2009 Legislative Session: Fifth 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)

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 40, Number 1

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Williams Lake hockey champions

B. Simpson

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2009 (Bill 10)

Hon. J. van Dongen

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

B.C. Community Achievement Award recipients in Richmond

O. Ilich

Film on youth and gang violence

H. Bains

NoRooz celebration

K. Whittred

Japantown multicultural celebrations in Vancouver

J. Kwan

Environmental awards in Burnaby

H. Bloy

Community information directory for North Delta

G. Gentner

Oral Questions

Impact of Olympic transportation plan on small business and workers

H. Bains

Hon. K. Falcon

Layoff of Vancouver workers for Olympic Games

S. Simpson

Hon. C. Hansen

Impact of Olympic transportation plan on small business and workers

M. Karagianis

Hon. K. Falcon

Role of Patrick Kinsella in B.C. Rail sale

L. Krog

Hon. W. Oppal

J. Horgan

M. Farnworth

R. Fleming

B. Ralston

S. Herbert

Committee of the Whole House

Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2008-2009 (Bill 4)

B. Ralston

Hon. M. de Jong

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2008-2009 (Bill 4)

Second Reading of Bills

Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2009 (Bill 8)

Hon. I. Black

K. Conroy

H. Bloy

C. Puchmayr

J. Nuraney

C. Trevena

Hon. R. Cantelon

H. Bains

J. Yap

J. Horgan

Hon. S. Bond

R. Chouhan

Hon. J. McIntyre

N. Simons

D. MacKay

S. Herbert

Hon. M. Polak

G. Coons

D. Hayer

C. Wyse

R. Lee

R. Fleming

Hon. L. Reid

S. Simpson

Hon. I. Chong

M. Farnworth

J. Rustad

J. McGinn

J. Brar

Hon. I. Black

Budget Debate (continued)

S. Herbert

H. Bloy

C. Trevena

R. Lee

[ Page 14415 ]

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2009

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Campbell: I'm pleased to introduce probably the youngest visitor in the House today. She's the newest addition to the Sharma family, four-and-a-half-month-old Amiyah Aishi Sharma. She is joined by her parents, Amy and Rishi. I hope the House will make them welcome.

D. Cubberley: Tomorrow is World Kidney Day. As the House may know, over 30,000 Canadians now require dialysis or a kidney transplant just in order to stay alive, and the numbers are rising quickly with the diabesity epidemic.

We're in Kidney Health Month; it's March. Tomorrow is World Kidney Day. In order to raise awareness of it, members of the Kidney Foundation of Canada are holding a clinic here in the precincts today to raise awareness of kidney disease, which in most cases is preventable. Members who haven't had their blood pressure checked can get this done quickly after question period, up until three o'clock today.

I'm not recommending, though, that ministers answer­ing multiple questions have this check done until they've fully calmed down.

Joining us in the gallery today are Doug Hobbs, a director and past president of the Victoria chapter, and Diana Dobson, past president of the Kidney Foundation of Canada, Victoria chapter. Will members please join me in making them welcome.

Hon. R. Coleman: A significant event took place 30 years ago today. A short little fellow — at least, most people are short to me, anyway — by the name of Bill Bond married his blushing bride. That was the Deputy Premier and Minister of Education. I would like to wish them a happy 30th anniversary today.

N. Simons: It gives me great pleasure to welcome to the House today directors of first nations child welfare agencies who are visiting and are here to meet on a quarterly basis to talk about issues facing their communities.

They are Mary Teegee from Carrier-Sekani; Warner Adam also from Carrier-Sekani child and family services; Kathleen Bennett from Northwest Inter-Nation family and child services; William Yoachim from Kw'umt'lelum; Kelowa Edel from Xyolhemeylh; Anna Sawyer from NIL/TU,O; Midge Stewart; Arlene Adie from Knucwentwecw in Williams Lake; Lloyd McJames from Gitxsan; Assanta Rosal from Okanagan Nation Child and Family Services; Corine Stone from Desniqi in the Chilcotin; Nita Walkem from Metlakatla child and family services. They're joined by Ken Adie as well.

Would the House please make them all welcome.

R. Sultan: In the precinct today are Alan Lill, who works with the $21 million living rivers fund created by this government; Rod Clapton of the South Coast Steelhead Coalition; and Ted Brookman of the B.C. Wildlife Federation.

They brought forward seven key recommendations arising from the steelhead summit held four months ago in Burnaby and attended by approximately 65 steelhead experts and MLAs. Would the House please make them welcome.

Tributes

WILLIAMS LAKE HOCKEY CHAMPIONS

B. Simpson: On behalf of the MLA for Cariboo South — and I ask the MLA for Powell River–Sunshine Coast to plug his ears and ask his forgiveness…. For the first time in franchise history, the Williams Lake Stampeders won the Coy Cup and are the champions for the men's double-A hockey.

Apparently it was quite the game. It went into overtime. Gilbert Robbins secured the final goal with a cross-ice pass from Francis Johnson with 6:24 left in the overtime period. Our congratulations to the general manager Don Hanson, coach Kelly Kohlen and the entire team of the Williams Lake Stampeders. Way to go, boys.

Introductions by Members

K. Whittred: Members, on behalf of the Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome a group of public servants who are seated today in the gallery. They are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop offered by the Legislative Assembly.

[1340]

The workshop provides a firsthand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how that work affects this Legislature. Would the House please join me in making them feel very welcome.

N. Macdonald: I have the pleasure of introducing a few people who are from Golden originally. Aleta Salmon and Martina Bezzola are attending the University of Victoria, and they're part of two very

[ Page 14416 ]

well-established Golden families. I'd like you to make them welcome, as well as John Frederick, who is joining them, also from Golden. Please join me in making them welcome.

I'd also like to introduce Ellen Zimmerman, who is here. She is a very well-known environmental activist — legendary, actually, and award-winning. She's from Golden as well.

I also see Raj Patara, who is another former student. She's from Golden, joining us, so I don't know who's left in Golden. Please join me in making them all feel welcome.

Hon. W. Oppal: Today in the gallery is a group of articling students from the Ministry of Attorney General. They are here to take

part in the continuing legal education session regarding law-making, the legislative process — and question period. No.

They are Laura Baptie, Meghan Butler, Alison Luke, Pamela Manhas, Johnny Van Camp, and Kirsten Wharton. They're accompanied by Corrine Swystun, who is from the legislative counsel office. I'd ask that the House please make them welcome, and I thank them for what they're doing.

H. Bains: My constituency assistant Raj Patara — one of the best, full of energy, obviously taught by one of the best teachers — is in the House, and she's full of ideas. Please help me welcome her to the House.

Hon. S. Bond: One of the important things we always want to recognize is the incredible work that is done by public servants in ministries across government. Today I'm very pleased that we have seven members of the Ministry of Education team. They are terrific, and I wanted all of us to make them welcome.

They are Heather Macatee, Jennifer Coward, Morag Masterton, Joan Sabourin, Elda Harvey, Tanya Trafford and Carrie Preziuso. They do a great job on behalf of British Columbians every day, and I know you'll want to join me in making them most welcome.

Hon. M. Coell: I want the House to welcome three guests from my constituency: MaryLynne Rimer, the board chair of school district 63; Keven Elder, the superintendent of schools; and Joan Axford, the secretary-treasurer for school district 63. Would the House please make them welcome.

Hon. B. Bennett: It's my pleasure to introduce to the House today the former mayor of Revelstoke, a great guy and the next MLA for Columbia River–Revelstoke, Mark McKee. Please help make him welcome.

R. Hawes: Today in the gallery are two of my constituents, Peter and Viola Ewert. They came out here seeking a little bit of spring weather and maybe picked the wrong time, it looks like. Peter has been very, very busy since retiring from a 30-year career with the Ministry of Agriculture. Could the House please make both Peter and Viola very welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL

STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2009

Hon. J. van Dongen presented a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2009.

Hon. J. van Dongen: I move the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

[1345]

Motion approved.

Hon. J. van Dongen: I am pleased to introduce the Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2009. This bill contains amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act in support of B.C.'s enhanced driver's licence program to be rolled out on May 1, 2009.

These amendments include a new fine for fraud offences related to drivers' licences, identification cards, enhanced drivers' licences and enhanced identification cards. Individuals who commit fraud are subject to a new fine of $400 to $20,000 and/or to imprisonment up to six months. This change builds on recent security upgrades to the B.C. driver's licence to help prevent fraud and identity theft.

The bill will also authorize ICBC to retain or seize fraudulent documents used to apply for or maintain a record related to drivers' licences or identification cards, including enhanced forms used for travel to the U.S. by land or water. Legislative amendments of a housekeeping nature are required to update references in the Insurance (Vehicle) Act and Motor Vehicle Act to remain consistent with recent changes to the Criminal Code, including new provisions for street racing and impaired driving.

These amendments are necessary to ensure that an individual convicted under the Criminal Code for new impaired driving offences will be subject to provincial sanctions currently in place under the Motor Vehicle Act, such as participation in the responsible driver program and ignition interlock.

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

Bill 10, Public Safety and Solicitor General Statutes Amendment Act, 2009, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

[ Page 14417 ]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) B.C. COMMUNITY ACHIEVEMENT AWARD

RECIPIENTS IN RICHMOND

O. Ilich: Yesterday three people from my community of Richmond were honoured with B.C. Community Achievement Awards. Jim Kojima has been involved for over 50 years in the Steveston Community Society. I actually have very fond memories of Jim, because when I was growing up in Steveston, hard as this may be to believe, he taught me judo when I was a teenager.

He continues to be involved in the Minoru Senior Centre and is working very hard on the 2009 Seniors Games coming to my community this year. Jim is dedicated to every aspect of his neighbourhood, and his commitment and strength embody the spirit of the B.C. Achievement Awards.

Don Montgomery also received an award for his commitment to multicultural appreciation, education and promotion. His involvement in the Vancouver Asian Heritage Month Society and the Vancouver Asian Film Festival Society has brought together a diverse group of ethnocultural artists and enthusiasts. Don works to create open dialogue and bring together British Columbians in an invaluable way.

Finally, Cynthia Chen was honoured. Cynthia Chen served on Richmond city council and with Chimo Crisis Services. She worked hard to raise funds for Nova House, a safe refuge for women and children traumatized by violence.

Since opening in 1981 Nova House has housed more than 5,000 women and children in several different houses. But in 2003, with support from all three levels of government, community groups, businesses and many individual donors, Chimo built and fully equipped a beautiful, new, purpose-built, permanent facility called Nova House. Cynthia has been an active member in that regard and also with the chamber of commerce. She has great integrity and a passion for community service.

I want to thank each of them for their inspiring hard work and dedication to the community, and I ask the House to do the same.

FILM ON YOUTH AND GANG VIOLENCE

H. Bains: Two and a half years ago I had the great pleasure of meeting a young individual named Mani Amar. Mani decided to move to the Lower Mainland from Port Alberni when he was 18 to go to school to take graphic arts. Mani didn't realize that this move to educate himself was going to open his eyes to a world different from what he knew.

What Mani saw nine years ago was that the South Asian community in the greater Vancouver area had been shaken by epidemic proportions of South Asian youth and gang violence — grim statistics such as the death of over 100 South Asians over the past 19 years. Talk about an eye-opener for a young individual from a rural community coming to a big city.

