2013 Legislative Session: Fifth Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 42, Number

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)

ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 17 — Senate Nominee Election Act

Hon. S. Bond

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

Prevention of bullying

D. Barnett

Prevention of bullying and democratic process

S. Chandra Herbert

Rotary International

M. Dalton

Bullying prevention initiative at Senator Reid School

S. Hammell

B.C. Creative Futures

J. Thornthwaite

Energy conservation initiatives in Colwood

M. Karagianis

Oral Questions

Multicultural outreach strategy and partisan activities by government staff

J. Horgan

Hon. J. Yap

C. James

J. Kwan

Waste incinerator proposal for Fraser Valley

J. van Dongen

Hon. T. Lake

Multicultural outreach strategy and partisan activities by government staff

M. Farnworth

Hon. J. Yap

H. Bains

Petitions

Hon. R. Sultan

Tabling Documents

B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Annual Report 2011-2012

B.C. Ferry Commission, Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2012

Ministerial Statements

Pink Shirt Day and prevention of bullying in schools

Hon. D. McRae

R. Austin

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

Hon. I. Chong

D. Routley

B. Simpson

Hon. B. Stewart

K. Corrigan

Point of Privilege

(Reservation of Right)

Hon. R. Coleman

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. D. McRae

H. Bains

K. Krueger

M. Mungall

R. Lee

[ Page 13121 ]

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2013

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1335]

Introductions by Members

Hon. M. de Jong: I look behind me and find a friend that I have come to know over the years — Doug McKay, who is a leader within the IBEW and commits himself to working on behalf of the women and men that are accounted among his members. It is great for me to see Doug here. I know all members will make him feel very welcome today.

M. Farnworth: We're in politics. Politics is about elections every now and then. We have our own on the 14th of May. But in the run-up to that monumental contest, another election has taken place — a very, very important election — and that is for who will head up the press gallery for the next several years.

I am pleased to tell the House that, beating back a strong challenge, Tom Fletcher has won his fourth term, showing that it can be done. But I'm also reminded, for my friends across the way, that lightning rarely strikes twice.

Hon. P. Bell: It was my honour today to host Donald McInnes down in the dining room and to present him with his Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal. Many of the members in this Legislature will know Donald from the good work that he has done over the years. Donald, of course, is the executive vice-chairman of Alterra Power Corp. and the founder and former CEO of Plutonic energy.

I also got to know Donald in my role as Minister of State for Mining about nine years ago. He did a tremendous amount of work on the Highway 37 power line. I would argue strongly that that came to fruition as a result of his hard work, along with many, many other projects.

Donald's most recent endeavour has been in the aquaculture industry with the founding of a facility up the coast targeting shellfish, which I think will be helpful for First Nations. That has been a trademark in Donald's life, working collaboratively with First Nations across the province of British Columbia. I know many in the First Nations community call Donald a very, very good friend.

Finally, Donald has focused his life on prostate cancer. I know many people in this Legislature have been provided with the wonderful trademark blue tie that Donald is wearing again today. He tells me that he is going to continue to wear it until he is no longer the president of the board of Prostate Cancer Canada, which will be some time.

We very much appreciate all the work that Donald has done. He's joined today by his wife, Amy, and his three children, Angus, Charlotte and Finley. We had a wonderful lunch today. Congratulations to the entire McInnes family.

Donald, thank you so much for everything that you do.

Would the House please make them very, very welcome.

R. Chouhan: There are a couple of friends in the gallery today — Mike Flynn, the business manager of IBEW 213, and Doug McKay, business manager of IBEW 258. Please join me to give them a warm welcome.

L. Reid: My daughter's grade 7 class — you'll remember, many of you, Olivia when she spent her early years here — is with us today. They're in the gallery. Their teacher is Mrs. Blumel. They have three parents with them — Ms. Bhandal, Mrs. Chhibbar and Mrs. Wen. I'd ask the House to please make them very welcome.

[1340]

G. Coons: In the gallery today are two friends, two constituents — Nelson Kinney and Jennifer Rice. They are both city councillors from Prince Rupert. I do have to add that Jennifer last month won the nomination as the NDP candidate for North Coast. If things fall where they should, Jennifer will be the next North Coast MLA. Would you please make them welcome.

R. Hawes: This morning members of our caucus met with the B.C. and Yukon Catholic Women's League. In the gallery today are the four women that came and presented a number of resolutions to us. There is President Doreen Gowans, President-elect Pat Deppiesse, legislation chair Agnes Geiger and resolutions chair Gisela Montague. Could the House please make these hard-working women welcome.

V. Huntington: I notice that we're graced in the House today by Dr. Paddy Smith, who is known so well to so many of us and who is a very active participant in the legislative intern program. Please make him welcome.

N. Simons: What a surprise. Today I would like to introduce to the House a couple of constituents from Roberts Creek — Caitlin Hicks, a writer and artist, and her husband, Gordon Halloran, best known as the "Iceman," the creator of the Ice Gate for the Olympics. They've joined us here in the House today, and I would ask my colleagues from both sides to make them most welcome.

[ Page 13122 ]

M. Dalton: In the gallery today is the love of my life — my beautiful wife, Marlene. We've been married coming on 28 years. She's accompanied by Grace Dunn, a very good friend of ours. We've spent many a vacation together at Thetis Island or on Christmas Eves, along with her husband, Kevin, and sons Paul and Adam. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

J. Trasolini: It's my pleasure today to introduce a couple of visitors — Paul Harris, who is the president of the Port Moody–Coquitlam NDP Riding Association executive, and his wife, Yvonne Harris, who is the secretary of the executive. Yvonne is a very accomplished author of several books for adults and children. She's also a marathon canoeist and enjoys the waterfront community of Port Moody very much.

I'd like to thank Paul and Yvonne for their hard work and dedication. They are community leaders. Can the House please join me in making them welcome.

C. Trevena: Mr. Speaker, I hope the House will make welcome two constituents of mine — Mark Zimmerman and Kathryn Manry, who've come down from Quadra Island for a visit. Mark and Kathryn were the successful bidders on a lunch here at the Legislature in the dining room. We had a pleasant lunch that I offered at a fundraiser for Save the Heart of Quadra Parks.

I mentioned this to the House before — Save the Heart of Quadra Parks bringing people from across the community together to raise the money that the province couldn't put forward for completing a provincial park. I hope the House will make both Mark and Kathryn very welcome.

I'd like to join my colleague across the House who welcomed the members from the Catholic Women's League, who addressed the opposition yesterday. We had a very good discussion. I'd also like to thank them for their hard work and for the information they shared with us.

N. Simons: I'm not sure if they're here. They might be in sound check. But the Abbie Hoffman Society is in Victoria playing tonight at Club 9one9. They're a Powell River band featuring Meg Hoffman, Jennye Hoffman, Laura Hoffman, Lisa Hoffman and Suzy Hoffman. They're accompanied by none other than Tony Colton, a roadie extraordinaire and spiritual adviser, as well as "Bad" Karen Skadsheim, a part-owner of Townsite brewery.

They're playing in Nanaimo tomorrow and at the Waverley on Saturday. So would the House please — whether they're here or not — go see them tonight or make them welcome today.

Mr. Speaker: Surrey-Cloverdale. I think you have an announcement to make.

[1345]

K. Falcon: Forgive me, Mr. Speaker. I thought I had an opportunity to answer a question, and I got very excited there. [Laughter.] But no, Mr. Speaker, I do….

I am really honoured to be here today and be back with all my colleagues on both sides of the House and to be able to announce that my wife and I…. My wife, actually. I had very little to do with it, I can assure you. But my wife had a beautiful baby girl, Jacqueline Rose, who was born a week ago Tuesday — on budget day, actually. We're just thrilled to be able to announce our latest addition. She joins our three-year-old, Josephine, and they wish all of you in the House their very best.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 17 — SENATE NOMINEE ELECTION ACT

Hon. S. Bond presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Senate Nominee Election Act.

Hon. S. Bond: Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Bond: I'm very pleased to introduce the Senate Nominee Election Act. Our government made a commitment to bring forward Senate nominee election legislation, and that is what this bill represents. It would create a statutory framework for British Columbians to elect nominees to fill vacancies for our province in the Senate of Canada.

The bill provides for Senate nominee elections to be held either in conjunction with provincial elections or as stand-alone events. Nominee elections would be administered by Elections B.C. The bill includes a number of stand-alone provisions and applies relevant sections of the Election Act.

I want to advise the House that it is government's intention to bring this bill forward as an exposure bill. We do not intend pass the bill during the current session. Instead, the purpose in bringing it forward today is to help generate debate and discussion about Senate reform and, in particular, to show in detailed legislation how Senate nominee elections would be conducted in our province.

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

[ Page 13123 ]

Bill 17, Senate Nominee Election Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

PREVENTION OF BULLYING

D. Barnett: Today is B.C.'s sixth bullying awareness day, coinciding with Pink Shirt Day. As we proudly wear pink shirts to represent our stance against bullying, we are also standing in solidarity with those who get bullied. Many of them suffer in silence, regardless of age, profession or gender.

That being said, bullying affects our children the most, since they are still figuring out who they are, and words can be very harmful. As a community, we need to reach out to our children and young people and remind them that they are not alone and encourage them to reach out to parents, teachers or other adults around them. After all, adults have also experienced bullying and can talk to them about this issue.

Although bullying can occur anywhere, we have to pay extra attention to our schools. For that reason, our government launched the ERASE Bullying strategy. ERASE brings awareness to bullying, but it also provides tools, for adults and youth alike, to handle difficult situations and recognize bullying when it happens, especially at school.

All children deserve to get an education in a place that is safe for them to learn and grow. That is why the strategy is a step in the right direction to stop bullying and keep our children safe. Be it Pink Shirt Day or not, all of us together need to continue to stand up against bullying.

PREVENTION OF BULLYING

AND DEMOCRATIC PROCESS

S. Chandra Herbert: Jeering, sneering, calling each other names, personal attacks — all are behaviours that take place in school yards and workplaces and, I'm sorry to say, sometimes in this House.

[1350]

Today is the Day of Pink, a day where British Columbians take a stand against bullying, where we stand as leaders in our communities to say: "Bullying stops here." We encourage everyone to do more to make welcoming communities.

The Day of Pink, of course, started when two young men stood up for another, who had been bullied for wearing a pink shirt. The next day they came to school and, in solidarity, brought pink shirts for everyone. They were standing against homophobia and for the right of their classmate to be who he wanted to be. They put action behind their values.

Like them, we stand in this House wearing pink. We speak words against bullying, too, but if we are to be true to the day and true elected leaders, we must do more than mouth the words and wear the shirts. The recent U.S. presidential election should give us pause. Upwards of $1 billion was spent on TV ads that were 90 percent negative and largely used to try and destroy the other person's character.

Is that how we create a healthy democracy? I think not. I know that we all care passionately about our communities. We may differ somehow on ways that we can grow a better province, but we all want what's best for B.C. We must create a more positive culture in our democracy so people want to get involved, if we want to be true to this day.

The election campaign is approaching closer. I know sometimes anger can get the better of us, but when those moments happen, please think of today and the words that we've said. Let's make "Bullying stops here" more than just a slogan. Let's make it a way of life.

