2007 Legislative Session: Third 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)

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2007

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 15, Number 2

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Joseph Gosnell

G. Coons

David Pendray

Hon. P. Bell

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

SUCCESS non-profit society

R. Lee

Women in business

B. Simpson

Langley Regional Airport

M. Polak

Victoria Honorary Citizens Awards

R. Fleming

Canadian National Institute for the

Blind

R. Cantelon

Safety for women on Highway 16

C. Trevena

Oral Questions

Disclosure of documents in B.C. Rail–CN

Rail investigation

L. Krog

Hon. W. Oppal

C. James

J. Kwan

M. Farnworth

Funding for Mary Manning Centre

M. Karagianis

Hon. T.

Christensen

Expenditures by Partnerships B.C. CEO Larry Blain

B. Ralston

Hon. C. Taylor

Maintenance of rural highways

G. Coons

Hon. K. Falcon

Performance bonus for highway

maintenance contractors

D. Chudnovsky

Hon. K. Falcon

Confidentiality of information from

wiretaps

J. Horgan

Hon. W. Oppal

Petitions

C. Trevena

R. Fleming

Reports from Committees

Select Standing Committee on Education,

report for second session of thirty-eighth parliament

J. Nuraney

D. Routley

Tabling Documents

Minority report of the Select

Standing Committee on Education

D. Routley

Budget Debate (continued)

Hon. C. Richmond

G. Gentner

V. Roddick

B. Simpson

K. Whittred

C. Evans

J. Rustad

R. Fleming

[ Page 5583 ]

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2007

The House met at 1:32 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

C. James: It's my pleasure to introduce someone who is no

stranger to this chamber. Joan Sawicki, who was first elected to the Legislative

Assembly in 1991 to represent the constituency of Burnaby-Willingdon and was

re-elected in 1996, joins us on the floor today.

Joan held many roles during this time, but I'm guessing that her

two favourites were Speaker and Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks. A

passionate defender of the environment, Joan now spends her time working on

these issues that are closest to her heart. Would the House please make Joan

very welcome.

Hon. M. Coell: I have two guests in the House today,

constituents of mine, Don and Muriel Cameron. Would the House please make them

welcome.

Tributes

JOSEPH GOSNELL

G. Coons: I'd like to take this opportunity to recognize a

state leader for the Nisga'a Nation, who was recently promoted within the Order

of Canada to the highest level of membership. Dr. Joseph Gosnell has spent his

lifetime revitalizing Nisga'a culture and bringing modern education, health care

and resource management to the Nass Valley.

His devotion as president of the Nisga'a Tribal Council and chief

negotiator for the landmark Nisga'a Treaty helped to create a model of

aboriginal self-government that has left its mark in history. I had the

opportunity and pleasure to personally congratulate him this past weekend, and I

hope the House recognizes his accomplishment.

DAVID PENDRAY

Hon. P. Bell: It's with regret that I'm informing the

Legislature that the agriculture community lost an outstanding citizen this past

weekend. David Pendray, who owned and operated Pendray Farms, a dairy farm

located near the Victoria Airport, passed away.

His farm is a model operation that has for years been at the

forefront of adopting new and innovative practices. David worked cooperatively

with the local community and took the time on numerous occasions to invite the

public, including members of this Legislature, to see his well-managed,

exemplary farm.

Dave was married to Linda, and they have three daughters,

Jennifer, Sarah and Alicia. The service will be held at Mary Winspear Centre in

Sidney this Saturday, March 3, at 11 a.m.

Introductions by Members

Hon. R. Coleman: I'd like to introduce to the House today

Jillian Rousselle and David Puterman. Both of these young people are co-op

students in the Ministry of Forests. They're both taking their master's degree

in public administration.

For them and for any other young person out there, there are lots

of jobs in the future of the Ministry of Forests. Go get involved, but come back

and work for this ministry because we need young people today.

[1335]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) SUCCESS NON-PROFIT SOCIETY

R. Lee: Non-profit organizations in British Columbia are

integral parts of our society. Usually it starts with a group of volunteers

becoming aware of emerging issues or need for services. They get organized,

raising awareness, promoting the cause, gathering supports, delivering the

services and finally promoting sustainable programs.

Founded in 1973, SUCCESS is one of the largest non-profit,

charitable social service providers in British Columbia. With an annual

operating budget of $17 million, 350 supporting staff and over 10,000

volunteers, it provided over 200,000 client services in 11 locations to assist

immigrants to overcome language and cultural barriers. About 70 percent of

SUCCESS's annual budget comes from the three levels of government.

SUCCESS provided airport reception services to new immigrants;

counselling, settlement and public education; training for language and

employment; services for children, youth, women, seniors and families;

translations and legal clinics.

SUCCESS delivers a continuum of health care services, covering

assisted living and an adult day centre, and operates a 103-bed multilevel-care

facility. I have the opportunity to participate in many SUCCESS events,

including public health fairs, youth leadership programs, senior groups, the

gateway to Asia program, the Walk with the Dragon and the fundraising gala.

I'm sure the Premier and some members of the House were as

impressed as I was last Sunday at the SUCCESS fundraising gala. The supports

from the communities are tremendous.

I would like the House to join me in thanking all the volunteers,

donors, sponsors, staff and board members of SUCCESS for their contributions in

helping immigrants to become fully participating and contributing members of our

society.

WOMEN IN BUSINESS

B. Simpson: A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of

co-hosting a women-in-business breakfast with the Quesnel and District Chamber

of Commerce. Twenty women attended, representing a diverse cross-section

[ Page 5584 ]

of the business community, including agritourism, retail, publishing,

banking, manufacturing, child care, and arts and culture.

The discussion focused on areas of concern for women trying to run

their own business and work in the business community. Many of these are

historical concerns that have yet to be fully addressed by both government and

society as a whole.

Wage parity remains an issue. Stories were told about women who do

work equivalent to senior management positions, yet get clerks' wages. One woman

told her tale of being dismissed from a company simply because she asked for

parity with a male counterpart. All agreed that it is well past time for this

inequality to be resolved once and for all.

A representative from the agritourism sector told how this growing

sector has great potential to support the diversification of our economy.

However, she pointed out that this emerging sector is struggling to be taken

seriously because it is comprised mostly of women entrepreneurs and because it

also doesn't fit the large-scale corporate model that's the preferred model for

banks and for government today.

Aside from the individual and sectoral stories these women shared,

there were two areas of major concern they held in common. The first is

financing. These experienced entrepreneurs and business leaders pointed out that

women still have a more difficult time raising capital than their male

counterparts. They argued that more must be done to support women to access

capital if we are to truly realize the positive impact that women entrepreneurs

can have on our economy, especially our rural economies.

The second and by far the most pressing concern expressed by all

of the women at the meeting was the need for more child care support at all

levels, from spaces to funding to referral and support services. Those in

attendance decried the lack of support from all levels of government and asked

me to make those concerns known in this Legislature.

LANGLEY REGIONAL AIRPORT

M. Polak: In 1947 Art Seller, the first tenant of the

Langley Municipal Airport, established a flight school, a spray service and a

fire-bombing operation. Since that time, Langley's airport has developed a

reputation as a progressive, community-owned airport that supports a valuable

high-tech source of jobs and opportunities in the lower mainland. It is now home

to 350 aircraft and 41 companies.

But the economic benefits of Langley's airport reach far beyond

the 120 acres of land it occupies. Every year approximately $6.1 million is

spent for local goods and services.

[1340]

Langley Regional Airport is a jewel of an airport in a perfect

setting. However, not too many years ago its future viability was in doubt. But

thanks to the work of airport manager George Miller and a dedicated team,

Langley Regional Airport now boasts commercial and recreational areas buzzing

with activity. It is recognized as a high-tech leader in the helicopter industry

not just in British Columbia but across Canada and around the world. Of the 41

companies that call Langley Airport home, half are helicopter-related, covering

nearly all activities of the industry.

Recently it was my privilege to welcome the Minister of Small

Business and Revenue on a tour of Langley businesses. We toured helicopter

maintenance and construction operations that are available in only a select

number of locations in the world.

In our current economic climate, opportunities abound for small,

innovative high-tech companies in all areas of British Columbia. In Langley the

pride we take in the success of our airport is matched only by our enthusiasm

for its future. Langley Airport's improvement plan sets forward a vision to be

the best community airport in the province. Certainly the contributions of

individuals like George Miller and his team, along with countless others in

British Columbia, are what make this the best place on earth.

VICTORIA HONORARY CITIZENS AWARDS

R. Fleming: Last November I was privileged to attend the

annual City of Victoria Honorary Citizens Awards ceremony. The Victoria city

council recognized ten exceptional citizens by presenting them with an honorary

citizen award for their service to and enrichment of our community. I'm proud to

say that three of the award recipients this year happen to be constituents of

mine in Victoria-Hillside.

Leni Hoover, a longstanding community advocate who works towards

the well-being of people on low incomes — in particular women — was honoured.

She was the founder and chairperson of Blanshard Community Centre and served as

executive director of the centre from 1993 to 2004. Although technically

retired, Leni continues to fight for those in need and is active on many

committees in many parts of her community.

Tom Arkell, a dedicated and exceptional volunteer who has

selflessly given much of his time to our community and to its school-aged kids

in particular, was also honoured. In doing so, he has become a leader, a role

model and an inspiration to others. Tom was a founding member of the Burnside

Gorge Community Association in 1991 and is still volunteering his time to the

community centre plus numerous other organizations.

Finally, Shellie Gudgeon is one of our city's hardest-working,

compassionate, dedicated volunteers, and we are blessed to have her working

actively in our community. She and her husband Mike are incredibly talented

entrepreneurs and restaurateurs in Victoria. Shellie has contributed to and

helped build a very strong community in Victoria through her countless volunteer

contributions to numerous special projects and fundraising events to revitalize

neighbourhoods, protect heritage buildings and enhance our community's social

capacity.

It's been my great pleasure getting to know each of these

incredible individuals while working with them

[ Page 5585 ]

in our community. I would ask that all members of the House join me in

belatedly congratulating and thanking the honorary citizen recipients and all

those nominated for these distinguished awards.

CANADIAN NATIONAL

INSTITUTE FOR THE BLIND

R. Cantelon: This morning I attended a breakfast hosted by

the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, with many of my colleagues.

Founded in 1918, the CNIB is a nationwide community-based charity that is

committed to research, education and vision health for all Canadians.

The CNIB is able to provide these services due to the generosity

of the general public as well as corporate donations and funding from different

levels of government. The staff and volunteers of CNIB work with those who have

visual impairments to assist them in adapting to their loss of vision so that

they may be comfortable and confident in functioning in their work and home

environments.

Degradation of vision, even vision loss, is something that will

likely touch the life of someone we know. One out of nine people of retirement

age experiences degenerative loss of sight, and that number jumps to one in

every four people over 80, which happens to be the fastest-growing demographic

in British Columbia.

It is important to remember that only 10 percent of all the people

CNIB work with have no sight. The overwhelming majority have some vision. In

fact, our hosts provided us with a piece of paper that you could hold up to your

eye and experience a sample of what some people are able to see — or not see, as

the case is.

It was a very interesting learning experience that certainly gave

me a better idea of the challenges that the vision-impaired face, and I ask the

House to join me and thank the B.C. and Yukon branch for all the hard work they

do in assisting the visually impaired.

