2011 Legislative Session: Third Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 24, Number 2

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Gord Piper

R. Chouhan

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M210 — Emergency Intervention Disclosure Act, 2011

N. Letnick

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Morden coal mine history

D. Routley

Visit to Lower Mainland by students from Saskatchewan First Nation

J. Yap

City of Burnaby placement as finalist for environmental award

K. Corrigan

Columbia River Treaty

B. Bennett

Victoria International Cycling Festival

R. Fleming

Ju-jitsu project for youth

R. Cantelon

Oral Questions

Cost of government information on harmonized sales tax

A. Dix

Hon. C. Clark

Impact of harmonized sales tax on families

C. James

Hon. K. Falcon

B. Ralston

Government changes to harmonized sales tax

B. Ralston

Hon. K. Falcon

Impact of harmonized sales tax on small busi ness

H. Lali

Hon. K. Falcon

Conditions at hospital facilities on Haida Gwaii

G. Coons

Hon. M. de Jong

M. Farnworth

Petitions

J. Horgan

Tabling Documents

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, annual report, 2010

Forest Appeals Commission, annual report, 2010

Petitions

S. Hammell

K. Heed

Tabling Documents

Islands Trust, annual reports, 2008-09 and 2009-10

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 14 — Coastal Ferry Amendment Act, 2011

Hon. B. Lekstrom

G. Coons

N. Simons

C. Trevena

L. Krog

B. Routley

D. Routley

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 12 — Police (Independent Investigations Office) Amendment Act, 2011

K. Corrigan

Hon. S. Bond

N. Simons

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill 12 — Police (Independent Investigations Office) Amendment Act, 2011

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 11 — Yale First Nation Final Agreement Act

Hon. M. Polak

S. Fraser

Hon. M. de Jong

C. James

Hon. G. Abbott

B. Simpson

On the amendment

B. Simpson

H. Lali

Bill 2 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2011

Hon. K. Falcon

B. Ralston

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Finance (continued)

B. Ralston

Hon. K. Falcon

B. Simpson

Estimates: Management of public funds and debt

Estimates: Other appropriations

Estimates: Ministry of Energy and Mines

J. Horgan

Hon. R. Coleman

D. Donaldson

V. Huntington

R. Austin

N. Macdonald

M. Sather

[ Page 7651 ]

TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2011

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Hon. S. Cadieux: Today in the gallery we have a delegation from the B.C. Federation of Labour. The occupational health and safety standing committee is here this afternoon. I am looking forward to meeting with the group after question period, along with some of my colleagues.

Joining us today are Dusty Kelly, Larry Stoffman, Paul Pelletreau, Jim Laliberte, Dave Clarabut, Rachel Barbour, Steve Milne, Dan Burroughs, Rob Ashton, Ron Corbeil, Nina Hansen, Jim Sayre and Beverly McKean. Mr. Speaker, I hope I haven't slaughtered anyone's name this afternoon.

Would everyone please make them welcome.

M. Karagianis: Today we have with us a number of guests on behalf of myself and the member for Juan de Fuca. An extraordinary group of students have joined us today. They became so disenchanted with the way the adults were handling the replacement of Belmont Secondary that they've taken up action on their own.

I'd like to introduce Ravi Parmar, who has led the charge, and Mack Edwards, Logan Howes, Cassandra Herbert, Laken Teele and Katie Rowluk. I hope we'll all make them very welcome here in the House today.

[1335]

J. Les: Today in the members' gallery I'd like to acknowledge a very special guest from Seattle. That is Mr. Matt Morrison. He's the executive director of the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region, sometimes known as PNWER. PNWER was created in 1991. Its members include British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories as well as the American states of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington State.

PNWER remains an instrumental organization to promote collaboration, competitiveness and economic growth and brings concrete benefits to all citizens of the region. We're very pleased to acknowledge the hard work of Mr. Morrison and his staff in advancing the objectives of our region. Would the House please join me in making Matt feel very welcome.

Tributes

Gord Piper

R. Chouhan: I also would like to extend my welcome to all the members of the B.C. Federation of Labour occupational health and safety committee here. To the names read by the Minister of Labour I want to add the name of one more who was supposed to be here today with us, Gord Piper.