ROTARY INTERNATIONAL

M. Dalton: I rise today to pay tribute to one of the world's most successful philanthropic organizations — Rotary International. This year marks the 100th anniversary of Rotary in British Columbia. Rotary club members are a global network of community volunteers. They are business, professional and community leaders who provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards and help deal with goodwill and peace everywhere.

More than 34,000 clubs and 1.2 million members conduct projects to address today's challenges, including illiteracy, disease, hunger, poverty, lack of clean water and environmental concerns.

A great example of the positive work Rotarians do on an international level is their project to eradicate polio from the face of the earth. Since 1988 polio cases have been reduced 99 percent worldwide, from 350,000 cases to less than 2,000. An estimated five million children have been spared disability, and over a quarter of a million deaths have been averted.

In my constituency four Rotary clubs hold weekly meetings — Meadow Ridge Rotary Club, Rotary Club of Haney, Rotary Club of Mission Midday and Rotary Club of Mission Sunrise. They take on many projects. In Mission these include the Rotary heritage park walk, the seniors busy bus and the wetlands project.

In Maple Ridge their work has included all-weather sports fields, community playgrounds and the ShelterBox project for disaster relief. All four of these Rotary clubs have made a lasting impact in both communities.

Rotarians judge themselves by the four-way test:

(1) Is it the truth?

(2) Is it fair to all concerned?

(3) Will it build goodwill and better friendships?

(4) Will it be beneficial for all concerned? British Columbia — indeed, the whole world — is a better place because of Rotary.

[ Page 13124 ]

BULLYING PREVENTION INITIATIVE

AT SENATOR REID SCHOOL

S. Hammell: We in this chamber are very aware that today is Pink Shirt Day. All of us know concerns about bullying should not be limited to one particular day but deserve attention daily. We see bullying in schools, at home, in the workplace and in the media.

Occasionally I hear my CA playing songs of Lady Gaga in the office, and in one she says: "No matter gay, straight or bi, no matter black, white or beige." Ending bullying starts by loving who you are and by being kind to those around you.

I recently met with Faizel Rawji, a principal in my constituency at Senator Reid Elementary School. In the fall the school launched a program called Three Things. To quote Mr. Rawji: "The program is the antithesis of bullying programs in that it promotes positive behaviours and a new norm in the school. It has taught the students to be three things: kind to themselves, kind to the environment and kind to each other."

[1355]

Last year the school had 480 referrals to the office, and as of today, after the school embraced Three Things, there have been 11 referrals. Amazing. Why? Because Senator Reid has become a school of kindness. Once the students have documented their three acts of kindness, they become part of the Three Things club and receive a purple T-shirt. If the student continues to do three acts of kindness, they wear their purple shirts on Three Things Thursday. Students are proud to share their acts of kindness, and on Thursdays there is a sea of purple T-shirts.

If we remember to govern ourselves by these three things here in the Legislature, I know we will create change for the better, three practical steps at a time.

B.C. CREATIVE FUTURES

J. Thornthwaite: B.C. is richly blessed with natural resources, but the one I want to talk about today is the creativity of our people. Creativity — it's human, social, powerful, but it's also economic. The creative industries in B.C. employ an estimated 85,000 people, the second highest amongst B.C.'s industries. Recently the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development announced the creation of B.C. Creative Futures strategy, which includes six new and expanded programs for youth to engage in creativity.

Artists in the Classroom is a program for artist residencies, providing funding to support hands-on projects for over 8,000 students.

The after-school sport and arts initiative is a youth-at-risk program of activities, including dancing, singing and music, story writing, acting, playwriting, painting, drawing and sculpture activities. It reaches 65 schools and 1,300 students.

Artists in education is a program that supports school districts in presenting professional touring artists and groups in B.C. schools, reaching 600,000 students each year. The scholarship program supports post-secondary school students, and the co-op placement program assists arts and culture organizations in hiring students in the creative sector.

Lastly, the creative youth initiatives supports new and innovative approaches to youth engagement in the arts.

These programs will be delivered by the B.C. Arts Council through $6.25 million in new funding, giving the B.C. Arts Council over $24 million, the highest level of funding in its history.

In addition, non-profit organizations like the Seymour Art Gallery, which shares fantastic works of art with members of the community on the North Shore, has received almost $400,000 in gaming grants over the last decade.

I'm confident that the B.C. Creative Futures strategy and the record levels of provincial support for the B.C. Arts Council will help ensure the success of creative British Columbians and the creative industries.

ENERGY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES

IN COLWOOD

M. Karagianis: Colwood is a city with a lot of bright thinking, and I'm proud to say that now all of Canada knows it. Colwood was recently named an official Canadian solar city by the Canadian Solar Cities project. Not only that, but it has been selected as one of 17 cities worldwide as a finalist in the Earth Hour city challenge. I encourage everyone to vote for Colwood at ehcitychallenge.org before March 15 so that they can win.

Colwood is a forward-thinking city that is harnessing the power of the sun and renewable energy technologies. More residents are becoming energy champions by investing in home improvements, including solar hot water panels and heat pumps. The city has put into service its first electric public works truck, and that saves more than $3,500 a year in fuel.

Colwood now has an electric vehicle charging station at the park-and-ride area near the city library and at city hall. The Colwood fire hall has installed solar hot water and electric panels as well. It's all been made possible through the Solar Colwood program, which works to raise awareness about clean energy options. The program was utilized by using funding from the Natural Resources Canada project and support from partners, including B.C. Hydro, to make it easier for residents and business to benefit from energy savings.

Last Saturday Colwood hosted its Here Comes the Sun event, a fun and interactive community gathering to celebrate the official Canadian Solar Cities designation. Residents checked out how the electric vehicle charging stations work and got more information on solar instal-

[ Page 13125 ]

lations for their homes.

[1400]

Colwood has seen the light. Here's hoping that other communities will too. Congratulations to Colwood on the award, and thank you to those community leaders who are showing the way forward to a cleaner, better energy future.

Oral Questions

MULTICULTURAL OUTREACH

STRATEGY AND PARTISAN ACTIVITIES

BY GOVERNMENT STAFF

J. Horgan: A new round of partisan ads began last night — taxpayer-funded ads to promote the government's bogus budget and to address the government's credibility gap, which was identified in a leaked document not long ago. Another leaked document last fall highlighted the political manipulation of the Burnaby Hospital consultation process — again, supported by taxpayers dollars.

Today another leaked Liberal document details a plan to target ethnic voters across British Columbia, blurring the line between partisan activity and public service. The document demonstrates the folding together of government services and resources into the election machinery of the B.C. Liberal Party. A central objective of the plan is "making sure that government, caucus and the party are all working together…in a coordinated…manner."

Can I put this question to the Minister for Multiculturalism? How does he justify using public resources to advance his partisan political purposes?

Hon. J. Yap: Multiculturalism is a bedrock of British Columbia. This government…. I'm sure all members of the House support multiculturalism. We have a robust program that includes outreach to multicultural communities, including a great program called EmbraceBC, where we reach out to communities throughout British Columbia, providing support for multicultural communities. It's important as a province to continue to support multiculturalism, and that's what we will do.

Mr. Speaker: The Opposition House Leader has a supplementary.

J. Horgan: Certainly, this side of the House supports multiculturalism in British Columbia. What we don't support, however, is the blurring of lines between partisan activity and public service.

Again referring to the document that was leaked today, it's a document that's sent out by the Premier's deputy chief of staff, and it states on seven separate occasions that the objective of the plan is to facilitate coordination between the party, government and caucus — the party, government and caucus, hon. Speaker — ministerial staff, minister's office staff working outside of the public service to a particular partisan end.

It goes on to say, further, that the plan will break down government silos in sharing information with the party. Another quote: "…creating a contact database…via coordination between constituency assistants, the party, the ministry of state for multiculturalism, Intergovernmental Relations Secretariat and GCPE."

My question is to the Minister for Multiculturalism. Again, how do you justify taking your partisan political ends and trumping public service in British Columbia? How does that do any service to the multicultural community in this province?

Hon. J. Yap: This side of the House doesn't have to take advice from the NDP on partisan advertising. Perhaps the House Leader for the NDP should talk to the member for Fraser-Nicola about partisan advertising, where the member admitted to using constituency funds for partisan advertising. The NDP should reflect on what they're doing, as mentioned — the member for Fraser-Nicola and what he had done.

Mr. Speaker: The Opposition House Leader has a further supplemental.

J. Horgan: With respect to the member for Fraser-Nicola, the political party he's a member of, the NDP, paid for those ads. I'm wanting to know now if the Minister for Multiculturalism is going to start paying back the taxpayers for the hundreds of thousands of dollars that have been put into this coordinated effort to bridge government work with party work.

[1405]

The minister will know…. The Public Service Act is quite clear. Political staff may not "engage in political activities during working hours or use government facilities, equipment or resources to support…these activities." Yet Brian Bonney, the same Liberal operative involved in the Burnaby Hospital affair, was directly involved in coordinating the activities of party hacks, political operatives and public servants.

Again, my question is to the Minister for Multiculturalism. How can he possibly justify using public resources, the people of British Columbia's resources, for pure partisan political purposes? How do you justify that?

Hon. J. Yap: Well, I'll tell you what we're not doing. We're not placing partisan ads using taxpayers' funds, as the member for Fraser-Nicola has admitted to. I'll tell you what we're doing to support multiculturalism.

We've supported, funded, 85 community groups, engaging more than 12,000 participants around British Columbia — nearly $1.3 million to 34 organizations to

[ Page 13126 ]

support projects that celebrate diversity, address racism and help build inclusive communities. We also delivered the Safe Harbour: Respect for All program to over 900 locations across British Columbia. This is an award-winning program that supports people from the multicultural communities who may need support throughout British Columbia. We have a great multicultural program, one that we continue to invest in.

C. James: This is a very serious issue. These documents show that an entire strategy was developed by the B.C. Liberals based on using taxpayer dollars for their own partisan purposes. The then communication director for multiculturalism was assigned to develop comprehensive lists that would help the B.C. Liberal Party — and I quote from the document — "bypass the media to get our message out. Be very well prepared when the writ is dropped."

This is a clear violation of the rules, and according to this leaked Liberal document, the Minister for Multiculturalism has full responsibility for implementation of this plan. So my question is to the minister. Will the minister tell us how many names of individuals and organizations have been passed on by government staff directly to the Liberal Party to feed into its election database?

Hon. J. Yap: I'll tell the member and members of the House what we are doing in multiculturalism. We hosted, this past fall, the most successful fourth annual provincial Nesika multiculturalism awards. A record number, 165 nominees from throughout the province, were nominated for the provincial Nesika multiculturalism awards, and over 400 attendees came to attend this awards ceremony.

We also had 2,700 people who participated in the 2012 Celebrate Your Roots interactive campaign, which was held to celebrate multiculturalism during Multiculturalism Week in November last year. It was a great success. This side of the House continues to support multiculturalism in British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. James: I'd like to say to the minister that what the public is concerned about is once again the B.C. Liberals using taxpayer dollars for partisan purposes. That is the issue here.

