British Columbia Hansard — Thursday, November 8, 2007 (38th Parliament, 3rd Session) (H1108pm-07) (H1108pm 07)

H1108pm-07

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Thursday, November 8, 2007 Afternoon Sitting Volume 24, Number 7 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

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

John van Dongen Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ........................................................................................................ Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ................................................................................................................Hon.

Tom Christensen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining......................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Krueger Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon. Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General................................................................................................................................Hon.

John Les Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Regulatory Reform............................................ Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of State for ActNow B.C. ............................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Gordon Hogg Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ...........................................................................................................................................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTENTS Thursday, November 8, 2007 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... .............................................. 9201 Tributes ....................................................................................................................... .............................................................. 9201 Aboriginal war veterans S.

Fraser Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... .............................................. 9201 Tributes ....................................................................................................................... .............................................................. 9202 Barry Stecyk Hon. T.

Christensen Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ............. 9202 Operation Remembrance in Prince George J. Rustad Diwali C. James Vancouver Canucks event in support of Canadian Armed Forces L. Mayencourt Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame C. Puchmayr Prevention of identity theft and Internet fraud R. Lee 100 Mile House Junior Secondary pledge against global poverty C.

Wyse Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 9204 Reorganization of Children and Family Development Ministry C. James Hon. T. Christensen Children and Family Development Ministry renovations N. Simons Hon. T. Christensen A. Dix Business compensation for Canada line construction G. Robertson Hon. K. Falcon Government response to gang violence M. Farnworth Hon. J. Les Liquor sales at rural agency stores N. Macdonald Hon. J. Les R.

Austin Petitions...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 9208 V. Roddick

Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ................................................... 9209 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2007 (Bill 43) (continued) On the amendment (continued) S. Simpson C. Trevena J. McIntyre D. Thorne N. Macdonald C. Wyse R. Fleming D. Cubberley L. Krog Point of Privilege............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 9236 J.

McIntyre Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ................................................... 9236 Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2007 (Bill 43) (continued) On the amendment (continued) L. Krog

9201 THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 The House met at 1:33 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Introductions by Members R. Hawes: In the gallery today — and this is on b e h a l f o f y o u , M r . S p e a k e r — I'd like to introduce some special guests from Kelowna who are visiting here in the precinct this afternoon. They're Abe Friesen and his wife Lillian. With them is their son Adrian, who lives here in Victoria. Mr. Friesen is the former president of lumber giant Pope and Talbot, and he has recently written a book about the history of Pope and Talbot.

I know you can't use props in the House, but as it says here, this book is an extremely interesting read — over my head. Sorry, I know you're not supposed to use props. I'd commend everyone in the House to this book, which I also know does ac tually mention the member for Nelson-Creston, who prob ably would be extremely i n t e r e s t e d i n g e t t i n g a c o p y o f t h i s b o o k . S o i f t h e House could make them welcome. I have one more thing. We do have a Member of the Legislative Assembly here who has a daughter- in-law who's currently in hospital , in labour.

That member is going to be a grandfather for the first time. That member would actually be you, Mr. Speaker. Congratulations on becoming a grandfa- ther. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: It's close. L. Krog: I am delighted by the convivial mood in this place today, because I have two classes of grade 5 students joining us from Park Avenue Elementary. Accompanying them are thei r teachers Trina Wilcox and Ray Schlitz, and EA support staff and their par- ents. I think this has been a wonderful demonstration of the civility in this chamber, having warned them about question period.

Would the House please make them welcome. [1335] Hon. S. Hagen: Joining us in the House today is Vicki Yeats, who is the manager of executive opera- tions in the Ministry of To urism, Sport and the Arts. S h e i s h e r e w i t h a g r o u p of cross-government em- ployees currently enrolled in the Managing in the B.C. Public Service program, which was launched last Tuesday. I would also like the House to welcome Karen Lamare from the B.C. Film Commission, who is participating on line. Would the House please make both of those young women welcome. Tributes ABORIGINAL WAR VETERANS S.

Fraser: It's the last day in this place before Remembrance Day. With that in mind, I'd just like to remind everybody that it was just in 1992, November 11, that native veterans were permitted to place a wreath at the cenotaph at memorial ceremonies in this province, in this country. I'd just like to remind everybody that aboriginal people have fought alongside non-aboriginal people defending Canada. With that in mind, I'd like everyone to join me and acknowledge with applause all the veterans in Canada. Introductions by Members Hon. I.

Chong: Today I am pleased to introduce a constituent of mine, Vanessa Denay, who just returned from the University of Ottawa where she had an opportunity to sit in on national parliamentary pro- ceedings. She thought it was so exciting that she should, on her return to Victoria, do the same. She is in the gallery. She is an anthropology student at the University of Ottawa. She's here with her friend Taylor Smith from Cranbroo k, B.C., who is studying political science at the University of Victoria. I hope the House would make them both very welcome. Hon. O.

Ilich: I have some members of our staff from the Ministry of Labour and Citizens' Services here today to observe. I think it's great that they're here. I'm just going to name them. Robert Duffus is here. Linda O'Connor is here. Pat Robinson, Craig Chambers, George Collicott and Allison Andrew are here. Would everyone please make them welcome. C. Evans: I, too, would like to welcome Abe Friesen, regardless of whatever he said about me in the book.

For the benefit of members, I would like to say that when Abe Friesen ran Pope and Talbot, it was solvent, and nobody in this building ever said anything grumpy about them. I also wanted to introduce my friend and mentor Ann Fraser-Mol and her friend Peg Close. When I came here, like many of us, I was ignorant and stupid and a beginner. Mr. Speaker: Member, that's unparliamentary lan- guage. [Laughter.] C. Evans: To whatever extent I might have matured i n t o t h e j o b , i t ' s b e c a u s e A n n F r a s e r - M o l t a u g h t m e how. Lastly…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. C.

Evans: Yeah, lighten up. It's easy. Lastly, I'd like to introduce my friend Spring Gillard, who is from Vancouver and writes about food

9202 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 and farming and stuff like that, and decided she was not too shy to meet you all. Tributes BARRY STECYK Hon. T. Christensen: As has been mentioned, this Sunday is Remembrance Day, and it's an opportunity for all of us to reflect an d remember the soldiers who have served our country in the past and the soldiers that are serving our country today.

I want to just take a moment to acknowledge a con- stituent of mine, who over the course of the last number of months has undertaken a rather extraordinary effort to raise awareness about our troops in Afghanistan and to salute them. Barry Stecyk is a constituent that has a kettle corn company, HevyD's Kettle Korn. He has arranged to send 600 bags of kettle corn to our soldiers in Afghanistan, each one with a message from an elementary school student in Vernon. He's also initiated the production of a CD that has 26 artists from across the country.

All of that is intended to raise funds for the military families fund. It included an all-day concert in Vernon on September 9. [1340] It's really a great example of the efforts a single individual can initiate to do something as important as recognizing the sacrifices of our troops in Afghanistan and their families back here at home. As part of Mr. Stecyk's initiative, he has arranged to deliver bags of kettle corn to all MPs and al l MLAs. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present one to you. Would the House join me in acknowledging Mr. Stecyk's efforts. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) OPERATION REMEMBRANCE IN PRINCE GEORGE J. Rustad: Mr. Speaker, most of us here understand what it's like to be away from our home and family for periods of time. But imagine what it must be like to be away for months at a time. Imagine what it must be like to not know if you'll ever return home to see your family again. This is what it must be like for those who have served Canada in the armed services. The sacrifices of our sol- diers and their families made on our behalf are enormous.

Unfortunately, some of these individuals who have served our country do not have a proper marker on their final resting place. It's estimated that there are more than 3,000 veterans whose gravesites are unmarked in B.C. This is why we formed Operation Remembrance Prince George. Our goal is to identify any gravesite of veterans in our area without a headstone, so that we can honour their service by placing a proper marker. The Royal Canadian Legi on, the city of Prince George, Exploration Place, the Prince George Commu- nity Heritage Commission and many others have come together to help us with this project.

Committee mem- bers Bob Whipps, Sandy Hewitson, Bob Campbell, Sharon Dow, Carli Boyden, Cathy King and others have been working with our office for more than a year. To date we've discovered 18 veterans whose final resting places have no markings, and we're still under- taking research on many more. The values we cherish, such as freedom of speech, de- mocracy and human rights, have been provided and pro- tected by those brave men and women who have served our country. It's incumbent upon all of us to remember them and to honour them.

Please join me in thanking eve- ryone involved in helping to recognize and honour those who provided us with a gift we can never repay. DIWALI C. James: It gives me great pleasure today to wish all British Columbians and everyone in this House a very happy Diwali. Diwali, the festival of lights, has been celebrated in India and parts of South Asia since time immemorial. Today it's a recognized part of British Columbia's col- lective culture, bringing together in celebration people from all religions and all walks of life. Diwali originated from the word "deepavali," which translates into an array of lights.

