British Columbia Hansard — Monday, May 12, 2008 (38th Parliament, 4th Session) (H0512pm-02) (H0512pm 02)

H0512pm-02

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, May 12, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Volume 33, Number 2 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR His Honour the Honourable Steven L. Point, OBC FOURTH SESSION, 38TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon.

Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ........................................................................................................ Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ................................................................................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon.

Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon.

Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General and Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations............... Hon. John van Dongen Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Regulatory Reform............................................ Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of State for ActNow B.C. ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................Sindi Hawkins Deputy Speaker ...........................................................................................................................................................................

Katherine Whittred Assistant Deputy Speaker.....................................................................................................................................................................Sue Hammell Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole................................................................................................................................................. Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .........................................................................................................................E.

George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant.........................................................................................................................................................................................Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .......................................................................................................................................................Ian D. Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees ....................................................................................................................................... Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk ..........................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ...................................................................................................................................................................Jo-Anne Kern Legislative Librarian ..................................................................................................................................................................................Jane Taylor Legislative Comptroller...............................................................................................................................................................................Dan Arbic

Party Standings: Liberal 46; New Democratic 33 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) .................................................................... Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP)............................................................................. Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP).................................................................. Surrey-Newton Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)..........................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Hon.

Pat (L) .............................................................Prince George North Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................ East Kootenay Black, Iain (L) ............................................................ Port Moody–Westwood Bloy, Harry (L)................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).....................................Prince George–Mount Robson Brar, Jagrup (NDP).....................................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Campbell, Hon.

Gordon (L) .........................................Vancouver–Point Grey Cantelon, Ron (L)..............................................................Nanaimo-Parksville Chong, Hon. Ida (L) .................................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Christensen, Hon. Tom (L) ................................................. Okanagan-Vernon Chudnovsky, David (NDP) ......................................... Vancouver-Kensington Coell, Hon.

Murray (L) .....................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...........................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .......................................... West Kootenay–Boundary Coons, Gary (NDP) ....................................................................... North Coast Cubberley, David (NDP)............................................................Saanich South de Jong, Hon.

Michael (L) ...................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Dix, Adrian (NDP) .........................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Evans, Corky (NDP).................................................................Nelson-Creston Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ...............................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Fleming, Rob (NDP) ..............................................................Victoria-Hillside Fraser, Scott (NDP) ..............................................................Alberni-Qualicum Gentner, Guy (NDP).......................................................................Delta North Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................ Comox Valley Hammell, Sue (NDP) ................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) ..................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Hawes, Randy (L).......................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Sindi (L) ............................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................ Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon.

Gordon (L).....................................................Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP)......................................................Malahat–Juan de Fuca Horning, Al (L)........................................................... Kelowna–Lake Country Ilich, Hon. Olga (L)...............................................................Richmond Centre James, Carole (NDP).......................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Jarvis, Daniel (L)..................................................

North Vancouver–Seymour Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................... Esquimalt-Metchosin Krog, Leonard (NDP)......................................................................... Nanaimo Krueger, Hon. Kevin (L) .....................................Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lali, Harry (NDP)........................................................................

Yale-Lillooet Lee, Richard T. (L)....................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L).............................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L)........................................................................ Chilliwack-Sumas Macdonald, Norm (NDP).................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................

Bulkley Valley–Stikine Mayencourt, Lorne (L).......................................................Vancouver-Burrard McIntyre, Joan (L).................................................West Vancouver–Garibaldi Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) .................................................. Peace River North Nuraney, John (L).............................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Oppal, Hon. Wally, QC (L).......................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...........................................................

Chilliwack-Kent Polak, Mary (L) ....................................................................................Langley Puchmayr, Chuck (NDP)...................................................... New Westminster Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ............................................................. Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................ Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L).............................................................

Kamloops Robertson, Gregor (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Roddick, Valerie (L).......................................................................Delta South Routley, Doug (NDP)..................................................... Cowichan-Ladysmith Rustad, John (L) ........................................................

Prince George–Omineca Sather, Michael (NDP).........................................Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (NDP)..................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ....................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sultan, Ralph (L) ....................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Taylor, Hon.

Carole (L).....................................................Vancouver-Langara Thorne, Diane (NDP) .................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L).......................................................Okanagan-Westside Trevena, Claire (NDP) ..................................................................North Island van Dongen, Hon. John (L)............................................ Abbotsford-Clayburn Whittred, Katherine (L)........................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wyse, Charlie (NDP) .................................................................Cariboo South Yap, John (L)...................................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman .......................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Bulkley Valley–Stikine ...........................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North ...........................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Willingdon................................................................... John Nuraney Burquitlam.......................................................................................Harry Bloy Cariboo North..............................................................................

Bob Simpson Cariboo South..............................................................................Charlie Wyse Chilliwack-Kent ..................................................................Hon. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas............................................................................... John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley........................................................................ Hon.

Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville..............................................................Diane Thorne Cowichan-Ladysmith ................................................................. Doug Routley Delta North ...................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ............................................................................. Valerie Roddick East Kootenay................................................................................

Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin.........................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops.....................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ............................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country.................................................................. Al Horning Kelowna-Mission ......................................................................

Sindi Hawkins Langley ...........................................................................................Mary Polak Malahat–Juan de Fuca .................................................................. John Horgan Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................ Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ..................................................... Michael Sather Nanaimo......................................................................................

Leonard Krog Nanaimo-Parksville .....................................................................Ron Cantelon Nelson-Creston .............................................................................Corky Evans New Westminster .................................................................. Chuck Puchmayr North Coast....................................................................................

Gary Coons North Island ...............................................................................Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour..........................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head ........................................................... Hon. Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon......................................................... Hon. Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside..............................................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Peace River North.......................................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South..................................................................... Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley .................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain ............................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Westwood.................................................................... Iain Black Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...............................................

Nicholas Simons Prince George North.................................................................... Hon. Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson ............................................Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................ John Rustad Richmond Centre......................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Richmond East........................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston...........................................................................John Yap Saanich North and the Islands ............................................ Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South ........................................................................ David Cubberley Shuswap............................................................................Hon. George Abbott Skeena.......................................................................................... Robin Austin Surrey-Cloverdale............................................................... Hon.

Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers ................................................................Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton............................................................................... Harry Bains Surrey–Panorama Ridge.................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey-Tynehead ....................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley...........................................................................Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ............................................................Hon.

Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard..............................................................Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................Gregor Robertson Vancouver-Fraserview .................................................Hon.

Wally Oppal, QC Vancouver-Hastings .................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington.......................................................David Chudnovsky Vancouver-Kingsway ......................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara ........................................................... Hon. Carole Taylor Vancouver–Mount Pleasant........................................ Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................Hon.

Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena.........................................................Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill...................................................................

Carole James Victoria-Hillside ...........................................................................Rob Fleming West Kootenay–Boundary........................................................Katrine Conroy West Vancouver–Capilano...........................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ........................................................Joan McIntyre Yale-Lillooet..................................................................................... Harry Lali

CONTENTS Monday, May 12, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ............................................ 12261 Statements..................................................................................................................... .......................................................... 12261 Natural disasters in Asia Hon. G.

Campbell Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ............................................ 12261 Introduction and First Reading of Bills........................................................................................ ....................................... 12262 First Nations Heritage Protection and Conservation Act, 2008 (Bill M207) M. Karagianis Right to Know Act, 2008 (Bill M208) Toxics Reduction Act, 2008 (Bill M209) G.

Robertson Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ........... 12263 Necklace project in Campbell River C. Trevena Mining industry in B.C. B. Lekstrom 2009 World Under-17 Hockey Challenge S. Fraser Dangerous offenders R. Hawes Capital City Volunteers R. Fleming Richmond Youth Concert Band J.

Yap Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ....................................................... 12265 Government action on forest industry B. Simpson Hon. C. Hansen N. Macdonald Hon. R. Coleman D. Routley Carbon offset projects M. Sather Hon. B. Penner Disclosure of documents in B.C. Rail court case L. Krog Hon. W. Oppal B. Ralston Closing of psychiatric ward in Port Alberni hospital S. Fraser Hon. G. Abbott

Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ................................................. 12270 Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Emissions Standards) Statutes Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 31) Hon. B. Penner S. Simpson J. Horgan B. Simpson C. Trevena Hon. B. Penner Motor Vehicle (Banning Smoking When Children Present) Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 36) Hon. J. van Dongen Hon. G. Abbott L. Krog M. Farnworth A. Dix C. Evans Hon. J. van Dongen Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 27) Hon. I. Chong C. Wyse S.

Simpson Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................. 12302 Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development Hon. T. Christensen N. Simons R. Chouhan

12261 MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 The House met at 13:34 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Introductions by Members Hon. S. Hagen: To all members of the House, I am very pleased to introduce four young artists who are spending a day in the capital to celebrate their winning posters in the Discover Your Community: History in Art Poster Contest established by Mr. Speaker. Their winning artwork is on display in the reception hall for May and June. They are Tessa Warhurst from George M. Murray Elementary School in Lillooet, Lisa Xie from Chief Maquinna Elementary School in Vancouver, Derrick Van V i e g e n f r o m E . J .

D u n n M i d d l e S c h o o l i n P o r t A l b e r n i and Eric Kim from Prince of Wales Secondary School in Vancouver. Would the House please join me and the Speaker in making them welcome. [1335] S. Fraser: Following the same line, I had the honour and pleasure of having lunch with an incredibly talented young man, Derrick Van Viegen, a grade 8 student at E.J. Dunn Middle School. He's an artist extraordinaire and one of the winners of the Speaker's 150 poster contest. He's accompanied today in th e gallery and at lunch by his parents Rick and Natalie and his sister Rachel.

Would the House please join me in making them all feel very, very welcome. Hon. L. Reid: Today I have 96 students visiting from A.R. MacNeill Secondary School in Richmond. I had the pleasure of saying hello before the House sat this after- noon. I'd ask the House to please make them welcome. H. Lali: I, too, would like to join the member for Alberni-Qualicum and the mi nister who spoke earlier. Tessa Warhurst is actually a student from my constitu- ency who lives in Lillooet, as was mentioned by the minister. She's a grade 2 eigh t-year-old, and she is one of the four winners.