Gord Piper passed away on Friday, April 22, at his home in Victoria. He was to be here on this lobby tour with us, championing the rights of injured workers. He has been a passionate occupational health and safety activist since 1989, both for prevention and compensation. His work representing injured workers and their rights is notable and touched many people, both union and non-union. He was awarded the Bud Jimmerfield Award in 2008, the most prestigious award of occupational health and safety for CAW.

Introductions by Members

V. Huntington: Today in the House I am very pleased to have Bernadette Kudzin and Yvonne Parenteau, my incredibly hard-working constituency assistants who, I might add, had to learn the job without a caucus support system and who conquered it brilliantly. I'm also delighted to introduce Shawn Courtney and Brad Densmore, who is the newest member of my staff. They are my research officers, and I hope the House makes them welcome.

K. Corrigan: I see that we have in the House today my friend Mike Hurley, who is the president of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association. On behalf of the House, I want to thank Mike for his great leadership and for the work that all firefighters do in this province keeping us safe, as well as the wonderful community work that they all do. So I hope the House will make him feel welcome.

Hon. D. McRae: I have two introductions. First of all, I'd like to introduce Julia McCoid, a teacher from Ecole Robb Road, who has come down to Victoria today with 55 grade 5 students and ten adults and toured the precincts and had a great time. They're sitting there behind me. So I'd like the Legislature to please make them welcome.

Amongst that group are three very special friends. We have Alyssa, Maya and Michelle Erickson, who have been longtime family friends. Their dad couldn't be here today. He is out coaching rugby, I think, at the B.C. high school championships. I'd like the House to please make my family friends welcome.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Nanaimo.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Nanaimo. The member for Nanaimo.

L. Krog: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I may have had, how shall I say, a little posting ahead of time as to who might be running against me in the next election. I

[ Page 7652 ]

appreciate the words of the member who lives in my constituency as well. But all that aside….

I don't know if they've made it into the House yet, but there is a group of students here from my constituency, Ecole Océane school. Would the House please make them welcome.

R. Cantelon: I appreciate the kind words from the member opposite, my MLA opposite.

We have several supporters in the gallery today of the childhood development centre in Nanaimo. Please welcome Janet Delgatty, Jeff Hawker, Mary Evans and Ben Hawker. Please make them feel welcome here.

[1340]

H. Bains: In the House today is a second group of students from Cougar Creek Elementary, 35 grade 5 students along with a few of their parents and teacher Jessie Sandhu. Please help me welcome them to Victoria.

Also in the House with Mike Hurley, my good friend, is Larry Thomas, my good old friend, who was the president of the Surrey Fire Fighters Association, along with that delegation. So please help me welcome Larry here as well.

Hon. S. Thomson: I have four very special guests in the gallery today. Joining us is my wife, Brenda, and I want to thank her for all her support. Along with my wife is my daughter, Alex, and two of my favourite grandchildren, Astrid and Simone, who are visiting us from Creston — their first visit to the Legislature. They're studying government in their classes. I'd like the House to make them very welcome.

D. Routley: I have three very important guests in the gallery with us today. Our CAs are so important to what we do. They serve our communities, and they make our presence known when we're not there. Joining us are my CAs, Patty McNamara and Betty Smits, and also Karlene Bara, who sometimes fills in when either Patty or Betty is on holiday.

I planned to have one other guest, a very important person to all of us — all the people I just mentioned and myself — and that's Rose Henry. She couldn't make it today, but I'd like everyone in the House to help me and Patty and Betty wish Rose a very happy 75th birthday.

N. Letnick: When we dial 911, we usually expect help. Lots of times we get the help when police, paramedics, ambulance, firefighters would show up to take care of our needs.

With that introduction, I'd like to introduce some guests that have already been introduced but are here today to witness something very important in their lives and in my life as well. That's the introduction of a private member's bill.

In the House we have Bronwyn Barter, president of Ambulance Paramedics of British Columbia. We have Michael Hurley, president of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association. We have Larry Thomas, secretary, British Columbia Professional Fire Fighters Association; Larry Hollier, president of the Kelowna Professional Firefighters Association; Mike Hill, treasurer, Kelowna Professional Firefighters Association; Sherman Hillier, provincial recording secretary, Ambulance Paramedics of British Columbia; and also my LA, Ryan Pineo, who was a great help in bringing this forward.