The word "light" really does sit at the centre of this wonderful festival. On Diwali, as the traditional oil lamps and fireworks illuminate the night, there is a deeper message to be relayed. The theme of light celebrated on Diwali night is a symbol of good overcoming evil, truth and knowledge prevailing over ignorance, and a hope for the entire humanity. It's a time for renewal, a day to celebrate one's fam- ily, friends and good relations. Music, dance and good food are some of the expressions of celebration that mark Diwali.

It's also a time of deep reflection, a day to remind ourselves how much more in common we have today as members of the larger British Columbia family. For these reasons and more, Diwali is now a much- awaited and truly meaningful part of British Columbia. As hundreds of thousands of people come together to celebrate one of the most significant events of the year, I am proud to celebrate Diwali with them. I want to wish everyone a very happy and prosperous Diwali. VANCOUVER CANUCKS EVENT IN SUPPORT OF CANADIAN ARMED FORCES L.

Mayencourt: With Remembrance Day taking place this weekend, it is an opportune time for all of us to pay our respects and gratitude to those who have chosen to serve our country. As we give thanks to those who have paid the ultimate price and veterans in our Armed Forces, we also have thousands of indi- viduals who are currently serving. We want to thank them for serving our country here and abroad. [1345]

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9203 Tomorrow night the Vancouver Canucks are going to be honouring the Canadian forces. They will be playing host to the Colorado Avalanche at General Motors Place. This event that's just before Remem- brance Day will honour the Canadian Forces and will feature over 170 Canadian Forces members in attendance along with their families. Many of the Canucks' real good fans have generously donated their tickets for tomorrow evening's game to members of the Forces. The Chief of the Defence Staff, Gen.

Rick Hillier, and selected Canadian Forces personnel will be on hand for pre-game ceremonies. Petty Officer 1st Class Michael Broadley will be sing ing the national anthems, accompanied by a 35-piece band. Canucks fans will also have several opportunities to show their support for the Canadian Forces throughout the evening. During the intermission there will be an on-ice skills competition between Canadian Forces personnel — army versus navy, and navy versus air force.

"Support our troops" banners will be set up at multiple tables around the concourse of GM Place, and that's an opportunity for us as private citizens to go up and write a note to our troops that are in Afghanistan. There will be video announcements from the Canadian Forces throughout the night. "Suppo rt our troops" pucks will also be distributed following the games. I first learned of this a couple of weeks ago from Al De Genova, who is a city of Vancouver parks board commissioner. He started this project. I want to also acknowledge Al for his good work in our community for our veterans.

CANADIAN LACROSSE HALL OF FAME C. Puchmayr: I wonder how many people know where the Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame is located. Well, it's right in the heart of the lower mainland — in New Westminster. The Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame is at 65 East 6th Avenue, next to the Canada Games Pool. This Saturday the Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame is having its annual induct ion ceremony. Some of the inductees are as follows. Mike Smith played Junior A lacrosse for the Rich- mond Road Runners.

He went on to play senior lacrosse for a decade with the Vancouver Burrards, where he sipped champagne from the coveted Mann Cup in 1975 and 1977 at the national championships. Art Webster came to the west coast in 1975 from the Brampton Excelsiors and went on to a 16-season career with the Victoria Shamrocks and the Victoria Payless, where he won two Mann Cup titles and went on to coach four more national championships. A l e x M a c K a y i s t o u t e d a s t h e b e s t d e f e n c e m a n i n his time.

He played for th e Vancouver Burrards in the 1949 Mann Cup championship and went on to a have a successful coaching career as well. Kerri Hardill is a pioneer in women's field lacrosse. Her last international tournament was the 1994 Commonwealth Games, played right here in Victoria, where she was selected the mo st valuable player of the tournament. Finally, in the team category, the men's world field lacrosse champions, Team Canada, beat the United States 15-10.

It was the end of Gary Gait's illustrious career, and he went out in style, scoring four goals in the final period to end Canada's 28-year gold medal drought. The team was coac hed by former New West- minster Salmonbellies coach Frank Nielsen. So please join me in honouring all the 2007 inductees. The next time you're in New Westminster, you can spend some time at the shrine of Canadian lacrosse, the Hall of Fame. PREVENTION OF IDENTITY THEFT AND INTERNET FRAUD R. Lee: I rise in the House today to talk about con- sumer safety. This is becoming an increasingly important issue in our society today.

Last week I attended an event organized by the Canadian Chinese Consumers Associa- tion. This association was established in 1986 in this province to provide consumer-related information to Canadians, especially those consumers who need assis- tance in making wise decisions. Thanks to a dedicated group of volunteers, this organization has been providing consumer education such as the recent publishing of a consumer information booklet. I would like to focus today on the potential traps for consumers, including Internet fraud and identity theft — things we should all be aware of.

Identity thieves steal key pieces of personal information either physically or in other ways, without your knowledge, and use it to impersonate you and commit crimes in your name. In addition to names, a ddresses and phone numbers, thieves look for social insurance numbers, driver's licence numbers and banking information. [1350] You may be asking yourself how you can protect yourself on line. Well, there are a number of things you should be aware of. Fake websites are designed to trick consumers and collect their personal information. Beware of Internet promotions that ask for personal information.

After completing financial transactions on line, make sure you sign out of the website and clear your Internet files and cache memory. As identity theft and Internet fraud have become very common in this day and age, education is the key. I encourage everyone to learn what they can do to protect themselves against falling victim to these criminals. 100 MILE HOUSE JUNIOR SECONDARY PLEDGE AGAINST GLOBAL POVERTY C. Wyse: I am honoured to have this opportunity to tell the House of a world event involving youth in my riding of Cariboo South.

Recently the students at 100 Mile House Junior Secondary School in 100 Mile House joined with many others to set a new Guinness world record as part of the Stand Up and Speak Out event.

9204 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 On October 16 and 17 more than 43 million people in 127 countries took a pledge to take a stand against poverty. Over 76,000 Canadians took

part in more than 500 Stand Up events across the country. These people spoke out to demand a more urgent political response to the growing crisis of global poverty and inequality. I am proud that the members of my constituency were part of that effort. The event was initiated by Lisa Posnikoff, president of the 100 Mile House Junior Secon- dary parent advisory committee. The school's principal, Mark Wintjes, also supported the event. He gave a slide presentation which students viewed prior to taking their pledge. The students then stood together for one minute in their school gymnasium.

The worldwide Stand Up and Speak Out event called on world leaders to keep their commitments made in the millennium development goals. These goals are a global promise signed by 189 coun tries to halve poverty by 2015. These nations have promised to end poverty, inequality and hunger, and to ensure that basic education, clean water and sanitation are provided to everyone. The students at 100 Mile House Junior Secondary have pledged to support these goals. These students are our future, and they will be holding today's leaders accountable for their promise to achieve these goals.

I ask the House to join with me in recognizing the students at 100 Mile House Junior Secondary for their commitment to the future and to the betterment of lives of others around the world. Oral Questions REORGANIZATION OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MINISTRY C. James: A very simple question to the Minister of Children and Family Development. He's admitted to put- ting the Premier's plan for regionalization on the back burner. Will he tell this House today how much money he's wasted on that botched reorganization scheme? Hon. T.

Christensen: The government believes firmly in the principle of community engagement, of engaging our local service providers and the broader community in determining how we can best provide services to vulnerable children and families. We embarked on a process in 2002 towards the estab- lishment of regional governance authorities. In early 2004 we chose to put on the back burner the establishment of non-aboriginal governance authorities and disbanded the planning committees that had been set up in that respect and focused our efforts on aboriginal planning committees.

On that front, we now have two interim aboriginal authorities. We continue to work very closely with the aboriginal community, with first nations leaders, to move forward on that very important agenda of enabling aboriginal people to have a more effective decision-making process to guide services to aboriginal children. The funding, which was approximately $5.2 million, that supported the non-aboriginal planning committees…. That work has been valuable in the ongoing work to engage communities in supporting services. Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a sup- plemental. [1355] C.

James: We're now four weeks into the fall ses- sion, and another minister is evading questions and not being straight with the public. This minister is one in a very long list. A $400 million cost overrun at the convention centre — no answers for the public. Partisan photo op s before kids, an out-of- touch minister in charge of child care and millions of dollars given away in forest lands — with nothing to protect the public. Rising gang violence — and we get dismissive reactions from the Solicitor General. Now we have one more. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. C.

James: The Minister of Children and Family Development refuses to disclose exactly how much he wasted on a botched reorganization over the last six years. So again to the minister: will he come clean? Will he tell British Columbians the total cost — not the last- year cost, not the cost for the board, but the total cost — of reorganization that he's now put on the back burner? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. T. Christensen: The Leader of the Opposi- tion may want to get off her script. I answered the question.

Approximately $5.2 million was spent in '02-03 and '03-04 towards the planning committees for non-aboriginal authorities — the planning committees to switch governance. In 2004 we discontinued those planning commit- tees, and we focused on the ab original side to establish aboriginal authorities. We're having great success. I note that the members on the other side didn't mind showing up to the celebrations of those successes when we established interim authorities. I would hope that in this House they would reflect that success as well. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members.