I think you mentioned that she was the overall first prize wi nner of this contest that the Speaker held. She's here with her mother Nancy Humber and siblings Piper, Meg and Keenan Warhurst. Would the House please give a warm Victoria welcome to my constituents. Statements NATURAL DISASTERS IN ASIA Hon. G. Campbell: Today I rise on behalf of British Columbians to express ou r deepest condolences to those impacted by the two recent natural disasters which have affected literally thousands and thousands of people. Reports out of China today suggest that a 7.8 magnitude earthquake struck China's Sichuan prov- ince.

It's left as many as 9,000 people or more dead and missing, with many, many more injured. The cyclone that hit the southern delta region of Myanmar, formerly called Bu rma, on May 2 has also left thousands and thousand s of people without their homes, in want of support. Really, I think we have to recognize that these things always come out of the blue, and they have an enormous impact on the communities that they hit. I know all British Columbians would want our emergency personnel and prof essional personnel to be available.

They will be available, subject to the call of the government of Canada, to make sure that we are actually improving the situation. We think we have people that we can offer to that. I know that this Legislature would want to send our concern, our condolences and our support and prayers to the governments of both countries and to the people who have been directly impacted and who will be indirectly impacted by these natural disasters. Hon. Speaker. I'd ask t h a t y o u d o t h a t o n b e h a l f o f t h e L e g i s l a t u r e , a s l o n g a s everyone agrees that that's what we should be doing.

Introductions by Members S. Simpson: H o n . S p e a k e r , I w a n t t o j o i n y o u r s e l f and the minister and my other colleagues on this side in also congratulating Lisa Xie. Lisa is the winner of one of the art competitions from Chief Maquinna School in my constituency. I would note that not only was Lisa a winner, but in her class they also took two of the three runner-up spots. So that class produced three of the four winners in their age category. Lisa is joined here by her parents and her brother Bolong, Max Xie and Gary Xie. Please make Lisa and her family welcome. Hon. R.

Neufeld: Today visiting the precinct is a young mother and her child. I've always said that I adopted this young lady's children because I haven't had any grandchildren of my own yet. I introduced her first child a number of years ago, but she brought into the world a little boy born April 21, at 7 pounds 15 ounces, named Mowat Jardine Sweet. Colleen and Randal Sweet are northerners, and Colleen worked as my MA for a number of years. Also, I'm fortunate enough to mention that in the very near future, I will become a granddad. I won't have to adopt anybody else's.

I will actually have a grandchild to love and care for sometime in June. Montana and I are both looking forward to that. [1340] B. Simpson: In 1981 when I was attending the University of Victoria, I met a beautiful young woman there who became my wife in 1985. She is still a beauti- ful young woman. I don't know what happened to me in the interim. My wife Trish is here with my two wonderful chil- dren, Jill and Jon. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

12262 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 Hon. M. Coell: I have some introductions to make: LCdr. Lucie Tremblay, who is the provost marshal of Pacific region and commanding officer of the military police at CFB Esquimalt, Sergeant Kwaitkowski, MCpl. Jodrey, MCpl. Donohue, Corporal Edwards and Corporal Pettinger. All are veterans of the war in Afghanistan and have been given the General Campaign Star for taking

part in operations in the presen ce of an armed enemy while fighting the Taliban in that country. Some have taken

part in NATO operations in the Balkans and wear the medals for those missions. The MPs even initiated a boy scout unit in Kosovo. Others have been given the special service medal for their service in humanitarian operations in Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Central America, assisting those areas in deal ing with natural disasters that have befallen them. They have performed regular police duties and have assisted in the training of civilian police in Afghanistan. All are dedicated, brave members of the Canadian Forces and deserve our gratitude for their service.

It is because of these people and others like them, who are willing to put themselves in harm's way, that we live in a peaceful, free and wonderful country. Would the House please make them welcome. N. Simons: It gives me pleasure to welcome a num- ber of parents in the House today, all here representing themselves and other families who have children with autism. I'd like to make welcome in particular Jodi Tucker and Blair Armstrong, w h o h a v e c o m e t o s p e a k with the minister about the importance of ensuring that there's adequate and fair access to autism therapies.

Would the House please make them welcome. R. Hawes: Included among those families are Steve and Sherry Peters from my riding. Would the House please make them welcome. G. Gentner: It's a pleasure to welcome to the House today the grade 10 social studies students from Seaquam Secondary, 112 students from the largest secondary school in North Delta. It is a school that participates through my office with the work experience program. I certainly would suggest to all members of the House that this is a great program that's offered to volun- teers to work in your offices.

Could the House please make them accordingly welcome. D. Hayer: I have two special guests today. One is Laurie Carlson, CEO of Mainland Sand and Gravel Ltd., and the other one is Ted Carlson, president of Mainland Sand and Gravel Ltd. Would the House please make them very welcome. S. Hammell: In the gallery there are two visitors from the constituency of Surrey–Green Timbers. They are here enjoying the ambien ce of our beautiful capital city and are in the gallery to watch what we fondly call question period. Would the House please welcome Vanji Ocropidici and Dr. Nanang Gilanto.

Introduction and First Reading of Bills FIRST NATIONS HERITAGE PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION ACT, 2008 M. Karagianis presented a bill intituled First Na- tions Heritage Protection and Conservation Act, 2008. M. Karagianis: I move that a bill intituled First Nations Heritage Protection and Conservation Act, 2008, be introduced for a first time. Motion approved. M. Karagianis: I am honoured to introduce the First Nations Heritage Protection and Conservation Act. This bill will better protect first nations heritage objects and sacred sites.

The bill amends the Heritage Conservation Act to includ e a process by which first nations can trigger protection orders when heritage sites, objects and remains are discovered. [1345] I believe that this bill amends the Heritage Act to pro- vide a better set of guidelines and tools that first nations, local government and the province need in order to im- plement protection, stewardship and conservation of first nations heritage and culturally significant areas, their arti- facts and their sacred history and, as well, to provide for the creation of a program to accomplish that goal.

I ask that all members please review the bill and support this. I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill M207, First Nations Heritage Protection and Conservation Act, 2008, intr oduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. RIGHT TO KNOW ACT, 2008 G. Robertson presented a bill intituled Right to Know Act, 2008. G. Robertson: I move introduction of the Right to Know Act, 2008, for first reading. Motion approved. G.

Robertson: I rise to introduce companion bills that will create the strongest toxics regulations in North America. B.C. has lagged far behind other jurisdictions in protecting people from toxic pollutants, and it's time we became leaders on this crucial issue for health and environment. People have the right to know what's in their food and the products that they buy. Communi- ties have a right to know what toxic substances are in their vicinity. These are the co re principles of the Right to Know Act.

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12263 This bill provides that suppliers and producers must warn consumers if their products expose them to recognized toxic substances or to genetically engi- neered food. This includes using hazard labels that clearly identify — with clear signals — carcinogens, reproductive and developmental toxins, hormone dis- ruptors and other known toxins.

This bill also supports community right to know by establishing a searchable el ectronic registry of toxic substances and genetically engineered foods in B.C. with locations, companies involved and information on dangers arising from exposure. This year a Canadian Cancer Society poll of 3,200 British Columbians showed that 97 percent support legislation that requires labelling of all products that contain carcinogens. As the Premier has said, this is a non-partisan issue. It is clearly one that members of this House can work together urgently to address.

I m o v e t h a t t h i s b i l l b e p l a c e d o n t h e o r d e r s o f the day for second reading at the next sitting after today. Bill M208, Right to Know Act, 2008, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. TOXICS REDUCTION ACT, 2008 G. Robertson presented a bill intituled Toxics Reduc- tion Act, 2008. G. Robertson: I move introduction of the Toxics Reduction Act, 2008, for first reading. Motion approved. G. Robertson: Government has a responsibility to protect people from toxins.

This bill bans toxins that are currently prohibited for use and sale in other OECD nations, Canadian provinces and U.S. states. It bans pes- ticides that are harmful to human health for residential or cosmetic use, on public lands and around children at schools, day cares and playing fields. This bill creates a comprehensive toxic and hazardous substance list and sets a goal for B.C. to achieve a 50 percent reduction of toxins generated by industry by 2015. It also creates a biomonitoring program, testing British Columbians to inform government decisions on toxic threats.

We need smart regulation of toxins to reduce cancer and other diseases directly linked to toxins, especially among ou r children. Strong regula- tion will save lives and health care dollars. B.C. will spend over a billion dollars this year dealing with thousands of deaths and new cancer cases that are caused by toxins each year. Finally, we need to regulate toxins to protect our environment, which is being saturated with toxic pollution at unprecedented levels. I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

Bill M209, Toxics Reduction Act, 2008, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) NECKLACE PROJECT IN CAMPBELL RIVER C. Trevena: Some members have been asking me about the necklace I'm wearing. I assure you it is not a prop; it is a necklace. It's jewellery, but it's also a quiet statement. It's red, it's tile-shaped, and it's got a picture of a T-shirt on it. Luckily, it's not unique. It's part of a project known as the necklace project, which is a fundraiser to support community activities in Campbell River aimed at the prevention and awareness of violence and abuse against women.

It helps ensure that events such as the December 6 memorial or the Take Back the Night march and ot her such events can take place to raise awareness of violence against women, and understanding and education about the issue. [1350] The necklace comes about as a result of a very mov- ing anti-violence demonstration — the clothesline project, which I've told the House about in the past — where women are invited to paint a T-shirt to depict their own or others' experience of violence. Their messages are haunting, they're brave, and they're bright.