[1345]

SAFETY FOR WOMEN ON HIGHWAY 16

C. Trevena: Last year there was a flurry of activity around

the so-called highway of tears, Highway 16 from Prince Rupert to Prince George.

The communities along the remote route thought that at last they were being

heard and that something would be done to investigate what's been happening

along that sad highway — where young women have disappeared and been killed — to

prevent anything happening to young girls again. But nearly a year on from the

symposium where families and communities shared their grief with politicians and

with police and promises were made, it seems that little has been done.

Short- and long-term goals were set, and all appeared achievable.

There was going to be investment in victim prevention, emergency readiness,

victim counselling and community development. There were simple options — going

into schools to make young people aware of the risks of hitchhiking and getting

signs placed along the highway. There was hope of building a network with safe

homes along the highway, emergency phone booths and 1-800 numbers.

There were longer-term goals trying to deal with the poverty,

isolation and lack of transport — all with a view, as the report of the

symposium stated, to providing a serious response to a deadly serious situation.

The commitment from the community there still remains, but sadly it seems that

it's only those along the highway who want to keep this campaign alive.

Encouragement from other sectors, including government, seems lacklustre a year

on.

Plans to hold a forum for young people looking at safety and

working on capacity-building are on hold now because there isn't the ministerial

commitment. Plans to get signage in place is now being funded by a local CD

sale. It's sad, and it's shameful.

I have to ask: is it the isolation — that these girls and young

women were killed or disappeared out in central B.C.? Or is it that they're

first nations? I think we should all pause in this House and ask ourselves what

the response would have been if it had been at least nine young, white males who

disappeared along that highway in B.C.

Oral Questions

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS IN

B.C. RAIL–CN RAIL INVESTIGATION

L. Krog: The former Finance Minister, Gary Collins, told

this House that his meetings with Omnitrax representatives had nothing to do

with the sell-off of B.C. Rail or the Roberts Bank spur line. New allegations

cast those assertions into serious doubt. The allegations suggest that

representatives of the Liberal cabinet and caucus set up the Roberts Bank spur

line as a consolation prize for failed bidders. Mr. Collins was not the only

member overseeing negotiations.

Can the Minister of Transportation confirm that other government

ministers and MLAs sat on a committee to oversee the negotiations, and can he

tell us who they were?

Hon. W. Oppal: This case is before the Supreme Court of

British Columbia. The member knows that. A special prosecutor has conduct of the

case. The member knows that too. Where the matter is before the Supreme Court

and a special prosecutor has been appointed, it is totally inappropriate to

discuss this matter in public. The member is a member of the bar. He should know

better than to ask that question.

L. Krog: With the greatest respect to the Attorney General,

members of this government are not currently under investigation. This is a

matter before the public. In an information bulletin dated November 3, 2003,

this government established a steering committee to "assist in overseeing

negotiations." The committee was struck "to ensure the best deal for British

Columbians."

Committee members included the current Minister of Education, the

current Minister of Agriculture and the

[ Page 5586 ]

current Minister of Energy. Did that committee ever discuss the potential of

the deal collapsing if only one bidder remained?

Hon. W. Oppal: However the opposition member may

characterize his question, the fact is that when he's talking about B.C. Rail,

he's talking about a matter that's before the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

[1350]

He knows full well that it would be totally improper for me or for

any other member of this House, as lawmakers, to discuss this issue.

C. James: Within the application for disclosure, there is a

long list of documents the defence counsel has requested. Those requests are now

a year old, and the government has withheld the information from the special

prosecutor.

To the Attorney General: why has the government refused defence

counsel's requests to access information?

Hon. W. Oppal: The special prosecutor has advised us that

it is not appropriate to comment publicly on any of these allegations that are

made. These are allegations that are made by defence counsel. When the defence

makes allegations of this sort, I can tell the Leader of the Opposition that the

normal course of events is for the prosecutor to respond in court. That's where

these matters are heard — in court.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a

supplemental.

C. James: I must state again that my understanding is that

the government is not before the courts. We're talking here about very specific

materials that have been requested. When this case began, the Premier personally

pledged that the government would fully cooperate in the investigation. Now it

seems that the government is withholding information. It's been over a year,

according to documents, since counsel asked for this information.

So my question again to the Attorney General: why is the

government refusing to cooperate?

Hon. W. Oppal: There's absolutely no evidence that the

government is not cooperating. I'll say it one more time. The conduct of the

case is in the hands of a special prosecutor who's at arm's length from the

government. He conducts the case. He has advised us clearly — and it has got to

be obvious to everyone in this House — that it is totally inappropriate to talk

about a case that's being litigated in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a further

supplemental.

C. James: I'm not speaking about the specifics of this

that this case will go forward. The disclosure requests were sent to a

representative of the provincial government over a year ago. So my question to

the Attorney General is: who is the representative that received those requests

over a year ago?

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, we have a trial judge who is

presiding over the case. The trial judge will ensure that all those matters that

are necessary for defence disclosure will be made. In the meantime, it's

appropriate for us to keep out of the case and not discuss the case. I don't

know how much more plain I could be.

Mr. Speaker: Just a friendly reminder to members that if

we're going to continue along this line of questioning, the Attorney General has

stated clearly that this is a matter before the courts.

J. Kwan: The government holds the documents that may assist

in the court case. If the government can't get bidders in their privatization

schemes, then there's not even the appearance of competition, and the process

falls apart.

If the government doesn't release the information requested by the

defence counsel and the special Crown prosecutor, how can British Columbians

then be asked to have confidence and be sure that other privatization schemes

have not been tainted?

[1355]

Hon. W. Oppal: I'll say it one more time. Defence counsel

has made certain allegations. The special prosecutor, I would expect, will reply

in kind. In the meantime, the special prosecutor has advised us quite clearly

and quite properly that it's inappropriate for us to comment on these matters.

There may be some substance to the defence allegations; there may be none. It's

foolish to assume that because the defence have asked for certain documents,

they already haven't been provided.

That's why we have the rule. We keep out of matters that are

before the Supreme Court or any court. We're not in a position to comment on

those matters. It's inappropriate for lawmakers. That is so clear, so basic, so

fundamental — as to why we observe that rule.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a further supplemental.

J. Kwan: The opposition is not asking for the government to

comment on the case. The opposition is simply asking the government…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Proceed, Member.

J. Kwan: …to release documents that would actually assist

in that process with the court case. The Premier made a commitment. "The

important thing is that neither the RCMP nor the government shy away from

carrying out a thorough, complete and diligent investigation in the public

interest." The Premier further said: "Obviously, it's troubling to everyone, but

the important thing is that there is an ongoing investigation and that I've told

[ Page 5587 ]

everyone to be as open and as transparent as they can about the entire

situation, and I hope the RCMP will do that as well."

The opposition is asking the government to live up to the spirit

of the Premier's comments by advising the public who is the representative

representing the province with respect to the information that's not being

released. Who is that person, and why won't the government release that

information to the courts?

Hon. W. Oppal: As near as I can understand the question,

the member is asking the government to release documents. We have a trial judge

that does that. The application is before the trial judge. It's not before the

government. It's not before us. We can't release the documents. That's entirely

before the trial judge in the Supreme Court of British Columbia who's presiding

over the trial.

Mr. Speaker: Just a friendly reminder again to members to

be cautious, if we're proceeding along the same line of questioning.

M. Farnworth: The issue is disclosure. The question that we

are asking is…. It's been a year since the request was put forward for that

information to be released, yet it has not been released.

So the question we will ask — and the Attorney General may not

like answering it, but it's legitimate for us to ask — is: why has it taken so

long to have this information released or given to the court? How long will it

be, and when will it happen?

Hon. W. Oppal: Same question with more vigour. First of

all, we don't know that the documents haven't been given. I can tell you a

little bit about courtrooms. Defence counsel often make allegations. Sometimes

they're accurate; sometimes they're not. We have a trial judge that presides

over these. The trial judge will determine — forgive me if I'm lecturing, but I

am — whether or not there's any substance to the application.

In the meantime, we as lawmakers keep out of it. It's for the

courts to decide on an independent basis. We don't interfere with the

deliberations of courtrooms and of judges. That's why we have independent judges

who decide these cases and decide these difficult issues in criminal and civil

cases.

[1400]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: If only a few of these allegations are proven

true, hon. Speaker, that will be very disturbing indeed. So once again, the

question is quite simple. Can the Attorney General confirm or not confirm

whether this information has at least been released?

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm not going to confirm anything. It's not

my job to confirm anything. The member of the opposition obviously has the

document that's been filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. That's what

he's referring to. It's a document filed by defence counsel.

I'll say one more time that it would be inappropriate and it would

be wrong — 100 different ways — for me to comment on it, and I'm not going to

comment on it.

FUNDING FOR MARY MANNING CENTRE

M. Karagianis: Well, it was my understanding that

government is not a party to this proceeding. However, I will move on with a

different line of questioning.

The Mary Manning Centre provides therapy, court support and victim

services to sexually abused children here in Victoria. For more than 20 years

the centre has provided these services for abused and exploited children in this

community. But in four short months, the centre may have to close its doors

because the provincial funding is running out.

It's a proven fact that the sooner that sexually abused children

receive support and counselling, the better their lifelong outcomes will be. My

question is to the Minister of Children and Family Development. Is the minister

committed to ensuring that children have access to sexual abuse therapy when

they need it, or does this government think it's acceptable for this facility to

close down, forcing children to wait months and months for help?

Hon. T. Christensen: Government is committed to ensuring

that children who are in need of counselling services receive those services. We

have the highest budget that this province has ever had to provide assistance to

children in those circumstances, and we're committed to ensuring that we work

with a host of service providers to find the ways that we can best meet the

needs of children in communities around the province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: Well, in 2003 this government cut funding to

the centre by 50 percent. When the centre appealed it, the government was forced

to return half of their funding. Then when a closure loomed a few years ago, the

government gave them a one-time grant. That grant will expire in less than four

months. Without stable funding, the centre will have to lay off their staff and

perhaps close their doors forever in this community.

To the Minister of Children and Family Development: will he commit

today to provide adequate funding for the Mary Manning Centre so that they can

remain open?

Hon. T. Christensen: As I indicated in my previous answer,

the government's financial commitment to meeting the needs of children around

the province has never been higher. This year's budget alone sees the provincial

commitment to the Ministry of Children and Family Development increasing by $141

million, the highest budget ever.

We work with a host of community service providers around the

province. We work with our regional staff

[ Page 5588 ]

to ensure that we're doing the best we can to meet the needs of children in

communities around the province. That's the commitment. That's what we'll

continue to do.

EXPENDITURES BY

PARTNERSHIPS B.C. CEO LARRY BLAIN

B. Ralston: My question is to the Minister of Finance.

Larry Blain, the Partnerships B.C. chief, hosted a dinner at Al Porto Ristorante

in Vancouver on June 23, 2005. The invited guests included board members and

senior staff and other honchos from the public-private partnerships world.

Those in Mr. Blain's party drank their way through 13 bottles of

wine: five Wild Goose Pinot Gris, three Columbia Crest Merlot, two Penfolds

Chardonnay and three bottles of another Australian wine called d'Arenberg Stump

Jump. They also drank a Grey Goose martini, a cosmopolitan, a rum, three bottles

of beer and a glass of premium Scotch. The entire bill was paid for by the

taxpayers of British Columbia.

Can the Minister of Finance answer this: how many bottles of wine

does it take to build a hospital?

