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)

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 20, Number 8

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tabling Documents

Office of the Auditor General, Follow-up Report: Updates on the Implementation of Recommendations from Recent Reports

Office of the Representative for Children and Youth, issue report, Phallometric Testing and B.C.'s Youth Justice System

Office of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, Annual Report 2010

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 4 — Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) Initiative Vote and Referendum Act

Hon. B. Penner

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Cancer Society Daffodil Day

D. Barnett

M. Farnworth

Canadian Sport Tourism Alliance conference in Richmond

R. Howard

Prevention of violence against women and children

K. Corrigan

Rural B.C. role in political process

B. Bennett

Community of South Wellington

D. Routley

Oral Questions

Cost of government information on harmonized sales tax

A. Dix

Hon. K. Falcon

Impact of harmonized sales tax on home care for seniors

A. Dix

Hon. K. Falcon

K. Corrigan

Harmonized sales tax low-income credit

B. Ralston

Hon. K. Falcon

Report recommendations on services for developmentally disabled persons

N. Simons

Hon. H. Bloy

S. Simpson

M. Karagianis

J. Horgan

Grant's law and protection for workers

R. Chouhan

Hon. S. Cadieux

Kelowna Women's Resource Centre

M. Mungall

Hon. I. Chong

Motions Without Notice

Appointment of Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole

Membership of Special Committee of Selection

Hon. R. Coleman

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

M. MacDiarmid

J. Kwan

J. Rustad

L. Krog

D. Horne

N. Macdonald

J. Yap

S. Simpson

N. Letnick

[ Page 6409 ]

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2011

The House met at 1:36 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

L. Krog: I have two introductions today. Firstly, I'd like the House to make welcome, from Parksville, Gail Murray and Frank Rowe. They're in the gallery today.

Secondly, exercising that privilege that's awarded to grandparents: grandchild No. 3, Alasdair Hadrian Douglas Irving, on March 11 — 8 pounds 1½ ounces. The whole family is doing very well.

Hon. S. Cadieux: I have the honour today to introduce someone I've known for many years since the sidelines of the football field in high school. Dale Saip is here in the Legislature this afternoon with his daughter Victoria. I am pleased to say that Victoria will have her tenth birthday on Friday and that this is her first visit to the Legislature. Will everybody please make her welcome.

J. Yap: I have two introductions.

First of all, about 3½ years ago, I rose in this House to announce the arrival of the world's most beautiful baby girl, Alyssa Joyce Robertson, a granddaughter of my constituency assistant Paige Robertson. Well, the Robertson clan has grown. Two more grandchildren have recently arrived for Paige and her husband, Jamie. Their grandson, Mason Charles Terrence Robertson, was born five weeks early on October 12, 2010, weighing 7 pounds 8 ounces, born to Geoffrey and Kat.

A granddaughter and sister for Alyssa, Sophie Ann Robertson was born a week ago on the morning of April 20, weighing seven pounds, born to Ben and Brianna. I ask the House to please help me welcome them.

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I also have an introduction of some students from my favourite high school in Richmond-Steveston, McMath Secondary School, which my daughter and son attended a few years ago. We have 175 grade 11 students who are in the precincts, and about 40 of them will be joining us sometime soon for question period, led by a number of teachers and chaperones, including teacher Angela Sommerfeld. I'd like the House to welcome them, and I know we will all provide them with a very vibrant display of democracy in action here in the House.

L. Popham: I have four visitors in the House today visiting from the Independent Learning Centre, school district 63, in Saanich. I have three grade 11 students — Amellia Pearson, Evan Reimer and Evan Wingerter — and their teacher, Will Moore. Please make them welcome.

[1340]

Hon. B. Penner: With all this talk about babies, I can't let the occasion pass without informing all hon. members that since we last met, my wife and I have become the very proud and delighted parents of Fintry Katherine Penner. Fintry was born on February 20 at 11:21 in the morning — I won't soon forget that experience — weighing in at 7 pounds 6 ounces. And for those that are wondering, Fintry is also the name of a small provincial park in the Okanagan which has been referred to as B.C.'s Garden of Eden.

For those that are also further wondering, Ranger the cat is getting along quite well with the new addition to the Penner household.

D. Routley: I'd like the House to help me welcome my 15-year-old daughter, Madeline, and after this I'll ask the security how they separated her from her cell phone coming into the gallery, because I haven't been able to do it. It gives me great pleasure to have my daughter visit us, along with her boyfriend, Zach Cannon. Please make them welcome.

M. Coell: I have a good friend visiting the Legislature today for meetings with the Premier. I first met Mel Couvelier 30 years ago, when he was the mayor of Saanich. He served for many years on Saanich council before coming to this chamber and was the Finance Minister a number of years ago. He's served his whole life in community service. I would like the House to please make him welcome.

Hon. G. Abbott: It appears we're on the cusp of a solution to the demographic challenge of society, based on the introductions here today. As you know, Mr. Speaker, I've always been deeply envious of you and other members of the grandparents' club here in the Legislature. So it is with some pleasure that Lesley and I would like to advise you — along with the other new proud grandparents, Ted and Karen Fuller of Victoria — of the birth of Raiden Andrew Fuller, who is our first grandchild on both sides. He was born April 20 to my daughter Megan and her husband, Brent. I'd like the House to please make welcome our newest British Columbian.

J. Les: With all of the introductions of recent births this afternoon, I felt I should get up and do my little bit. I'm very pleased and proud to announce to the House that my latest grandson, Branson James Les, arrived on February 20 — another son for my son Alan and his wife, Elena. February 20 has already been mentioned earlier today. As a matter of fact, he was born, I think, about

[ Page 6410 ]

two hours after the aforementioned Fintry Penner just down the hall at the Chilliwack General Hospital. In any event, Branson is doing just fine. His little sister Emily is proud as punch.

I know that the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has been keeping very careful track of exactly how many grandkids that is. It's 15, Mr. Speaker.

L. Reid: I am delighted to welcome back to this place our former MLA for the North Coast. Mr. Bill Belsey has joined us on the floor. He is joined by his wife, Lonie Belsey. I'd ask the House to please make them both very welcome.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the Auditor General report Follow-up Report: Updates on the Implementation of Recommendations from Recent Reports , the Representative for Children and Youth issue report Phallometric Testing and B.C.'s Youth Justice System , Conflict of Interest Commissioner Annual Report 2010 .

[1345]

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 4 — harmonized sales tax (HST)

initiative vote and referendum act

Hon. B. Penner presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) Initiative Vote and Referendum Act.

Hon. B. Penner: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Penner: I'm pleased to introduce the Harmonized Sales Tax Initiative Vote and Referendum Act. The purpose of this bill is to cancel the initiative vote on the HST that is currently required by the Recall and Initiative Act to be held on September 24 of this year. That vote will not be necessary, as it is being replaced by a mail-in referendum under the Referendum Act commencing this June, which should save taxpayers at least $18 million compared to a traditional "walk up to the polling booth" vote. This bill also makes clear, for certainty, that the Recall and Initiative Act does not apply to that referendum.

Mr. Speaker, 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 4, Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) Initiative Vote and Referendum 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

(Standing Order 25B)

CANCER SOCIETY DAFFODIL DAY

D. Barnett: It is my pleasure to be here today in honour of Daffodil Day. The Canadian Cancer Society, British Columbia and Yukon Division, continues to be a leader in cancer research funding, prevention, advocacy and patient support. Daffodil Day is a positive move to raise awareness of the ways that people can reduce their risk of developing cancer.

Cancer affects every one of us in one way or another. With an alarming one in three British Columbians developing some form of cancer in their lifetime, our government shares the society's commitment to improve cancer and treatment options. In fact, B.C. has some of the most favourable outcomes in North America, with the lowest mortality rates for all cancers combined. This is thanks to a strong and dedicated network of cancer care across this province.

However, an estimated 50 percent of all cancers are preventable. By living a healthy lifestyle — not smoking, getting enough exercise, eating healthy and controlling weight — your chances of getting a chronic disease are reduced by up to 80 percent.

Thank you to all the volunteers, donors and people that have made this campaign a success, and thank you to each of you for being here today. Each one of us here has the power to make a difference in the fight against cancer.

M. Farnworth: April 27 is Daffodil Day in British Columbia and across the country. All of us in this chamber are wearing a daffodil. It's a symbol of the Canadian Cancer Society. It's a symbol of the fight against cancer.

It's something that's touched every single one of us in this House. There's no doubt about that. Former members and current members have been cancer survivors. I myself lost my mother, when she was 38, to breast cancer. Today the survival rates for breast cancer are a lot better than they were back in 1976.

As the member from Cariboo has just stated, we have significant outcomes in this province that are better than just about anywhere in the country. The trouble is that good outcomes aren't good enough, and that's why we wear this yellow daffodil: to send a message that we will not rest in the fight against cancer until we have got a cure for cancer.

Today we can treat skin cancers in a way that was never done before, but there are other cancers that strike fear into people because their survival rate is still very abysmal, pancreatic cancer being one of them. Five percent

[ Page 6411 ]

of people have a chance of living five years later. That's not good enough.

That's why we wear this yellow daffodil: to stand in support with those who are fighting cancer and to send a strong message that we will not rest until the battle against cancer is won.

I come from Port Coquitlam, the hometown of Terry Fox. He did probably more than anybody else alive to bring awareness about cancer not just to Canadians but around the world. I think that's a legacy that all of us want to ensure continues until the day arrives when we've defeated cancer once and for all.

[1350]

CANADIAN SPORT TOURISM ALLIANCE

CONFERENCE IN RICHMOND

R. Howard: I am pleased to rise today to talk about the latest success for Richmond's tourism and sport industries. Richmond has won the right to host the annual conference of the Canadian Sport Tourism Alliance, CSTA for short. Richmond beat out nine other cities in Canada for the right to host this prestigious conference, which will run from April 18 through 20 in 2012. This conference, called the Sports Events Congress, is the CSTA's flagship event. Next year marks the first time ever that it will be held in western Canada.

It is Canada's largest annual gathering of sport tourism professionals and event management firms, with more than 300 delegates expected to attend. This honour is a direct result of the shining role Richmond played in the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games and the outstanding facilities infrastructure that are their legacy. The iconic Richmond Olympic Oval now offers over 47,000 square metres of meeting rooms, sports courts, ice rinks, reception areas and running tracks, and it will now host selected congress events.

The award-winning Vancouver International Airport and the Canada Line are two major reasons that Richmond was able to win the right to host the CSTA's annual gathering.

Mr. Speaker, the 2010 Winter Games gave Richmond the chance to shine on the world stage, and we made the most of that opportunity. With our partners we are harvesting the afterglow of the 2010 Winter Games. Through strong partnerships with our government, the city, Tourism Richmond, the Richmond Chamber of Commerce, the Richmond Sports Council and others, we are firmly on the map as a premier destination for tourism, convention and sport.

PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE

AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN

K. Corrigan: This month marks two important weeks, the National Victims of Crime Awareness Week and the Prevention of Violence Against Women Week. This year about 20,000 women and children in B.C. will be exposed to physical, psychological or sexual abuse, and 12 percent of all homicides in British Columbia are related to family violence. Family violence cases constitute the second-largest case type for Crown counsel after impaired driving. You only have to open the newspaper to see horrific stories of women, children and families victimized in our province today.

Lack of support for vulnerable families, relative poverty, lack of social housing, lack of access to the justice system and education, lack of access to support services for women and children have left thousands of women and children in B.C. vulnerable to violence.

The provincial government has a major responsibility to play in legislation and targeted programs and policies that will both prevent and protect women and girls from violence. Unfortunately, over the past decade many supports, including legal aid, have been deeply cut. We must invest in social supports such as safe houses, legal assistance, child care and skills training to help women and children escape violent family relationships and rebuild their lives.

While it's vital that we invest in protection for survivors of violence, it's equally important that we focus on prevention. We must confront gender stereotypes and challenge attitudes, customs and practices that perpetuate violence. We must cultivate a healthier attitude towards women and girls and advocate relationships based on equality if we hope to build safer environments in the family home, workplace and community.

Violence occurs across all ethnic, religious, age, social and economic lines. Every one of us has a responsibility in confronting and ending violence against women and children.

RURAL B.C. ROLE

in political process

B. Bennett: It's good to be back in this place. I'm as honoured to be an MLA today as I was ten years ago when I first got elected — perhaps a tad more seasoned than then.

Over the past six months I was given the gift of time to reconnect with my constituents, to travel the Kootenay region and, for that matter, to travel all over rural B.C. I believe that with our new leader — and I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the new Premier — rural British Columbians are seeing that the door to meaningful dialogue with the provincial government is now wide open, and the welcome mat is there for all to see.

I'm particularly proud of the important role that rural British Columbians played in choosing our new leader. Cranbrook, Williams Lake, Terrace, Mackenzie, Dawson Creek, Lillooet, Grand Forks, Comox, Campbell River —

[ Page 6412 ]

sounds like a country-western song. British Columbians from every rural niche and cranny had as much to say over the choice of our new leader as voters in Vancouver, Surrey and Victoria, and that's something to be proud of. It's something that rural British Columbians noticed and are grateful for.

[1355]

As elected people, we have choices. We can stay with the status quo and be left behind by the people we're trying to represent, or we can change how we do things. Discarding the old one-member, one-vote system that favoured the big cities was the right thing to do. Encouraging rural British Columbians to participate in the democratic process, in the knowledge that their vote will count, was also the right thing to do. Again, congratulations to the new Premier. Now let's get some work done.

COMMUNITY OF SOUTH WELLINGTON

D. Routley: I rise today to speak of a beautiful area south of Nanaimo — the community of South Wellington, originally named Alexandra camp. South Wellington formed around its first coalmine in the late 1800s, grew to include several stores, a hotel, a sawmill, a shoe repair, a Chinese laundry, a dance hall, three schools, three churches, a bank and eventually a total of five coalmines. In 1950 the last coalmine closed.

South Wellington, the beautiful community that it is, survived the Depression, mine disasters, strikes, wars, fires. It produced outstanding football teams and mine rescue teams, as well as first aid teams. Its May Day parade was supposed to be a sight to behold with the South Wellington brass band leading the community. A fire in 1914 left most of the community in tents.

From the past to the present it's people who have been the key to keeping that community and all communities alive and thriving. South Wellington and Area Community Association is now the heartbeat of that community. The South Wellington and Area Community Association — with Krista Seggie; Barb Ehmig; Doug Catley; Eve Reinarz; Gillian Butler; Andrea Bonkowski, also a Nanaimo school trustee; Susan Toth; Debbie Gregson — works to keep the community alive through events like their Christmas breakfast with Santa.

Formal stakeholder to the Nanaimo regional district area A official community plan, SWACA is a participant, defending South Wellington Elementary School from closure year after year. Currently South Wellington is represented by a beautiful exhibit at the Nanaimo Museum entitled Treasures of South Wellington . The work of artist Clare Singleton, a story artist, along with artifacts, is educating the people of Nanaimo about its heritage around coalmining and the beautiful community of South Wellington. I invite all members to attend that exhibition, which shows until May 14, and I'd like to personally thank Clare Singleton, the artist, for letting her pictures adorn the walls of my office.

Oral Questions

COST OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION

ON HARMONIZED SALES TAX

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition. [Applause.]

A. Dix: Well, thank you very….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: Hon. Speaker, just to be clear to the Minister of Education, I had him down for the first heckle.

Interjection.

A. Dix: Oh yeah, the Deputy Premier is a distinguished statesman now.

A very simple question for the Minister of Finance today: how much public money did the government spend on advertising and promoting the HST last year, and how much public money does the Minister of Finance — and surely he knows the answer to this question — plan to spend in advance of the referendum date?

Hon. K. Falcon: First of all, let me congratulate the member for his new position as Leader of the Opposition. That will be the first and last time the member hears nice things coming out of my mouth with respect to him.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: My colleagues are highly skeptical, of course.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: One of the criticisms we have quite rightly been accused of is not at all communicating facts and information with respect to HST to the public of British Columbia.

[1400]

We are, in fact, going to ensure that there is a fulsome, informed debate about HST, which is one of the most important public policy decisions the public will probably have in perhaps many decades in British Columbia.

So we have provided $1.7 million to ensure that there's $250,000 each for the pro- and the anti-HST side, that

[ Page 6413 ]

there's $500,000 under the aegis of the universities and colleges to sponsor debates in every region of the province and that there's $700,000 made available for a voter guide to ensure there will be free, full and totally competitive debate about a very important public tax policy.

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

A. Dix: Let me say this for the Minister of Finance. He sure is unrepentant. He sure can't help himself. I mean, he campaigned — all the B.C. Liberals campaigned — against the HST. Then they brought it in. Then they printed $800,000 in leaflets to promote the HST. They threw those in the garbage can. They did radio ads last year. They won't tell the public how much they spent, and the minister didn't tell the public how much they spent just now.

Now the minister has appointed himself — not since the refereeing in game 6 have we seen anything like that — the arbiter of fair debate in this campaign. Why doesn't he put away his slush fund and let the public decide, let the public make their decision, in their referendum about the HST?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, that's exactly what we are going to do. That is exactly….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: In fact, we have committed…. Not only will they get that decision and that choice; we have made sure it will be a simple majority and not a two-thirds requirement, as was under the old Recall and Initiative Act. Our new Premier has moved that date forward to ensure that British Columbians, by the end of June, will have the opportunity to have their voice heard.

But I want to be clear about something. We are absolutely unapologetic about the fact that we are going to make sure it is an informed debate. This is an important choice for British Columbians, and I will happily engage in the debate with the Leader of the Opposition about whether the harmonized sales tax is the right way to go or the Leader of the Opposition's preferred choice to go back to a sales tax, the provincial sales tax of British Columbia.

Bring on the debate, Mr. Leader of the Opposition.

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

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON HOME CARE FOR SENIORS

A. Dix: It's fair and balanced. What is it? — $250,000 for opponents of the HST, $200,000 for Tom Syer to organize the government's campaign, unknown amounts in radio ads. Yeah, it's a fair campaign, but there's one thing that's going to even it out. The people of British Columbia know that they were misled in the last election campaign. The people of British Columbia know this is a $2 billion tax shift onto them, and they're going to defeat the HST.

Matt Foley and his sister Kerry are caring for their elderly mother. She desperately wants to stay at home, but the doctors say she needs 24-hour medical care. They contracted a home care provider for that service. They are, in fact, draining their bank accounts because they love their family. That's what they're doing. They are going to pay $10,000 in additional costs this year because of the HST. Does the Minister of Finance think that's fair? Does the Minister of Finance think that soaking a Burnaby family for an extra $10,000 reflects families first in British Columbia?

Hon. K. Falcon: Under the HST, as the member should well know, 1.1 million lower-income British Columbians receive a rebate four times a year from the government to reflect the fact that there may be additional costs associated with HST.

[1405]

Now, to put that in perspective, this member, the Leader of the Opposition, wants to go back to the PST. He said, in fact, he will campaign on it. So I ask that member a similar question. For the single mother with three children that today is receiving $920 a year in HST rebates, why does the Leader of the Opposition want to go back to a provincial sales tax where that single mother with three children gets absolutely zero? That's what I'd like to know from the Leader of the Opposition.

K. Corrigan: There's no rebate for the Foley family. Matt Foley told me that for nine months he and his siblings took turns sleeping on the couch in their mother's home to look after her. They are now draining their family resources with 24-hour nursing care in order that they can respect their mother's wish that she not be moved out of the family home and from her neighbourhood, where she feels safe and comfortable.

The B.C. Liberal HST is hitting this family for an additional $10,000 a year. The question Matt Foley asked me and I ask the minister: does this make any sense at all? And is it fair?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm happy, if the member opposite will get the information to my office, to look into a specific situation for her.

But again, I want to be very clear what the choice is, particularly for low-income British Columbians. The Leader of the Opposition and the NDP want to go back to the provincial sales tax. The provincial sales tax provided a $75 rebate for adults only if you earn up to

[ Page 6414 ]

$15,000 in income or if your family income is $18,000. That's it. Nothing for children — nothing at all.

Under the HST, as you know, there's $230 for every qualifying individual, including adults and children. That is a very significant amount of money. I can tell you, as the Minister of Finance, that single parent in Kamloops or that single parent in Burnaby that has several children that is currently receiving almost $1,000 a year in HST rebates deserves to know that the NDP's preference is to go back to a provincial sales tax where they get zero.

The reality is this. All over the world, in 140 countries, the reason why they have moved to value-added taxes or harmonized sales taxes is because they are more efficient, they grow the economy, they're less duplicative, and they require less administrative overhead and cost. Those members want to go back to a system of sales tax that not a single country around the world has looked at in 35 years.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

K. Corrigan: For trying to respect their mother's wishes to stay in her home and for keeping her out of the health care system, the Foleys are having to pay an additional $10,000 a year. It's clear that the B.C. Liberals broke their word on the HST. It's clear that families like the Foleys are paying more because of it.

When will the minister come clean and admit that the HST is a massive tax shift hammering B.C. families and benefiting their corporate friends?

Hon. K. Falcon: As I've mentioned to the member, I'm happy to look into the Foleys' situation. If the member would provide that information, my staff and I would be happy to look into it.

But I think there is a larger debate that is taking place here. The larger debate is whether we move from a sales tax system that requires an administrative cost to government of $30 million a year and 300 civil servants to operate, or we move to a harmonized system that gets rid of 300 civil servants and $30 million a year, that eliminates $150 million a year of cost imposed on small business to comply with two different sales taxes, and move to a unified tax. That is a very legitimate debate to have.

As I say, under the HST, not only does it grow the economy and grow revenues, but it provides 1.1 million British Columbians, low-income British Columbians, with a significant financial rebate four times a year. That helps families.