This young individual decided that he was going to make a difference, so he decided to use what he knows best to get the message out. He used art to educate our South Asian youth, families and others in the community. Mani made a film called A Warrior's Religion .

[1350]

On top of media interest from the RCMP, Langara College and high schools to use this film as a prevention tool, one day you may be able to find this documentary in the Legislative Library when the movie is put on DVD. Mani says that if we can save this generation of youth, our future generations will be saved.

As you can see, the youth and gang violence issue is not slowing down. Violent crimes have increased significantly in the last couple of months in many communities on the Lower Mainland. So it's our duty to protect our youth and help bring awareness to our families and communities. I ask you to support this film and get your youth out to watch the showing at Bell Performing Arts Centre on March 18 and 19, with two seatings at 5:15 p.m. and 7:45 p.m.

I understand that at its premiere our Solicitor General also had the opportunity to watch this film and was very impressed. I understand that the Attorney General was also involved. I want to thank everyone who supports this young man. We need to bring this epidemic of violence to an end, and we want to thank Mani for that.

NOROOZ CELEBRATION

K. Whittred: I rise today to ask every member of this House to join me in celebrating NoRooz. NoRooz is the Persian new year and celebrates the first day of spring. I have a large Persian community within my riding, and I have been honoured over the years to be able to take

part in many of the NoRooz celebrations. NoRooz literally means "new day" in Farsi.

The longstanding celebration is marked to bring hope, peace and prosperity. It is celebrated throughout the world in many countries, including Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey, Pakistan, Iraq, Tajikistan, India and of course Canada. Celebrations begin on the last Wednesday of the year, called Red Wednesday. As a part of cultural celebrations every year, bonfires are lit and people leap over the flames for happiness and enlightenment throughout the coming year on a day called Shar Samba Soree.

Each year this celebration takes place at Ambleside, where hundreds of Iranians gather to celebrate this unique holiday. Every year the event draws more and

more partici-

[ Page 14418 ]

pants. In previous years I've had the privilege of taking

part in the celebration, and this year is no exception.

I will also be attending a large Iranian Day festival being held at Mahon Park on March 15. As always, I look forward to the abundance of Persian food, the variety of entertainment and the colourful mixes of culture.

It is always an honour to be part of these festivities and to share in the cultural diversity of my community. I would like to wish everyone that the blessings of the spring bring peace, good health, happiness and prosperity in the year ahead. Please join me in wishing all NoRooz Mobarak .

japantown multicultural

celebrations in vancouver

J. Kwan: The Powell Street Festival Society, the

Tonari Gumi, the Vancouver Japanese language school and Japanese Hall, and the Vancouver Moving Theatre will be hosting the Japantown multicultural neighbourhood celebration on Saturday, March 28. The event celebrates the history, diversity and enduring promise of Vancouver's Japantown.

Japantown lies in my constituency on the traditional territory of the Coast Salish First Nation, and it's the site of Vancouver's earliest beginnings. Historically known as Little Tokyo, Japantown is situated between Gore and Dunleavy streets and lies along Powell Street.

The first Japanese immigrants arrived in British Columbia in the 1890s and worked in the local mills and canneries of Vancouver. In 1941 the government began its registration and fingerprinting of all Japanese men and women.

When Japan made its attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, all Japanese males between the age of 18 and 45 were rounded up for resettlement. These enemy aliens, as they were seen then, were forced from their homes and relocated to labour camps. Japanese Canadians were finally given their freedom of citizenship in 1947. The government was forced to recognize them as citizens, and they were given compensation.

The Vancouver Buddhist Church, a landmark for the Japanese community, was built in 1906. The church was seized by the government during World War II but returned to the community after the war.

[1355]

The multicultural celebration has planned activities including storytelling, community displays, performances, a street procession, a ceremony and gala at the Japanese Hall.

With this day of the celebration, the partners move forward on the city of Vancouver's historical and cultural review, commemorates the 80th anniversary of the diplomatic relations between Canada and Japan, and explores Japantown's multicultural past and present.

I ask all members of the House to wish them well and wish Japantown a long and vibrant future in Vancouver–Mount Pleasant.

ENVIRONMENTAL AWARDS IN BURNABY

H. Bloy: Every year during Environmental Week Burnaby recognizes community leaders who are leading the way to a greener future. Nominations are now open for the 2009 Environmental Awards in the categories of communications, planning and development, community stewardship, youth, and business stewardship. This year Burnaby has added a new award category — green choices.

The Burnaby environmental awards distinguish outstanding environmental accomplishments of individuals, groups and companies in Burnaby over the past many years. In addition to the environmental awards, people can nominate environmental stars who have significantly contributed to a greener Burnaby over the past year.

Some past winners are…. There are many youth stars in Burnaby: Morgan Balaz-Munn, Melissa Campagne, Frankie Cena, Jomini Chu, Theresa He, Michael Hong, Clark Hsieh, Carol Kwon, Thomas Lee, Alex Ng, Matthew Quon, Greg Von Euw, Stephen Wong, Jie Zheng of Burnaby Mountain Secondary School.

There is Nick Kvenich, a longtime friend of mine and an environmental star. Jennifer Atchinson was also a winner last year of the B.C. achievement award. Burnaby Habitat for Humanity's Restore fit. Greg Von Euw won a youth award when he was just 11 years old. Simon Fraser University Community Trust — Christine Leston of Stony Creek environmental committee. John Thomson has been very active in the community for years, and I also know him personally through scouting.

I urge everyone in Burnaby to nominate their fellow citizens who are working hard to make Burnaby a greener, more environmentally friendly place to live. Nominations close Friday, April 9, 2009, and I'm looking forward to the results in May. Thank you, and good luck to all the nominees.

COMMUNITY INFORMATION DIRECTORY

FOR NORTH DELTA

G. Gentner: Benjamin Disraeli once said that success in life is the man who has the best information. The same can be said about a community. Information about its resources shared throughout will ensure a successful and vibrant community. One of our purposes as an MLA is to share information, opportunity and services to our constituents.

North Delta is an active and thriving community with interconnections among governments, agencies, non-profits and organizations. This multilevel, multifaceted aspect of the community inspired my office to publish a service directory called The Matrix , a 22-page booklet of collated information of organizations under such

headings as "Community and Culture," "Environment," "Seniors,"

"Sports and Recreation," along with listings for schools, houses of

worship and government services

[ Page 14419 ]

in North Delta. Over 15,000 were distributed, and I am pleased to say The Matrix was well received.

However, efforts have not ended there. Community information is a living document that must constantly be renewed, constantly reviving information. Our office has come up with The Matrix appendix that is shared throughout the community.

North Delta and Surrey share one of the longest commercial grids in the province. North Delta businesses within the Scott Road shopping corridor, stretching over 13 kilometres, pay over $4.3 million in taxes alone. It's these 500 small businesses within North Delta that have been incorporated into The Matrix appendix. With the appendix, The Matrix now describes where to find services.

The Matrix appendix encourages North Delta residents to explore and enjoy businesses' and our community's diversity. Shop local and help ourselves, help our small business, and our communities will thrive. The more we know about our community, the better it will be for everyone. Information is a seed for an idea and only grows when it is watered.

[1400]

Oral Questions

Impact of Olympic transportation

plan on small business and workers

H. Bains: The Olympic transportation plan released today will affect hundreds of small businesses along the major corridors that will be closed during the Olympics. Can the minister explain why large corporations like Great Canadian Casino and Whistler Mountain are being paid compensation for their Olympic cost but the small businesses and the workers have been cut loose?

Hon. K. Falcon: Actually, the transportation plan that was released today is a combination of work by VANOC, the Ministry of Transportation, the community of Vancouver, Whistler, the RCMP. It is a comprehensive plan, it's a coordinated plan, and it's a way that we can ensure that the hundreds of thousands of visitors coming to Vancouver and Whistler can enjoy themselves and see what a great sustainable city we have in Vancouver and Whistler.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Bains: A $150 million plan with seven pages of bullets. Is that called a plan?

Yesterday we learned that the taxpayer must subsidize the Olympic cost of Great Canadian Casino, but their workers are left out in the cold. The company is laying off 200 workers for the month of the games. The company's looked after, and the workers lose their jobs.

Again to the minister: it's a simple question. Why the double standard from the B.C. Liberals?

Hon. K. Falcon: You know, it is amazing to me the extent to which the NDP will go to try and find anything, something negative about the Olympics. Do you know what's great about this? Actually, if you roll back the tape to 1985, you will see the same negativism about Expo 86. That was the NDP saying it was going to be a big failure. People wouldn't show up. Transportation would be a disaster. It's going to be way over budget. And they were wrong, wrong, wrong — just like they're wrong about the Olympics. It's going to be a great success.

Let me tell you this, Mr. Speaker: 130,000 people a night in downtown Vancouver spending money, having a great time and supporting all the local businesses is good for British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat, Member. I think there are other people that want to ask questions from the sidelines.

The member has a further supplemental.

H. Bains: It's clear that there's one standard for large corporations under this government and another standard for the workers. We know that the owners of Whistler, Cypress Mountain will be compensated for the fact that VANOC needs their mountains for the Olympics.

Can the minister ensure that the workers will keep their jobs during the Olympics? If not, will they be compensated, or are they going to be the victims of this B.C. Liberals double standard too?

Hon. K. Falcon: You know, it is amazing. Apparently, according to the NDP, the city of Vancouver has never put on a major event before. Apparently, they forgot about the Celebration of Light, which brings 400,000 people a day. They've apparently forgotten about the Sun Run, the Santa Claus parade. It's actually possible to organize major events and still have an enormous benefit.

I can tell you this, Mr. Speaker. The NDP….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Take your seat, Minister.

Members. Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: When the Vancouver Canucks bring home a Stanley Cup, I'm looking forward to the NDP opposing the fact that they're going to have a victory parade in Vancouver. That's the kind of negativism….

[1405]

[ Page 14420 ]

The fact of the matter is that there will be 130,000 more people a night in downtown Vancouver, partying, buying drinks, buying food, enjoying the atmosphere, spending money, and the NDP will still be trying to figure out how this is negative for the Lower Mainland of British Columbia.

LAYOFF OF VANCOUVER WORKERS

FOR OLYMPIC GAMES

S. Simpson: I assume the Minister of Transportation is answering Olympic questions now instead of the appropriate minister. Maybe it's because he's going to be putting a toll on the Olympics next thing you know.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Take your seat, Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

S. Simpson: Well, we didn't get answers from the minister responsible. We didn't get answers from the Minister of Transportation.

Businesses are being compensated in relation to the Olympics. We know it's true with GM Place for usage. We know it's true with Intrawest. We've now heard Great Canadian Casino is going to get compensated as well.

However, workers are on their own — 200 layoffs at the racetrack; 750 people at GM Place, who don't know what the future holds; and 400 more at B.C. Place, who are in limbo at the moment. How come workers are left off the list while businesses are taken care of?

Will the Minister Responsible for the Olympics stand up and acknowledge today that this government will pay at least as much attention to the workers as they do to their business friends?

Hon. C. Hansen: I would like to have seen an NDP government in the late 1990s care about the 50,000 workers from British Columbia who had to go to other provinces to find jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that this is a government that cares about the workers who are coming into British Columbia — a net increase of over 50,000 workers who have come from other provinces to get jobs here in the last four years.

