeds go to the Vancouver Island Sexual Health Society and Options for Sexual Health of B.C.

Mur is joining us in the gallery today. I ask you to join me again in applause. These are very worthwhile causes. I thank Mur for his work and his creativity in bringing this forward.

C. Puchmayr: Another success story. From the dining room to sociology student, Toni Steele is in the gallery. Please make her welcome.

D. Routley: I would like the House to help me welcome Wade MacGregor. Wade is here representing TimberWest's 16 dependent trucker owner-operators and pursuing the cause of operating profitably and safely at the same time. May the House help me welcome Wade McGregor.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the British Columbia Electoral Boundaries Commission's amendments to the preliminary report.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) SPIRIT OF B.C. IN RICHMOND

J. Yap: An exciting provincewide celebration is underway. February 8 to 16 is Spirit of B.C. Week. Held each February, Spirit of B.C. Week showcases the various communities that make up our great province. It's an opportunity for British Columbians to highlight the local initiatives and successes in the arts, culture, volunteerism and sports in their diverse communities. An initiative of 2010 Legacies Now, Spirit of B.C. Week was initially created to involve all communities at a grass-roots level in the lead-up to the 2010 Winter Games.

This celebration has grown significantly. This year more than 100 B.C. communities are participating in the Spirit of B.C. Week, hosting over 350 events provincewide ranging from arts exhibitions to sporting activities, with the creativity, energy and spirit of the people of our province.

My own community, Richmond, had the honour of hosting one of this year's Spirit of B.C. signature events, the Spirit of B.C. Richmond Rocks celebration, which I was happy to attend this past weekend. Community leaders, athletes, volunteers and local citizens attended an afternoon of curling demonstrations, both able-bodied and wheelchair. We were also treated to a fine musical performance by the band Bitterly Divine, a rock-and-roll band comprised of first nations musicians led by Tewanee Joseph, who also happens to be the executive director of the Four Host First Nations Secretariat.

All present were invited to write a few personal words on whiteboards on what "spirit" means to them, the idea being to create a community spirit wall with hundreds, if not thousands, of individual spirit

[ Page 9682 ]

thoughts. This builds on the "I've got the spirit" car stickers initiative, which was launched recently to promote the Spirit of B.C. in the Richmond community.

I invite all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Richmond Spirit of B.C. Committee and chair Ed Gavsie for organizing a great celebration and demonstrating that Richmond has got the spirit.

[1410]

SCOTTIES TOURNAMENT OF HEARTS

K. Conroy: From January 22 to 27 the Trail Curling Club hosted the B.C. Women's Curling Championship in Trail. Known as the provincial Scotties Tournament of Hearts, this event determined who represents B.C. at this year's national Scotties Tournament of Hearts to be held in Regina starting this Saturday. Eight teams vied for that honour, including three teams from the Royal City Curling Club in New Westminster, one each from Richmond, Williams Lake, Vernon, Kamloops and Nelson — all representing their various geographical regions across B.C. The MacInnis rink from Kamloops won the right to be Team B.C., representing our province this weekend in Regina.

An event of this magnitude is a daunting task to pull off. The people from Trail once again rose to the occasion. Over 150 volunteers were required. I want to give special recognition to the hard-working group of volunteers who formed the host committee. These include Sandra Stajduhar, Dana Haas, Eleanor and Frank Jorgensen, Eileen Gallamore, Marilyn Wiens, Janet Cameron, Jack Irvin, Dave Hogg, Shelley and Barry Frew, Brenda Moncrief, Rhonda Vilene, Lori Bagshaw, Maureen Klit, Lorna Perri, Flo Woodhouse, Donna Butler, Jacquie Swanson, Daphne and Cecil Hookey, Penny and Pat Fennell, and Georgina Jamieson.

I'd also like to point out that whenever these major events come to our area, they are televised for the country to see. What many of you don't realize is that we don't really have many main television big players in our region. It is the hard-working crew at Shaw Cable who do the fantastic job of bringing these important sports events to your living rooms. Kudos to all of them, but especially to our own local Shaw camera experts Kristina Krichowski, Jen Waldie and Bob Sutherland, who all worked the Trail bonspiel and continued to provide excellent service to our area.

Kudos to the city of Trail for once again hosting a first-class sporting event and to everyone who played, watched or worked and participated through volunteering. Congratulations on being part of an exciting week of good curling.

MULTICULTURALISM WEEK

D. Hayer: Each year in February our province and residents take the opportunity to celebrate and share our heritage and culture. We call this celebration Multicultural Week, which the Attorney General and I declared officially in Vancouver on Monday.

It is time to acknowledge the vast diversity of our cultural heritage — a legacy that springs from the beginning of this province 150 years ago. The welcome we extend to newcomers is made possible through the commitment of non-profit organizations, community groups and volunteers. That is why this year, in partnership with the multicultural advisory council, we have started the first annual Nesika Awards.

These awards will recognize excellence by people, organizations and communities whose leadership is bringing B.C.'s diverse cultures together. The Nesika Awards mean "we, us, ours" in the In-SHUCK-ch language, and it is a fitting description of the welcoming attitude that we value so highly in our province.

Diversity is one of British Columbia's greatest strengths, and it ensures we enjoy the dynamic cultural life that is the envy of many nations. It strengthens our economy through financial investment, trade opportunity and the immigration of many new immigrants. In any one week we might be exposed to first nations culture through art and history, join in a Chinese new year celebration, participate in Vaisakhi and a celebration of Oktoberfest, and attend Robbie Burns night.

Multicultural Week is an opportunity to celebrate our own traditions and cultures and to explore the tradition and cultures of other British Columbians. I encourage every member of this House to take a moment to think about the importance of multiculturalism and to honour the culture of diversity that makes this province the best place on earth to live and work and play in.

COMMUNITY EVENT IN GOLD RIVER

C. Trevena: I'd like to tell the House about an event in Gold River this weekend. It's a community celebration aimed at bridging divides. The celebration, which is also part of Spirit of B.C. Week, will be tinged with sadness as many mourn the loss of a stalwart in the community, Frank Sinclair, a faller killed in the bush earlier this week.

Organizers did want to make sure that the event went on. A lot of planning has gone into it, and it's a mark of both the village of Gold River and the first nations, the Mowachaht-Muchalaht. The relationship between those communities has at times been strained. The Mowachaht-Muchalaht, whose traditional territory covers Nootka Sound and whose ancestors greeted Capt. James Cook at Yoquot, no longer live on the ocean but on a reserve on the edge of town.

The village of Gold River itself recently marked its 40th birthday. It's had its good times, a prosperous mill, and its bad times when that mill closed. It's now looking at a renaissance with a new power plant.

[1415]

Perhaps a sign for the future of the village and for the other communities was brought by the Lieutenant-Governor. He recently visited Gold River Secondary School and had a tour of and lunch at Tsaxana. His message was clearly celebrating diversity, working towards reconciliation and building bridges.

[ Page 9683 ]

Over the last several months a group including the mayor, school board representatives, people from the reserve and young people has been working through the Centre for Innovative and Entrepreneurial Leadership to find ways for their communities to improve their relationships. The results have been described as invaluable, and everyone wants to build on what they've learned.

The first step, though, was to celebrate what they had — hence Saturday's bridging communities day, where food, music, dance and sport will bring together people from both sides of the river. I'm happy to be going to that event and invite others to join me and to work in their own way to bridge communities.

ELECTRONIC DEVICES AND YOUTH

J. Nuraney: I rise today to express concern about the relationship between our children and electronic devices. At a recent B.C. parent congress held by our hon. Minister of Education, we learned of very disturbing statistics. By graduation, an average teen would have spent more time watching screens — be it television or computer — than in the classroom, playing sports or talking to their parents.

Forty-eight percent of Canadian kids between the ages of eight and 15 have their own televisions, and 26 percent of them have their own computers hooked up to Internet. The average time spent daily using media by eight-to-18-year-olds is six hours and 21 minutes. Sixty percent of Canadian boys in grades 3 to 6 play video games almost every day.

It may be of interest to this House to know that one of the top video games for boys in grades 3 to 6 is Grand Theft Auto. While it is admirable that our children of today adapt very quickly to this technology, it is also alarming that without proper guidance and supervision, they can fall victims to the unscrupulous predators. As passive users, children utilize tools with no understanding of the concepts represented on the screen. It is, therefore, important that they be taught to utilize this very effective tool to help them understand the relationship between real ideas and what is being represented on the screen.

I cannot emphasize enough the responsibility of the parents and caregivers to supervise and direct the use of electronics in the lives of our children, not by penalizing but by nurturing. The Canadian Centre for Child Protection, in conjunction with the Ministry of Education and Solicitor General, has developed three guides about safety and the Internet for parents. I strongly advise parents to avail themselves of this very important information.

WOMEN'S MEMORIAL MARCH

J. Kwan: At noon today at the corner of Main and Hastings, outside the Carnegie library, the Women's Memorial March was held. Every year for 17 years people from our community have gathered together in support of each other as we honour the lives of women who suffer or die from violence.

As aboriginal leaders lead the march, they often sing the women's warrior song. As they march, they lay single red roses for each woman that has gone missing in the downtown east side. It is no coincidence that this march is held on February 14, Valentine's Day, for each of these women is loved by someone somewhere in our community.

The solemn march is organized and led by women because many women, especially aboriginal women, face physical, mental, emotional and spiritual violence every day. We know that this has a long history. The first official recording of a woman missing from the downtown east side was made in 1978. Today we know that there have been at least 64 women who have gone missing, and all were probably murdered. This is an overwhelming sense of loss and grief in our community. It is felt by families, friends and everyone in the community.

No matter what charges are laid or what the courts decide, there is a continuing need for communities to come together to express the feeling of loss and grief and to remember all those who still are unaccounted for, whether in our cities or towns or on the highway of tears. Each year we gather to amplify the voices at the margins of life in order to renew our commitment to end violence against women. We as public officials have an obligation to acknowledge the trauma that has been inflicted upon those women, their families, friends and our community.

[1420]

I stand here today to thank the organizers for creating this tradition, all the participants for joining together in this public expression of sorrow. I invite all members of this House to join me in reflecting on the issues which the women in our community face and which the Women's Memorial March raises, and to support these women to seek closure in these tragedies.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

MENTAL HEALTH BEDS

D. Chudnovsky: When Riverview was decommissioned, this government promised to build between 400 and 500 replacement mental health beds for Metro Vancouver. Here's what they have built: nine beds in Vancouver Coastal, 115 beds in Fraser Health. Since 2002, $41 million has sat in the bank rather than going towards the new mental health facility it was intended for — $41 million untouched, when people are suffering across the region. How can the Minister of Health justify these six years of inaction?

