2011 Legislative Session: Third Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 20, Number 10

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 5 — New West Partnership Trade Agreement Implementation Act

Hon. P. Bell

Statements

Congratulations on royal wedding

Hon. K. Falcon

J. Horgan

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Day of Mourning for workers

K. Conroy

D. Hayer

Roller derby

M. Mungall

Samantha Nutt and assistance for women in war zones

J. Thornthwaite

Autism awareness

C. Trevena

Steveston fundraising for Japan earthquake relief

J. Yap

Oral Questions

Government response to court ruling on teachers' collective bargaining

A. Dix

Hon. G. Abbott

School district funding and court ruling on teachers' bargaining

R. Austin

Hon. G. Abbott

Funding for school meal program in Surrey

H. Bains

Hon. G. Abbott

Cost of government information on harmonized sales tax

B. Ralston

Hon. K. Falcon

Government and third-party information on harmonized sales tax

J. Kwan

Hon. K. Falcon

Appointment of judges

L. Krog

Hon. B. Penner

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

H. Lali

D. Hayer

D. Thorne

J. McIntyre

B. Routley

E. Foster

M. Mungall

J. Thornthwaite

Motions Without Notice

Committee of Supply to sit in two sections

Hon. R. Coleman

[ Page 6471 ]

THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 2011

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

J. Horgan: I'd like to introduce in the gallery a constituent of mine, Rick Atkinson, who is the regional vice-president of the paramedics association here in Victoria, CUPE Local 873. Rick is in the precinct today. There he is there. Thank you very much, Rick. Would the House please make him very welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 5 — New West Partnership

Trade Agreement Implementation Act

Hon. P. Bell presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled New West Partnership Trade Agreement Implementation Act.

Hon. P. Bell: I move that Bill 5 be introduced and read for the first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. P. Bell: I'm pleased to introduce Bill 5, the New West Partnership Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 2011. The new west partnership trade agreement was signed by British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan on April 30, 2010. The agreement seeks to further reduce and eliminate barriers to the free trade movement of workers, goods, services and investments across western Canada between British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan. Our common goal is an open, efficient and stable market that operates in the best interests of our workers, our businesses and our investors.

Bill 5 introduces provisions that do the following three things, all of which are necessary to ensure that the province meets its obligations under the new west partnership trade agreement and the national agreement on internal trade: first, to ensure that the province has the statutory authority to exercise its rights and fulfil its obligations under the agreements; second, to provide a right of appeal and judicial review of panel decisions and ensure monetary awards are enforceable, all of which will effectively implement the agreement's dispute resolution procedures; and finally, amend the provisions to the College of Applied Biology Act to ensure that the rules of the council of the College of Applied Biology comply with the labour mobility provisions of the new west partnership agreement.

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

Bill 5, New West Partnership Trade Agreement Implementation Act, 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

CONGRATULATIONS ON ROYAL WEDDING

Hon. K. Falcon: Tomorrow, April 29, at 11 a.m., the marriage of Prince William of Wales and Catherine Elizabeth Middleton will take place in London, England. On behalf of all members of this Legislature, I would ask that the Speaker send a letter of congratulations to Prince William and Catherine Middleton for their wedding tomorrow.

J. Horgan: I want to join with the Minister of Finance. As a descendant of Irish ancestors, I will be more colloquial and say, on the opposition side, we give our best wishes to Wills and Kate on their most auspicious of occasions. Tomorrow, sometime at four in the morning, my spouse will be watching on the television.

Mr. Speaker: Consider it done.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

DAY OF MOURNING FOR WORKERS

K. Conroy: Today the Day of Mourning is being held to remember people who've been killed or injured on the job. In addition to the pin from WorkSafe B.C., we've all been given the opportunity to wear a pin that has come to symbolize this day. The pin shows a canary in a birdcage. As I'm sure most of you know, in the early days of coalmining, miners were sent into the mines carrying canaries in a birdcage to determine the air quality in the shafts. If the bird died, the miners had to quickly evacuate or perish themselves.

Steve Hunt, a member of the United Steelworkers, designed the pin after sitting through the Westray mining disaster hearings. The Westray mine was a coalmine in Plymouth, Nova Scotia, where, in 1992, a methane explosion killed 26 miners. Steve felt that the day of mourning required a symbol that would ensure we not forget the tragedy of the miners and the lives lost. He took the image of the canary and used it to symbolize the plight of workers worldwide. Nothing got done to ensure workers' safety until the canary died.

[ Page 6472 ]

Unfortunately, it's much the same for far too many workers today. Today this pin is being worn across Canada and the United States not just by steelworkers, but by thousands of people from many different unions and by politicians like us on both sides of the House and both sides of the border. As legislators, it is our duty to make sure legislation is in place that ensures every worker in B.C. can go to work in a safe environment and return home to their families at the end of their shift.

[1340]

I want to thank the steelworkers for providing the members of the Legislature this pin that we can all wear in solidarity as we remember workers who have died or been injured on the job and their families who are left behind.

D. Hayer: Mr. Speaker, the Canadian flag is flying at half-mast on Parliament Hill in Ottawa and over the Legislative Assembly in Victoria, not honouring the loss of a major leader or a captain of industry but in honour of the everyday worker lost or injured while on the job. Today across this land we recognize April 28 as a National Day of Mourning to commemorate those who died or were injured in the line of duty while performing their jobs.

In 2009 alone almost 1,000 Canadian workers lost their lives while on the job. That is more than 2½ deaths every day. Since 1993 well over 15,000 men and women lost their lives due to work-related causes. That is equivalent to the entire population of a medium-sized town in British Columbia, and that is an immense tragedy.

We have been commemorating this day and the loss of workers in our nation since 1991, and today what Canada began then has been adopted by 80 countries around the world. So if we see legislative employees or other workers wearing black arm bands, ribbons or lighting candles, we will know that they are remembering so many fellow workers who truly gave their all for their jobs.

I ask all members of the House to bow their heads for a moment, to join me in remembering all those who have lost their lives as a result of their work and to work diligently towards ensuring safety in the workplace to curtail this tragic loss of life.

roller derby

M. Mungall: Well, it was just one year ago that I was getting ready for the Salmo Slamo, where the Babes of Brutality of the West Kootenay Women's Roller Derby League were doing their first demo of the sport. I even spoke about it in this House.

At the time the league had two fresh teams, not quite ready for a bout, but that bout did happen not long after the Salmo Slamo. The Gnarlie's Angels went head-to-head with the Babes. Watching from the suicide seats, I cheered the Babes to victory at the league's first match.

Fast-forward to now, just months from that first bout, and you will find my local league boasting a full eight teams, making it the largest in Canada. Now on the roster for this season's bouts, the Angels and the Babes are joined by the Castlegar Dam City Rollers; the Slocan Valley Vendettas; as well as both Nelson teams, the Killjoys and the Lumber Jackies. I can't forget our junior team nor our travel team, the Kootenay Kannibelles, who recently trounced the Okanagan's SS Rodeo.

Now, the coolest part of the roller derby explosion is that the West Kootenay women, while the largest league, aren't the only growing league. We have Okanagan, East Kootenay, Okanagan-Shuswap, Abbotsford, Rain Valley Vixens, Vancouver Terminal City Rollers. Fort St. John has got a league too, and it's accepting fresh meat for the Energetic City Roller Derby Association so that they can battle it out with Prince George's Rated PG teams or any of the teams in the UNBC league.

Who can forget the gals that started it all in B.C., Victoria's very own Eves of Destruction? The Eves spread the derby word wide and far, and now bout hunters like myself are league sponsors.

On May 6 I'll be attending my first bout as a sponsor. Sinful de Mayo is a doubleheader. Get your tickets quick, because they go fast.

Remember, Mr. Speaker, to whip it and whip it good.

SAMANTHA NUTT AND ASSISTANCE FOR

WOMEN IN WAR ZONES

J. Thornthwaite: On March 8, I was honoured, along with my colleague the member for Burnaby North, to attend the International Women's Day presentation sponsored by Capilano University. Together we presented a certificate of appreciation to Dr. Samantha Nutt, the founder and executive director of War Child Canada.

[1345]

Dr. Nutt has worked tirelessly for the last 15 years to expose the atrocities and violent sexual and physical abuse of women in war-torn countries. As a keynote guest speaker at the event, Dr. Nutt shared three heart-wrenching stories that she experienced while working in the Republic of Congo, Darfur and Afghanistan. She spoke of the horrors of violent rape and physical abuse that millions of women all over the ages suffer on a daily basis while simply trying to provide food and water for their families.

However, she was heartened to share that the efforts of many non-governmental organizations who focus on providing education and assistance by women to women can help turn around the abuse they must endure every day.

While we here in B.C. can boast of all the encouraging numbers of our fellow women as doctors, lawyers and many high-level executive positions, including our new Premier, we must also realize that this is not universal and that in developed and developing countries we still

[ Page 6473 ]

have a long way to go. It is up to each and every one of us to talk about it and to help make a change. In the words of Dr. Samantha Nutt, all women need to be heard, respected and empowered, no matter where they live.

AUTISM AWARENESS

C. Trevena: April is Autism Awareness Month. Having one month dedicated to the disorders allows for a greater discussion around autism and gives individuals, families and governments the opportunity to address concerns, interventions and supports.

About one in 110 children is affected by autism spectrum disorders, which are believed to have neurological roots. There is no typical child or person with autism, but the disorders affect development. Many find it hard to form social relationships. Some find difficulty in communication, interest or focus, and behaviour may appear extreme. Autism is more likely to affect boys than girls, and there are close to 7,000 children and youth in B.C. diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.

Not everyone who has autism needs treatment. Some are so-called high-functioning, but among the challenges for parents is trying to access support services for their child who does need help if the disorder is diagnosed.

Early intervention is proven to help children and their families deal with the characteristics. But controversy is never far from the surface. At the moment it's whether to build a special centre which provides support for autism or to ensure families have money to select the supports themselves. Access to therapists is always contentious.

Money is, like in so many areas, always a problem, and for many parents, answers are too slow — parents who see their children grow up without the help they perceive is needed, parents who age themselves and are worried about future care for their adult offspring.

Networking is vital for many families. In Nanaimo this weekend there will be a chance for families from across Vancouver Island to get together for the first annual Autism Expo, designed as a celebration, a community gathering and an opportunity for families to connect with one another as well as local organizations that provide intervention or support services to the mid-Island area.

STEVESTON FUNDRAISING FOR

JAPAN EARTHQUAKE RELIEF

J. Yap: I rise today to highlight two recent events in my community. Steveston is well known for its big-heartedness, having welcomed the first Japanese immigrants to Canada in 1877. So when the tsunami struck Japan last month, Stevestoners immediately answered the call. In late March the historic Steveston Wharf was transformed into a festival ground as 7,000 participants took

part in the Walk for Japan. Organized in a matter of days by the Steveston Rotary Club, Steveston Community Society and the Steveston Buddhist church, this event raised over $80,000 for the Japanese Red Cross.

Steveston resident Janet Yau is another example of compassion and kindness. She decided to hold a raffle in support of Japan's people after hearing about the tsunami, so she went to work recruiting 55 local businesses to donate prizes. Janet then spent three weeks selling tickets all day, every day. She formed a team of ticket sellers, including more than two dozen moms in the area and even her four-year-old son, Tyson.