[1410]

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

LOW-INCOME CREDIT

B. Ralston: The Minister of Finance — and he's repeating it again today — has tried to scare low-income British Columbians by inaccurately saying that when the HST is defeated in the referendum, they will get no tax credits at all. His example, which he's given again here today, is a single parent with three children and an annual income of only $24,000 a year — a tribute, I suppose, to the Liberals' low-wage policy of the last ten years.

He said that currently she receives $920 a year in HST credits, but nothing if the HST is defeated. But in fact, in the absence of the HST credit, the family would still receive $893 in federal GST credits and other credits — not nothing, as the minister just claimed.

Will the minister admit that he was wrong and make a commitment to end this distortion in future public statements?

Hon. K. Falcon: Actually, the member is wrong that the provincial rebate going back to those individuals, the HST rebate, is $230 per individual. It is separate from the GST rebate. That is $920 for any individual earning up to $20,000, or any family, a family income up to $48,000, which reduces over time after $25,000.

Those are uncomfortable facts, maybe, for the member opposite, but they are facts. It is important that as low-income British Columbians — 1.1 million who receive almost a quarter billion dollars worth of rebates under HST — they understand what the choice is really all about. That is information that is making sure they have accurate information, which we will ensure they do.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: The minister promised factual and unbiased information in this debate. Clearly, he's not prepared to live up to that commitment. You can't receive an HST rebate and a GST rebate at the same time. When the HST is defeated, those families will receive the GST rebate. Will the minister not tell the public the truth about what will happen when the HST is defeated?

Hon. K. Falcon: What is really unfortunate is that the Finance critic apparently doesn't understand his own role. The Finance critic does not understand the basic elements of the HST rebate. That's what is of concern to me as the Finance Minister. He should look into it. I'm happy to arrange a briefing for the Finance critic opposite.

The fact of the matter is clear. Under the PST, if you are a single individual earning up to $15,000 a year, as an adult you get a $75 credit — period. If you are a family or two adults with a family income up to $20,000, you get $150 — period. Nothing for children. It's a $75 credit for each adult. That is it.

Under the HST, we provide, the province provides, a rebate of $230 for each adult, for each child, to reflect the fact that we know that there are some additional costs imposed as a result of harmonizing the provincial sales tax and the GST.

[ Page 6415 ]

I suggest that the Finance critic get his facts straight before he asks questions in this House.

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ON SERVICES

FOR DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PERSONS

N. Simons: Families in this province have suffered under this government, but none more than families caring for a family member with a developmental disability. A $22 million cut has resulted in cancellation of day programs, the elimination of programs that provide supports to employment and has actually forced the closure of 33 group homes in this province.

I'm asking the minister responsible: what's he going to do to ensure that the supports are there for families with members with developmental disabilities in this province?

[1415]

Hon. H. Bloy: Our first priority as a ministry and as a government is to look after individuals with developmental disabilities. CLBC's budget has been increased every year for the last five years. We are committed to helping families. We are committed to helping families with disabilities. We have gone through a review with CLBC. It's been positively received by many of the members.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

N. Simons: Today a report was released by the Community Living Action Group warning that the $22 million cuts and the other cuts violate the rights of people with developmental disabilities. The response that was just provided does not adequately meet the needs or the concerns of people with developmental disabilities, their families, their advocates, their caregivers — anyone in this province.

What is the minister going to do to ensure that this violation doesn't continue and that adequate supports are in place for people with developmental disabilities?

Hon. H. Bloy: To the member across from me, I'll repeat: the budget has been increased, and we're serving more members every year. CLBC supports over 13,500 individuals with developmental disabilities, and we do this with some great staff and 3,200 contract employees.

S. Simpson: The report that was released today by the coalition…. Thirty-three group homes closed — that's the reality.

The previous minister who had this file assured us in April of last year in estimates that no one would be forced out of their homes. That's simply not the reality. The executive director of the B.C. coalition of disabilities in today's report said: "Many group home residents have lived together as families for years. Tragically, however, over the last year some group home residents have been forced to move, and their families have been torn apart."

Will the minister tell those families just what this is about with families first? Who came first with this decision to make these cuts?

Hon. H. Bloy: I can assure you that there have been no cuts to CLBC and that in fact, it's increased every year since 2005. CLBC impacts thousands of lives of B.C. citizens every year with funding services and support for adults with developmental disabilities.

I can tell you that advocates express high levels of satisfaction with the work that CLBC is doing. You know, CLBC has started personalized support initiatives introduced in February 2010 to help individuals.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: The reality is this. The minister might call it a system redesign to not call it a cut, but it's a cut.

What are those community groups saying? Well, what did the executive director of the B.C. Association for Community Living say about this government's action? "We know that service redesign is not an answer to addressing the funds needed for those who are waiting for service. It is a shortsighted, poor and harmful excuse for fiscal planning, and it is completely unsustainable." That's what the community thinks about this position.

Hon. Speaker, 600 more people coming every year into this service. Wait-lists are growing, and the government is cutting back and not funding. Will this minister tell the House why it is okay to fix your fiscal mess on the backs of the most vulnerable people in British Columbia?

[1420]

Hon. H. Bloy: I have to remind the member again and again that the budget is up for CLBC. CLBC impacts the lives of thousands of B.C. citizens by funding services and supports for their staff. Self-advocates continue to express their support of the redesign and changes that we've done within this ministry. CLBC supports over 13,500 individuals with developmental disabilities, and 93 percent of CLBC's budget of over $700 million goes towards programs for services for individuals with developmental disabilities.

M. Karagianis: Thirty-three group homes closed and more to be closed this year, vital and critical services for vulnerable individuals gone, no consultation with families, and this minister has the audacity to stand here and try and defend that position? That is unconscionable.

If the minister would avail himself of this report, it very specifically says they are calling for an independent provincial advocate to provide oversight for the Community

[ Page 6416 ]

Living B.C. program. Will the minister agree today to adhere to this report's recommendations?

Hon. H. Bloy: Let me reassure the members and the members across from me again that the budget has not been cut. Our first priority as a ministry has been to look after the individuals. CLBC remains committed to innovative approaches. We're committed to being able to help more individuals within this province, and we're committed to being able to do it within budget. In fact, we have increased our budget every year, and CLBC has a budget of well over $700 million a year.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: The continued claims here that there are no cuts are absolute nonsense. We know that group homes are closed. We know that there are great waiting lists. The question to the minister is regarding this report that's come out today. Will the minister support the report's recommendations?

Hon. H. Bloy: Again I'll remind them each time. There have been no cuts. There's been a redesign process that we've gone through, and we're doing it with individuals for better services to individuals. Every individual has had a choice of where they want to live. No one has ever been moved….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. H. Bloy: If I can remind the member, our budget's been increased every year.

J. Horgan: Can the minister confirm that he supports the closure of 33 group homes in British Columbia? Yes or no — do you support that?

Hon. H. Bloy: There've been redesigns around this province. There's been a large consultation process of well over 18 months. No one has ever been removed from a group home in the province of British Columbia without their explicit choice.

GRANT'S LAW AND

PROTECTION FOR WORKERS

R. Chouhan: In 2005 Grant De Patie was dragged to his death while trying to stop a thief. As a result, a law was proclaimed, Grant's law. Grant's law offers protection for workers by requiring either two workers on site at night or an installation of a protection barrier for a lone worker.

The law is there to protect workers, but the provincial government has failed to follow through on enforcement. On top of that, the Labour Minister is now calling for a review of Grant's law. Will the minister commit today to protecting vulnerable workers by scrapping the review and ensuring stronger enforcement of the law in order to avoid tragedies like this in the future?

[1425]

Hon. S. Cadieux: Indeed, the death of Grant De Patie was a tragic, tragic loss of life, and that's why government did work with WorkSafe B.C. to bring in Grant's law. This was the first prepay gas regulation in Canada.

The member, in fact, is incorrect, though. He is confusing two separate regulations. Grant's law has been in place since 2007, and there is in fact very high compliance. Since the regulation was implemented, the number of gas-and-dashes in Vancouver went from over 200 in 2007 to just one in 2010.

KELOWNA WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTRE

M. Mungall: After 25 years of service the Kelowna Women's Resource Centre is closing its doors today, all because of the failure of the B.C. Liberal government to provide stable, predictable funding as well as their topsy-turvy approach to B.C. gaming grants. The centre has helped women in Kelowna access services for themselves and their families, including helping hundreds of single mothers to file their tax returns so they could access supports like the child tax credit.

My question is to the Minister of Social Development. How is this uncaring government's disregard for services like the Kelowna Women's Resource Centre putting families first?

Hon. I. Chong: First of all, let me say that the gaming review process, which the Premier announced, will be underway shortly. We're going to have an independent judge, or someone of that stature, take a look at our gaming grants, the charities, the non-profits and the interaction we have, because we believe there's an important role that our non-profit organizations provide throughout all of our communities.

What's really important was that when the Premier made an announcement that $15 million would be restored and returned, we followed through on that. On March 31, $15 million was added to $120 million — $135 million to non-profits throughout the province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Mungall: Well, the truth is that $15 million was too little and too late for the Kelowna Women's Resource Centre. So my question again to the Minister of Social Development is: does he support women's centres in

[ Page 6417 ]

this province and the good work that they do for families of B.C.?

Hon. I. Chong: Since 2001 our government has provided the largest amount of dollars for our non-profit organizations, through our gaming grant process, ever in the history of British Columbia.

As a result, when the review is undertaken and when we have the options provided by that panel, we are going to be able to ensure that we have the ability to work with our non-profit sectors, who provide vital services throughout every community in the province of British Columbia.

[End of question period.]

Motions Without Notice

Appointment of Deputy Chair,

Committee of the Whole

Hon. R. Coleman: By leave, I move, seconded by the member for Juan de Fuca, the Opposition House Leader, that Douglas Horne, member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain electoral district, be appointed Deputy Chair of Committee of the Whole for this session of the Legislative Assembly.

Motion approved.

MEMBERSHIP OF

SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF SELECTION

Hon. R. Coleman: By leave, I move that Bruce Ralston, MLA, be substituted by John Horgan, MLA, as a member of the Special Committee of Selection.

Motion approved.

[1430]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Coleman: In this House this afternoon I call continuation of budget debate.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Budget Debate

(continued)

M. MacDiarmid: Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak in favour of Budget 2011. Before I do that, I would like to extend my warmest congratulations to two people: firstly, to our new Premier and also to the newly chosen Leader of the Opposition. Both of these leaders engaged with British Columbians as they campaigned for the leadership, and both campaigned with energy and enthusiasm. Both have spoken of offering British Columbians a clear choice with respect to how our province will be governed.

The Leader of the Opposition is known as a tireless worker. We will not always agree, but I know that he is dedicated to his constituents and to public service, and I look forward to what will no doubt be spirited debates in this House.

Our Premier is committed to a new families-first agenda. Her fresh, positive, open and energetic approach is resonating with British Columbians. We're focused on working with and for all people who live and work in every part of this great province. We'll build on the successes of the past decade as we move forward with her leadership. It's an exciting, positive time for our province.