The Olympics are one of the biggest job generators this province has ever seen. In fact, we know that the transportation plan alone is going to generate about 250 jobs in British Columbia during the time of the Olympic Games. So I think it's a little rich, as I mentioned yesterday, that this member who opposed the creation of those jobs at Hastings Park is now trying to pretend that somehow he's their great defender.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: The 68,000 or so people who lost their jobs in January will be waiting to see if this government does anything for them. It's workers, people who collect a paycheque, who are being hurt by this. It's small business people who are getting no support from this government, and now there may be more.

How many more workers are going to join this list? How many more small businesses are going to be in a crunch? Will this minister stand up and tell us today: are the ski hill workers at Cypress and Whistler going to lose their jobs for the period of the Olympics?

Hon. C. Hansen: In my enthusiasm in my last response, I actually misstated. It's not 250 jobs. It's 2,500 jobs actually being created as a result of…. But Mr. Speaker….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Take your seat for a second.

Minister, continue.

Hon. C. Hansen: Again, it's a little rich to hear this member try to pretend he's the defender of small business in British Columbia when that party has a policy that's actually going to ratchet up the cost to small business in British Columbia by about $480 million a year. That's the kind of damage that the small business community is more concerned about.

I can tell you that the small business community in B.C. is celebrating the Olympics. They know it's a big economic stimulus to this province, and they know that there are going to be huge beneficiaries from this in just about every corner of the province.

[1410]

IMPACT OF OLYMPIC TRANSPORTATION

PLAN ON SMALL BUSINESS and workers

M. Karagianis: This transportation plan is two months late. It's about 80 percent complete, seven pages of bullet points and a few maps. But what was it the minister called it — a comprehensive plan? Not at all, not likely.

It's clear that there are going to be major impacts on taxpayers, businesses, workers, students — impacts that aren't even mentioned in this little seven-page plan. Once again the government has shown that they are not the least bit concerned about average citizens. Downtown Vancouver streets will see streets closed, parking gone.

[ Page 14421 ]

Can the Minister Responsible for the Olympics explain why there has been no study done on the impact on small business and a mitigation plan for them?

Hon. K. Falcon: I would remind the member opposite that the International Olympic Committee described VANOC and the organization as the best-organized Olympics ever.

I get that the NDP spend virtually no time ever talking to small business. That's why they don't ever support the NDP. But I'll tell you this. The small business community is thrilled about the opportunities the Olympics are bringing to Vancouver — 130,000 people every night in downtown Vancouver spending money. That's tips. That's benefits. That's jobs. And that's something the NDP has never understood. That's why they oppose major projects like Expo and the Olympics, and that is a shame.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: Well, the IOC certainly doesn't care about small business in this community, and neither does that side of the House.

This plan is so full of holes. Let's look at an example. The municipality of Whistler says that they are still in discussion with the government and VANOC about funding for transit and emergency services, including the costs for increased traffic accidents. Will the minister admit today that this Olympic transportation plan means additional costs to the province, to local government, to the taxpayers of this province — more costs on the backs of taxpayers?

Hon. K. Falcon: What the Minister of Transportation will tell the opposition Transportation critic is that Vancouver and Whistler are going to be a model for sustainability, a model for a community that has a heavy emphasis on walking and cycling and public transit. That is what the world is going to see when they come to Vancouver.

I'll tell you this. The additional buses, the additional SkyTrain cars, the additional benefits that the world is going to see as they visit the Lower Mainland are all part of a transit plan the Premier announced back in January that's adding more buses, more SkyTrains, more public transit options for all the people of British Columbia.

ROLE OF PATRICK KINSELLA

IN B.C. RAIL SALE

L. Krog: Yesterday, if the Premier wasn't already aware of it, he was made aware that his friend Patrick Kinsella and his companies — the former co-chair of two Liberal campaigns — received $297,000 of taxpayers' money from B.C. Rail. My question to the Premier is quite simple. What services did Mr. Kinsella and his companies provide for $297,000?

Hon. W. Oppal: Obviously, this matter arises out of those issues that are now before the Supreme Court in the B.C. Rail dispute. In the circumstances, I'm not going to comment on it.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: I want to remind the member from Point Grey that he's not just an ordinary member of this assembly. He's the Premier of Her Majesty's government. He is the leader of the B.C. Liberal Party. And he promised…

[1415]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, just take your seat.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

L. Krog: …that he would have the most open and transparent government in British Columbia ever.

My question is to the Premier. He has been asked. He's had a day to find out. It is his duty. Tell this House today: what did his friend Mr. Kinsella do for $297,000?

Hon. W. Oppal: If that member has any evidence of wrongdoing, he should take it to the…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: …appropriate authorities.

J. Horgan: My question is to the Premier, who ran in the 2001 election claiming to want to preside over the most open and transparent and honest government in North America. I'm wanting to know….

Interjections.

J. Horgan: Wow. Wow. Too much pixie dust. Too much pixie dust.

I wanted….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat.

J. Horgan: I wanted….

Mr. Speaker: No, Member.

[ Page 14422 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Member for Victoria-Hillside, withdraw that remark unequivocally, please.

R. Fleming: I will withdraw the remark, and my heckle should have said that the B.C. Liberals…

Mr. Speaker: Member.

R. Fleming: …betrayed their promise on B.C. Rail.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Continue, Member.

J. Horgan: My question is a simple one to the Premier of the most so-called open government in British Columbia's history. How can it be that a close personal friend and campaign manager can get $300,000 from the government of B.C. and we're not allowed to know what he did? Can the Premier please explain to me, my constituents, everyone in this place how it's possible that it's none of our damn business?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: Right now there's a trial proceeding in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and in the circumstances, it would be improper for anyone in this House to comment on any matter that arises either directly or indirectly from that trial.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Audited financial statements from a Crown agency — formerly a Crown agency — B.C. Rail: proceeds to Progressive Holdings, Progressive Group, The Progressive Group — $297,000.

This is not before the courts, to the best of my knowledge. Mr. Kinsella, to the best of our knowledge, is not before the courts. This document was tabled in this Legislature. Will the Premier tell us why his pal got $300,000? Did he write a memo? Did he send an e-mail? Did he say that everything was fine? Is the train running on time? What the heck did he do?

Hon. W. Oppal: My answer is the same. The question is the same.

[1420]

M. Farnworth: Well, the Attorney General won't answer, in part because he wasn't here. He stated a few moments ago that people should ask the appropriate authorities. Well, guess what. The Premier was here. The Premier is the appropriate authority, and he knows the answer as to why Patrick Kinsella was given a $300,000 untendered contract.

Our question is very simple. To the Premier: why was Mr. Patrick Kinsella given a $300,000 contract? What did he do for that $300,000, and why won't you tell this House and the public of British Columbia what he got that money for?

Hon. W. Oppal: Well, that was the same question, except with a lot more bombast. So my answer is the same. I'm not going to comment on it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

M. Farnworth: And that answer was the same answer with the same lack of transparency, the same lack of accountability and the same lack of openness which this Premier said he would always provide to the people of British Columbia. He clearly won't answer it in this House. He won't answer it in the hallway. What is the Premier afraid of? What has he got to hide? Where did that $300,000 go, and what did he get for it?

Hon. W. Oppal: I don't think this side of the House needs any advice on accountability from a group of people…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat. Sit down.

Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: …who brought us Bingogate and Casinogate.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

R. Fleming: Even an untendered contract that broke all the rules in how it was awarded still has documentation behind it, and that's what we're asking about today — $300,000 awarded to the campaign chairman of the governing party, a personal friend of the Premier. We want answers.

What did he do for B.C. Rail? What did the taxpayers of British Columbia get to put him on the payroll — the party leader on the payroll? Will the Premier stand up in this House and tell us exactly what Mr. Kinsella did for his 300 grand?

Interjections.

[ Page 14423 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Attorney, just take your seat. I understand we have a lot of other members that just want to ask questions back and forth first.

Hon. W. Oppal: This question and the previous questions all arise out of the same set of circumstances, the same event that is now being tried in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and I will not comment on that.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Fleming: The question is very simple. The parliamentary library documents contracts between 2002 and 2005 that total $300,000 for Mr. Patrick Kinsella, who co-chaired the Liberals' 2001 and 2005 election campaign.

[1425]

It's a very legitimate question to be asking the government, now that it's exposed, to provide details on what he was hired by B.C. Rail to do, because he wrote the platform for the governing party that said that it wouldn't privatize B.C. Rail, and then he got the best of both worlds. He came in, in 2002 and started getting on the payroll and made 300 grand, presumably to advise on exactly how to privatize B.C. Rail.

So tell the taxpayers of British Columbia exactly what Mr. Kinsella was on the payroll to do and what he was paid for.

Hon. W. Oppal: There are people who are before the Supreme Court, charged with some serious offences, and when comments of that sort are made, we take every chance here of jeopardizing a right to a fair trial.

B. Ralston: The question is a very simple one. To the Premier: what did Mr. Kinsella do for $300,000? The public of British Columbia is entitled to know the answer to that question.

Hon. W. Oppal: The answer is the same. It's before the court. I will not answer it.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Perhaps the Minister of Transportation might care to answer this question. Can he explain what Mr. Patrick Kinsella did for $300,000?

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm sure that and other questions will be answered at the trial.

S. Herbert: Well, on this matter I heard the Minister of Transportation say: "Oh, well, that document is public." You're damn right it's public, and that's why we demand an answer.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

First of all, Member, choose your words a little bit more carefully.

Continue.

S. Herbert: What I want to know, what my colleagues want to know and what the people of British Columbia want to know is: what did Patrick Kinsella, a key adviser of this Premier, do for $300,000 of their money?

Hon. W. Oppal: Let me give that member a bit of a lesson on separation of powers.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, we're not going to continue. Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: Our system operates under principles of independence. The Legislature is separate and independent from the executive. The executive is independent from the judiciary. Each body does not intervene or comment upon the activities of another body. That's what the principle of independence means.

While that member obviously doesn't appreciate these long-hallowed principles, I want to remind him that any comments that we make here can have unfair repercussions on the fairness of the trial process.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

[1430]

S. Herbert: I think the only lesson we're getting here today is that this government deserves an F in accountability, an F in openness and an F for standing up for the people of B.C.

It's a basic question. A Crown corporation — where it shows very clearly that this man, Patrick Kinsella, the key adviser to the Premier and personal friend, took $300,000 of the taxpayers' money. Taxpayers deserve an answer for how that money was spent from their Premier. Will the Premier answer this question now, finally?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[ Page 14424 ]

Hon. W. Oppal: Let me read a quote from the member for Nanaimo made on November 2, '06.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: He might learn something.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: "It is essential to the rule of law that the integrity of the judicial process not be interfered with. High-profile prosecutions have failed in the past because politicians felt compelled to make comments in public that were later deemed prejudicial." That's the member for Nanaimo.

[End of question period.]

R. Lee: I ask leave to do an introduction.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

R. Lee: Joining us today in the gallery are 28 grade 7 students from Westridge Elementary in my riding. They are joined by their teachers Mrs. Pritchard and Mr. Austin, and Miss Cho, a student teacher from SFU. Will the House please join me in making them feel very welcome.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call committee stage of Bill 4.