Hon. G. Abbott: It's richly ironic to hear from this member, who was certainly a supporter and, I'm sure, a member of the New Democratic Party — the New Democratic Party government that in the 1990s continued the process of deinstitutionalization without supports at Riverview.

It was that former government in the 1990s that concluded that the mentally ill could live without sup-

[ Page 9684 ]

ports on the streets of the downtown east side. It was that former government that announced a $125 million mental health plan, and moments later the Health Minister of the day, Penny Priddy, announced there wasn't one penny to support that $125 million health plan.

Our government has taken action since 2001. Not only did we fund the $125 million mental health plan; we have put forward $138 million towards community mental health facilities in regions all across this province.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member has a supplemental.

REPORT ON DECOMMISSIONING

OF RIVERVIEW HOSPITAL

D. Chudnovsky: I invite the minister to make that speech and to tell that to Debbie, whose son now, today, can't get the mental health services he needs in Terrace. He's been in and out of the courts and jail instead. I invite him to tell Elizabeth, who had to leave a hospital at the end of January to go live in her van. I invite him to tell that to the Vancouver police department, who have chronicled the mess that this government's mental health services are in, in this province today.

The government is going ahead with extensive plans to redevelop Riverview, even though a consultant's report on Riverview decommissioning has been kept secret. Will the Minister of Health release the secret report on Riverview decommissioning?

Hon. G. Abbott: This member doesn't know what he's talking about. The beds that he references at Riverview for Vancouver Coastal Health Authority continue to be funded. They've been funded through the period. They continue to be funded.

Vancouver Coastal Health has had a heck of a time trying to find locations. They've looked at a hundred properties in Vancouver Coastal for replacement facilities for the Riverview beds. They have struggled with that.

But I can tell you it's been a great success across the province, whether we're talking about Prince George or Terrace, as the member mentioned, or Kamloops or Kelowna or Victoria or other locations. The mentally ill now have community mental health beds and supports closer to home, unlike what that government did not do in the 1990s.

[1425]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a further supplemental.

D. Chudnovsky: The people of the province see the results of this government's policies. The people of the province know there's a crisis in mental health services in this province, and no amount of excuses from this minister can change the evidence that people see on the streets every day.

By the way, hon. Speaker, the minister seems to have ignored the question, so I'll ask it again. Will the Minister of Health release the secret report on Riverview decommissioning?

Hon. G. Abbott: If I was going to ask advice on how to deal with mental health issues in this province, that group over there is the last group that I would contact.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, you can continue now. Continue.

Hon. G. Abbott: This group across the way, this group that deinstitutionalized without support, this group that had a $125 million mental health plan without a single penny appended to it…. They did very little.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we have increased the number of mental health beds in this province by 44 percent since 2001. We now have well over 7,000 mental health beds, and we've more than doubled the number of addiction treatment beds in this province — again, unlike the sorry record of the group across the way.

PROPOSED TRANSLINK ROUTES

IN COQUITLAM

D. Thorne: We'll try that again. Yesterday we learned that according to TransLink, the ridership numbers in the Evergreen line business case include future residents of the proposed massive market-condo development on the Riverview site. But TransLink's information is being disputed by a spokesperson from the Ministry of Transportation.

My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Who's wrong — his ministry spokesperson or his TransLink?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm not exactly sure what the point of the question was, to be perfectly honest with you. The fact of the matter is that TransLink…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: …has been working with the communities of the Tri-Cities to bring an Evergreen line up to the Tri-Cities. They've selected a route that the member should know all about. We've met with the community leaders. We've said to the community leaders: "You've got 45 days to take a look at what the technology means for your communities and to come back with any recommendations, if you want any changes to the route."

My understanding is they don't. They've been pretty clear about that, at least thus far. But I'm not going to prejudge any of the consultations they have with their communities. We will do something that is very different from what that group did when they

[ Page 9685 ]

were in power, and that is when we say we're going to build something, we will get it built.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: Perhaps I'll rephrase my question so that the Minister of Transportation can understand it better. There are two proposed routes being recommended by the Minister of Transportation. City councils in the Tri-Cities have been asked to do a 45-day consultation to decide which route would be the preference of the communities.

The communities, including the city councils, were not told that the numbers of riders projected for the southern route, which has now been added back into the mix, included projected residents of a developed Riverview site. They were not told. The mayor of Coquitlam did not know. I did not know. City councils across the region did not know.

TransLink says yes, those numbers are included in the projected ridership for that proposed southern route. The Ministry of Transportation spokesperson says this is not true. Those projected residents are not included.

[1430]

All I want to know, all the residents of Coquitlam and the political people on councils want to know from the Minister of Transportation is: who is telling the truth — the Ministry of Transportation or TransLink, both of which the minister controls?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, I'll tell you what this Minister of Transportation would like to know. This Minister of Transportation would like to know: do they support actually getting this Evergreen line built, or do they not? Because I can tell you….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: The member can fiddle around with what she thinks population growth numbers on a proposed southeast corridor may or may not be. I was very clear when I met with the leaders of those communities. TransLink has actually spent a lot of time in consultation, working on the northern route. I have said to them that….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

We're going to listen to the question. We're going to listen to the answer. Please.

Minister, continue.

Hon. K. Falcon: We have met with the leaders of those communities. We had a very good meeting, and I explained to them that TransLink has done an enormous amount of public consultation and, in fact, environmental work on the route that they are actually proposing. We have no intention of shifting that route, but we asked the community for their feedback within 45 days.

Whether they're proposed numbers that the member talks about…. Those are projections. You can project whatever kinds of numbers you want, but you'll never know what they are until you know what kind of zoning a community wants to undertake.

What would be nice…. My ultimate dream, as it always has been in this House, is that just once — maybe just once — we will finally get the opposition taking a position on a major project underway in the province of British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Farnworth: What's clear, hon. Member, is that you are genetically incapable of answering a question.

Let's be clear. We want the Evergreen line. We want SkyTrain. But what we want…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Farnworth: …is communities to be able to do what the minister asked, which was to come back in 45 days with an informed answer and informed recommendations. Crucial to that is knowing what the ridership numbers for the two routes are based on, because the numbers that are put out there are put out there by TransLink, which the minister controls, and the other by his own ministry, which he controls.

The question we have is: whose figures are right? Is it TransLink's figures that are right, or are the Ministry of Transportation's figures right when they say that they're not included? The reason this is important is because the projections from his own government, in terms of the numbers being built that they would like to see on this massive development, have increased from 7,000 now to 25,000. That's faster than the increase in the overrun of the convention centre.

My question is really clear. Minister, whose figures are right? Is it TransLink saying the right thing, or is it the Ministry of Transportation saying the right thing?

Hon. K. Falcon: I know how difficult this could be for members of the opposition, because one thing they're not used to seeing is any kind of population growth. When they were in power, they just saw people moving the heck out of British Columbia. They're not used to rapid growth in communities, and I understand that.

All those members have to do is actually look at what the business case does. The business case talks about potential population growth on both the lines. It does not include numbers on Riverview. They are actually TransLink numbers that were provided as part of the business case.

[1435]

[ Page 9686 ]

I will say this. I am really pleased to hear that they are actually, apparently…. Now, this is today. This could change. They were against the Port Mann Bridge, and then all their MLAs, as soon as the leader said they were against it, were on the radio saying: "No. Actually, she didn't mean that. We really actually support it."

But today, at least, we've heard in this House that they support the Evergreen line — apparently, provisionally — but that's a good start for a group that never takes a stand on anything.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: What we get from the minister is that these are TransLink's numbers, and he didn't dispute those numbers. In other words, the TransLink numbers are right. In other words, the southern route numbers take into account a massive development proposal on the Riverview site.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: That's what you just said, Minister.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Just sit down for a second.

Members, let's listen to the question and listen to the answer.

Continue, Member.

M. Farnworth: From the heckling we get, he wants to say: "No, they're not." Well, he's got an opportunity to stand up here right now and once again tell this House. Who is right? Is it the TransLink figures that are right, or is it the Minister of Transportation's denial of those figures that is right? One of them is right, and one of them is wrong, and we want to know which one it is.

The other thing we want to know is that whatever happens on the Riverview site — whether they want a 7,000-unit development or whether they want a 25,000-unit development — when the city of Coquitlam makes a decision…. If they vote and say, "We reject this proposal," will this government respect the decision made by the city of Coquitlam and the people of Coquitlam?

The minister can answer two questions. Is it the TransLink figures that are right or his own ministry's figures that are right? Will he respect the decision by the city of Coquitlam?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: This is a most fascinating discussion for me. Am I actually hearing the members of the opposition now calling for the line to be moved to the southern route? Is that what they're calling for? They're saying that they're now pushing for…. In spite of this fascinating discussion on what potential growth figures may be on the southern line, we're actually talking about a northern route.

Member, if you are calling for a southern route, stand up and say that in this House. I think that would be helpful to this discussion.

As I've said before, we use the figures that were put forward in the business case through TransLink. Riverview was not a specific consideration when they did their modelling.

TRANSLINK BOARD REMUNERATION

M. Karagianis: The minister seems unable to answer that question about TransLink, but I've got one that maybe he can answer. Will the minister confirm for us that TransLink last week gave themselves a 500 percent increase in salary at the taxpayers' expense?

Hon. K. Falcon: What I can confirm is that a screening panel led by former New Democratic Premier Mike Harcourt made recommendations to the board. The board had no options to vary those recommendations. The recommendations were that they were to be paid….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, Members, I would think that you would show the former Premier the respect that I think he deserves.

The recommendations….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat. We're just waiting so I can hear.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: The recommendation was that the board be compensated in an amount that's equivalent to other authorities, like the Vancouver Fraser port authority and the Vancouver Airport Authority. The issue really is: is it appropriate compensation for the task we're asking them to do?

[1440]

Let's remind ourselves what we're asking this board to do: to oversee and execute the implementation of a $14 billion transportation plan, the largest transportation plan in the history of the province of British Columbia. When we asked for the screening panel to go out and seek the best and the brightest, they did a very able job in doing that under Mike Harcourt, and they have made recommendations to make sure they are compensated appropriately.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[ Page 9687 ]

M. Karagianis: I just want to be very clear here. We've just had transit fares go up in the Greater Vancouver area to being the highest transit fares anywhere in this country. Meanwhile, the Minister of Transportation's handpicked board and handpicked screening panel, except for one member, have now voted for — a group of board members who all hold very high-paying jobs elsewhere — a fee of $1,200 every single time they meet. Every single time this board meets….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Karagianis: Every time this board meets, they can bill the taxpayers $1,200. And you know what, hon. Speaker? They can actually do that every single day, and they don't even have to appear in person. They can phone in to the meeting, and they still get to bill the taxpayers $1,200 each, every single time they meet.