I'd like to take a moment to thank the people of Vancouver-Fairview who put their trust in me by electing me as their MLA in 2009. It's a great honour to represent them and to serve as the MLA for this diverse, vibrant part of B.C.

All of us who are Members of the Legislative Assembly recognize the honour and privilege that it is to serve as MLAs. We all choose this work because we want to make a positive contribution. We want to make a difference, and that is what we have in common. Even though our approaches may be very different, each of us here wants to serve the public and do our very best for our constituents and for British Columbia.

[1435]

I'd also like to take some time to thank the many people who support me in many different and valuable ways.

In my office in Vancouver-Fairview I have three superb constituency assistants. Adrian, Chantal and Joanne take their work very seriously, but they do their work with a smile on their face. They're always eager to help not only our constituents but really anyone who calls. They deal with issues that are often under municipal, federal or other jurisdiction, and they make great efforts to help, problem-solve, troubleshoot and really support both individuals and organizations that ask us for assistance. They are fantastic, and I'm extremely grateful to them for their diligence, their creativity, their compassion and their total can-do attitudes. They rock.

I also want to thank the many volunteers who helped with my election process and who continue to support and assist me in many ways — far too numerous to name, but I'm deeply thankful to each and every one of them.

Since being elected, I've had the opportunity to work with many civil servants, and I've been amazed and inspired by the dedication and tremendous skill and effort that these public servants bring to their work every day. We have many unsung heroes working here for the people of British Columbia and actually all around the

[ Page 6418 ]

province, and we're very fortunate to have them. My thanks to all of them.

I also want to thank my friends and my family. Being an MLA does have its challenges, and without the love and support of these people, I would not be here. I'm especially thankful for all of the help, the hours of listening, and the acts of generosity and kindness from my friends and family. I want to particularly thank my mom, Betty; my brothers — John, Don and Andy — and their families; and my husband, Robert. My husband is a true gem. A more supportive and loving partner does not exist anywhere.

I mentioned Vancouver-Fairview earlier as a vibrant, diverse part of B.C. This riding is a wonderful place to work, live, shop and play, to attend school — really, to do almost anything. It's a great part of the province. It's home to an astonishing array of organizations, from the Heart and Stroke Foundation to the Canucks Autism Network and various others — many other organizations.

There are literally hundreds of non-governmental organizations that are enriching the lives of British Columbia in many ways. I've had the opportunity to meet representatives from many of these groups, and it's actually impossible for me to do justice to the work they do and the difference they make to people every day. I'm proud that we are able to provide support for many of the groups with government funding and that we have such good working relationships with so many of these groups.

Let me give just a few examples of work that is going on in Vancouver-Fairview today, work that benefits British Columbians in many parts of the province, not only just in our neighbourhood.

The Canucks Autism Network is making a difference for families and individuals affected by autism spectrum disorder. In 1996 the lives of Paolo and Clara Aquilini changed forever when medical professionals told them that their son had autism. Since then they've experienced triumphs and trials with their son, who's now a teenager.

One of the things they found very difficult was the fact that their much-loved son could not participate in some activities that children without autism simply take for granted. They searched for ways to support families with autism, and it's their profound desire to enhance the quality of life for families living with autism in B.C. With this vision, they founded the network.

The Canucks Autism Network is supported by the Vancouver Canucks. And how about those Canucks? The Canucks For Kids Fund provides support for the Autism Network, and there are many other donors organizations as well as a lot of volunteers. The network works to provide high-quality recreational sports and vocational development programs for individuals and families living with autism. As well, through their work, the network is helping to raise public awareness and promote understanding of what autism is and how it affects those with the diagnosis and their loved ones. It's really an inspiring organization.

Another great organization is the Stroke Recovery Association. Since 1979 this association has been providing information and programs for stroke survivors after they leave hospital. There are now 37 branches all around this province, with a provincial office which is in Vancouver-Fairview.

Now, this organization has a simple, profound message: never give up hope, and never stop trying. They provide support, education, information and programs for stroke survivors and their families as well as caregivers. They focus on quality of life, and much of their work is done by dedicated volunteers. They're making a difference to the lives of people all around B.C., and it's another organization to inspire us.

[1440]

There are so many organizations like this which all have some common features. They have hard-working volunteers who are truly dedicated and making a difference through their contributions, and these organizations are also working hard to provide support for the people they serve, really focusing on helping with the quality of people's lives.

Education and outreach are also common features, including public education. In the case of organizations that deal with some health issues and conditions, there's often a huge effort to educate the public so that these conditions can be prevented or the difficulties associated with the condition can be made less.

Now, these organizations come in all sizes, and one of the largest in Vancouver-Fairview is the B.C. and Yukon

chapter of the Canadian Cancer Society. Today, of course, is Daffodil Day, and we've heard about this earlier from a number of members. It's a great time to talk about the work of the Cancer Society.

We know that two out of every five of us will be diagnosed with cancer sometime in our lives, and one out of every four will die of cancer. These are sobering statistics, and they're very real for all of us. It's unlikely there's a single person present here today whose life has not been touched by cancer in some way.

There are a number of MLAs who have firsthand knowledge of cancer and the challenges that come with it, myself included, and we've lost colleagues and friends. We think of former MLA Sindi Hawkins today and remember her great contributions, her depth, her strength and the legacy she's left, and we remember what fun she was.

There's a great deal of work to be done without question, but we should not forget that we have much to be optimistic about and many reasons to be hopeful. B.C. has a tremendous group of health care providers, researchers and volunteers who together are a powerful team. We have the best cancer outcomes in Canada and,

[ Page 6419 ]

indeed, some of the best in the world. More and more people are living longer with better quality of life, and many people are being cured of cancers that would have taken their lives not long ago.

The message of the daffodil is simple: to demonstrate support to those affected by cancer and to say to them: "You are not alone." This is another example of an organization that is making a difference each and every day, and I would like to thank the Canadian Cancer Society and especially to thank the many volunteers who make such a great contribution here in B.C.

The organizations I've described so far would be called health not-for-profits. Another organization based in Vancouver-Fairview would not be called a health organization, and yet it's making a contribution to the health and welfare of those it serves. This is the Jewish Seniors Alliance of Greater Vancouver. Our government provides financial support to the JSA, and I met with their president Serge Haber earlier this month.

The JSA has as its core values information, education, advocacy and research. Its purpose: to respond to the needs of all Jewish seniors in the Lower Mainland and the organizations that serve them. They provide information, and they disseminate it on seniors issues and provide valuable linkages with other organizations. They have workshops, and they have a spring and fall forum every year.

This year the spring forum was called Sex in the City, and it was a huge success and open to all members of the public. It included an education session with Dr. Larry Goldenberg about men's health and another session with Meg Hickling on the birds and the bees — how to talk to your grandchildren about sex. People came, they learned a lot, and they had fun while they were learning. The JSA is a wonderful organization that reminds us of the respect that we should have for our older citizens as well as demonstrating the great power of volunteerism.

In addition to my role as MLA for Vancouver-Fairview, I'm also the parliamentary secretary for seniors to the Minister of Health. Since this recent appointment I've been able to meet with a number of seniors groups as well as having informal meetings with seniors in Vancouver-Fairview and elsewhere in the province.

Our older citizens are a diverse and fascinating group. Some define seniors starting at age 55, which means this group goes from age 55 to well over a hundred, so it's no wonder they're so diverse and they really defy any kind of definition.

Seniors in B.C. have contributed to building this province into the great place that it is. In fact, some have called it the greatest place on earth. Many of them continued to work well beyond the age of 65, and as well, they do many hours of volunteer each and every week in this province.

[1445]

Now, some of our seniors are described as frail, and some are less able to get around and become isolated. As a family doctor I learned long ago from my older patients that they wanted to be as independent as possible and wanted to grow old in the home of their choice. Some people call this aging in place. The conversations I've had as parliamentary secretary have certainly reinforced that knowledge, and our government has made and continues to make efforts to assist our seniors to do just that — grow older in the place of their choice.

British Columbia is a fabulous place to live, and many Canadians have figured this out. Many of them choose B.C. as a place to retire. We have a rapidly growing population of people over the age of 65, and we need to thoughtfully prepare for the reality of the demographic changes ahead. We will do best if we talk with and listen to our seniors and those who support them — family members and other informal caregivers — and we're certainly paying careful attention to this now.

Our Premier clearly values seniors. She chose to have a parliamentary secretary for seniors because she wanted to make it clear that seniors are part of the families-first agenda. Families include seniors as grandparents, aunts and uncles. Families are not exclusively young parents with children. In a province as diverse as British Columbia is today, families are many different things, but seniors are an important part of our families.

I'm proud of our government's record with seniors. One of our most significant accomplishments is dramatically increasing affordable housing for seniors both in my hometown of Vancouver and right across the province.

Here are just a few examples of our investments in housing. In September the province provided a $2.2 million grant for the renovation of Three Links Manor, providing 39 apartments with integrated support services for low-income seniors in Vancouver, and a similar project, another $2.8 million grant for the renovations of Grandview Towers, and this provides 55 apartments.

A new assisted-living development for elders and seniors in Duncan brought 50 new affordable apartments to that community. Cowichan Elders is a $15.4 million development that will bring together affordable housing with services like light housekeeping and meals, creating a place where seniors who need some assistance can live independently.

Seniors in Burnaby have more supportive housing options with the opening of the Poppy Residences, a new $18 million building providing 70 one-bedroom apartments, again with support services for seniors.

In 2010-11 our government will invest over $562 million to address a range of housing needs from homelessness to affordable housing and home ownership, and we've done work in other important areas that benefit seniors. In 2008 we legislated new protection for seniors to ensure that RRSPs are protected from creditors

[ Page 6420 ]

during bankruptcy proceedings. We continue to lobby the federal government to advance or eliminate the current rules requiring seniors to convert their RRSPs when they turn 71.

In conjunction with the federal government and provinces, B.C. is working to find innovative solutions for pension reform to ensure that middle- and low-income British Columbians have suitable retirement income. We expect to spend over $2.44 billion on home and community care this year for seniors, which is an increase of 56 percent since 2001 and up $873 million.

We've increased spending on residential care and assisted living by more than 47 percent since 2001, increasing from $1.1 billion to more than $1.7 billion. Our investment in home care and home support has increased by more than 79 percent since 2001 from $402 million then to almost $725 million today.

Under our government, the Premier's Council on Aging and Seniors Issues was brought together, and we followed through on their key recommendation to eliminate mandatory retirement, providing choice for those who want to continue working. For the first time since 1993, we increased the homeowner grant to $845 and raised the property value threshold to $1.05 million, and now there is no threshold for low-income seniors.

We've expanded the shelter aid for elderly renters, the SAFER program. We now have more than 15,760 seniors households who receive a monthly rental assistance payment. That's 3,600 more seniors than back in 2001.

Here are some other areas where government spending is making a bigger difference. We've reduced median wait times to access residential care to less than 90 days today, compared to up to a year in 2001, and the number of publicly subsidized hospice beds in B.C. has quintupled from 57 in 2001 to almost 300 today. That's an increase of 419 percent.