By the draw date Janet had sold 4,050 tickets and had raised a total of $8,100 for the Red Cross. Janet is quoted as saying in the Richmond News : "If anything, this whole experience has reaffirmed to me that Steveston is truly a village. This small-town community aspect makes this place unique."

[1350]

I'd like the House to join me in recognizing the work, community spirit and compassion of Stevestoners who contributed to this important task of helping people in a time of great need.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO COURT RULING

ON TEACHERS' COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

A. Dix: In order to continue our era of good feeling in the House, yesterday I asked a question of the Minister of Finance, and today I'm going to move on to the Minister of Education. The Minister of Health may want to wait for Tuesday. I'll give him a little preview. I'll ask him if he now agrees with the Premier's policy on health spending.

But we know where the Minister of Education stands on that, so I'll ask him a straightforward education question. He knows that the B.C. Supreme Court ruled against the government and found the government's decision to not allow teachers to negotiate improved classroom conditions for students to be illegal. I want to ask the minister if he's planning to appeal that decision.

Mr. Speaker: Minister of Education. [Applause.]

An Hon. Member: That's the last applause you're going to get.

Hon. G. Abbott: Yes.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: I am certain that I'll be able to weather this storm of appreciation from both sides of

[ Page 6474 ]

the House. The recent ruling of the B.C. Supreme Court is, of course, appealable. That is an important decision which government will have to make — whether to appeal or not.

I can advise the Leader of the Opposition that the consideration of whether to appeal is ongoing. Legal analysis is ongoing, and government will make its decision shortly. I believe the appeal period reaches its end mid-May, so the member will be hearing, I'm sure, relatively shortly about the government's decision with respect to that.

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

A. Dix: Well, I'm puzzled, hon. Speaker, because…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: …the Premier of British Columbia said when the court decision came out that she would respect the decision. She said she'd respect the decision and change the law. So I wanted to ask the minister whether his new role is to tell us what the Premier meant to say or whether he thinks that considering an appeal is respecting the decision of the B.C. Supreme Court.

Hon. G. Abbott: It's pretty clear that the Leader of the Opposition is a better politician than he is a lawyer. Clearly, the fact that the Premier respects a decision does not make it non-appealable. It is important….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue.

Hon. G. Abbott: Now, I know, Mr. Speaker, that the Leader of the Opposition is a master of revisionist history. If their….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: However, I think I might be able to cite quite a number of cases from that period of time between 1991 and 2001 where a former NDP government respected a number of decisions of courts in this province but also elected to appeal those decisions. The distinction is not that subtle, and I hope the member can understand that.

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

[1355]

A. Dix: You know, hon. Speaker, the Premier was explicit. She said she'd respect the decision. She said she'd come back here and change the law. That's what she said. She didn't say she was considering an appeal. That's the Minister of Education. That's what he's saying now. That's not what she said.

I just want to remind…. So it's a little bit of he said, she said here, but I would say this. This is important. The court ruled: "The evidence that the government relied on in the hearing before me to support its assertion that class-size limits were causing hardships to students and parents was anecdotal hearsay." What is needed in B.C. at a time when 12,000 classrooms are outside the composition limits, at a time that 4,000 classrooms are outside the class-size limits, is action. Why doesn't the government accept the court decision and negotiate class size and composition with the BCTF?

Hon. G. Abbott: So now I think I'm starting to understand the nature of the question. This is actually about the Leader of the Opposition returning some favours to the B.C. Teachers Federation early on. We know….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Take your seat, Minister.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. G. Abbott: We know that the Leader of the Opposition has always relied very heavily on the public sector unions to support his campaigns, and so I appreciate that he will raise this important issue. It may well be…. I've reviewed the words of the Premier very carefully on this point. There is nothing in her words that indicates that this is not an appealable issue nor that we would not give appropriate consideration to that. The member is thinly disguising a supposed question in order to get where he wants to be, which is openly shilling for the B.C. Teachers Federation.

SCHOOL DISTRICT FUNDING AND COURT

RULING ON TEACHERS' BARGAINING

R. Austin: Actually, I think what we would like on this side of the House is to put our children's education first and foremost. That's what we consider to be putting families first. It's been six years since this government last made a substantial investment in new schools for Surrey.

Now after years of increased enrolment, the school district is making students in schools, like Earl Marriott, attend in shifts because of a lack of classroom space. Recently the B.C. Supreme Court ruling has struck down provisions restricting teachers from negotiating calendars and timetables, and the Surrey school district may be hit with increased costs because of this government's failure to invest in Surrey schools.

[ Page 6475 ]

Given the fact that this Supreme Court judgment will take effect before the end of the next school year, is the government ready to help districts like Surrey comply with this ruling?

Hon. G. Abbott: I appreciate the member raising this important question. I had the opportunity recently to meet with the Surrey board of education. It was a very good and constructive meeting. They do have challenges with respect to growing school population, and I'm delighted to say that this government, since 2001, has invested $230 million. So $230 million, ten new schools and 3,000 new student spaces in Surrey school districts since 2001.

We'll continue to make those investments. I am sure…. I am dead certain that all of the members from Surrey will show up in June when we celebrate the opening of the Adams Road Elementary School in Surrey. They'll all be there.

[1400]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Austin: School districts all over B.C. are currently in the final stage of planning their budgets for the next school year, and several districts are planning increased class sizes in order to balance their books after years of cuts from this government.

Given the fact that the Supreme Court judgment on class size and composition will take effect before the end of the next school year, will the government act immediately to budget for the implications of this judgment, or do they plan on leaving school districts to pick up the tab for their mismanagement yet again?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for his submission. I heard a similar submission just two days ago when I met with the B.C. Teachers Federation in one of my continuing meetings with the federation, and I appreciate the member reiterating the theme again.

But the important thing is this. We have never — never once, in ten years as this government — reduced education funding in the province of British Columbia — never once. Overall, we have seen the budget for education in this province grow from $4.1 billion in 2001, when these folks left office, to, today, $5.8 billion in education funding. That equates, on a per-student basis, that we've moved from $6,262 per student back in 2001 to $8,357 today.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

FUNDING FOR

SCHOOL MEAL PROGRAM IN SURREY

H. Bains: Five different Liberal Education ministers have promised to fix CommunityLINK's unequal funding formula, a formula that forces the Surrey school district to make cuts to the classroom learning to pay for the school meal program, and yet nothing has been done — nothing.

According to Laurae McNally, the chair of the Surrey school district, if the government doesn't take immediate action, the board will "probably eliminate part of our school meal program, or we will have to make up the shortfall out of our operating budget, which will mean taking away from every classroom in the district."

To the Minister of Education: will he be any different than his previous colleagues by acting immediately to ensure that the Surrey school district doesn't have to make cuts into the in-class learning to pay for the hungry students' meals in our schools?

Hon. G. Abbott: Thank you….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. G. Abbott: Certainly, I am looking forward to acting thoughtfully in respect of CommunityLINK. I wouldn't say necessarily acting immediately.

The NDP philosophy of acting immediately was what led, for example, to the accumulation in the Surrey school district of 363 portables back in the 1990s. That's the kind of approach of ready, fire, aim that the NDP has always undertaken.

[1405]

But we will be looking very thoughtfully at the CommunityLINK program. We will be looking thoughtfully at the formula. Regrettably, when the CommunityLINK program was formed in 1996, the government of the day that produced it I don't think put in provision in the formula to respect the growth in student population that would occur over time, and that has proven challenging to others. We will review the formula, and we will thoughtfully reform it.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Bains: The minister wants to talk about portables? Mr. Speaker, 9,000 students today are studying in portables. It's a shameful record of your government, Minister — 9,000.

Surrey school district….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

H. Bains: For the benefit of the minister, Surrey school district added more than a thousand students last year,

[ Page 6476 ]

and yet the CommunityLINK funding formula remained unchanged. Even worse, on a per-capita basis, Surrey receives, if not the lowest, one of the lowest of all school districts in the CommunityLINK program on a per-student basis, leaving them with a $600,000 shortfall for their school meal program this year.

So my question again is to the minister. Five ministers they have gone through, and you are saying that we are still waiting. You still have to think about it. When will you take action so that the students in Surrey are treated equally as everywhere else in the province?

Hon. G. Abbott: Well, let me just remind the member, first of all, as he said in his

preamble around portables, that we can't hold a candle to the NDP government in terms of use of portables in the Surrey school district — can't hold a candle; not even close.

You know, I am very proud that our government, despite economic pressures that we have faced, has maintained $51 million annually to the CommunityLINK program in this province. I'm proud of that.

The formula that is in place today has been in place since 1996. I have agreed that that formula should better reflect student numbers. It is regrettable, perhaps, that in my five weeks I haven't reformed it. You apparently had five years to do that and were unable to do it. We will be working on that, because CommunityLINK is an important program. But we will be doing it thoughtfully. We won't be doing it on the back of an envelope, as the member suggests we should. We will be pursuing this thoughtfully, I'm sure.

I know this member is very thoughtful. If he has some good ideas on how to reform CommunityLINK, I'd like him to tell me, because I know, regardless of what we do, he'll line up to oppose it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

COST OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION

ON HARMONIZED SALES TAX

B. Ralston: Everyone in the province knows that the B.C. Liberal government misled British Columbians about the HST during the last election. Ever since, the B.C. Liberal government has been spending the public's money in an effort to change their mind about the wisdom of shifting $2 billion from big business onto individuals and small business here in British Columbia: paid Tom Syer $200,000; pro-HST website, $70,000; $780,000 on pamphlets thrown into the wastebasket; an undisclosed amount to run radio ads.

[1410]

The Minister of Finance surely knows the cost that this campaign is going to take in the months before the referendum. Will he lay out now, before the public, the entire cost of the public portion of the referendum campaign? Surely he knows, and the public has a right to know.

Hon. K. Falcon: If there was ever a better example of why government has an obligation to make sure the public has accurate facts and information on the HST, it was certainly provided yesterday when the Finance critic for the NDP stood up and asked the question on HST rebates which demonstrated he had absolutely no idea of what an HST rebate was all about.

You know, a week and a half earlier another one of their leaders, Jack Layton, was in B.C. saying: "You know what? The HST is good in Atlantic Canada because they don't charge it on home heating fuels." Well, guess what. We don't charge it on home heating fuels in British Columbia either.

So as I committed to from the very beginning, I will make sure that all of the information associated with informing the public of what the facts are around the HST will be made public prior to the end of this legislative session.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: The Minister of Finance is frequently wrong, occasionally right, but never in doubt, and this response just proves that. He's going to be using the public's money…. The B.C. Liberal government will be using the public's money to promote the HST here in British Columbia, to justify the shift of $2 billion from big business onto small business and individuals. How much of the $600 million contingency fund is he planning to use to advance that campaign?

Hon. K. Falcon: As I committed, fully and up front, all of that information would be made available the moment I am aware of what that dollar amount will be. I said that right from the very beginning. But I notice the Finance critic….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat for a second.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: I am sure that the member might want to check his facts on the question he asked yesterday, because he hasn't acknowledged how very wrong he was. And I do think that if the Finance critic for the NDP does not understand something so fundamental as HST rebates, as distinct from GST rebates, then you can see that getting accurate information out to the public is absolutely the right thing to do. We will do that, and

[ Page 6477 ]

we will make sure the public knows exactly what we're spending to provide accurate information to the public.