The Leader of the Opposition has a further sup- plemental. C. James: O n c e a g a i n , w h a t w e s e e f r o m t h i s g o v - ernment is one answer from one minister and another answer from another minister. Interjections.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9205 Mr. Speaker: Members. C. James: In March 2006 the minister's predeces- sor told this House in estimates that $31 million had been invested in governance planning in the Minis- try of Children and Families — $31 million spent on regionalization that's now been put on the back burner by this minister. My question to the minist er: if it's not $31 million, what is the accurate figure that you've wasted and not spent on children and families programs? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Hon. T.

Christensen: It's clear that the Leader of the Opposition is confusing the process towards the estab- lishment of aboriginal authorities with the process towards the establishment of non-aboriginal authorities. The process with respect to non-aboriginal authori- ties was discontinued in 2004. Yes, we have continued very much and very committed to the establishment of regional aboriginal authorit ies, and we're having great success on that front.

If the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we shouldn't be working with aboriginal communities and aboriginal leaders to find ways to ensure that aboriginal people have a more effective voice in directing the deliv- ery of child and family services to aboriginal children in this province, then she should stand up and say that. CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MINISTRY RENOVATIONS N. Simons : Can the minister confirm that he and his leadership team recently held five days of meetings at a resort in Chase instead of using that brand-new, half-million-dollar boardroom on Fort Street? Hon. T.

Christensen: I can confirm that our leader- ship team and others in the staff from time to time have meetings in various locations around the province.

They did recently have a meeting — I believe it was a two-day meeting, not a five-day one, but I can confirm that for the member — at the Quaaout resort, which is outside of Chase, British Columbia. [1400] They felt that it was important in terms of moving forward on the agenda to have further discussions with aboriginal stakeholders , to reflect on where the ministry is at and to ensure that we do move this im- portant agenda forward in terms of how we engage with communities — how we engage, in particular, with aboriginal communities to improve services to aboriginal children and families. Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Members. Member has a supplemental. N. Simons: I think that the priorities of this minis- try are changing every minute, and I believe that they're completely in chaos. I think that the outrage expressed by members of first nations across this prov- ince speaks to that very loudly and very eloquently. First, the absolute waste of $560,000 on a new boardroom, and they can't even use it. I'd like to know if this minister knows the ch aos that exists not only in the non-aboriginal authority development but in the aboriginal authority development. Will he do what's necessary… Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Members. N. Simons: …and put the funding of his ministry where it's needed — where the children are getting the services they need, the fami lies get the services they need and the social workers get the help they need to do their jobs? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Just take your seat, Minister. Hon. T. Christensen: This ministry has over 4,200 employees and over 150 offices around the province. We serve communities right across the province, and we actually believe it's worth getting out there and talking to them about how we can serve them. This ministry has about a $1.9 billion budget.

This is a ministry that has doubled funding in services in child and youth mental health over the last five years. This is a ministry that has added almost 200 front-line workers in the ministry an d is adding more as we speak. This is a ministry that in the Prince George area moved from a position where we were horrendously understaffed in the late 1990s to a full-staffed comple- ment, 38 percent higher today in terms of child protec- tion workers. A. Dix: It was the spring of 2006.

It was a previous minister, it was a previous deputy minister, and unbe- lievably, at MCFD headquarters there was a previous renovation. In 2007 — new minister, new deputy min- ister, new renovation — $560,000. It looks like a movie set up there. My question to the minister is this. If your leader- ship team needed the boar droom, even though there's another boardroom in the building, even though it's a leased building…. If they needed a room for 50 people, why aren't they using it? Hon. T. Christensen: It's a rather interesting ques- tion. It's being used today, in fact. Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

9206 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 Members on both sides, listen to the question, and listen to the answer. Minister, continue. Hon. T. Christensen: This is a boardroom that is getting frequent use. It is a valuable asset for the ministry to ensure that we can work with our staff, to ensure that we can work with our stakeholders in moving an agenda forward that better serves children and families right across the province. It's a boardroom that was renovated under budget. It's a boardroom that now pr ovides video conferencing facilities.

It's a boardroom that is large enough to accom- modate up to 90 people. It is a boardroom that will serve the ministry and serve the pe ople of British Columbia very well in the years to come. [1405] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Member has a supplemental. A. Dix: I think we know why we're in trouble at the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The minister thinks that a $200,000 project that comes in at $560,000 is under budget. In the next shuffle, which I'm sure will come soon for him, he'll get responsibility for the convention centre. Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Members. A. Dix: In 2006…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat for a second. We all know it's Thursday, so let's just take a little bit of time and reflect on where we're at right now. Continue, Member. A. Dix: In 2006 the Premier sent over a senior offi- cial to the Ministry of Children and Families. They did a renovation. I'd like to ask the minister how much that cost. I'd like to ask the minister why, in 2007, it was justifiable to do another major renovation on a leased building, unless he was trying to be tenant of the year.

I'd like to ask the minister when he is going to stop with the constant internal renovations and start devot- ing services to children and families. Hon. T. Christensen: In the last two years alone, the last two budgets, we've added over $164 million for supports for children and families. We are focused on meeting the needs of childr en and families across the province. At the same time, we as a ministry are going to ensure that our staff have the space and the supports they need to better serve children and families. We have more than 150 offices across the province. We have over 4,200 employees.

We have about a $20 million annual capital budget to ensure that we have the space necessary to support the work the ministry does. We have about a $13 million budget to support office expenses, office materials and supplies. Again, the 4,200-plus em ployees across this prov- ince that work for the Mini stry of Children and Family Development have the resources they need — much better than they ever did under that NDP government — to meet the needs of children and families across the province. BUSINESS COMPENSATION FOR CANADA LINE CONSTRUCTION G.

Robertson: Yesterday this government paid lawyers to fight off the Cambie small business seeking damages in the B.C. Supreme Court from the devastating impact of Canada line construction. The lawyers actually attempted to have the merchants' case thrown out on a technicality. So not only is this government destroying the small businesses, but th ey're denying them their day in court. The judge, th ankfully, ruled against this government and its Canada li ne partners, and the case will be heard.

My question to the Minister of Small Business and Revenue: how do you feel about writing big cheques to lawyers to continue your fight against small businesses rather than fairly compensating those merchants directly? Hon. K. Falcon: The member well knows that we're not going to comment on cases before courts… Interjections. Hon. K. Falcon: …but there's more to come. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Minister, just take your seat. Hon. K. Falcon: The best

part is to come. Mr. Speaker: Please take your seat. [1410] Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members, let's listen to the answer. Hon. K. Falcon: I will say this. There is one big cheque we sure did write, and that was a cheque for $435 million to build the Canada line that they

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9207 opposed. And I can tell you that our biggest problem with that project is going to be all the NDPers trying to cram up on the stage and claim credit when that opens. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. G. Robertson: It is absolutely deplorable that this government is letting the situation degenerate into a legal battle with small businesses. It is totally disre- spectful of these hard-working families and of the whole province's small business community. It's also a horrendous waste of taxpayer dollars.

The Premier and his Transportation Minist er led the charge on the Canada line project from day one, and they created this mess. Will the Transportation Mi nister stand up in this House today, show some leadership again and lead the funding partners in compensating the small businesses on Cambie? Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Member. Hon. K. Falcon: You know, it's always interesting when I listen to these opposition members, because so often what they say on that side is very different from what they did when they we re in government.

But the members might want to remind themselves that under the NDP, they also were bu ilding a rapid transit line. They may recall that. It was called the Millennium line. I understand there were a number of small businesses that were impacted pretty dramatically, which were appealing to that government for exactly the support that he's now espousing. It's a mockery, Mr. Speaker, because they did nothing when they were in government. I can tell you that what we are doing is building a line that will take 100,000 peop le a day out of their cars and into rapid transit. They opposed it.

They're going to try and claim credit on opening day, and they will not get that benefit. GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO GANG VIOLENCE M. Farnworth: At the beginning of the week, the Solicitor General publicly attacked the police chief of West Vancouver, Kash Heed , over comments that the chief made about regional policing. The Solicitor General said that they were out of line, an unwarranted diversion and a red herring. Given the very public flip-flop the minister made yesterday, will he now publicly admit that Chief Heed was not out of line, and will he publicly apologize to Chief Heed? Hon. J.

Les: As all members of the House know, we have a very serious investigation going on in the lower mainland, given the recent events. I was pleased to see yesterday how all of the various police forces across the lower mainland came together in a clear expression of the fact that they are wo rking in an integrated fash- ion to deal with the challenges that they have. I think it showed clearly that the integration we have put in place, in which we have invested almost a quarter of a billion dollars a year in additional operating funding, is working. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. M.

Farnworth: Well, his answer was as out of touch to my question as his approach has been to dealing with the problems of gangland violence, hon. Speaker. [1415] My question, once again, is to the Solicitor General. He publicly flip-flopped on his comments at the begin- ning of the week. Does he believe that Chief Heed was out of line or not? And if he doesn't believe that he was out of line, will he take the opportunity now to show some ministerial class, because he publicly criticized him, and will he now publicly apologize to Chief Heed? Hon. J. Les: Actually, I spoke with Chief Heed.