The T-shirts hang on lines in a very dramatic way, and it's a very emo- tional display which brings an awareness of the issues and honours those women who have been abused. Those T-shirts are reflected in these necklaces. The idea came about because the organizations deal- ing with violence against women keep being told that they need to be sustainable. It's not an easy task when dealing with something like violence against women. H o w d o y o u f u n d r a i s e ? D o y o u d o b a k e s a l e s o r p l a n t sales?

Well, a local artisan in Campbell River came up with the idea of these necklaces, and they're now sold throughout the city and through the women's centre. The project is growing, with the women's symbol on some of the necklaces, and they're on key chains as well. At $15 apiece, it's going to be slow to become sus- tainable with these necklaces, but we can only all hope that such projects are not always going to be needed and that, as a society, we do finally see an end to vio- lence against women. MINING INDUSTRY IN B.C. B.

Lekstrom: I rise today to recognize Mining Week in British Columbia and to celebrate it with all of my col- leagues here in the Legislature and all British Columbians. I think we have a good-news story to tell in this province about what mining means to our economy, what it means to the people of this province. The value of B.C. mining is estimated to be about $5.6 billion for 2007, which is up from roughly $2.9 billion in 2001. I think it shows, by working together, the importance of

12264 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 our land base, what the resource can do for all of us in our day-to-day lives and what we can do by cooperat- ing with industry and government, communities and the people. It really is a return not for government and the general revenue, as many might have you think, but for the people who live here — the jobs that are created, the benefit to our families and our children, allowing us to grow and prosper. The issue really is one that we can work together on. The environment is always something that's on every- body's mind.

We want to make sure that the children of the future — our children, our grandchildren — can enjoy the quality of life that we've enjoyed through our lives growing up in this wonderful province and that we do that together. The mining industry, I think, has come a long way and does a marvellous job. I would encourage British Columbians, if they have never had the opportunity, to look at a reclaimed minesite. Do so. I think you'd be quite amazed at what you see out there with the na tural beauty that's main- tained after the mining resource has been extracted.

Mining actually impacts only 0.04 percent of the land base in British Columbia, yet the benefit is significant to each and every one of us. It is an industry that has meant a great deal to the northeast part of the province where I'm from, but also to every region of this province. All of us in our day-to-day lives are dependent on the mineral explorations that take place around this province. We are recognized as leaders in environmental sus- tainability when it comes to working with the mining industry around the world.

People look to British Colum- bia for the contributions that government and the mining i n d u s t r y m a k e t o g e t h e r o n b e h a l f o f t h e p e o p l e w e a l l represent in these chambers. I'm very proud to be part of a government and be part of a province that promotes this. 2009 WORLD UNDER-17 HOCKEY CHALLENGE S. Fraser: Port Alberni loves the game of hockey. Loyal fans turn out in larg e numbers to cheer on their beloved Bulldogs, and their love of the game has led to a very exciting development.

For the first time in history, mid–Vancouver Isla nd communities will be hosting the 2009 World Under-17 Hockey Challenge, thanks to a bold bid by Port Alberni. This is outstanding hockey. Players chosen to com- pete at this level are of exceptional calibre. The event is an exciting showcase of future stars. Germany, Russia, Finland, Slovakia and the United States will all be com- peting in the tournament, al ong with teams from five regions across Canada.

The Port Alberni proposal to put on the 2009 World Under-17 Hockey championship showcased their ability to put on this amazing event with the unique involvement cooperatively of five other Island communities all working together. Alberni Valley will share half of the games with Campbell River, Comox Valley, Oceanside, Nanaimo and Cowichan Valley. All communities will benefit greatly. For hockey fans: get ready for the time of your life. Tournament dates are December 29, 2008, to Janu- ary 4, 2009.

Several exhibition games will be held on December 28. [1355] Port Alberni is certainly no stranger to putting on world-class events. Anyone who's had an affinity for tall ships already knows that Port Alberni puts on the premier event in the world. Everyone in the know has already marked July 11 and 12 on their calendar this year for the Tall Ships Challenge in Port Alberni. Pull out your schedules once again and mark December 29 to January 4. That's the hockey challenge, and the stars of tomorrow from all over the world will give us Islanders and others the best hockey we have ever imagined.

Way to go, Port Alberni. Another class act, and a hard one to follow. DANGEROUS OFFENDERS R. Hawes: Blaine MacDougal is a convicted mur- derer and rapist with a history of prison escape. On his first day-parole he raped two women. A decade later on a second day-parole, he again raped a young woman. For this he was named a dangerous offender. "Dangerous offender" is not a designation easily obtained by the Crown, as it must be shown that there is a significantly high risk that the offender will commit future violent sexual acts.

It brings an indefinite sen- tence, and its purpose is to protect the public from the most dangerous violent sexual predators in the country. The offender is then inca rcerated until the risk is deemed to no longer exist. Clearly, something has gone dramatically wrong in the assessment process when a dangerous offender like Blaine MacDougal again finds himself in Ferndale minimum security institution from which he walked away a few weeks ago. Nine other dangerous offenders who were also housed in Ferndale have now been transferred to higher levels of security until they can be further assessed.

Thankfully, Stockwell Day, the federal Solicitor General, has ordered a full review of the assessment and cascading system to ensure inmates are properly placed and the public is not unduly endangered. But there's one remaining qu estion that has not been addressed. Blaine MacDougal was working towards yet another parole when it was discovered, while he was on an escorted pass, th at his personal computer held over 20,000 pornographic images. Why would a known sexual predator with dangerous offender status have a personal computer with access to Internet pornography while he's in jail?

I can't find one person who thinks this makes any sense whatsoever. While the corrections system is being reviewed, Minister Day should also review the use of personal computers in prisons, particularly the use by known sexual predators. CAPITAL CITY VOLUNTEERS R. Fleming: Last month on April 26, I had the privi- lege to attend the 20th anniversary celebration of an amazing organization in my community called Capital City Volunteers. It's an organization founded

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12265 to improve the social well-being of seniors in my community by linking them with dedicated volunteers. Seniors in Victoria may or may not have the benefit of family nearby, and none should feel isolated or lonely. Capital City Volunteers helps seniors get to appointments, run errands, get a haircut or just talk about life over a cup of coffee, and 20 years has seen a lot of changes at Capital City Volunteers. Originally, it was called the North Park Volunteer Services Association, and Luella Hillmer was the first coordinator.

She was instrumental in forming the society with the support of the First Baptist Church and residents of North Park Manor. The new society then foun d office space at North Park Manor, and operations began with a grant from the New Horizons program sponsored by the provincial government. Initially, most of the services were deliv- ered out of North Park Manor. But in 1989 Elsie Coles was hired as a volunteer coordinator, and she continued to advance the society's purpose until retiring in 1995. She helped broaden the mandate of the society.

The agency's mandate was changed to serve seniors and people with disabilities throughout the city of Vic- toria. This new funding and mandate led the board to hire Karina Wolf as execut ive director. Karina has led the organization since 1996. Although there have been many growing pains along the way in this organization in its 20 years to keep pace with our aging society's growing needs, Capital City Volunteers continues to situate itself as a grass-roots community program that provides a vital link for those who strive to maintain their independence.

I invite all members of this House to join me in thank- ing the literally hundreds of Capital City Volunteers, executive director Karina Wolf, community services coor- dinator Nansi Blenkiron and the many volunteers who do so much for the people they support in my community, and to recognize this extraordinary milestone anniversary. [1400] RICHMOND YOUTH CONCERT BAND J. Yap: "A painter paints pictures on canvas, but musi- cians paint their pictures on silence." How true a quote from legendary orchestral conductor Leopold Stokowski.

Recently I was fortunate enough to hear some truly inspirational music at the Richmond Youth Concert B a n d a n n u a l d i n n e r . T h o s e f o r t u n a t e e n o u g h t o b e i n attendance at the Richmond event were treated to an evening of good fellowship, good food and great music. The Richmond Youth Concert Band had its begin- nings in 1976 to perform for the twinning ceremonies between Richmond and its sister city Wakayama, Ja- pan. It had a humble beginning, initially formed as a small honour band with a six-week agenda.

But the success it experienced in its initial performances set the groundwork to grow from there into a full concert band with a jazz ensemble. Today the band is 45 members strong, with stu- dents ranging from grades 8 to 12. The musicians represent the best of the best, undergoing rigorous rehearsals and training. Th e audition process is com- petitive and brings out the best in the students. Each year the students are fortunate enough to attend a musical retreat as well as a focused music workshop.

The band has a bursary and scholarship program so that financial concerns do not deter young talents from joining the band. The band also gives back to the community in addi- tion to its musical gifts. Th is year's fundraiser brought in $3,000, half of which was donated to Richmond Family Place. The band relies on the efforts of many volunteers, especially the students and their parents. I want to recognize association president Hans Havas and directors Debbie Tablotney and Grace Tsang for their tireless efforts and leadership to the band.

I invite all members to join me in congratulating the Richmond Youth Concert Band on their 30th anniversary of promoting music and bu ilding community among the talented young musicians of Richmond. Oral Questions GOVERNMENT ACTION ON FOREST INDUSTRY B. Simpson: Last Friday Campbell River saw its last sawmill close forever, and 257 people lost their family- supporting jobs. Today in Kamloops another mill is closing permanently and an other 200 jobs lost. These are permanent job losses. They're not temporary layoffs. These workers are losing their ability to pay their mort- gages and support their families.

Yet what do the B.C. Liberals offer these workers? Federal money to cover one- year tuition and to give them jobs as urban tree-planters. My question is to the Mini ster of Forests. Would the Minister of Forests please explain why the B.C. Liberals are refusing to put provincial money into a true stability program for forest workers and forest-dependent communities? Why is that happening? Hon. C.