I would like to ask the minister: is this prudent use of transit fares and taxpayers' dollars?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. K. Falcon: One quick point before I answer the question, and that is that the member is totally wrong and factually incorrect to suggest they're the highest fares in Canada. That is demonstrably a false statement, and I would hope that the member would stop repeating that information, because it's false.

What I would like to point out is that I find it a little rich to get this lecture from the members opposite. One thing I do have is a recollection that there was a time….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Listen.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm thinking fondly back to a time when there was, in fact, a current NDP mayor named Derek Corrigan who, when they were in government, they appointed as a part-time — now, a part-time, I give you — chair of B.C. Transit and paid him $120,000 a year. Yup. It gets worse, I'm sorry to say. What does he do? He also, as he's telling everyone to go green, leases himself a Saab 900 Turbo automobile.

The NDP — even the NDP — had to get rid of this individual. But they, unfortunately, then paid $56,000 in severance to the same individual. That's not the kind of leadership we're going to put on a board that's responsible for billions of taxpayer dollars.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

AVAILABILITY OF BEDS

AT ROYAL COLUMBIAN HOSPITAL

C. Puchmayr: The crisis at Royal Columbian Hospital has reached such a proportion that the fire marshal has had to intervene due to overcrowding in the hallways. Cots and patients lined the hallways and were blocking the emergency exit. It is a deplorable situation.

What will the minister do to ensure that this deplorable situation is resolved immediately?

Hon. G. Abbott: The member's question…. I should begin by saying this. Royal Columbian Hospital has a very, very busy emergency department — in fact, the second busiest in the entire province of British Columbia. There are a lot of people who make their way through there.

I do want to say to the nurses, the doctors, the residential care aides — all of those who are working tirelessly in Royal Columbian Hospital — thank you for what you've been doing. I want to thank them and salute them.

During the past few….

Interjections.

Hon. G. Abbott: You don't want to hear the answer?

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

[1445]

Hon. G. Abbott: During the past few days the very dedicated staff at Royal Columbian has not only been dealing with the regular flow of emergency patients. They have also been dealing with the outbreak of Norwalk virus in the Queen's Park Care Centre, which is adjacent to the emergency department and is often a referral agency for the department. They've been dealing with Norwalk at Ridge Meadows Hospital, and they've been dealing with Norwalk at residential care facilities around Royal Columbian Hospital.

This is an unfortunate situation, and I hope the member can recognize that the incidence of Norwalk virus has had a profound effect upon the ability to refer patients out of Royal Columbian emergency department.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. Puchmayr: The minister needs to get out to New Westminster and see that the Queen's Park Care facility isn't near Royal Columbian Hospital. It's a separate facility that is situated a few kilometres away. The situation at Royal Columbian Hospital is a situation that began after 2005 when this government tore down St. Mary's Hospital, which used to be the overflow for this type of crisis.

It's not only the firefighters that are sounding the alarm. It's the paramedics as well. Ambulances are parked in the parking lot taking up the space. Patients

[ Page 9688 ]

are waiting inside the ambulance. The ambulances are not able to be redispatched into the field because of it.

Will the Minister of Health take leadership and resolve this crisis now, before more lives are put at risk?

Hon. G. Abbott: Well, I'll begin by advising the members that St. Mary's never had an emergency department. They were doing no emergency work at St. Mary's at the time of closure or before the closure.

I should also note for the member's benefit that the Fraser Health Authority has been working tirelessly to ensure that they have the resources to deal with a growing population in the Fraser Health Authority. In fact, after the decade of the 1990s when we saw over 3,300 hospital beds cut in the province of British Columbia, today we have 8 percent more acute care beds in Fraser Health Authority than we did in 2001 when we took office. We have a thousand more residential care and assisted-living beds today in Fraser Health than we did in 2001, and we have hundreds more mental health and addiction beds in Fraser Health than we had when we took office.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

FOREST WORKER SAFETY

C. Trevena: Mr. Speaker, the village of Gold River is in mourning because another forest worker lost his life on the job. On Tuesday Frank Sinclair, who was an experienced faller, went to work in the bush and didn't return home.

The Auditor General and the Premier's own forest safety ombudsman have both called on the government to invest in safety for our forest workers. But the Minister of Forests says it's too expensive.

My question is to the Minister of Labour and Citizens' Services. Since the Minister of Forests has refused to show any leadership, will she commit to have her ministry take the lead role in addressing forest worker safety?

Hon. O. Ilich: First of all, I would like to express my sincere condolences to the family and friends of Mr. Sinclair. We are always concerned with the death of any worker.

What I can tell the House is that WorkSafe is on site. They have sent an investigator to Gold River, and we're working with local authorities to determine the cause of this tragic accident. WorkSafe will continue to do what it can to make sure that any reports and help are given to the family.

SAFETY OF BAMFIELD ROAD

S. Fraser: My question is about accidents that may be about to happen. I've raised the issue of the safety of the Bamfield road a number of times with the Minister of Transportation, and recently the B.C. safety ombudsman report affirms what I have been demanding. Fix the road. Make it safe.

The Minister of Forests rejected the ombudsman's report. Does the Minister of Transportation agree with the Minister of Forests that it is unnecessary for us to address road safety issues in the forest?

[1450]

Hon. K. Falcon: I can certainly speak with some knowledge on the Bamfield road, which is the core of the member opposite's question.

The member knows that this is a logging road and that we have an agreement with the forest companies. In fact, we provide $200,000 a year as a contribution towards the upkeep of the road, to provide some level of maintenance for the small amount of public that utilizes the road. I think there was an issue of the deterioration of the road during the strike. There wasn't the usual work that was going on. My understanding is that they're finalizing some plans now to get that road back into condition and back into shape for the folks that use it.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued debate on the throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

D. Jarvis: When I left off this morning, I was discussing how this government was listening to my constituents and their concerns with regards to…. We had discussed community safety, greenhouse gases, the greening of North Vancouver in the schools and literacy in schools and in Cap College.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

With respect to seniors, this throne speech addresses several innovative programs that benefit our seniors. In the past year this government has definitely shown its commitment to senior citizens and to their future. As of January 1, 2008, changes to the human rights legislation will allow employees to choose when they want to retire. This will not only have huge implications for senior citizens who wish to continuing their working careers, but it will also contribute to B.C.'s growing economy.

Last year we celebrated the opening of phase 1 of the remodelled Lynn Valley Care Centre, which is a campus of care for the seniors on the North Shore. In the first phase a total of 14 units — being four one-bedroom couples units, eight single one-bedroom units and two studios — were built. Once the second phase is completed this year, we'll have a total of 29 subsidized assisted-living units and 139 complex care beds.

These kinds of initiatives will keep our seniors that are aging within our own community, with the kind of

[ Page 9689 ]

support that they require to lead the most productive and healthy lives possible. Lynn Valley Care is an example of the kind of success that we can achieve when government, the private sector and different governments and agencies partner together to solve our collective problems.

With respect to children and youth in North Vancouver and the shores, we marked yet another success earlier in January with the North Shore safe house, which was reopened. This government made a commitment for two long-term transition beds for the homeless youth. This was also made possible with the help of the federal government, who originally closed the unit and who originally funded the project, plus a large donation by a West Vancouver family.

The North Shore Youth Safe House was able to reopen after its closure in 2006, as I said, partially due to the $125,000 commitment of this provincial government. The home will provide a four-bed emergency shelter and two transitional beds, a supportive housing unit for youth that will greatly benefit homeless youth in the district of North Vancouver and North Vancouver–Seymour and more — in fact, all the way up the Sunshine Coast and up the Sea to Sky corridor to Whistler. I thank the Minister of Children and Families and his staff for the support and help.

[1455]

It's imperative that I also address the issue of childhood obesity. A current study revealed that childhood obesity is rising at an alarming rate, turning the problem into almost a crisis, as was noted in the throne speech. I believe that through continued encouragement of healthy living, we can come together and solve this problem.

Initiatives such as encouraging children to walk to school rather than riding the bus, more exercise and team sports in the schools — which is really needed, other than the way they've had it in previous years — and increased access to gym time will move us in the right direction.

I also sat on the Health Committee for child obesity, and the walking train mentioned in the throne speech was certainly paramount in the committee's findings. This government has listened to us again.

I live near an elementary school, and it's actually quite amazing to watch the parents drive their children to school nowadays. The school is at an end of a cul-de-sac in my area, and this cul-de-sac is approximately 120 feet long. The parents will sit in their cars and wait five to ten minutes so that they can inch their way up through the cul-de-sac, and there's such a traffic jam. It just blows my mind, the fact that they just don't let their children get out and walk when it's safe. The walking trains and the bicycle routes situation will probably solve that purpose. At least they should be giving it a try.

With respect to transportation, on January 14 the province of B.C. unveiled a 12-year, $14 million public transit plan to be completed by 2020. I'm pleased to say that this much-needed investment in transportation will address many of the transportation issues. There are always issues out there that would bring that to my specific attention. Transportation for the entire North Shore is always way up there on my radar. You can ask any Minister of Transportation who has heard my speeches and requests for this matter.

I continue to ask the government to help us with our complex transportation needs. We are a hilly community divided by ravines. Any of you who have had the pleasure of visiting North Vancouver–Seymour can attest that we are also at the mercy of two extremely busy provincial bridges.

Ask any North Shore resident what happens when there's an accident on either bridge or their approaches, as it happens more often than not. Residents will be very happy to tell you how long they sat going nowhere. It has almost become a rite of passage to say: "That was nothing. Let me tell you how long I was stuck and missed my flight or missed my meeting or missed my next birthday." They may be humour-filled stories in retrospect, but no one wants to hear such stories during 2010. No one wants to hear "I missed the downhill" or "I missed the closing ceremonies."

Anyway, we are also happy to hear and see that we will be getting some new buses over on the North Shore. It's tough on buses, because they're going up and down hills. You people that live in the flatlands don't appreciate how much wear and tear the buses go through. I hope we can look forward to more, and we certainly deserve schedules that will be of assistance to my constituency, which is spread out across the riding from Lonsdale right up into Deep Cove and up Indian Arm.

One other transportation issue is our aging SeaBus fleet. We need to know that if one breaks down, we are not going to be in commuter gridlock. Currently two exist that were built in 1975, but they're getting old and very dicey. They've had a few breakdowns in the last little while. The minister has suggested that one will be ready by 2009, so I would encourage him to push that up even further, if possible.