I think, if I can characterize hi s thoughts, that he's rather bewildered, as I am, in terms of the spin that the oppo- sition has put on…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Take your seat, Solicitor General. Continue. Hon. J. Les: Mr. Speaker, I thought what was perhaps important to share with the members of the House were the comments of Chief Constable Jim Chu yesterday at the press conference that was held in Vancouver, where he said: "There are no easy answers to the problems of gangs and violence. Many are quick to offer their opin- ions and try to convince you that they have a quick and simple solution.

There is only one real course of action." He went on to say: "We must all work together — police, government and the community — to keep our- s e l v e s s a f e . " T h a t ' s w h a t w e a r e c o m m i t t e d t o o n t h i s side of the House. LIQUOR SALES AT RURAL AGENCY STORES N. Macdonald: Big, private liquor stores get a 16- percent margin on their liquor sales while small, independent rural agency stores only get 10 percent. Representatives of 250 rural agency stores have met with the Solicitor General. They have sent letters. They have told him that these different margins are completely unfair.

The rural caucus has been clear to the Solicitor General, as well, that these are unfair. When is the Solicitor General going to give small rural businesses an even playing field? Hon. J. Les: I've met fairly recently with representa- tives of the rural agency stores across British Columbia. I believe there are about 230 of them across the prov-

9208 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 ince. Of course, many of them came into being about four years ago, I believe, as an additional convenience for customers in rural areas of the province who would then be able to buy liquor and spirits at government liquor store prices. These liquor outlets were never intended to become large liquor stores. They were an additional line of business that was to be available to these proprietors in rural areas of the province, and they were rather read- ily taken up at that point in time.

We are examining the issues to see if any adjustments are warranted, and if so, we will get back to those representatives as soon as we can. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Member. The member has a supplemental. N. Macdonald: This issue has been raised repeat- edly with the minister, and the minister always comes back and tries to say that there is a difference between the big liquor stores and th ese rural agency stores. The difference in the business is that these big liquor stores are connected to B.C. Liberals. They have that connection; the small rural agency stores do not. There's an element of fairness here.

If 16 percent is good for the big liquor stores, it should be good enough for rural agency stores. When is the Solicitor General going to do the right thing and make it an even playing field? When do they get the 16 percent? Hon. J. Les: As the member opposite should know, it was always very clear th at the rural agency stores were actually agents of the provincial government liquor stores. Those were clearly the conditions under which those licences were extended. There's never been any confusion about that.

However, as I've said, I've met with the representa- tives of the rural agency stor es, and if there are issues there that need to be addressed, they will be. [1420] R. Austin: Unfortunately, the small rural agency stores in British Columbia, of course, don't have a Pat Kinsella working for them. They couldn't afford to hire Ken Dobell, so they're stuck. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Member. R. Austin: In estimates earlier this year the Solicitor General said that rural agen cy stores "receive a 10- percent margin. I've never been in the retail business.

I'm not sure whether a 10-percent margin is good, bad or indifferent." Well, 250 rural agency stor es are telling this minis- t e r t h a t i t i s b a d . I t ' s h u r t i n g t h e i r b u s i n e s s . W h e n i s this minister going to do the right thing and provide the same 16-percent margin? Hon. J. Les: It seems there's a bit of confusion on the opposite side of the House. Rural agency stores were never meant to be primarily liquor stores as com- pared to the licensee retail stores that we have across the province. That's always been clear.

In rural agency stores the intention is that the sale of liquor is a sideline to an agent of the provincial gov- ernment liquor stores. The lic ensee retail stores sell only liquor and a very limited range of associated products. There's a clear distinction between those two types of outlets. It was on those terms and conditions that the rural agency store licences were accepted, and I think it actually is something that benefits rural British Columbians in terms of their ability to access their liquor products. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. R.

Austin: If 16 percent is good enough for big liquor stores, why isn't it good enough for small rural agencies? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. J. Les: Again, I'd have to say to the member opposite that he clearly has done little research. He's much more interested in throwing up a bunch of flak and confusing the issue. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Solicitor General, just take your seat. Continue. Hon. J. Les: The member opposite is clearly com- paring apples and oranges. I've laid out for the member opposite that there are clear distinctions between these classes of licences.

They have always existed. I think we, in fact, deal fairly with all retailers of these products across British Columbia. [End of question period.] V. Roddick: I ask leave to present two petitions. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. Petitions V. Roddick: On behalf of the Royal Canadian Legion, both the Ladner and Tsawwa ssen branches, I present a petition from each which asks to keep Royal Canadian Legion authorized designated-smoking areas open. Orders of the Day Hon. B. Penner: I call continued debate on the amendment to second reading of Bill 43, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9209 Second Reading of Bills GREATER VANCOUVER TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AMENDMENT ACT, 2007 (continued) On the amendment (continued). S. Simpson: I'm pleased to have the opportunity to rejoin the debate for the remainder of my time in re- gard to this motion put forw ard by the official opposi- tion — the hoist motion on this bill. [1425] I'd like to just take a second here to very quickly do a bit of a recap of some of the concerns that I raised previously, when I had an opportunity to speak to this amendment.

As I pointed out at the time, the challenges that we see around this bill are th at it is a huge infringe- ment on democracy. It does remove the authority and the rights of the elected officials who have been responsible for the governan ce of TransLink since its inception. It hands the control of transportation largely into the hands of one interest in the transportation sector. That would be the business interest.

We know it's the board of trade, it's the Gate way Council, it's the char- tered accountants, and it's the Minister of Transporta- tion — four of the five people responsible for putting together the new board of experts who will be respon- sible for, essentially, the administration and the gov- ernance of TransLink. [S. Hammell in the chair.] While they clearly represent an important sector, they certainly do not represent all of the interests. They don't represent transit users. They don't repre- sent local government. They don't represent those who are concerned about sustainability.

They don't represent a whole series of experts who bring other views and perspectives to the issue of transportation and what constitutes sustaina ble transportation in the metro region. The other challenge is that this will give unelected officials taxing authority. That's a very concerning thing. We can go back an awfully long way to the dis- cussion about no taxation without representation, and essentially this does that. The other issue here, of course, is that what this bill does is give an unelected body the ability to override municipal authority, and th at's very concerning.

We know that as we try to make better connections be- tween transportation and land use, which is fundamen- tal and essential if we're going to accomplish the kinds of sustainability that we're looking at, this creates a greater divide in that proce ss by, in fact, separating the folks who make those decisions. Those land use deci- sions are largely made by our mayors and our councils, either at the local level or at the regional level through those mayors and councillors, who represent the local councils at Metro Vancouver. Now that body will continue to have land use responsibility.

It will continue to work on things like the livable region plan. It will continue to work on things like the sustainable re gion initiative. But at the same time, you will have this unelected body that is totally separate and distinct, which will be responsible for transportation-related issues. That division between those two bodies, I believe, makes the likelihood of success much less. We've called for this hoist motion. We've said: "Set this bill aside for six months. Give the minister some time to think about this.

Give the minister some time to talk to some of those people that we believe he hasn't spoken to — the people who ride buses on a regular basis. Talk some more to those local elected representatives who share concerns about this alienation of transportation planning and governance. Talk to some of those experts, who can bring an awful lot of wisdom to this." We also think the minister has to do that.

One of the things I'd like to do, as well, is talk a little bit about the kinds of principles and values that we believe need to be inherent in a governance structure related to TransLink or to tr ansportation in our region. I think there are seven essential key principles and values that we need to bring forward to create the kind of structure that needs to be in place. The first of those is that the TransLink board needs to be democratically elected. It needs to be a body that is accountable, and it's accountable through democratic elections.

That can be done in any number of ways. [1430] There are many of them, but one of the ways that certainly makes sense is the GVRD. It's a system very close to the one we have now. The folks at the GVRD — the mayors and the councillors — are elected. They then come from their councils to sit at the GVRD. They have a level of accountability. That accountabil- ity comes back to their vote rs every three years, and we believe that needs to be protected and defended — the importance of that accountability. We need to have a democratically elected body in charge of our transportation.

The challenge here, of course, is that the gov- ernment has gone in exactly the opposite direction. It has dismantled the democratically elected board and put in place a board made up of experts — a board of experts that's made up and is being selected by a group of people who, in large part, bring a very narrow perspective to that ch oice of selection. That's a big concern.

The next thing that I think we need to look at, as w e l o o k t h r o u g h t h i s , i s w e n e e d t o m a k e s u r e t h a t those who make these strategic decisions, the ones who decide about what regional transportation issues are and how the strategic decisions get made, need to be directly accountable to th ose who live with the out- comes of such decisions. Th erefore, this body really does need to be regional in nature. It needs to be re- gional, and it needs to reflect a regional sense about it.

9210 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 Part of the problem we have here gets back, again, to two things. One is it again comes back to our best way to accomplish that is by using Metro Vancouver, a regional body, to help provide that leadership and to have TransLink, or the tran sportation authority, di- rectly connected to Metro Vancouver and working in conjunction with or as part of Metro Vancouver in a more holistic sense. It's interesting, hon. Speaker, that when you look at the folks who are making th e selection, probably the least explicable of those is the Vancouver Board of Trade.