GOVERNMENT AND THIRD-PARTY

INFORMATION ON HARMONIZED SALES TAX

J. Kwan: The minister wants all to be forgiven. He says: "We did a terrible job introducing the tax." Then what does he do? He steps up an advertising slush fund with an undisclosed amount of taxpayers' money so that he could tell British Columbians that what's bad for them is actually really good for them.

[1415]

Then to top it off — just wait — he allows for an unlimited third-party advertising campaign for the people's referendum. That's not mea culpa. That's another con job, and the minister knows it.

Will the minister cancel the HST advertising campaign and put spending limits on third-party advertising so that the people of British Columbia will have some balance and fairness in the referendum that they fought for?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, allow me, if you will, to roll back the date a little bit here if I could. I'd like to talk about an advertising campaign that…. Actually, the Leader of the Opposition was chief of staff at the time when one of the largest advertising campaigns, $7.8 million to promote the Nisga'a treaty, was put into place by that government.

Now, what is interesting about this? What is interesting about this is that the NDP said that it would cost no more than $2.3 million. And what happened? Well, three days before Christmas, the chief of staff at the time quietly released the cost: 400 percent more than they said it would be.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

The member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: I'll remind the minister that this HST referendum is not the minister's referendum. It is not corporate B.C.'s referendum. It is the people's referendum, Minister. They are the ones that went out….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

J. Kwan: They're the ones that went out and got others to sign the petition. They're the ones that went out and put their sweat so that they can hold this government to account, so that they could finally have a say on this $2 billion tax shift onto the backs of families and small businesses.

Will the minister stop insulting British Columbians and stop with the advertising campaign and trying to pull the wool over the eyes of them once again?

Hon. K. Falcon: I would think that that member, of all people, would want to make sure that low-income folks in her riding have the facts on HST rebates. I would hope that that member, when she knows that she's got single parents in her riding with several children that are receiving $920 a year of HST rebates, would want that individual to know that the NDP position of going back to the PST means they get zero. I would think that that's an important fact for folks in her riding.

I cannot understand why those members are so afraid of having information in the public. Last night I was on a telephone town hall in Surrey, and 27,000 residents took part. The NDP is absolutely terrified to have a debate over the facts because the facts actually aren't with them. That is what they're afraid of.

APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES

L. Krog: B.C. Liberal inaction has created a serious shortage of judges in British Columbia. There are 17 judicial vacancies as we speak here today, and the consequences of that are serious. Even judges are speaking out publicly in an unprecedented way about this.

[1420]

So the question to the Attorney General is very simple. Is he going to fill these vacancies — yes or no?

Hon. B. Penner: We have appointed nine judges in the past year in British Columbia. That's not to say that there aren't challenges in the court system. We are managing to a budget, something the NDP would never want to do if they were in government. Their option is always to tax more, borrow more and spend more. On our side of the House we believe in living within a budget and trying to get the best value for every dollar spent.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Coleman: In this House we will continue budget debate.

D. Hayer: May I have leave to make an introduction?

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

D. Hayer: It gives me great pleasure to introduce 63 students from grades 8 to 12 who are visiting from the

[ Page 6478 ]

Fraser Heights Secondary School in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead. Joining them are five teachers — Ms. Louise Hazemi, Mr. Brent Derbyshire, Ms. Angela Monk, Mr. Perrie Scarlett and Ms. Vicki Schrader — who have taken time out of their busy schedules to bring students here. Would the House please make them very welcome.

Budget Debate

(continued)

Mr. Speaker: Member for Fraser-Nicola. [Applause.]

H. Lali: Thank you. Well, keep going. Don't stop there.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I continue debate from this morning on the budget that was presented in February by the government. I was reading into the record some of the comments in terms of the budget that folks who are observing or folks in the media are saying so that the ministers across the way don't think that I'm just making this up. It's right there in the record.

I'm going to read this out. It's an editorial in the Vancouver Sun on February 16, 2011. The caption reads: "A Stand-Pat Budget Sees Debt Growing Out of Control." I quote the editorial from the Vancouver Sun .

"Finance Minister…said he couldn't describe the status quo budget he presented Tuesday as exciting given the absence of new spending programs or tax measures. It may not be exciting, but it is alarming given the massive increase in overall debt."

I continue.

"However, economic growth going forward is hardly robust. The budget forecast the economy to grow by 2 percent in 2011, 2.6 percent in 2012 and 2.8 percent a year thereafter through 2015.

"The government insists that the debt remains affordable, citing the debt-to-GDP ratio, which will peak at 17.8 percent next year for tax-supported debt and 26.1 percent for total debt. But total debt has been growing at an annual average of 6 percent, far outpacing the rate of revenue growth. Without robust economic growth, the government's debt management plan — that is, holding the debt-to-GDP ratio below 18 percent — cannot succeed."

[1425]

This is from the editorial of the Vancouver Sun , and the Liberals are just pouring on debt for future generations. The editorial also continues:

"If there was one thing that stood out from this status quo, stand-pat budget, it was a rise in total provincial debt, which includes the debt of Crown corporations. By 2013 debt is expected to reach $60.4 billion, up from $33.4 billion in 2006, an 80 percent increase" in just four and a half years. "That will bring annual interest costs to $2.9 billion, accounting for more than five cents of every dollar of government revenue.

"Debt now represents more than 100 percent of revenue, and the budget plan has it rising still higher. To put all this in the worst possible light, the budget sees per-capita debt growing from $7,880 in 2006 to $12,762 in 2013, despite projected population growth of nearly 500,000."

It's unbelievable the amount of debt that this government is piling on. When they took office in 2001, the former Premier, Mr. Campbell, swore on a stack of bibles that he was going to bring down the deficit, when the budget was already balanced three years in a row; that he was going to control the debt, and here it is. The debt is just skyrocketing.

Here's another one of these testimonials. Again, this is from the Vancouver Province on February 16. Michael Smyth, the columnist, writes: "Budget Swimming in Slush for New Leader." It says:

"The weather outside the Victoria convention centre was unseasonably warm and sunny, but the conditions inside were considerably slushy. As in slush fund, that is, although the Finance Minister preferred to call it 'flexibility' built into his new budget for whoever becomes the next leader."

This was written a couple months back.

"With the Liberals in the home stretch of a hotly contested leadership race, the Finance Minister said his 'status quo' budget was designed to give the winner some money to play with after he or she moves into Gordon Campbell's west-wing office…there's enough slush sloshing around to fill every Slurpee machine in B.C."

This is from the Vancouver Province , Michael Smyth's column.

And of course, there's a $600 million contingency fund. Obviously, there's another $350 million in the forecast allowance in the budget. If you add all of that up, you've got a billion-dollar slush fund this year alone, with actually billions more in goodies that the Liberals hope to push out during the election campaign to try to win back the public and buy their vote.

The Minister of Finance — the former Minister of Finance — tried to paint a picture that everything was gloomy supposedly in the '90s and that everything is really glossy in the first decade of this century. I quote the Vancouver Province again:

"Of course, there were no overhead slides showing all the deficit budgets under Campbell's watch or how the accumulated debt is now set to hit an astronomical $60 billion. I remember a time when Campbell said mounting debt was simply an irresponsible 'tax on our kids.' Now the interest costs alone on the debt represent the third-biggest expense in government."

It's unreal how the former Premier and now the present Premier, who's obviously still waiting to take a seat in the House, can sit there and try to justify their ballooning of the debt when they railed against it, both of them and many members who were still sitting on the opposite side there when they were in opposition in the 1990s.

Here's another one from Les Leyne, the Times Colonist , February 16, 2011. The caption reads "Budget Built on Liberal-Created Myths."

"By now" — this would be the former Finance Minister — "…knows the story so well he recites it from memory. With nothing much new to say about Tuesday's budget, he took the opportunity in his budget speech — the last one Premier Gordon Campbell will likely applaud in the Legislature — to tell the old story yet again."

It's the Liberals' "very own creation myth," Les Leyne calls it.

He talks about some of the myths of the supposed structural deficit of $4 billion when it was actually a balanced budget. Their own Auditor General's report in

[ Page 6479 ]

2004 said it was a $1.4 billion surplus in the last year of the NDP.

[1430]

Then there's obviously the myth that they approved $45 billion worth of building. Of course we need a lot of the structures that are going up. They keep talking about the myth of their significant growth in the standard of living and, also, how supposedly when the NDP was in office, they put out a myth that thousands of people actually left this province in search of work, when the reality was that tens of thousands of people actually moved here from other parts of the province during those years.

You check the stats. Take a look at the stats. The former Minister of Finance is getting a little edgy because of the misrepresentation of the facts that they were putting out. Check the stats. The population of British Columbia during the 1990s grew by over 600,000 people, and the unemployment rate in 1991 was over 9.5 percent at the time. By the time we left office when the Liberals took over, it was 6.5 percent.

Under their ten years, when the Liberals have been in government, the average unemployment rate in British Columbia has been over 8 percent — over 8 percent. Under the last ten years of the Social Credit government, because they like to talk about GDP growth on an annual basis as the mark of how well an economy is doing…. Under the ten years of the Social Credit, the annual growth was 2.9 percent. That's a percentage of the GDP.

During the years of the NDP, the 1990s, the average annual growth was 3 percent. Guess what. Under the tenure of the B.C. Liberals, while that member was Minister of Finance, the average has been a distant third at 2.4 percent. So if they want to talk about numbers and they want to talk about job creation, all they need to do is take a look at those reports, which are put forward by the Auditor General of this province — not by any left-wing think tank or right-wing think tank but an auditor general.

Now I see that the minister is just sitting there with his head bowed, because he knows the kind of misleading facts that the Liberals have been putting out, especially on the HST during the election. When that member was asked a question point-blank about the HST during the election, "No, it's not on our radar," they said. We know the truth. They were already negotiating this.

There's been enough FOI information that has come out to say that the Liberals were already in negotiations with the federal government in terms of the implementation of the HST, which they Pearl-Harbored the people of British Columbia on right after winning the election. Had they answered that question in the affirmative and said the HST was on their radar, they know the results of the election would have been different. The member knows that, and the member opposite knows that, but he continues to mislead.

Deputy Speaker: I would caution the member.

H. Lali: Thank you, hon. Speaker. If I also may, the member opposite across the way is shouting a whole lot of things, and I think he needs a caution there as well, hon. Speaker. But anyway, hon. Speaker….

Deputy Speaker: Member, I would ask you to withdraw that last remark.

H. Lali: I withdraw. I apologize. I wasn't trying to challenge the Chair, hon. Speaker. I was just sort of making a comment.

Deputy Speaker: I will accept that, Member. Continue.

H. Lali: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

To continue on, Les Leyne continues in his editorial comment here. He says: "Start with the $4 billion deficit they inherited" — or supposedly they did, when they were saying that. "It was more or less imaginary. The last budget the NDP posted was balanced. The deficit was forecast by a fiscal review team that applied worst-case projections to make things look as bad as possible in order to give the Liberals room to work."