[1405]

Hon. C. Taylor: Mr. Blain's expenses are in the public

domain. It is the practice for Partnerships B.C. not to pay for any alcohol.

There were a couple of instances that were found out to be true, so he has

repaid those expenses.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

MAINTENANCE OF RURAL HIGHWAYS

G. Coons: Seaport Limousine, based out of Stewart, B.C.,

provides passenger, freight and charter service throughout northwest B.C. They

depend on the province to keep rural roads clear during the treacherous winter

months.

I received the following message from the manager of Seaport:

"My driver called when he reached Terrace. There was no snow removal

equipment working the highway until he was nearing Kitwanga. That is a distance

of about 200 kilometres in falling snow conditions with no snow removal

equipment working the road. I'm not sure what the sanders' contracts say for the

highway, but I suspect that somewhere within the document it suggests that snow

should be removed from the highway."

Can the Minister of Transportation explain why his

government is failing to live up to the responsibility to keep rural roads safe?

Hon. K. Falcon: I thank the member for the question.

Obviously, I would have to check on that specific day and that specific

circumstance. One thing I would warn the member of, though, is that quite often

during heavy snowstorms, as we've seen this winter with some of the worst

accumulations in two decades, you do get a situation where they are sometimes

replacing the plows, which they have to do on a regular basis, and they're also

reloading the salt trucks. So there will be periods where the equipment is still

being utilized, but it's not on the highway.

Now, that's not in any way, shape or form to suggest that there's

not room for any improvements. That's why we actually, unlike the previous

government, have 117 people whose sole job is to audit the performance of these

private contractors. I think, given the winter conditions, they've done a very

good job in very challenging circumstances.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: Yes, I do. I find it interesting that the

minister talks about treacherous weather conditions when basically in the House,

we were hearing lots of windstorms coming from the other side.

Two weeks ago….

Interjection.

G. Coons: I feel it coming. Two weeks ago I contacted the

minister….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Continue, Member.

G. Coons: Two weeks ago I contacted the minister about this

situation, and he's failed to respond. When roads aren't properly maintained,

especially in the winter months, lives are at risk.

The mayor of Stewart recently led a session about road maintenance

concerns. At that session, highway users expressed their lack of confidence in

both the contractor and the minister to keep this highway properly maintained.

They say the minister has dropped the ball.

Once again to the minister: what is your government doing to

ensure maintenance and safety of our rural highways?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, I'm not quite sure what point that

member is trying to get across, because actually these are the same BCGEU

employees and private maintenance contractors that serviced the highways during

the ten years that they were in power. During that decade that they were in

power, apparently…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1410]

Hon. K. Falcon: …that NDP member's government did not see

fit to do anything extraordinary. In fact, so much confidence did they have in

those private maintenance contractors that they didn't even audit the work they

were doing. Under this government,

[ Page 5589 ]

effective in 2001, we actually make sure that the performance standards that

are set out in the maintenance contract agreements are to be met, and we audit

and make sure they do exactly that.

I want to be clear. I don't want to pretend for a second that

given some of the worst snow conditions we've seen in two decades, it will be

perfect. But I can tell you that those unionized workers have been working their

butts off day in and day out, delivering a very good service under very

difficult circumstances.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. The member for

Vancouver-Kensington has the floor.

PERFORMANCE BONUS FOR

HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS

D. Chudnovsky: It's good to hear once again from the Ken

Georgetti of Cloverdale, the Jim Sinclair of southeast Surrey, once again

defending public sector workers. We thank him for that. And I'm sure that….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member. Can we have some silence. I can't hear

what your question is, so I don't know how the minister can hear you. Continue.

D. Chudnovsky: I'm sure those working people across the

province will do a thorough assessment of whether this minister is in fact their

friend and is really defending them across this province.

Last week in the House the minister said, and he repeated it

today: "We have 117 staff that do nothing but audit the performance of our

maintenance contractors right across the province." But this minister knows that

the system is based on self-regulation. It's the very companies that are

supposed to do the work that are monitoring themselves on a day-to-day basis,

and it's not working. He knows it; I know it. Everybody in the House knows it.

Will the minister commit to a review of the system to ensure that

the services that British Columbians deserve are delivered?

Hon. K. Falcon: Actually, the member is wrong, not

surprisingly. This happens on a regular basis. We in fact do have our regional

managers and other staff that actually drive the highways, checking to make sure

that the conditions that are set out in the contracts are being adhered to. They

work very closely with the maintenance contractors — absolutely.

I could tell you, Mr. Speaker, that it's a lot better than what it

was under ten years of the NDP government when they did no checking whatsoever.

Under an extraordinarily difficult winter, I actually believe that in most cases

— not all cases…. In cases where they didn't perform, we've been very clear

about that, and we've withheld winter bonuses.

In most of the cases, these workers — who have put in a lot of

overtime, have worked extraordinarily hard under very difficult circumstances —

find it, frankly, a little tiring to hear an urban MLA trying to tell them how

they're not keeping these roads up.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

D. Chudnovsky: Interesting comment about urban MLAs.

Perhaps others on the other side will take it as seriously as I do.

Let's get this straight. We've got thousands of people across the

province complaining to the minister — I get copies of most of them —

complaining to us, complaining to MLAs across the province that the job isn't

being done on highways maintenance. These very same people are the ones whose

tax moneys go to paying these performance bonuses. Perhaps the minister can

explain to us what it takes to not get a performance bonus in this province.

Hon. K. Falcon: I can in fact give you an example, as we

have in the past, where there was a contractor who was doing a

section of the

Coquihalla, essentially from the toll booth to Hope, that was consistently not

meeting the standards set out. They lost their bonus, and that represents, by

the way, about $168,000. It is a very significant financial penalty. It's not

one, I will tell you, that we impose lightly.

These contractors — during a winter period where they're utilizing

all of their equipment, bringing in extra staff to try and help deal with

demands, paying overtime — are taking a big financial hit. I can tell you that,

by and large, they work very hard.

Member, for you to take one drive up to the interior and discover

that there's a different part of this province, discover that there are actually

potholes when you have the worst winter in 20 years…. I know that was a

revelation to that member. But I can tell you that these workers are doing a

good job, and I'm proud of the work they're doing, by and large, right across

this province.

[1415]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

CONFIDENTIALITY OF

INFORMATION FROM WIRETAPS

J. Horgan: I listened carefully to the Attorney General's

responses to questions earlier in question period. I just want to remind him of

his view of the matter of sub judice in November, when it was revealed that

wiretaps had inadvertently captured conversations between the Premier and the

then Minister of Finance Gary Collins.

[ Page 5590 ]

At that time the Attorney General was quite free and fulsome in

his comments about what the courts should or should not do, and he's quoted in

the Vancouver Province as saying: "Keep in mind: this is an invasion of

privacy of phone calls that are lawful in every sense. If something is altered

without the consent of a judge, then that's something that is a matter of

concern."

My question is a quite simple one to the Attorney General. Is it

only convenient to speak about issues before the court when you're defending the

Premier, and it's inconvenient to do so when you're defending a government that

was visited by the police in 2004?

Hon. W. Oppal: There is a clear line of demarcation between

the executive and the judiciary, and that's all I was pointing out. That ought

to have been clear to anyone.

Mr. Speaker: I remind the member again about the questioning.

Member has a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Certainly, I'm conscious of your concerns in

this regard. But when principles are movable and subject to expediency, it's

difficult for those of us on this side of the House to take the Attorney General

seriously — when on one day he can speak publicly without any inhibitions and on

another use sub judice as an explanation.

Again I'll ask the minister: is it appropriate for the chief

lawmaker in British Columbia to speak about what may or may not be appropriate

with respect to wiretaps?

Mr. Speaker: I think, Member, you've mentioned the words

"sub judice" a number of times. To me, this is a classic example of where we

are. I think this is a classic example of the sub judice of the convention, so I

will allow the Attorney to answer this last question, but that's it.

Hon. W. Oppal: Mr. Speaker, these are not a matter of

convenience. There are clear principles in law with respect to what is the

appropriate line of demarcation between the executive and the judiciary. I don't

think I can be any more clear than that.

[End of question period.]

Petitions

C. Trevena: I have leave to present a petition with

approximately a thousand signatures opposing the eviction of Tom Bakken, who has

been homesteading Crown lands outside Campbell River for 40 years.

Mr. Speaker: Have you got some more?

C. Trevena: I'd like leave to present a petition with

approximately 500 signatures opposing cuts in provincial child care funding.

R. Fleming: I present a petition from constituents of mine

to immediately restore and maintain child care operating funds and to continue

full funding of the child care resource and referral program.

Reports from Committees

J. Nuraney: I have the honour to present the report of the

Select Standing Committee on Education for the second session of the 38th

parliament with respect to the committee's investigation into finding effective

strategies to address the challenge of adult literacy.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

J. Nuraney: I ask leave of the House to suspend the rules

to permit the moving of the motion to adopt the report.

[1420]

Leave granted.

J. Nuraney: I move that the report be adopted, and in doing

so, I would like to make some brief comments.

In November 2005 the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

charged the Select Standing Committee on Education to investigate effective

strategies to combat the challenge of adult literacy in our province. This

report is a product of the committee's consultations with a variety of

stakeholders, including people with expert knowledge of the topic, educators,

learners, and literacy practitioners. It contains some startling numbers about

the levels of literacy and numeracy among the adult population of British

Columbians and also describes challenges within the existing programming

structure.

In order to address these important issues, the report outlines an

adult literacy strategy to assist the province to become the most literate

jurisdiction in North America by 2010. The strategy describes four principles to

guide future action and focuses on (1) the importance of all sectors of society

playing a leadership role, (2) the need for an integrated approach via creation

of a centralized literacy secretariat, (3) learner-centred programming and

(4) the prevention strategy of screening early to detect literacy problems.

Our recommended strategy also contains specific suggestions for

the four demographic groups identified in the committee's mandate: the

second language and seniors.

I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to all members of

the committee for their diligence and commitment to the committee throughout

this important process. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the

Clerk of Committees staff for their efforts, specifically Kate Ryan-Lloyd, Josie

Schofield and Mary Newell. My sincere thanks to all of them.

D. Routley: I rise to speak to the report of the Select

Standing Committee on Education to outline what we the opposition saw as the

failings and shortcomings of

[ Page 5591 ]

that report and to table the official opposition's minority report on the

committee's assigned task of investigating challenges to literacy in British

Columbia and recommending solutions and strategies for improving the level of

literacy in this province.

I'd like to echo the Chair, the member for Burnaby-Willingdon, in

his thanks to the staff and the other members of the committee, and I would in

particular personally like to thank the member for his good chairmanship of our

committee. I will seek leave at the end of my comments to table our official

report.

Like members opposite, we were pleased that the government had

seen fit to assign the committee the task of investigating the extent of

literacy challenges facing British Columbians and making recommendations for

increasing the level of literacy in this province. As the British Columbia

economy becomes increasingly knowledge-based, the importance of ensuring that

our young people and our workforce have sound literacy and numeracy skills will

continue to rise.

Both the Progress Board and the Competition Council have pointed

to the need to add efficiencies to our workforce. Indeed, it became clear to all

members of the committee that if individuals did not possess what the experts

termed level 3 literacy skills, they would not be equipped fully to participate

in our modern economy or to move on to more advanced training.

While I believe that all members were impressed by the depth,

complexity and passion evidenced in the many written, verbal and formal

presentations we received during our work, the official opposition's hope was

that the committee might produce a truly useful report outlining a worthwhile

strategy. That hope was quickly dashed.