[1450]

In the 1990s the government of the day limited seniors care options to home support and residential care. Our government has added supportive housing and assisted-living units to the continuum of care to provide seniors with more options. This is what they've told us they want: more choices, including being able to grow older in the place of their choice.

It's important for us to realize that many of B.C.'s seniors are healthy, active individuals. Some of them need just a little support to remain independent, and some do need more help and require specialized assistance and even assisted living. But we recognize that people want to remain living in their communities for as long as possible. Understandably, they want to remain out of hospital where possible. They want access to primary care providers.

In 2009 our government released Seniors in British Columbia: A Healthy Living Framework , which outlines our action plan to support seniors in living healthy, active, independent lives.

There are some who speak very negatively about the demographic changes ahead for us in this province. By 2031 the number of British Columbians over 65 will double. By then, one in four of us will be over 65. That'll be about 1.3 million people. The reality is that this is an exciting time for us. We are all living longer, healthier lives. The seniors healthy living framework focuses on the great contributions and the important roles of older people in our society. We can and do benefit from the experience and wisdom of our diverse older population.

Now, preparing for this demographic shift requires the involvement of many provincial ministries as well as provincial agencies, along with the federal and municipal governments, the business sector, community organizations and individuals. To do our best for and with our older citizens, we all need to work together, and we need to include them as well. Again, we are doing this. This work is well underway.

The seniors healthy living framework is a framework for action to support our older citizens over the coming years, and it has four cornerstones: to create age-friendly communities, mobilize and support volunteerism, promote healthy living and support older workers. This framework is supported by the Seniors Healthy Living Secretariat, which is part of the Ministry of Health.

I'd like to briefly elaborate on just one of the cornerstones, and that is volunteerism. Here are some interesting facts. B.C. seniors spend more time volunteering than any other age group in the province — over 44 million hours in 2004. Volunteering among seniors has been linked to improved quality of life, stronger social networks, increased levels of physical activity and lower mortality rates. Almost everyone who has ever volunteered says very clearly that they received much more than they gave. Volunteering is a powerfully positive thing.

One important role of the seniors secretariat is to engage with stakeholders. To that end, it has established a Seniors Healthy Living Network to engage citizens and stakeholders. The network includes 13 members from a whole host of sectors and communities. There is representation from aboriginal and multicultural communities, researchers from organizations that deliver services to seniors and from volunteer and business organizations. Also, the secretariat is exploring some innovative models to provide non-medical home support services.

How can we work to develop models that are sustainable partnerships? Community Action for Seniors Independence, or CASI, is the name given to the pilot projects which are underway today in five B.C. communities. This is a partnership between the government of B.C. and the United Way of the Lower Mainland. Each of the pilots is unique, reflecting the unique communities that they are happening in. Focused on the service priorities identified by the seniors, activities and services

[ Page 6421 ]

vary greatly and include such things as a walking club, provision of yardwork, housekeeping and transportation services.

We know that just a little help with simple tasks like housekeeping and yardwork can make all the difference in helping older people to remain in their own homes and communities.

Many of these initiatives are possible because of our increased investments in health care. Budget 2011 focuses new funding on health care and social services. Specifically, it provides the Ministry of Health with $605 million of increased funding in 2013-14.

[1455]

The new funding provided in Budget 2011 builds on the funding increases in past years so that the Ministry of Health budget will be increasing by almost $2 billion over three years. These are substantial increases and continue our investment in our public health care system that we all so greatly value.

The Ministry of Health is changing and adapting in a number of ways to meet the needs of all British Columbians. An important initiative is working toward making sure that all British Columbians who want a regular family physician will have one by 2015. Investments in primary care over the last few years are really making a difference, especially for people who have complex health needs.

Another Ministry of Health provincial initiative that's making a difference is called Patients as Partners. I had the privilege of attending an event celebrating Patients as Partners earlier this month, where their first annual report was released. This group includes patients and caregivers, along with providers and non-governmental organization partners. They've been exchanging ideas and sharing their experiences, and I can tell you that after attending that conference, their experiences are powerful.

A key goal for the ministry is to support quality health care through patient-centred care. This means that the patient and their family are at the centre of all that we do. Patients as Partners is an initiative that works to engage patients and their families in their own health care, increasing and developing their knowledge and their skill to self-manage their health care and become partners in their own health, working along with their health care provider.

This is a shift in thinking and a shift in the way of providing care for many providers. Rather than the provider seemingly being in charge and directing care, they become something of a coach and a mentor.

We're working toward providing patients with a meaningful voice across the entire primary health care system, and patients around this province are becoming active participants in their own health and seeing improved health as an outcome. They're also becoming involved in their communities and in the health system.

We are fortunate here in British Columbia to have one of the best health care systems in the country. Certainly, our outcomes for cancer care and in other areas are the very best in Canada. With the work we're doing, we're continuing in our quest to make sure that we are continuously improving our system and that we're providing the best possible care for British Columbians.

Budget 2011 demonstrates our government's commitment to prudent fiscal management at a time when our economy and the global economy are recovering from one of the worst economic downturns in decades. It is a fiscally prudent budget while at the same time clearly providing increased funding for the vital public services that we all depend on.

The funding promised for the implementation of full-day kindergarten is there, and this program will be available for all kindergarten students in British Columbia as of September 2011. Full-day kindergarten provides a strong foundation for our youngest students in a creative, play-based environment. If you ever go into a full-day kindergarten classroom, you'll see what fun they're having as they learn.

We have funding in our budget for increased education, social services and health care. At the same time, we're continuing to keep taxes low for our citizens, small businesses and corporations.

Our businesses large and small are the places where British Columbians work. In fact, some people refer to them not as businesses but as small and large employers, because that's what they really are. Our favourable personal and business tax rates mean that B.C. is an attractive place for new investment, and that means more jobs for British Columbians.

This budget supports vital services and moves us closer to eliminating our deficit. We are working hard with British Columbians to keep our province strong, to support economic growth and to encourage job creation. I'm pleased to have had this opportunity to speak in favour of Budget 2011.

J. Kwan: I have to say it is great to be back in the House — after a long hiatus, I might argue. In fact, back in February…. It seems like a century ago that we were back in this House, and we only sat for four days in this year of 2011. We're heading into the fiscal year-end — right? — as we're days away from actually having the fiscal year-end coming to its closure.

[1500]

So what's happening now? We sat for four days in the month of February, and essentially, after those four days the House pretty well stopped functioning after the government tabled a do-nothing budget. In fact, members of the House would remember that the former Minister of Finance said that he was happy to deliver what he called a status quo budget. That is code for a do-nothing budget.

[ Page 6422 ]

Today with a new Premier…. With much fanfare from the government side, there is a new Premier, and what are we doing? We're back in the Legislature since February debating exactly the same budget that the former Premier, Gordon Campbell, had tabled on his way out the door. There's where we're at.

So it's kind of like the earth stood still. I think there was a book called that. For this government, the budget stood still. Even though the Premier left…. Gordon Campbell walked out the door and didn't come back to this chamber. We now have a new Premier installed in the province of British Columbia, and guess what. We're exactly at where we were back in February debating the very same budget that Gordon Campbell had tabled.

This is notwithstanding the fact, according to the former Minister of Finance, that the budget gives the new Premier "flexibility" to bring in initiatives that she wants to support. But on budget day it was reported that the budget gives the new Premier $2.55 billion in flexibility. This includes contingency funds over the next three years — $600 million, $450 million and $450 million — and a forecast allowance of $350 million in each year for a total of $2.55 billion in flexibility.

Yet on this first day back of the Legislature since the four-day sitting of the House in February, you would have thought that the new Premier would take this opportunity to bring in a throne speech to outline to British Columbians her vision. Not so. You would have thought that the Premier would take this opportunity to table a budget to show British Columbians where her spending priorities are. Not so. Instead we're back here at this very place debating the same old do-nothing budget that was tabled by Gordon Campbell — the same budget that the former Premier, Gordon Campbell, had tabled back in February. Now, why would that be? I just wonder: why would that be?

Is it (a), that the B.C. Liberals are out of gas — that there are no new ideas, no new direction, no matter who is at the helm? Could that be the reason? Or is it (b), that the new Premier is really just a carbon copy of the old Premier with the same old bag of tricks, only she presents it with a smile that makes you feel very nice and warm and fuzzy on the inside? Or heck, maybe it's just the combination of both. I don't know.

I have to say that the new Premier wants you to believe that she's new. She wants you to believe that she's different from Gordon Campbell, that she really cares about you and your family, and she says that for her the priority is — yeah, you've all heard it a thousand times now — family first. We've all heard that slogan over and over and over and over again.

Well then, Madam Speaker, let's just review her record for a moment, shall we. Let's just take a look at what this new Premier has done, both her record when she was the Deputy Premier right here in this chamber with Gordon Campbell at her side. Can it be that this is the same Premier that, when she was the Deputy Premier and the Minister of Education, saw 120 schools close across British Columbia? And as if that's not enough to put a notch on her belt, to be proudly saying, "Hey, I closed 120 schools across British Columbia…."

[1505]

As if that's not enough, Vancouver had faced an education funding crisis not very long ago, and this Premier in fact wanted to see the schools in the east side of Vancouver close as well — that more schools needed to be added to that list of 120 that she saw closed when she was Deputy Premier.

The school board was struggling with these potential closures in the east side of Vancouver. The Premier was a talk show host at the time on the airwaves, and she was on the public record as saying that these schools should close. These schools could close, of which there are three designated inner-city schools. Two of them are in my riding, Seymour and Queen Alexandra. One other inner-city school is in my colleague's riding of Vancouver-Hastings, Macdonald School.

These schools — in fact, all the schools slated for closure in the east side of Vancouver — provide a base, an anchor for some of the most vulnerable kids in our communities. The closure of these schools would have been devastating for the families and the children in those communities. Many of them are low-income; many of them live in poverty; many of them are immigrants from a different community, from a different country. Many of them are struggling on a day-by-day basis. Many of them are aboriginal children.

But for Premier Clark, I guess those kids and those families don't fit into her families-first agenda, because the closure, for her, of those schools would have been just fine — just like how she closed 120 schools when she was the Minister of Education, when she was sitting here in this chamber. I guess for her it really depends on whose families you are talking about.

For the NDP, we on this side of the House, those kids and families are very much part of our agenda. That is why we fought tooth and nail to keep those East Van schools open. I went to rallies; I held community forums. I spoke at the school board meetings not once but several nights, over and over and over again, and brought the message to the school board.

Thank goodness the Vancouver school board listened and listened well to the citizens of British Columbia. In spite of the fact that they were faced with a funding crisis, they managed to keep those schools open. Now, it is only temporary. It is only a temporary measure. I expect that the agenda potentially could come back for these school closures.

You know what? With this Premier sitting at the helm who wants to see the schools close, I actually don't get any comfort at all that our education system would be protected. I have no sense of comfort that those families

[ Page 6423 ]

that rely on these schools would be deemed and would fall into this Premier's families-first agenda, because I think that those children, those families, would simply be forgotten by this Premier. Conveniently, they'll be forgotten.