So they can justify the massive cuts that they made. See, on the one side, they've painted this gloomy picture to the people of British Columbia: oh my god, there's a structural deficit of $4 billion. They didn't tell the people of B.C. that it was $2 billion in corporate tax giveaways and people in the richest 2 percent of the province which formed a part of that. But they turned around and made massive cuts to health and education and social services and ministries all across the board.

There were courthouses that were closed all across the province, five of them in my constituency, which was known as Yale-Lillooet at the time. Transportation offices, probation offices, environment offices, ministry offices, etc., all across the province. Hospitals closed, wings in hospitals closed in rural B.C. and across other parts of the province and on the upper Island as well.

[1435]

They gutted the health care system in rural British Columbia, all because of the misleading information that was put out there at the time.

So Les Leyne continues: "The most telling comparison between the Liberal myth and the reality is on deficits. The entire thrust of Campbell's tenure as Premier was to eliminate deficit spending…but according to the current plan, at the end of what would have been Campbell's third term, the Liberals will have run seven deficit budgets."

I would also like to read a portion of some of the editorials that have come forward. There's an article, again by Vaughn Palmer, in the National Post this time, which was submitted on February 16. The caption reads:

[ Page 6480 ]

"From Debt Loathers to Debt Loaders." That's what it says right here. I want to quote what Mr. Palmer says.

"For all of Finance Minister's" — and he names the former minister — "insistence on a status quo theme for Budget 2011, he wasn't standing pat on borrowing and the provincial debt. The minister projects for the debt burden to exceed $60 billion three years from now, at the end of the current B.C. Liberal fiscal plan.

"For comparison's sake, just three years ago, as then Finance Minister Carole Taylor tabled her last budget in the Legislature, the debt stood at $34 billion, about where it was when the Liberals took office.

"From debt loathers to debt loaders in the space of six years."

It says here also, and I continue:

"Finance reports that each additional $1 billion in debt adds $42 million in interest cost each year. And that is at the current relatively low interest rates contracted by the public sector. As well, each additional one-point rise in interest rates is projected to boost interest charges across government, its Crown corporations and agencies, by a further $200 million a year."

I continue:

"The total provincial debt is scheduled to reach 100 percent of revenue this year, up from 80 percent when the Liberals took office…On a per-capita basis, debt will be up almost 50 percent from the good years in the middle of the past decade. And the debt load, expressed as a share of provincial economic output, is jumping from less than a fifth to more than one-quarter of provincial output."

I'll skip a little bit here, and I'll continue with what else he quotes. From Mr. Palmer:

"All manageable, the Finance Minister insisted Tuesday. Nothing that would pose any risk to the province's vaunted triple-A credit rating. Still, by the standards professed by the Liberals when they came to office, one wouldn't have expected anything like this degree of indebtedness at the provincial level.

"Unless the next leader of the party is prepared to return the government to its earlier ways, the direction is toward much more borrowing, more debt and a correspondingly higher exposure of taxpayers to higher interest rates, and less money to provide services."

So you can imagine, the new Premier, when she takes her seat — the reality for her is to either cut services or raise taxes. Because you can't have it both ways, if they say they're going to try to protect health care and education.

You know, what's missing out of this budget — because it's the same old, same old — is there's a lack of any strategy on job creation. There's also a lack of any strategy on protecting the jobs that we have, especially in the resource sector of this province. Especially in the resource sector — whether you're talking about forestry, agriculture, ranching, or you're talking about tourism, or many other areas. Mining, for instance, oil and gas.

There's no strategy there. There's nothing put in place to actually protect jobs or to even shift the economy, to diversify the economy, into the new clean, green technologies that the rest of the world is already pouncing on, especially European countries. None of that is in the budget to be able to promote all of that.

[1440]

You know, under the B.C. Liberals, with the abandonment that they perpetrated on rural British Columbia especially…. You look at the resource industries where there've been massive job losses. To give you an example, under this Liberal government's mismanagement of the forestry file and their sellout of the softwood lumber deal by joining in with Mr. Harper, selling out to the Americans, and their deliberate neglect of the pine beetle infestation…. When the federal government was coming forward with a couple hundred million dollars of their own money, these Liberals refused to match it.

So what you had as a net result over the last ten years under this Liberal government is that 78 sawmills and pulp mills in this province were forced to close by this Liberal government putting 42,000 permanent, family-supporting forestry jobs out of commission and most of that in rural and coastal communities in this province. That's their commitment to job creation, and there's none of that in this budget to be able to protect that.

When you look at the level of poverty…. You know, the number of people not only in absolute numbers but as a percentage of our population has steadily risen for ten years under this Liberal government to one of the highest in the country. But when you look at child poverty, it is now, for the eighth year in a row, the highest rate of child poverty of any province in the country, under this Liberal government. They have the audacity to stand up here in this House and try to tell British Columbians that they are the better managers of the economy and that they are creating jobs when what they've done is made hardship for families.

The new Premier now has the gall to actually stand up and say: "I'm going to put families first." She says, "I'm going to advance education," or make education better. But when you look at her own record when she was in this House, it was exactly the opposite as a record number of schools were closed. And a record number of cuts to children and families….

D. Hayer: It is an honour to speak in support of this budget that we will be debating during this session of the Legislature. However, I would like to welcome you back to these chambers, as I welcome all other members. I also have the honour and privilege to welcome two new leaders to this House — our new Premier, Christy Clark; and our new opposition leader, the member for Vancouver-Kingsway — in their new roles in the government. I look forward with great anticipation to the day when our new Premier joins us in this House.

The leadership races were extremely exciting, and this new leadership will certainly usher a breath of fresh air into these chambers as we proceed through the session and through the rest of the year.

I have always believed that new ideas and opinions are good and that changes of direction bode well for our citizens, for our province and for the future. I would be remiss, however, if I did not thank our former Premier Gordon Campbell for his work in the public service and everything he did to ensure that our city of Surrey and all of British Columbia was a better place.

[ Page 6481 ]

I also want to personally and especially thank him for keeping with and understanding the pain of the victims, of families of those 329 men, women and children who died as a result of the Air India bombing and those who died in the similar bomb attempt at Japan's Narita airport.

In 2005, on the 20th anniversary of the Air India bombing, my wife and I travelled by ourselves to Ireland to pay homage to the victims. I was very pleased and proud to see Premier Gordon Campbell in Cork and in Bantry in Ireland at the same time, representing the government of British Columbia to recognize the tragedy that occurred in the skies 20 years before that date.

Premier Campbell's creation of a special memorial at Stanley Park with the help of the Prime Minister of Canada and the mayor of Vancouver on the 25th anniversary of the tragedy earned a special place in our hearts and in the hearts of every victim of terrorism.

Our former Premier was also a leader in the recognition and reconciliation of the tragedy that was the Komagata Maru, one of the darkest days of our province.

I would also like to give my due thanks to the leader of the opposition party across the aisle for the excellent contribution to this House and to the people of British Columbia.

[1445]

Since I was first elected in 2001 I have been impressed by the work ethics of Joy MacPhail from 2001 to 2005 and the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill from 2005 to 2010 and of the member for New Westminster from 2010 to 2011.

Most of all, I want to thank the people of British Columbia and the party members who participated enthusiastically in our democratic system to elect both of our new leaders with grace and dignity. We all are very lucky and fortunate in British Columbia and in Canada. In other parts of the world where they want a democracy, where they want elections, they have to pay with their lives to achieve the freedoms and the privileges that we enjoy here, and sometimes we take it for granted.

Because of the beliefs and strengths and dedication of our pioneers, we have a country and a province we can be proud of. Our province, our country, is considered the best place in the world to live, to work, to visit and to do business in.

We must not forget our soldiers who fought and died to keep us free. Without the spirit of the pioneers, the dedication and sacrifices of our soldiers and the contributions of our seniors, we would not have the freedom to choose, the freedom to speak out and the freedom to enjoy a lifestyle and a future that is second to no country in the world.

Madam Speaker, that is what our government and our budgets are all about — creating and ensuring a future not just for ourselves but for all the generations to come. It is our task within this chamber to chart a course that will maintain the services we have all come to expect, that will strengthen the economy that we all depend on and that will build on the livability of British Columbia for today, for tomorrow and for decades to come. Without a sound financial footing, without a strong and vibrant economy, we could not be doing the things that are important to all British Columbians.

We also could not be doing all the things that are so important to my constituents in Surrey-Tynehead. The accomplishments in Surrey-Tynehead depend on the strong economy, but they also depend on the investments that our government has made and is making to make our homes, our lifestyles and the families better and stronger.

Just recently our new Premier, Christy Clark; the Minister of Health; and I, along with my other colleagues, attended the groundbreaking ceremony of the new eight-storey addition to the Surrey Memorial Hospital. This massive undertaking, which is worth more than half a billion dollars, is the largest investment in health care in the history of our province. This project will add more than 150 new care beds to Surrey Memorial Hospital.

The new tower at Surrey Memorial Hospital will expand many services, including 48 children's neonatal intensive care beds and specialized mental health and pediatrics units. The new tower is projected to cost over $500 million and will contain a new emergency department that will be five times larger than the existing facility at Surrey Memorial Hospital.

It will include a separate children's emergency, an enhanced minor treatment unit, a maternity department that will have 13 new birthing beds, private rooms for moms and their families, and additional academic space for new doctors and other health care professionals in partnership with UBC medical school and Fraser Health. The new tower will also have a new rooftop helipad to deal with emergencies in Surrey.

This is just one of the numerous investments our government is making in health care throughout Surrey, and it will create more than 3,760 jobs. All of this comes on the heels of 73 new acute care beds we opened at Surrey Memorial Hospital in August 2008.

As well, there was a $10 million expansion of Surrey Memorial Hospital's kidney dialysis unit, which increased the availability of stations from 18 to 30. This was all part of a $30 million upgrade initiative at Surrey Memorial Hospital that began in 2005. This project aimed to build capacity, expand services and ease congestion at the Surrey Memorial Hospital. These additional beds represent a 26 percent increase in acute care beds in Surrey; that is 491 of them since Fraser Health was created by our government.

[1450]

For cancer services, this government has spent $12.5 million on renovations to the B.C. cancer centre in Surrey. These vastly improved services for cancer patients in

[ Page 6482 ]

our community will allow them to stay in the community and be treated with first-class service at the Surrey cancer centre from the B.C. agency. The health care improvement for Surrey residents will be immense.

The incredible addition to Surrey Memorial Hospital is not alone. In June of this year a new $239 million out-patient hospital will be opened at Fraser Highway and 140th Street in Surrey. It will be officially opened and will accept its first patients in June of this year. This tremendous new facility will be 188,000 square feet, and it has created more than 1,500 construction jobs.

This new hospital will feature expanded day surgeries and diagnostic services, including four operating rooms and ten procedure rooms. It will also include a primary care area for seniors or people living with chronic diseases or HIV/AIDS. This facility will decrease wait-lists, make day surgery more accessible and greatly ease the patient load on Surrey Memorial Hospital.

These excellent additions to the health care in Surrey, which will be filled with state-of-the-art equipment and technology, would not have come about if it had not been for prudent budgeting by a government driven to ensure that our economy stayed strong.

There is almost $1 billion being invested in health care in Surrey. Because of this budget and past budgets, we have been able to accomplish so many more things.