Hansen: It is in recognition of the challenges that forest families around this province are facing that the Premier of this province , when we knew there was $129 million coming for resource communities in this province, made the commitment that it was going to be dedicated to ensure that forest-dependent families in British Columbia are going to get the direct benefit of those dollars. It is welcome dollars, the $129 million, and it is in addition to the $185 million that the province has com- mitted to the Northern Development Initiative Trust.

It is in addition to the $50 milli on that's been put into the Southern Interior Development Initiative Trust and the $50 million for the Island Coastal Economic Trust. We recognize that there are families in forest communities going through challenges. We're going to stand there with them, and we're going to support them. Mr. Speaker: I remind members to listen to the question and listen to the answer. Member has a supplemental.

12266 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B. Simpson: The minister's response begs the ques- tion: if the $129 million wasn't going to forest workers, where else would it go? General revenue — is that what the minister is suggesting? Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Minister. [1405] B. Simpson: So this money was supposed to be directed there. As far as I'm aware, there is no opportunity for forest workers to apply for supports from Northern Trust or any other fund that this minister has mentioned in his response. The ministry's own website points out that only 5,000 workers will be se rved by this fund.

Since January 1, 2007, 13,000 workers have been impacted. That doesn't include pre-2007. So my question to the minister is this. This money will be oversubscribed the minute it is available. Why won't the B.C. Liberal government and the Premier add their own funds to this, match the federal money and make this a real sustainability fund for forest workers and their families? Hon. C. Hansen: It's as a result of the…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Minister. Hon. C.

Hansen: It's as a result of the work of this government over the last number of years that we have seen the diversification of the B.C. economy. It's as a r e s u l t o f t h e w o r k o f t h i s g o v e r n m e n t o v e r t h e l a s t number of years that we have seen a net increase in jobs in British Columbia of over 430,000. We have a range of programs in place to assist forest workers, their families… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. C. Hansen: …and their communities.

We will continue to make sure that those families are supported by this government, whether they are in temporary layoff and waiting for mills to start up again as markets recover or whether we are seeing new industries that must be encouraged in these regions. Mr. Speaker: The member has a further supplemental. B. Simpson: It's a result of this government's forest policies that we have lost the diversification in the for- est sector over the last seven years. It's a result of this government's failure to intervene for forest-dependent communities and forest workers… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. B.

Simpson: …that we are now at 13,000 forest workers whose jobs are thre atened and a fund that may assist 5,000 of those workers. Again, my question is to this minister. If this minister isn't willing to answer it, if he needs the Premier's permission, then let's have the Premier answer it. Will the B.C. Liberals at least match the federal money and make this a fund that will truly help these workers out? Hon. C. Hansen: This member knows the challenge of the markets in the United States. He knows what is actually the cause of the downturn in the…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Members. Continue, Minister. Hon. C. Hansen: This member knows the challenges that the forest sector is facing in terms of markets in the U.S. today, but we as a go vernment are standing and supporting forest workers around this province. We are supporting communities; we 're supporting economic diversification. I challenge the member to actually go on line and read the backgrounder in the press release from last Friday. One of the programs announced last Friday by the Premier was tuition support for displaced forest workers.

That will benefit 5,000 workers alone, never mind the other programs that will be there to support those families. N. Macdonald: B.C. Liberals have pushed the forest industry to complete collapse. There are over 46 major wood-processing facilities that have been closed. There are over 20,000 forest workers that have lost their jobs under this government's watch — 13,000 with this minister alone this year. It's not only millworkers; it's not only loggers. It's also the province's high-tech sector, with Coe Newnes in Salmon Arm. They're going down, with 110 jobs lost and 220 more at risk.

Coe Newnes is a high-tech company. It is known continent-wide for its high-tech support for mills and for the machinery that it provides. The jobs are going to be devastating to Salmon Arm, but they are also a devastating loss of expertise for the province. So the question is: what specifically is the minister going to do for Salmon Arm, for those high-tech jobs in Salmon Arm? What is he going to do? [1410] Hon. C. Hansen: Let's actually just talk for a minute about some of the unemployment rates we saw in the 1990s compared to what we're seeing today. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members.

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12267 Hon. C. Hansen: If you actually look at the unem- ployment rates in the Thompson-Okanagan region, they've been hitting record lows. We recognize there are forest families in forest- dependent communities that are going through some big challenges today. We are supporting them. But in addition, we've created an economic environment in British Columbia today that is producing jobs and that is producing new opportunities for those families and new opportunities for those communities.

All I can say is that if the forest industry was going through the kind of challenges in 1996 that it's going through today, the entire economy of this province would be on its heels. But because we have such a strong economy, we can support those communities, and we can create the diversification they need. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. N. Macdonald: So this government won't put up the Forests Minister. We're asking forestry questions. They've given up on getting him answering questions, but if another minister is going to stand up, there has to be some improvement on the quality of answers.

What every single person in this province knows is that B.C. Liberal forestry policy has been an abject failure. We see it each and every day. Some 13,000 workers this year…. Now even cutting-edge companies like Coe Newnes, which was until Wednesday Salmon Arm's largest private employer…. Now 110 people are out of work, and 220 are at risk. These workers have been offered no severance. Like tens of thousands of people in this province, they are being affected by this government's poor policy.

These are people with mortgages to pay, but all the minister has to offer is some federal money to pay for scattered programs like tuition for some. So the overhyped pronounc ements by this Premier are worth nothing to them. This government came to power promising to increase jobs in forestry. Mr. Speaker: Can the member put the question, please. N. Macdonald: To the Minister of Forests: will he admit that B.C. Liberal forest policies have crushed B.C.'s most important industry? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. R.

Coleman: I think it's time for you to be honest with British Columbians over there on the opposition. Be honest with British Columbians. Tell them the truth about the No rth American markets. Tell them the truth about the dollar. Tell them the truth about the changes in housing starts in the United States. Why don't you tell the people the truth? Quit selling false hopes over there. The reality is that we're doing everything possible to work with our forest sector, and we'll continue to do so in the province of British Columbia. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat, Member. D. Routley: Mr.

Speaker, 13,000 jobs have been lost under the watch of that Forests Minister, and he doesn't have the gumption — or the government doesn't — to put him up to answer question s until he thinks he's on the last one. Well, he's not. Some 13,000 family-supporting jobs have been lost, and the real tragedy…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. D. Routley: No, the real crime is that thousands of those jobs were lost unnecessarily. Pulp mills with markets…. Pulp in 2002 was $500 a tonne. Today it's $840 a tonne. Sawmills with markets can't get logs.

It's because of his policies around logs and pulpwood. [1415] News for the minister: those workers don't want to be transitioned out of their jobs. They want their jobs, and he can give them to them. He has the power, with the stroke of a pen, to change those policies and get fibre to those mills. That's not a market matter. That's a policy matter brought on by that minister and that Premier. When will they step up and do something to reverse that, and bring wood to our mills? Hon. R.

Coleman: Once again, the member opposite refuses to be honest with the people of Vancouver Island and the people of British Columbia. Why don't you be honest? Why don't you go and have a conversation… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. R. Coleman: …with the pulp and paper sector in British Columbia? You quoted a year, hon. Member. If you go talk to them, do you know what they'll tell you? Whatever increase in th e pulp price they've gotten has been lost in the increase of the dollar. They'll tell you. I was actually in meetings with the pulp sector only a week ago, and that's exactly what they told me.

Quite frankly, why don't you people start to be honest with British Columbia? First of all, there's fibre available for pulp mills in the province of British Co- lumbia, and we get it to them when they need it. We've told everybody that wants to come and look at Harmac that we'll find the fibre if they want to have a look at that business. We'll continue to do that, in spite of the fact that they want to be disingenuous and not tell people the truth.

12268 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. D. Routley: Well, the minister said to quit selling false hopes. You know what, Minister? It's not a false hope to the pulp mill workers to deliver them fibre to a market that they can fill. It's not false hope to deliver cedar logs to cedar mills to fill markets they can fill — except that this minister created a monopoly so they can't get those logs. That is what's happened. This minister and this government fiddled away the best markets in North American history.

Just like bad chipmunks, they didn't put any chestnuts in the tree. Now the winter of markets is upon us, and the com- munities we represent are on their backs when they're being asked to fight back. This minister, this bad chip- munk that failed to put ches tnuts in the tree during the good times, now points to us. Deliver to the workers and the communities of British Columbia a promise today, Mr. Minister. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. D. Routley: Promise them that you will reverse your policies, deliver fibre to those mills and keep those jobs in British Columbia. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Coleman: I learned a long time ago that when nobody had a valid argument, they would resort to insults because they had nothing else to put on the table of any valid information. So $129 million, community development trust; $17.25 million going to tuition for workers; $85.5 million for transition for ol der workers; and $26.25 million for job opportunities, announced by the Premier on Friday. The fact of the matter is that we work with compa- nies. We find them the fibre. That isn't the issue here.

You better start being honest with people, because we're going to work with th e communities to find their future while you spend your time delivering negativity and putting your constituents down when you shouldn't be doing so. CARBON OFFSET PROJECTS M. Sather: Ecosystem Restoration Associates, a carbon offset company, cut down over 300 red alders along the North Alouette River in Maple Ridge, along with native shrubs. They're planting little seedlings, and they're going to sell this project as a carbon offset project.

It's really troubling that these kind of anti- environmental initiatives are happening, particularly when so many more companies are getting into the carbon offset business. My question to the Minister of the Environment is: what is this government going to do to provide oversight to carbon offset companies? [1420] Hon. B. Penner: I'm not familiar with the specific case that the member just referenced, but I will endeav- our to look into it. It's wort h noting that the opposition has been opposed to almost every single initiative we've brought forward to combat greenhouse gas emissions. We continue to wait….

Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Just stay seated, Minister. Continue, Minister. Hon. B. Penner: They've been opposed to every renewable energy project that's gone forward in British Columbia in the last seven years. They've voted against, in principle, a ca p-and-trade system to limit industrial greenhouse gas em issions. They're opposed to a carbon tax, which academics and environmentalists support as a way of putting a price on carbon instead of using the atmosphere as a free garbage dump.