Let me turn for a minute to talk about another issue. I wonder where these families are at with respect to Premier Clark's families-first agenda. As we speak today, in Vancouver housing advocates — the Carnegie Action Project, the Downtown Eastside Neighbourhood Council, VAN.ACT! and the Council of Senior Citizens — are coming together to fight for shelter spaces for the homeless.

They're trying to save these shelters, of which there are five: on Cardero Street, the Cardero shelter; the Fraser Street shelter on East Broadway; the Howe Street shelter on Howe Street; the Fir and 7th Street shelter run by the mental patient advocates that already closed; and the Stanley New Fountain, also slated for closure.

[1510]

These five shelters are slated for closure, and they're providing some supports to some of the most vulnerable people in our community. They are people without a home.

They are fighting this fight, raising the awareness, calling the government to action, putting a shout out to the broader community to ask for help. This is what some of the people at the shelters have to say. "I can't go to an SRO," said Chase from the Cardero Street shelter. "I'll go crazy and just end up back on the street. If this shelter closes, I guess I'll head to the Super Valu parking lot. That's where we came from before they opened this place."

Another homeless person says: "If I lose this place, these regular meals and my guaranteed slot here, then I'll go back to selling drugs to survive."

Another homeless person from the Fraser Street shelter said: "Two women near IGA on Broadway got me to come here about a month ago. I've been outside a long time. I guess if they close this I'll be in the doorways, back lanes and behind restaurants."

From the Howe Street shelter: "If this closes, I'll find an abandoned house. I'll have my Coleman stove. I hope nobody will notice me. If this shuts down, the government will spend more money on Corrections. People here will be panhandling, living in the alleys. You would think they would rather we stay in the shelter."

These are the direct words of the people who are homeless, staying at these shelters. And yet these closures are going to happen. Why, Madam Speaker? Because we're in this House debating a do-nothing budget, a budget that will not support these shelters.

Others have written to my office about the closure of these shelters. Let me just put some of their words on the public record here.

Someone speaking directly about the Stanley New Fountain shelter that is in my riding…. On April 6 the person wrote to me. "I do some janitorial jobs in the Downtown Eastside. I can tell you for a fact that many doorways no longer have one to two people sleeping in them, trying to get warm and dry. People should not be treated like dogs. Keep the shelters open. Even the least of our brothers and sisters need respect and warmth."

Another person wrote, March 29: "Politicians closing shelters puts our must vulnerable citizens at risk — our girls and women. Please consider your negative actions. It could be your mother or sister. Would you allow closure then?"

Another note that was sent to my office. Let me quote this and put it on the public record.

"I've not been in this shelter long, only for about a week now. When I arrived here in Vancouver, I was very worried about where to go. I've never collected government assistance, and I was very hesitant to go on welfare. All I required was an opportunity to get back on my feet, to feel secure and to get my life back on track again without worrying about where I was going to stay each night. This facility provided just that.

"I'm able to rest in the evening, and during the day I can look for job opportunities. Without this facility I would be forced to go on welfare or sleep on the streets. I'm certain that neither is the goal of this government. This facility is an absolute necessity, for it provides the intrinsic dignity that each and every one of us requires to sustain ourselves in this complex society.

"Here we are given the absolute necessities: a small, basic meal — nothing extravagant; a mattress with proper bedding; and a bathroom where we can keep clean. Remember, this is a transitional stage for all of us here, a necessary part of our community, enabling us to move on and be productive to the Canadian economy."

Those are the direct words of these folks who are staying at these shelters, who are homeless at the moment.

There is a cry out for community advocates, housing advocates, calling for help. Somehow these families and their needs are not being heard.

[1515]

These individuals, to put a face on it, are somebody's son or daughter. They are somebody's brother or sister. They are someone's mother or father. They may be nameless or faceless, but they are part of our communities, and they are someone's family members somewhere.

So I ask this question of the new Premier: do they factor in with the Premier's family-first agenda? I guess not, because this is the same Premier that presided as the Deputy Premier that cancelled over 1,700 units of affordable housing in the Liberal government's first term as government. As a result, I dare say, we saw homelessness skyrocket in the province of British Columbia, particularly in Metro Vancouver.

In my own riding of Vancouver–Mount Pleasant in the Downtown Eastside I literally had to step over people to make my way across the street. There are days where I see people littered all over the sidewalks in the streets of the Downtown Eastside. I talked to people who told me about how the homeless fought to get a space under an awning to stay dry, and in that fight to vie for that little space, the police had to be called to break up the fight.

[ Page 6424 ]

That's how desperate people were, and that happened at a time when the current Premier was the Deputy Premier in the province of British Columbia.

The Liberal government knew darn well the impact of the gutting of the social safety net, the cancellation of affordable housing programs in our communities throughout, yet they went ahead and did it. The Deputy Premier then didn't speak up one whit to say, "Wait a minute. We cannot do this. This is not acceptable in our democratic society," and they barrelled on ahead and made these cuts.

Now here we are today, many years later, because that was back in 2001. We're now in 2011. Ten years later, a decade later, the Premier has an opportunity to do something about the closure of these shelters. The Premier could stand up and act today and say: "No, we're not going to repeat the mistakes of the past. We're not going to allow for these closures to happen. We're not going to throw these homeless people out onto the streets again, albeit that all they're accessing at the moment are temporary shelters, but we will not let that happen."

The Premier has the opportunity to do that. She could act today and say that she will fund these shelters with the flexibility in the budget that the former Minister of Finance had identified. She could do that. She could say that in her family-first agenda these families actually matter — it matters to her and to her government — and that no one would be left behind. She has that choice. The opportunity is here, and I call on her to do exactly that today.

In fact, I challenge any member from the government side to stand up in the budget speech today and to say that these shelters should be saved, that the homeless people living in these temporary shelters should not be thrown out into the alleyways and parking lots and that they should be allowed this temporary haven, I guess — if you would call it that — and to save these shelters now.

I look forward to listening to the speeches from the government side, for someone to get up, to have enough courage to say to the new Premier that those individuals who are homeless today matter in the eyes of the Liberal government and they are part of this family-first agenda. I open that up for any members on the other side to take up this challenge.

[1520]

Now, I read in the papers today…. There was an article, actually, by Seth Klein, who talked about the issue of poverty, and he states that poverty reduction is missing in this federal election. Poverty is nothing new. The issue of poverty is something that all levels of government should address.

Where does that fit in with this new Premier? Did you know that for seven years in a row B.C. had the highest child poverty rate in all of Canada? I'm not making this up. This is actually a fact. Did you know that seven provinces and two territories have poverty reduction plans in place or in development? And did you know that B.C. is not amongst them? Let me repeat that. B.C. is not amongst them. We do not have a poverty reduction strategy or plan in place, nor do we have one in development. Yet we are the province with the highest child poverty rate in all of the country not for one year, not for two years, not for three years but for seven years in a row.

Did you know that the 2010 child poverty report card released by First Call found that in the year 2008, 14.5 percent, or 121,000 children in B.C., lived in poverty? It's not a made-up figure. Just imagine.

We had today, when we opened the House, many announcements of wonderful births.

Deputy Speaker: Member, may I ask you to take your seat.

Is the member rising on a point of order?

R. Sultan: Point of privilege, Madam Speaker. I would like to reserve an opportunity to respond to the assertions about childhood poverty in British Columbia at a later date.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Members. The member will have the opportunity to engage in debate.

Please proceed.

J. Kwan: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Indeed, it's not a point of privilege at all, and you would think that the member would know the rules by now. But hey, then, what do I know?

Okay, so let me just continue on with my budget speech. The 121,000 children living in poverty — that was what was reported out from First Call. They used the statistics from Canada's low-income before-tax cutoff. The after-tax child poverty rate in B.C. was the highest in Canada — the highest in Canada.

So I ask this question: how about those children and those families? Do they count for this Premier in her families-first agenda — the 121,000 children living in poverty?

Yes, I was saying that there were many announcements, wonderful news of children and grandchildren being born, and all of those children and grandchildren, I assume, would have opportunities in their future. I want that for my children. Hopefully, one day I'll be like the member for Chilliwack and have 15 grandchildren. You know, maybe that will happen. I doubt it. But hey, you know…. I've got to say that the point here is this — that for all the children we know in our lives, we want them to have opportunities.

I was a child that grew up in poverty, so I know what it's like to not have some basic necessities. We enter

[ Page 6425 ]

into public life to do better not just for ourselves but for others. That certainly is one key reason why I'm standing here today, speaking to this budget.

[1525]

So I ask this question of our current Premier, Premier Clark: what is she going to do about these children living in poverty today in our communities? Do they count for her families-first agenda? Will she finally, after a decade, put in a poverty reduction strategy with specific targets and goals that would be met in a tangible, practical, realistic way?

I don't want to hear words about how the priority is families first, and yet we have a do-nothing budget and a do-nothing poverty strategy in place. I don't want to hear from the Minister of Children and Family Development saying that closing some 33 group homes for children with disabilities is somehow a good thing and that somehow it's being re-engineered as part of the government's plan to meet the needs of children. That, to me, is not meeting the needs of children. That, to me, is not placing families first.

The risk of poverty is over three times greater for female lone-parent families, and on average, poor female lone families live $12,600 below the poverty line. Poor two-parent families were $8,200 below the poverty line. Over half of the children who were poor — that's 55 percent — have been poor for at least four out of six years.

Over half of poor children — that's 55.7 percent — lived in families where at least one member of their family had a full-time job. So that means these families are working families trying to make ends meet, and they cannot make ends meet. That's the reality.

Six provinces, six governments across the country — Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba — have committed to poverty reduction plans for their own jurisdictions. So are these children — the 121,000 living in poverty here in British Columbia — in Premier Clark's families-first agenda?

Premier Clark. I ask her if she will commit to a poverty reduction strategy that is more than just words. I challenge the members on that side of the House to get up and to say to their Premier that it is time, long overdue in the province of British Columbia, for us to have a poverty reduction strategy and plan with solid targets and timelines in place. I ask the Premier to commit to that today.

I ask the Premier to amend this do-nothing budget to improve the living conditions of the children and families today that are living in poverty in our very province. Or if the government doesn't do that, is it the government's message, then, to say that those families don't count in her families-first agenda?

Premier Clark saw the gutting of our social safety net for the most vulnerable families in B.C. back in 2001 when she was the Deputy Premier to Gordon Campbell. She was part of a government that took away children's maintenance support for single moms on income assistance.

I was right here in this chamber debating that legislative change, and I could hardly believe it. It took my breath away. What are maintenance support dollars for single moms? We're only talking about a measly $200 of support for children, literally for children who are of single parents on income assistance. This Liberal government and this Premier, when she was the Deputy Premier, said, "No, you do not deserve that $200, new baby in British Columbia with a single parent living on income assistance" — literally took that money away from those families and clawed back every single cent of those family maintenance support dollars.

She was part of a government that eliminated funding for women's centres. Yeah, 47 women's centres across the province of British Columbia had their funding reduced and eliminated because of that, and today we heard, as well, of the resource centres losing their funding.