[1425]

The committee travelled at great public expense; $135,000 was paid

to support this committee. Of that, $34,000 was travel expenses. We travelled

throughout B.C. to hear from people — instructors, students and experts — only

to ignore much of what was said. Instead, the committee produced a final report

that, in short, said that British Columbia had a significant literacy problem

but that all government needs to do in order to meet its so-called great golden

goal of a golden decade was to maintain status quo.

Indeed, the committee's summation of the task facing government is

best articulated in its observation that the challenge facing the provincial

government to attain its goal of making British Columbia the most literate

jurisdiction in North America by 2010 is a manageable one. Note the date: 2010.

Note the fact that we will have no means of measuring our progress until after

the next election.

Based on the province's current ranking in North America and

perhaps on the extent of literacy problems in the rest of Canada and in the

U.S., the committee explained its real task. "By the year 2010, the year when

the next international survey will be conducted, B.C. will have to match or

exceed the performance of Yukon Territory." That's it. That says it all. The

committee decided that things in B.C. aren't so bad, so all we need to do is not

slip in the rankings, and we'll have fulfilled the Premier's great goal.

The committee decided that if we set our expectations low enough,

we won't have to try too hard to meet them. Well, that's just not good enough.

It's not good enough because it ignores the many cuts and barriers caused by

this government's policies — cuts to colleges, 3,000 seats to 2,000 for literacy

training; cuts to child care, the main barrier to women accessing programs; and

barriers in the MCFD and other ministries. That kind of approach ignored the

fact that cuts and changes to early intervention programs in our K-to-12

education system are leaving a new generation of young people vulnerable to a

life of low literacy skills.

That kind of approach ignored the real and unique challenges that

face our first nations people who want to improve opportunities for themselves,

their families and their communities. It ignores the great pool of labour they

represent and leaves them out of the benefits of a high point in our economic

cycle. Is this the new relationship?

That kind of approach ignored the fact that even if we met the

Premier's great goal, we will still have one million working-age British

Columbians with low and inadequate literacy and numeracy skills. Is that what

great goals are made of — leaving out one million people? That kind of approach

ignored the fact that British Columbia has a huge number of well-educated,

highly skilled immigrants who could become productive participants in our

economy if only they were given access to better lingual skills and instruction.

Instead, government appears ready to ignore the outcome.

Strangely, that kind of approach ignores the fact that while the

B.C. economy is in desperate need of skilled workers to fill shortages in many

industries and sectors, we have a vast pool of available workers right here at

home who only need our help to meet their own potential and to fulfil

industries' demands. The Premier and his government should step up to the plate

and add value to our workforce. That kind of approach says: "Don't worry. We

won't have to deal with this whole literacy thing until after the next

election."

It sounds a bit like the throne speech and the Liberal

environmental targets. It's not good enough, and we can and we must do better.

We believe government should establish more ambitious goals and commit

significantly to reducing the number of working-age British Columbians who have

low literacy skills.

We heard that people suffering with low literacy skills are the

last to benefit from a good economy and the first to be punted out the door when

the cycle changes. We learned that higher literacy scores mean a better GDP. We

learned that higher literacy skills mean better health, better communities and a

better democracy. We believe that government should commit to restoring programs

in our K-to-12 system so that the next generation of British Columbians does not

fall through the cracks.

We believe that if the government wants to establish a truly

worthy great goal for a golden decade, one that will actually serve the needs of

British Columbians, then it must commit to something more ambitious than

[ Page 5592 ]

simply maintaining the status quo. Following through on that kind of

commitment won't be simple, easy or even necessarily manageable, but it's what

British Columbians expect of their government.

[1430]

Mr. Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, the member for

Burnaby-Willingdon closes debate.

J. Nuraney: I find it really strange that a member of the

committee, who sat with us through all those times and heard so many

submissions, when the deliberations of the committee took place to finally make

recommendations was not present at that meeting.

However, not to undermine the work of the committee, let me assure

you that the committee worked very hard, listened to various stakeholders and

experts in the field and arrived at suggestions. These are substantial

recommendations that are mentioned in the report.

If the person says that it's maintaining the status quo, I beg to

say that maybe literacy really needs more attention.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Nuraney: With those remarks, Mr. Speaker, I conclude the

debate.

Mr. Speaker: Just a reminder, Members, that you shouldn't

make comments, whether people are in the House or in the committee meetings.

The question is the adoption of the report.

Motion approved.

Tabling Documents

D. Routley: I seek leave to table a copy of the official

opposition's report on the topic of adult literacy.

Mr. Speaker: While the rules don't provide it, I understand

there is an agreement.

Government House Leader.

Hon. M. de Jong: You're correct. Although our rules don't

contemplate that, we're prepared to grant leave to the motion the hon. member

has made.

Leave granted.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call resumed debate on the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. C. Richmond: Before I get back into the context of my

speech, I just want to thank a few people before I go any further. First of all,

the staff in the ministry, both in Victoria and in the field, are very talented

and dedicated people who work tirelessly on our behalf to make B.C. the best

place on earth to live. Secondly, my personal staff, both here and in Kamloops.

I know I speak for many members here, where it would be impossible for us to do

our jobs without them. They work very hard on our behalf.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

I do want to take a few moments to make a few comments about my

hometown of Kamloops. As I said….

Interjection.

Hon. C. Richmond: The birthplace of whom?

As I said before lunch, the feeling when you walk down the street,

I think, is the most significant thing that you notice. You walk down and talk

to people in Kamloops — I know other members can do the same in their hometown —

and the feeling of confidence and optimism is overwhelming compared to just a

very few short years ago.

There's good reason for that. The annual unemployment rate for

2006 in Kamloops dropped to 3.9 percent, the lowest rate recorded in decades.

Last year some 4,800 jobs were created in the Thompson-Okanagan region.

[1435]

This is a remarkable turnaround from just a few years ago. In

April of 2001 the unemployment rate in Kamloops was 14.1 percent — 14.1. And

it's now 3.9 percent. What a turnaround in a few short years. It's proof that

prudent fiscal management, removing barriers to employment and encouraging

investor confidence work.

Local business successes are numerous in Kamloops. It's a great

achievement for the people, and they deserve full marks for being some of the

hardest-working, most industrious people that you will ever meet. [Applause.]

I'm going to wait for the applause to die down from my colleague, but it's

deserved, and I appreciate it.

Along with great employees the region is home to many progressive

companies that are committed to achieving the best for their workers. Last week

I had the honour to help recognize one such company, NRI, who won a WorkLife

B.C. Award for promoting a balanced lifestyle in the workplace. By offering

their employees flexibility in their employment, this successful company has

created an environment that gives its workers a sense of being part of the

family. This is something I hope all companies and employers strive towards.

Looking into the future, the jobs prospect for the people in

Kamloops continues to be positive. There are help-wanted signs all over town. In

fact, the Kamloops Daily News ran an

article on Monday, February 19,

stating that the help-wanted

section in their paper is two and a half pages long

and that local businesses are struggling to find workers. I know it's been said

before, but I am proud to say it again. What a difference a few years

[ Page 5593 ]

makes. From having an underperforming economy to a booming one, it's a

remarkable turnaround for both British Columbia and Kamloops.

Just a couple of items I want to touch on again about Kamloops.

These are two items that are top of mind in the people in the community and the

surrounding area. I mentioned the airport expansion briefly in my opening

remarks, and I'm pleased to see the expansion getting underway. It is coming

closer to fruition thanks to a $4 million commitment from our government's

transportation partnerships fund to help them extend the runway to 8,000 feet.

This is a partnership between the airport, the city of Kamloops,

Sun Peaks Resort, the Tourism Ministry, our government and, hopefully, the

helping further our appeal to visitors and creating even more opportunities for

those who live in the community.

In addition to creating employment, the strength of a strong

economy allows us to invest record amounts into critical services for my region,

including education and health care, as well as to finding a solution to the

challenges stemming from the mountain pine beetle, which is the other item I

just want to touch on for a few moments. The devastation resulting from the

mountain pine beetle has caused great harm both economically and environmentally

to the Kamloops-Thompson region as well as to many other areas of British

Columbia.

Our government, plus our partners — including the federal

government, the first nations and those involved in the forest industry — are

working hard to minimize the damage that resulted from the infestation. Through

the mountain pine beetle action plan, we have committed to invest almost half a

billion dollars to fight this menace. Locally Thompson Rivers University is on

the front line of this battle, recently receiving nearly $380,000 in funding

from our Forest Investment Account's forest science program to conduct six

research projects. Not only is this assisting in finding solutions to the pine

beetle problem. It is also helping students by giving hands-on experience,

furthering their skills.

I would be remiss, too, if I didn't talk for just a moment about

how important mining has become again to the interior and especially to the area

in which I live. Mining is now becoming the economic engine it used to be after

almost being shut down by the previous government. Record dollars are being

spent on exploration, and mining will play a very important

part in our economy

in the next few years as we see the results of the beetle kill and its effect on

the annual allowable cut in forestry. I know many people in our area earn their

living from mining. It was great to attend their conference here the other day

and see a great number of them.

[1440]

I would like now to speak about some of the accomplishments in the

Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance. From my viewpoint as the minister,

this year's budget has brought forward many positive developments for the

ministry and the people it helps every day, including enhancing income

assistance rates.

Before I touch on the specifics, I think it would be judicious to

talk about how we arrived at this point. One of British Columbia's many recent

success stories has been the movement of people from income assistance to jobs.

Five years ago there were over a quarter of a million people in our province who

were reliant on income assistance. This number, as I hope everyone can agree,

was very troubling — far too many.

Welfare was, unfortunately, a trap that was difficult to escape

and an unwanted way of life. While most longed to find work, become self-reliant

and support their families, unemployment was high and jobs were scarce. Thanks

to good fiscal management, our financial house is in order. Today there are over

350,000 more jobs in B.C. than there were in December 2001. To look at this

number in another way, B.C. has seen more jobs created in just five years than

there are people who live in the Greater Victoria region.

Last month Statistics Canada reported that there were 32,000 jobs

created in British Columbia in December alone, and our unemployment rate fell to

4.3 percent provincewide, tying a 30-year low. But as I said a little earlier,

Kamloops is even lower than this.

Since December 2001 B.C.'s overall unemployment rate has fallen by

5.7 percentage points. People from across Canada and even the world are moving

to our province in order to take advantage of our economic turnaround. These are

great and undeniable successes, and for the Ministry of Employment and Income

Assistance, the news is very positive. Compared to June 2001, about 115,000

fewer British Columbians are dependent on income assistance, a decrease of

approximately 45 percent in just under six years.

These facts are undeniable proof that our province's efforts in

helping people escape the welfare rolls and find full-time jobs are working. As

a former United States President once said: "We should measure welfare's success

by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added."

With more people working and paying taxes, businesses opening up

and investment confidence at record highs, our province is experiencing record

revenues. The result of this is that we are now in the financial position to

make sure everyone benefits from this economic turnaround, including British

Columbians most in need.

This year's budget is great news for families, children and

employable singles who are on income assistance, ensuring everyone gains from a

strong economy. First, we're boosting the maximum shelter rates by $50 a month

for all clients, giving employable singles, couples and single-parent families

the highest shelter rate in Canada.

Second, we wanted to increase rates for families and children, and

we've done just that with increases ranging from $97 to well over $200 a month,

depending on the number of children.