It's time for the opposition to say what they would do to combat greenhouse gas emissions rather than just spouting hot air during question period. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Minister. The member has a supplemental. M. Sather: Well, I don't know what the research and the minister are doing, but it was on TV on Global last Friday night. But anyway, research…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. M. Sather: Red alder is part of the natural…. Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat for a second. Members. Members. Continue, Member. M.

Sather: Red alder is a naturally occurring species that puts nitrogen into the soil and provides the soil for the conifers that will come later on. What this company did in cutting all that alder down…. They opened this area right along a floodplain to more erosion. As well, the trees that they've left there…. The community is re ally upset that these are going to get into the river and cause a logjam. In addition to that, they clea red a whole bunch of wildlife habitat in bird nesting season.

How can the people of British Columbia have any confidence in carbon offset projects like this if the gov- ernment has no oversight, isn't paying attention and maybe doesn't even care?

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12269 Hon. B. Penner: I understand the opposition gets their research through the media, and we've already seen that demonstrated before. I've already indicated we will be looking into the matter that the member raises here today. However, we continue to await any sign of leadership — any sign of leadership at all — from the opposition when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, reducing emissions or providing for our energy needs in British Columbia.

You know, the only thing they've put on the table so far this session in terms of their energy plans or their energy ideas is to continue to import power into British Columbia well into the future. They're opposed to self-s ufficiency. They're opposed to wind power projects. They're opposed to run-of-the- river projects that even ha ve partnerships with first nations. That opposition hasn't shown any leadership at all when it comes to the environment. DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS IN B.C. RAIL COURT CASE L.

Krog: On Friday the Prem ier's former deputy minister confirmed that he reviewed and discussed documents seized by the RCMP in the B.C. Rail corrup- tion case. Mr. Dobell also confirmed he did not sign an undertaking that would have given him the ability to see those documents. In other words, Mr. Dobell was not entitled to see or discuss those documents. These under- takings were sworn in order to protect the integrity of the RCMP investigation into the B.C. Rail corruption case while seized documents were vetted for privilege. Question to the Premier: can he explain why Mr.

Dobell received access to these confidential documents contrary to the undertaking sworn in court? Hon. W. Oppal: The member opposite is obviously referring to evidence that he 's heard in the trial that's before the Supreme Court. We have made it clear throughout that we will not comment on anything that's before the Supreme Court, because it's improper to do so. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. [1425] L. Krog: The documents shared and discussed with Mr. Dobell all deal with the second round of the bidding process, the round where the issue of the consolation prize arose.

That means those documents go to the heart of the B.C. Rail corruption trial. When Mr. Dobell re- viewed those documents, he was also told that the RCMP was going to interview Ministers Collins and Reid about the documents. The special prosecutor instructed that this information not be shared, yet we know it was. Does the Premier agree th at sharing this informa- tion with Mr. Dobell may have provided the means for Mr. Collins, Ms.

Reid and others to be informed about the nature of the RCMP's concerns prior to the inter- views, and does the Premier not agree that this is a serious breach in the integrity of the RCMP investiga- tion? Hon. W. Oppal: Well, I'm somewhat disappointed in the member opposite, who is a member of the bar. He obviously has.… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney. Hon. W. Oppal: He has obviously ignored the well- established principle of judicial independence. We will not ignore that principle on this side of the House. B.

Ralston: The Premier felt comfortable enough to discuss these issues last spring in estimates debate here in this very room. Mr. Dobell confirmed Friday that he was under no obligation of confidentiality with respect to these documents. He had not signed an undertaking to the court. During the peri od in question, there were at least four cabinet meetings involving many of the people who were to be interviewed by the RCMP. The Attorney General must see that the disclosure to Mr. Dobell tainted the in vestigation. This wasn't a leak from the RCMP. This wasn't a leak from the special prosecutor's office.

It occurred between the Ministry of Attorney General and the Premier's office. What is the Premier going to do about it? Hon. W. Oppal: These issues are all before the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett is hearing the case. She will make the appropriate findings, and we'll live by them. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. B. Ralston: The issue of the documents before the court was discussed here in estimates debate in spring 2007, so that excuse simply doesn't wash.

The Ministry of Attorney General informed the Deputy Minister to the Premier about key documents that the RCMP wished to use to question Ministers Collins and Reid. This was contrary to a protocol approved by the Su- preme Court restricting access to the documents to four people only. These actions of the Ministry of Attorney General may well have tainted the integrity of the RCMP inves- tigation. If the Attorney General won't act, will he at least agree that the matter be referred to the RCMP for their investigation? Hon. W. Oppal: If the process was tainted, we'll let the judge make that finding.

We don't have to make that finding here. CLOSING OF PSYCHIATRIC WARD IN PORT ALBERNI HOSPITAL S. Fraser: The Vancouver Island Health Authority last week shut down the psychiatric ward at the West Coast General Hospital in Port Alberni with only two days' notice. The ward is now closed despite opposi- tion from the community and from doctors. I know the

12270 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 minister will say that this is because one of the psychi- atric doctors was leaving the community, but it is well known in Port Alberni — and the minister should know this — that general practitioners play a very vital role in psychiatric care. Th ere is no reason why that can't continue in the designated ward. The ward is an integral part of the health care con- tinuum of Port Alberni and the entire west coast and Pacific Rim, and everyone in the community under- stands that it is a vital service. Everyone understands what a mistake it is to close the ward.

The closure is about hurting communities, not about helping patients. Will the minister commit to reopening the ward? Hon. G. Abbott: It is interesting that this member of the Legislature would submit his political judgment in place of the medical judgments of the professionals at the Vancouver Island Health Authority. The fact of the matter is that Port Alberni has lost one of its two psychiatrists. They are not able to maintain the pro- grams at the hospital as a consequence of that. [1430] As the member knows well, Vancouver Island Health Authority is recruiti ng extensively to replace this position.

But until it is replaced, they will not be able to provide those services. It is perhaps unfortunate that we do have, provincial ly and nationally, a short- age of psychiatrists. That is one of the consequences of the lack of investment in health care professionals in the 1990s by the NDP government. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. The member has a supplemental. S. Fraser: I mean, the answer doesn't befit a minister of the Crown. It's more like an answer from an uninter- ested spectator. For a moment I thought I was asking a question on forestry.

We've heard this before from the minister and from VIHA — that it's a worldwide shortage. The problem with doctor shortage in Port Alberni was solved by the former chief of staff and the local community, which worked together a couple of years ago. The response from VIHA and the minister was to fire the chief of staff, because it made them look bad. Another thing. There's nothing on the VIHA web- site. There are no ads for this position. There are no ads on the Health Match B.C. website. There's nothing. The minister is patently wrong here.

Simply put, this clo- sure is unnecessary and will only serve to put patients and staff at risk in this community. My question is to the Mi nister of Health, or to the spectator of health. There is no reason for the psychiatric ward to close. There is no reason to trans- port psychiatric patients for hours. There's been no discussion with the RCMP. Th ere's been no discussion whatsoever. This government is picking apart health care in the region. On Wednesday the minister gave the community two days' notice that that ward would be closed.

Will the minister today give the community two days' notice that he will ensure it's reopened? Hon. G. Abbott: One of the things I will not be doing is submitting the political judgment of the member for the medical judgment of the Vancouver Island Health Authority. That I will not be doing. I know the members opposite don't like to hear this, but when the 1990s started, there were 128 physicians being educated annually at the University of British Columbia. When the decade ended, in fact to 2001, there were… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. G.

Abbott: …128 physicians being graduated annually from the University of British Columbia. Last fall our government, after its investment, saw 256 students registering — 256 medical students at UBC, at the University of Victoria and at the University of Northern British Columbia. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading debate of Bill 31, Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Emissions Standards) Statutes Amendment Act, 2008; and in

Section A, Committee of Supply, for the information of mem- bers, estimates for the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Second Reading of Bills GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION (EMISSIONS STANDARDS) STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2008 Hon. B. Penner: I move that Bill 31 now be read a second time. I'll canvass in a bit more detail than I did in first reading some of the key elements of Bill 31. The first portion…. Interjections. Hon. B. Penner: Mr. Speaker, would you like me to pause for a moment while some members calm down? Mr. Speaker: Members, would you go about what- ever business you have outside the chamber.

Continue, Minister. [1435] Hon. B. Penner: The first portion of this bill con- sists of amendments to the Environmental Manage- ment Act. These amendments will add new provisions to address the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12271 from certain industry sectors, one of them being waste management facilities, which includes landfills, sewage treatment plants, waste inci nerators and recycling or composting facilities. New authority being added to the act will allow the government to require operators of specified waste management facilities to capture and manage green- house gases produced by wastes that they handle. This legislation will allow the government to regulate a wide range of sources and techniques to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions generated by the decomposition of waste. [K.

Whittred in the chair.] The intention is to focus on landfills first. As a sector, landfills are a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for about 8 percent of British Columbia's total greenhouse gas emissions. The main component of landfill gas is methane. Tonne for tonne, this gas has a greenhouse gas impact in the atmosphere that is 21 times greater than the effects of carbon diox- ide, which is the most common greenhouse gas.

Regulating for the capture of methane from landfills is, therefore, an effective way to make significant headway in reducing British Columbia's contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions. When compared to some other greenhouse gas reduction actions, capturing landfill gas is also a relatively efficient way to reduce emissions. The other industry sector being addressed by the addition of new authorities to the Environmental Management Act is power generation.

These amend- ments will put into law two key commitments in this government's energy plan concerning greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation facilities. The first of these commitments is to require that there be zero greenhouse gas emissions from any coal thermal electricity generation in British Columbia. This means that coal-based generating facilities will need to capture and store or sequester their greenhouse gas emissions. The legislation recognizes that some coal-based generation facilities may use more than one kind of fuel.