[1530]

So I ask this Premier to do something, if families first is in fact her priority.

J. Rustad: It's a pleasure and an honour to have the opportunity to respond to the budget and to be back in the House. I know that may sound strange to some people, but I'm one of those people that are very passionate about the job that we do down here.

Just before I get into my comments, I do want to talk just briefly about the previous member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and her comments. There's no question that we have done more as a government and the Minister of Energy and Housing has done more for homelessness than any other government has done in B.C.'s history. If the member from Mount Pleasant isn't interested in taking my word for it, maybe she can listen to a former colleague of hers, the current mayor of Vancouver, in his praise for the work that we are doing for the homeless.

Furthermore, on child poverty I find it interesting that the member speaks so passionately about that, and she doesn't recognize that we have had the steepest decline in child poverty in B.C. of any jurisdiction in Canada. As a matter of fact, our current child poverty rates are below the 1980 levels. There has been more done for child poverty in this province than by any previous government, and that is without having a child poverty reduction plan.

That's because we have tried very hard in this province to set the right economic conditions to be able to create jobs and employment and opportunities to raise living standards. To that end, the average hourly wage in this province is now $23.12. That's up 27½ percent since 2001, when we first took power.

Back to the budget. The people in my riding have been very optimistic about our future. When we laid out the budget, we laid out a stand-pat budget that went

[ Page 6426 ]

ahead, that raised money for health care spending by over $600 million, that raised money for education to now having over $8,357 per student, that raised money for social services by over $65 million — all of that at a time when we're fighting our deficit and trying to reduce our spending. That's a tough challenge to be able to balance those things.

Of course, one of the reasons why we had a stand-pat budget is because we've had leadership races. We have a new leader now for the B.C. Liberal Party, a new Premier. I want to congratulate Christy Clark on her win and her vision in bringing forward. I look forward to working with her on a family-first agenda and moving this province forward in a positive and energetic way.

I also want to congratulate the member for Vancouver-Kingsway on his recent victory for the NDP. It's no small feat to be in public service, but certainly, to lead a party, whether it's in opposition or government, is a real challenge. I want to thank him for stepping up to the plate and doing the work that he's doing.

Having said that, though — as the Minister of Finance said earlier — there won't be too many other words of praise coming forward in the near future. The one thing I did notice about the Leader of the Opposition and his policy and his strategy coming forward…. The NDP used to be known for the N and the P standing for "no policy," but he has clearly decided to focus on the D, which is going to be "divisiveness and destruction."

I very much look forward to how this debate will be going over the future and listening to the various policies coming forward. In particular, it reminds me of a quote that he had from a little ways back — this was in particular reference to corporations, but it won't end there — and that is that people need to pay their fair share. In other words, he wants to tax; he wants to spend; he wants to redistribute; he wants to interfere in people's lives. He wants to divide people from various categories. That will be the strategy coming forward. It should be quite entertaining to see how it goes.

One of the things that I'm very proud about is what we've been able to do to set the right economic conditions for this province and in particular for my riding, Nechako Lakes. The people in Nechako Lakes are very optimistic about the future, and I just want to touch on a few things, a few reasons why.

[1535]

The economic situation in B.C. has changed quite dramatically. We have seen over 45,000 jobs created in 2010. We have the highest confidence rate from anywhere across the country — for consumers, that is. Corporate taxes have been reduced. We're going from 16½ percent down to 10 percent. Small business taxes are scheduled to be eliminated.

What I mean by divisiveness is that their side would like to reverse those. They want to increase those taxes.

Why is that important? Because of job creation. Study after study has shown that job creation comes from small companies. Job creation comes from people willing to invest and create those opportunities for families and for communities throughout the province. You have to have the right environment to do that, and you don't do that by raising their taxes and trying to drive them away from the province.

In my riding — I'll just give you some examples — we are seeing an almost unprecedented amount of capital investment. Thompson Creek's Endako Mines in Fraser Lake, in Endako, is going through a $500 million expansion that's going to almost double their production capacity of molybdenum.

We're seeing the Mount Milligan project go ahead just slightly outside of my riding, but Fort St. James is the main point of access for that. This is now creating…. They've had 350 people working. Over the course of this winter they're going to expand that to over 600 people working this summer. There are going to be phenomenal opportunities. I know Mackenzie will even have an opportunity to benefit, which is good to hear for that area. Like I say, this is a great opportunity for people in my community.

We've got right now a problem in Fort St. James, which has gone from an area that had two-thirds of its milling capacity shut down. That has now come back. Its milling capacity has come back, and they have a challenge. They can't find enough people to work. There are huge economic opportunities.

We're also seeing the Huckleberry project south of Houston. There's another mine that has extended its life. HST has helped to benefit them. They're looking at extended life. They also have an additional ore body. I'm optimistic that that mine will be open for another 12 to 20 years, which is great news for the community.

We just saw a recent announcement from New Gold, which has bought out the Blackwater project, which is just south of Vanderhoof. This is a project now where New Gold — once it has finished its current project in B.C., which would be in 2012 — wants to move its workforce up to the Vanderhoof area to get this mine under production. It'll be a new mine. It's a goldmine. It'll create literally hundreds of direct jobs and many hundreds more of indirect jobs in the area. It's exciting times.

They're making these investments because they have confidence in the economy in B.C., because we have set the right environment and because our budget carries forward with the work that we have been building on. That is really the focal point of what we want to talk about here. It's creating jobs. It's building strengths for families. It's creating our revenue stream, which we so desperately need in the government to be able to fund the services that we want to provide.

There is one point, though, that…. Sorry, before getting to that, I do want to make one other point, and that

[ Page 6427 ]

is our focus on exports. We've seen significant growth in exports in the province of British Columbia, in particular to China. China is an incredible opportunity for us in B.C. I've recently had the opportunity to travel to China and had an opportunity to see some of that firsthand. I was travelling with school district 91.

They want to set up an international school in China that will help to bring back, literally, the potential for hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars to come back and flow to the school district to be able to provide additional educational opportunities within our school district — not to mention that it has the opportunity to be able to have exchange for students from China to come over here, for our students to go over there for an enrichment of culture and exchange, which is so important for students in the future.

This is an opportunity that school district 91 is driving, and I'm very pleased to have had the opportunity to go over with them and support that project. But over there it was absolutely amazing to see the other opportunities. China's a country that's hungry. They want to see growth. They want to see partnership. They want to see those kinds of opportunities that can really make a difference for them and their society, and they would like to partner with us.

It's a great opportunity, and our new Minister of Jobs is doing a great amount of work over there and effort, trying to create those relationships and build those opportunities. It's one of those things that are important, once again, for us as we focus on jobs — not just families but jobs — because of what they can support.

[1540]

One of the things that trouble me somewhat is when I think about what Jack Layton and the NDP federally are doing and what the NDP locally would like to do, which is the idea of spending more, ramping up spending, ramping up taxes and creating something that is unsustainable.

Currently our deficit, which last year came in $450 million under our target…. This year we have about a $925 million deficit that's in. We have a deficit that we need to get rid of. Why do we have to get rid of that? Because at some point interest rates are going to start rising. At some point we're going to run into some economic challenges around debt and deficits. People around the world really need to get their heads around the change that could be coming.

I recently read a very interesting book called Endgame: The End of the Debt Supercycle and How It Changes Everything by John Mauldin and Jonathan Tepper — a fascinating read. I would make that mandatory reading for every Member of the Legislative Assembly. What it talks about is how society has become so dependent on debt and deficits that it is running the risk of creating some real economic challenges.

A quote from the book. No disrespect to Japan and the current challenges. This was written before the tsunami and earthquake and problems that they have, but it called the debt situation in Japan a bug in search of a windshield. Its debt level right now is over 200 percent of GDP. Its deficit is running around somewhere between 10 and 14 percent of GDP. That is totally and completely unsustainable.

When you look at the United States, their debt level is now around 100 percent of GDP, and their deficit spending is around 42 percent of their total spending. It is unsustainable. But there are no easy choices. There are no quick fixes. There's no "we just raise taxes" or "we just reduce spending." There are no easy fixes.

That's the challenge we face as a society in general, which is why I'm focusing a lot of my talk on the budget on this issue. If we're going to be able to go forward….

I just want to use the United States as an example. If they want to raise taxes to try to reduce their deficit…. Raising taxes puts a brake on the economy, which then actually has a negative impact on revenues. Yes, you get a short-term bump, but long term it actually slows economic growth.

They could try to inflate their way out, which seems to be what they're doing now. They're printing money and buying their own bonds, but that can only go on for so long before that has enormous consequences for economic activity.

What are the solutions? How do we get out of that? It's a solution that people need to think about, because we have to be able to be fiscally responsible. In British Columbia we have been very good in our fiscal responsibility, but we have to do more. We're going to have to start thinking about our debt increases. We're going to have to make sure that we start considering surpluses, because if we don't, there's a wall coming. Even though we might be on a slower curve approaching that wall than some other places, like Greece or Japan or Ireland or Spain or Portugal or even the U.S., it's still coming.

The challenge is that nobody can say just how much debt is acceptable. As long as investors are willing to buy debt, it's fine to keep issuing it. But if investors get nervous, as they did in Greece or as they've done in Ireland or as they're doing in Portugal or Spain, interest rates start going up. You start seeing an increase in interest rates, and suddenly your debt payments become a real issue. Now your deficit is even harder to manage.

That is why it is so important to keep the eye on the fiscal responsibility and why, when I see Jack Layton and the NDP saying they want to increase spending by $30 billion, it creates a real challenge in my mind in terms of what we're going to do in the future, how we're going to meet our challenges. It's why we need to stay focused on fiscal responsibility.

I'm using that just as an example because it's the choice that people are going to have to make soon here in the province of British Columbia. You've got a Leader of the Opposition that wants to raise taxes, that has said

[ Page 6428 ]

they want to increase spending on virtually everything. Where is that money going to come from?

[1545]

We are going to see an environment where interest rates are going to be rising. We're going to see an environment where our debt-servicing in this province is going to create some challenges. Unless we are fiscally responsible in making sure that we have room, it is going to be a challenge.

One of the things that we all have a responsibility for here is to be able to provide services for people, to be able to try to improve lives, but also to make sure that our children and our children's children have opportunities in the future and that we don't leave them unnecessary burdens. Fiscal policy around the world has left our children with enormous burdens.

Take Greece, just for an example — protests in the street, etc., because people don't want to see changes to entitlements and to programs and services that they've gotten used to. The sad reality is that they're not going to be able to carry on with that. If they don't make changes, they're going bankrupt. As a country, they will go bankrupt. People won't lend them money. That has enormous consequences, and not just for Greece but for every other jurisdiction.

We don't want to go down that road. We don't want to go down the road that…. They're sitting down in the United States right now trying to debate as to whether they should increase their debt ceiling or not. That's a rather moot point. If they don't increase their debt ceiling, their spending cuts by 42 percent, what do you think that'll do to their economy and to their society?