Would you please help them be welcomed.

M. MacDiarmid: With us in the House today is one of my constituents from beautiful Vancouver-Fairview. He's an exceptional volunteer. The diagnosis is not completely certain, but we believe he is a lifelong political junkie. I ask the House to make Tim Crowhurst warmly welcome.

Hon. B. Penner: I'm advised that my 14-week-old daughter, Fintry, so enjoyed question period yesterday and seeing her dad on TV that she was able to convince my wife, Daris, to bring her to Victoria today. Accordingly, I have the privilege of making my first official introduction with them being present here in the precincts of our daughter, Fintry Katherine Penner, and my wife, Daris.

I notice they just had to step out for a moment. You may have heard Fintry. She's not bashful about speaking up when she feels it's appropriate. I ask the House to please make them welcome.

D. Hayer: We have eight very special guests here today, our community leaders. The first one is Joginder "Joe" Singh Wahlla and his son Tony Tajinder Singh Wahlla; and Charanjeet C.J. Sidhu and Col. Karam Singh Virk from India; Darshan Singh Shetta; and Kirpal Singh Mangat. Larry Thomas is the past president of the Surrey Fire Fighters Association and currently secretary of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association.

Also, I have another special guest, who was here yesterday. My wife, Isabelle Martinez Hayer, is here. Would the House please make them all welcome.

Hon. P. Bell: Joining us in the precincts today is Dr. Mark Smith. Mark originally hailed from Port McNeill. He has recently returned to British Columbia after spending four years getting his doctorate of chiropractic from Life University in Atlanta, Georgia.

[1345]

I'm pleased to be able to tell the House that he's chosen Gordon Head as the area of Victoria to set up his practice. If people have a pain in the back sometime after July this year, they can go and see him at Progressive Chiropractic. Would the House please make Dr. Mark Smith very welcome in the Legislature.

[ Page 7653 ]

Mr. Speaker: It's one of those days. If you haven't been welcomed, welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill M210 — EMERGENCY INTERVENTION

DISCLOSURE ACT, 2011

N. Letnick presented a bill intituled Emergency Intervention Disclosure Act, 2011.

N. Letnick: I move that the bill be now read for a first time.

Motion approved.

N. Letnick: The bill allows individuals under certain specified circumstances to apply for a testing order if they suspect that they have been exposed to a communicable disease and a sample has not been obtained voluntarily from a source individual.

Currently emergency workers and victims of crime who suspect they have been exposed to serious illness cannot determine their exposure until many months later, often past the window of preventative treatments. Because of this doubt, suspected exposed people usually ingest a concoction of prophylactic drugs, and they, with their families, carry the mental burden of uncertainty.

This bill allows those individuals to ask the authorities to compel source individuals to get a blood test in a timely manner and, if a communicable disease is determined, to have the source individual's doctor communicate the results in confidence to the applicant's doctor.

The bill was drafted after reviewing similar acts in Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta. The bill is predominantly modelled after a law in Manitoba and respects models developed by the Uniform Law Conference of Canada on mandatory testing and disclosing legislation that addresses Charter rights and concerns.

Respecting personal privacy is important, and the provisions of this bill do that by ensuring all testing information is communicated through physicians only. Results are never made public and may not be used outside of the scope of the intended bill.

Over the summer months I plan to visit ridings across British Columbia, meeting with MLAs on both sides of the House and their communities, explaining the bill's intent, documenting stories and all concerns relative to the bill. I will also contact representatives from other provinces who have similar legislation to compile evidence of the effectiveness of their bills in achieving the desired outcomes. Following this consultation process a final report will be presented to the Legislature in the fall, along with any proposed amendments to this draft bill.

Mr. Speaker, it's my privilege to be sponsoring this bill and by so doing enjoy a small role in improving the lives of men and women and their families who go about day in and day out bravely serving the people of British Columbia.

The use of the provisions of this bill may not occur frequently, but just having them will provide families with the knowledge that British Columbians care and the peace of mind that comes with knowing if they or someone they love has been exposed to a communicable disease.