This scheme also outlines clearly hiring partisan outreach staff with public dollars. Mr. Bonney, the former director of communications for multiculturalism, wrote the job descriptions. Mr. Bonney directed who would be hired. Mr. Bonney directed those individuals to do partisan work. All this was done using taxpayer dollars — 100,000 taxpayer dollars.

[1410]

So my question is again to the Minister for Multiculturalism. How can he justify this direct use of taxpayer dollars for partisan activities?

Hon. J. Yap: One of the programs we're very proud of that we implemented as part of our multicultural program is our multiculturalism grants program. Over $324,000 was granted to 40 different community organizations in the first phase of the multiculturalism grant program.

Let me share with members of the House which community groups received these funds, these multiculturalism grants. We have the African Canadian Soccer and Cultural Association, located in the riding of Burnaby–Deer Lake. We also saw a grant go to DIVERSEcity Community Resources Society, located in the riding of Surrey-Newton; and a whole bunch in the riding of the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, including Immigrant Services Society of British Columbia, Canadian Club of Vancouver and NEC, Native Education College.

We have a great program in multiculturalism, supporting communities around the province.

J. Kwan: What we are talking about is the Liberal government's program using taxpayers' money to do partisan work. The Liberals are consumed with any and all activities that they perceive to be able to enhance their political fortunes. We saw it in the $17 million taxpayer-supported advertising plan that was just recently leaked. We now have it again — another Liberal leaked document.

On page 3 of that document it says: "Quick wins." Mr. Speaker, I can't tell you how dismayed I was when I read it. It involves the Premier's office staff defining apologies for wrongful treatment based on race as "quick wins."

Eleven weeks to an election, and the B.C. Liberal government is now attempting an apology to the Chinese community for historical wrongs.

To the minister again: why is the Liberal government using apologies for historical injustices experienced by the ethnic community as quick wins for political gain?

Hon. J. Yap: I hope she is not suggesting that this House should not consider making an historic apology to a community in our province, in our country, that was wronged 100 years ago, during the early years of the province of British Columbia. I hope that's not what the member is suggesting — that we should not work towards reaching out and apologizing to a community that was discriminated against.

Let me tell you what we are doing in multiculturalism, for the benefit of all members. We hosted the first-ever Embracing Difference, Engaging Community Symposium, with 25 diverse sessions held in the Lower Mainland, encouraging multiculturalism, challenging racism. It was attended by over 230 delegates — a great success.

[ Page 13127 ]

We also, as I mentioned, have a great program of multiculturalism grants that are provided to communities throughout the province, throughout British Columbia. Again, for the benefit of the member, we provided grants to the NEC, Native Education College; Association of Neighbourhood Houses, Mount Pleasant; Chinese Cultural Centre, greater Vancouver. The list goes on — all of these located in that member's riding, Vancouver–Mount Pleasant.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: What I'm suggesting is that the acknowledgment of historical wrongs for the Chinese community or any other community should be done because it's the right thing to do, not because it's politically expedient.

[1415]

This leaked document — and I refer the minister to it — lays out very clearly that the real motivation for why the Liberals are now talking about issuing an apology to the Chinese community, after 11 years in office, is because it is a "quick win" for election purposes. It is not about acknowledging historical wrongs.

Again, my question to the minister is this. Why is the minister allowing his government to use partisan political opportunism, trump significant historical injustice issues, for a quick political win? Why is he doing that?

Hon. J. Yap: Again, we should not take advice from the NDP on that side of the House. I've just been handed a publication, what appears to be a Korean-Canadian community publication, where no less than the Leader of the Opposition has placed a full-colour ad where he talks about the New Democrat official opposition change for the better, etc.

The Leader of the Opposition in this partisan ad lists, as the address, the address here, in Room 201, Parliament Buildings, Victoria, British Columbia. We should not take advice from that side of the House.

What we will continue to do is support multicultural communities through programs like the multiculturalism grant. I can go on and on talking about what great community groups have received these multiculturalism grants, including la Société francophone de Victoria in Victoria–Beacon Hill; Kaleidoscope Theatre Productions Society, Victoria–Swan Lake; Nikkei National Museum and Cultural Centre, Burnaby-Edmonds. The list goes on and on — great support for multicultural groups.

WASTE INCINERATOR PROPOSAL

FOR FRASER VALLEY

J. van Dongen: In July 2011 the Minister of Environment made a very controversial decision when he approved a solid waste management plan that opened the door for a large garbage-burning incinerator in the Lower Mainland. The minister approved this controversial plan over the strong objections of the citizens in the Fraser Valley; the objections of local and regional representatives; the objections of MLAs such as myself; and even the objections of the member for Chilliwack, the minister's own colleague, when that member correctly said: "The minister's approval is regrettable and wrong."

Despite the minister's naive assurances, it is abundantly clear that Metro Vancouver is thumbing its nose at everyone, from the minister on down. When is the minister going to face the fact that Metro Vancouver has absolutely no intention of living up to his conditions, especially the requirement for real and meaningful consultation with the FVRD, the Fraser Valley regional district, as the minister promised during the desperate days of the Chilliwack-Hope by-election?

Mr. Speaker: Just before I recognize the minister, I want to remind members not to be using BlackBerrys during question period.

Hon. T. Lake: First of all, I have to say that the member is absolutely wrong. I did not approve any incinerator waste-to-energy proposal in Metro Vancouver.

We were abundantly clear when we approved the solid waste management plan for Metro Vancouver. They were instructed that if they were to consider in-region waste-to-energy, they would have to consult fully with the Fraser Valley regional district.

The Premier and I made a commitment, too, that if such a proposal was put forward, it would be subject to a full environmental assessment review.

[1420]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. van Dongen: I repeat what I stated. The minister approved a solid waste management plan with an option for a large incinerator. The facts are that Metro Vancouver has repeatedly defied the minister's stated requirements, and they have dismissed democratically elected representatives, such as Mayor Sharon Gaetz and Coun. Patricia Ross.

Metro Vancouver recently denied a Fraser Valley regional district seat on a third-party expert review panel that is supposed to discuss scientific and technical issues. Last month the chair of the Metro Vancouver waste committee, Malcolm Brodie, summed it up this way, "Whether people like it or not, the decision has been made" — referring to the incinerator proposal.

Again, Metro Vancouver shows no respect for the citizens of the Fraser Valley and no respect for the conditions in the minister's letter of August 2011.

When will the minister act decisively on this serious threat to air quality in the Fraser Valley and just say no to a $400 million garbage-burning incinerator by remov-

[ Page 13128 ]

ing that option from Metro Vancouver's solid waste management plan on the basis of their non-performance on consultation with the FVRD?

Hon. T. Lake: I'm surprised that the member has adopted the NDP method of environmental assessment, which is just say no before any process occurs at all.

We've made it very clear that if an in-region waste-to-energy facility is considered by Metro Vancouver, it will undergo a full B.C. environmental assessment process and full consultation with the Fraser Valley regional district.

MULTICULTURAL OUTREACH

STRATEGY AND PARTISAN ACTIVITIES

BY GOVERNMENT STAFF

M. Farnworth: I listened intently to the non-answers from the Minister for Multiculturalism. I felt…. You know what? We really have to go back and ask some more questions. I think it is really important, because I've come to understand why the minister doesn't get what has been going on in his own ministry: because it was run out of the Premier's office.

The tenth of January, 2012. The Premier's deputy chief of staff, Kim Haakstad, sends a draft version of the multicultural strategic outreach plan to Liberal staffers in the Office of the Premier, to the minister of state for multiculturalism, to the caucus and to the B.C. Liberal Party. What becomes clear when you go through the documents is an effort to subvert the public service and make it a wing of the B.C. Liberal Party for its own partisan political purposes. The problem is that we've seen this before. They keep getting caught, and they still don't learn.

Just think back to the smear attack website against the Leader of the Opposition that was developed by taxpayer-funded staffers, launched by the Liberal Party, in this very building.

Who can forget the Burnaby Hospital — their so-called community consultation committee, led by the members for Burnaby-Lougheed and Burnaby North, a committee which used good-minded people who thought they were doing the right job. They were used by this government for their own partisan political aims.

Again, to the Minister for Multiculturalism: does he not understand that telling people to forward names to list for the Liberal Party is not the role of a public servant — that subverting the public service is wrong? Will he stand and at least acknowledge that?

Hon. J. Yap: This question from the NDP, whose leader was recently called out by the Vancouver school board for handing out partisan red-packet lucky money to students in Vancouver….

[1425]

As I have said, we have a great program in multiculturalism. We are supporting multiculturalism.

The member talks about: what are we doing to support multiculturalism in different communities? Well, let me share once again what we are doing. Through the B.C. multiculturalism grant program, we are continuing to provide support to societies like the Visible Art Society in Vancouver–Mount Pleasant; the W2 Community Media Arts Society, also Vancouver–Mount Pleasant; the Belfry Theatre Society, Victoria–Beacon Hill; and also the Kaleidoscope Theatre Productions Society in Victoria–Swan Lake.

We continue to support multiculturalism. It's very important to promote multiculturalism. This side of the House will continue to do this, providing support to community groups to fight racism, to encourage inclusiveness and to promote multiculturalism in the province of B.C.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: Everybody in this House, in this province, supports multiculturalism. What they don't support is a government that uses public taxpayer dollars to pursue a private partisan agenda by the Liberal government of this province and using the public service to do it.

So my question to the minister is this. What part of using the public service to pursue their political agenda doesn't he get? Does he not understand that that is wrong?

Hon. J. Yap: Once again, the member should ask his own colleague, the member for Fraser-Nicola, why he placed partisan attack ads using taxpayers' funds. That's what he should do.

The leaked document clearly shows that the Liberals are breaking the rules meant to ensure that taxpayer money isn't being used for political partisan reasons. In fact, the document sets out rule-breaking as a primary goal. Crossing the lines between government, caucus and the party is mentioned seven times in this document. For example, on page 3: "Explain and break down government silos, and share info with the party."

How does this minister justify just blatant instructions to break the rules by instructing staff to use taxpayers' resources for political partisan purposes?

Hon. J. Yap: I appreciate this opportunity to continue to talk about the great work we're doing in supporting multiculturalism. EmbraceBC, the signature program of the government of British Columbia, as I said, funded over 85 community projects, engaging more than 12,000 participants throughout the province of B.C. It's import-

[ Page 13129 ]

ant to promote multiculturalism, and this side of the House will continue to do that.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

H. Bains: Let's look at the pattern of behaviour of this Liberal government. Mr. Speaker, $17 million in taxpayer-funded partisan pre-election ads in the lead-up to the election, a new set of taxpayer-supported ads that started yesterday and will ramp up as we get close to the election, an $11 million taxpayer-supported awards show to give Liberals more photo ops before the election, Liberal operatives…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

H. Bains: …gaming the Burnaby Hospital consultation process for political gain and a multicultural outreach strategy with the express purpose of breaking the rules to spend taxpayer money for partisan political gain.

[1430]

The Liberals have no shame. That's clearly what is shown in their….

Interjections.

H. Bains: Can the minister offer any justification for so blatantly spending taxpayer resources on their election campaign?

Hon. J. Yap: Once again, through to the member. I'll tell you what we are doing, Member. We are supporting programs like the B.C. Hate Crimes Team and organizing against racism and hate, and the Safe Harbour: Respect for All programs. These were all recognized by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation Award of Excellence in 2012.