For those facilities, the requirement to capture and store or seques- ter applies only to the coal-related emissions. Since it may not always be feasible to separate the actual coal-related emission s from emissions produced from other fuels, the legislation provides that the requirement to capture and store emissions can be met by storing or sequestering greenhouse gas emissions from the same facility that are equivalent to the emissions produced by the burning of coal.

The overall aim is to ensure that coal-based generation facilities in this province will not add to the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This legislation also recognizes that technology is evolving and that ways to both capture and store or sequester emissions will improve and change over time. With this in mind, th e act provides authority to make regulations on acceptable methods and standards for the capture and storage of emissions.

The second energy plan commitment addressed by this legislation is the requirement that all new electric- ity generation will have "zero net" greenhouse gas emissions and that existing th ermal facilities will have zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2016. This means that greenhouse gases produced by these facilities must be offset.

Specified producers of electricity, which will be defined by regulations based on their use of fossil fuels other than coal, will be required to report on their emissions and balance any greenhouse gas emissions that they do not store or sequester by using offsets, much like the compliance framework proposed as part of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act. The net zero emissions requirement will apply not just to load-serving public utilities like B.C. Hydro but to all generation facilities connected to the grid, includ- ing independent power producers.

Together these two requirements — zero emissions for coal-based genera- tion and net zero for other electricity generation — will allow the province to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from our electricity generation sector. Along with this government's support for renew- able energy sources like run- of-river hydro projects, expansion to B.C. Hydro fac ilities, future wind power projects and wood waste, the new provisions in the Environmental Management Act will ensure that British Columbia will continue to have one of the lowest greenhouse gas emission electricity sectors in the world.

This bill also contains legislation developed by the Ministry of Forests and Range. The bioenergy strategy amendments to the Forest Act will provide new licens- ing provisions that will enable the better use of wood residue for mountain pine–beetle attack timber as a source of power, thereby encouraging the development of the bioenergy sector. This government is committed to taking action on climate change while also creating new economic opportunities for rural communities.

We also want British Columbia to be self-sufficient again in meeting our electricity needs, and we've set a target date of 2016 for accomplishing that. All these goals are discussed in the energy plan and the bioenergy strategy. The bio- energy strategy makes it clear that we can make better use of our abundant natural biomass resources such as wood waste and mountain pine beetle–kill timber. This bill delivers on this idea by encouraging the use of wood fibre as a potential source of bioenergy power. The provisions in this bill will improve access to fibre in several ways.

The amendments will give government the authority to issue a forest licence directly to successful applicants responding to calls for power from B.C. Hydro. This will streamline the issuing of licences and eliminate government's obligation to conduct a duplicate competitive award process. [1440] A new form of the licence-to-cut tenure is also be- ing created called the fibre supply licence to cut. It will provide access to timber that is desirable for bioenergy or other purposes, including piles of waste wood left at roadsides or landings.

The rights of existing licensees will be protected by ensuring rights to these piles are

12272 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 issued only if the primary licensee has no interest in the waste wood. Authorities concerning forest ry licence to cut are also being updated to do two things. First, the amendments will allow this form of licence to be used to enable the removal and processing of waste timber at roadsides and landings. Second, the changes will enable the existing forestry licence to cut for standing timber to be direct-awarded to successful applicants responding to B.C. Hydro's call for power.

Authorities in the forest legislation concerning timber scaling requirements are also being updated by this bill to facilitate the measurement of chips and other material to support th e bioenergy industry. This will facilitate more efficient and cost-effective opera- tions. These amendments will also create the means to enforce the chief forester's partition of the allowable annual cut for certain purposes, such as the harvest of beetle wood. Lastly, this bill contains minor housekeeping amend- ments to the Forest Act and the Forest and Range Practices Act.

To sum up, the amendments to the forest legisla- tion will further the work of this government in achieving its bioenergy strategy, creating new oppor- tunities for rural communiti es and ensuring sounds management of forest resources. Meanwhile, the amendments to the Environmental Management Act will provide new authority to address greenhouse gas emissions from waste management facilities and elec- tricity generation. I'll take my place and see if there are any comments from the opposition on second reading. S.

Simpson: I am pleased to have the opportunity to stand and speak to Bill 31, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Emissions Standards) Statutes Amendment Act, 2008. This particular piece of legislation deals with a couple of changes, some very specific changes — though there's not information to tell us what the results of that will be — related to forestry in the province and the creation of new tenures. This is of concern, certainl y, to the industry, to first nations and to others, and I'll look forward to having the opportunity a little bit later in this discussion to speak to that.

I would acknowledge that I am the des- ignated speaker on this bill. The bill also deals with changes that relate to coal-fired electricity and, in particular, to carbon capture-and-storage approaches or strategies related to that, strategies that we'll talk about a little bit as I proceed. We know that technology certainly is not developed today and presents some real challenges for us as we move forward around how that will work. It also talks, significantly, about other forms of electricity generation and zero emissions on electricity generation.

What the bill talks about generally, when y o u l o o k a t i t … . A s t h e m i n i s t e r r e f e r e n c e d i n h i s comments, it does go back and deal with the energy plan that was introduced last year. The disappointing thing ab out the bill is that it really doesn't take the discussion that was in the energy plan and advance it any further than what was put in that document at that time. So we've had a significant period of time pass, and this piece of legis- lation doesn't tell us a lot more about what will actually occur or not occur because of the plan.

The plan itself, the energy plan, referenced a number of items, and we were told at that time to wait for the legislation. We were told that when the legislation came, it would inform the plan, and it would tell us what was anticipated. It would give us some substance and detail in regard to how the government planned to move for- ward — in this case, around emission standards. [1445] Unfortunately, the legislation doesn't do that. What the legislation does is….

This piece of legislation is very similar to most of the bills that the Minister of Environment has introduced in regard to climate change issues in this session. It's an enabling bill. Now, what that means, for people who might be listening, is that it's a bill that creates a framework for taking certain actions — actions that are vague at best. It authorizes a regulatory regime. People who are interested in this debate and certainly concerned about the issue of climate change and greenhouse gas emis- sions should know that those regulations now are done by cabinet.

What that means is that there is no legisla- tive oversight. In most of these instances, as with other pieces of legislation that we'll talk about a little bit, the bill says very little about what the government actually hopes to achieve. It says little about the analysis that has been done, if any, to tell us where we're going. There are no background, supporting documents provided for this legislation. Instead, it says, "Trust me," again, for the minister and for cabinet to put in place any regulations that they deem a p p r o p r i a t e .

T h e r e i s n o n e e d t o h a v e a n y c o n s u l t a t i o n about those regulations. It's not a requirement. There's no need to have any discussions with members of this House about those regulations. It is not a requirement. There's no need to inform the public about what's being deliberated so that input can be got before decisions are taken. As we know, the level of secrecy that has been embraced by this Premier and by this minister and this cabinet around the whole climate change issue….

And the secrecy continues to be a matter that is mind- boggling for most people — that on this issue of such global importance the government would resist talking to British Columbians about their plans or engaging British Columbians in helping to evolve those plans. Instead, what we have is another piece of enabling legislation that suggests that there may be some changes made.

The minister would tell us that it's a piece of legislation that fu lfils the commitments of the energy plan, but to fulfil th e commitments of the en- ergy plan, in my view, requires the government to tell us much more than they're prepared to tell us in Bill 31. It would require the government to talk to us about how they actually get at some of these challenges that are identified in the bill.

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12273 How do we actually get at those zero emissions that they talk about for electricity? What is the coal capture and storage, the sequestration strategy? How is that going to get put in place? As we know, there's a great amount of work to be done on that issue before it gets commercialized in a way that industry can actually accomplish the sequestration that everybody talks about and that we certainly hope is successful. There is an open and very public debate about whether that will or won't work.

There are people who are clear advocates, and I would be hopeful that carbon capture and storage can be made to work. It's very important for us, certainly, as a province that has a pretty strong co almining industry and one that needs to be able to pr oceed. But we need to find ways to do that with additional technology that deals with the results of that industry in terms of those buyers of our coal who primarily use it to burn for electricity production.

We, of course, as British Columbia, should feel some obligation to be working to develop that carbon capture-and-storage technology to be able to sell it as a complement to coal as we move forward. Getting back to the reference that I was making in terms of what the bill does and doesn't do, the bill doesn't talk about…. It's interesting.

The bill talks about greenhouse gases in its introduction, its subject matter and its title. [1450] Yet I would challenge anybody — and the minister, maybe at some point when he gets to close comments — to get up and point out in this legislation where it actually talks about how greenhouse gas emissions get reduced by this bill, what th e approach is to that, how much they might get reduced by, what kinds of penalties might be put in place for those who don't follow the approaches here, how the technology for sequestration will get developed and what the projections and expec- tations are about reducing emissions from that.

The problem is that that information…. This bill, this legislation, doesn't touch those matters in any way, shape or form. It doesn't ta lk about any of the issues about how we get at greenhouse gas reductions, and that's a problem. It is the same problem, I think, as I've pointed out, that we see with pretty much all the legislation that's been brought by the Minister of Environment on this issue in this session. We will get to talk about it all, or certainly a good portion of it, before the government brings closure.

Every one of those bills fu nctions in much the same way as this — as an enabling piece of legislation. That's a problem. If you talk to people who are experts in this field — whether it be academics, people in the environmental community, people in the business community — they look at bills like Bill 31 or Bill 18, the cap-and-trade bill, and their response to us is : "It tells us nothing about what the government is actually going to do. It gives us no formal process to engage in these discussions.

It gives us no confidence that the government is going to develop plans that are sustainable for British Columbia and that will, first of all, actually lead to reductions in greenhouse gases; second, that will provide support for industry and for communities as they cope to deal with these reductions in emissions; and third, that actually engages us in a discussion of these solutions." Bill 31 does none of that. It doesn't offer that opportu- nity up in any way, shape or form for British Columbians, for the business community, for the environmental com- munity.