[1500]

An offshoot of suffering from gridlock on a regular basis is that the Seymour area of my community can be isolated for emergency services. I hope to have this problem solved, possibly with the help of some of our private sectors, which have come forward and offered land to help the issue. The private sector businesses also understand this issue. That's why they're there and hope to resolve the problem.

In conclusion, I want to say that I am honoured to have been presented with the opportunity to respond to this throne speech today, in the 38th parliamentary session. I know that this government hears and understands the needs of people in North Vancouver–Seymour, and I look forward to another year of working in partnership with them.

To paraphrase the Rolling Stones: "You can't always get what you want. Sometimes you find out you get what you need." I will be supporting this throne speech of 2008.

G. Gentner: I rise on this important day relative to addressing the throne speech. Above all, because it's St.

[ Page 9690 ]

Valentine's Day, I wish everybody all the love in the world. Hopefully, it can permeate these walls, throughout the hallways today. Make sure you say, "All the best," to your loved ones.

In my community of North Delta…. What is of major concern to me relative to the Speech from the Throne is that there doesn't seem to be any direction relative to the economy. I have to relate to you what my community is about. My community is working people. Basically, we are known as the most average community in British Columbia — the average salary that's brought in and the average amount of time that stays in a community, 19 years.

The issues I hear on my doorstep are pocketbook issues. People come in talking about hydro rates; increases to utility fees, doctor fees, dentist fees; higher ferry fees. We're hearing about TransLink and the increased fees there to go to work every day. For me, these are the issues that I don't see any major address on in the Speech from the Throne.

Maybe we'll hear more about it in the budget, but it seems to me that when it comes down to working people every day, they seem to be getting gouged day by day. They're getting hit by more and more user fees. For me and my community, this is probably the most important issue that the government, I feel, has failed to address.

I also have to talk briefly about the most important issue. That's the transportation issue that's hitting my community. That is the South Fraser perimeter road. It has been talked about many times in previous throne speeches, and it's alluded to in this one.

We hear about what the government is planning to do with transit, perhaps adding a SkyTrain expansion — for example, the UBC line. The minister admitted that there would be an attempt, not to do a cut-and-cover, as we saw along the Cambie line…. In fact, there will be a use of tunnelling — the use of the machine, the great mole.

Yet in my community the South Fraser perimeter road is being proposed. My community, my neighbourhood, that of the Sunbury residents association, has made it very clear. Why couldn't we do the same in my neighbourhood, in my community? Because this $2 billion road is going to have a major impact — not only on the environment, the riparian habitat along the rivers, Burns Bog and the farmland but on the neighbourhood itself. Reading the throne speech, I don't see that commitment, and I have to get it on the record that it's a major concern within my community.

This throne speech has been referred to by many as the kitchen sink. It's a catch-all basin of everything, regurgitated, I think, either from previous throne speeches or unfulfilled or old borrowed ideas from neoconservative platforms from elsewhere. Two aspects of the throne speech that I take issue with are the government's two major issues, here called "Smart Starts with the Environment" and "Smart Means…Sustainable Health Delivery."

[1505]

Early in the speech…. "This session all members will be asked to build on the record of stewardship with new conservancies and parks envisioned in approved land use plans." Oh, to build on the record of stewardship, of conservancies and land use plans. So much hope has been captured before, and the word is "sustainability."

We are waiting for a plan regarding greenhouse gas emissions, air quality improvements, reduction of carbon intensity caused by motor vehicles. But what about sustainable growth, the mechanism that can deter sprawling growth? What about the retention of ecosystems that sequester carbon, a fundamental part of the climate change plan equation itself? That has not been elaborated in detail in the throne speech.

When you look at the transportation policy, it is clear what this government's real agenda is. There's no better place to study it than right in my own community of North Delta itself — the imposed growth created by this government on our farmland, on our ecosystems and on our economy.

All the rhetoric regarding curbing carbon really, to this government, is a hill of coal if the government has a policy of building freeways that expand the carbon footprint. The Liberal government's South Fraser perimeter road comes to mind. It will destroy farmland. It will destroy 240 acres of some of the prime, best farmland this province has to offer — a gateway project that will not reduce carbon but will increase it.

Air emission controls will hit the little guy, going to work every day, with more taxes. But what will the government do about all the ships out in the harbours, all the bunker fuel that's being spewed, all the industrial pollution? I guess we're going to have to wait for the Minister of Environment's bill to fully understand how serious they are regarding curbing carbon.

The South Fraser perimeter road is so green that Environment Canada condemned it. Clearly, the Liberal government's climate change bill is a farce. The Transportation Minister's insistence on plowing the South Fraser perimeter road right through Burns Bog flies in the face of reducing the lower mainland's carbon footprint. Burns Bog sequesters carbon, and this government doesn't really care.

I remember well the day four levels of government converged in order to sign a memorandum of agreement on the purchase of Burns Bog and a conservation covenant that would commit all partners to the maintenance of the ecosystem's viability. We were all buoyed. The community had worked so hard, and finally, Burns Bog was protected. I remember it well because I was part of the negotiating team, but today is a black day for the bog and the trust of a provincial government that has lost its way. It seems that the carbon-spewing zealots will stop at nothing on that side of the Legislature.

In a recent publicly released letter from Environment Canada, the federal government environment agency came down hard on the Transportation Minister's plan for pushing South Fraser perimeter road through Burns Bog. The letter stated that the province should consider scrapping its proposal and find an alternate route. What is of great concern is that, regardless of these warnings of environment degradation, the

[ Page 9691 ]

provincial Ministry of Transportation, assisted by the Ministry of Environment, plans to go ahead.

There's no stopping this government and its design to destroy the Fraser Estuary. Last month the Minister of Transportation requested an extension to review, in order that it can rationalize its further destruction of the bog. The Environment Canada letter is clear, and the technical review is overwhelming, but the Liberal government has already committed to acquiring land for its fixed route before the science has been concluded. Smog is a Liberal touch in this case.

In the early years of its first mandate the Liberal government compromised the provincial environmental assessment office, but that compromise should not taint a partnership that includes environmental stewardship shared by Canada, B.C., Metro Vancouver and the community of Delta. Thank heavens the federal environment regulator still has some sense and integrity.

Environment Canada did not mince words. "If the highway is built…there are very serious risks of negative impacts on bog hydrology." The message is clear. South Fraser perimeter road will compromise hydrology and will adversely affect natural unique bog amenities such as plants, wildlife and habitat.

[1510]

We all know that bogs are a huge contributor as a scrubber of carbon. It has been referred to by the experts as the lungs of the lower mainland. In its technical review Environment Canada stated that Burns Bog can only exist with a sustainable, non-compromised transition zone, often referred to as the lagg. It is in this area where the province is proposing the freeway.

In its technical appendix, "Environmental Assessment of South Fraser Perimeter Road," Environment Canada stated, "In

summary, Environment Canada believes that the value of the bog is seriously compromised…. There is presently no evidence that the multiple functions…of a natural lagg, including its unique ecological characteristics, can be replaced by an engineered structure" such as South Fraser perimeter road — page 7.

The province's proposal is deficient, and clearly, Environment Canada does not accept the Liberal carbon-enhancing project. Long-term viability of Burns Bog is put at considerable risk by the project. Environment Canada went on to say that should the South Fraser perimeter road proceed as currently proposed, it is concerned that the project will "compromise the ability" of Metro Vancouver and its partners to meet their commitments under that covenant, which his government signed, "including restoring the bog in accordance with the recently approved Burns Bog ecological conservancy area management plan."

The B.C. Liberals have a tradition of disregarding contractual obligations and actions on this project. It will show not only its contempt for the environment but disdain for local and regional governments who have bought into the plan for protection of the bog. Gateway's executive director, Mike Proudfoot, has been assigned as Assistant Deputy Minister of Transportation, a clear indication that the Minister of Transportation will continue with his concerns and his bully-like tactics in destroying Burns Bog.

Hon. K. Falcon: You were going to pave the thingy.

G. Gentner: You will pave it.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, please allow the speaker to respond to the throne speech. All members will have an opportunity to respond and express their own opinions. Thank you.

Please continue, Member.

G. Gentner: The Liberals' currently designed South Fraser perimeter road will not only result in the release of more carbon but will destroy hundreds of acres of farmland, compromise valuable ecosystems, impact residential areas and destroy valuable riparian habitats along the world's most productive salmon-bearing river, the Fraser River itself.

The Liberal climate change agenda is clearly smoke and mirrors — mirrors and smoke. We on this side are going to pick the Liberal climate change promise apart bit by bit. The carbon promise will burn, fume, and it will smoulder.

I want to turn my attention to health, specifically those aspects within the throne speech that deal with seniors' health. Older British Columbians are not a burden. They have worked hard to build this province into a modern and compassionate society. They've survived the Depression. Many more wore our country's uniform during war, while many more worked in factories and industry for the war effort, scraping by so that today we can have a decent, caring world in British Columbia. They paid their fair share of taxes, and they continue to do so today. They are a continuing source of wisdom, experience and talent.

In British Columbia we cherish our universal public health care system. In repeated surveys and opinion polls, support for medicare is reaffirmed as a fundamental value. Our system, for the most part, provides universal access to quality care for all regardless of wealth, social status or other barriers. Sadly, this universality and equality of acute care beds ends for seniors at the doors of long-term care facilities. Too often long-term care is not available for seniors who need it most. Unfortunately, long-term care is not included in the Canada Health Act.

[1515]

The Premier boasts about his relationship with the federal government. The Premier brags about his relationship with the Prime Minister. He brags about his new program for seniors, but where has he been during Premiers' conferences? Where has he been when it comes to demanding from the federal government the insurance of universal health care for all seniors? Where has he been with the need for facilities and

[ Page 9692 ]

places for seniors that will, in the end, bring down the costs of hospital care?

I raise this because it's not in the throne speech. Ironically, if a frail and elderly person receives medically necessary services in a hospital, those are provided from the public purse. Yet the same person receiving essentially the same service in a long-term care facility must pay for it out of pocket. Our system is failing to provide thousands of older British Columbians with the affordable care they deserve.

The government brags about the so-called increase in for-profit long-term care facilities. We also have a growing elderly immigrant population. Many suffer from language and culture barriers. Providing appropriate care for these seniors sometimes is a challenge. Many worked in low-wage industries and are now doubly disadvantaged by a long-term care system that favours the wealthy.

I have to commend the progressive intercultural community which works in my community and demonstrated what it can do for the elderly. It's located on Scott Road. I have to commend Mr. Charan Gill and Inderjit Gill for the wonderful work they have done to be able to provide long-term care service for their community.

Interjection.