We also will be soon publishing the annual report on multiculturalism, which will show the great programs throughout the province, including the public sector, in supporting multiculturalism.

[End of question period.]

Hon. R. Sultan: I would like to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

Hon. R. Sultan: I am pleased to present to this House a petition signed by 100 North Shore seniors asking the government to revisit the SAFER rental subsidy program.

Tabling Documents

Hon. S. Bond: I have the honour to present the following reports: the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal Annual Report 2011-2012 and the B.C. Ferry Commission Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2012 .

Hon. D. McRae: I seek leave to make a ministerial statement.

Leave granted.

Ministerial Statements

PINK SHIRT DAY AND

PREVENTION OF BULLYING IN SCHOOLS

Hon. D. McRae: Today is Bullying Awareness Day in British Columbia, or as you can see from the fashion choices on both sides of the House, it is also known as Pink Shirt Day. It's a day for all of us to get together and take a stand together to erase bullying for good. It's a day to teach our children about how they can prevent bullying and how they can help others from being bullied.

Today, as we recognize Pink Shirt Day, we're also encouraging youth to stand up against all kinds of bullying, including cyberbullying. We've seen all too clearly that bullying can happen anywhere, whether it's on line, at school or at the mall.

Over lunch hour today I was joined by the MLA for Oak Bay–Gordon Head and the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. We visited Hillside Mall, with mall employees and construction workers who wore pink shirts. Middle school students from Lansdowne Middle School also joined us.

The message we heard loud and clear from everyone was that to stop bullying in its tracks, we need to involve the whole community. It's the kind of message that is getting through to people in towns and cities across British Columbia — that we're all in this together.

Bullying is an issue that has been close to the Premier's heart for a long period of time. In fact, for six years Pink Shirt Day has successfully raised awareness about bullying in schools and homes and on line, and this year is no exception. Last year the Premier announced the ERASE Bullying strategy and is putting tools in the hands of educators, parents and students to help make schools safer and a more positive place to learn.

As a teacher and as a parent, I can tell you emphatically that bullying has no place in our schools, and parents deserve to know that their children are safe when they go off to class.

That's why we're working hard to encourage students to be helpful bystanders and to intervene or speak out when they see bullying happening. It is one of the keys to creating safe learning environments, because there is a

[ Page 13130 ]

strong connection between feelings of safety and belonging and student learning.

I want to thank everyone in the House today and everyone across B.C. for wearing pink today. Thank you for your efforts to raise awareness. We're all in this together. We need to send the message together that bullying will not be tolerated.

So awareness of bullying is perhaps less of an issue. We must now, as legislators and leaders in our communities, all try our utmost to take us beyond the stage of awareness of a social ill and ramp up to direct actions — including legislation, if that will help to address this problem.

Some must be watching this event each year and asking themselves why we seem unable to raise our kids to simply treat one another with respect, and there's no easy answer or single solution.

[1435]

Certainly, one area that must be addressed is the recognition that we are still failing kids who are dealing with their own sexual orientation and the way in which kids treat this at an adolescent stage of development.

I hope that the measures the government has taken this year with the ERASE Bullying program alleviate this scourge, but I suspect that we all have a lot more to do in the coming months and years ahead to make our schools a truly safe and welcoming environment.

Orders of the Day

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

Mr. Speaker: If members could attend to their other duties so we can get on with the budget debate.

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. I. Chong: I will take what few moments remaining I have with respect to the budget speech to offer some closing remarks.

I want to begin by saying what I mentioned yesterday about how budgets are composed or how they are arrived at, and that is to take a look at revenues, to take a look at expenditures.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

On the expenditures side, we know that we have a good track record of controlling spending. The revenue side is a little more difficult, because it can fluctuate. You do depend on what you believe are going to be market prices, your ability to export, the trade opportunities that are out there. So it's not easy always to determine what those are.

This year more than any year, though, it was important to ensure that the forecast assumptions for revenue were going to be accurate, were going to be credible, and for that, they needed validation. For that, we were able to ask a very well-respected economist, Dr. Tim O'Neill, to provide that information.

Dr. Tim O'Neill, a highly regarded Canadian economist, reviewed the Ministry of Finance process for forecasting provincial revenues. He concluded — this is coming from a well-regarded, highly regarded economist — that overall, the ministry's methodologies and assumptions are transparent and well founded.

So I find it interesting that the NDP opposition are making assertions that the revenue forecasts are inaccurate. I'd like to know where they're getting their information from. I'd like to know who it is that is providing them this data. Who are their validators?

Every credible person or organization that has looked at our budget, as boring as it is…. It was not meant to be an election-year budget. It was meant to be a balanced budget, as we promised we would deliver on. Every credible organization or person has validated what is in that budget, in that the revenue forecasts are believable, they are truthful, and they are conservative.

With that, a number of areas and characteristics were provided for three levels of prudence, Madam Speaker. An economic forecast based on a panel of forecasters, where we did at the end of the day take the lowest, not even the average, wanting to make sure that we were being as conservative as possible.

Another level of prudence, and that is to provide for contingencies. It would have been very easy not to have contingencies, but these are the dollar amounts that are provided for each and every year. So we had to ensure that the amount for contingency was real and was similar and consistent with past years.

Another level of prudence, and that is the forecast allowance. That, too, had to be in place because of past, historical records showing that a forecast allowance was provided for.

[1440]

What is clear is that our economy indeed will grow. It will not grow as much as we would like it to grow, because it is still very fragile out there. There is still instability in the global marketplace. But it has been recognized by everyone that our economy will indeed grow — not a large amount.

What we have done to ensure that we have a budget that is credible is we have said we will maintain our

[ Page 13131 ]

spending at lower levels or at the same levels, finding savings where we can. We will ensure that we do not spend more than what we will be bringing in. That is what contributes to a balanced budget.

I want to say that the Premier and the Minister of Finance deserve praise for this budget. It is a sober budget. It doesn't attempt to buy voters with their money. What it does is provide a very real budget, a balanced budget.

The numbers in this budget appear to be solid, as was quoted by the Vancouver Board of Trade. They found the $1.1 billion savings in government departments to be plausible. They also found — and this is the board of trade — that projected natural gas revenues were revised downward by $379 million, at the insistence or advice of that independent economist, Dr. Tim O'Neill.

With that, as I say, I would like to challenge the NDP to tell us where they're getting their figures from. They say they're going to reveal their budget. Well, I find that hard to believe, because all they're talking about is more and more spending.

I've done some quick calculations. From what I've heard so far, the additional spending that the NDP propose is anywhere from $6 billion to $8 billion. We currently have a spending budget of around $40 billion. So $6 billion to $8 billion represents anywhere from a 15 to 20 percent increase in spending. So my question to the NDP, and I'd like one of them to get up and answer this: are they going to raise taxes by 15 to 20 percent? Taxpayers deserve to know.

Now, if they don't raise taxes, where else are they going to find these dollars? My understanding is that, at last count, the provincial sales tax brings in roughly about $500 million to $550 million. But let's say, for the sake of argument, $600 million, because things have changed over the course of the last number of years.

If we were to take a look at that, and we need to bridge that $6 billion gap of extra spending, it means you would have to raise the provincial sales tax by 10 points. Is that what we're going to see? You're going to have to tell us. The NDP opposition, you're going to have to tell us where you're getting these revenues, because you seem to not want to look at the liquefied natural gas revenues. You seem not to be wanting to take a look at that generational opportunity, because your policies that we've heard thus far are about delaying that opportunity.

So we know the spending is there — unless you're going to cut spending. We've already said we're protecting spending in a variety of ministries — in fact, increasing spending still in health care.

With that, I encourage the NDP to tell us where they're going to find the money.

D. Routley: I'm continuing my response to the speech, the budget speech of 2013. I'm going to return to the beginning of my speech.

I think that after this budget speech, and should there be a change in government, one of the most difficult things facing any new government would be what to do with all of the acrobats and gymnasts and magicians that must be employed in the government at the current moment.

Of course, it takes an enormous acrobatic flexibility and considerable gymnastic skill to be able to interpret what has happened in this province this year as a balanced budget. In fact, I was reassured by the news from the member from Cloverdale that something real was delivered on budget day, and that was a baby. Certainly, the budget speech was something less than real.

[1445]

What the budget speech was, in fact, was not a budget, but it was a political narrative. It is indeed an election budget in that it is a political narrative. It seeks to allow an escape for the B.C. Liberal government from its past. Its past is one of seven out of 12 years being deficit — the two largest deficits in the history of British Columbia. In fact, in the past four years, the term of this current Liberal government, all of their budgets have been deficits.

In 2009-2010 the budget deficit was $495 million. Oh no, that's what we were told. We were told that it would be $495 million before the 2009 election.

H. Bains: Maximum.

D. Routley: Yes, maximum — not a penny more. But in fact, the deficit in 2009-2010 was $1.8 billion, from a government that would seek through this budget to create a narrative that would tell the people of British Columbia that no, they don't spend more than the government takes in. They're so prudent. They're so prudent that they had a $1.8 billion deficit in 2009-2010 after promising repeatedly in this House and throughout this province and on the campaign trail that they would have no greater than a $495 million deficit.

They were told throughout the province by everyone who had any notion of what was happening in the world that it would be a bigger deficit than $495 million. But no, they promised the voters going to an election that they would have a $495 million deficit. They knew better, and yet they told the voters that that was the case. They knew better, and that was not the truth.

Well, what happened the next year, 2010-2011? Surprise — another deficit. So each time there's a deficit under their much-vaunted anti-deficit legislation, their balanced-budget legislation, we as members representing the province are trotted in to this place. This facade is ripped down and ripped apart, as we are asked to amend that balanced-budget legislation year in and year out, coming in here in a farce, really, to allow this government its deficit.

In 2010-2011 that happened again, and it was $300 million — $300 million in that year. In 2011-2012, the

[ Page 13132 ]

third year of this current government's mandate, what happened? What was the surplus that year? It was zero. In fact, it was negative $1.8 billion again.

So in 2010-2011 it was $300 million. In 2011-2012 it was $1.8 billion in deficit. Surely the next year from this government, with its narrative that tells the province that, no, they're prudent money managers…. They're so opposed to deficits, in fact, that they've ruled them out by law, and they're telling us in this current election narrative that they've balanced a budget.

Well, what happened? What happened? In 2012-2013, the Minister of Environment will cheer that it was a $1.4 billion deficit — $400 million less than the year before. That is worth cheering, of course, because it is a bit of an improvement.

But over those four years this enormously competent government, the B.C. Liberal government, had a cumulative deficit of $5.3 billion — over those four years. Now they lurch towards an election, bleeding all the way to the finish line and telling the people of the province that they've balanced the budget.

How did they do that? Well, for the third year in a row they've claimed the benefit of the sale of the Little Mountain lands — $300 million brought forward from last year. What else do they plan? They plan to sell $600 million, roughly, of public assets, and they've booked in this year $475 million of that money.

Now, those assets aren't sold — so counting the chickens before they're hatched. So $300 million was booked last year. Now it's being brought forward to this year. That $475 million is being counted that hasn't even been sold yet.