Committee of the Whole House

MINISTERIAL ACCOUNTABILITY

BASES ACT, 2008-2009

The House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 4; K. Whittred in the chair.

The committee met at 2:34 p.m.

section 1.

B. Ralston: I just want to confirm that in this

section that's set out, ten separate ministers…. They are the only, if I can put it this way, beneficiaries of the legislation, in the sense that they will be receiving that 10 percent holdback of their ministerial pay. It applies to these ten ministers only, and that's why they're set out in

section 1.

Hon. M. de Jong: The hon. member is correct that this determines that the legislation is relative to ten ministers. It does not, however, guarantee anything for those ministers. Obviously, it alters the base, but there are other intervening factors that could be taken into account. The legislation does apply to the ten ministries listed here.

[1435]

B. Ralston: I'm referring, in the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act, to the payment of the holdback for achieving individual responsibilities. That's

section 5. So I'm presuming that I'm not speaking of the holdback for achieving collective responsibilities, but does this not apply to

section 5? I believe that in

section 2, which we'll deal with shortly, it refers to

section 5 and

section 6 of the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act. I had understood that those are the sections that it referred to.

Hon. M. de Jong: That's correct, but it still doesn't guarantee. The final accounting needs to be done to ensure that the ministry numbers have come in, in compliance with the adjusted numbers.

B. Ralston: What this bill does is adjust the voted estimates to include the supplementary estimates which, in the case of these individual ministries, we debated not so long ago. I believe it was last week, although some of the days are beginning to blur together. So what else remains to be done?

I'm assuming that, given that it's March 11, we're 20 days from the close of the fiscal year. Is the minister anticipating there's some unforeseen turn of events that would lead to those projections not being realized?

We're very, very close to the end of the fiscal year. Unless there's an unexpected spurt of spending out of the main estimates — which we are assured is under control and indeed reduced to essentials by the Minister of Finance, and we've just voted on the supplementary estimates, which were a fixed amount — I'm not sure why the minister feels the need to be quite so Delphic on this point.

Hon. M. de Jong: Only because the deed is not done until the audits have taken place and the public accounts have been reported upon.

B. Ralston: I would say, in terms of the probability of the ministers achieving this, that…. Would the minister agree that it's a high probability that the main estimates, which were passed in the budget last spring, and the supplementary estimates…? The combination of those two is very likely. There's a high probability that it's very likely to determine the spending in individual ministries.

[ Page 14425 ]

Is there some concern on the revenue side as we approach March 31 that leads the minister to want to hedge his bets and suggest that in individual ministries — because the revenue is cascading downwards, notwithstanding what the Minister of Finance has said — individual ministers may exceed the spending allocated for their individual ministries?

Hon. M. de Jong: On the individual side, this is purely about expenditures. We obviously aim to hit the targets. If this helps the member, I am not aware of any circumstances that would lead me to conclude or alert the member to that not taking place. His characterization of it as being likely is therefore, from my perspective, accurate.

Section 1 approved.

section 2.

B. Ralston: I just want to briefly address the method by which the holdback that's referred to…. In

section 2 it refers to sections 5(1) and 6(1) of the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act. In

section 5 it refers to the payment of half the holdback for achieving individual responsibilities.

The way in which this is calculated is on the basis of the pay that's set out in the Members' Remuneration and Pensions Act. My calculation is that an individual cabinet minister receives approximately, if my calculations are correct, $151,820 a year for their duties.

[1440]

The ministerial portion of that is $50,820 approximately. The ministers receive 50 percent more than an ordinary MLA gets. An ordinary MLA is approximately $101,000 when cost of living increases are taken into account.

I just want to ascertain that this individual holdback on that amount of $50,820 is $5,082, if I've calculated correctly, and that's the holdback for achieving individual responsibilities that we're talking about. That applies to each of these ministers.

The sum total that this bill is directed to is $5,082 times ten — just over $50,000. The entire machinery of the Legislature, the introduction of the bill, the advice from the Clerk, the formal debate here…. What we are debating in dollar amounts is just over $50,000.

I just want to make that point. If the minister would be so kind as to acknowledge that my calculations are correct or are approximately correct, and we're talking about the sum of approximately $51,000.

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm not in a position to verify the member's math, but insofar as I think he did calculations based on the ministerial stipend — the ministerial portion of the salary that ministers of the Crown receive — and applied the holdback calculations to that portion, he is correct.

B. Ralston: So if I am correct, and I think I am, the pay of an ordinary MLA has just approached approximately $100,000. The ministerial pay is half of that, which is $50,000. The holdback of 10 percent is calculated on that $50,000, so it's about $5,000. So ten ministers — $50,000. Would the minister agree that this bill concerns and is about paying the sum of $50,000 — $5,000 to ten ministers? That's what we're debating here?

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, the bill is about accountability and about obliging the government to present to this House in a regularized and open way the numbers and that which follows from supplementary estimates. The member has done a calculation as to what it represents on an individualized basis for the ministers involved.

I'm not going to quarrel with the math, but I've also tried to be fair about saying that at the end of the day, it requires verification by the audits that are done and, finally, the publication of the public accounts before any minister receives any of the holdback that is taken through the course of the year.

B. Ralston: In

section 2(d)(ii) it refers to the Minister of Forests and Range and "the amount of any expenses incurred by that minister for that fiscal year under the authority of

section 65…." I just wanted to confirm that that was the $112 million that was spoken of, I believe, in the supplementary estimates for fire suppression throughout the province.

[1445]

Hon. M. de Jong: Apologies to the member and the House for the delay, but I just wanted to make sure I got this correct.

I think the member referenced the supplementary estimates. He may recall that for the statutory appropriation that is concerned relative to fire suppression, there isn't in fact a separate supplementary estimate vote. I am, however, advised that the amount that was spent in excess of the calculated amount for the '08-09 fiscal year for protection — for fire suppression — was $26 million.

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

In subsection (2) of

section 2 that we're referring to now, it refers to the operation of

section 6(1.1) of the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act. How might that come into play in this particular set of estimated amounts?

I had understood that the estimates reflected that revision of ministerial responsibilities, and this appears to refer to further revisions in the event of government reorganization. Can the minister explain how that might come into effect? Is this simply a "covering all possibilities" type of provision, or is there some actual intended purpose in this particular fiscal year?

[ Page 14426 ]

Hon. M. de Jong: I just want to verify that we are talking about

section 2(2), which begins with the phrase "nothing in subsection (1)…."

Interjection.

Hon. M. de Jong: This is a provision that is included in the unlikely event that there were to be a government reorganization in the course of the next 20 days — which, again, I am not anticipating.

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

Just to close on this section, would the minister agree — or is he prepared to reflect — that given the dollar amounts that are involved of approximately $50,000 for ten ministers, engaging the formal mechanisms of the Legislature for that sum may not be the most cost-efficient way to achieve the professed goals of this legislation?

Is the minister prepared — he may not be, and I appreciate that — to reflect if there's perhaps a less cumbersome way of achieving the goal of ministerial accountability without the necessity of a formal bill and all that it implies in terms of time and cost — and for, I think, a very, very small sum?

[1450]

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, I will respect conclusions and opinions that the hon. member and others may have about this. I have heard arguments that in cases where supplementary estimates are called to authorize expenditures of unanticipated surplus funds, this may not be the originally intended purpose for which the law was created.

That is something I'm sure this member will be reflecting upon and actually something that the government may be reflecting upon. It is helpful to know the member's views on the matter.

Section 2 approved.

section 3.

B. Ralston: Can the minister simply advise, when it refers to the public statement of the revised information that would be made under

section 6 of the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act, when in the calendar we might expect that to be made?

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm sorry. I think the member is looking for a date, but I didn't quite catch the date relative to what portion of the section.

B. Ralston: Perhaps I'm misreading the section. Although he anticipates little change is likely in the 20 days prior to the end of the fiscal year, I'm just wondering: at which point in the calendar year will it become public whether or not ministers have achieved the individual responsibility that's set out in this act and in the companion act, the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act? When will the public be advised whether ministers have achieved those targets or not?

Hon. M. de Jong: I think I understand the member's question. The answer isn't definitively available until the public accounts are tabled. My recollection is that it happens in late June or beginning of July. There is a separate report attached to the tabling of the public accounts at that time.

Sections 3 and 4 approved.

Title approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 2:54 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Ministerial Accountability

Bases Act, 2008-2009

Bill 4, Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2008-2009, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading debate of Bill 8, Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2009, to be preceded by a very brief recess if that's agreeable.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, the House stands in recess until three o'clock.

The House recessed from 2:55 p.m. to 2:56 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

Workers Compensation

Amendment Act, 2009

Hon. I. Black: I move that Bill 8 be now read for a second time.

When picturing firefighters and the dangers that they encounter, most people don't think about cancer, the

[ Page 14427 ]

cancer risks, even though cancer is a very real danger in firefighters' lives.

Today in the interests of British Columbia's professional firefighters and their families, I would like to present legislation that will ensure that professional firefighters who are non-smokers and are diagnosed with lung cancer will not have to prove that their disease is related to their work. The automatic presumption will be that their lung cancer is related to their firefighting activities. The occupational disease presumption is limited to firefighters who are non-smokers because of the clear medical links between smoking and lung cancer.

[K. Whittred in the chair.]

In 2007 the Professional Fire Fighters Association asked government to add lung cancer to the list of diseases presumed to be related to employment as a firefighter.

Madam Speaker, I have to comment that working with the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association over the last year as minister and before that as MLA has been an extraordinarily impressive experience. The B.C. Professional Fire Fighters have been very articulate, highly professional and ready to work with us in explaining what it is that they view that they need. They have been more than willing to do their part to help us accomplish what is needed for the families of British Columbia's firefighters.

I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge Michael Hurley, president of the B.C. Fire Fighters Association; Larry Thomas, their secretary-treasurer; Richard Melnyk, the VP from the Kootenays; Jay Brownlee from the Lower Mainland; Reid Wharton, the VP from the Island region; John Iverson, vice-president of the northern region; and Larry Hollier, vice-president of the Okanagan region.

When we had the firefighters here the other day, I had the pleasure of bringing this exciting news closer to home as well. I spent some important time meeting and learning of the current issues of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association with some of the firefighters that serve my constituency in Port Moody–Westwood, specifically Rob Suzukovich from Port Moody, Mike Shelfley, Dave Piffer, Jason Miller from Coquitlam, Spencer Hughes, Ben McCulloch, Steve Piccolo and Mac Sullivan, also from the Coquitlam Fire Fighters Association.

It was in May 2008 at the B.C. Fire Fighters Association convention that government announced changing the Workers Compensation Act to add lung cancer to existing presumptions for brain cancer, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, colorectal cancer, ureter cancer, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkins lymphoma and leukemia. Those cancers and the presumption element associated with them were put forward and passed by our government in 2005, again working with the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association.

As with existing presumptions for other cancers, lung cancer will apply to professional and volunteer firefighters who are primarily assigned to fire suppression duties for a minimum period of time and who are regularly exposed to the hazards of a fire scene, other than a forest fire scene, throughout that minimum period.