It's hard to understand how the Vancouver Board of Trade got chosen of all those groups. The Vancouver Board of Trade, the last time I checked, represents busi- ness interests in the city of Vancouver proper. It doesn't represent interests in Surrey, Abbotsford, Coquitlam or any of the other municipalities. It represents Vancouver's interests. Yet they, as the most parochial of those interests, sit at the board that will ma ke selections about who the members of this expert board will be. That's probably the least explicable of the business choices who are going to be the decision-makers on this.

The third key principle or value that I really do believe we need to adhere to in the restructuring, if there's to be a restructuring of TransLink and of our governance structure, is that there cannot be taxation without representation. It is simply inconceivable to us on this side of the House how a panel could represent, how this government could embrace a governance structure that contradicts that fundamental principle.

How on earth could the government say that it's okay to give taxing authority to an unelected body and to allow that unelected body to make tax choices in terms of tax rates and to decide who will pay those taxes, in the instances of whether they be business or residential, in the case of property taxes? It is unbelievable that this gov- ernment would allow that to occur, would endorse and embrace taxation without representation.

The fourth principle that I think needs to be an inher- ent part of the discussion about how we get at governance i s t h a t s e n i o r l e v e l s o f g o v e r n m e n t t h a t h a v e a f i n a n c i a l and policy interest in our transportation authority should have representation in this discussion. T h e y s h o u l d h a v e r e p r e sentation, and we know, of course, under the existing TransLink authority, that there is room there for provincial representation, for MLAs to represent the government side. The govern- ment didn't take advantage of the opportunity to do that.

We think that it is important, and probably not just at the provincial level. The federal government plays a significant role in transportation funding as well. [1435] It would be our view that along with the elected representatives at the local level, it makes sense to have an MLA or MLAs, a Member of Parliament or Members of Parliament also be part of that governance structure, to have that voice there. We know that the funding for transportation cannot be accomplished without significant contribu- tions from the provincial and the federal level.

The provincial and federal voices should be at that table, and they should be elec ted members who are pre- sumably representing the government side in those instances at the federal and provincial level. We think that would make great sense. Hon. Speaker, the fifth piece of this, the fifth principle that I think we need to look at, is that the greatest possible transparency should be provided and that financial information should routinely be made available to the public. TransLink has, as with many agencies, been pretty secretive about much of its activity — more so, I believe, than is necessary.

We certainly know about secrecy and lack of trans- parency in this place. It's a regular sort of occurrence with most government programs. Policy and positions are done in as secretive a fashion as possible. But here, it is my view that we need to have the greatest degree of transparency possible. What that means, I believe, is that to the greatest degree possible, that financial information has to be available. The minutes have to be available. Discussions have to be done in public to the greatest degree possible.

Only then do I believe the people in the region can have the kind of confidence that in fact the decisions are being made in their best interest. A s w e k n o w , w h e n y o u l o o k a t f u n d i n g , i t i s t h e people in the region who w ill pay a significant cost of that funding — whether it's through property taxes, whether it's through fares when they ride the bus or the SkyTrain, or whether it's through other methods.

For instance, when there are delays, when there are issues around privatization — and we know that this government has now essentially said that any project over $20 million will pretty much be driven to be a privatized project…. That wi ll occur with transporta- tion projects as well. It's critical that that information be public and open as well. People in the regi on should know where their dollars are going, and they should know what these deals are with private oper ators when the government forces a private operator on the region. It should all be a public discussion. That's an essential piece of this.

The sixth piece of this that I think is pretty critical is that senior levels of government should provide sus- tainable, stable and fair funding for transportation, most particularly for transit. If TransLink has had one huge stumbling block…. It certainly has other challenges, but the biggest stumbling block for TransLink since its inception and in the last number of years has been the lack of a funding source from senior levels of government that has allowed it to go out and accomplish its objectives to build the kind of sustainable transportation infrastructure that everybody in this chamber talks about.

W e t a l k c o n t i n u a l l y o n b o t h s i d e s o f t h i s H o u s e about the need for sustainability. We talk about climate change. The Premier talks about climate change. We know that 40 percent of our emissions come from transportation. We know that the vast majority of vehi- cles emitting those greenhouse gases are in fact cars in the lower mainland. We've heard the Premier talk about the need to increase the amount of people using transit, yet we

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9211 have not seen any substantive commitment to transit funding from this government for years. That's a huge problem. The government needs to step up. It needs to tell British Columbians that it means its commitment, and it needs to put the money on the table. When it does that, I believe the opportunity and the potential to access federal dollars become much greater when the province actually puts its own dollars on the table. [1440] I would certainly suggest that if there's a failure….

One of the key failures of this government around meeting transportation need s in British Columbia and w h y w e h a v e t h e m e s s t h a t w e h a v e i s b e c a u s e t h e government has refused to put the dollars on the table to fund transit in a way that it should be funded. The last of the seven prin ciples I would put on the table is that the various levels of government that have a stake in transportation…. They are all levels. We know that. All levels of government in the region need to treat each other with a level of respect that we have not seen in the transportation debate.

We have not seen that. We have heard the Minister of Transportation talk about TransLink. We have heard the derogatory com- ments of that minister in relation to members of local government with whom he does not agree. This isn't to say that there will not be disagreements. Disagreements are just fine . Sometimes those disagree- ments will be vigorous, and that's just fine too, but it has to be done with a level of respect that we have not seen from this minister or, quite frankly, from this Premier.

I think that if we adopt those seven principles as a way to begin this discussion and if we get the minister to go back and take six months and think about this a little bit, maybe, just maybe, the minister could come back with an amended and revised piece of legislation that all of us could support — one that is based on principles of democracy and fairness, one that represents no taxation without representation, one that commits the kinds of dollars and resources to make this all work and one that clearly shows there needs to be a level of respect from this government to our local officials, to our local governments and to the people who use transit and transportation.

It would be a refreshing experience to have this minister show some respect for the people who think transportation is important in the lower mainland. With that, I will take my seat. C. Trevena: Earlier this week I was speaking against this bill that's in front of us, because I find it anti- democratic. Today I will happily support the hoist motion, because I believe it will give the minister a chance to rethink the bill and rethink the tabling of it. It would allow the minister to look at the dangers that this bill introduces into our democratic system.

Earlier today I was talking about Bill 39 and the changes to the Electoral Boundaries Commission and again raising the dangers to our democratic system, which is very fragile. Boards run by elected people, such as TransLink, are more accountable than those run by appointed people, because elected people are answerable to hun- dreds or thousands of others. That's how democracy works. Appointed people, no matter how well- intentioned, are largely accountable only to those who have appointed them. They l ook to their superiors and look after and work with those working for them.

TransLink is a board one step removed. It's a board of people who were elected to local municipalities and then, as such, sit at TransL ink. They're obviously sup- ported by a staff who have expertise in planning and in transportation. As elected representatives, the TransLink board's job is to reflect the needs of their community — the needs in transportation, in planning and in development of their communities, the communities they were elected to represent.

No matter how good appointees are, no matter how committed appointees are to their jobs, they cannot truly represent a community, because they have been appointed. They haven't been elected. I support this hoist motion because I think that reflection on this may not be such a bad thing for the minister. He may want to talk with his Premier who, when he was Leader of the Opposition in 1998, actually supported TransLink, supported the fact that elected members there were on the TransLink board.

In fact, at that time the now Premier, the then Leader of the Opposition, wanted more legislation to prevent pro- vincial interference. Instead, we now have this bill, Bill 43, which takes it completely out of the hands of elected people and into the hands of an appointed board. [1445] A look at the history of this may help explain the way that things have been happening. I represent North Island. I'm not in the lower mainland, but I'm very aware of the democratic process, and I'm also very well aware of what's happening in the province.

In May 2004 TransLink opposed the then RAV line, and I guess this is when th ings started to unravel for that elected group. They opposed it because of its high cost, because it was a public-private partnership, a P3, and because the regional tran sit priority, as defined by those people who were elected from within the region — the priority of those who were elected to represent the region — was to the northeast, not through the RAV corridor. By June, a month later, we have the minister saying t h a t h e w o u l d s u p p o r t a g o v e r n a n c e m o d e l w i t h u n - elected officials.

I find this very dangerous — unelected officials for a governance model. Darn, these pesky elected people upsetting all their plans. Let's get rid of them. They are parochial, according to the minister, who represents Surrey-Cloverdale, so we get this inde- pendent governance review panel. TransLink opponents were on it, a former deputy minister, a businessman. Within a year, they produce a report, which — surprise, surprise — proposes getting rid of the elected board and replacing it with profes- sionals.

So with one year's discussion by unelected people, with the stroke of a pen, we get an end to the democratic structure that is dealing with transportation in the lower mainland.

9212 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 After the previous bill was introduced, Bill 36, the minister set in swing the appointment of the board. Even though this was still a bill in front of this House — hadn't been debated and hadn't been passed by this House — the minister started the process to replace TransLink.