[1450]

When Don Drummond, noted economist, made recommendations to the Ontario government about how to balance its books, he said, "Don't do two things. Don't cut from skills training" — skills and apprenticeships, which the government just did. He said: "If you're counting on asset sales to help balance the books, don't count your chickens before they're hatched." That's what this government has done. That's, together, $775 million that really has nothing to do with the government's income this year. So much for a balanced budget.

This government now prides itself as being so valiantly opposed to deficits — which it has created seven out of the past 12 years — and constantly criticizes the years of governance of the NDP as having been a time of a have-not province. Well, Madam Speaker, let's look at that claim.

One year under NDP governance the province was considered a have-not province and received transfers on that basis. Under this B.C. Liberal government in the past 12 years, five times this province has been considered have-not. So everything that B.C. Liberals have told the people of British Columbia in the past five years has essentially been untrue — from: "We will not harmonize the sales tax…." Well, that certainly wasn't true. Go further back.

Interjection.

D. Routley: You said that to the restaurant…. In writing, you said: "Oh, it wasn't on the radar."

They said it wasn't on their radar.

Interjection.

D. Routley: Right. Okay, now they didn't say any of that. I suppose the government didn't actually say it wouldn't run deficits, but it did. The government has less of a quarrel with me than with the people of B.C. It's the people of B.C. who have lost faith. It's the people of B.C. who have clearly lost faith and trust in the government. Why should they have any faith when what they've been told has been so patently untrue and so patently not the case?

Not only has the government run all these deficits, but let's look at the debt. The debt in '01-02 was $36 billion. It was 27 percent of GDP, the total debt. The total debt projected for '13-14 will be $62.5 billion, 27 percent of GDP — the same. Yet there's a little wrinkle there, because this government, through its many off–balance sheet agreements — called contractual obligations and pointed to by the Auditor General of this province as, in many cases, constituting debt to the province…. That has increased by over $80 billion — more than the provincial debt, almost double the current debt of the province.

This is what these gymnasts of financial wizardry, these magicians of fiscal prudence, these Cirque du Soleil performers of public policy have managed to accomplish over the last 12 years, the last four years being particularly dismal.

Not only has it been dismally incorrect that they should claim that they are currently running a balanced budget, which is patently not the case — 12 percent of British Columbians believe, according to a recent poll, that this budget is balanced, that lack of faith obviously founded well in recent experience — but considerably more tragic is the fact that we're left in a situation where our province, in a broad way, is losing faith in the process, is losing faith in politics.

We know that liquefied natural gas is the future hope of the government. We heard in the papers just today that perhaps it's hit the bottom, the basement price, the lowest price possible. So it's not a booming commodity.

[1455]

There is a booming commodity in British Columbia. The booming commodity in British Columbia is cynicism, and it booms because of promises that have been made to the people that have not been kept. It booms because of a place like this — where we're expected to represent people with dignity, integrity and honour — being so badly mistreated by the performance of a government

[ Page 13133 ]

that has not been faithful to the people who have elected us, all of us, as members.

That is considerably more disastrous than a deficit or a debt because, as British Columbians face the challenges of the coming years, we need to be able to work together, and any government in this province will need to have the faith of the people in order to accomplish anything. So it is with an absolutely heartfelt expectation and desire that I would say to the government, and to everyone who represents people in this province in the democratic process, that we need to do better.

We need to do better than telling the people simply what needs to be heard in order to achieve a seat in the House or a seat at a council. We need to do better by telling people — having the courage to tell people — the truth about what we face. When people do that…. If this government had had the courage to do that over the last four years, they would not be in the place that they are now, so thoroughly discredited in the eyes of British Columbians.

If we are able to, in fact, generate the courage to face people and tell them what the true facts are about the challenges that we face and how we can overcome them and work together — not simply create narratives for elections that we call budgets, but actually face the problems of our communities and our province — then we will be better people, this will be a better place, and we will live in a better province again.

B. Simpson: Before I get into the substance of my comments on the budget, I want to say hello to my mom, who's watching this afternoon, and ask her not to call me this time while I'm standing and speaking. We can chat afterwards. I hope that you're feeling well, and I'm glad that you're watching.

I also want to add my congratulations, personal congratulations, to the member for Surrey-Cloverdale on the birth of his child.

It is a privilege, as the member who spoke before me said, to stand in this place and to give comment on the budget that is before us. But I have to say that I feel that this time…. I mean, I think budget debate in general, throne speech debate in general, is a partisan back-and-forth. In front of an election, it feels much more like shadowboxing in advance of the main event — in this case, on May 14.

I had to laugh as I was reflecting on my response to the budget today. Listening to question period about partisan ads and spending taxpayer money on partisan ads, it feels like pretty much every day in this place. The taxpayers are paying us to engage in partisan debate when we should be engaging in parliamentary debate. We should be engaging in debate about what matters to British Columbians, not what matters to B.C.'s two main political parties.

It is crystal-clear that in advance of an election we do not get a real budget. That's just the fact. That's just what happens because of where the fixed election date is set. It's not a real budget, because we as parliamentarians will never have an opportunity to actually dissect the budget and take it apart ministry by ministry, which is the normal budgetary debate cycle if we were not facing an election on May 14.

We would finish these political speeches, we would say yea to second reading of the budget, and we would go into committee stage of the budget. Then for hours on end over a period of months parliamentarians, legislators in this place — with the exclusion of backbench government members, unless they get special allowance — get to dissect the ministerial estimates and take the budget apart.

[1500]

It's not a real budget, and that's not going to happen, because we don't have enough time in this session. We'll probably rise on March 14, and then we're into an election in May. If there is, in fact, a change of government, this budget completely disappears.

It's not a real budget in the sense that it has to withstand the scrutiny of implementation. So when the government puts a budget together every fourth year with a fixed spring election date, there isn't the discipline to actually put a budget together that you have to live with.

We saw that crystal clear before the 2009 election. The 2008 meltdown had occurred, and yet the fiscal discipline required to address that wasn't driven into the budget because it was in advance of the election and wouldn't have to withstand any scrutiny other than some political speechifying.

The third reason that it's not a real budget and British Columbians shouldn't regard it as a real budget is that the Auditor General and the comptroller general won't get to comment before the government takes us to the polls.

I've stood with the members from Delta South and Abbotsford South, two other independent members in this House, and we have put forward what we believe is a practical series of reforms for this Legislative Assembly, to make this Legislative Assembly work better, to realize what the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan was saying are some of our obligations in this House.

We've said that the election date must change, not for this election — this election is too close; we should go to the polls on May 14 and let British Columbians decide who is to form government next — but in order to avoid the difficult situation that a government faces in changing the election date after they've got power. Do you put it ahead six months? Do you pull it back six months? Let's make a date change now.

Editorial after editorial, individual after individual, group after group have said we should not have any more spring elections on the fixed election cycle. We should go to the fall. There's a bill in front of the House that would be very simple for the government to take, to put in front

[ Page 13134 ]

of us. The opposition members have already indicated they support moving the fixed election date. The Finance Minister has indicated he thinks it's a good idea. Let's just do it now. Let's be done with it.

I challenge every member of this House to take that back to their caucus, to act as free agents. If you believe that that is the right thing to do, go to your caucuses and demand that we bring a bill, government bill or otherwise, to this House to fix this problem now. It is the most opportune time to do it.

It doesn't advantage or disadvantage any of the political parties. It simply fixes the next election date 4½ years from now — four years and five months, actually — and makes sure that we never repeat this business of bringing in a budget that can be claimed to be false, that will prove to be false and that the electorate of British Columbia doesn't have confidence in, and rightly so.

The other aspects of the reform agenda that we put forth…. We are calling for election finance reform. British Columbians should not have to question whether or not money buys public policy.

British Columbia is one of the few jurisdictions that has absolutely no restrictions — none — on corporate, union and individual donations. We have no restrictions on residency requirements for individual donations or company donations, as we saw recently when the Liberal Party held a fundraiser in Alberta because Albertans want to influence the outcome of the B.C. election. The opposition party's response to that was that they get donations from outside of British Columbia as well.

So we believe that you need to get rid of corporate and union donations. You need to cap individual donations, and you need to institute a residency requirement so that British Columbia's one-person, one-vote principle is supported by only British Columbians giving money to the provincial political parties.

We also believe that it's necessary that there is oversight, public oversight, of the political party leadership process. It's been interesting to watch the push-back and the counter-arguments to that, because the only counter-argument that we've been given on that is that political parties are private entities and there's no business in having public oversight.

[1505]

Well, that's a ridiculous argument because the only purpose of political parties is to gain public power. And because, as we've seen on this occasion and other occasions, the NDP had the same thing happen…. You hold a leadership convention, and the individual who wins the leadership convention from a political party ends up becoming Premier right away.

Because of that, we need the public to feel confident that the members who have a right to vote in those leadership contests and the vote count in those leadership contests are aboveboard and beyond any question so that the individuals who win political party leaderships win them fairly and in a transparent manner, and then win the right to become the Premier of the province.

Quite frankly, the Leader of the Opposition has a great degree of influence in this province too. So two of the key people in this province are elected through that process. Right now that process is not without its problems and, I would say, actually lacks a great deal of integrity.

From a legislative perspective, we have also said that we need to go back to secret ballot votes for the Speaker. The Speaker, according to the standing orders, is supposed to be elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly, and yet for some reason, over the last three parliaments we've slid into a habit of a speaker-designate by the Premier when he or she sets their cabinet. That really makes the Speaker a function of the Premier's office and government and not a function of the Legislative Assembly, and for people who do listen to this, that's a vital difference.

The Speaker has to be given his mandate or her mandate by all the members of the House. Every member of the House has a right to stand for nomination. Every member of the House should have the right to vote for the Speaker. By doing it that way, the Speaker becomes a function of the MLAs in this House and, I believe, is then free to make sure that we do some of the reforms that we need in here as well.

Now, that does not — and I've spoken to our current Speaker — have anything to do with how the current Speaker has acted. He has acted above reproach, and I have found him absolutely supportive of us as independents. That's not the issue. The issue is a matter of process, and we need to return to that.

I guess what the independent MLAs are doing is putting both political parties on notice that if there are independent MLAs, if there are Green Party MLAs or, potentially, Conservative MLAs in this House in the next election, we will be making sure that there is a secret ballot held for the Speaker's position. We have the right to do that because you can only change those rules by leave of the House, and we simply won't give that leave. So we can guarantee that that will occur.

The next piece on the legislative front is to move to permanent standing committees. We don't have a good committee structure. In fact, Madam Speaker, you have written on this yourself. We don't have a good committee structure in British Columbia. They are sessional committees. They rise and fall with the sitting of the Legislature. They have to be restruck. They have to be reappointed. In fact, unless they're given a mandate by government, they don't meet at all, and they don't serve a function.

Most jurisdictions have permanent committees. The minute a new parliament is formed after an election, the committees are formed. They have permanent status. They can operate independently of the

[ Page 13135 ]

sitting of the Legislature, and they can operate independently of the government giving them a mandate to act.