It establishes that if a qualifying firefighter contracts primary site lung cancer, the Workers Compensation Board, WorkSafe B.C., must presume that it was caused by the worker's employment as a firefighter unless the contrary is proved. This presumption means that firefighters will be eligible for workers' compensation benefits without having to provide scientific and medical evidence that the cancer was caused by their work in their specific situation.

This legislative amendment will apply to qualifying firefighters diagnosed with lung cancer since May 27, 2008, when this presumption was first announced.

[1500]

British Columbia is a leader in recognizing presumptive occupational diseases associated with long-term employment as a firefighter, and I am very proud to propose even further protection for the men and women who help keep our communities safe.

I move second reading of the Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2009.

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

Deputy Speaker: Proceed, Member.

Introductions by Members

J. Nuraney: We have in the gallery today students from grade 5 from the Maywood Community School in Burnaby, a school that I have great admiration for. The work that they do truly is commendable. Not only do they teach the students, but they reach out to the parents of the students and make them feel part of the community. I think the work that the school does and the principal and the teachers are truly commendable.

In the gallery with us, present with the students, is Sue Montebello, the principal, an absolutely amazing lady who does great work in Burnaby and for the school. We have David Kelsey, the teacher. We have Brenda Hain, a librarian. We have Heidi Canavese, a staff member. And Mrs. Fatima, one of the parents, has also accompanied the children here today. I would like the House to please join me in making them feel very welcome.

Debate Continued

K. Conroy: We rise, too, on this side of the House to support this legislation. I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge the firefighters from my area, Richard Melnyk and Lee Depellegrin, who I met with this week.

[ Page 14428 ]

We've all been meeting with our firefighters this week, and we've all been very impressed by the excellent briefing that they presented to us, the issues that they talked about and the fact that this legislation is very near and dear to their hearts. We talked about other issues, but this was one that was very near and dear to their hearts. I want to thank the firefighters for their commitment to their profession, to the people that they work with and to their communities — for the job they do.

As the minister has said, this bill does amend the Workers Compensation Act to recognize primary site lung cancer in non-smokers as a disease linked to the occupation of firefighting. We know that the B.C. Fire Fighters Association has repeatedly asked the provincial government to expand the list of recognized cancers, and this was one of the cancers that they had asked should be expanded, to be recognized. In other areas one that they talked about was esophageal cancer.

There is growing scientific evidence of the strong relationship between the different cancers and the occupation of a firefighter, and I think the fact that lung cancer for non-smokers is being recognized today is one that firefighters are indeed glad about. While we do support this, we also want to talk a little bit about the history of support to firefighters and their recognition of the occupational disease presumption.

I want to just talk about when this record started in this House — just a bit of history for members. I want to talk about how it did, in fact, start February 15, 2005, when former Member Joy MacPhail tabled a motion calling for amendments to the Workers Compensation Act that would create an occupational disease presumption for firefighters.

I'd like to read that motion for the record: "Ms. MacPhail to move that this House recommend to the government that it introduce an amendment to the Workers Compensation Act to ensure that the following injuries be deemed to have been due to the nature of the work of firefighters unless proven otherwise on a case-by-case basis" — and they're listed — "primary site bladder cancer, primary site kidney cancer, primary site colon cancer, multiple myeloma, primary site brain cancer, primary site lung cancer in a non-smoker, primary site testicular cancer, leukemia or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma."

[1505]

Of those nine diseases that have been listed here, those nine types of cancer, eight of them will now be recognized after passage of this bill, and this was recommended back in February of 2005. So I wanted to make sure that that was on the record as a bit of history for members — that it was actually Joy MacPhail who originally brought these recommendations forward to the House.

Also, I'd like to recognize the great work of the member for New Westminster, who on October 31, 2005, when this bill — it was Bill 11 — was introduced, when the original seven cancers were recognized…. At committee stage, the member for New Westminster introduced an amendment that would have at that time added primary site lung cancer to the list of cancers. Unfortunately, this did not receive the support of the House at that time in 2005, but I think it is important to recognize that that was how the opposition was thinking ahead, showing support for the firefighters and the fact that they should be supported in the work they do.

But again, I want to say today that we do recognize the importance of the addition of lung cancer for non-smokers, for firefighters. We do definitely support this bill.

However, we'd like to put on the record that we also support the firefighters' requests for esophageal cancer. They presented that in the brief, and it's unfortunately not in the text of the bill. We, in fact, had a motion on the floor that would have recognized that, and it is unfortunate that the government couldn't have seen in its wisdom to include esophageal cancer with this very bill.

Again, we support the lung cancer for non-smokers. It's just unfortunate that the workers compensation coverage couldn't be extended to esophageal cancer also. This was raised, actually, back in 2008 by our former critic and member for New Westminster.

So again, I'd like to say that we are definitely on the record for supporting the firefighters in their efforts to ensure that they have the proper compensation for the very, very important job they do. I'd like to thank the firefighters for the work they do, for the excellent briefing they prepared for all caucus members on both sides of the House, and for their commitment to their communities and the work that they do.

H. Bloy: I stand up to support this bill. You know, I couldn't imagine what a day in the life of a firefighter would entail and just what firefighters do each day in all of our communities around British Columbia. I know that they fight more than fires. They do so much for our community.

But before I start on my remarks, I really have to correct the history lesson from the member across the way. She claimed that Joy MacPhail stood up and made a motion in the House in 2005 in February. I can tell you that the firefighters, the professional firefighters of British Columbia, had been going to the government of the day in the '90s for years to make changes. For her to bring Joy MacPhail up when Joy MacPhail cancelled a number of items that firefighters were entitled to….

It's in fact in 2003 that we sent it to the Workers Compensation Board to review those nine cancers. In reviewing those nine cancers, we came up in 2005 with our recommendation of seven at the time. We had been working with the professional firefighters every year. That is the story of how it happened, not what didn't happen.

Firefighters are invaluable resources to our communities and the contribution that they make by themselves, their friends and their families…. The Burn Fund is a

[ Page 14429 ]

great example where firefighters go above and beyond, dedicating their time to support burn survivors, to raise public awareness. For over 30 years moneys raised for the fund have supported programs such as burn awareness, research prevention programs, helped hospitals like Vancouver General and B.C.'s Children's Hospital.

There are more than 3,600 professional firefighters in 50 communities around B.C. and the Yukon. We as a government have demonstrated our commitment to firefighters throughout the years.

In 2003 the government asked the Workers Compensation Board to review a request from the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association that firefighters developing certain cancers be presumed to be contracted through their work. In 2005 our government amended the Workers Compensation Act to recognize firefighters' cancer risk for seven cancers.

[1510]

I can be proud to say that the official announcement was made at the Firefighters' Club in Burnaby. It was made by the former cabinet minister, hon. Patty Sahota. I was there with my colleague from Burnaby-Willingdon, and we made the announcement for the seven presumptions. In 2005 we extended that to include part-time, paid, on-call and volunteer firefighters.

In 2007 government ensured that seasonal forest fire fighters working for the B.C. public service were eligible to receive full medical and extended medical benefits. In 2007 the government granted $2 million towards accommodations in the Burn Fund building.

In 2008 the government granted $2 million in the Burn Fund building to support education and research. In 2008 government added testicular cancer to the list of occupational diseases for firefighters, bringing the number up to eight. In 2008 the government also announced planned changes through legislation in 2009 to add lung cancer to its list, and I am proud to say that's what we're here to do today.

I want to thank all professional firefighters for their strength and determination on staying on this file for so many years. I was pleased that we were able to work with so many great firefighters, and I want to thank them for bringing these to government and coming back each year with clear and articulated requests that we have been able to work on.

In 2003 when we first spoke to firefighters — or not the first time; for two years since we were elected — from Burnaby there were two firefighters that were here on a regular basis: Joe Robertson and John McQuay.

And then this year, for the past few years, we have four firefighters from Burnaby that have actively worked on file. We have Randy Delmonico, Rob Lemieux, Miles Ritchie and Mike Hurley, who is president of the Burnaby Professional Firefighters. He's also the British Columbia president of the professional firefighters.

I truly want to thank the firefighters for what they do in their community, for what they bring to us, and I truly want to thank them for staying determined from the '90s and for their partnership in the work that they did with our government to get to where we're at today.

I am proud of all firefighters in British Columbia, and I support this bill.

C. Puchmayr: As I was heading over to the House today, I was not aware that this matter was coming forward until I arrived. It's an interesting coincidence, and I thought I would take the opportunity to rise here in the House.

As you're aware, I have been absent some time, overcoming a liver transplant, and I will do my best to stay focused and not to get too angry with the member across the way who, I think, is attempting to elevate this to a different level. I'm going to keep the discussion at a reasonable level, a sensible level.

I think we can all agree that the firefighters that we have in our community, that we have throughout the province do a very difficult job, and they do put their lives on the line, literally, every day that they come to work. I think that the fact that this was recognized going back to February 15 of 2005, when Joy MacPhail did introduce a member's motion bringing in nine of the cancers that we have today ….

That's the first time it shows up on the paper. Certainly, I was very pleased, as the new Labour critic in 2005, right after being elected, when the then Labour Minister, the Minister of Aboriginal Reconciliation, brought the legislation forward to provide presumption of cancer legislation to career firefighters in the province of British Columbia. It was certainly a step that templated the original NDP motion, and certainly, this side was very supportive of it.

We also put forward some amendments with respect to adding other forms of cancer, including non-smokers lung cancer, which we are dealing with here today.

[1515]

Back in the fall of 2005 when the first legislation came in, we were already at today's date with the sciences, and the sciences haven't changed all across North America. The facts are very clear that cancer is very common. Primary site lung cancer in non-smokers who are firefighters has an extremely high weight of probability, that it is causative to the relationship to their job, especially if you are primarily in suppression and, therefore, should qualify as one of the presumptions.

That hasn't changed since we made the amendment in the fall of 2005, and therefore, I do have some concerns with the fact that it's being introduced today when there are surely members in the province that may have succumbed to lung cancer since the fall of '05 and members who may still be battling with lung cancer today and that may not qualify for the short period of retroactivity that

[ Page 14430 ]

is being allowed in this bill. So we will probably be dealing with that in committee stage. But again, it shows that we are moving forward.

It's unfortunate that it had to take the eve of a provincial election and a day after the firefighters lobby for this to go forward, but nevertheless, we are appreciative that the legislation has come forward.

We know that it is the fruition of hard work certainly on this side and certainly of the Professional Fire Fighters Association and the hundreds of thousands of dollars of their dues that they have spent in hiring the specialists and hiring the doctors and the scientists to quantify what they've known for many, many years, just by virtue of the mortality rate of firefighters to lung cancer and to other cancers. They have worked extremely hard in achieving that recognition. Fortunately, we are here today again expanding on the presumption-of-cancer legislation.

Last November I attended a funeral of a firefighter. I grew up in the same neighbourhood. We hung out at the same places. I didn't know him that well when I was young. I was actually quite shocked when I heard that he had passed away from esophageal cancer. Esophageal cancer is another cancer that we have been asking the government to put on the list. The sciences are there. Ontario is engaged. Ontario has the legislation. Last time I spoke on this in question period in November of 2008, Manitoba was in the process and may very well be on the books today.