G. Gentner: It's our money — our money, Mr. Speaker. It's the province of British Columbia's money, and we need more money in this province to deal with the burgeoning problem of provision of long-term health care for the seniors that need it most.

In Canada 19 percent of unattached female seniors fall below the low-income cut-off level, now known as the poverty line. When you consider the higher standards of living in British Columbia, low-income senior women are extremely vulnerable. About another 20 percent of seniors are hovering just below the poverty line. Close to 40 percent of seniors in the province are trying to get by with as little means as possible, and we have a government that doesn't care.

There was promise when this government was elected in 2001. The Liberals promised 5,000 new long-term care beds. But boy, four years later how that definition of beds has changed. In the 2005 throne speech the government was committed to the goal of 5,000 new beds for seniors across the spectrum of assisted living, residential care and independent housing. That's a new shot, a new change.

The Liberal government originally pledged to build 5,000 long-term beds by 2006, but they came short. Suddenly the government says it will be accomplished by the end of 2008, five months before the election. Oh, but they are a sneaky bunch — a conniving group who are fabricating numbers in order to cover themselves.

The throne speech has abandoned that promise. Lo and behold, the Liberals are not talking about long-term beds anymore. They're talking about units. The new head count, in order to make its posturing, is the meshing of long-term beds with units. It's tricky stuff, this mathematics.

The addition table would turn Stephen Hawking's quantum gravity upside down. Let's see. How does this arithmetic work? One plus one equals ten? No, that's not enough by 2009. Let's say ten plus ten equals 300. Yes, we'll put a new door handle over here and call it a new unit. We'll paint an old suite for the homeless and call it seniors supportive housing.

You know how it works, Mr. Speaker — the melding of the minds. We have a debate, perhaps in cabinet with the Minister of Health and the Minister Responsible for Housing. They'll get together and try and figure out a way to deal with this problem. They'll say such things as, "We'll count the suites," though they are intended for the homeless, but there's a chance that that occupant can be a senior. So they'll call that a senior long-term care bed.

You see, it all comes down to the word "potential." Perhaps the Minister of Health will reason that because a unit might be occupied by a senior in ten years, it therefore should count, as well, as one of those magical 5,000 beds the government has promised.

Perhaps the Minister for Housing on the other side…. He's a shrewd bookkeeper indeed. He's a little smarter. After all, he has a calculator, something that the minister responsible for the Vancouver convention centre wished he'd had. Well, this clever fellow has figured it out. He knows his Liberal algebra. He reasons that it's not a question of whether every unit or bed, old or new, might be occupied by a senior, but that most occupants have the potential of reaching 65 years.

[1520]

His clipboard colleague from Health concedes that this is clever math, but he suggests one additional addendum. He not only knows his math, but he knows his Health portfolio and says: "The way our health care is going, let's make the age for eligibility for seniors 55, and then we can pretty much say that all occupants are potential senior units." They agree, and now we know how the Liberals got their 1,500 long-term beds to 5,000 units.

Now, I'm not making this up. Clearly, the goal was 5,000 long-term beds. But the government, in its previous throne speech, has changed its political language and has committed to create 5,000 beds and units. It's funny what happens when you change the language. Assisted-living units are now part of the Liberal formula to build 5,000 long-term care beds. And what's more, when you read the government advertisement, it counts both upgraded units and seniors independently living in their own houses as part of the total of more than 3,600 new units. In a recent eight-page insert in The Vancouver Sun this is what the government is peddling.

So new units are living in your own home. You live in your own home and Meals on Wheels delivers once a week. That, in the government's mind, with its own math, counts most likely as a long-term bed/unit. I'm sorry to say that it's all a bunch of bunk. But we'll wait for the figures before we get to the election. I'm sure it will be beefed up.

Part of the government's 5,000-bed commitment includes language that surrounds revitalization of facilities. So-called revitalized facilities or units are counted as new. The government, in its devious means,

[ Page 9693 ]

is counting old as new. An upgrade with a little upkeep or paint — something that years ago was marked on the ledger as general maintenance — now, surprisingly, under Liberal bookkeeping means any improvement is counted as a new capital project. A long-term bed now is not just a bed in a care facility. It's counted with the independent unit as well.

It's so dreamlike that you can see how the Liberal cabinet members came up with the numbers. Maybe they turn off the lights, and they sit around with a candle flickering, maybe a Ouija board. On one side you've got a celestial struggle erupting between the chief clairvoyant…. He's probably the member from Point Grey. Then you've got the member for Shuswap. He's maybe the genie and just came out of the bottle. They create something called political numerology, a divine relationship between numbers and objects. In this case, the number 5,000 and beds. This is what was in the previous throne speech. But why from the promise years ago of 5,000 beds to today's units?

This throne speech has a message. It's truly telepathic, or perhaps, maybe, it's just pathetic. It's pathetic because the government has abandoned its commitment. Only a Liberal government would twist the facts that beds, units and even homes are lumped together as 5,000 long-term care bed commitments.

Let's look at the record. The government promised to privatize B.C. Rail. They tried hard, but they couldn't. They couldn't sell the land out by Delta. I think there's a little problem with that one. Something got in the way.

The 2007 throne speech took up 14 pages on climate change. "The science is real," it said. "It leaves no room for procrastination. Global warming is real." Did we get a budget to assist it? Nada. Nothing.

Speaking of vows, after all, isn't that what this throne speech is supposed to be — a set of goals? But where is the commitment? Where is the execution? Where are the results? The Premier four years ago vowed to make B.C. the most literate place on the continent, but according to the Auditor General, the Premier has failed the province. Originally, the Premier committed to making B.C. the most literate location in North America by 2010. But they couldn't make that number, so they're now changing it to 2015. It's similar to that shaman science practice, similar to that of putting numbers together with long-term beds.

It's the same thing with the promise of reducing injury and death in the forestry sector. It hasn't happened. Same thing with the tree-planting, the promise to fight climate change by replanting forested landscapes. Grossly under budget. Gross lack of reforestation in a planting structure.

No mention of the government's commitment of 5,000 long-term beds in the throne speech. Why is that? The high price inserts still peddle the notion, but not in this throne speech.

[1525]

But there is something in the throne speech regarding seniors, so let's look at that. What's suddenly changing here? Could it be that the spin doctors, the mathematicians realize the numbers don't add up after all, and they could get caught? No. What they've done, knowing they can't fulfil the bed count…. It's no longer a health issue or a housing issue. It's a Minister of Finance issue, who's going to now give us some hope — not more public financing but a scheme for personal saving accounts.

That's right. You pay taxes all your life, but what the Liberals are proposing is that that's not enough. We'll give tax breaks to the corporations, but you're now going to be forced…. If you want any type of long-term care home or care at all, you are now going to have to invest in what the government's calling an independent living savings account program — a tax shelter for the rich.

The Liberal government's personal health savings account scheme plays on the fears that all British Columbians face when they age: retaining your independence for as long as you can. Independence is the key to self-esteem. They want self-respect and the ability to maintain their dignity and autonomy. Crafting a health savings account under the guise of independent living implies dignity for the elderly can only be obtained if you are rich enough to pay into a tax-sheltered account.

Personal health saving accounts are not for the poor, and it's unlikely they're affordable for the working people. With this escalating cost of living expenses from user fees, utility fees, hydro fees, etc., there is less and less that British Columbians have in the ability to save to address their day-to-day needs.

For most middle-class British Columbians, the largest and most prosperous investment is in their own homes, although mortgage payments account for close to 40 percent of many British Columbians' monthly costs. Many homeowners envision a luxury of mortgage-free senior years and bank on a high real estate return as insurance to defray higher care costs due to aging.

For many mortgage holders, funding additional plans such as RRSPs and mutual funds is already difficult to manage. For the non-indebted homeowner or renter, RRSPs can offer savings and opportunities for senior years. However, to expect an additional burden…. British Columbians must now find the additional money for personal health savings accounts. That will be a tenuous undertaking for most people.

Now, the details surrounding this wealthy Liberal tax shelter are sketchy, and we will have to wait and see what the act will look like. We know what the personal health accounts look like in the United States. They're set up because there is no public medical system. These accounts are a precursor to higher deductible premiums. That is the history of medical tax shelters.

The introduction of health savings accounts will challenge the belief that health care costs are a shared responsibility rather than a burden to be borne by an unwell individual. You know, it's really going to be too bad if you're ill when you get old, because if you haven't had the fortune to invest in this tax shelter, you're going to be left out in the cold.

Withdrawals from the personal health savings accounts will be tax-free if used to pay for qualified medical expenses. Will those who can afford to pay

[ Page 9694 ]

into the accounts have better access to drugs than those who cannot afford to pay into them? Will account funds cover expenses related to most forms of medicare, disability, dental care, vision care, long-term care? Will non-account participants be afforded the same vision care or long-term care as those who paid and received a tax receipt under the personal savings account?

This is a major change for our medical system. Like an RRSP, will the government guarantee it from bad investments? If the middle class became reliant on personal health accounts as the catch basin for senior health care, there is a risk that an account holder may find that their medical expenses outstripped the contributions they could afford to make, and what then?

The throne speech talks about individual choice. Individual choice means private medicine, and heaven help us what it will mean when we reach our twilight years.

[1530]

In closing, let's talk very briefly about what the experts say about medical savings accounts. I have a report here from the prestigious Canadian Medical Association, a report put forward by the department of community health sciences, faculty of medicine, University of Manitoba; and, of course, the department of health policy, management and evaluation of the faculty of medicine, University of Toronto.

"Medical savings accounts will not save money but will instead, under most formulations, lead to an increase in spending on the healthiest members of the population."

It goes on to suggest in its conclusion:

"Our results suggest that MSAs will not save money but will instead, under most formulations, lead to an increase in spending on the healthiest members of the population. MSAs may indeed be able to increase access and choice, but they will do so by driving up costs, with little attention to the appropriateness or health benefits of this increased spending. When one adds to the mix concerns about equity and implications for preventive care, medical savings accounts have very little to recommend. It is past time that they were buried."

The example of the United States has made it very clear why we should not be moving in this direction, and I know that it's a major election plank there. The Conservatives in Alberta are going to privatize medicine, and how they're going to do it is to force seniors to pay through their pocketbooks.

It's been a pleasure to speak here.

J. Nuraney: I have, once again, the honour to respond to the throne speech, as I have done in the past several years. Before I start with my remarks, I would like to address some of the things that the member for Delta North was talking about.

He took quite a bit of time talking about Burns Bog but forgot to mention that when his government was in power, they wanted to pave that place and put the PNE on top of it. Isn't it strange that today that member has the audacity to stand in this House and talk about Burns Bog and how we, this government, protected Burns Bog in the interests of the environment?