Again, I find this a very frightening, very authoritar- ian move by a minister and by a government who care not a whit about the democratic process, who care not a whit about the fact that people have a right to elect people to represent them — whether it's for transportation, whether it's for school boards, whether it's for health authorities. This government is looking at the centralization of our government structures, and this is why I will support this hoist motion, Madam Speaker, and oppose this bill. Democracy. The fundamental of a democracy is that it ensures accountability.

If you don't like what someone is doing, whether it's the voters of the con- stituency of Surrey-Cloverdale on the performance of their MLA or the voters within Surrey looking at their municipal representative, there is accountability. A voter has the right to question their elected representative, to see them, to challenge them, to ask why they are doing what they are doing and to voice their concerns about what they're doing. And a voter has the ability through the electoral system, through the democratic system, to vote them out of office if they do not like what they are doing.

This is what democracy is about. It is the voice of the people. It is the voice of the people on every level. Whether it is transportation, health care, school boards, municipal government, provincial government or federal government, we have accountability. We are accountable to the people who elected us. Those are the people who are our bosses. Those are the people who we represent and who have the say over our future. That is true whether we're talking about sewers, buses, housing or child care. A vote is the most powerful tool we have in a democracy.

It is a democratic tool, and that is what is being take n away in this bill. That is what is being taken away throughout our province. [1450] If this gets through, Madam Speaker, if this bill becomes

an act, if we get a whole new governance structure for TransLink, this is going to be a model across the province. That is terrifying. I represent the North Island. Within the North Island, we're seeing a change in the governance in the regional district. We're seeing a split in the Comox-Strathcona regional district. We have one part of the regional district around the Comox Valley and one around Campbell River, the north and the islands. Within that, there is a new governance structure where there is going to be a corporation that handles the parts of the local government that are at the moment integrated.

This corporation is as yet somewhat unde- fined, but it looks like it is also going to be including appointees as well as perhaps elected people. This is extremely dangerous. These models, where we're taking away the elected person, where we're taking away the democratic right o f s o m e b o d y t o s a y : " I d o n o t l i k e w h a t y o u ' r e d o i n g ; I'm going to vote you out," or "My voice actually matters because I am a citizen, and I have a right to say that a board is my representative…." These pilot projects are quite terrifying. Who has the ability to ask an appointed board?

Who has the ability to challeng e an appointed board? Who does the appointed board answer to? It certainly doesn't answer to the voters. It certainly doesn't answer to the voters in any of the areas where TransLink is operating, and as these boards are imposed across the province, it's not going to be happening elsewhere. Earlier in the week when I spoke against the bill, I raised this corporatization and centralization. We are seeing it being brought in by this government time after time. This example, TransLink, is the most insidious example, but it is being replicated across the province.

We had health boards; now we have health authorities. Instead of having local boards who knew what did and didn't work for their communities, we got five health authorities. They're centralized and separated from the people — centralization and separation taking away from democratic control. We are seeing endless problems because of these boards. Because these boards are appointed, they do not reflect and at times do not understand the needs of the communities. They are not close to the communities. They do not hear the concerns, and they're unaccountable.

They cannot be questioned or challenged or voted out of office. Luckily, school boards stil l maintain some of their autonomy and their links wi th their own communities. The trustees are elected, and they are non-partisan. They're working for the good of education in the commu- nities in which they live and work. But school trustees are looking over their shoulders. When they see something like this come down the way, they are worried. After all, they know an appointed board would not challenge on issues like funding cuts , which the school trustees are suddenly faced with.

We've already seen this government take powers from regional districts over independent power projects. While we debate this bill, further moves are happening to curtail democratic local involvement. As I mentioned, Comox-Strathcona regional district is being split in two. There' s been no consultation. The minister just sent a directive saying: "That's it.

You're going to have two." Without this consultation where somebody is having more directives about a corporation which will establish some form of governance that we still don't know, an unelected board is again mo ving the system of local governance out of democr atic control and out of democratic hands. I think one of the other reasons I support this hoist motion is that this centralization — whether it's TransLink or other boards being centralized — is all coming from a government that promised, at some stage, transparency and a ccountability. That, Madam Speaker, is risible. Transparency and accountability.

Where is the transparency? [1455]

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9213 We are being given this form, this structure, after a year. The minister started implementing a governance model while the bill still hadn't even been debated in the House. This from a government that said: "Openness, accountability, open cabinet meetings. We will be accountable." The minister can come back and say: "Well, we still have representatives. We have local elected representatives on the new TransLink board. We have the mayors' council." But that simply doesn't cut it.

That is an organization t h a t w i l l m e e t f o u r t i m e s a year and will have really very little to say and will have no influence over what is happening with this board. Another issue that I'm very surprised this government has allowed to happen within the whole TransLink legislation, and another reason why I will support the hoist motion, is the issue of taxation. It has been raised before — taxation without representation. Taxation is fundamental in a democratic process.

Taxation is what pays for our services, and people can elect governments that cut taxes, or people can elect governments that raise taxes. Or people can elect governments that look at different tax structures. But they do not expect unelected, unaccountable boards to have the right to raise taxes. They do not expect an unelected board to raise moneys through taxation. I am actually very surp rised by this because no taxation without representa tion…. We've heard this being mentioned through the House over this.

There are members on this side who oppose the bill and are supporting this hoist motion, who talk about no taxation without representation. I'd like to remind members on the other side of the House that no taxation without representation sparked a revolution. No taxation without representation was the rallying cry by the Thirteen Colonies in what now is the United States. They were complaining about taxes being imposed by parliament without their consent, which violated the traditions of people going back to the Magna Carta. Taxation without representation is a very, very dangerous path to move down.

Not only do we see our democratic voices being silenced through these sorts of moves, such as the TransLink bill, but the idea of taxing without representation is very worrying. The British government at the time, in the 18th century when they wanted to impose taxes without representation, said that it was okay. The colonists were virtually represented. Well, maybe that's the same for the people in the lower mainland who are going to be having this new TransLink board. Maybe they are going to be virtually represented by some board that they have no account- ability for.

I find it very strange that the government is willing to also lose that control, lose the control of taxation. It's a very powerful tool to have, but as I say, this gov- ernment seems to be willing to just hand it over to a board of appointees. With this bill — and this is why I support the hoist motion — people are not getting the voice that they deserve. I think the government really should take this hoist motion very seriously. They should consider supporting it. Perhaps if they don't want to look at the democratic process….

As I say, we've been discussing earlier today Bill 39, which looks at the electoral boundaries and the changes there — again, the impacts of our democratic structure and our electoral process that Bill 39 implies. [1500] I would hope that the government would look if not at the democratic reasons for considering our hoist motion then at the taxation issues, because this is exceed- ingly worrying and exceedingly concerning. I mean, it's not a slogan without meaning. It was a slogan that did inspire revolution.

I'm not saying that this would inspire revolution in the lower mainland, but I am saying that it will create a lot of concern from taxpayers, the people who have a financial voice and are saying, "I care about my transit structure; I care about my local governance," and who want to have a greater say, not to have the virtual rep- resentation that this bill will allow. I've got to admit that virtual representation is perhaps why the government is actually moving through this. It does sound very 21st century. It does sound very strange.

Maybe this is something that this government wants to work on in other areas — you'll get virtual representation, virtual taxation and virtual other things — and to get their public relations teams to be working on this. It does go a long way to explain what is happening in our province — the concept of virtual representa- tion, the concept where you take away from elected voices and elected bodies the right to have that control. We are increasingly seeing virtual representation. We are seeing virtual representation in our regional districts, as I mentioned, in our health authorities and in our ferries.

Throughout the areas that we as British Columbians had believed were ours, throughout the areas where we had thought we had a say, this is being taken away. It really is a matter of huge co ncern. It is something that we should all be wary of. I respect the members opposite as people who are also like members on this side. I had hoped that they believed in democracy. They are elected representatives for their communities. They are the people, as on this side, who are there to represent a community — to represent thousands, up to about 50,000 people, and to give them voice.

Yet with one bill they can take that voice away from so many people over such an important issue and, with that move, can also set the stage for other areas where democracy is being pulled back, where other appointed boards are being put in place. I think this is a dangerous bill. I think the hoist motion will give the government a chance to think about it. If you're making fundamental changes in any structure, i t s h o u l d n o t b e r u s h e d t h r o u g h . I t s h o u l d b e w e l l - thought-out.

If you're making fundamental changes in a governance structure and taking it out of democratic hands, this too should be thought through. It should be questioned thoroughly. I would hope that the government does think about what no taxation without representation means and

9214 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 about the implications that it's going to have. I believe fundamentally in the democratic process. That's why I'm here, and I hope that is why most other members are here, why 78 other colleagues are here. We believe in democracy. We believe that everyone has a voice and that we will individually do our best to represent that voice. Sadly, I think this bill will take that voice away from too many people. It will set a precedent and will mark a very dangerous way forward for the coming years. I support this hoist motion.