Esophageal cancer is also the first…. The opposition introduced the amendment to the original legislation to add volunteer firefighters to the equation of the presumption of cancer. The first firefighter that was a volunteer firefighter that passed away of cancer — immediately after the legislation — was a captain in northern Vancouver Island. He unfortunately died of esophageal cancer.

I was working with some of the volunteer firefighter lobbyists who were then trying to promote esophageal cancer as one of the identified cancers. That hasn't happened, and it's unfortunate that it isn't coming forward in this bill. We have introduced a private member's motion through the new Labour critic, and it is still on the books. We're hoping that certainly when we're in government next May we will be introducing that legislation to this House.

What's really sad about the test for compensation for cancer…. I'll give you an example with firefighter Captain Glendinning. Here's an interesting test. Captain Glendinning passed away after 31 years of service. His friend Deputy Chief John Watt succumbed just months before him. They were hired at the same time. They fought some of the same fires side by side. They were exposed to the same toxins and the same chemicals, and one was awarded a presumption designation — not a presumption designation, but one was awarded a designation of work-related.

[1520]

Even though he had been retired, he still died on duty and certainly received a different type of recognition. There was quite a ceremony that firefighters from all over North America and across Canada came to attend because it was a line-of-duty fatality.

You know, his good friend, who he worked with for all those same years and fought those same fires with…. His diagnosis from WorkSafe was different, and they denied his rights to a compensable case. He didn't die in the line of duty. He died just of esophageal cancer.

That's why we made that resolution, that's why we made that motion, and that's why we're going to bring in that bill — so that that injustice will not happen again in the province of British Columbia after the May election.

Now, with the lung cancer, which we're dealing with here today…. The legislation will pass. I guarantee you that. This side will guarantee you that. The legislation will pass. Primary lung cancer, non-smoker will pass. There will be an automatic presumption if you're a non-smoker and you're primarily in suppression and you have a diagnosis of lung cancer.

Again, it saddens me that we have firefighters today that are diagnosed, but they were diagnosed before the government agreed that the science is acceptable. Yet they're still diagnosed. They still have lung cancer. They may still lose their lives — in my opinion, in the line of duty — but according to the government's reluctance to bring this forward earlier, they will not be categorized as dying in the line of duty, and they will merely go without being compensated. That's sad.

It would be good if the minister takes note of these and we look at the issue, maybe, during committee stage and look at the issue with respect to the retroactivity of this.

With those comments, Madam Speaker, it was a pleasure to rise in here again. Hopefully, I will have one more opportunity, maybe tomorrow. With that, I will take my seat.

J. Nuraney: I will certainly resist the temptation, but I want to stay focused on the record of this government.

I was elected in 2001, and since that time, I remember that we have had representations from the firefighters to come and talk to us about the presumptions and what it is they would like to have the act amended to, or the Workers Compensation Act expanded to, to cover certain presumptions.

I think that effort was made very honourably by the members of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters. I have been in contact with those firefighters since 2001, until two days ago, when they again visited us and talked to us about the possibilities of expanding the list of presumptions.

What we've got today in this bill is the presumption of lung cancer, and I think it is important that we keep studying the occupational hazards that the firefighters go through on a day-to-day basis as they fight fires in our community.

[ Page 14431 ]

We had a fire, unfortunately, in Burnaby a couple of weeks ago in an apartment building on Smith Street. Once again, the firefighters in Burnaby rose up to the challenge and came and helped and reduced the fatalities in that incident.

I think we not only need to recommend the work that they do and commend them for the work that they do in terms of fighting fires in our community, but we need to recognize that there are risks involved in their occupation. These are the risks that we need to study. We need to have medical evidence, and we need to not only continuously upgrade our knowledge of the occupational hazard but to see how best this government can help.

I believe there are close to 3,600 professional firefighters in 50 different communities around British Columbia and the Yukon. This government has demonstrated its solid commitment to firefighters throughout the years since we have been in government.

[1525]

In 2003 the government asked the Workers Compensation Board to review a request from the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association that firefighters who develop certain cancers be presumed to have contracted them in the course of their work.

In 2005 the government amended the Workers Compensation Act to recognize firefighters' cancer risks to include brain, bladder, kidney, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, urethral, colorectal and leukemia as occupational diseases. In 2005 the government extended this to include part-time, paid on-call volunteer firefighters, which I think was an addition that this government did upon the recommendations of the professional firefighters.

In 2007 the government again ensured that the seasonal forest fire fighters working in the B.C. public service were eligible to receive full medical and extended health benefits. This was another extension which I think was really laudable on the part of this government. In 2007 the government granted $2 million towards accommodations in the Burn Fund building.

In 2008 the government granted $2 million to the Burn Fund building to support education and research. The reason that I am chronologically putting these things forward is the efforts of this government on a continuous basis to work with the professional firefighters….

In the year 2008 government added testicular cancer to the list of occupational diseases for firefighters, bringing the number up to eight. In 2008 the government also announced planned changes to the legislation in 2008-09 to add lung cancer to the list. In March of 2009 the government follows through this plan to amend the Workers Compensation Act to include lung cancer on the list of occupational diseases for firefighters, bringing the number of the occupational diseases to nine.

In this bill, as we debate this bill and offer our comments, I think that the government has worked really well with the professional firefighters to accommodate their request, and after having seen the medical evidence and the proof that these are occupational hazards, we have continued to expand the list.

I also would like to recognize the work of Miles Ritchie and Mike Hurley, both from Burnaby, who have continuously worked with us to make us understand, first of all, what their occupational hazards involve and then to ask us for our support in recommending to the minister of the time to make sure that these presumptions were included in the bill. I am very proud of this government's record in working with the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters.

I would like to mention that I will be supporting this bill, which I think is a result of tremendous work that has been done in partnership with the Burnaby Fire Fighters and the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters as a whole.

C. Trevena: I, too, am rising in support of Bill 8, which brings lung cancer as one of the cancers recognized under workers compensation for firefighters.

I think that none of us can really conceive what a firefighter must go through in their daily lives. I think that it's not a place here to be scoring political points on who had said what when. I think we should all be marking the fact that we do actually have this here. It's going to be put into workers compensation so that in the future we do have firefighters who are going to be protected. I think that both sides of the House should be celebrating that.

I don't want to press the case. I say it's not winning political points, but I have to recognize that my colleague the former critic from New Westminster did raise this as a possibility in 2005. We could have had this in since 2006 if the act had passed, but we are here in 2009, and it is the case.

[1530]

I think we really do have to note the tragic situation that firefighters find themselves in and that they are contracting these diseases, these cancers, in their daily work — work that we expect them to do. That's why it's so important that we as a House jointly support this and jointly say that this is something that is important.

I would hope that the House equally speedily recognizes the other case of esophageal cancer. As my colleague from New Westminster said, a volunteer firefighter from North Island did die with that disease, and it isn't covered. It is something that should be covered in the future. We do have it on the motion paper.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

I'm sure that we would be wholeheartedly in support if the government wanted to move this in, in the next few weeks before the House rises, before the election — to bring in esophageal cancer also. This is something that, as I say, we have been pushing for and would be very pleased to be able to support.

[ Page 14432 ]

But we are here today talking about the fact that lung cancer for non-smokers is going to be included. I think we should be working to ensure that this goes through very swiftly so that the firefighters who have lung cancer as a result of their work…. We know that some are going to slip through the cracks, and that is exceedingly unfortunate. But for those who have it and will be able to be covered under this act, do so — and that it happens as swiftly as possible.

As I say, there is esophageal cancer that we are also hoping…. The firefighters themselves came and talked to us about that. I hope that this government moves swiftly on that and that we aren't waiting beyond the end of this session.

Again, it's quite tragic that we have the recognition by year. Every parliamentary session we seem to be recognizing one more cancer, one more cancer. I think that if we could just say: "Okay, we want to move ahead. We've got lung cancer here. Let's move ahead with esophageal cancer…." It is something that we have tabled as a motion and hope that the government does move on very quickly.

I know that a number of people want to have a few words to acknowledge this on both sides of the House. As I say, I think this is not a time to score partisan points. It's a time to really accept this, move on and hope that we swiftly embrace the other cancers.

Hon. R. Cantelon: I too rise in support of this bill. I'd like to speak briefly about the process that led to this support certainly in my constituency.

First, I'd like to acknowledge the firefighters who have approached me and have been talking to me over a number of years on a number of issues that concern them: president of the local Mike Rispen, Chad Porter, Brian Woods, Ron Daly, Bill Eggers and Mark Brakley.

I've gotten to know these gentlemen very, very well over the past few years. I think they've taken a very collaborative and positive approach in how they come forward and suggest changes. These are obvious ones to us and obvious to them, and I know that both sides of the House will support them. The manner in which they did it, I thought, was very instructive to me and to other people that wish to get things done.

The first characteristic I attribute to them is persistence. They come on an annual basis and meet with me — in fact, annual and even semi-annual — and I have very polite and well-informed discussions with them. I have to say that these are very large guys. At first it can be a little intimidating. You wonder just what approach they're going to use, but I want to tell you that they're as eloquent as they are effective as firefighters. Certainly, this is an approach that I think is very effective in talking to legislatures, and I want to salute them on that.

I would also like to say that we, of course, recognize the other aspect of the job that they do fearlessly: entering fires, smoke-filled rooms where no one would dare to go, even with the protective equipment that they have. They were relating to me when I met with them the other day….

Well, the wife of one of the firefighters has now requested that he do the laundry associated with work in the fire hall, because even after they take off the protective equipment, the stuff just permeates the equipment right through to the clothing that they wear underneath. There's a toxic odour to it that they don't want to bring into the house with them.

[1535]

To me, that spoke very eloquently of just how dangerous this work is and how it must affect them physically and personally. Yet they carry on and do this work. As they learn more and more about the dangers and the risks that they do, they still bravely do these jobs.

It was even related, too, that they can feel it after they're off shift and they've been on a fire. It actually exudes out of the pores of their skin. It has been absorbed through their skin.

These are very, very dangerous risks. I highly support how they work, but mostly I'd like to salute Mike, Chad, Brian, Ron, Bill and Mark. I've come to know them very, very well. They're very effective leaders in their community and very effective spokespeople for their member firefighters.

I'm happy to stand here and support this bill.

H. Bains: I, too, rise to speak in favour of Bill 8, recognizing lung cancer as a compensable disease for the firefighters.

I want to thank Larry Thomas from Surrey, who was the president of the Surrey Firefighters Association and also a key member of the B.C. Fire Fighters Association executive. Their tireless work around this issue and other issues to make the lives of their members better — I want to thank them for that.

I want to thank all the firefighters for always being ready to put their lives on the line in order to protect us. They go out there, like the member said before, without even thinking about what lies ahead of them, and the only thing on their mind when they're going on a call is how they're going to protect and save lives and property.

I think the fact that both sides in the House today are tripping over each other to say who was first goes to say a lot about the firefighters and the kind of respect they have garnered across all the political lines. I think they have done a tremendous job in bringing this issue to the forefront, bringing the awareness to the public and bringing the awareness to the legislators here.

Finally, I think it's a good day. It's a good day for the firefighters that the lung cancer now will be recognized as a compensable disease without having to prove that they suffered this in the time of their duty. I think it's a good day for their families, because many of them

[ Page 14433 ]

suffer as a result of them losing their lives. They were faced with the toxic fumes, and they ended up losing their lives.