The member also spoke about how Canadians survived the Depression. Canadians are very resilient. They also survived the doom and gloom of the '90s, when that government was in power.

He also talked about and took a lot of time talking about the long-term care facilities. Let me remind the member that when we became government in 2001, I visited quite a lot of those long-term care homes, which were in a totally deplorable condition. The seniors who were living in those homes had no access by wheelchair. Their bathrooms were of an old style. They could not use the tubs. The conditions that we found the seniors living in, in those homes were absolutely deplorable.

The member from North Delta has forgotten all of that. However, since we got elected in 2001, we have continuously shown vision and leadership in our commitments in the throne speeches. What we have seen in this speech is a continuous process, a consistency, a flow of commitments that are built one over the other.

In 2001, when we formed government, there was an air of despondency, and people were leaving our province to seek opportunities outside. Families were broken up, unemployment was very high, and one out of ten British Columbians was on welfare.

[1535]

Today I'm proud to say that we, this government, have turned this province around. Today we enjoy the highest level of investments. Today we enjoy the lowest rate of unemployment. Today we see increased immigration into the province. Today we see our children get more and better opportunities in education. Today we see British Columbia becoming a hub of the high-tech industries, and today we see hope and renewed aspirations among our citizens.

All this has not happened by chance. Our government set the course and constructed a plan to bring about this change. We have been consistent in our approach and commitment. This resulted in bringing back the confidence needed to develop economic growth.

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that we can only spend what we have. As our economy improved, so did our revenues. We now have the ability to invest in matters we consider important. We have now invested the most dollars ever in health care. We have also invested the most dollars ever in education. We have now also invested more in transportation than ever before. Our investments in social programs have never been better.

This throne speech builds further as we move forward. We will be hosting the Winter Olympics in 2010, and this has created enormous excitement in my community in Burnaby. Young athletes are now dreaming about participating in events. For the first time, our government came up with the idea of leaving legacies for the benefit of the communities, a concept that is becoming a model to emulate for other nations and by other nations who will be holding Olympic events in the future.

The economic benefits this event will bring to our province are enormous. Many of my Burnaby business

[ Page 9695 ]

people and entrepreneurs are actively working to be part of this great opportunity.

The celebration of the 150th anniversary will also mark a milestone. It will be an occasion to celebrate the accomplishments of our province and showcase the diversity of our citizens, including the first nations people. Our history, unfortunately, is studded with injustices meted out to aboriginal people in the past.

This government has taken the courageous step of trying to remedy that situation. The building of the new relationship with first nations has been very successful and has resulted in concluding half a dozen treaties. This exercise will continue to allow the people of first nations to take charge of their own destiny.

Creative and innovative methods are being found to address some pressing problems with the children and families of this community. A healing and wellness village will be established as a place of healing for those suffering from trauma, addiction and mental illness. It is time that we look at these problems through the lenses of the aboriginal people.

As the world moves to the age of technology and globalization, we must also adapt ourselves to a lifestyle in keeping with the changes. Climate change has become the top of mind issue among one and all. Our government has taken leadership and has taken decisive action. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act now requires us to reduce greenhouse emissions by 33 percent from the 2007 levels by 2020 and by 80 percent by the year 2050.

[1540]

Whilst the government is putting legislation in place and encouraging business and industry to come to the table in finding solutions, we as individual citizens must also play our role. Individual and community engagement in this process is essential. To encourage individuals to become smarter in conservation, government will offer tools to monitor consumption by installing things like Power Smart meters.

We are also in the process of developing building codes which will establish and construct very efficient buildings. The innovative clean energy fund will help create 100,000 solar roofs in British Columbia and build on the expertise in solar technology. BCIT, an institute of great pride in my riding, is well ahead in the development of this technology.

Changing temperatures and precipitation patterns are already affecting our weather, water, water cycle and ecology. This impacts our forests, ecosystems, water levels, infrastructure, agriculture industry and recreational opportunities. Our government is moving forward to plan for such impending disasters.

The government in the past never had any foresight to develop any plan in anticipation of future needs. The classic example we have is in our health care. The previous government had ten years and were warned about the upcoming aging population that will be there with us after the year 2000, but the previous government never, ever exercised any caution or implemented any plan to meet the crisis that we are now burdened with.

Our government is thinking well beyond the coming decade and will be launching the Forests for Tomorrow program, which will help plant 60 million seedlings over the next four years.

Sustainability of health care continues to offer challenges. Our government will implement new initiatives which will allow citizens to gain access to their health records and medical information so that they can play an informed role in making both preventative and therapeutic care choices.

More investments will be made in research on diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and strokes. Our universities are world leaders in such research centres. In British Columbia we have attracted more scientists in the past five years in different fields of research, as government invests more dollars in this sector.

Hip replacements have become a major need in our aging population, and new investments in the centre for hip health research will be undertaken. The Fall Prevention Society of Burnaby is doing an excellent job in this regard in educating our seniors to avoid falls and to protect themselves against such incidents. The establishment of seniors community parks will be of great help in making our seniors active.

The health of our children is a major concern. In this regard ActNow has undertaken various initiatives to encourage our youth to be active. Schools have undertaken many programs in this regard, and the elimination of junk food and the changing of eating habits have contributed greatly towards achieving our goal of a healthy society.

Accreditation of foreign-trained doctors has been an issue plaguing our new immigrants. This government will now seek authority to ensure that health professionals also are certified to practise in this province. If they're already approved and certified in other Canadian jurisdictions, they will automatically be able to practise their profession in British Columbia. A new restricted licence will also allow internationally trained physicians to practise in their specific area of qualification.

A shorter period for bachelor of nursing science degrees will greatly enhance the number of medical professionals who will enter the work force sooner, as we need more and more of these health care workers to join forces.

[1545]

The United Kingdom, a couple of years ago, implemented the practice of allowing qualified nurses to triage patients, and this helped considerably to reduce wait times at emergencies. The expanded scope of practice for nurses will be very beneficial.

The other aspect that our government is very keen on and has been addressing for the past few years is our challenges in dealing with homelessness and people with mental illness. This has continued as a priority with this government, which has developed a very comprehensive strategy.

We have increased housing stock for lower income, and I'm happy to say that a housing complex has been acquired in Burnaby for this purpose. A large number of people living on the streets are those suffering from

[ Page 9696 ]

mental illness. This has been the direct result of the policy adopted by the previous NDP government when they closed the Riverview facility, letting out about 4,000 patients into communities without proper support.

Money was promised to help with the rehabilitation. That money never came. Many were left without any support and found themselves on the streets. The re-opening of the facility on Willingdon and at Riverview is welcome news. Burnaby will now be able to deal with this problem in a more humane way.

On the education front I can say with confidence that our government has made very positive changes. Funding levels are highest ever, class sizes are more manageable, and support services for children of refugees and new immigrants have been enhanced.

I am proud to mention that in Burnaby we have a large population of refugee immigrants. Concerns were raised to me by the families that their children, who have had no educational background, were feeling frustrated and leaving schools to end up on the streets. This problem will now be addressed as more funding has been made available to our school districts by the Minister of Education and by the minister of immigration.

A new centre for autism education and research that the throne speech mentions will also be of great help. There is a growing preponderance of this condition, and this centre will no doubt be very welcome.

The access for students to our institutes of higher learning with a grade B average is also good news that was announced in the throne speech. This will offer more opportunities for our children to be a part of our institutes of excellence in learning that we are now so very proud to have around the province.

The throne speech continues to build upon the vision that this government has got. It continues to build upon what this government considers to be essential to make British Columbia the best place on earth, and it will continue to work hard to make sure that every British Columbian has the opportunity to look to the future with confidence.

[1550]

Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to say that I will be supporting this throne speech when it comes to the vote.

Deputy Speaker: Member for New Westminster.

C. Puchmayr: Mr. Speaker, I guess my lecture when you were in my community the other day helped you to pronounce the name properly, and thank you very much for that.

Deputy Speaker: Member, you refer to the Chair and the Speaker. Please proceed with your comments to the throne.

C. Puchmayr: I just wanted to say that in New Westminster that's how we find out who comes into New Westminster that really doesn't live there. It's usually how they pronounce the name. It's a historic name. It comes from Westminster. It was named by Queen Victoria when there was a dispute over the name.

I'm very proud of New Westminster. It is a community that also has its challenges, as many communities have today. And certainly as many communities have, it has come to deal with some of the issues that have been brought forward by the policies of the government that is in power today.

I will be speaking against the throne speech, as I have the previous throne speeches. I'll tell you that the first throne speech that I heard in this House sounded very…. It had some promising ideas in it, but again, it failed to deliver on those ideas. The second throne speech, again, made a lot of announcements.

At first blush, you would think that the government was prepared to head in a positive direction, yet the end results…. After the budget speech was introduced, we saw that they were nothing but hollow and broken promises once again.

This throne speech was a very long throne speech. I believe it was around 50 minutes. I know we had the sympathy of the Lieutenant-Governor when he asked us to please bear with him as he went through the speech.

Some of the things that came out in the throne speech are issues that I'm going to wait to see what the budget brings forward, to see how the budget addresses them. Certainly, this side is going to look at ensuring that this government commits to some of the initiatives they are saying they will commit to. We will certainly make some proposals, if not, to make sure that we go forward in a direction that all British Columbians can benefit from and not just a select few.

We talk about the prosperity. The other side always talks about, you know, the greatest place on earth to live. When I walk around in my community or when I walk around in the downtown east side and I look at the people that are living in the streets, I know very clearly that to them, this is not "The best place on earth" to live. It may be warmer than other parts of the country, but again, we have seen the horrors of homeless people that pass away in the streets trying to keep warm and those that are mugged or victims of violence while living in the streets after they've been turned away from shelters. To me, it's absolutely unacceptable in this day and age.

As we talk and we hear the other side boast about how great this province is now and how poorly this province was in the past, we have to remember that there was a real global crisis going on in the '90s, and it brought stock markets down all over the world. Even if you read some of the pundits in some of the journals

[ Page 9697 ]

and the financial journals, you see that what happened in the crash in those days was significant and that a lot of countries and a lot of cities were brought into poverty.

This province here, seeing what was happening globally around the world, actually did quite well. There were way fewer people that were homeless in the streets. We had better services in place. Our children could go to university full-time, and they had some of the lowest tuitions, if not the lowest tuition rates, in Canada. We were graduating people at Red Seals with trade certificates that were coming out of those trade industries. They were coming out, and they were able to work and get jobs in their new fields.