Third, we've raised the total rates for employable singles by

$100, or 20 percent, to $610 a month, giving them the second-highest rate in

Canada.

These increases will take effect in April of this year and will be

reflected on the clients' March 28,

[ Page 5594 ]

2007, payments. They're expected to cost $188 million until the end of the

2009-2010 fiscal year, with $58.1 million allocated for 2007-2008. Our new rate

structure also takes into account all the other provincial and federal tax

credits, child supports, family bonuses and numerous programs and supports that

low-income families and families on income assistance are eligible for.

In addition, effective June 1, 2007, standardized payments will be

made to approximately 5,000 clients residing in Community Living B.C.

facilities. With these standardized payments, all clients in Community Living

B.C. facilities will be provided with the maximum monthly disability rate,

giving them $190 per month for personal expenses.

[1445]

On top of this, a new transportation supplement is available for

clients requiring travel to a drug or alcohol treatment facility, and increases

are being made to the diabetic diet supplement, raising it by $20 to $35, and to

the guide animals supplement, boosting it from $62 to $95 per month.

This government has taken a balanced approach in setting the new

rates and enhancing levels of support, a realistic undertaking between what is

fair to our clients and what is fair to working British Columbians — increases

that are reasonable and are geared towards families, children and individuals

who need the assistance most.

While we are pleased that our province is in a financial position

to increase rates, I would like to remind British Columbians that for those able

to work, welfare is a hand up, not a handout. The best social assistance program

is still a job.

I should add in here that those expected to work, the employables

on our rolls, spend an average of only four months on our rolls. That's an

interesting statistic that most people are not aware of. Four months is usually

what they spend.

To help people find work, we're investing some $70 million on

employment programs. One of these is the new $35 million B.C. employment program

that was launched last July, providing income assistance clients with

individualized services and support. Another is the $7.5 million community

assistance program that provides approximately 5,000 multibarriered clients each

year with services to improve their quality of life and strengthen supports

within their communities.

Persons with disabilities. Equally important is to build the best

system of supports for those in need, and this includes persons with

disabilities. As we've seen significant progress over the past year in achieving

this goal, on top of proclaiming December 2006 as Persons with Disabilities

Month, I am very pleased with two initiatives that have been developed by the

Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance.

Our governmentwide disability strategy builds upon the solid

foundation of supports the government has in place for people with disabilities.

Today we are investing more than $4 billion annually on programs and services

for British Columbians with disabilities, and we want to ensure that they can

access them when and where they are needed.

Last October I had the pleasure to launch our 10 by 10 Challenge

with Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan. Another goal that is important to me is to

disabilities. The goal of the 10 by 10 Challenge is to increase the employment

of people with disabilities by 10 percent by 2010.

When the challenge was announced, there were approximately 132,000

persons with disabilities employed in B.C. We want to boost that number to

145,000 in three years. So many people with disabilities have tremendous talent

and skill to offer their communities and local economies. These people want to

work. They are able, willing and eager to work, even if it's only on a part-time

basis.

There are currently 300,000 working-age people with disabilities

in British Columbia. Some 34,000 have college diplomas, 30,000 have trade

certificates, and 28,000 have university degrees. Yet only 44 percent of them

are employed. That's not good enough.

With the upcoming 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games and

B.C.'s current economy the strongest it's been in decades, there have never been

better opportunities for all British Columbians to fully participate in the

workforce. I hope all of my colleagues on both sides of the House are fully

supportive of this initiative and promote it in their constituencies.

Again, I just want to emphasize the importance of the 10 by 10

initiative that we have. It was taken up very vigorously by the mayors

throughout the entire province, and they are getting behind this for us to

increase the number of disabled people working.

Before I go on, I just want to make a quick mention of the

overwhelming success of our Quit Smoking Now pilot project, launched in January

to help income assistance clients give up smoking. Within days of being

announced, thousands of people had called and volunteered for the program, which

provides free nicotine replacement therapy — skin patches or gum — for three

months.

The real winners of this program, though, will be the children.

They will be able to live in a smoke-free environment, and their parents will

have more money to put food on the table. I know all of us want to see a

healthier British Columbia, and by encouraging as many people as possible to

quit smoking, we can accomplish this.

[1450]

I want to touch briefly on education because it is a priority in

all constituencies, and it is the ticket to future success. This past year we

saw the funding of 200 new post-secondary seats at Thompson Rivers University.

Kamloops-Thompson school district 73 saw almost $113 million in operating funds

for the current school year, up from $109 million last year despite declining

enrolment.

For the future, the news for education continues to be good. Total

per-student funding will rise to an estimated $7,900 per student, a new record

and an increase of over 4 percent over this year's number. Our government will

do even more to access post-secondary

[ Page 5595 ]

education and trades training opportunities throughout the province, ensuring

British Columbia has a well-trained workforce for the future. This includes $135

million over three years to support the creation of 7,000 additional

apprenticeship spaces, 25,000 new post-secondary spaces and 2,500 new graduate

spaces.

Just a few comments, Madam Speaker, about health care. As we look

to the future, nothing is more important than the investment we make in our

health care system. Building on the opening of the $17 million, 44-bed Hillside

Centre — the second of two new, state-of-the-art mental health facilities built

on the grounds of Royal Inland Hospital — health received a further shot in the

arm in the budget.

Currently 42 percent of all government spending is directed

towards health care, and over the next three years we will invest an additional

$2.69 billion towards this most vital service. This new funding is in addition

to the $987 million previously allocated, marking a total increase of $3.68

billion. In 2001 the health care budget was just over $8 billion. By the end of

this year's budget, it will increase to $13.1 billion. That's an increase of 7.3

percent.

The $100 million health innovation fund will promote innovation

within the health care system. The fund will assist health authorities in

implementing best practices, restructuring service delivery systems and

eliminating key information bottlenecks. But money alone will not fix this

problem. We need to look at other methods, including preventive health and

alternate forms of treatment, to make sure our children and grandchildren will

have access to publicly funded health care in years to come.

This is why the Conversation on Health is so important. While the

prognosis for the health of our economy is outstanding, we must always pay

attention to the well-being of our universal health care system. A few weeks ago

the Conversation on Health kicked off the first of its 16 provincewide public

forums in Kamloops. There are those, including some in this House, who do not

want us to talk to the citizens of British Columbia. In Kamloops there was a

demonstration outside of those who didn't think we should be talking to our

constituents about health care.

But 100 participants, representing a cross-section of the Kamloops

region, came together to discuss the future of this, our most cherished

component of our social safety net. I know the Minister of Health, who attended

in Kamloops, was impressed by the thoughts and suggestions that were put forth

by the people. All of us here are aware of the necessity and importance of our

health care system, and we know it is going to have to evolve to meet the

challenges of tomorrow. With our aging population, it is more important than

ever to plan ahead and make the necessary and long-term investments needed to

sustain the system for all British Columbians.

In December the Premier's Council on Aging and Seniors Issues

submitted their report to the Premier, and I am very pleased to see that some of

their recommendations are already being implemented. As announced in the throne

speech, our government will introduce legislation to abolish mandatory

retirement. This is a very important step forward as people 65 and older

currently face a form of discrimination based on their age. This is patently

wrong and forces many people out of the workforce against their will. Now 65

years of age is no longer considered old, and people in today's contemporary

society are productive well beyond this age.

[1455]

As my colleague from North Vancouver–Lonsdale said in the

Legislature: "…65 is just a number. People are not like a quart of milk. There

is no best-before date. Someone does not become disposable because the calendar

flips."

We on this side of the House believe that people should be free to

make their own decisions. If they wish to retire at 55 or younger or keep on

working past 65, that should be their decision, not one made for them by

government.

Another budget highlight, without question, is the housing legacy.

When I read through everything that we're doing in housing, I find it hard to

believe that there are people here who are not in favour of what we're doing in

housing and say that we're not doing enough. I'm not going to go into all of the

items in housing, but the expansion of the rental assistance program is great

news for those who have left income assistance for jobs. By increasing the

income threshold to $28,000, more working families than ever before will receive

help with their housing, leaving more money in their pockets to spend on other

items such as food, clothing and entertainment.

It happens right now, Madam Speaker, where they live. We don't

have to wait to build housing. Thousands more people will be better off and

spending less money on their shelter than they were before, and they will be

able to spend that money on their families.

I was also pleased to see the threshold raised for first-time

homebuyers — increased by $110,000 to $375,000. It could save first-time

homebuyers up to $5,500, and that's a real boost to people. At $375,000 it

covers the greatest percentage of homes, especially in the interior.

I can see that my speaking time is nearly up. I appreciate the

opportunity to speak once again in the House to the people, especially in my

constituency, and I thank them for the privilege of being here to represent

them. This is a very forward-looking budget, and that's why I will be supporting

it.

G. Gentner: I rise to address what is a falsehood, as seen

as the "balanced budget." Hon. Speaker, I'm proud to represent my constituency

of Delta North, and I'm proud to stand before you on their behalf.

However, most of my constituency members are angry today. In fact,

they're outraged with the direction this government is going as outlined in the

budget relative to, of course, the hypocrisy that was also outlined in the

throne speech.

My constituency exists not just of 50,000 people. My constituency

is Delta itself. It's the Fraser estuary, it's the river, it's farmland, it's

Burns Bog, it's a habitat, and it's a vital jewel in the lower mainland.

[ Page 5596 ]

I remember years ago I attended a public hearing in Delta, and the

council of the day were suggesting a need to develop what was known back then as

the southlands. There was a councillor who stood up and sort of made a passing

remark to some of the environmentalists and the farming advocates and said,

"Well, you know, birds can't vote. So go ahead. Go ahead."

The consequence of that, of course, was that pro-development

council was thrown out of office for good reason. A balanced budget looks at the

bottom line — the triple bottom line. It looks at the social consequences as

well as the environmental impacts.

[1500]

There was a strategy put in place in the early '90s, and it came

forward from the GVRD, which worked tirelessly towards a livable region

strategic plan that came forward in 1996. "Greater Vancouver can become the

first urban region in the world to combine in one place the things which

humanity aspires on a global basis, a place where human activities enhance

rather than degrade the natural environment."

When you look at this budget, degradation is exactly where this

government is going in how it's going to deal with land use in the lower

mainland. It goes on to say: "…where the quality of the built environment

approaches that of the natural setting" — again, look at the budget and see what

the Ministry of Transportation has for my community — "…where people control the

destiny of their community."

Again, when you look at the heavy-handedness of the government and

how it treats local government, it is clear where this budget is going.

Certainly, it isn't one of consultation.

When you compare the budget to the throne speech, they're

certainly at opposite poles of each other. There is theory, as derived through

the throne speech, versus the practice. In the throne speech they talked about

the need for climate change — but a budget that's very hypocritical.

My community is going to have as much severe impact as some would

say, possibly, what Site C might be doing to that community up north. I hope,

not only for my constituents but for all British Columbians, to fully understand

the type of destruction that is underway in my community of Delta.

When you look the globalization, it all starts at one place. All

things start at the port. We hear all the accolades about the Pacific gateway

and the provincial gateway and how the wonderful trade is going to enhance our

lives. Well, trade is not a commodity. We are very vulnerable in the global

community. If you read the Bloomberg report, Canadian stocks fell the most they

have in eight weeks after a huge overnight slump in the Canadian stock market.

That has raised concern that demand for commodities may slow in the world's

fastest-growing major economy — the Chinese economy, which is driving the

Gateway program.