In transportation improvements alone in Surrey, we have built the 156th Street underpass at Highway 1; widened to four lanes Pacific Highway, 176th Street, from the U.S. border to Highway 1 in my riding; four-laned the Fraser Highway and Highway 10, which was promised for decades and decades; built the Golden Ears Bridge; and are building a pedestrian and bicycle overpass on Highway 1 and 168th Street in my riding, which will connect the Fraser Heights, Tynehead, Guildford, Fleetwood and Port Kells area.

Most important of all, we are building and soon will open the new 10-lane Port Mann bridge, which will have buses running on it for the first time since 1989, and it will include a separate bicycle lane and a pedestrian walking lane. This new 10-lane Port Mann bridge is designed to handle future light rail system expansions to Surrey and Langley. This incredible and long-awaited project is expected to be opened at least a year ahead of schedule, probably next year. Coupled with that massive project is the widening of Highway 1 to eight lanes, all the way from Vancouver to Langley.

Along with ambitious construction projects that employ thousands of people, there will be improvements to all the interchanges on Highway 1 and completely new overpasses and interchanges all along the Highway 1 route from Langley to Vancouver.

These projects will get my constituents to work and back home much quicker. They will also provide massive boosts to business and commerce by getting goods and services moved much faster and more efficiently.

Until this project is completed, the loss to the economy is estimated at $1 billion a year, and that's a lot of money being wasted by individuals and businesses. Those savings alone justify this massive investment in infrastructure in our project, which is needed for our future generations to enjoy and use.

Another important aspect of this project is that it will greatly improve the air quality for people who live in my riding and throughout the Fraser Valley. Right now people are standing in the traffic for hours and hours and wasting time, when it should be taking only minutes to go through.

At my old office on the Fraser Highway and 160th Street…. From there to go to the Port Mann Bridge used to take, in traffic, 45 minutes to one and a half hours. When there is no traffic, it takes only 5 minutes. So you can see how people are gridlocked and wasting time and burning fuel, which is not good for the environment or for anybody else.

In addition, the South Fraser perimeter road is on its way, with the construction expected to complete in about two years. This route from Deltaport to the Trans-Canada Highway 1 and 176th Street to Golden Ears Bridge, will take commercial trucks off the residential street. This will improve safety and traffic flow while cutting truck travel time.

[1455]

Another great addition to the transportation in Surrey will be the construction of an expansion of SkyTrain or light rail from the current station in Surrey Centre, Whalley area and to Guildford and then to the Fraser Highway and 168th Street — this future expansion going so far as downtown Langley, and probably later on, to the Abbotsford area.

Additionally, there will be new rapid buses added and future rapid transit in the form of SkyTrain or light rail system down the King George Highway to Newton and other parts of the rapidly growing city of Surrey.

This budget and past budgets have also allowed us to accomplish a great deal for our young people and for our future leaders. For them, for their future and the future of their families, we have built Simon Fraser University's new Surrey Centre campus, created Kwantlen University and built the new world-class trade and technology campus in Cloverdale, along with expanding the Newton campus of Kwantlen.

We are also building and opening a number of new elementary schools and began all-day kindergarten for those parents who wish it for their children. We have also seismically upgraded schools, and we will continue to do those critical upgrades when needed.

Madam Speaker, we have developed so many more StrongStart programs throughout Surrey schools that parents are really happy to see, and this will ensure that children and the families receive a good beginning to school, to our education system and to our society.

[ Page 6483 ]

I am working closely with the Surrey board of education and the Minister of Education to help vulnerable students within the city of Surrey by helping to fix that CommunityLINK funding formula. This board has been wrestling with this funding inequity for more than 15 years, and I want to see it fixed. I will be working closely with my colleague MLAs and also with the Surrey board of education and our Minister of Education.

In this world there is no place for vulnerable children and their families to be treated like second-class citizens. The Surrey school district is B.C.'s largest, with more than 12 percent of the province's total public school enrolment, and it needs to be treated equally and fairly with all other districts in the province.

I am working with the Minister of Education and the board of education to ensure that this occurs as soon as possible. I am also working with both of them to obtain capital budgeting and funding for the Surrey school district to replace portables at the Fraser Heights Secondary School in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead and to build more new schools in Surrey, and we have many more new schools. Because the population of Surrey is growing so fast — especially the children — we need to have more funding for capital to build more schools for the new kids that will be coming and attending our schools.

CommunityLINK, by the way, means learning good nutrition and knowledge. Its funding provides services such as the breakfast and lunch program, inner-city and community school programs, school-based support workers and counselling for at-risk children and youth.

We can also thank this budget and those of the past ten years for creating many great new housing projects for seniors, creating libraries and recreational centres for them to join and to mingle with others of their own age group. For example, there is the Harrison at Elim Village, a $30 million residential care facility for seniors.

Introductions by Members

Deputy Speaker: Thank you most sincerely, Member.

If I might ask you to join with me in acknowledging the students who have just arrived in the gallery. They are students from Mitchell Elementary School in my riding. I'm very proud of them. We had a discussion sometime back about what they might see when they're here, and I told them you would all be fabulous. So thank you very, very much. Welcome.

Debate Continued

D. Hayer: Welcome to the students that are here.

Madam Speaker, for example, there is the Harrison at Elim Village — as I was stating — a $30 million residential care facility for seniors. Kinsmen Place Lodge, a $33.7 million building project, and over $91,000 for the ActNow B.C. seniors park at Fleetwood Community Centre.

[1500]

We also provided over $365,000 for Fraser Health — three new stroke prevention clinics. We have also created centres for the homeless people and for those who are at risk of homelessness, and have funded many programs, facilities and sites to combat the tragedy of addiction and mental health. Additionally, we opened up the first phase of a $17.9 million Maxxine Wright centre, which provides pregnant women and their children with safe and supportive housing.

We opened up Freedom Place, a $7.3 million development which provides 20 assisted-living units for young adults with physical disabilities in the Guildford area of my Surrey-Tynehead riding. Most of these accomplishments have been done through responsible and decisive budgeting in the past.

Let's talk about what specifically is in Budget 2011. It reaffirms the government's commitment to funding the vital public services that British Columbia depends on, while continuing to demonstrate prudent fiscal management during a time of transition and ongoing economic recovery. It provides the government with the spending authority to manage the province's affairs for coming years, focusing on new spending on health care and social services, while providing some fiscal flexibility priorities for the new Premier and executive council.

Budget 2011 also reflects our responsibility to hold the line on government spending as the B.C. economic recovery continues. Our approach is helping B.C. successfully manage the economic downturn better than other jurisdictions around the world. Most of the people agree that B.C. has come out ahead, when you compare to other parts of Canada and other parts of the world, from this economic recession we've had the past couple of years. While we are holding the line on spending, we will continue to deliver new schools and new health care facilities, road improvements, social programs and hydroelectric facilities.

British Columbia's economy performed better than expected in 2010, with an estimated growth rate of 3.1 percent. B.C.'s independent Economic Forecast Council is forecasting growth of 2.7 percent in 2011. Exports, housing starts, retail sales and tourism numbers are all on the rise. Mining is back. We have mineral exploration spending now more than ten times higher than it was at the end of the 1990s. Thanks in part to our accelerated infrastructure program, construction activity surged in the last two years.

What has also surged is the amount of money left in taxpayers' pockets. Since this government was first elected in 2001, most British Columbians have had their personal income taxes reduced by 37 percent or more. An additional 325,000 people no longer pay any income tax in British Columbia at all. Anyone earning less than

[ Page 6484 ]

$20,000 per year does not pay any provincial income tax at all in British Columbia, and we have Canada's lowest personal income tax rates for any individuals earning less than $120,000 a year.

Keeping taxes low is an essential part of our plan to ensure job creation, attract new investment and keep our economy growing and expanding. Looking after the family is very important, creating jobs is very important, open government is very important, and connecting with British Columbians is very important. So in addition to all these investments in health care in Surrey, as I previously mentioned, I want to point out that this budget contains a $6.5 million increase for 2013-14 for the Ministry of Health to sustain front-line service delivery.

In fact, the new funding provided in this Budget 2011 builds on the funding increases in the past to raise the Ministry of Health's budget by almost $2 billion compared to 2010. By 2013-14 health care budget expenses will be reaching $18.5 billion, and the total health care expenses will make up almost 50 percent of total government spending. Of almost every dollar government spends, 50 percent of that goes on health care services.

For those who are vulnerable, Budget 2011 will provide $65 million over the three years to the Ministry of Social Development for income assistance for individuals and families in need. In education this budget sees per-pupil funding rising to $8,357 in 2011-12, the highest level ever in the history of the province of British Columbia.

[1505]

Just so everyone is clear on how much we are investing on education, our government spent more than $24 million per school day on education programs and services to support students across the province. The funding in higher education will also be increased. We will provide $1.9 billion for post-secondary institutions in the 2011-12 year. Post-secondary funding has increased by 36 percent since 2001-02. That is a 36 percent increase since we were first elected in 2001.

It is clear to me and should be clear to everyone who reads this budget document that our government is once again on the right path to funding the needs of today and the needs of future generations. This is a good budget. This budget gives our government flexibility, and it sets the stage for future generations to succeed, because as the future generations succeed, our province will stay the best place in the world to live in, to work in, to raise a family in, to visit in or to do business in.

I support this budget fully and stand by our government for the budget and look forward to the members from the opposition to respond and agree with all the great things I have said that are in this budget and everything else our government has done over the last ten years to make sure the economy of British Columbia stays the best economy, not just in Surrey-Tynehead but all over British Columbia.

D. Thorne: I rise to respond to the 2011 budget, but first I would like to congratulate the new Premier and the new Leader of the Official Opposition.

Generally, this budget is status quo in that it doesn't introduce any new programs or significant spending initiatives. This budget continues to cut spending and fails to invest in key areas, like protecting vulnerable children, improving access to education and training, protecting the environment or introducing a poverty reduction plan which would meet the new government's mandate of putting families first. However, a significant budget cushion of approximately $2.5 billion over the next three years has been left for the new Premier and her caucus.

I am honoured to stand before you once again representing the people of Coquitlam-Maillardville, who have placed their trust in me since 2005. I take this trust seriously and hope I have represented my constituents with dignity, honour and passion. I say "passion" because I am passionate about this beautiful province and its future.

That's why I stand before you today to look back at what this government has and has not achieved in the last ten years in power and in their yearly budgets. They may have changed Premiers and shuffled cabinet titles and ministers, but the fundamental issues that trouble our province remain the same.

Health care and education continue to suffer. We are ignoring climate change and environmental issues at our peril. The floundering economy is reflected in our high rate of unemployment and the thousands of forestry jobs lost. Child poverty is worse here than almost anywhere in Canada.

My constituents wonder if they will end up in a Tim Hortons outlet when they go for help in the emergency department at the Royal Columbian Hospital, and they wonder if their neighbourhood schools will close.

Today I'm going to take a stroll through several ministries and look at some of the issues that are particularly important to my constituents and how or whether the new budget has affected them negatively, positively or at all.

I look first at the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development. More than a year ago, same time, same place, I talked about cuts to the arts and what they mean to my riding. Nothing has changed. The arts continue to be underfunded in Coquitlam-Maillardville and around the province.