[1555]

We had forest companies that, understanding the cyclical nature of that industry, under the old forest practices would…. This goes back, and you can do the research on it, a hundred years. Forestry and lumber has always been a cyclical industry. Natural resources has always been a cyclical industry. What prudent companies did in those days…. Government regulation ensured that they stayed behind, ensured that they invested in here, ensured that if they wanted to cut trees in British Columbia, they also had to manufacture in British Columbia. That's now gone.

Now we have an industry that is totally market-driven. It's market-driven to such a degree that companies look at their balance sheet and say, "Well, you know, we can mill this wood cheaper across the border in the United States, or we can send it to China. We're going to shut down the mills and just continue to export the logs" — and at record volumes, I might add.

In 1996, I think, there was an export of 275,000 cubic metres. A cubic metre is about the equivalent of a telephone pole. Now we're at five million cubic metres of logs, with absolutely thousands of British Columbia workers losing their jobs.

The throne speech does talk about retraining forest workers that are losing their jobs. It talks about that, but think about this. Think about living in a community that is a forest-dependent community, that has an ample supply of trees, that has a mill — a pulp mill or a sawmill — in that region, and suddenly the mill decides: "I would rather be a real estate developer than a wood manufacturer. I can still cut down trees, and I can export them and have my mill in another country manufacture that."

What do you do with that worker now in a community that has one industry? What is retraining of that worker going to produce for that community? Absolutely nothing. Businesses are hurting in those communities. Businesses are suffering. People are losing their jobs. Businesses are leaving. Jobs are leaving British Columbia and going south of the border at record rates, and going to China — manufacturing jobs.

We're talking about the higher-scale-of-pay jobs that are leaving British Columbia under the watch of this government. That's shameful because — you know what? — those are our resources. Those are our trees. That's our oil. That's our natural gas. That's our coal. We should benefit from it. Our children should benefit from it, and their children should benefit from it. Instead, we're not benefiting from it. Very few people are benefiting from it.

We talk about how great this province is. Well, I'll tell you that back in the '90s there was a gap between the rich and the poor. The biggest gap between the rich and the poor was in Newfoundland. That was the biggest gap, and the narrowest gap was here in British Columbia. The most balance was here in British Columbia, and now it's completely the opposite.

The other statistic that is really alarming, when you look about how great it is to live in the greatest place on earth…. And I believe this can be the greatest place on earth, but when you have child poverty, when one in four children are living in poverty, that's shameful. That is absolutely shameful.

At one time, back in this terrible era of the '90s, back at that time we were the best here. The best place in the country to raise children was in British Columbia, and now it's the worst. Now it's the costliest to raise children in British Columbia.

That's where we're headed. I mean, we need to start to look at things in a balanced way. We need to ensure that we have viability, that we have sustainable industries and that we have sustainable communities so that we can continue on.

One of the things that sort of struck me in this throne speech was the Walking School Bus idea. I spoke to a woman who told me that they travel for an hour a day to drive their children to the bus stop so that their child can take a bus to school, and travel another three hours a day to and from school.

[1600]

What kind of a Walking School Bus is going to deal with that issue? What? Instead of going to bed Sunday night, you start walking to school? The Walking School Bus is another one of those nice-sounding, fluffy things. That's another nice-sounding thing — the Walking School Bus. But you know what…?

Interjection.

C. Puchmayr: Even the Transportation Minister doesn't understand that there are children in this province spending hours and hours a day on buses because they are closing schools constantly and forcing children to bus.

I would like to tell you that many children are now forced into buses. When you do that, when you close a school, you rip the heart out of that community. If you want to reinvest in that community, and the school is gone, what do you do?

The school is now out of the community. Someone wants to reinvest in the community. They're going to look at attracting workers. We're saying there's a shortage of skilled workers. Why would somebody want to relocate in a community that has no school? Why? They wouldn't.

So again, that little component of taking that school out of the community is also taking the ability for that community to grow. If it's a resource community and if

[ Page 9698 ]

we are in a low cycle and you take the school out while the cycle is low, you're not going to have the same community when the cycle increases, because families aren't going to want to move to somewhere where the children have to ride on a bus for three hours a day to go to and from school. That is a fact.

We need to have complete communities. We need to live with the upturns and the downturns, and we need to build a British Columbia that benefits all, not just the investment community.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

The throne speech talks about the climate change issue. We heard it in the last throne speech — which we thought was the green throne speech — but really nothing came out of that, which is more evidence that the throne speech may sound good to some people, may sound good to some pundits, but once it's all over with…. Once the budget has been introduced, once we've completed this session, I guarantee you that you're going to look back and say: "Wow, there was a lot of hot air in that throne speech. There was really not a lot that was accomplished."

There are also many, many things that were announced in 2006 and 2005 in the throne speech — never happened. It was announced here. That's where it started, and that's where it ended.

This blue-ribbon panel on climate change. We're now talking about capping emissions and then being able to buy somebody else's non-emissions, cap-and-trade. Right now we already have sort of a system where companies have left here because of our environmental laws. Some companies think we're too strict already, so they're going to go to China and have their commodities produced in China.

Now, capping and trading is going to do the same thing. Capping and trading could have that same effect. Why is there not somebody that represents blue-collar workers sitting on this blue-ribbon panel? Why aren't blue-collar workers represented?

Why aren't people, whose very jobs could leave this country because of cap-and-trade…? Why aren't they part of the equation? Why aren't they sitting there with the employer, with these blue-ribbon panellists? One of them, I believe, happens to be the president of Exxon or one of the major oil companies. I don't think it is Exxon, but it is one of the major oil companies.

So this is the blue-ribbon panel. The oil company has more access to the climate change initiative than the workers that could be affected. It makes no sense.

[1605]

All of British Columbians should play a role in this — all British Columbians. I know the other side has some concern when workers sit down at a table, probably because they make a lot of sense. Working people understand their industries. Working people understand what they go through. Working people understand what they need to do to survive and what they need to do to bring up their families. So why aren't they there? Why aren't they at the table? It would be a great initiative to have them at the table.

Foreign workers. It's something that we're certainly hearing more and more of all the time — that there's a need for bringing in more workers from other countries. It used to be skilled workers, and now we talk about doctors. There certainly needs to be an avenue for somebody who learns medicine in India or China and who wants to come and practise medicine here. There is no greater crime to humanity, I think, than when you take a doctor out of a country, allow him to come to British Columbia and then not allow that doctor to practise. Actually, you've eliminated a doctor from a country that really needs a doctor.

There's nothing wrong with that. That's the direction to go. But this makes it sound like the doctors are going to come right into this province, get a stamp, and they're going to be available for our health care system. That is absolutely not on. That is a national thing, and it's the College of Physicians that deals with it.

My concern with some of these programs and fast-tracking education of a health care specialist…. You have to be cautious about that. There is a lot of curriculum that trains professionals and that certainly trains professionals in the field of health care. There's a reason for that. It's the safety of the patient. It's to ensure that the patient has the best care possible. To fast-track that care could put the health and safety of patients at risk. It could even put other practitioners at risk as well. So just allowing a fast-tracking of the system isn't the way to go.

When we look at what's happening right now in the health care system…. I'll just talk about New Westminster for a minute and Royal Columbian Hospital. Ambulances parked outside during the day. Patients and gurneys blocking all the doorways. The fire marshal has had to come in and take action. The fire marshal has had to deal with it to ensure safety of people.

The fire marshal actually spoke to me this morning and said that he wanted to absolutely praise the health care workers in there — the doctors and the nurses — for what they were enduring and for what they were going through and asked if we could please help cast some light on what is going on in that hospital.

Here we've got a health care system that is actually creating a disincentive for people wanting to get into the health care field. People are being overworked in the health care field. People are being overworked, and the situations are absolutely horrific for them. I have spoken to doctors, and I have spoken to nurses. I have spoken to doctors who have had almost their entire elective surgeries cancelled because of emergencies that are bumping them.

[ Page 9699 ]

Earlier, in an exchange with the Health Minister in question period, I mentioned to him about St. Mary's Hospital, which used to be the overflow. I'll just explain how that worked, because St. Mary's Hospital was fairly close — about a kilometre and a bit away from Royal Columbian Hospital.

[1610]

If a situation like what is arising there right now happened at Royal Columbian Hospital, they would pick up the phone and open a surgical bed or a surgical arena and move a patient up to that hospital. They had the ability to actually move patients up and perform surgeries, as well, at St. Mary's Hospital. There was an ability to have extra emergency room arenas available for exactly that, and that's now gone from the system. It's absolutely gone.

Doctors tell me about patients being triaged and waiting, all with serious maladies. They may not immediately seem life-threatening. Suddenly somebody goes into cardiac arrest and is bumped up the scale. The doctor even said that patients are dying because they're waiting. They're waiting to be triaged. They're waiting to come in.

An Hon. Member: What doctor? Name the doctor.

C. Puchmayr: One of the doctors is Dr. Matishak from Royal Columbian Hospital, who has clearly said that.

The Transportation Minister not only doesn't understand his file; he also doesn't understand the health care file. He denies that any of this is going on in British Columbia.

Interjection.

C. Puchmayr: He can sit there and heckle all he wants, but you know what? He needs to get out more often. He needs to look and see what's going on. Why doesn't he come into New Westminster and look at Royal Columbian Hospital and see what's going on? Why doesn't he talk to the doctors? Why doesn't he go in there and talk to the doctors if he doesn't believe it? He can very well do that. He has the ability to do that, but he would rather hide in Cloverdale and not address the issue and pretend that it doesn't exist.

Unfortunately, too many people on the other side like to just put their blinkers on and pretend that these things don't exist. They hate to admit that their policies are causing people to expire, to fall on the emergency room floor and die. Their policies, their closure of St. Mary's Hospital. It's a shame that they have their blinders on and refuse to acknowledge the crisis that they have created.

The foreign workers. Here's an interesting thing — another secret deal with the minister to get more foreign workers into British Columbia. I think the minister from the Philippines was here recently signing an agreement with our government on foreign workers. The foreign worker agreement does not….

Interjection.

C. Puchmayr: Well, I don't have the agreement, first of all.

Here is the government signing an agreement with another country, and we have to FOI the agreement. We have to go to freedom of information to get a copy of the agreement. Isn't that bizarre? We've asked the minister for it. We've asked his office for it. We've asked for the copy. We have to get a freedom-of-information, and we might have it by March 17.

Is that transparent and open government? Is that what we hear all the time from the other side, the most transparent and open government in the history of British Columbia? Shame, shame, shame — just another broken promise.

Let's talk about Manitoba. Manitoba has signed one as well. Manitoba has signed one that puts in protection for workers. It talks about expediting the immigration policy to try to reunite families. British Columbia's is more related to someone that is able to come over, who has that job already filled. So there's all the potential of having a labour contractor play an influence on it.