Companies and financial experts are saying: "Don't panic. Don't

move your assets into bonds yet. Let's give it a day or two." Hot off the press:

"Chinese stocks tumble the most in ten years after the government approved a

special task force to clamp down on illegal share offerings. The index dropped

9.2 percent, wiping out $100 billion from a stock market that doubled in the

past year."

That's how vulnerable we are. We can put all your money into these

assets to build this infrastructure, to bring on the trade, but when you're

dealing with globalized trade, it can change in a flicker.

The government has been sort of mute on the point that there's

going to be a merging of the ports, something that the throne speech talked

about briefly — about gateway and the same with that of the global economy, the

Asia-Pacific. The merging of ports, of course, is a derivative of the globalized

approach of this government. The merging of the ports, however, doesn't address

at all the local interests of communities that are wondering what type of

influence they're going to have when you have this consolidation of interests on

one megaport. That's lost.

We know why the port is being merged — namely, because the

Vancouver Port Authority is looking for more land from the Fraser Port

Authority. Of course, one of the big reasons given is the need for efficiencies.

But if there were efficiencies put together and we were able to put those ports

together and make it work…. I don't necessarily believe you have to put $1.3

billion in a South Fraser perimeter road if you're going to make sure those

ports work.

[1505]

What is being suggested through this budget is something that is

not sustainable, because what it's going to do is wipe out the farmland in the

lower mainland. It's going to wipe out Burns Bog, contrary to what members

opposite say — that it won't. It's going to impact the Fraser River, the most

important salmon-bearing river in North America if not the world. Close your

eyes for a moment and think for a second that all that we have fought for when

it comes to land, land use planning, will be wiped out by the avaricious nature

of the government opposite.

We can talk about the development on Roberts Bank and the

expansion. But you know, one thing we don't really look at — never really

considered — in the environmental assessment process is: what's the impact of

climate change? After all, that's what the throne speech was all about, and of

course, the budget never addressed it.

Well, climate change means ocean levels are going to rise, and

with the port expansion already destroying the habitat, the mud flats and

marshlands are going to be wiped out in 50 years. There won't be a Roberts Bank.

The estuary, the delta ecosystem itself, is going to be heavily impacted by

climate change, yet this government has put nothing in the budget to see how

it's going to impact my community.

The government talks at great length about the port and how we're

going to change all the horrible emissions by, as we know, the year 2015.

Particulate will be the number-one concern of air emissions in the lower

mainland. It has mentioned a green plan — but again, nothing in the budget on

how we're going to deal with the port air emissions.

[ Page 5597 ]

The Environment Minister talked on the Bill Good Show

recently. He talked about electrification, how we're going to hook up the ships

to AC or DC. Yet the Port of Seattle has a program of cold ironing, which has

greatly reduced ship emissions while in port for some time. This is our

competition.

Moreover, the use of off-peak weekend power enabled Seattle City

Light to offer favourable rates, which makes the project economically feasible.

The total cost of the project was $2 million, including half a million dollars

per ship to connect each vessel to electric power ashore. The project will

reduce 1,400 metric tonnes of fuel use over a summer cruise season. But here,

hon. Speaker — not a dime.

We keep hearing about the studies that are underway, but there are

no viable results in the budget. When you take under consideration the makeup of

international shipping — whether they be ships from Liberia or from China — are

we seriously going to work with our federal government and liaise a deal with

international shipping companies to ensure that they hook up to electrification?

I don't think so.

I think it's hypocrisy — in order for a throne speech that says

you might do it, where a budget clearly has no vision at all — to take to the

forefront what California ports have been doing now for five years relative to

the reduction of sulphur oxides and nitrogen oxides, up to a 92-percent

decrease.

The Port of Long Beach has enacted a comprehensive air-quality

improvement plan to achieve measurable long-term reductions in air-quality

emissions from port operation, in particular diesel particulate matter. Here we

hear talk, no action. The Port of Long Beach, our major competitor, and its

tenants have cut nearly 600 tonnes of NOx per year and 70 tonnes of particulate

per year. More than 600 pieces of cargo-handling equipment have been retrofitted

with diesel oxidation catalysts at seven container terminals.

[1510]

The Port of Los Angeles, another competitor for containers. Back

in 2001 Mayor James Hahn called for no net increase in air emissions at the

port, and they have succeeded. Alternate maritime power is one result of this

groundbreaking effort to reduce emissions at the port. Alternate marine power

ships plug into shoreside electrical power, which is literally an alternative

power source for marine vessels.

While cold ironing has been used for naval ships, ferries,

assisted tugboats and some Alaskan cruise ships, the Port of Los Angeles is the

first port in the world to use AMP technology for service container ships. Where

in the budget do you see that type of inspiration and type of leadership? It's

not there.

San Pedro Bay terminals — they too have been innovative. They've

looked at changing night runs for trucks, targeting 40 percent of their truck

shifts for truckers to work at night and for warehouses to stay open on

non-residential impacted roads. Food for thought — but again, hon. Speaker,

empty words from the members opposite.

Where else is this taking my community — the Vancouver Port

Authority? More noise, more light, more pollution. Quite recently, poor little

Delta has been trying in desperation to address this onslaught of container

trucks. They came forward with a new bylaw to separate the containers from its

very rich industrial land. It did so mainly because of the erosion of its

industrial tax base and the ability to plan where the trucks can go through its

community.

On December 3, 2006, after two years of consultation with the

business community, the municipality passed its third reading. The purpose was

to flag containers in the industrial zones where containers were taking up the

valuable service lots.

Unfortunately, however, this bylaw went to the Ministry of

Transportation, and the ministry stepped in and used the unthinkable

section

52(3) of the Transportation Act and refused to sign off on the bylaw. Imagine

that. Here is a community undergoing huge changes because of globalization, the

plans by this government, yet this government will not even work with a local

government that's going to be severely impacted.

Section 52(3) is an obscure

section that allows the government to

intrude on municipal authority. Any zoning in relation to land within 800 metres

— not feet — from a highway or provincially funded road can be stopped, and that

is what this government has done. In its heavy-handedness it has said to Delta:

"We know best. We're industrializing you. We're saying to heck with the

farmland, we're saying to heck with Burns Bog, and we're going to run a freeway

right along the Fraser River."

I want to briefly talk about Burns Bog. Here we have a carbon sink

that scrubs the atmospheric carbon; it stores it. What's this government doing?

It's going to put a freeway on the transition zones of Burns Bog, on the South

Fraser perimeter road. It's going to impact the hydrology, which is going to

destabilize the ecology in such a way that the nutrient level is going to

increase. By doing so, of course, you're going to see very fragile fauna

completely dissipate. That's a shame, because many members of this House on both

sides, many members of organizations and, of course, Delta and the GVRD worked

tirelessly to save Burns Bog.

[1515]

South Fraser perimeter road — 200 homes in my community are going

to be expropriated. Many members of my community are livid. They're irate with

the lack of consultation of this government and its inability to look at the

larger picture, look at all options, look at sustainability. They're fuming at

the notion of not two lanes but four lanes and shoulders along the fragile

ecosystem itself, along the riparian habitat — namely, the Fraser River — more

air pollution, more noise pollution and bulldozing internationally recognized

heritage sites. Seven ravines that are fish-bearing streams are going to be

totally compromised. Tree lines along the Fraser riverbank, gone; shade that

provides important features for species, wiped out. Erosion — therefore

concreted slopes. Talk about a vista there. What an eyesore this government is

giving to Delta.

[ Page 5598 ]

There are options, but this government won't listen to them. The

council of this day has asked to maybe look at a snowshed approach to cover it

up. There's a Surrey diagonal to take some of the load off. Some members of my

community are actually suggesting a tunnel, but they're riled at the point that

this government won't listen, won't even consider options. It's got its blinders

on, and it's paving. It's paving the lower mainland. It's gone. It's all

earmarked. You can read about it — fast-breaking news in the budget.

Now, of course, there is a vision. There is a way. We can look at

sustainability through the merging of the ports, if we are able to somehow

coalesce the movements of shipping up the river rather than putting it on flat

decks at a cost of close to $1.3 billion — the South Fraser perimeter road.

We've got to say to the people up in northern British Columbia, most of whom

agree, that expansion at Prince Rupert is needed and necessary and has to be

done very soon indeed.

That is planning. That is planning not only for the lower

mainland, not only for those up north, but for British Columbia as a whole. It

also means intermodal yards placed up in Prince George and Kamloops to take that

container traffic away from sensitive areas in the lower mainland, areas where

industrial land is worth close to a million dollars per acre. But this

government has no vision. It has no plan.

This government's ultimate plan is to destroy the agricultural

land reserve. Make no bones about it; that's where we're going. Ex-Premier Dave

Barrett said: "If it had not been for the agricultural land reserve, Vancouver

today would be a bloody mess." He's right. There are urban areas all over North

America looking in envy at what we have in this province. The one that surrounds

Portland, Oregon, was adopted by the agricultural land reserve here in British

Columbia.

There'd be no farmland left if there was no agricultural land in

Delta. There'd be no farmland left in Langley or Abbotsford. The Fraser Valley

would be a freeway on top of a freeway on top of a freeway. Urban sprawl would

be everywhere. Think about it. We'd truly then have Liberal utopia. It'd be a

bloody mess. That's right — a brave new world made of the automobile with many

more Wendy's takeouts and Styrofoam containers everywhere thrown right out the

window. I know, hon. Speaker. I've been to Orlando, Florida, and I've seen the

tolls on every freeway — a tollbooth every two miles to pay for all the

concrete.

Think about it. For all the urbanites living downtown, it wouldn't

be the downtown you know today. It would have a major freeway through it.

There'd be no critical mass because housing would be sprawled all the way up the

valley. That's how vitally important the agricultural land reserve is. It's been

part of our culture for over 30 years, and now we are seeing this government

destroy it.

We wouldn't see bistros or boutiques on Robson. There'd be no

critical mass. There wouldn't be condos. We'd have big boxes way outside the

core with people in automobiles driving to and from. Do you think there would be

a great demand for housing in False Creek? False Creek wouldn't be what it is

today.

[1520]

The containment of urban sprawl in this province, particularly in

the lower mainland, is directly related to the fact that we have protected that

land through the agricultural land reserve. Perhaps we may not even have a B.C.

Place. We may have something called the Phil Gagliardi memorial stadium way up

in Abbotsford. Get in your car and drive up there.

The Minister of Transportation would have his heyday over there.

He would be like a kid in a sandbox playing with Tonka trucks. Boy, oh boy.

Engineers would be knighted around this province. He'd be so excited that he

wouldn't even be able to contain himself. The Fraser Valley would be one big

drive-through, and every ministry official would drive a big eight-cylinder car

with big fins and plush leopard-skin upholstery and long horns on the hood. Yep,

this is the world. It's Liberal utopia. That is what this government believes

in, because we would not have the ALR.

Urban sprawl does not just impact the need for more freeways, but

it also stretches infrastructure. Major waterlines and sewer trunks would have

to run up the valley to treat all this urban sprawl.

New watersheds. The cost saving because of the agricultural land

reserve is enormous. If Vancouver had grown like Seattle the last decade, the

data suggest it would have converted approximately 18,000 additional acres — an

area equivalent to about 1/8 of the agricultural land reserve within the Greater

Vancouver area, or about 4/5 the size of Burnaby — to sprawling suburbanite

development.