I think we as a society should say that it's a good day for us, for recognizing the reality of the life of firefighters who are constantly put in danger, a danger which they may not see clearly at that particular time, but over time it affects their lives.

I want to say that the esophageal cancer I was hoping would be part of the list that the minister has put together of the type of cancers to be covered is not there. I am disappointed. Hopefully, the bill can be amended, or the minister actually can make some amendments to it — I don't know if there is a procedure to do that — to include esophageal cancer as one of the cancers to be recognized.

At the end, I stand here proudly to speak in favour of this bill, and I'm sure that both sides of the House will support this. I think our firefighters out there deserve our support. With that, I want to thank them for bringing the awareness. I want to thank all the members who are actually here supporting this bill.

J. Yap: It's my honour to rise to join this debate and speak on this bill, Bill 8, Workers Compensation Amendment Act. I will be speaking in favour of this act and supporting this act, joining all other previous speakers who have spoken in favour of this act.

[1540]

Like everyone else who has spoken before me, I am grateful for the work that firefighters do for members of the community each and every day. As has been mentioned, they go into dangerous situations without thinking, going in to put out dangerous fires to help people, to save lives. They do this as a matter of course because it's their job, and all of us are grateful for the work that they do.

This gratitude has to go beyond recognizing that they do a great and valuable job for us. We need to recognize as well, as our government has done, that they do put themselves at risk for certain diseases. With this act, we will be recognizing that lung cancer will be added to the list of cancers that for firefighters who qualify as non-smokers will be presumed to have occurred — the affliction — as a result of work as a firefighter.

This is the latest in a number of changes to the legislation, the journey beginning in 2003 when our government was approached by the Professional Fire Fighters Association to look at including diseases on a presumptive basis.

In 2005 our government acted to amend the Workers Compensation Act to recognize cancer risks such as brain cancer, bladder cancer, kidney, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, colorectal and leukemia as occupational diseases. Today with this act we will recognize the presumption of lung cancer.

This is the result of a great collaboration, a great partnership, between the members of the Professional Fire Fighters Association and our government in working together to look at the signs that support the need for us to take this action.

I am very supportive of this act, and I do want to thank the members of the firefighters association of my community of Richmond, who have worked hard on this file, specifically Tim Wilkinson, Cory Parker and Rich MacMillan, firefighters from Richmond who came to talk to us, to present the case for us to put this act in place.

Firefighters provide a great service to communities throughout British Columbia. This is an important change, the Workers Compensation Amendment Act, that will allow us to once again recognize how much we value the work they do on behalf of all of us. It's my honour once again to speak in favour. I will be voting and supporting this act.

J. Horgan: It is also a pleasure particularly for me to rise today and speak in favour of Bill 8, which amends the Workers Compensation Act and adds lung cancer to the list of presumptive cancers for non-smokers who are in the occupation of firefighters.

I have three family members who are professional firefighters, and I want to correct the pronunciation from the Minister of Labour. My cousin Rob Suzukovich from Port Moody is one — and my nephew Andrew Nelson in the city of Vancouver and my big brother in the city of Victoria, Brian Horgan, who had his cancerous thyroid removed some years ago.

It's not on the list, and it may well not get on the list for a while. I've heard members today talk about esophageal cancer, and I know government is seized of the importance of that issue to firefighters right across the province. I am hopeful we can continue to work in a cooperative way, both sides of the House recognizing the importance of the work that firefighters do in our communities right across British Columbia. I know, certainly from my family members, that they are selfless public servants.

We met with representatives. My colleague from Alberni and I met with the Alberni firefighters and with Rob from Port Moody. I pointed out — and this will be no surprise to other members — that when we're looking at the popularity of public servants, we in this place are fairly low down the list. I don't think anyone would be alarmed by that.

[1545]

Interjection.

J. Horgan: My friend from Prince George quite rightly says that we're at the bottom.

So whenever we can find ourselves doing what we can for those who are absolutely at the top — firefighters, police, emergency service personnel — I think it's

[ Page 14434 ]

our job to do that, and not just because we can bask in that reflective glory, which we like to do. We often have these moments where we all recognize the importance of the public service that's provided by firefighters. When they make a modest proposal, although it does have an impact on revenues to WCB and to government, it's important that we make the right choice, not because we want to bask in that glory but because of the important work they do.

I think this is one of those rare occasions. I believe this is the second time in this parliament that we've had the opportunity to come together, opposition and government, to support a worthy undertaking. I commend the Minister of Labour and those who have come before him — the member for Richmond Centre and previous Labour ministers — who have made this a priority for the government of B.C. I'm very happy to be in an opposition that recognizes that this is not partisanship. It's not an opportunity to score points. It's an opportunity to do the right thing.

It's not just because I have three family members who spend their lives running into burning buildings. It's all of the other people that do it with them, men and women right across the province.

This is a good bill. This is one of these days when all of us will be able to go home and say we did something good for the people of B.C.

Hon. S. Bond: On February 2 a gentleman by the name of Russell Wangersky won Canada's largest non-fiction award. Russell Wangersky was actually recognized for his memoir called Burning Down the House: Fighting Fires and Losing Myself .

The judges who selected this book said this of Wangersky's book: Burning Down the House is "an astonishingly insightful and harrowing depiction of modern-day firefighting…an account so relentlessly lucid and visceral that the reader emerges from the experience almost as exhausted and traumatized as the writer himself."

When Wangersky — and I happen to have had the pleasure of being there — accepted that award, he came to the podium, and he was incredibly overcome. He said this, his voice shaking: "I love to fight fires, but I won't again."

The book and Wangersky's comments depict for us what men and women every day in British Columbia do on our behalf. They overcome the fear and all that goes with walking or running into a burning building to make sure that they protect the women and the children and the families of British Columbia. I was incredibly moved by the fact that Wangersky's pain is reflected in his book.

I would really commend this work to those of us in the House today who are rising together. I would completely concur. This isn't a day for who said what when and where. It's a day for recognizing the fact that we have a responsibility as legislators in this province to work together to ensure that the people who serve British Columbia in this way have every opportunity to be protected and cared for in an appropriate way.

Our bill, Bill 8, the Workers Compensation Amendment Act, will actually create a lung cancer presumption for firefighters who qualify as non-smokers. One of the things I think both sides of the House have agreed on and have made clear in their comments is that probably every one of us has created a personal relationship as a result of the incredible efforts made by firefighters in this province related to these types of issues.

I am very lucky, as are my colleagues from Prince George–Omineca and Prince George North, because we were fortunate enough to have the past president of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters, Mr. Al Leier, live and work there in Prince George. I sat beside Al on numerous plane flights, where he took every opportunity to remind me about the importance of British Columbia being a leader in this area that we are adding this amendment for today.

[1550]

As we've developed personal relationships with the firefighters in our own communities, we've all been compelled to find ourselves in the place we're in today. I want to say an incredibly profound thank-you to John Iverson, Blake King and Fred Wilkinson in particular, who were here most recently but who have on a regular basis met with us.

In fact, they invited us to the fire hall one day, and we made sure that we arrived at the fire hall when it was breakfast time. Our firefighters created the most incredible breakfast for us, and we….

J. Horgan: They can cook.

Hon. S. Bond: They are great cooks. I would totally agree with the member for Malahat–Juan de Fuca. They are fantastic cooks. They have amazing hospitality.

Even while we were sharing that breakfast together, they still took the opportunity to remind us about the importance of the work they're doing.

What I'm so impressed by is the professionalism that these firefighters brought to the Legislative Assembly. In fact, we get lobbied by a lot of people on a lot of subjects, but from our perspective — and I'm sure this would also bring agreement from both sides of the House — very few organizations do it as well, as methodically and as scientifically based as our professional firefighters have done.

We look forward to that ongoing relationship. I know there's always more to be done, and I can assure you that all of us in this House are committed to seeing that ongoing work being done over the next number of months and years.

I also want to recognize the firefighters for something incredible that they do. In my particular role as Minister

[ Page 14435 ]

of Education, I get to see that side of it in particular. I also had the chance to meet with Tim Baillie. I think Tim is a firefighter in Surrey. The member opposite is nodding, so I've got the right place. There is no one more passionate than Tim Baillie about making sure that people in British Columbia are educated about the kinds of challenges that are faced by families every day — things that are preventable, things that we can actually help people become more aware of.

When I think about firefighters, I often think about Burn Awareness Week. If you think about what they do — and we've just had one in February, in fact — firefighters help public and private elementary schools in British Columbia, parents, students and their families access information. They do it in innovative ways, where they actually look at products that are interactive. They talk about quizzes and colouring pages and animated videos. They do all of that in addition to the incredible work they do protecting our lives and our communities every single day.

Today not only do we want to commend our firefighters for their very professional efforts in making sure that each one of us in this House was well aware of the need to move forward on this legislation — and I am proud to stand up today as part of a Legislature that is adding another step and another piece to the work we've done with our firefighters — but we also want to thank them for the countless hours that they spend volunteering, caring for kids, creating the burn camp where children have an opportunity to be themselves and share time with others who have gone through the horrific experience of major burns.

I join with my colleagues today. I want to say how proud we should be, and I agree with the member for Malahat–Juan de Fuca that today when we leave this place…. We leave this place feeling different ways on different days, but today is a day of celebration. It is a day of commitment to say that we will continue to work with our firefighters.

As I close my comments, obviously in favour of this, I certainly commend the book and the work of this incredible Canadian author, Russell Wangersky, to our members if they really want to have that personal insight in terms of how challenging this job is.

Let me just read, in closing, a sentence or two from one of his stories. Here's what he says: "I don't fight fires anymore. My heart still jutters in my chest when I hear the trucks coming. It would have been simpler if I had been permanently burned. If I had been seriously hurt, there would be a visible reason, a badge that wears like an honourable discharge. But nothing is simple."

I will certainly be supporting this. I hope that each one of us will celebrate the fact that we've done a good thing here today.

[1555]

R. Chouhan: It's a great honour to rise today to support this bill, which deals with the lives of firefighters. When we're talking about firefighters, we are not just talking about people who are putting their life on the line jumping into burning buildings. We are also talking about very decent human beings who are so committed to support their community.

I can talk about firefighters in Burnaby. Every time there is a need for the community to help children or seniors, firefighters in Burnaby are always there. Be it community cleanup day or to raise funds to raise awareness — burn awareness and all that — firefighters are always there. I'm so proud to be associated with Burnaby Firefighters Association.

As the previous speaker has said — and many others — today we are here to celebrate that moment when we can all jointly and together support our firefighters all over British Columbia. A few days ago we met with firefighters from various communities here, and I'm proud to say that I had a visit from three extraordinary firefighters. Their names are Mike Hurley, Rob Lemieux and Miles Ritchie.

These are the three leaders. Under their leadership in Burnaby, firefighters have been doing a tremendous job to support our community, and I commend their work, the job they are doing. I also want to thank them for all the work they are doing, and I wish them all the best in their work.

You know, I wish that we continue to support firefighters regardless of which party we belong to. Today is the day to celebrate and not talk about partisan politics here.

Again, I want to say that I join all my colleagues from both sides to support this bill. Let's do it. Let's support it, and let's pass this bill.