People need to get their heads around just what this means in terms of how our debt gain and how the end of this is really going to change everything. I don't suggest that this needs to be an immediate reaction here in British Columbia, but it is something that people need to be aware of. It's something that, as politicians, we need to be thinking about and debating, and it's why I suggest that people read this book and put some serious thought to this.

It's really easy to pound the desk and say that we need to spend more money. We hear it every day in the Legislature. But without taking into consideration this issue and the future and how we should structure our spending, we are going to leave something very nasty for our children. That is something that as a politician, as a representative for Nechako Lakes, I am not interested in doing.

Along that line…. This is one of the reasons why I'm also focused on that. We're talking about taxes and how taxes should be structured. We have a big decision coming up called the HST. Unfortunately, we didn't explain what the problem was, and instead, we just brought in the solution.

We didn't explain that our deficit level was going to increase dramatically. We didn't explain the choices and options we had to try to deal with that — whether we're going to run massive deficits and carry on that deficit problem, funding problem, to our children. We didn't explain that we could have reduced services or we could have increased taxes in the middle of a recession. We didn't explain what those options were. Instead we came forward, and we said, "We want to bring forward something that we believe will help us bridge over this problem," without even saying what the problem was.

To go back now and to start considering the PST and go back to a taxation system which most jurisdictions around the world are getting rid of, if they haven't already gotten rid of it, is very shortsighted in terms of our tax revenues and how we're going to be able to support programs coming forward, not to mention the financial impact it'll have on the province — not just the $1.6 billion that we will likely have to pay back or the $30 million in transition costs but also the forgone additional revenue that HST will create in future years.

Yes, it's revenue-neutral to PST today, but in future years, as our economy grows, the revenue coming from HST will be larger, and we'll have to find a way to be able to make up that revenue as well, which creates big challenges when you take the bigger picture into consideration.

The opposition has been very fond of saying that we need to spend more money on agriculture. Well, spending more money on agriculture means we need to take money from taxpayers and redistribute it to the agriculture sector. HST provides that. It provides over $16 million for the agriculture industry.

[1550]

I've talked with many of the farmers, many of the ranchers in my riding about this. They say that they're worried that they're going to lose HST. This is something they have wanted to see for many, many years. They've been asking for it for many, many years. Finally, we have the opportunity to provide this for them, and that opposition that says they care about agriculture would just take it away. "No, sorry. Gone. You don't get that opportunity. You don't get that restructuring."

That's what they're campaigning on — a $16 million hit to the agriculture industry. The same can be said for the forest industry, for the mining industry, for those workers that are trying to provide for their children, that have a contract, that are out working on a landing and have the benefit that HST will provide.

Talking about families first, the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant talked about wanting to be able to help and support families first — $230 per person in benefits under HST to low-income people. They'd like to just throw that away, completely throw that away and say to low-income people that they don't matter, that we're not going to help.

Low-income families spend way less on HST than the benefits they're going to get on this, and they have

[ Page 6429 ]

lots of choices around that. I've talked to some of the low-income people. They enjoy that extra money that's coming. They would just say to low-income people: "Sorry, no. You don't get it. We want to go back."

Those are the wrong answers. They're the wrong answers because of the structural changes that we need to our taxation system in terms of supporting, but they're also wrong answers because they actually take away the benefits and the attempt that we've had in terms of trying to make some adjustments on the taxation level.

When I also think about divisiveness, which is what the NDP are now going to be standing for over the upcoming months and years, I also think about things like the carbon tax. Carbon tax is not popular in my riding, but people pay it, and I understand why, because of those additional costs. But the people in my riding are going to see a $200-per-household increase to the homeowner grant. People in my riding have also seen a decrease in personal income taxes. People in my riding have seen those benefits that have flown through on a revenue-neutral carbon tax.

They would like take away those benefits and take that carbon tax and spend it on transit in the Lower Mainland. They stand up and say they want to speak for rural B.C. My riding doesn't even have a bus anywhere, yet they would like to take those dollars that are in tax breaks for the people in my riding and redistribute them to other areas of the province.

They say they stand for rural B.C. Clearly, they are a party that is going to try to create divisions — divisions amongst people in urban areas, divisions amongst rural B.C., divisions amongst the perceived have-nots and the perceived haves. The very interesting side of that, of course, is that in the eyes of government, everybody who's earning something is basically fair game to be able to raise taxes on and to have that — whatever they said — equal and fair share of revenue that needs to be paid.

I want to say a few more things about some of the things that are happening in the riding, because as we all know, over the last four years or so we've gone through some very tough times in the forest industry. Since 2006, when the housing bubble started to burst in the United States, it's been a very challenging time, and my riding is very dependent upon forestry.

But today, because we have set the foundations and we have the right policies in place, all nine mills, with the exception of one of the smaller family-owned mills, are running. They're not just running; they're running two shifts. They're back to the point where they're making profits. Virtually all of them I've talked to are talking about capital investments, investing additional money in their mills, in expanding their production capability, in improving their profitability and the way they can handle the mountain pine beetle.

Those are the right things we need to see happening. But if we had the opposition's way with increased taxes on those companies, you would end up in a situation where they wouldn't have as much money and ability to be able to do those investments, and they would start wondering whether or not they should be investing in B.C. or whether they should be investing elsewhere.

[1555]

The same goes with HST. HST has brought about a $7-per-thousand-board-feet competitive edge for the forest industry through the reduced costs in all the contractors and suppliers all the way up through the chain. That's a huge change for the industry and allows them to start thinking about making those capital investments and building those futures.

My communities are very dependent upon forestry. They're also very dependent upon agriculture. They say they support it, yet every action they stand up in this House to do says that they would oppose and hurt those industries and those sectors. I don't know how you stand up and say you support rural B.C. when you do that type of action in your policies.

In addition, when I think about opportunities in the riding, we've seen enormous opportunities by First Nations. I have 13 First Nations in my riding, and they are starting to form partnerships. They've started to form partnerships with Conifex and mills. They've started to form partnerships in terms of the opportunities with mining. They're forming partnerships in terms of the opportunities for independent power. Two new projects that they're hoping to get off the ground in my riding have made the cut on the next call from B.C. Hydro. Those opportunities and the embracement of those partnerships will start to make a change.

I had a chat with one of the chiefs in my riding recently over the last year. We talked about the band and unemployment. They're facing a situation that's absolutely horrendous — 85 percent unemployment. It's a situation that we wouldn't want to wish upon anybody. It's a situation that is more daunting and challenging than you could possibly imagine.

But they're starting to look at those opportunities. They've partnered in a community forest. They're looking at a partnership in terms of pellet production, a partnership in power production. They're talking with a mining company about opportunities there. These things will make enormous differences for that First Nation.

It's a difference because what it means is that people will have jobs. They'll be able to support families. They'll be able to contribute back into their community. They will be able to do things that they haven't been able to do in a very, very long time.

I sat down and talked with him, and I congratulated him for the work that he was doing. I said very clearly and very bluntly: "Government doesn't have the money to solve that issue, to solve the issue of 85 percent unemployment." We can't do that. It has to be private sector that creates the jobs. It has to be partnerships.

[ Page 6430 ]

It has to be a change, because doing the same thing and expecting different results is a definition of insanity. We have to be able to do things differently, which means you have to have the right environment. You have to encourage that investment. Once again, the divisiveness of the opposition is to oppose that, is to say: "No, no, we don't want to try to create those opportunities. Government should step in and do that."

I want to close with a few comments about the people in my riding. I've had the honour now to serve my area, Nechako Lakes, for two years and Prince George–Omineca before that for four years. It has been an enormous honour to be able to try to help people in my riding.

Whether it's a family that needs a wheelchair and helping them get through the system for that or a grandparent that wants to try to adopt a grandchild and helping them get through a system like that, or whether it's being able to provide the millions of dollars of roadway improvements that we've been able to do across the riding or the additional capital projects for schools and other things, it is truly an honour to be able to do this.

I want to thank my constituents for putting their trust in me, for sending me down here to try to do things that will help them and to benefit our area, our families and our children.

I also want to take a moment to thank my wife. We all put in a lot of work and a lot of effort down here. I know all of our spouses pay a price for that, because it's time away from home. So I want to say to Kim, thank you, and to use a quote I got from China, wo ai ni , which means "I love you."

L. Krog: I'm always delighted to have an opportunity to rise in the House and say a few words about another Liberal budget.

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

However, I would be remiss if I didn't respond at least in some small part before I get into the substance of my remarks without saying a few words about the remarks of the member opposite for Nechako Lakes, a person for whom I have enormous personal respect.

[1600]

Obviously, we disagree on many issues. It is a bit difficult for us in the opposition to take a lecture about divisiveness when another sterling example of Liberal policy, which was extremely divisive — their treatment of the teachers of this province — was just struck down by the Supreme Court of British Columbia. It's a little hard to take a lecture on divisiveness. It's particularly even harder when you consider that this is the same government that's been likewise lectured not by simply the Supreme Court of British Columbia or the B.C. Court of Appeal but by the Supreme Court of Canada when it comes to the issue of divisiveness.

We can never forget what happened to the Hospital Employees Union. In this government's scramble to put in place a group of workers in this province, mainly female, as a way of demonstrating how strong and in control they were…. Now, how was that some happy aspect of anything but divisiveness? How was that bringing people together? I wonder if the women who lost their jobs felt that their families were being put first, so to speak, when that horrendous bit of legislation was passed.

I can tell you, hon. Speaker, in my community there are many who believe quite fundamentally that the significant outbreaks of C. difficile in Nanaimo Regional General Hospital are all directly traceable back to that legislation, that the health care system in my hospital has never recovered.

Again, when I hear this lecture about divisiveness, I just can't quite pass up the opportunity to respond and simply say to the member for Nechako Lakes and to this House that I think he's just plain wrong. But that's just one aspect of what I've heard around budget and handling finances today that I most respectfully have to disagree with.

We have just heard a lecture about fiscal responsibility and debt and deficit. Now, isn't that just too much to take? Correct me if I'm wrong, hon. Speaker. I know that the member for West Vancouver–Capilano, who might want to try and rise on a point of privilege, may wish to respond to what I have to say, but two of the three biggest deficits in the whole history of the province of British Columbia have occurred under what government? Was it a New Democratic government?

Some Hon. Members: No.

L. Krog: Was it a Social Credit government?

Some Hon. Members: No.

L. Krog: It was the Liberal government — two of the three biggest deficits. And where was the third-biggest deficit? What source was that? It was the political parents of the B.C. Liberal Party, the Social Credit Party — the third-biggest deficit in the history of the province of British Columbia.

You know, hearing a lecture from these folks about fiscal responsibility is like listening to a rabbit talk about family planning.

The estimate is that the total provincial debt from the end of the 2010-2011 fiscal year is going to rise from $47.3 billion to, by the end of 2013-2014, $60.4 billion. That, for those math whizzes in the House who haven't been able to quite get to the percentage — and I know the former Minister of Health is watching anxiously, as I'm going to announce it for him — is a 28 percent increase, and we on this side of the House are to take a lesson in fiscal responsibility from this government.

[ Page 6431 ]

What do w