I know that some of the Minister of Transportation's developer

friends are elated with Liberal utopia. And the Transportation Ministry would be

blissful. It's a destructive ministry that thrives on congestion, that wants to

widen all the freeways. This will, in the words of the Livable Region Coalition,

likely transfer the region in the foreseeable future into sprawling,

low-density, automobile-dependent urban agglomeration.

Now, the agricultural land reserve has also been the basis of

what's known as the green zone, which currently constrains sprawl in the lower

mainland. It's one of the four pillars that make up the livable region strategic

plan passed under the previous leadership of a mayor who is now the Premier. The

green zone, which is now going to be wiped out in Delta when the land's taken

out of the ALR — a thousand acres…. Some 220 acres will be out to supply the

purpose of the South Fraser perimeter road. Gone. The most arable land in the

world — gone.

This government doesn't care. They think that through their

globalization and…. You know, maybe the so-called business friends across the

way…. They should maybe take a look at Bloomberg today and just see what's going

on out there. Put all that money into the infrastructure without fully

understanding where the world economy is going.

I believe, with all due respect, that most Vancouverites don't

generally appreciate the agricultural land reserve.

[ Page 5599 ]

But, you know, hon. Speaker, the rest of the world does. Most recently, the

plan was chosen from more than 500 submissions as the one that demonstrated best

practices, improved the living environment, at the prestigious 2002 Dubai

international awards.

My community is exasperated. It's offended and enraged by what is

happening. The impacts that are happening through this budget hit my community

more than any other community in the province. The amount of transformation and

change that's going to happen in my community is appalling. There is no triple

bottom line, and there is no sense of sustainable development.

[1525]

There is some good news here. At the recent Liberal convention in

Whistler, the delegates rejected a motion that called for the land commission to

be modernized so that local municipalities could more easily move lands for

other uses. Now maybe the rank-and-file members of the party over there are

saying that maybe the ALR is a good thing, but this cabinet has different plans

altogether.

Regardless, it would be close to tragic to see the lower mainland,

which was a pioneer 30 years ago, reverse course just as the rest of the world

is trying to catch up to us. We have a productive, secure agricultural land base

in British Columbia which is vital to our ability to maintain agriculture as a

viable industry, to secure our food supply and to act as an urban containment

boundary. We understand that on this side. We understand how vitally important

it is.

Hon. Speaker, I realize my time is coming to a close. I want to

conclude by saying that this budget should be known as the "scorched earth"

British Columbia budget — a promise of a throne speech, a false hope, followed

by a deluge of environmental obliteration. For my community, indeed the Fraser

delta itself, this government is involved in a process of decay, of ruin and of

destruction. Nothing so insidious, so utterly revolting and completely base,

what this ruthless assault on everything this province holds dear…. That is what

this budget speaks about.

This gluttonous devouring of the Fraser River ecosystem…. The

delta, the estuary, the farmland, the most important salmon-bearing river in

North America are threatened by nothing more than an army of — I don't know what

to call them — beasts, Teutonic-like thugs marching through marshlands, bogs and

farmland — thugs who are so vile and on a vile mission to assault my community,

our province and our planet. My community is outraged with this budget.

Deputy Speaker: Member, Delta South.

V. Roddick: Thank you for that clarification, Madam

Speaker. The member opposite seems to forget that he's supposed to be

representing Delta North and is not still a council member.

Your party, I might add, wanted to put the PNE in the Burns Bog

and pave it.

An Hon. Member: We didn't.

V. Roddick: No, you sure didn't.

Our country was built on trade — world trade — and I'd be

interested to know where the clothes on your back actually came from.

Our throne speech is a plan. We are not a knee-jerk government, as

the NDP were for ten years. We work with the federal government, and one of our

golden goals is for the best air quality and water quality ever. For the record

also, the local business community via the Delta Chamber of Commerce did not

support the container bylaw, and the ALR without a doubt has support both in the

lower mainland and throughout the province.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

It is an honour and a privilege to stand and represent my

community. Delta South is one of the major gateways not only to our province but

to Canada as a whole and beyond. Delta South still manages to be a community in

the true sense of the word. Ladner was a precursor of today's multicultural and

multi-ethnic society. The small village boasted an aboriginal population as well

as Caucasian, Chinese and Japanese employed in the canneries and boat-building

and repairs and fishing and farming, as well as sundry other entrepreneurial

business ventures.

Descendants of these pioneer families continue to thrive in Delta

South today. They and hardy newcomers are staunchly committed to maintaining and

enhancing our forefathers' vision in a beautiful — actually, a spectacular —

place to live.

I've pounded this podium on several basic issues over the last

seven years. Many of these issues will have decisions made during this term of

office.

[1530]

Health care in our community now includes our unique local liaison

group, Delta Healthcare Association, which keeps Fraser Health Authority abreast

of our community issues and allows us to discuss what fundamental changes we

must make to improve our health and to protect our precious public health system

for the long term.

The Delta Healthcare Association, in conjunction with the Fraser

Health Authority, held a hugely successful health fair last October, attended by

over 800 people and opened by the new Minister of State for ActNow B.C.. And

they are now planning a local conversation on health to support the provincial

Conversation on Health because of the pressures we are facing in the health care

system, which continue to escalate.

Your government will continue to listen and learn from British

Columbians and to innovate and explore new ways of delivering better health

services. This will not be easy, and it won't be without controversy and change.

Actually, the most effective health promotion strategies we have discovered to

date are education and individual action, such as the school fruit and

[ Page 5600 ]

veggie snack program, which is in 50 schools this year and will be in every

public school by 2010.

The ActNow B.C. program is making progress in fostering greater

physical activity, healthier eating habits and tobacco reduction. Ag in the

Classroom is putting agriculture back in the curriculum. The Action Schools B.C.

program is spreading into our classrooms across the province to promote healthy

living among our students. The Select Standing Committee on Health reports, the

current one and the 2005 one, both encourage us to take charge of ourselves and

our individual health.

We have initialled a treaty with the Tsawwassen First Nation and

are in ratification mode. It is anticipated that this will be the first urban

treaty signed in B.C. British Columbia is determined to take Canada and walk the

path together with lasting reconciliation.

While there are serious concerns arising from the removal of land

from the agricultural land reserve, we must remember that all communities have

used agricultural land to expand and grow over the centuries. This aspect is

nothing new. What is new is that we in the Fraser Valley, our province's food

basket, are facing the loss of critical land mass, the ability to rotate our

crops as well as the loss of bird habitat for the Pacific joint flyway.

We need to think outside the box to find solutions. How do we

replace lost land and enhance bird habitat? Believe it or not, I actually have a

suggestion, as opposed to the member opposite, on how to tackle this, which I

will mention later on.

In my 2006 throne speech I pushed for the reinstatement of the

original Delta Port liaison committee to assist in addressing local concerns. We

need to work together because we want sustainable, vibrant, creative communities

that live in balance with the natural amenities that make Delta so special.

I am delighted to announce that the Vancouver Port Authority as

well as the corporation of Delta are working to relaunch the liaison committee

this spring. The liaison committee can also work with those involved with the

merger of Vancouver and Fraser port authorities.

We have in Delta three respected proponents of the port merger

that our member opposite was so concerned about: Peter Podovinikoff, former CEO

of Envision Credit Union and current chair of the Fraser Port Authority board of

directors; Allan Baydala, president and CEO of the North Fraser Port Authority

and chair of the B.C. AIM Consortium and tourism and communities organization —

lives in Ladner; and Allen Domaas, president and CEO of the Fraser Port

Authority. They are recognized, valued and respected for their background

experience and local knowledge of the community.

I believe that the port merger can benefit not only Delta and the

Fraser River but also the province and the country. We can turn the port merger

into a positive, with Delta on the receiving end of much-needed infrastructure,

environmental and cultural amenities, etc. We can say to the world that our

community has found a way to incorporate and reconcile the advantages of small

town, rural living with our global responsibilities.

A merger will make it easier for us to communicate effectively,

with one agency rather than three. One authority will work to our advantage

dealing with the debris trap and dredging.

[1535]

We need to accept our responsibility to be part of a community

greater than Delta, which leads me to agriculture. Exactly a year ago Planning

for the Future — Growing B.C. Agriculture was launched at the Pacific

agricultural fair in Abbotsford. The agricultural plan will go a long way to

ensure that B.C. leads the way in North America in healthy living and physical

fitness; leads the world in sustainable environmental management, with the best

air and water quality and the best fisheries management; and the creation of

more jobs per capita than anywhere else in Canada.

The MLA group has travelled the province listening to every level

of the agriculture industry. It has been fascinating, enlightening and

encouraging. That doesn't mean that there's a silver bullet to resolve all the

complex issues facing our sustainable food supply, but I do feel people are

listening, participating and, above all, are actually interested in where their

food comes from.

We must tackle our growing urban-rural agricultural divide. Become

involved. Agriculture is our only sustainable natural resource. It is our key to

the future because we and our wildlife still have to eat to live.

It is also imperative that the Gateway program not only listens

but hears our community's concerns. The general public is trying its level best

to be heard and understood. We are hard-working citizens who pay taxes so that

the publicly funded entities can hold hearings and make decisions that affect

all our lives. Our message must be heard. As taxpayers and citizens, we deserve

no less.

Over the past year there's been a decision made on the South

Fraser perimeter road, south of Highway 99, proposed as one of the possible

routes 12 years ago by the Delta Farmers' Institute. It is to follow the railway

track, hook into Boundary Bay Airport and attach to Highway 99 at approximately

72nd.

We need to start phase 1 now — immediately. Delta South is being

throttled by traffic. Let's get busy here and have phase 1 up and running by

2010. It can be done. It must be done.

Vancouver made the decision not to have freeways running through

it like Seattle, so Vancouver must as a result not ignore its responsibility to

the outlying areas for absorbing the movement of goods and services. We need

collective help here. Let's get together. Let's get started. Phase 1 will work.

Delta South is a community with many challenges and much

potential. We have it all — Burns Bog, thanks to our government; Boundary Bay;

unique urban spaces; historical village; agriculture, marine and industrial

areas. We have much to protect and share with the rest of B.C.

Delta South is faced with a number of multi-jurisdictional and

contentious issues, but let us be the doorway, for heaven's sake, not the

doormat of the province. We must develop a plan for the people who

[ Page 5601 ]

live in Delta South, not one for those who simply drive through it on the way

to somewhere else.

British Columbians' tax dollars paid to build the St. Lawrence

Seaway 50 years ago. Those investments consolidated Canada's place as the

Atlantic's primary entrance to the heart of North America. All Canadians

benefited. It's time for Canada to make the same commitment and seize the

opportunity for its Pacific gateway. The potential for mutual benefit is

enormous.

[1540]

After the last election I said I looked forward to the opportunity

for the B.C. Liberal government and the municipality of Delta to forge a new

relationship that could address local concerns in a positive, constructive

manner that would benefit everyone. This relationship would also need to include

input from the two Delta MPs, both Delta MLAs, mayor and council, and the

Tsawwassen First Nation.

To represent Delta effectively, Jim Lornie, former mayor of

Campbell River, has been working as a mediator-facilitator to bring the sides

together to create a workable formula for successful resolutions to Delta

concerns. I'm pleased to report that baby steps have been taken in this

direction, and baby steps inevitably lead to full-grown adult steps. A

multilevel government presentation to Delta council was held in January, and a

town hall meeting in North Delta is in the planning stages. We will follow up at

one of Delta council's Monday workshops when schedules permit.