Permanent committees will give every MLA in this Legislature a meaningful, productive and constructive role in the governing of the province, and that's what I believe all of us come here to do. We all come here to play a productive and constructive role, and yet our committee structure in British Columbia does not allow us to do that, so we're forced to come into this chamber and play partisan politics instead of being constructive and productive members of the governing of the province.

Finally — and it's a longstanding debate of how you do this; we didn't get into that as independents — we do need to move in the direction of more free votes in this House. It is not necessary for the political parties to whip every vote. It is not necessary for political parties to exercise the degree of discipline that they do over the individual members of their caucus. It is absolutely not necessary. What it does is it diminishes the role of MLAs.

[1510]

The political parties need to figure that out. There are very few votes in this House that are confidence votes. There are many opportunities for us to be able to have more free votes and for caucus MLAs to have more freedom to act in the interest of their constituents and to act in the interests of public policy in British Columbia.

It's not a real budget. It is a pre-election budget. It will be seen to be such. Even if this government gets back into power again, I can guarantee that.

The second point is that it's not a credible budget. Now, the Minister of Aboriginal Relations made the point that it has been vetted and validated by an economist who has a very strong track record. I guess my challenge back is: how often are economists wrong? I would actually argue that if you gave a batting average to economists, they wouldn't get hired by any baseball team.

How many times do we hear in the newspaper and on the radio that the economists are surprised by this month's job numbers, the economists are surprised by how soft the economy went, or the economists are surprised how big the rebound was? Economists seem to be walking around always surprised — caught off-guard by the reality that's out there that their models don't give them.

Economists use models. They look at process. They look at procedure. That's all Dr. O'Neill did. He said that based on current practice, the practices used by this government are, in fact, valid. That's all he said — that it's a valid way to do forecasting. Does that mean the forecast is real? Not at all. Does it mean we will actually achieve the numbers in the budget? Not at all. It's not what Dr. O'Neill was signing off on. He just simply said that there's some prudence in there and that the forecast follows a reasonable process, an accepted process. It doesn't mean the numbers are real.

I also struggle these days with the dependence that we have on third-party auditors. One of my pet peeves is the Pacific Carbon Trust. I think that's a distortion of tax policy, where we claw back operating money from the public sector to benefit private sector agencies for projects that, quite frankly, would have happened without any public money going into them.

The argument I get back from the Pacific Carbon Trust and others, including the Minister of Environment, is: "Well, all the projects are third-party validated." Well, just do a scan of KPMG, Ernst and Young, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Moody's, all of the banks. How many of them are now in court? How many of them have court challenges against them for not validating in a way that is ethical? These are the same third-party validators that said the Icelandic banks were fine three days prior to the Icelandic banks collapsing and subsequent criminal and civil court cases proceeding against both the banks and the third-party validators.

We have a special obligation as legislators to question third-party validators. An economist signing off only on the revenue projections and only saying, "Yep, that looks like proper process," doesn't give British Columbians any comfort. In fact, the whole exercise was a failure. It was a $25,000 taxpayer failure because the explicit reason for doing that, as articulated by the Finance Minister, was to build confidence in the budget, and the poll that came out afterwards showed that no confidence was built. It was a waste of money. Again, the only way to avoid this truly is not by hiring third-party validators but by changing the election date.

I would suggest that we should revisit the concept of a parliamentary budget officer. That should be something that we should get an exposure bill on, like we saw in the Senate bill today, to float out to British Columbians whether they have enough trust in us to allow us to continue to manage our own books or whether we need a third-party validator, independent of even the Auditor General's office, along the lines of the federal Parliamentary Budget Officer.

[1515]

So change the fixed election date, potentially at least for a short period of time, put in a parliamentary budget officer, and then we can get back to some credibility on the budget.

Then the final point I want to make on this budget, in particular: it's not a balanced budget. That issue has been canvassed. If the government wasn't already living on gaming and lottery money, I'd throw some of my money on the table and guarantee that this budget would not be balanced if the government was forced to actually live by it.

It's just too thin. It does not have a sufficient amount of leeway in it in order to accommodate even a reasonable fire season. That would eat up the contingency all on its own.

We have the nurses, the doctors, the teachers all going to go into contract negotiations. We have a very, very

[ Page 13136 ]

lowball expectation on the expense side that — oh, by the way — the external, independent accountant, economist, did not look at. The independent economist only looked at the revenue side, not the expense side. I'd have liked to have seen what he had to say about the projections for expenses.

It's not a balanced budget, but quite frankly, this is one of the areas that the NDP doesn't have any credibility on. That is, they cannot say that the government's budget is not credible when they have not stood with their own courage, the courage of their convictions, to say what an alternative budget is.

I believe, to be fair, they're in political mode. They're in election mode. They want to hold their powder dry until closer to the election. That's the way elections work. That's the way politics work.

But I think it's maybe time for us to consider mandatory alternative budgets by opposition parties, regardless of who they are — that in order for them to gain credibility year over year with the electorate, that instead of just simply criticizing the government's budget, they should be compelled to table a budget of their own each year so they can build a track record and so they can communicate to the citizens what their intentions would be and how they would govern differently with each year's budget and fiscal situation.

It's interesting that for the NDP, they seem to be of mixed minds on LNG. But on balance, the person who seems to be the one that will be designated to lead that for the NDP buys into the big lie of "LNG is going to save British Columbia."

Again, if I was a betting man, I'd bet that we're not going to get one plant or one pipeline. The numbers are just simply not there. We're too late in the game. But what that means is that we need an alternative strategy. We need an alternative that gives us a sense of what British Columbia's future holds with respect to our natural resources.

There are some interesting and telling aspects to this budget. One of the things I note that is quite intriguing is that the budget projections forward are a budget projection on PST. Now, when we were sold the bill of goods of HST, one of the members of the government said: "If we don't do HST, we'll see investment bleeding away, employment bleeding away, the diminution of municipal and provincial taxes and the consequences there." Another said the PST is "inefficient and job-killing."

What's interesting is — and British Columbians should pay attention to this — the three-year forecast in this budget shows none of that. In fact, the government is out there saying we're going to have 100 million vacancies. Sorry — a million vacancies. I got caught up in the trillion on the LNG and all that stuff, so I'm exaggerating a little.

Okay. So a million potential vacancies in a PST world — that we're going to attract all of this investment to LNG in mines, etc., in a PST world.

One of the problems we have is that political parties use economic fearmongering to justify social or tax policy and yet don't hold themselves accountable when that doesn't prove to be true. We need to stop that. It's not fair to British Columbians to do that.

In a PST world what this budget shows is that we continue to create jobs, we continue to attract investment, and our economy continues to grow GDP.

[1520]

The second thing it shows that's interesting is that the government, even with increases in taxes…. Now, this is a government that has lived on lowest tax regime in the country — getting taxes down, getting regulations down — and that in advance of an election, which the polls do not indicate they win, takes a risk with their base voters — conservatives, former Reformers, Liberals and the business community — by raising business taxes and corporate taxes.

Yet it's not enough. Even with holding expenses as tight as possible, razor-thin, and raising the revenue, it's not enough. The government is still living on MSP increases, tuition and lotteries, and it's not enough. Why? Because the real story is that, like jurisdictions everywhere, we're all living on borrowed money.

The true story of Canada is hidden, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer has pointed this out. It's hidden in the fact that we only take the federal debt against the Canadian GDP and we say we're okay. But Canada has only one GDP and multiple layers of debt and deficits. Every province, with the exception of Saskatchewan, is posting a deficit and adding to their debt.

If you roll up the Canadian GDP, it's $1.7 trillion. If you add the provincial debts into the federal debt, it's $1.2 trillion. You need to roll it up because what the federal government does to download to the provinces impacts their debt, and their debt is relative to Canada's GDP. So if we do that — the GDP numbers — the fact that we're living on borrowed money becomes clear. Then if you add into that the municipal infrastructure deficit, which, as of today, in things that must be dealt with just now, is $200 billion. That's an accrued debt.

That takes the debt to $1.4 billion against a $1.7 trillion GDP. You take student debt, which is $22 billion accrued, about $27,000 a student. You take the household debt that the Bank of Canada governor has been warning us about — the average Canadian household debt, $27,500; the average B.C. household debt, $37,200. You add to that financial debt, the social debt, the child poverty, the homelessness.

You add to that the ecological debt that's accruing. We saw last week the Forest Practices Board and the Auditor General saying that we have cumulative impacts on the land base that we don't even understand the implications of. That's the ecological debt that we are accruing and

[ Page 13137 ]

passing on to future generations.

We are living on borrowed money — all across the board. The argument of balanced or not balanced is a moot point. The bottom line is we have an imbalance between revenue and expectations of delivery of public services.

Now, it's interesting to go back to the Drummond report. It's the Ontario budget review process which came into this House prior to this budget. It was in the context of the last budget. One thing that was not reported and under-reported in the Drummond report…. They were given a mandate to try and figure out how to fix the Ontario budget cycle, which just goes deeper and deeper into the hole. But they were told they could not advise raising taxes. They could not advise on the revenue side; they could only advise on the expense side.

What Drummond did…. He said, "I can't advise you on the revenue side," but he did say: "I'm not going to talk to you about whether or not you should raise taxes." The advice he gave to government is that they and all governments need to look at taxes or revenue relative to GDP. Are their taxes and revenue relative to GDP coming up, just as the expenses are?

What he points out is we're so myopically focused on expense-to-GDP. We hear that all the time with health. Health as a percentage of GDP is unsustainable. What Drummond points out and others have pointed out is revenue as a percentage of GDP is unsustainable. Revenue is declining as GDP goes up, and expenses are coming up. That's unsustainable. That's the problem. That's called a structural deficit, and every economy — with maybe the exception of China, although that's a question now — is living in a structural deficit because there's an imbalance between revenue and expense.

[1525]

Drummond pointed out there's not much room on the expense side in Ontario. I would argue the same is the case here. You have to look at the revenue side of the equation. This government did some of that. The next government has a huge problem because they've built up entitlements for fixing some of the health care, education, etc., problems that are out there.

We need to talk about revenue and expense, and I would suggest that what we need is a conversation with British Columbians — a real conversation with British Columbians — on that.

I note that my time is almost up. In closing, what I'd say is that we have a situation here where we're just shadowboxing in front of an election. We need to stop that. We need to change that. Again, I challenge all of the MLAs to stand for something in this session. Let's together change the election date so we don't get into this shadowboxing after the next election.

I would also challenge the political parties to take the choke collars off their MLAs and allow MLAs to become more parliamentarians than politicians.

I think that after this election, whoever forms government, I wish them well because the challenges confronting them are going to be phenomenal. But I think British Columbians are ready for a conversation about balancing revenue with their expectations for public services.

I think we can rebalance that. We can get out of structural deficit. British Columbians need to moderate their expectations of government, but they also need to be willing to pay more if they want more. That's a conversation that's worth having. It's a conversation that would allow us to come into this House and put real budgets forward that actually deliver good public services with the right tax balance.

Hon. B. Stewart: It's a pleasure to rise today and speak in support of the 2013 balanced budget, which I know is supported by members on this side of the House. I strongly support this balanced budget's family-first agenda.