I urge the government members to also support the hoist motion because it gives a chance for reflection. With that, Madam Speaker, I will conclude my remarks. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak again on this very important motion on our democratic structures. [1505] J. McIntyre: I rise because I absolutely cannot sup- port this hoist amendment. I've sat here for days and days while the opposition spoke against Bill 43 — all of them or a large number of them. Now they're asking for this time, this six-month reprieve from actually get- ting on with badly needed legislation.

I can't sit here any longer and listen to one speaker after another speaker say the same thing over and over. Then by the end of th e session, guess what. The NDP is going to say that we didn't have enough time to debate bill X, bill Y or bill Z, because they're going on and on and on. Now it's my turn to go on. I don't support this hoist, because I actually support Bill 43, and I'd like to get on with the reading of the bill. Bill 43, which is the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Amendment Act, provides, finally, a sustain- able funding framework to ensure that TransLink is viable for the long term.

It should be passed as soon as possible. Let me tell you and let me tell the viewers at home w h a t i t a c t u a l l y p r o v i d e s f o r . I t p r o v i d e s f o r a m a y o r s ' council, which includes all the mayors of all municipalities all at the same time, and we can maintain accountability for TransLink directly to the taxpayers. They will know that it's their mayor who sits on that board. It provides for a professional board of directors with the skill and professional background necessary to oversee the operation of TransLink.

It also provides for an independent commissioner, the operative word being "independent." It increases the transpar ency and the due diligence regarding TransLink's plan and initiatives as well as to authorize any proposed fare increases. It also provides for a substantially improved planning process. Let's actually take a minute here to go back a bit in history. This legislation, this Bill 43 that the NDP is trying to avoid passing, implements a majority of recommendations from a blue-ribbon, respected TransLink review panel.

That was a three-person inde- pendent panel — people like Wayne Duzita; Marlene Grinnell, who has years and years of municipal experi- ence and experience at TransLink; Dan Doyle, a Highways deputy minister. They had 120 written su bmissions and 30 stake- holder meetings. They went out and spent some time looking at this whole situat ion, and one after another the NDP here in the House over the last while, like lemmings, have been speaking against this legislation because they know better than an independent panel — right? The government went to the independent panel to depoliticize the issue.

Once again, what do we have? NDP politicizing transportation in this province. They go for the exact opposite. [Applause.] Yeah, right. I'm glad you're clapping, because the NDP has had an ugly history of political interference in transportation in this province. The biggest, of course, and most blatant example would be their interference in B.C. Ferries and the B.C. Ferries board, which produced — whatever it was — half a billion dollars of three ferries that don't work. It led to our government esta blishing an independent, arm's-length authority to run professionally.

Lo and behold, I think by all accounts, it's way improved, but the NDP would never admit that — no. What else did they interfere in? Would it be the Millen- nium line — no — that was created under the NDP? There are a number of quotes here by serious people like Pat Jacobsen, the TransLink president, who said in the Sun way back in October 2001: "There never was a business case for this line. It was never the region's priority." Then how did the NDP build the Millennium line?

Philip Hochstein of the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association says that the Millennium line was a politically driven project with a politically driven timetable. They've made what is really a four-year pro- ject into a two-year project to suit the political election timetable. Surprise, surprise. So for me to sit here and listen to the NDP rail against the concept of running a major transportation authority in a professional, business -like manner is laughable, completely laughable. I can't believe it. Sadly, it does represent the NDP's approach, but it is laughable.

Let's listen to what Maurine Karagianis said just the other day, November 6, in Hansard. She said: "The min- ister has said all along that we need more expertise. All of these municipal leaders, despite their capacity…." Deputy Speaker: Member, can you just remember there are no names in the chamber. J. McIntyre: Oh, I'm so sorry. I apologize. The member for Esquimalt-Metchosin, I believe. I'm sorry. Yes, in my enthusiasm, I forgot. [1510] Anyway, the member mentioned that all of these municipal leaders, despite their capacity to run very efficient and effective, huge multi-billion dollar com- munities….

Somehow their expertise is just not the depth that's required for this new TransLink model, but the expertise that these business-centric appointees will bring is all that's needed. I must remind the member that it's not the mayors and the councillors that are running billion-dollar

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9215 municipalities. It's their chief administrative officers. There's a whole administrati on and bureaucracy that run these. You think that elected officials like you and I actually run the cities? No. She's got it all wrong.

Whereas business people actually do run their organi- zations and are accountable to their shareholders…. So enough. The member for Vancouver-Hastings who just spoke before me was very concerned about an expert board. He was really worried about expertise. It's ridiculous. The NDP is saying we don't need a profes- sional board with skills to oversee transportation. Instead, they would prefer…. Interjection. J. McIntyre: Listen. Just a moment. Instead, they would prefer people who use transit or people who ride a bicycle…. They want them on the board. An Hon. Member: That's typical NDP. J. McIntyre: Exactly.

It's not to denigrate for one moment that those people have value and that they have a good perspective. They should have opportunities for input…. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Members. J. McIntyre: I don't know about you, but I think I would prefer a professional like Larry Berg of YVR at the airport and David Hahn of B.C. Ferries than some- one from the general public who rides a bus or a bike overseeing a billion-dollar organization. Let me say it a different way. Let me give you a different example. It might explain my point.

Certainly, patients in a hospital have valuable input into how health care is delivered in the province. They're users of the system. They're taxpayers. But when it comes to surg ery, I think I'd prefer to have a professionally trained doctor than another patient wielding a scalpel in their hand. Interjection. J. McIntyre: Yeah, I think a patient would have a lot more skill than a doctor. That's a good idea. So let's have the average citizen running billion-dollar organizations. Anyway, I want to turn to another benefit.

If you would bother to pass Bill 43 and get on with it, we could get on with these benefits being distributed to the lower mainland. Under the current struct ure, Metro Vancouver and the TransLink board have been at odds. They've been at odds all over the place. We've had differing positions on Gateway. We've had reversals on the Canada line. We've had quotes in the newspapers for the last years. Larry Campbell, former mayor of Vancouver and a TransLink board member, saying: "Quite frankly, I don't see it working.

We've got to get rid of the paro- chialism." Doug McCallum, former mayor of Surrey, saying: "We have serious structural problems in governance." Lois Jackson, mayor of Delta, saying: "I believe we should have every single mayor on the TransLink board, and we do n't need five representa- tives from somewhere like Surrey and Vancouver." We also have editorials in the Vancouver Sun .

On June 23: "TransLink has co me to represent political gridlock in the lower mainla nd rather than a transit system that moves fluidly." Another editorial on the same day: "Instead of blindly heading down this road, it's time to admit that TransLink itself is broken — that it's incapable of doing the job it was created to do. On Monday, Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell and Surrey Mayor Doug McCallum faced up to this reality." Most municipalities right now — and according to the NDP, you wouldn't know it — do not have a repre- sentative on the TransLink board.

It's led to a whole series of one-year terms so that the appointments can be rotated among all the municipalities. One-year terms don't lead to any kind of long-term planning, any kind of long-term thinking. It lacks public accountability, because the members are continually going through a rotating door. It leads to th e kind of public admission of the breakdowns I just cited. If we were able to get on with the reading of Bill 43, we would see that this legislation provides for a whole new governance model that will enhance TransLink in five major ways.

First of all, it will enhance public accountability and public confidence in the board. All the mayors will be overseeing and approving budgets. It will enhance their ability to be forward-looking, like they should be, ten years and 30 years down the road. It will also enhance effective decision-making by creating much, much clearer lines of responsibility and authority. It's very clearly defined between elected officials and non-elected officials who've been appointed to governing bodies. It also separates what the executive and the staff of TransLink are responsible for.

It will increase the transparency of the fiscal manage- ment. You'll know who supported the budget and who voted for it. It also increases a timely and efficient delivery of much-needed transportation services and projects. We need to get on with this and stop the infighting and the gridlock. [1515] The NDP claims that democr atically elected politicians won't have a say anymore, and they're dead wrong. Every day I've been hearing on and on that this is the death of democracy, that this is taxation without representation — you know, another doom-and-gloom, sky-is-falling sce- nario from this NDP opposition. No.

They're dead wrong. What we will see is decision-making with respect to long-term strategic planning as well as the exercise of new taxation and borrowing authorization powers that will now rest with the council of mayors. That's a council of every single mayor — not a few, but all mayors all at the same time. An Hon. Member: Better democracy.

9216 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 J. McIntyre: Exactly. We will see responsibility for implementing the plan lie with the new board, the new professionals. All they're doing is implementing, and they will implement in a pr ofessional and businesslike way. And thank goodness, Madam Speaker. This council of mayors is also going to provide a much-needed link back to the regional and municipal growth management through their decisions on the TransLink long-term plan. That's something that I think people did raise concern about when they heard about the new possible structure.

There have been great lengths taken to make sure there is a link to the accountable mayors, back to linking things like the livable region strategic plan. The TransLink board will be required by amendments to consider those regional interests in both the ten-year and the 30-year strategic plans. So the safeguard is built in. The mayors' council will also be responsible for appointing that independent commissioner and the board from a list of nominees, so it does increase public accountability as the public, as I mentioned earlier, knows exactly who represents their interest.