With the enormous challenges facing the doorway community of Delta

South, this is a very positive achievement to help us plan for the future and to

develop a big picture approach to problem-solving. We must not be afraid to look

for solutions beyond borders, beyond party lines. The strength of our province

has always been the strength of its people as leaders, builders, innovators,

risk-takers and pioneers of opportunity.

As I mentioned earlier, there is an opportunity to work at

increasing our local supply of agricultural land. Like most solutions, there is

no quick fix. We need to partner with the DFO, the David Suzuki Foundation, the

land trust and the Delta Farmland and Wildlife Trust, to name just a few.

Our migratory birds, which are part of the Pacific joint flyway,

are smart cookies. They recognize the farmers' fields as first-class

restaurants, and now much prefer them over the ever-increasing local marshlands.

Sea Island, Lulu Island and Westham Island are all man-made. Our pioneers built

dikes to create the farmland that exists today. Why don't we take another look

at that original plan? Can we all work together to grow and enhance our bird and

fish habitat and at the same time build up our agricultural land, as well as

planning for global warming and rising sea levels?

To borrow a phrase from a constituent, there has to be a better

way. Investment in our infrastructure development is critical. Careful and

thoughtful planning, combined with cutting-edge technology, leads to a much

cleaner environment. This province is in the forefront; we are leaders. We do

what we say we're going to do. We have labour peace, the lowest unemployment and

the best employment for women and youth, ever.

There is nothing to gain in this world by being negative,

destructive or pessimistic. We need to be optimistic, positive builders who have

confidence in our province and its people. The golden decade of opportunity

indeed lies ahead, because we do have a better way as laid out in the most

progressive throne speech of February 13, '07, and the budget speech of February

20, '07. We can find the resolve to ask more of ourselves than we demand of

others, to lead Canada in partnership with first nations, to tackle challenges

of global warming and unplanned urban sprawl, to increase affordable housing, to

reduce homelessness and to help those who cannot help themselves.

We can improve quality, choice and accountability in our two most

important public services — education and health care — to open up Canada's

Pacific gateway and strengthen our economic competitiveness. These are the

elements of the Pacific leadership agenda. British Columbia is taking the lead

in Canada. We designed a foundation in the throne speech to build a workable

plan for the province, a climate action team, a citizens' conservation council,

plus 33 achievable global warming initiatives. It's bold; it's courageous.

[1545]

Climate should not be a partisan issue. It's up to all of us. Work

together, and we will succeed. So later this spring your government will invite

all Pacific coast governors and their key cabinet members to British Columbia to

forge a new Pacific coast collaborative that extends from Alaska to California.

A new, unified B.C. green building code will be developed over the

next year with industry, professional and community representatives.

The cost of climate change is directly related to our consumption.

For our goals to be met, citizens must take primary responsibility and make

choices that reflect their values.

The challenges of housing, homelessness, addictions and mental

health require us to rethink the actions of a generation. New approaches are

needed. Your government believes municipal governments with populations greater

than 25,000 should identify and zone appropriate sites for supportive housing

and treatment facilities for persons with mental illness and addictions in

official community plans by 2008.

Urban sprawl puts huge pressures on our limited land base and

increases servicing costs for property tax payers for new roads, bridges and

rapid transit, for sewage and water services, and for increased energy and

transmissions. Working with the Union of B.C. Municipalities and the private

sector, the government will develop new incentives to encourage smaller lot

sizes and smaller, more efficient homes that use less land, less energy, less

water and are less expensive to own. Our communities should be places where

children are cared for and are safe.

I recently met with a student from the UBC Alma Mater Society, and

we discussed several current

[ Page 5602 ]

concerns and issues, which also included Campus 2020, which will help us

shape the vision of B.C.'s post-secondary system for years to come. We are

listening. We're acting on all levels of our education system.

Up to 80 StrongStart centres will open in underutilized school

spaces over the next year. The new ReadNow B.C. program will provide $27 million

in initial funding to help British Columbians improve their reading skills. More

choice and flexibility will be encouraged to better meet student needs. The

graduation portfolio standard will be simplified. The British Columbia School

Superintendents Association read a letter supporting what we had in our throne

speech and our budget.

Provincial schools will offer new choices in curricula, new course

content and new demonstration schools better tailored to unique student needs.

The government will unleash our Pacific promise as a budding powerhouse of

clean, renewable energy; profitable, sustainable forestry; world-leading

technology; high-quality manufacturing; value-added agricultural products;

award-winning wines; world-class mineral deposits; and superb tourism

destinations.

We've signed TILMA — the trade, investment and labour mobility

agreement — with Alberta to serve not just our two provinces but Canada as a

whole. It's high time we dealt with interprovincial barriers.

In the balanced budget of 2007 there are many important themes,

starting with housing, but I would like to touch on items that are hugely

helpful at the street level, especially in my community. There are 13 of them —

a baker's dozen, if you will.

First and foremost, a 10-percent reduction in provincial income

tax to help every taxpayer. Managing the cost of today's living, Budget 2007

cuts personal income taxes by 10 percent on the first $100,000 of income, and

that's on top of 25 percent in 2001 — because tax cuts really do work.

A refund of provincial sales tax will be available to a registered

charity or eligible hospital auxiliary on medical equipment purchased on or

after February 7. This is marvelous. It's something that our local hospital

auxiliary, under Elaine Canning, and the provincial hospital auxiliary

association have been lobbying for, for several years.

[1550]

An excellent presentation was made to the provincial Finance

Committee, and everyone listened and delivered. Why are the members of the

opposition telling every hospital auxiliary that they should continue paying PST

on medical equipment purchased, by not voting on this budget?

The homeowner's grant — increasing the threshold due to rising

value of houses, etc. This means a great deal to each and every homeowner

provincewide. Why is the NDP hitting homeowners of all ages in their wallet by

not voting for this budget?

Also, the extension of eligibility to low-income seniors who are

hard-pressed to pay their taxes and thereby remain in their homes, which they

bought years and years ago. Why is the NDP attacking our seniors and their homes

by consistently criticizing this budget? The Land Tax Deferment Act — the age

has been lowered to 55 from 60. This program is a low-interest program that

enables qualifying B.C. homeowners to defer the annual property taxes on their

houses.

The opposition is obviously against the property transfer tax. The

threshold has been raised for first-time homebuyers and will apply throughout

the province. This could save people up to $5,500. The opposition is obviously

against first-time homebuyers. Why else would they be criticizing this budget?

Registration and collection threshold. This measure removes the

responsibility for collecting and remitting tax from approximately 20,000 small,

home-based craftpersons and not-for-profit organizations that only make

infrequent sales. This makes eminent sense. How can the NDP be against

home-based craft people?

Roadside tire service. Currently tire-changing service is the only

roadside service subject to tax. Not only does this eliminate business

complexity, but it helps those of all ages who are not particularly adept at

changing tires. This helps both people and businesses — something that the NDP

seems unable to comprehend.

Farming breaks. Motor fuel tax. All biodiesel fuel to be eligible

for alternative motor fuel status. Use of propane motor fuel for farming

processes is exempt — i.e., forklifts. Grain milling and other agricultural

feeds and seeds are exempt when used solely for an agricultural purpose. How can

the opposition be against the farming community when we still have to eat to

live?

Tax remittance. The due date for remitting tax returns is extended

from the 15th to the 23rd day of the month. This really helps small business.

Tax return reporting frequency — another great time and cash-flow helper. The

threshold for reporting less frequently than monthly is increased, and

businesses with an annual tax remittance of $12,000 or less may qualify for

quarterly, semi-annual or even annual reporting frequencies. This is great news

for small business.

Audit assessment limitation periods are reduced from four to six

years. All businesses will benefit from this initiative, which reduces the

impact of inadvertent error and the amount of potential tax liabilities. The

record retention period is reduced to five from seven, reducing the

recordkeeping burden for over 100,000 businesses. Believe me, is this ever good

news. These are just four of the much-welcomed breaks for small businesses.

Small businesses support this province. How could the NDP possibly be against

these measures?

[1555]

Whether it be agriculture, first nations, the environment, our

children and families, health care, education, natural resources or the

Olympics, this is British Columbia's time to lead. We will act with speed and

purpose, because we're confident in our endeavour.

Hon. G. Hogg: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

[ Page 5603 ]

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Hogg: With emotion and rhetoric at such a high as a

result of the scintillating comments of my colleague from Delta South, I would

like to propose an introduction.

Last evening as my colleagues Jennifer Cownden and Raechelle

Louise Williams took Valerie Richmond out for her birthday party, we had the

privilege of meeting….

Interjection.

Hon. G. Hogg: Which one it was? I've been sworn to secrecy.

We had the privilege of meeting a couple who were visiting from

Vineland, Ontario, Beverley Dueck and Victor Teeson. They are out here enjoying

our wonderful province, visiting grandchildren, and they were a delight to meet.

They're now in the House, and I wish the House to please provide them with

greetings.

It should be commented that they're celebrating, I think, their

37th week of marriage. Is that correct? Their 37th week of marriage.

Debate Continued

B. Simpson: It comes as quite a shock to me that I hate so

many categories of British Columbians. I wasn't aware of that. And to my mother

and father who are probably watching: I really don't hate seniors. It's okay.

It's just the rhetoric of this House.

Interjection.

B. Simpson: Or kittens or rabbits.

The member for North Vancouver–Lonsdale, in amongst all of the

impassioned rhetoric, does make one cogent statement. That is, she said that

climate change causes us to have to rethink the actions of a generation. I would

suggest that it's actions of generations.

The real challenge, I believe, of climate change is to do that

rethinking. Climate change should make us fundamentally and fully aware that how

we engage with this planet that we call home isn't working. It's starting to

catch up to us. We're seeing it all around us. I live in the community of

Quesnel, in the heart of the mountain pine beetle, and I'll speak of that

shortly.

We live right in the heart of one of the outcomes of this shift in

the global climate. It's not a game. It requires us to fundamentally rethink not

only how we live but more importantly, to this House, to rethink how we govern.

That's what I would like to spend a few moments looking at. What does climate

change say to us about the way that we live, the way that we act and, in

particular, about the way we are governed and that we need to be governed?

The throne speech makes a very important statement that the facts

are there, the science is in, and that we have no excuse for further

procrastination. Yet, unfortunately, as has been pointed out by many of my

colleagues, there's a disconnect between a throne speech with lots of rhetoric

around climate change and a budget speech that speaks of housing and doesn't

have a budget for what's in the throne speech.

That's unfortunate, because I think a lot of British Columbians

were hopeful that the government had actually woken up to climate change and

were hopeful that they would see something in the budget that would address what

is becoming an evident and immediate concern for many British Columbians. It's

not there.

So the question that I have is: how do we get from rhetoric to

substance? Many of our people on this side have spoken to the issue of rhetoric.

I want to speak to the issue of substance.

Back to the member for North Vancouver–Lonsdale. One of the things

we have to keep in mind is that the kind of thinking that created the problem of

climate change, of mountain pine beetle, of the other impacts of this global

phenomenon…. You can't solve that problem with the thinking that got you there.

[1600]

I want to look at the budget and the government's plans around six

reference points that I believe are fundamental for us to do the kind of

changing in our thinking that we need to do. The first is around the reference

point of sustainability. What is sustainability in the world of climate change?

Secondly, around the reference of our economy. What does climate

change say about our economy, and what do we need to do to restructure our

economy?