The national provincial arts funding average is $25 per capita. In B.C. it is $6.54 per capita. That is an $18-per-person difference, and meeting the national average would make a huge impact for artists, musicians, dancers, actors and creative groups as they seek to enrich our society.

[1510]

The only good news last year regarding the arts was that this government was forced to back down and return $7 million in funding to the B.C. Arts Council. Of

[ Page 6485 ]

course, this reversal came only after months of protests and outcry from the arts community, the resignation of B.C. Arts Council chair Jane Danzo and continued debates in the Legislature.

This partial restoration of funds doesn't change the fact that programs and productions had already been cut and many talented people have lost their jobs and left our province. Nor does it address the huge cut in funding through gaming grants in general.

I am proud that the official opposition has been unwavering in its support for the arts, constantly pointing out their importance to our quality of life, our economy and our future. Without the arts, how would we see beyond the realities of the present day and express our dreams of change?

I am also proud that the official opposition has supported small community charities which have seen gaming grants eliminated completely or cut back drastically. I call on the government to restore gaming funds to their former levels and, finally, to involve the community if new grant categories are to be created or older ones eliminated.

I look now at the Ministry of Education. Having been one of two Education critics for the past two years, I know firsthand that these have not been easy days for public education. School boards have had to grapple with budget cuts as the Education budget has remained largely unchanged.

While there has been an increase in per-student funding to $8,357, no inflationary pressures faced by school districts have been addressed. My own school district, Coquitlam, the third-largest district in the province, receives only $6,781 per-pupil funding, the lowest in British Columbia. The only funding increase will go to full-day kindergarten and the remaining portion of teacher pay increases in the current contract. Many school districts have tacked an extra week on to spring break to balance their budgets.

We have seen 190 public schools close in this province since 2002. Why, when our new Premier was Education Minister, 120 schools were closed, 2,000 teachers were laid off and many librarians and special needs supports were cut.

I was more than pleased when a provincial law that stopped the ability of teachers to bargain for class size and composition was ruled recently as unconstitutional. The legislation was brought in by our new Premier when she was Education Minister.

"It is clear from the government's own evidence that a key reason that school administrators and the government did not like to have class size and composition limits included in collective agreements was the fact that these districts increased costs to school districts," said Justice Susan Griffin. She also said that the legislation came at a cost to teachers. "They lost the ability to be involved in decisions which could greatly affect their working conditions."

On a happier note, from school district 43, the new Mandarin bilingual program has been a great success. Because Coquitlam, as I mentioned, has the lowest per-pupil funding, we are especially grateful for the funding for this program, as it has come from external sources. Last year 140 families hoped to enrol their children in the 90 available spaces, and we're expecting that this year we'll see even larger numbers.

I move now to the Ministry of Advanced Education. Higher education has moved beyond the reach of many young people in B.C. at a time when we will need a more educated workforce, as many jobs will require a university degree. Right now B.C. ranks seventh among the ten provinces in the number of university degrees granted per capita.

What is stopping our young people? Tuition fees have doubled since 2001, forcing student debt levels to among the highest in Canada, averaging $27,000 for a four-year program. Student aid has been cut by $34 million. Underfunding of trades and apprenticeship training often means long waiting lists, which makes little sense when we keep hearing that there is a trade shortage on the horizon.

[1515]

Under the B.C. Liberals, B.C. became the only province in the country to eliminate a needs-based grant program. The province of B.C. also currently provides the least amount of student aid in Canada. At 2.5 percent above prime, student loan interest rates in B.C. are the highest in Canada. These are not statistics that bode well for a society that will depend not just on knowledge but on creativity and innovation.

Let's look now at the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Innovation. Let's look at some hard numbers when it comes to job creation and economic growth. Between 2001 and 2009 B.C. was a have-not province six times and was the only province in western Canada to have negative growth in exports. Between 2001 and 2009 B.C. had the lowest growth in average hourly wages and lost approximately 50,000 jobs in natural resource and manufacturing industries.

Why, in December 2010, B.C. lost a shocking 20,000 full-time jobs, half of which were in construction, and let's recall that this government claimed that 46 percent from the HST would flow to the construction industry. But according to StatsCan, B.C. had the second-worst drop-off in building permits in Canada, and residential building permits fell by 51 percent in November alone.

Some 3,400 jobs were lost in the accommodation and food services industry over the last year, and the B.C. Restaurant Association tells us that the HST certainly played a hand in that. With higher ferry fares, fewer provincial park services, fewer fish for recreation anglers, it is no wonder the tourism industry is suffering.

Looking now at the Ministry of Environment. In my riding of Coquitlam-Maillardville the environment and its preservation are huge issues. We have several committed and active environmental organizations that

[ Page 6486 ]

monitor local waterways, clean up parks and trails, and work to further educate the public about clean water, clean air and the future of our beautiful but beleaguered planet.

Here are just some of the ways the Ministry of Environment has failed to act to protect our parks system. Interpretative programs were eliminated. Massive cuts between 2002 and 2004 led to the removal of toilets and boat launch facilities from many parks. Trails, bridges and other park infrastructure have also been in decline. Some 22 conservation officers were eliminated, along with 128 scientific technical officers, 21 park assistants, 17 biologists and 26 licensed science officers.

In 2003 the Parks and Protected Areas Statutes Act was amended to allow for oil and gas exploration and development within B.C. parks. As well, there continues to be ongoing subsidies and tax breaks to the fossil fuel sector.

I am proud that the official opposition supports policies that put environmental sustainability at the forefront of decision-making. As an example, the Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture, established in 2007, firmly established the opposition position on closed-containment fish farming. Our policies are science-based, transparent, and we are always aware of our accountability to the public. Unfortunately, the current government has taken no action on the recommendations of this committee.

Now, moving on to the Ministry of Health, everybody's favourite. Fraser Health, which serves my riding, continues to experience a shortage of acute care beds. We even made the national news earlier this year when the Royal Columbian Hospital emergency department was so overcrowded that beds were moved into the nearby Tim Hortons. There were many jokes: "Will that be a double-double on meds?" and "Roll up your rim to win your turn with a doctor." But really, it is no laughing matter.

Stretchers often block the hallways and exits of the ER, and ambulances are diverted to other hospitals. The fire marshal was called in twice to the Royal Columbian to deal with overcrowding in 2008.

What do we hear as the solution from the government? More calls for privatization. If it hasn't worked so far, why would we continue with this same tired policy?

[1520]

Eagle Ridge Hospital, which also serves my riding, was built to accommodate 200 beds but has never reached that goal. Local city councils have passed many motions calling on Fraser Health to "quickly and publicly address all 27 recommendations" in the service review delivered to the health authority in 2009.

I recently attended a status update on these recommendations at city hall, and I'm happy to report that many of them have been achieved, so we are making some progress. However, too many are "in progress," and I can only hope that they will soon be put in place.

One of the questions that came up at this public meeting was how the Tri-Cities, with 215,000 residents and expected to grow to 290,000 by 2020, still has no maternity facilities at its only hospital. I wonder the same thing, and I suspect, like SkyTrain to Coquitlam, that I may not live long enough to see that happen.

Preservation of the Riverview lands continues to be a high-profile issue in my riding. In 2007 the media printed a story that the government was considering selling much of the Riverview property to develop up to 10,000 units of market housing and 1,000 units of social housing, probably a token amount. Approximately 15,000 people from around the province have signed our petition in response to this announcement.

Since that time the government has remained ominously silent. In this case, Madam Speaker, no news is not necessarily good news. With the provincial government short of funds and possibly owing money to Ottawa in the future for the ill-conceived HST, I worry that it will look to Riverview to fill its coffers.

I have been proud to champion the cause of protecting what is left of the Riverview Hospital, and I will continue to do so. The land contains many valuable and rare trees, along with precious wildlife and other horticulture worth preserving. This land must be preserved for people with mental illness and for its environmental and heritage value. Instead of continuing to cut beds, we should be increasing the hospital's role to help with our many vulnerable citizens with mental illness.

As of October 2010, Riverview had only 189 patients remaining. Since 2002, as part of the Riverview redevelopment project, patients have been, and continue to be, moved into private long-term care facilities, often necessitating the transfer of current residents. This is no doubt a dramatic process for all concerned.

Tucked into the Ministry of Health are women and seniors — grouped together, I assume, because both groups are marginalized by this current government. The problems of poverty, HST, higher food and energy costs, etc., affect seniors to a disproportionate degree — those who are able to remain in their own homes and the men and women in seniors housing communities.

Meanwhile, our frail seniors who are in residential care are looking at yet another rate hike. This $54 million revenue grab will leave many men and women struggling to pay for basic needs. A senior whose before-tax income is $22,000 will now have to pay close to $2,000 more for long-term care. This translates into fewer necessities such as toiletries, dental care, over-the-counter medicine, hearing aids and clothing for seniors. It will mean that seniors might remain in their homes longer than they should, with many eventually ending up in acute care as what are commonly called "bed-blockers." This certainly seems like false economy to me.

Just looking briefly at the Ministry of Agriculture. Although my riding is suburban, I am still angered that this government has allowed the Agricultural Land Commission to remove thousands of acres from the

[ Page 6487 ]

ALR, while at the same time weakening legislation for environmental assessments. I'm also disappointed that the Buy B.C. program seems to become less important in the budget every year.

Moving now to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, which is very, very important to my riding. Because only 25 percent of people who live in Coquitlam-Maillardville work in the city they live in, transportation issues are very important. Our residents use the West Coast Express for commuter rail service into Vancouver and east to Mission, and you will see many TransLink buses on our streets, although many neighbourhoods are not served. This is despite the fact that automobile exhaust is one of the largest sources of pollution in B.C.

[1525]

And the Nevergreen line, as I call it, has been on track and off track and then back on track so many times that everybody has lost track. The government announced the line would go ahead several years ago, before the estimated $1.4 billion in funding had been secured.

The federal government made its financial commitment, and construction was finally expected to start in 2010. However, the provincial government was $2 million short, and now TransLink has announced it cannot afford to build or operate the line, which they estimate will cost at least $350 million per year.

I would be pleased if someone, anyone, could tell me and the community what is going on. The last time I looked, SkyTrain's website said construction would begin in early 2011. Like my constituents, I'll believe it when I see it. It seems to me that we've passed early 2011, so the website will probably be updated any day now.

Looking at the Ministry of Finance, which flows quite naturally, I think, from the transportation ministry and talking about the Nevergreen SkyTrain line to Coquitlam, I hear from my constituents that the HST continues to be a huge issue in my riding. I can understand why, as the $1.9 billion tax shift from business to consumers hits everyone, from small business to those families that are struggling to make the end of the month come before the end of their money.

As everywhere else in the province, Coquitlam-Maillardville residents were outraged with the introduction of the HST just weeks after an election campaign where they were not told it was on the table. I meet people of every political stripe who are willing to be counted in the fight to stop the tax. But let's remember that all the Liberal MLAs voted for it right here in this House and are now making a concerted effort to resell the HST to British Columbians before the referendum is held this summer, and it's all at taxpayers' expense.

All of us in the opposition are pleased, of course — moving on to something positive to say — that the government finally listened to working British Columbians and raised the minimum wage. [Applause.] Well, it's good to know that they're listening. I always appreciate that.