Nor did, for example, Bill 18, the cap-and-trade bill that we are in the process of discussing now. Just to speak a little bit about the kind of challenge we have here. On the issue of coal and coal sequestration, I spoke a moment ago about the challenge of actually getting at this technology and determining what this technology can and can't do. Well, there isn't a technology today. There certainly are some pilot projects. There are some investments going on in Saskatchewan and else- where.

The federal government has put some dollars in play to try to develop some capture-and-storage solutions, but it hasn't been done yet. So we don't know what this looks like. For people who might be listening, essentially the process largely for this with coal is what's called a gasification process where you separate out the gases, the CO 2, or the car- bon dioxide, and the hydrogen mostly, and then you find ways to sequester or store the CO 2 underground — which is the primary gas around greenhouse gases. It's a complicated piece of work to do that. There is work going on.

I know in the United States they have invested significantly in looking at sequestration or capture-and-storage strategies. There are investments going on in Saskatchewan. I would note that there is no investment in looking at that in British Columbia that we can see. Certainly, the government has talked about it in their energy plan. The minister has talked about it, but in terms of actually investing dollars in helping to see how that works, we haven't seen dollars invested to support that kind of research and technology. [1455] That has to raise a question, and it is a question about credibility.

The question about credibility is this: if, as a government, you put forward a plan as one of the cornerstone plans of a piece of legislation on how you're going to reduce emissions through a strategy or a technology that is in its formative stages, that has not been developed yet, that has not been commercialized yet and is not being put into place yet…. You put forward pieces of legislation that say, "This is what we're going to accomplish," using something that is unproven.

Then you refuse in your budget or anywhere in the legislation or anywhere else to talk about how you, in fact, will support the development of that technology. It is irresponsible to simply say that we're going to adopt a technology that everybody knows doesn't exist yet. There's been some hopeful work done. There cer- tainly have been other effo rts made around this, but the technology doesn't exist. That is the shame with this legislation. It is another piece of legislation, much like most of the rest of the legislation we've seen that comes with the

preamble "greenhouse gas reduction" in it from the Minister of Environment, that is not

12274 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 based on any work. It's legislation that's based on shal- low rhetoric. It's legislation that's based on trying to grab a headline. Maybe just to give you my sense of why this has happened in this session with Bill 31, with other bills. When the government brought the budget forward, there was a lot of hype around how this was going to be the green budget for this government, framed largely around the fuel tax. We did get a fuel tax in the budget, and I would note that that piece of legislation is a substantive piece of legislation.

It provides the details that the legislation offered up by the Minister of Envi- ronment — like Bill 31 — doesn't. I would say that the fuel tax does provide a signifi- cant amount of detail, and it's easy enough to read that and to be briefed on that by ministry officials and to understand where this go es. The shortcomings, the places where the government doesn't have answers in that bill and where the Minist er of Finance didn't have answers, are easily identifiable, and ministry staff would acknowledge that they don't have answers around those questions. But it is a substant ive bill.

It does talk about what penalties look like. It does talk about dollars and cents. It does talk about levels. It does talk about all of those things. Bill 31, like Bill 18, talks about none of those things as an enabling piece of legislation, and it embraces technol- ogy that isn't operationalized yet. So that's a big challenge. I guess the question…. We'll, hopefully, have some dis- cussion of this, should we get this bill to committee stage, and we'll have to see whether the government brings it for committee stage or not.

When we get this bill to commit- tee stage, we'll certainly be looking for an explanation of how the government and the minister plan to accomplish those things that are identified in the bill. G e t t i n g b a c k t o w h a t I w as talking about. This is part of the reason, I suspect, that this bill, along with a number of other bills that are a lot like it…. Pretty shallow. Not much in the way of substance.

Back-load everything into regulation so that the minister, or more correctly the Premier, can write those regulations in due course somewhere down the road and can do it in secret, talking to whoever they want to, but not having to tell anybody who those discussions are with. What we had, though, was a budget that said it was the green budget. It talked ab out a fuel tax that, in fact, was brought forward, and it then said that there would be a number of initiatives. We were told about a plan, a climate change plan. We haven't seen that plan yet.

Maybe we'll see it sometime in the next couple of months after we're out of this place. We were told that there would be a plan. Well, the budget really brought the tax, and it brought a handful of items that got PST exemptions through 2011. In terms of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, that's largely what was brought. We'll get a chance to talk about the tax when the government deems to bring that piece of legislation for debate. [1500] What we do know is that there was this huge vac- uum after the government had told us that this was the green budget.

That vacuum has now been filled up, so to speak, by half a dozen pieces of legislation, mostly under the name of the Minister of Environment, though some under other ministers. It's been brought forward to say: "Here you go. We've cobbled together what might be the climate change plan." The problem, of course, is that those pieces of legis- lation don't connect to each other very well. They cer- tainly don't look like a plan or at least a plan that any thought has been put into. And of course, they don't connect to the other activity going on in the province and other public policy of this government.

We'll talk about that a little bit — in the area, particularly around this, when it comes to ques tions around forestry and bioenergy and the total disconnect between what's being discussed here and the state of affairs in our forests in British Columbia today. What we have is a situation where we do need to get at this issue.

We would call on and certainly en- courage the government that if they're going to adopt legislation like this — if they're going to come forward and talk about things like sequestration — they actu- ally put in place some resources and some expertise to be able to go out and explore that issue; that they make available to the public some understanding about what the state of affairs on carbon capture and storage is — information about what research is going on in those areas and some understanding of when it's reasonably expected and, hopefully, some understanding from an independent authority about when that technology might be in place and when we might expect it to proceed.

There clearly is a large debate about that issue around carbon capture and storage. That issue is often spoken about in terms of whether we should or shouldn't be doing carbon capture and storage. For us, in coal, I think it makes sense. We would be supportive of looking at an effective program that actually got us there. We would like very much for the government to come forward and tell us where that program is and how we might expect to see that program moving forward. Part of the challenge we have is also with some of the things that we know aren't in the bill.

We know there are things that are, of course, in the energy plan. [Interruption.] S. Simpson: There you go. Somebody is paying tonight. Interjections. S. Simpson: There are pieces of the energy plan that aren't enabled by this particular legislation, and we will look to see where the legislation comes for that. The bill doesn't talk about ensuring that the clean or renewable electricity generati on continues to count for at least 90 percent of new generation, which the gov- ernment has talked about, but we don't see that in this particular piece of bill. We know this is a very big issue in communities.

We've heard from people in first nations communities

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12275 and others. It doesn't talk about how it deals with issues around coalbed gas practices in North America and here in British Columbia and how we will deal with that. I would note that the bill, when it talks about emis- sions reductions, doesn't talk about how it gets that flaring and fugitive gas from our oil and gas sector. We haven't heard anything about that. The government has said continually that their goal is to eliminate that by 2016 and to reduce by half the flaring and fugitive gases by 2011, I believe.

The challenge, of course, is that we're getting pretty close to 2011, and we still haven't heard how that might occur to get that 50 percent reduction. [1505] This might be an ideal piece of legislation for the g o v e r n m e n t t o h a v e i n c l u d e d t h a t p i e c e i n a n d s a i d : "Here's how we're going to get at flaring and fugitive emissions." That would have been a positive thing for the government to do. It would have been a substantive thing for the government to do, because we do know that flaring and fugitive emissions are a significant problem and contribute to our emissions.

Yet we didn't hear anything about that. We didn't hear anything about that at all. I know I have colleagues in the House who will speak to this matter as well, but I want to move my discussion over a little bit to the

section on bioenergy. The bill purports, really, to be designed to help emissions by getting us into bioenergy in a more sub- stantive way than we are today. But what it doesn't do — and this is unfortunate…. It talks about getting into bioenergy. It talks about significant changes, particu- larly around forestry and ar ound tenure relationship. But it gives us no idea about what those reductions in emissions might well be. It doesn't tell us what we can expect to get in terms of reduced emissions there.

While the number is a modest number in the fuel tax bill, the Minister of Finance told us in the budget that her expectation was that by 2020, the fuel tax would reduce about three megatons of emissions. I think she said that. I think the budget number says that. That's an optimistic number, but the three mega- tons is the number there. That would be a little more than about 2 percent of our overall emissions in British Columbia. That's what will be accomplished by the fuel tax, and we'll have a discussion here about whether or not that constitutes an effective tax when that piece of legislation comes.

At least there was a number that said: "Here's what we think we're going to accomplish by doing this." In regards to this bioenergy strategy…. Among other things, we get no number. We have no idea what will be accomplished by this approach to bioenergy. But while we have no idea how this works, what we do know is that this notion of creating a whole other set of tenures for bioenergy creates a complication in a sector, a key industry, that is in crisis. We discuss this industry in question period just about every day because of the 13,000 people….

Some 13,000 jobs gone in the last year or so because of the crisis that has been created. We would say, and we know, that a significant part of that crisis relates to fi- bre supply. We know a significant amount of that crisis relates to the lack of fibre coming into mills for them to be able to do t he work that they can do, an d that i s a huge, huge problem. We now are looking at creating here, under this structure, probably an opportunity for the private power operators to look at how they get into bioenergy.

The discussion here isn't around how we can in fact begin to create maybe opportunities for others who are already working to be able to take advantage of some bioenergy opportunities that already exist with existing facilities, where there's some room to work around that. The suggestion here is that if we're going to harvest trees for the purpose of bioenergy, there's a serious question about the economics of this. We know the government has not judged the economics of this in- dustry very well, and that's reflected in the 13,000 people who don't have a job today, who did have a job a year or so ago.