The budget reflects the reality that our province has not been immune to the economic challenges of recent years. But I think it's important to recognize that despite these challenging times, which many of our members and the members opposite have spoken of, this government is still strongly committed to rebuilding a strong economy, creating jobs and providing all families in British Columbia with safe communities, top-quality health care, a solid education and an exceptional standard of living.

This budget fulfils the government's promise to balance the budget in fiscal 2013-2014. The plan contains key elements that will enable the government to move to a surplus of $197 million from a projected deficit of $1.2 billion in fiscal 2012-13.

Revenues are projected to grow by an average of 3 percent per year, while expenses have been contained and are expected to grow at about half that rate, resulting in surpluses, as I mentioned — $197 million in the coming year, $211 million in the following year and $416 million in the fiscal year '15-16.

Prudent debt management. We've got to talk about that for a minute here. One of the benefits that this government in the past 12 years has provided is literally billions of dollars in savings by making certain that they executed and delivered on their expense controls and making certain that we delivered balanced budgets in the times when things were much better than they have been in the last 3½ years.

What has happened is that the government has worked on its restraint program. B.C. government ministries have freed up over a billion dollars, about half of which has been allocated in this coming year or this budget cycle to increase program funding and refundable tax credits for the government's family-first initiative. Over a decade of prudent fiscal management has worked in B.C.'s favour, as I mentioned.

[ Page 13138 ]

I can't help but think about the record of the opposition. When I look back on some of the things that…. You know, eight consecutive deficits. That contributed to a deficit that this government took over in 2001. We are still paying interest. The bottom line is that the government is sitting down, and it's hamstrung by the fact that the interest cost is something that doesn't go into services; it goes into interest and debt-servicing.

[1530]

For the member opposite that's talking about the deficits, I can read them out to him if he'd like to know: $2.3 billion in '91-92; in '92-93, $1.5 billion; in '93-94, $900 million; in '94-95, $230 million; in '95-96, $320 million; in '96-97, $385 million; in '97-98, $170 million; '98-99, $1 billion.

Honestly, the deficit that we are still servicing is some of that overspending. That's really all that this government has tried to do. It has tried to live within its means. An integral part of prudent fiscal management is knowing that we must find ways to find the revenue to pay for the services that we expect as British Columbians. That's why I know that the modest increases to things like the corporate income tax rate and MSP are necessary to keep our economic books balanced.

You know, we talk about MSP. Almost a million British Columbians either have it reduced or pay nothing for their MSP. That's something that this government is responsible for making certain of — that for the people that are least able to afford those premiums, it is not a hardship. So 800,000 of those British Columbians will pay nothing for their MSP premiums.

I think it's also worth mentioning that the economic and revenue projections contained in this budget have received a strong endorsement from a former chief economist at the Bank of Montreal, Dr. Tim O'Neill.

One of the things that I mentioned briefly a minute ago is this government's record on spending. It brought in balanced-budget and accountability legislation to make certain that government was incentified to make certain that ministries not only brought their budgets in on target but, the fact is, were encouraged to deliver savings and return that back to the treasury.

On the revenue side we've seen the volatility. I'll quote in a minute here about some problems that are happening in a neighbouring jurisdiction — about revenue forecasts and some of the challenges they face. But Mr. O'Neill has reviewed the budget and has concluded that it is built on sound processes and the effective use of private sector outlooks and incorporates prudence by adopting a cautious economic forecast that reflects the global uncertainty and risk.

Now, while other jurisdictions are postponing balanced budgets to later years, we are in the enviable position of having a balanced budget and are in a much better place than most to manage the ongoing global volatility and uncertainty.

I mentioned about other jurisdictions, and I read to you from a recent press release put out on budget day in the province of Alberta:

"'Alberta is dealing with rapidly falling resource revenues, and it means we're making some tough decisions,' said President of Treasury Board and Minister of Finance Doug Horner. 'Our government is leading by example, with a slimmed-down cabinet, an 8 percent MLA pay cut'" — on their $156,000 that they currently get paid, slightly more than in B.C., by a third — "'and a pay freeze for MLAs. Today we are taking action on management salaries.'

"The management salary freeze covers opted and excluded government employees. In addition, the province has identified nearly $600 million in savings across ministries. The Redford government has also accelerated the results-based budgeting process, which challenges every dollar government spends."

Alberta is now forecasting, for its deficit in 2012-2013, between $3.5 billion and $4 billion. Now, that's a province that…. We talk about the blue-eyed sheiks in Alberta. I think about the fact that they have a lot of resources. They certainly have a number of problems — high growth rates and things like that. But these things that I mentioned here, which the minister has only brought to light in the last two weeks, are things that this government has been practising for a decade.

The reality is that this government has shown leadership where other governments haven't. That's the reason that we're getting to balanced budget in 2013-2014. Making tough choices to achieve savings allows us to invest in what matters most to British Columbians — job creation, maintaining a quality health care system, providing top-notch education to our children and having access to affordable health care.

Within the balanced budget government is bringing new measures to benefit B.C. families and help make family life more affordable. Every family with a child turning six on or after January 1, 2013, meeting the basic eligibility requirements will qualify for a one-time B.C. training and education savings grant of $1,200. This can go towards post-secondary education.

[1535]

We've been investing that thousand dollars in savings for every child born in this province since January 1, 2007. Those are real dollars.

You heard the Finance Minister talking about the power of savings. A contribution by families of just $10 a month will add another $4,500 in that child's lifetime before going to post-secondary education, and $50 would add up to an amount, which I think he quoted, of somewhere around $12,000. It is an amazing power when you put your mind to it. The government is trying to demonstrate that by getting these RESPs set up for these new British Columbians.

As I look around at my colleagues, I see many parents and even some grandparents amongst us, including myself. I'm sure that we can all agree that child care costs add up fast. So over the next three years we're going to invest in an additional $76 million to improve families' access to quality early learning and child care supports.

[ Page 13139 ]

This includes $32 million for child care spaces, an additional $37 million dollars to improve the quality of child care and early-years services, along with $7 million to improve coordination of early childhood development programs and child care services.

This is on top of the government's record of adding 320 StrongStart centres across British Columbia and all-day kindergarten introduced for approximately 38,000 children. These are huge and powerful investments we've made in education for children, and we want to make certain that we have the best outcomes. We don't just say it. We deliver it.

Starting in 2015, we will invest $146 million in a new provincial tax credit that will provide up to $660 a year to help cover the cost of child care in B.C. for children under the age of six. Approximately 180,000 families will be eligible to receive that benefit. This budget also includes $81 million for the seniors home-renovation tax credit and $27 million for the children's fitness and art tax credits over the next three years.

We're putting together another $13 million towards the ongoing renewal of single-room-occupancy hotels to improve the quality of life for some of the most disadvantaged citizens here in British Columbia.

Recently I reflected on some comments made by the member from West Vancouver. He commented about taxes that people are paying. In 2001, under the NDP, an individual earning $20,000 would have paid personal income taxes of $752. Doesn't sound like a lot. Today, under the B.C. Liberal government, that individual's tax bill is only $81.

A low-income couple earning $40,000 in 2001 under the NDP would have paid $793 in personal income taxes. Under the B.C. Liberal government today, that couple pays zero. A family of four earning $70,000 under the NDP paid $4,300. Yes, that's $4,300 in taxes. Under the B.C. Liberals today, their tax bill is around $2,200.

Low taxes, putting it in the hands of the lowest-income earners, is what we've said. We're helping with children. This is a government that cares. As a parent of three kids and a grandparent of three other granddaughters — Ruby, Ginger and Hazel — I understand the importance of taking time for our youngest learners.

This government takes health and well-being of students seriously, and B.C. is leading Canada in one of the most aggressive student health initiatives in the country. We know that students who are physically active do better in school. That's why, over the next three years, this government will be providing the $27 million I mentioned for the children's fitness and art tax credits. There's also $18 million for the recently announced Creative Futures initiative that will help increase youth participation in the arts.

We are investing $1 million to help ensure that students have access to healthy foods they need for optimal growth and development. As a former Minister of Agriculture, I have to tell you that it's great to see B.C. fruits and vegetables in our schools. I know that our hospitals make that a priority, as well, in their purchases.

The successful sports and arts legacy program, which provides more opportunities for youth participation, will receive another $20 million, the same funding allocation it has had since its inception in 2010.

[1540]

Investments in health care and education are key to the success of British Columbians.

Let's talk about health care for a second. Health spending is expected to rise at about 2.6 percent per year over the next three years. That doesn't sound like a lot, considering the increases that we've been accustomed to in the last decade, but that's still an additional $2.4 billion from the provincial treasury, that 2.6 percent.

I'm pleased to see that Kelowna, which has become much more of a regional centre in terms of its health care operations, is receiving the capital investment for the new Interior heart and surgical centre — in addition to the recently opened Kelowna General Hospital Centennial tower, along with the new Polson Tower in Vernon, the improvements in Kamloops. They're going on across this province in every community that has health centres or hospitals.

I know that there are a lot of priorities and a lot of people saying that we need new this and more of that, but the government is getting to it. We're expending a massive amount of capital across the province to make certain that we have the health resources that people expect.

We are very aware of the huge need for trade professionals in British Columbia today and in the very near future. The need for skilled trades also has presented itself in my own industry. It's quite a different industry than it was 25 years ago, when I first, kind of, was just a dirt farmer, as some of the people I worked with said.

Being a former orchardist and grape grower, I have to say that the need for having people that understand the challenges in even agriculture…. The skills they need to be globally competitive are so different than they were before. The reality is that we are desperately looking for those types of people that understand accounting, soil science. The fact that we need people that are doing trades….

Even myself, I took welding and construction at Okanagan College to make certain I had a good grasp of things that I would need around the farm — besides the fact that I had to be the bookkeeper, the general manager and hire all those other professions that go along.

Today we really do count on the college for people on our hospitality side to make certain that people are well trained, that they're welcoming. They understand what it really takes to make certain that we not only make a great impression but that we retain people that come here and visit.

We have to make better wine, and that's a real chal-

[ Page 13140 ]

lenge. It's not like there isn't a lot of wine being made in the world. Frankly, making better wine every year is the goal and what should be the goal.

Across all sectors there is that challenge of the global economy that is making it important that we do have improved skills for people that are coming out of our schools, or even available. Recently in a discussion with the deputy vice-chancellor at UBC Okanagan, Deborah Buszard, we talked a lot about how we're going get people that really understand and can catapult the British Columbia wine industry into a place that is enviable for people that are trained here.

I have the experience of having a son, Kitson, who went off to New Zealand to get his training to become a winemaker and is now back working in Canada. I don't want to see that happen for other families. I'd like to see them trained here in British Columbia.

I'm thrilled about the investment we've made at Okanagan College. The president, Jim Hamilton, and Deborah Buszard, UBCO's deputy vice-chancellor, and others with the leadership at those two institutions in the Okanagan are getting directly involved in the skills shortage we have right now — even in my own industry, as I mentioned.

We are now one step closer to helping fill the skills shortage gap. There is a planned post-secondary capital investment in 2013, including expansion and renovation of the trades-training facilities, I believe built in 1965, in Kelowna at Okanagan College — desperately needed. Other communities — Penticton; Vernon; other centres that have colleges, like Northern Lights in the Northern Rockies, across the province — are all making huge investments in training for skills that we need, workers that are going to help build British Columbia.