Of course, it took about ten years, and unless some action is taken on affordable housing, the rising costs of transit, hydro increases, tuition costs, user fees, etc., the government is going to have to look at raising it again to keep up with costs that have spiralled out of control since 2003.

I want to get through these before my time is up, Madam Speaker, so I'm not pausing in between the ministries.

The Ministry of Attorney General. We do live in interesting times. The Crown Counsel Association says there are not enough prosecutors to fight crime in this province. The association president disputes claims that ten prosecutors have been hired to deal with gang violence. Instead, prosecutors were moved from other offices, leaving those offices understaffed. That is coming from the association.

As well, 60 legal aid offices have been cut, ten jails and 24 courthouses have closed, and there are not enough judges to oversee trials. Pretrial facilities are 200 percent over capacity, which increases the threat of violence. Surely we must make sure that the justice system has the resources it needs to keep our streets safe.

Much as I would like to ignore the B.C. Rail deal, I simply can't. The office of the Attorney General signed off on a $6 million deal to secure guilty pleas from two former political aids in this corruption trial. I have to believe this was so the government could save face and avoid media and public scrutiny.

As well, for more than seven years, the government has refused to answer questions relating to the sale of B.C. Rail. They have refused repeated public calls for an independent inquiry into the sale of the former Crown corporation, and like my constituents, I wonder what they are afraid of.

Moving onto the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and gaming. Gaming policy and enforcement and responsible gambling strategy come under the Minister of Public Safety, along with the B.C. Lottery Corporation. I remember very well when casinos first came to this province with a promise that they would generate revenue for non-profits and charities, many in the arts sector.

[1530]

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

But that social contract, which led to city councils approving casino locations, has been broken. In fact, gaming grants are actually lower now than they were in the 1990s, despite a huge increase in profits. Like most of the people in this province, I question why the top priority for gaming revenue should be subsidizing private casino companies' car parks and show lounges. Aren't the casino companies making enough money? Do they really need subsidies when grants are being cut

[ Page 6488 ]

for the arts and for charities that help people with disabilities, seniors and children who want to play sports, take music lessons or perform?

Casinos can receive a subsidy of 3 percent of their net win plus an additional one-time subsidy, which is an additional 2 percent of a casino's net win. Together these subsidies have offset about 40 percent — 40 percent, Madam Speaker — of the capital costs of casino development in B.C. in recent years alone. I can assure you that these casinos have not spent 40 percent of their capital costs on programs for problem gamblers or helping their families.

Again, it is difficult to see why casinos need subsidies at all. Gambling revenues at the lottery corp were at $2.5 billion in 2009-10. Casino receipts increased from about $492 million to about $1.3 billion, with casino growth going from one-third of the Crown corporation's total revenue to more than half of it.

Slot machine revenue has jumped to $1.3 billion, an interesting statistic when I remember something about the B.C. Liberals talking about stopping the expansion of gambling. Gaming, as it is now called instead of gambling, is a big business. At the very least, isn't it time that we separated gaming policy and gaming enforcement into separate ministries?

Looking now at the Ministry of Social Development and references to the budget and what occurred there in the 2011 budget. In February the budget projected 3,000 more people would be on income assistance over the next two years. So what does the government do? It cuts employment programs for people on income assistance by $16 million. Income and disability assistance is shamefully low.

Certainly thousands of B.C. children live in poverty, the most in Canada. Where is the poverty reduction plan? What is this government doing to be sure that children have enough to eat and warm winter coats?

In my riding of Coquitlam-Maillardville we see homelessness. Since 2007 the number of homeless people in the Tri-Cities has fluctuated between 160 and 210 people. After threats, obscenities and impassioned debate, Coquitlam council approved rezoning land for a homeless shelter in the eastern part of our city. Standing in the way of construction is a memorandum of understanding with the province, an operational plan and, most of all, funding by the government.

The Hope for Freedom Society, along with five local churches and volunteers, continues to operate a cold and wet weather mat program to provide temporary overnight housing for those in need. I thank them for caring, and I hope that the provincial government shares the same urgency as we do to provide the homeless with something more permanent in the Tri-Cities region of British Columbia.

Moving now — I'm in closing, I think — to the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Back in 2006 the hon. Ted Hughes released a scathing report into the beating death of a Port Alberni toddler, and 62 recommendations were proposed, which the government accepted. What has happened? Clearly not enough.

The B.C. Representative for Children and Youth, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, said in her final report on implementation of the recommendations that less than half had been completed. "Much has been promised and little delivered," she said.

It would seem logical that the ministry charged with child protection and the person charged with representing children and youth would have the same goals and work together. It has not seemed so. The province tried to reduce Turpel-Lafond's budget. She was forced to take the province to court to get documents she needed just to complete one report.

[1535]

In January Turpel-Lafond released a report reviewing the deaths of 21 infants since 2007. The report made several recommendations and questions the practices of the ministry in providing preventative care, ongoing monitoring of difficult family circumstances, and reviewing and learning from past mistakes. She indicated — again, I quote — "chronic, deep poverty" as the single-largest risk factor in the lives of families that she reviewed.

With 9,000 children in care at any one time, how can this government continue to not only ignore many of Turpel-Lafond's recommendations but to actively make her work more difficult? Surely everyone can agree that the best interests of children are what matters.

Madam Speaker, we are facing many challenges in this beautiful province, but I am confident that we can meet these challenges if we all work together for the good of our citizens. It is long past time to put people first and to let their wishes and needs be heard in these halls. Our young people must be able to get a better education. Our seniors must have respect. We must protect our resources and commit to a sustainable environment. Our citizens who are sick need the best health care. Our public schools must be viewed as one of our most precious resources and protected.

Of course we all want economic prosperity, and I believe we can have that by making smart choices that put people first and address the widening gap between rich and poor. All things are possible when there is a will to succeed. We have nothing to lose and everything, everything, to gain.

Deputy Speaker: Can I ask members who are having separate conversations to keep their voices down a little so we can hear the people who are participating in the debate.

J. McIntyre: It's with great pleasure that I take my place in the budget debate today. It's very nice to be back in the House. I thought I would like to start by, first of all, thanking all the constituents of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky who two years ago — I guess just about this time two

[ Page 6489 ]

years ago — placed their confidence in me representing them here in Victoria. It is every day a privilege to serve my constituents, and I really want to, as I say, begin this by thanking them all.

I also, of course, want to thank my constituency assistant Judith Fee, who does a huge amount of casework in our very big, sprawling riding, and my staff here in the Legislature, former and current, and most of all, I think, like all of us, want to recognize our families, who do so much behind the scenes to give us the support to be able to do this job. So I want to thank my husband, Andrew, my two children and my dad in Toronto, who will be 85 this September and who I still find that I rely on regularly for his strong advice. So thanks to all of them and to all of my colleagues who, again, make my job easier.

I thought I would start today with some budget highlights. Much has been said back and forth, but I think it is worth putting into the record some of the key things that this budget does for British Columbia. Our former Finance Minister has reiterated a number of times that this budget in 2011 really recognizes the commitment of the government to fund vital public services that we've all come to rely on, while also continuing on a prudent fiscal course during a time of transition and still ongoing economic recovery.

The deficit actually is now lower than what we originally forecasted. It's now 25 percent lower and is now at $1.265 billion. The budget also forecasts deficits lower of $925 million going forward to 2011-12 and $440 million in 2012-13, ending up with a surplus now of $175 million in 2013-14. So we're on track to balance the budget at the time we originally said.

Also, I think most importantly, and in contrast to the member across from us from Fraser-Nicola, we are bending the curve down on the GDP-to-debt ratio, which was higher. It was about 21 percent or so when we took office in 2001. We lowered it by about 37 percent or something, down to 13 or 14 percent. Yes, admittedly in this time of recession, where we're investing in infrastructure, it is creeping up a little, but it will never reach the level that we inherited, and it's on course to go down.

[1540]

We are very confident that we are funding the priorities, and I want to go through those: an extra $605 million to the Ministry of Health through 2013-14 to sustain that front-line delivery; $65 million over three years to the Ministry of Social Development to help the most vulnerable, those on income assistance and families in need; and some additional flexibility — $150 million in the contingency fund.

We're also still funding health care at record amounts. By 2013-14 the Ministry of Health budget will increase by almost $2 billion from the 2010-11 levels, and it's on track to $18.5 billion, or over 42 percent of all expenses, by 2013-14.

On the capital side, we've done an immense amount of investing, especially during the economic downturn. The capital spending on schools, hospitals, roads, hydroelectric projects and other infrastructure is now expected to total about $19 billion over this next three years. Since October 2008 we've committed $5.5 billion to about 900 accelerated capital infrastructure investments around the province that have stimulated the economy. It's kept British Columbians working, especially in a very difficult economic downturn.

Debt. I also, as I say, want to acknowledge, I guess in rebutting my member across, that we are bending down the debt-to-GDP ratio. That's a very important part of this budget.

I also want to remind people that this budget — it has sometimes been called status quo — is really built on the basis of a very, very strong foundation. In the decade that the B.C. Liberals have been in government…. I thought I'd just zoom through a couple of highlights. B.C. has created almost 50,000 jobs overall last year alone — in 2010, still coming out of an economic recession — and altogether moving up towards 400,000.

We've eliminated corporate capital tax on financial and non-financial institutions, which I think is pretty vulnerable with the new leader across the aisle here, who I want to congratulate personally. But I have some fear about his plan for British Columbia, especially with a promise to raise taxes.

We have lowered the general corporate income tax rate from 16.5 to 10 percent over these last few years, and the small business rate is about to be eliminated. It went from 4.5 to 2.5, and April 1 next year, exactly 12 months, will be down to zero — gone, eliminated for small businesses around this province.

We've also eliminated over 150,000 regulations since forming government. Our average hourly rate is up at over $23, which is up even over last year, January 2010, and altogether a 27.5 percent increase since December.

I cede the floor to my colleague.

J. Les: I beg leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

J. Les: I'm delighted this afternoon to welcome to the precincts….

Interjection.

J. Les: No, that would be overdoing it.

I am delighted to welcome to the House this afternoon 36 grade 11 students from Highroad Academy in my constituency of Chilliwack. They arrived in Victoria this afternoon. I am delighted they've taken some time to visit the legislative precinct. I hope all members will be on their best behaviour while they're in the House —

[ Page 6490 ]

no heckling, no catcalling, especially from the member for Abbotsford West. Would you please help me make them all very welcome.

J. McIntyre: I'm happy to add my voice of welcome to you all. It's wonderful to see students in the gallery. It's very important, I guess, government procedures that you're witnessing today, and I hope it will be a memorable visit for you all.

Debate Continued

J. McIntyre: So yes, back to my speech. I think that was a good break.

I'd like to move on, actually, from some of those general highlights and the strong economic foundation we've laid to talk a little bit about British Columbia's leadership role in adapting and developing a green economy, because I think that's something obviously very important as we move forward.

Again, despite something the member for Fraser-Nicola said when he asked about and tried to deny that we even had the foundation of a green economy…. I'd like to rebut some of that, because for the first time ever we now have private sector innovation that's being applied freely to the development of clean, tidal, geothermal, wind, run-of-the-river and biomass projects all across the province now.