It's their mayor, and it's the most senior elected official at the local basis. It's not a mishmash of councillors and mayors that are moving around every year. Very, very clear lines — that's what is necessary, and that's what will make it more workable. We also have the roles and responsibilities of the mayors, the TransLink board and the independent commissioner very clearly defined. Let me give you an example. Here's what the independent commissioner will be responsible for, and he's only to be appointed one time for a six-year term. He has to review and approve any increases in transit fares.

He is in charge of approval of TransLink's procedures for dealing with public complaints. So we have an independent commissioner. He's also responsible for how TransLink conducts their annual customer satisfaction surveys. He will also be auditing TransLink's reports on customer satisfac- tion and complaints and their service performance as it relates to their plan — an independent commissioner who will be watching and evaluating all of this on behalf of the public.

Lastly, he will also be commenting on the consis- tency of TransLink's ten-year plan with, as I said earlier, that regional growth management strategy. So they will be monitored to make sure that they are in fact doing that. Now, I al so w ant to talk a little about the funding and what this proposed bill — if we can ever get back to it — will do to put TransLink finally on a much sounder footing. I recall, in my years in business…. I remember all the kerfuffle a number of years ago when TransLink and GVRD were voting on their ten-year plans.

It involved major, major projects like rapid transit, the Canada line, Evergreen line — trying to decide all the priorities. So they have a ten-year plan, but guess what. They only had funding for three years of it — oopsy. What do we do? Start digging for rapid transit, for under- ground, and then get halfway through the tunnel and go: "Oopsy, we don't have any more money for the other years"? No. You have to do this — guess what — in a pro- fessional, businesslike way. You can't just think that one day you'll get there and maybe raise a few taxes or maybe levy a few vehicles or do a parking lot tax.

Interjection. J. McIntyre: Yeah, why don't we do that? Anyway, that was a ridiculous way they were try- ing to operate. You just cannot start on projects of that magnitude and not have certainty of funding. You can't stop partway through. Can you imagine building a house like that? I don't think so. Anyway, I saw TransLink struggle for years with these controversial levies and parking stall taxes — huge uproar, huge uncertainty. But no, under Bill 43, if it was allowed to pass, we will see that TransLink needs to live within its means.

It will be required to adopt a ten-year strategic plan to remain viable, and this will result finally in an improved and certain funding framework. [1520] Also, a very important part of the work of the panel is that they recommended that new revenues would be required to meet the increasing needs as we go forward. But it will be balanced. It'll be balanced between transit users, vehicle users and property owners. Placing the onus on only one of those bodies was blatantly unfair. Right now, guess what. Under the system that the NDP opposition is trying to protect, the burden is primarily on property owners.

All of the viewers who are out there watching, if you do own or rent property, you'll see that a certain amount of your taxes pay for this, and you are almost virtually the single payer. TransLink's portion, people may not know, of the region's property tax bill…. Guess what. It's gone up over 150 percent in the past five years alone. It's shocking, and it's clearly not sustainable. TransLink was not on a financially sustainable footing. Those rapid increases that we've seen, which we've all experienced as taxpayers in the lower mainland, are estimated to slow under this new balanced formula.

The panel's assessment, when they're recommending this balance of revenues…. The property owners are now expected and anticipated to see only about a 3- percent or 4-percent increase over these next years — a completely different reversal of a pattern that was out of control. The panel was striving for a system that has pre- dictable and sustainable funding, that is fair and that is balanced between users of the system and taxpayers.

By comparison, what the NDP is supporting is a system where an increase of 40 percent to 50 percent in the property tax revenues would be required in the next four or five years alone for TransLink to imple- ment its current ten-year plan. That's what the NDP w a n t s . T h e y w a n t t o k e e p i t j u s t a s i t i s . " L e t ' s h a v e TransLink be unsustainable and have no certainty of funding. Let's have all of th e property tax payers in the

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 9217 lower mainland…. In addition to the 150-percent in- crease over the past five years, let's go for another 50 percent in the coming five years. Why not? Who cares? They're rich property owners — right? Let's tax them." How the NDP can stand up and mock this legisla- tion and vote against a profe ssional business plan that protects taxpayers to a much greater degree is way beyond me. Now, as I wind down here, I want to talk about an- other positive aspect of Bill 43 for my riding in particular.

One of the elements of this is that the service region can be expanded. It would include, at the western end, communities like Squamish and Pemberton, who very much need public transit. In the Sea to Sky corridor, which is growing at a rapid rate, there's a huge demand for people to be able to get up and down that corridor. We need to take cars off the road. The opportunity to have regular transit service in my corridor would be just a fantastic occurrence. It will be voluntary.

Nobo dy is forcing them, but if the local communities and the council of mayors agree, TransLink will be able to expand service beyond its boundaries. I think that is a fantastic aspect of all of this. This structural change to TransLink will provide for a long-term vision for tr ansportation in the entire lower mainland that includes plans for better, more balanced, more effective transit as part of a larger transportation network. It finally provides tools for TransLink to build for the lo ng term. The long term is the important part of this. That's what's professional. That's what's businesslike.

TransLink will finally have a revenue stream necessary to achieve their strategic long-term goals. It will enable construction of the Evergreen line expansion. It will allow them to expand the current SkyTrain system as they see fit, and it will establish a transit and rapid bus service across the Port Mann Bridge, which we are so desperate for. In short, I cannot in good conscience support this hoist amendment. I also cannot support and sit here, as I said at the beginning of my comments, and listen to one opposition member after another deliberately delay the passage of this bill.

I wa nt my voice on the record that we need to get on with this legislation. [1525] D. Thorne: It truly is a pleasure to rise today in support of this hoist motion, a motion that one can only hope will slow down this Minister of Transporta- tion's plan, his ideas, his move to control the whole transportation system — probably in British Columbia, but certainly in the lower mainland — and to take over from a democratic, elected board and run everything centrally through Victoria.

It's even more of a pleasure to follow the member for West Vancouver–Garibaldi, who has shown in no uncertain terms her scorn for elected officials in British Columbia. I can only wonder if that includes us here as well. Because if, in fact, we can have experts running transportation in the GVRD–Fraser Valley and if this is what makes this plan a good plan, then I would think we can have them running the whole province, run- ning everything here in Victoria. Why are the taxpayers paying any of us to sit here when everything could be run by a panel of experts? It's a pleasure to rise an d follow this speaker.

Before I go on, I have some things that I want to say, many of which have been said — the draconian legislation, the loss of democracy, all of the things that my colleagues have been speaking about in the last couple of days. I myself spoke at second reading a week or two ago and recounted my own personal experiences with trans- portation on the lower mainland, and I fully intend to repeat some of those things today. I'm sure that will please anybody in the House who was not here the first time I spoke and who missed the things that I had to say in my personal experiences. I will repeat those today.

I just want to say that since I spoke two weeks ago or ten days ago, my constituency assistant has sent out my speech to any number of lower mainland councils, mayors, the GVRD and many, many people involved in transportation currently on the lower mainland. I have had nothing but positive comments back to my office in Coquitlam-Maillardville, — people thanking me, and thanking me for brin ging up exactly what all of the elected officials, almost to a one, in the GVRD feel about this bill. Just a little bit of history on TransLink and the GVTA — the time line.

It's very interesting how all of this came about here in the House. It's very interesting. As I say, I was around for much of this, but it's great to have it written down here with dates and to be able to recount it to this House this afternoon. In 1998 the GVTA bill was introduced by the then NDP government. At that time — on July 29, 1998 — the current Premier, then Leader of the Opposition, supported the creation of Tr ansLink and, in fact, called for even more legislation to protect the autonomy and independence of TransLink from provincial interfer- ence. Very interesting information.

One wonders how we ended up here today when this is how we started out nine years ago. One only wonders. Well, having been there, I know how we got to where we are today. Okay, so in 1999 TransLink was officially launched. Everything went along fine for the next five years. Interjections. D. Thorne: I see the Minister of Transportation came in when he heard about my time line. He missed my personal experiences before, so he has come in to hear me repeat some of the things I said before. Anyway, in the meantime, things went along.

I was sitting on the GVRD board of directors, and yes, of course, there were problems with transportation in the lower mainland. Underfunding will do that. It will cause problems. [1530] I can guarantee the Minister of Transportation that if he underfunds his new board of experts, they are going to have problems as well. Believe me; they can't do it without proper funding, as I know — right?

9218 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T HURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2007 Hon. K. Falcon: Why did you underfund them? D. Thorne: No, no. Hon. K. Falcon: You just said that you underfunded them. Why? D. Thorne: I'm talking about in 2001-2004. Interjection. Deputy Speaker: Member. D. Thorne: Things went along very well until January 26, 2004, when the member for Surrey-Cloverdale was appointed the Minister of Transportation. In the following days he promised to direct major transportation invest- ments towards Surrey. Tha

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H1108pm-07
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H1108pm 07
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	4b38ecf6bc467e0ab74a83d8660e3107aa42368b

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