Take the mining school up in Smithers — a great example of someplace that is working on skills training for an area. Who would have thought Smithers would be the mining capital of British Columbia? There are more diamond drilling rigs out of….

Interjection.

[1545]

Hon. B. Stewart: It helps if you have a bit of local knowledge.

These investments will more than double the size of the current complex at Okanagan College, providing much-needed student space and innovative classrooms for trades and technology programs.

This government is going to be investing more than $10.4 billion on taxpayer-supported capital projects over the next three years, and $95 million is being invested in the Okanagan Valley transportation corridors. These projects also will mean more jobs for highly-skilled trades professionals in the Kelowna area.

I'm particularly proud to say that this government is maintaining a steady course to protect the important services we deliver to the public. As Minister of Citizens' Services, I am committed to continuing to provide leadership across government for the effective delivery of public services and meet the needs of citizens, businesses and clients. My ministry acts as the key conduit between government and the people of British Columbia. We are responsible for service delivery, technology, access to information.

Shared Services B.C. is responsible for providing a wide range of cost-effective services in infrastructure to ministries and government organizations. As a reliable caretaker of the provincial real estate technology and purchasing services, we strive to provide innovative, integrated and sustainable services at a lower cost.

The entire ministry is committed to meeting and exceeding last year's service levels, with a budget that has been reduced by $5.3 million. Savings have been found through innovative new policies like leading workplace strategies, which see government workers adopt flexible working models, saving on an office and the infrastructure cost by having them in bricks and mortar.

In the last year we have put more than 1,000 workers in that situation, and they work from their laptop and walk around and have access to offices that are shared, rather than having dedicated offices.

My ministry also includes the integrated workplace solutions division, formerly known as B.C. Buildings Corp, which has the responsibility for the overall management of the government's real estate portfolio. I know staff there are working hard to support the Ministry of Finance's initiative to release surplus assets.

I know the minister spoke about empty fields and parking lots that aren't really creating any economic activity. We've identified a number of them. Really, after we've gone to ministries to make certain that there is no future use in other ministries for these properties, we dispose of them as a normal occurrence. But the fact is that we've identified and taken a very aggressive approach in making certain that we're not sitting on surplus assets.

The planned expansion of our LNG resources will require digital infrastructure to be developed at the same time as the physical infrastructure. My ministry is ready to work with partners and stakeholders to make sure that our on-line capacity doesn't lag behind our physical capacity.

Another goal of this government is to provide high-value services that are secure, protect personal privacy and are easy to use. The Minister of Health and myself introduced the new B.C. Services Card just a few short weeks ago. It combines health care cards with drivers' licences in the province at no additional cost. It protects valuable personal information with the latest anti-forgery features.

As well, it will reduce identity theft. By reducing the number of health care cards in the system, we will be able

[ Page 13141 ]

to better control costs and reduce fraud while providing better and faster health care services.

You know, it's this innovation…. I think people in other provinces have recognized British Columbia for the fact that we have continued to innovate and find different ways of delivering services. The staff and the people that work in Citizens' Services are really second to none. It's recognized across the country as being one of the most innovative, internal government ministries.

We are committed to speaking with citizens about the ways they want us to use this new form of identification — for example, maybe to vote on line, to register for government programs. We will continue to work closely with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to ensure identity and privacy security concerns are the cornerstone of the new CareCard.

This budget continues to support our commitment to expand connectivity in rural and remote communities in British Columbia. I'm pleased to say that that is one area where we have done a tremendous job. In the last ten years we have grown from an 80 percent on-line connectivity to 93 percent.

[1550]

Internet access. I think that most of us, especially sitting here in the capital region, couldn't imagine not having the Internet and access to it. Internet access helps people access information services, especially when they live in rural and remote communities — the people that are least likely.

Today 93 percent of British Columbians have access to high-speed Internet connectivity, and that number continues to grow as more and more communities receive high-speed Internet connections on a regular basis. Citizens continue to benefit from the last-mile Internet connections made in B.C.'s rural and remote communities through investments via the connecting citizens grant program.

We have just recently committed another $2 million over the next five years to help connect citizens in the most remote areas. You can look forward to news on the announcement of this in the coming weeks.

This will allow people that are in those areas where satellite connection is really the only option…. They will be given a priority to be able to make certain that they can access connectivity, which brings us 3 percent closer in that gap to getting, by 2020, 100 percent connectivity across the province.

We are creating new economic opportunities for families by working with the private sector and other levels of government to expand connectivity into communities while at the same time improving cell phone coverage along provincial highways, resulting in significant improvements in public safety by making it easier for motorists and residents in these areas to contact first responders more quickly.

Through the work we are doing with our partners, the new cellular coverage has been installed on hundreds of B.C. highway kilometres, with over 1,000 more kilometres to come.

This year my ministry is focused on leveraging the strategic telecommunications and exploring new solutions to increase connectivity to places in B.C. where traditional service is completely impractical. This will help the province to achieve its families-first vision, to capitalize on the opportunities presented by technology, to be a gateway to open government and data and to deliver quality services to citizens.

It is also important to mention that we are supporting First Nations in their efforts to close the gap that exists between aboriginal people and the rest of the province when it comes to broadband Internet connectivity. Today 170 out of 203 First Nation communities have broadband connectivity. It's not 100 percent, but we're working hard with ANTCO and Ruth Williams to make certain that we bridge that gap, and our partnership with the federal government is stronger now than it has ever been.

NetWork B.C. will continue to support First Nations as they connect and bring them on stream. Connecting communities is essential for the delivery of our services. It improves access to health care, education and economic opportunities.

Our connectivity objective is also about supporting education in B.C. My ministry is a partner in a program to bring fast fibre optic connections to schools like Anne McClymont primary school and Hudson Road Elementary in my own hometown of West Kelowna. Replacing old copper wiring with fibre optic connections means schools will be able to take advantage of the best learning opportunities that the Internet can supply and offer.

Since July of 2011 over 180 schools have already been upgraded, with more to come. As of February 21 we are at 185. We look forward to working collaboratively with local community groups, all levels of government and the private sector, including small Internet service providers, to achieve an ultimate goal of 100 percent connectivity across the province.

We recognize that the Internet has changed the way that people communicate. By using new technology, we can better reach out to the public.

This brings me to open government. The Premier has committed that this government will change the style and approach to governing. The open government platform agenda is about a different way of governing. Our Open Information and Data B.C. websites, which are up and running over 3,000 data sets on line, support ministries and the public, providing leading-edge tools and information that let them operate in a more open manner.

We want to hear directly from people. We want to make British Columbians know that we are not only listening, but we're acting on what we hear. We are providing and enabling citizens with opportunities to influence

[ Page 13142 ]

and improve policies that impact them and their quality of life. In order to continue to do that, we will continue to make government information more open, outward-facing, more accessible to British Columbians.

[1555]

Lastly, Service B.C., one of the cornerstones of British Columbia, the government agents that are out there in every community. I guess I should give a shout-out to them if they're watching today. The Ministry of Citizens' Services is responsible for Service B.C. Whether you're in Atlin, Stewart, Ashcroft, in every corner of the province it's the front line of service delivery to the public. But it's also changing.

Our B.C. government agents are the professionals when it comes to the delivery of services to the public. I've witnessed many of these firsthand in my tours across the province — the B.C. Service centres.

The government agents and their staff deliver a number of the front-counter services to the public, and they are always helpful and friendly. They help people with a variety of services, whether it's a new driver's licence, registering for the Medical Services Plan, getting income assistance or needing assistance in finding a job. I look forward to an opportunity to visit even more of the Service B.C. centres across the province.

They combine the services of various ministries, depending on the communities' needs and making a one-stop shop for government service. For instance, one centre may combine ICBC and the Ministry of Social Development and housing, while another may see court services integrated with services with the Ministry of Children and Family Development. No matter what the agency is inside, signage outside greets the clients in 12 different languages, welcoming people of diverse cultures inside to access many services.

I am proud of the government's record on sound fiscal management. We are building on that foundation. With this budget, we are being proactive at keeping debt affordable and returning to balanced budgets in the year 2013-2014. I look forward to the year ahead, the future opportunities and the many accomplishments we will achieve.

Balancing the budget means managing taxpayers' money with respect. The way we are going to do that is by focusing on growing the economy, not growing government. We all know from the opposition that they don't believe in balanced budgets. They don't understand the importance of seven credit-rating downgrades.

K. Corrigan: The member opposite just said that we don't believe in a balanced budget. We don't believe this is a balanced budget.

I'm going to start, first of all, because I probably won't have an opportunity to respond to the throne speech…. There are a few things I want to say about some people in my community, and I'm going to do that now.

First of all, I want to thank the wonderful constituency assistants I have — Cate Jones, Caitlin Meggs, Isaac Vallee and Angela Liu.

Caitlin Meggs is not technically my CA anymore because she had the audacity to decide that she wanted to go to law school and travel to India. So she has been doing that the last several weeks, and I wish her well. The problem is that when you have excellent staff, as we all do, sometimes they make decisions to take other directions in life, and they don't stay with you forever, unfortunately.

Here in the Legislature, a wonderful legislative assistant — Heidi Reid. I've had previous legislative assistants who have been wonderful to work with, including Susan Vasilev and, of course, another one, Erich Nahser-Ringer, who decided that he was going to pursue a masters program. So we lost him as well. He was wonderful to work with.

I also want to thank the many volunteers in my community that come and volunteer in my office to help serve the community — a diversity of constituents who come and help me serve the diversity of the community that Burnaby–Deer Lake is.

I also want to thank my dear husband, Derek, husband of — I've lost count; I think it's about 37 years now — a long time. Oops. Can we cut that part? I thank my dear husband, Derek, and my family for supporting me these past four years and my wonderful now adult children, Sean, Darcy, Patrick and Kelsey.

It's hard for families, particularly a spouse who gives up a lot of time with their partners. We all know that in this work that we do. So it's a sacrifice for everyone.

[1600]

I would also note that I have four grown adult children and no grandchildren, and that's a hint.

I also want to recognize that I have five colleagues who are retiring this year. They're all wonderful colleagues, and I will miss them all. I hope to be back here, and if I am, I will be sad that they are not here.

I particularly wanted to mention the members for New Westminster and Coquitlam-Maillardville. We have had a wonderful women's caucus who've really enjoyed each other's company and all become very good friends. I will truly miss those two members who are part of that women's caucus.

I also want to pay a little tribute today to somebody who died recently, on October 25, 2012, and that is Jim Lorimer, who was a former member of this House and cabinet minister. He was born in the city of Victoria, this very city, in 1923. He was a proud veteran and, of course, a veteran of provincial politics as well, representing the predecessor to what is my riding now. He was in Burnaby-Willingdon.

[D. Black in the chair.]

Jim and I both shared politics and law. When I gradu-

[ Page 13143 ]

ated from law school and after I articled, I came and worked in partnership with him and my husband, Derek, in a little office on Kingsway before I stayed home and raised children for a long time. And then Jim came back to the Legislature. He was, of course, part of the great Barrett legacy of 1972-75, years that brought us the agricultural land reserve and ICBC. Jim played a major role as the Minister of Municip