Hon. J. McIntyre: It's my great delight this afternoon to rise in my place to speak obviously in favour, as we all are, of Bill 8, which is an amendment to the Workers Compensation Act to create a lung cancer presumption for firefighters who qualify as non-smokers. I think this is yet another step in the work we're doing on behalf of the firefighters, who each and every day may be in a situation where they have to risk their lives for us and for our public safety, for our families.

They do a most amazing job, and I wanted to just sort of reflect, especially at the end of my first term here. I remember very vividly the pride I felt in 2005 when this government did amend the Workers Compensation Act to recognize the firefighters' cancer risks. It included quite a broad variety — for brain; for bladder; for kidney; for non-Hodgkins lymphoma, which I lost my mother to; ureter; colorectal and leukemia — as occupational diseases.

I will never forget sitting here and seeing the gallery with all the firefighters that had come with pride to be here on the day when that legislation was introduced. They all had the red lanyards on. You look up and see the

[ Page 14436 ]

sea of people who every day risk their own safety to be able to keep us safe and protect us.

I still can remember how thrilled I felt, and I know that much work had gone on with other members here in the House to bring that legislation to the forefront. I felt how fortunate that I could be part of a government that introduced and in a House that passed the legislation.

Then we went on in time, I think further proving our commitment to professional firefighters. Actually, we at that time added the part-time and paid-on-call and volunteer firefighters, which I thought was very important.

I remember I actually had a call to my home in Lions Bay from the Lions Bay volunteer fire department, who rescued us at a time of need with a car on fire in our garage. Those are the kinds of things you never want to happen in your life, but you always remember those people who came to your rescue.

Now, especially as the MLA, I make sure I go every September to the Lions Bay Fire Rescue fundraiser to help celebrate those people who volunteer time to be able to keep us so safe.

I think this is an amazing day actually, and I know the firefighters who are here this week were very, very grateful that we're adding yet another disease to this act. I don't want to call it a disease. I guess it really is, actually — lung cancer.

[1600]

I was very pleased to see how important…. Actually, when you talk to them, you know and understand how important it is to their families. The way it's expressed is that it's not even so much about them but about the concern they have for their families and for their children that if they were, unfortunately, to get a disease or get a cancer that obviously would end their life prematurely, they really, really need to make sure that their families are protected. It's very emotional, and I think this is one of the finest things — actually, one the finest pieces of legislation — we've done, when you know the thousands of people it affects all around the province in a positive way.

I want to extend my personal thanks to the West Van firefighters that came here and who over the last few years have come. That would be Gord Howard and Tony D'Angelo, from the West Van fire department, who are just great. I think, having had several visits with them now, that we've really developed a great rapport. I also want to extend a very special thank-you to Jay Brownlee, who is a vice-president now of the Fire Fighters Association for the Lower Mainland. Jay also is in West Vancouver.

They have been just amazing. They have done all sorts of this…. Others have spoken, I know, about the volunteer events. They do the Pipes by the Sea down at Ambleside Beach.

This summer, when I really wanted to give them back a show of support, I was invited to attend the launch of the kids burn camp that is up in Squamish, which is in my constituency. They had firefighters from all around the Lower Mainland, certainly, if not the province — including, I think, Tim Baillie, who someone mentioned before, who worked so hard on the Burn Fund.

When I saw all these kids frolicking around on a beautiful summer day in July…. They were frolicking around, and they were all playing with hoses and firehoses. In fact, I got drenched myself, which I'm sure was good sport for others. It was just a wonderful event to know and see that the firefighters, on their own time and through their own efforts, are so engaged in doing something that will help children and help families through their generosity and through their time.

I just want to add my voice to the support in the House today for this legislation and to thank all the firefighters who do what they do each and every day.

N. Simons: I'd like to take this time to offer my congratulations, as well, to the professional firefighters for making sure that the message they've been carrying for some time has resonated with the legislators of the parliament of British Columbia. I'm proud to say that both sides are very supportive of this initiative.

I think it's essential that we explain to folks, who might not understand, that now certain cancers are associated as linked to the occupation of firefighting, and we've simply today added to that list lung cancer for non-smokers.

The Professional Fire Fighters of Powell River. I had an opportunity to meet with a couple of them when they came down this time. It's just yet another opportunity to meet with the fine folks who work up there. I have to say, in particular for Powell River, that they've been very helpful to me. In fact, they were the ones that suggested a constituency assistant for me. Maggie Hathaway was a former dispatcher for the Powell River firefighters. She knows where every street address and every home is, so it's been very helpful. I know that they have great respect for her as well.

The firefighters know the kind of work that they're getting into. They do it proudly. They do it without hesitation, and I think the onus is on us to ensure that they are protected from some of the negative impacts that their job might entail.

With that, I simply offer my congratulations, my full support to this. I think there's more work to be done in other areas to ensure that firefighters are able to do their jobs effectively, including issues around seismic upgrading to ensure that our fire departments are safe and our fire departments are in a position to be able to respond in times when there might be a natural disaster or what have you. They're prepared. They're excellent, well-trained individuals, and we have to do what we can to ensure that they can do their job as well as they want to do their job.

[ Page 14437 ]

Congratulations. The support of the House is with you, and thank you for what you do.

With that, Madam Speaker, I cede the floor to the next speaker.

[1605]

D. MacKay: I'm pleased to stand today to speak in support of Bill 8, the Workers Compensation Amendment Act.

Going through the bill itself, I notice that

section 1 describes what's happening in the bill, where we amend the definition of an occupational disease to include primary site lung cancer for firefighters. Basically,

section 2 of the act states simply that it provides that "primary site lung cancer contracted by a non-smoking firefighter is an occupational disease and repeals a spent provision."

I have to ask. What has taken us so long to get to the stage that we're finally at today to protect firefighters and people that put themselves at risk every time they go to a fire? I can't help but talk about this, except I've got to go back a little bit from a personal side of this and talk about that dreaded word, cancer.

Cancer is not a pretty word. I can think back to my own mother, who started off with breast cancer. She had her breast cancer removed, and I went back to visit her in Royal Alex Hospital. I'll never forget walking into the hospital room, and there's my mother sitting on the edge of the bed, smoking a cigarette. She was still smoking.

Later on she got lung cancer. She finally quit smoking after she got lung cancer because they removed a portion of her lung. Unfortunately, my mom passed away from brain cancer several years later.

Lung cancer is a terrible disease. When I go back to a previous career…. Having attended several postmortem examinations — lots of postmortem examinations — and having seen people who were smokers, I can't believe people continue to smoke today in spite of some of the things that we educate our young people on and having seen some of the things that I saw during those postmortem examinations on people who smoke cigarettes.

As soon as the chest cavity was opened up…. This sounds a little bit gross. This is the reality of lung cancer and people who continue to smoke. Invariably, most people, from my understanding, that smoke wind up with lung cancer. The lungs of people who smoke are black. Lungs are supposed to be pink, but invariably, in lung cancer or in smokers' cases, the lungs are black. They look like lumps of coal.

Some of those postmortem examinations also looked at bodies of people who had lung cancer, usually from smoking, and the sight is not very pretty. I apologize for getting off track slightly, but it brought back so many memories to me when we started talking about lung cancer.

Lying in bed in a small community at two o'clock in the morning, when it's 25 or 30 below, the fire sirens go, and you think: "Oh God, whose place is on fire now?" Because it's usually a fire call that gets these people out of bed. These volunteer firemen get out of their bed, they get dressed, and they rush down to the fire hall and respond on behalf of the people who live in that community to protect them from fire.

They don't know what they're getting into when they get out of bed in the morning. They leave their families. They get on the fire truck and respond to a fire call.

I suspect that I'm no different than anybody else living in a small community. When you hear that fire siren go in the middle of the night, these people get out of bed and they respond. I just pull the covers over my head and go back to sleep and pray that it's not somebody that I know personally that is going to suffer a terrible disaster by having their home or apartment or whatever it is catch on fire.

But I also think about those people who are responding, because these young people that respond to these fires in small communities are made up of people who live in the community, and most of us know who they are.

To those young people who put themselves at risk every time they go to a fire call…. I think we as a society owe these people exactly what we are doing here today, and that is including lung cancer amongst several other cancers as occupational hazards for those people that look after us in the middle of the night, when it's 30 below and they get out of bed to respond to a call.

I am pleased and happy that we are acknowledging lung cancer as an occupational hazard and a disease that a lot, if not some, of our firefighters are subject to as they attend these fires on our behalf. We have breathing apparatus for them, but that doesn't protect them entirely.

I certainly stand here in support of this bill, and I'm pleased to do so.

[1610]

S. Herbert: I rise today to support Bill 8. I'm very glad that it has finally come to this floor, and I thank the minister for bringing it forward today. I think it's a bill whose time has definitely come, if not some time ago, but it's here today, and we should be glad that it's here today.

I spoke with Gord Wilson and a number of Vancouver firefighters — Local 18 — and they expressed how very clearly they needed this bill. They expressed how much they also were looking forward to adding esophageal cancer as something to be considered, because, as all members here I'm sure know, they are putting their lives on the line for us. They're putting their lives on the line for families, large, small, individuals, businesses — really anybody. They don't know what they're going to face when they go out on a call quite often, and quite often it's a situation which is very dangerous.

Just yesterday, Monday, in my community there was a hazmat call-out just across from my office. To see how

[ Page 14438 ]

quickly and how respectfully the firefighters responded to local residents' concerns, to businesses' concerns, to make sure that they could continue to function…. Meanwhile, the firefighters are facing a very difficult, and could be challenging situation.

They again and again show how much they give to the public and how much they do for all of us. I had the opportunity to work with some firefighters who every year come and put on the big Christmas light display in Stanley Park to raise money for the Burn Fund. Their commitment to children, to people living with horrific burns and what that can do and how they hope to rebuild those people's lives with their assistance is something to be lauded by all of us.

When Gord Wilson came to visit, he raised with me concerns around their signals being able to reach into buildings more than six storeys tall. Certainly in my community of Vancouver-Burrard we have many, many towers — 20 storeys and up. So they raised those concerns as part of their ongoing lobbying efforts with government to make sure that we are listening to them and that we are making their jobs as safe as they can be and making their jobs so that they can perform their jobs in such a way to put out fires as soon as they start.

The other weekend I was doing street corner discussions in my community and ended up speaking with a woman who had her home just below her, the apartment below her, burnt out, and she didn't know where to go. But the one thing she did know was that the firefighters were there for her and that they listened to her and that they helped her and her family get through that tough time. We were able to assist her in getting into emergency housing, and she has now been there and has got back on her feet.

It's that kind of commitment they bring which inspires me and I'm sure inspires the other members of this House to do our jobs as public servants to support them in their needs. I thank the minister for bringing this forward. Certainly on behalf of the firefighters in halls 6, 7 and 8 in Vancouver-Burrard, we thank the members here for making this possible. I hope we will continue to do much for firefighters in this province and take action on the other concerns that they have raised with us in their visit here.

Hon. M. Polak: I rise today, as well, to add my voice in support of Bill 8. I wanted to talk a little bit about the personal kind of involvement our firefighters have in our communities. When I think about the firefighters in Langley, I can't help but think about a very well-known former firefighter in Langley, and that's our former ci