[1545]

We introduced further incentives in 2005 to support the development of wind power projects. We also supported the construction of B.C.'s first tidal energy project, and it began operation in 2009. Policies that we have done have prompted the private sector to invest more than $2.5 billion now in new, clean, renewable power right here in British Columbia.

We established the innovative clean energy fund to support promising clean power technology projects and to help them succeed. That resulted in ICE fund contributions of about $47 million to 34 different projects all around B.C.

We passed legislation in 2008 that set a 5 percent average renewable fuel standard for gasoline and phasing the diesel requirement with a 3 percent target for 2010, 4 percent for 2011 and 5 percent by 2012. We've made a commitment to reduce the carbon emissions intensity of transportation fuels by at least another 10 percent by 2020.

Those are all very important attributes as we move forward, and we know that British Columbia is being looked at as a leading centre across North America with the legislation that we've been rolling out over the last few years.

Just locally, to give you a little bit of local flavour, in West Vancouver–Sea to Sky, of course, British Columbia has been building a green highway that runs from Whistler to Victoria and will include more stations throughout B.C. as it possibly gets extended as far south to California. We entered a federal-provincial partnership investing $89 million in 20 fuel cell buses in the Whistler hydrogen fuelling station, where I had the pleasure of being at the opening with the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure.

So those are the kinds of things that we are taking a lead on in making sure that we have clean, green jobs, especially for youth and people who are contemplating careers. We want to make sure that those are the right kinds of jobs that are available for you.

I also want to take a moment to…. There was an interesting

article by Moura Quayle, who used to be a deputy minister here not too long ago in the provincial parliament. She's now at the Sauder School of Business at UBC. She wrote this

article with John Richards at the School of Public Policy at Simon Fraser just this week.

It provided very good food for thought as we go forward. We have a new Premier, new Leader of the Opposition, but there is a great opportunity. The genesis of the article, the gist of the article, was that we have a lot to celebrate in British Columbia, but we have almost a duty or, hopefully, an obligation to take the green economy to the next level.

They cited a recent column by economist Mark Jaccard, who had been very favourable about our carbon tax and other steps we were taking. Interestingly, his report highlights figures from our budget that the carbon tax has paid back to British Columbians $200 million more than it has taken away. So they comment that the carbon tax has actually delivered a significant tax cut.

According to his assessment, at least three-quarters of British Columbians are paying less today because of the carbon tax, and of course, for thousands of people that means that we have more money in our pockets — right? — for groceries, child care, sports, all sorts of other costs that families incur.

They go on to say that our carbon-pricing policy has helped one of the largest clusters of clean tech companies in the world to expand. Clean tech stands, of course, as one of the fastest-growing sectors with hundreds of companies and thousands of jobs.

I also want to comment — and I feel quite strongly about this from other roles I've played in government over the years — that they're urging, and stating really, that our economic advantages have been bolstered by the leadership that we took in the Western Climate Initiative, in WCI, which was the regional agreement to help tackle some of the issues of climate change. Throughout, the cooperation that we've had with other jurisdictions like California, Quebec, Ontario and others, British Columbia is literally being regarded as being on the leading edge of the green economy.

I also want to move on from that to another type of job that, again, we're hoping to make sure that our youth and people behind us are developing skills and have interest in, and that is in what we have here in British

[ Page 6491 ]

Columbia: a vibrant motion picture industry. The theme is the same. They're good, clean, green jobs, high-paying jobs, but they need skills. They need the skills that we hope to prepare our youth with.

We have a very vibrant motion picture and interactive game industry here — third-largest motion production centre in North America. Our government has supported this industry with tax credits to level the playing field with other jurisdictions and to support what we have here in a very skilled labour force and also the diverse locations that we have around beautiful British Columbia.

[1550]

I just want to put on the record here that our film tax policies and the credits that we've provided have made sure that British Columbia is competitive. Budget 2008 raised those tax credit rates. Budget 2009 eliminated the expiry dates and expanded the eligibility for domestic credits, allowing some of our B.C. production companies more access to capital in other markets. Then in February 2010 our government announced new tax incentives and extended them to interactive digital media.

We've now got B.C. film crews, infrastructure and production companies that are recognized as the best in the industry and, coupled with these locations I was talking about, make B.C. now a top choice for domestic and foreign producers.

The motion picture industry here in British Columbia employs approximately 35,000 people. That is a lot of people. Most of those jobs are sort of project-based, freelance, and 5,000 or 6,000 of those are located on the North Shore adjacent to and throughout the riding that I represent. It's a very, very important industry.

That leads me and provides a very nice segue, because the industry is flourishing here in British Columbia now partly because of the HST. Without the HST that was introduced, you can ask many of the people…. You ask Peter Leitch, who is the head of the Motion Picture Production Industry Association. Those jobs, they know, would be immediately, overnight, going to Ontario where the HST is offered. They have been….

I want to thank them here and put on the record their efforts to help educate the public on this topic and let people know how important the HST is to particular sectors, that it's well worth considering.

I want to go on, because I do want to take some of my time today to talk about the HST and about the HST referendum that's coming up. My plea today is to make sure that the public does get engaged in the information and the public engagement campaign that we're finally embarking on, because as much as we have an excellent track record on the economy, and we have a good foundation, we still are facing considerable uncertainty related to the harmonized sales tax.

It makes some of what we're discussing here, and some of what we're talking about in the budget, moot if we find ourselves in a position to have to pay back to the federal government $1.6 billion and if we also have to go through the steps of re-employing hundreds of employees, $30 million a year, to reinstitute a tax department and audit department here in British Columbia. We'll be asking companies to deal with two different tax agencies again, both federal and provincial. That's about a cost of $150 million to business itself.

Really, as I say, my plea today is to make sure that British Columbians have the facts that they need to make an informed decision, so to that end we've taken a number of steps. The public has told us…. As much as we respect their decision in this referendum, they have told us over and over very clearly that they want the facts, the straight facts. So we have taken these steps.

We have appointed an expert panel. They're reviewing the referendum options, and they're going to be reporting out to the public independently about the likely impacts on consumers, on the budget and on our economy. We've delayed the release of that report, I understand, till after May 2, till after the federal election, but hopefully we will have that objective information.

We've also engaged in what's called Talking Tax. It's a public campaign that we're embarking on that's to provide this timely opportunity to discuss and review the HST in advance of the referendum. It's also an opportunity for voters to fully understand the choices before them and for the government to listen to what British Columbians have to say about the tax and also to hear their ideas about how the HST can be improved.

I don't know if some of you were here earlier. The Finance Minister was talking about the thousands — there were something like almost 30,000 people — that had participated in a couple of the teleconferences here because the public is engaged. It shows. They want to know more about it.

The other thing is, as I say, we really want to make sure that the public understands the two options, because this isn't a matter of no tax or tax. This is a matter of which form of taxation.

[1555]

Do you want to go with the single HST that's a benefit to businesses and creates jobs, or do you want to return to this two-tax PST-GST system which sees the provincial sales tax embedded at every level of the value chain, of the production chain? I'm hoping and confident that once we go through this public engagement process and people get the facts, they'll be able to make a much better decision. I just wanted to take a few minutes to talk about some of that plan, because people may not know what's before them now.

Under the plan that we announced a couple of weeks ago, we're providing a total of $500,000 for the yes and no sides, which will be subject to conditions on the appropriate use of the public funding and the accountability for that spending. We're creating a public dialogues fund

[ Page 6492 ]

of $500,000 to be independently managed by the province's public universities, colleges and institutes. They'll be holding informative public dialogues in advance of the referendum.

We're also producing and sending a comprehensive guide to every home in British Columbia with information that will have statements from both the yes and no side. We have asked the hon. Stephen Owen, and he's agreed to be appointed as an independent funding decision-maker. He'll be overseeing this. He has a very…. I think he's regarded very well by both sides of the House, and I'm very confident that he's going to be able to lead us in that discussion.

As I say, my final plea is that we have and do find ways to engage the public, including youth and everyone around the province — from rural, urban, all those who hopefully will be able to see the benefit and know why, actually for almost two years, we have consistently supported the tax. I think we know in our hearts it is the right thing for British Columbia.

It's been a very difficult thing, and I think we have a number of times apologized to the public for the way in which the tax was introduced, but it is probably the most significant public policy issue we're facing as a province. There are over 130 countries all around the world that have all gone to value-added tax. The rest of Canada, basically the vast majority of the population in Canada, has moved to that. So we will be going there, and we are there now.

The lost cost in opportunity, if we ever had to really reverse this system — the cost to business and to the public and to those at the lower end of the income scale who are getting a benefit, are getting cheques quarterly to help them with those costs, to actually more than help them with those costs…. All of those things will be a great loss. I just want to be on the record of saying that I hope we can get the facts out, and I hope that the public will see and will forgive, despite the way it was launched, will see the merits of the tax and support and cast their ballot.

They have a whole month, from June 24 until July 22, to cast that ballot, and I hope that everybody will do it in an informed, educated basis and take the time to get themselves up to speed.

With that, I'd like to do a switch here in my comments, because I realize that most of us do take the time at budget response to talk a little bit about their riding and how things are faring in the riding. I feel that we're halfway through this second term, and I thought it would be a nice opportunity to take people, and hopefully the viewers at home, on a tour pretty well down the Sea to Sky Highway, which is the main road that links all of my communities in the wonderful riding of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky that I represent.

I thought I would start at the north end and talk a little bit about Pemberton — start there. The village of Pemberton is undergoing a very interesting…. It's been a long, sort of tenuous road through a boundary expansion that will allow them actually to attract a school, a private school, elementary school gyms that they're working on. Their music festival…. All sorts of things depend on some of these zoning issues, and Pemberton will have, with this boundary extension, a better and bigger opportunity to set their own goals and objectives for what they would like to be going on in their community.

They've been the beneficiaries of some infrastructure grants, including a walkway around One Mile Lake, trails, infrastructure for wastewater. They just recently received some money for diking, which has been very much appreciated.

I think the community is growing. They have many babies. They had a record of babies, I think, in the last couple of years. So it's a thriving community, albeit still small — under 5,000. It's been, again, a pleasure to serve those members.

I also want to mention, of course, First Nations. The Lil'wat, Mount Currie band is adjacent. Pemberton and Mount Currie, I think for the first time in their history, are actually having joint municipal — if you can call them that; or joint band and council — meetings on a regular basis.

[1600]

That came out of a report called Winds of Change , where they had a very unfortunate tragedy in their community and realized that they have to work together, both aboriginals and non-aboriginals, to set their future course. They are doing that in a very respectful and very successful way.

I think those efforts were really highlighted during 2010, during the torch relay, when the torch stopped at Mount Currie band. In fact, when the torch stopped at the Squamish Lil'wat Cultural Centre in Whistler, when one of the youth from Lil'wat Nation passed the torch to one of the youth from the Squamish Nation, it was a very, very touching moment that I think all of us will remember — all of us holding candles.

Those are the kinds of memories from the 2010 torch relay and activities that were, I think, so important to binding and bonding the Sea to Sky corridor, because naturally, with the Olympics — many of the games, including the Paralympics, being held in Whistler — we had this wonderful opportunity of being able t