Labour contractors. We can't control labour contractors in the Philippines. We have no ability to.

It really concerns me that it isn't just a natural progression of immigration. We have many people waiting to come into this country that have filled out all the papers. They've done everything that is required of them to come in. They're waiting legitimately in line to come into this country, and yet we're looking at fast-tracking workers in.

At one time it was skilled workers. They were talking about skilled workers. Well, now it's unskilled workers. It's going to drive down the value of the work. It's going to drive down the wages for the work. It's a concern that workers are being brought into this country to fill a job, and they can be sent home.

[1615]

You know, we have the employment standards branch, which used to be an actual…. It could actually be an advocacy branch for workers who feel that they're being mistreated or being abused on the jobsite. They could go and discreetly file a complaint. There could be an investigation.

Well, now the employment standards branch is a self-help branch, where you go in there or go on a computer because they closed so many offices. You pull off the paper, the form, if you can manoeuvre through the computer to get to it. You fill it out, and then you serve it to your employer.

Could you imagine a temporary worker coming over from the Philippines, who's being abused in a work environment, doing that and going to their employer and saying: "You're not treating me right. You never paid me again. This is the second week I've worked for nothing"? Can you imagine that? They're going to be sent back home again, and that's sad.

There's no protection for foreign workers coming into this country. We saw at a farm in Maple Ridge where Mexican workers went on strike to be sent back home because the working conditions and the living conditions were better in Mexico than they were here

[ Page 9700 ]

— living in utility trailers, cooking outside. Fortunately, somebody found this out.

How many situations like that do we have in the 6,700 farms in British Columbia, or potential situations like that? They're there, and we have no protection for them. We just want to bring the workers in, and those workers basically have no rights. They basically have no rights. They certainly don't have the right to become citizens. They don't have the right to vote. So it's great. Just keep bringing in foreign workers. They can't vote.

Well, I see the minister is sitting here, so I'm hoping that maybe after I speak, he will send a copy of that memorandum over to my office so that we can actually have a look at what secret agreement he's signed with the minister from the Philippines. That's what disclosure should be all about.

The throne speech, again, doesn't address the difficulty that people are having living in British Columbia and working for minimum wage. There's no mention of raising the minimum wage. Many workers are now working numerous jobs. They're working two and three part-time jobs. I know a lot of young people that are. They're working very long hours.

The throne speech talks about family and quality-of-life stuff. But what quality of life is it when you're working three part-time jobs or even two part-time jobs, where each job…? If they don't work you 40 hours a week, they can work you 11 hours a day. They can work you over eight hours every day at straight time because they keep you less than 40 hours a week. So there is now a disincentive to hire full-time workers. This speech has nothing to deal with that issue, and that concerns me.

In closing, Madam Speaker, again, I certainly do not support this throne speech. Once bitten, twice shy — well, bitten three times now. I guarantee you that once we are back here next year with the next throne speech, we'll be talking about the failures of this throne speech. Those are my comments.

Hon. J. van Dongen: I'm very pleased today to join in this debate on the throne speech. Before I do that, I want to comment on the tulip in my lapel, which was given to me this morning by the B.C. Hospice Palliative Care Association. It's also the official flower for Parkinson's, which my mother died of two years ago. So it has a lot of meaning for me today, and I just wanted to pass that on to the members.

[1620]

I'm very pleased to be here as the representative for the constituency of Abbotsford-Clayburn. The city of Abbotsford, which I share in representing with the member for Abbotsford–Mount Lehman and the member for Chilliwack-Sumas, is a fascinating place to be and is a unique, growing community. It is a great place to represent.

It is the fifth-largest city in British Columbia. It is also one of the fastest-growing cities and fastest-growing regions in Canada and in North America. Yet it is still the largest community in terms of farm-gate agricultural production. About 18 or 19 percent of B.C. farm-gate sales originate within the city of Abbotsford. As a parallel, the city is also the centre for agribusiness in British Columbia and for a lot of farm organizations.

Together with that agricultural base, we have a very exciting and up-and-coming regional airport in Abbotsford. We have some of the brightest and focused business entrepreneurs in the province. We also can state categorically that we have one of the most culturally diverse communities in the province. Our chamber of commerce has won awards and recognition for its high level of activity, and we have strong and committed social services agencies that I am very proud to work with and support.

Abbotsford today is not a small rural town where everyone knows their neighbour and where there are no traffic lights. We are also not Metro Vancouver. I think that very often people don't realize that even though we have citizens commuting into Vancouver, we are a separate and distinct community and a separate and distinct region in the Fraser Valley. We are a thriving, growing, distinct urban centre that is transitioning to a confident, individual and unique community.

Within my constituency, we have currently the old MSA Hospital, which is an aging facility and overdue for replacement. I'm very pleased to say that, again, within the boundaries of my constituency, there is being constructed and almost finished the new Abbotsford Regional Hospital and Cancer Centre. This facility, as I said, was talked about during the 1990s but is now almost completed — a decision that our government made very early on. It's an investment of some $330 million on the capital side and an investment of probably an additional $50 million on the operating side to fund the increased staffing in that hospital.

I'm very proud that the new, most modern facility that we've seen…. I think it's unique, in the sense that it's a greenfield facility that includes both a hospital and a cancer centre, giving some great synergies for the future.

I am pleased today to speak in support of the throne speech. This throne speech lays out new measures to strengthen the economy, and it's something that our government, I'm proud to say, has always focused on — a strong economy. That's what it takes to both create employment for people and provide the funds to provide social services.

This throne speech is designed to also help create safe, secure communities, to build excellence in education and to further strengthen the new relationship with first nations. It will help give British Columbians options to become personally involved in fighting climate change and in contributing to environmental sustainability.

[1625]

Most importantly, it offers many new initiatives in health care. The health care initiatives in the throne speech build on the input from the Conversation on Health that which will improve care for the long term with new emphasis on patient choice, enhanced access, quality, professional opportunities, health, prevention measures and accountability.

The member for Abbotsford–Mount Lehman and I did have a conversation with our own constituents

[ Page 9701 ]

some time ago. We had a variety of people who are both consumers of the health care service and providers of the health care service. We had doctors. We had nurses. We had maintenance workers in hospitals. As I said, we had a variety of consumers. We had some very insightful information offered to us in that conversation.

Our goal is to have an efficient, effective and integrated health care system that promotes the health of all citizens and provides high-quality patient care. We continue to maintain the commitment to one public payer for health care services that will continue to deliver services through both public and private providers.

We are adopting new strategies that will continue to improve our system. It's a program of continual improvement and one where we look to foster with our citizens their own initiatives, taking charge of their own health care, focusing on prevention and choice and protecting our health care system for the long term. These strategies will also include expanding the role of nurses, pharmacists, paramedics, midwives and naturopaths to help provide to our citizens the most complete service possible in the most efficient way.

When I look at the increased investment from our provincial budget in the health care service, one only needs to look at the change in my time as an MLA. When I was first elected in 1995, the health care system consumed about $6 billion — actually a little bit less than $6 billion. It was about 33 percent of the provincial budget.

This year our government is investing $13.1 billion of taxpayers' money — a lot of zeros, a significant amount of money — in the health care service. Those dollars represent about 44 percent of the provincial budget. So you can see the significant trend that we are facing in our society, in particular because of the aging of our population, the growing demand for services, the growing costs of professional services and the growing costs of new technology.

We are in an area when the baby-boomer part of our population is aging and is in a period of their lives, as many of us are, where they're starting to use the health care service.

My constituency is in the area serviced by the Fraser Health Authority. Certainly, it is a large health authority with over 20,000 dedicated professionals and a management team that is really faced with not only the growing pressures of the aging population but the rapidly growing population that I spoke of earlier. They have a great deal of challenge to continue to meet the service requirements on an ongoing basis and to meet the standards, and they are very dedicated doing so. I compliment them on that.

[1630]

I think fiscal sustainability is a very, very important principle that our government is committed to. We believe that we want to deliver not only the best health care service possible — one that meets standards of accountability that are comparable to any in the nation — but one that will not mortgage the future of our children and grandchildren, one that will continue to be sustainable and affordable into future generations.

I commented on the one public payer for services under the Canada Health Act being a very important principle that our government espouses and will continue to espouse, and we acknowledge that we are delivering the health care service through both public and private service providers. A healthy mix, depending on the various efficiencies we can achieve, is what we will continue to do to provide citizens with the best service possible.

Under the initiatives in the throne speech looking to ensure quality health care, there are two initiatives that I would like to highlight. The first is a new health profession review board, which will ensure that all qualified health workers can fully utilize their training and skills and not be denied the right by unnecessary credentialing and licence restrictions.

Over the years we have seen difficulties, inefficiencies, friction and sometimes turf wars at the edges of our various health care professions, and this review board will help to try and mitigate that. I think that in the past, sometimes through well-intentioned purposes and sometimes maybe strictly turf protection, we have seen friction between professions, and this is an important and helpful initiative for the future.

We no longer have the luxury of engaging in non-productive argument about who should do what. What this review board and this principle are intended to do is to ensure that people can practice to the full extent of the scope that they are trained for. I will look forward to the implementation of this initiative, because I think it will help move us in a direction that is very important for the maintenance of the quality of our service when we see the kinds of pressures that we're facing.

The second initiative that I'm very pleased was announced by our government in the throne speech is the patient care quality review boards that will be installed in every health region. I talked about the high standards of service that we seek to achieve in all of our health facilities and through all of the services offered. As the Minister of Health says very often, 98 percent of the time we meet those standards and deliver on expectations.

There are times when for various reasons — very often communication reasons between the various players in the system — those service levels are not achieved. These service quality review boards will, I think, provide opportunity for citizens in a formal way to have their concerns heard when they think that the standards were not met.

Secondly, I think that process will be very helpful as a way to provide information into the system that

[ Page 9702 ]

will provide the impetus and the indications of how and where to make changes to improve service and the consistency of service.

I also want to comment now on improved access to health care, another principle covered in the throne speech. It includes elements such as the upgrading and expansion of B.C.'s Children's Hospital. Invariably when I talk to constituents that have had experience with B.C.'s Children's Hospital, they are happy and pleased with the service that they have received, and this will significantly improve the capability of that facility and those professionals.

[1635]

Another very important aspect of the throne speech is the move to broaden the services, authority and training that nurses can provide — such as suturing, ultrasounds, allergy testing, cardiac stress testing and others. Nurses will be able to give medications for minor pain at triage, while patients are waiting to see a doctor, and to order lab work, blood tests and X-rays. This is an example of the kind of change we can make that is within the scope of nurses' training, that is supported by the nurses and that can improve the service to citizens both in ER, emergency, and in other parts of