What we know, of course, when we look at this…. We can look at what that effect has been on this sector. We've seen 271 jobs lost in Mackenzie. We've seen 530 jobs in Harmac. We've seen the Fort St. James mill — 270-odd jobs there. [1510] These are all situations where the question of the future of the forest sector and tenure — and supply is a key piece of that — has not been addressed effectively by this government and is arguably not being addressed effectively now.

Yet we have Bill 31, and what Bill 31 is prepared to do is in fact create the potential, the framework, for a totally different approach to how we deal with some of these issues. It's done without at this point…. At least it hasn't been made available to us. We haven't seen the science — that we're going to burn that wood waste, and we're going to burn that wood product — to really under- stand what the implications of that are for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. I think most of us here would say that maybe that works well.

We're accelerat- ing the loss of carbon from primarily, in this case, the dead forests or wood waste. We might accelerate that by burning it. There's no doubt about that. But we don't know what the long-term implications of doing that are. That's a question that requires an answer. It's a question that requires an answer not just around this issue around bi oenergy, but it's the much broader question around cl imate change and the lack of plan. Maybe when the climate action team reports out in July, they will have done the work. Hard to say. Maybe they'll have done the work.

Maybe at some point the secretariat will release information, but hard to say. There's certainly no indication of that now, as to the independent assessment of a number of these schemes of the government and what the actual projections are on reductions in emissions. I understand the government is paying Mr. Jaccard pretty well to deal with these things, so maybe he's

12276 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 going to do those assessments and provide that infor- m ation. The hope we wou ld have is that if he's doing this work or if they've contracted somebody else or if it's being done in house by Mr. Whitmarsh and his team — if it's being done by anybody in a substantive way — they will make that information available. They will be able to talk about Bill 31 and what the bio- energy strategy in Bill 31 looks like. What does it mean in terms of emissions, and what are the challenges in terms of emissions? But we haven't seen any of that.

We haven't seen any of that at all. We also know that we have a current situation where there is an issue arou nd planning in the forest sector. As I said previously , that is a discussion that comes up in this House on a daily basis as members on this side go home to thei r communities or visit other communities in this province and hear from forest workers and their families and hear from the leadership of those communities who see a crisis unfolding in front of them, see their jobs disappearing and are looking for help and for a plan that they think will work. But we don't have that plan right now.

Instead of a plan being done that will actually deal with those chal- lenges around the forest industry, the government is suggesting here in Bill 31 adding a new layer of tenure without any review of the impact on annual allowable cut on mid- and long-term timber supplies — on how that will work. The question becomes: is it responsible to take that kind of action when you haven't done the work on the industry and on the sector in the first case? That is a challenge.

I think that with the bill, we need to look at a couple of things, and I'd like to talk a little bit about some of those things that we need to look at. We are looking for a much better explanation arou nd how, in fact, we get to zero emissions in electricity. The bill talks about offsets as an approach to do that. [1515] We on this side of the House are of the view, in regard to the use of offsets, that offsets provide an in- terim tool while you develop the technology to actually reduce emissions. They shouldn't be a way to buy your way out of responsibility to reduce emissions.

They provide a tool that gives you some time to do that work to reduce your emissions. That's an important tool, and we're supportive of an offsets program as a tool to be used for that. We are much less enthusiastic about the ability of industry or others to buy their way out of taking action to actually reduce greenhouse gases by deciding it's a cost of doing business to buy offsets.

As you know, there were questions raised today by the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows in regard to what those offset programs look like, needing to have a good understanding of which programs are available for offsets and how they should be used — how you deal with organizations or groups that want to put offset businesses in place — and ensuring that they are in fact delivering on their promises and that if we're buying into a particular set of offsets as are suggested in Bill 31, we are in fact accomplishing the objectives of net zero that the minister talked about.

The problem is that we don't have that information. The government has not made that information available. We have no sense right now about what the government's policy on offsets will be. In some cases, and we may find this, there may be industries where for the fo reseeable future reducing emissions is a challenge that we can't get around. Aviation may be one of those sectors. Progress is being made, but depending on who you talk to, it has a long way to go before we see significant reductions in aviation. Aviation is an area where offsets might be a reality for us for an extended period of time.

If we identify industries th at fit that bill, then they should be identified and labelled as such. There should be reporting and monitoring around that and insur- ances that those industries as well, even where it's somewhat more challenging, are continuing to strive to find the reductions in emissions that we know need to be put in place. We don't know from Bill 31 what the government's intentions around offsets are, other than that they ref- erence offsets in the bill as a way to get to net zero around electricity producti on.

So the question then becomes: what is it that we're doing around getting to net zero there? We also know there's a di scussion in the bill…. The bill speaks to enforcement. The bill speaks to the ability to get at ensuring that records are in fact retained, etc., in regard to some of the pieces of the bill. I look par- ticularly at the waste management facilities. In other sections of the bill it also talks about records being kept. What it doesn't talk about anywhere in the bill is who has access to those reco rds. How transparent will that be?

How available will that information be for the public so that they can have confidence that the expectations that are suppos ed to be accomplished by the bill…? At some point presumably in regulation, we're going to see some kind of numbers put to these regu- lations. We're going to have a reasonable expectation about what the actions of Bill 31 should accomplish in terms of reductions in emissions. What should we reasonably expect? What will we measure against? There should be some explanation — and it's not here — about how we will measure those reductions.

Will the companies measure those reductions and report it? Will the gov- ernment measure those reduct ions themselves? How is that all going to work? We don't know that yet. [1520] I'm assuming that we're going to see some broader framework for how we meas ure those emission reduc- tions. We're going to see that at some point from the government. It's apparently not going to be in this session. Maybe it will be in the spring or at some time in the future. We don't see any of that at this point to know what we should reasonably expect to accomplish and how it gets measured.

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 12277 As important — and this is certainly an issue that is a critical for us as the opposition — is how that gets reported out to the people of British Columbia so that everybody has access to information that will tell them what the government reasonably expects to accomplish in emission reductions, what is actually being accom- plished and how it fits with these particular pieces of legislation and these particular bills. A number of them are in front of us today. How will we measure those reductions in emissions in regard to those bills?

It will take us a little bit of time until we get to that. Part of the challenge, of course, is around needing to have a better sense of how the government will apply this particular work to other policies in the province. We have the booming oil and gas sector. As I noted, we saw nothing in this legislation about controlling flaring in that sector. It's someth ing that we think needs to be done. We know the coal industry is a very important industry. Coalmining is very important. It's an important sector for us to be able to take advantage of.

However, we have no sense about what we can reasonably expect to accomplish there. We have no sense about how we measure progress. Are we to expect that in 2016, I believe, we will have sequestration in place? Should this government survive through the next election, are we to hear silence between now and whenever on these issues? Or is there some way that British Columbians can get to know how that carbon capture and storage planning is going and who will be doing the work? Possibly that's not going to be at issue at all.

It may be that instead what we will see is the government simply silent on this issue until such time as the federal g o v e r n m e n t o r S a s k a t c h e w a n o r W e s t V i r g i n i a o r t h e U.S. government or somebody else comes up with a plan that works, and then the government may look to adopt that. I guess that's not an unreasonable approach to take.

It is essentially the approach that the government is taking around tailpipe emission standards, as they relate to California, in another piece of legislation that we will presumably soon see in front of this House, where the government doesn't really know how they're going to approach this. That's again reflected in the leg- islation. It's much like this legislation or like Bill 18 on cap-and-trade. There at least we do know there's work being done in California on tailpipe emission standards.

Should California ever settle its legal differences with the Environmental Protection Agency in the United States, that may actually move forward, and we might make some progress on that. In that instance, it's important to know that Cali- fornia, a jurisdiction unlike British Columbia, pays a lot of attention to transparency and to making information available to their citizens. They have done a pretty good job of that in relation to a whole range of climate initiatives that they've taken, including the issues around tailpipe emissions and how they deal with that. Not so much, here in British Columbia.

We have levels of unprecedented secrecy here in British Colum- bia. In California they talk to their citizens about issues that are important to them. We do things differently in British Columbia, as we know. This is a bill that we'll be looking for more informa- tion on as it goes forward. I would say: does everybody in this House want to find a way to have clean coal, as it's called, where we can effectively sequester CO 2 emissions and be able to allow coal to go forward? Ab- solutely.

It's particularly important in British Colum- bia, because our coal industry is an important industry for us. [1525] We're starting to see this now, as there's more and more talk about carbon tariffs and issues like that. We will start to see, at least in some countries, greater pressure if you're exporting products like coal that are significant CO 2 generators. There will be tariffs attached to that. That's not necessarily a bad thing. If we're going to move forward on climate in itiatives here, we may see ourselves doing similar things as well.

But we can expect that to occur at some time in the not that distant future. If we had could develop that technology and sell it, it would be an excellent thing. Along with the coal, that would be very positive. That's a very good thing. If we can make that progress, that would be great. The challenge here is some lack of confidence that this bill really takes us anyw here in that direction. It lays out a framework about what we might like to see but doesn't tell us anything about how we get there.

It's the same thing in relation to electricity produc- tion, where it talks about a net zero on emissions there — a very positive thing. We certainly want to get our emissions down. Of course, we know that in terms of electricity, our emissions are pretty good because of the vision — it wasn't necessarily for the reason of climate change — of W.A.C. Bennett and the creation of B.C. Hydro and the creation of our heritage dams and the progress that we've made there. It's very , very important for us to continue to support B.C. Hydro and move B.C. Hydro forward on these issues, and we would be very keen to do that.

The more work we can do around net zero emissions, all the better. The same around change as it relates to waste man- agement facilities, to manage waste-generated GHGs. That's another piece in the bill that I haven't spoken very much about. Absolutely, waste management is a very important issue in British Columbia. We know that in Vancouver, of course, we have the debate going on between incinerato

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0512pm-02
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0512pm 02
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	42c28cbd4548abf20a0ede400eb9efdd8f05f6f4

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