On behalf of all paramedics, police officers, victims of crime and Good Samaritans, I wish to thank the B.C. firefighters for their leadership on this matter. It's my hope that all members of this House will see fit to support the bill when it comes before them.

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

Bill M210, Emergency Intervention Disclosure Act, 2011, 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)

MORDEN COAL MINE HISTORY

D. Routley: I rise today to speak of the Morden mine. The Morden mine is a former coal-mining site south of Nanaimo. In 1852 coal began the founding of our communities — Nanaimo, Ladysmith, South Wellington — in fact, all the communities of eastern Vancouver Island.

It was dangerous work infamous for its child labour. Hundreds of people died; hundreds were injured. Chinese workers weren't remembered by name but by number, and still the people of our communities gather every year to remember those workers who fell and died, directly but also indirectly as a result of their exposure to the dangers of coal mining.

In 1913-14 there was a strike, a very bitter strike, where our communities were divided. It was an effort by the workers to have the freedom to be represented by unions. During that time the Morden mine, owned by the Pacific Coast Coal Mines company, decided rather than working underground, which they couldn't do anymore, they would work above ground. They embarked on a project to create the first concrete mine head.

[1350]

It doesn't sound like much in today's terms, but in those days reinforced concrete technology was a very new thing, and this was a very revolutionary project. It's all that remains as a physical reminder of that great heritage that our communities enjoy.

[ Page 7654 ]

Now the Friends of the Morden Mine are working to preserve that. The society is preserving this site with historical walks. They're the volunteer caretakers and the park builders. They maintain the trails, and they remind us of the economic value of diversifying our community, the importance of remembering our history.

We don't have the Parthenon, but we have things like the Kinsol Trestle. We have the reminders of how industry affected the beginning of our communities. I ask all the members to visit the Morden mine site and to invest in the history of B.C.

VISIT TO LOWER MAINLAND BY STUDENTS

FROM SASKATCHEWAN FIRST NATION

J. Yap: Like all members, I always enjoy welcoming visitors to my home community. On May 23 my constituent Katarina Petakovic-Dekic introduced me to 16 grade 7 students visiting from the Opawikoscikan School in Pelican Narrows. They are members of the Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation, one of the largest First Nation bands in northern Saskatchewan.

They have occupied their traditional lands of 20,000 acres since time immemorial. Over 60 percent of their population is 18 years old or younger. Before this trip, none of these students had ever been outside of Saskatchewan, and only one had ever been on an airplane. They've experienced poverty and difficult challenges over the years. Under the guidance of their teacher, Cheryl Morin, students selected the Lower Mainland as the destination for their graduation trip and fundraised diligently to this end.

When I met with the students, they were heading off to go whale watching. Their plans also included touring the International Buddhist Temple in Richmond and lunch at a Chinese restaurant, where they looked forward to learning how to use chopsticks. Five of these students were able to attend game 5 of the Canucks-Sharks playoff series, something I'm sure they will never forget.

Ms. Morin related to me how important home and family are to these students and to their people. This is a good thing. It is also a good thing these students were able to experience the Lower Mainland's cultural mosaic and see that home and family are important to all cultures.

It's a big world, and it's an honour that these students chose to come here to see more of it. My thanks to Katarina Petakovic-Dekic and Cheryl Morin for taking the initiative in helping these youngsters see a slice of the big world in Steveston and this place we know and love called British Columbia.

CITY OF BURNABY PLACEMENT AS

FINALIST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AWARD

K. Corrigan: Well, I'm very pleased to take this opportunity to congratulate Burnaby's mayor, Derek Corrigan, for being a finalist for a prestigious national environmental award. Now, we don't know who won it yet, but he has been encouraged to go to Halifax this Sunday to attend the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Awards of Excellence. It will be for the 2011 Green Champion Award, which was developed to promote and reward municipal champions, inspire municipal governments, and showcase and encourage the exchange of best practices among Canadian municipalities. So I am very hopeful.

He's in the running because of a long list of environmental achievements and, of course, would be the first to say that if he does win this award, it is because of a highly dedicated staff and council colleagues who would have made that possible, if it happens.

The mayor and Burnaby have championed, supported, developed and led dozens of exemplary, innovative projects that demonstrate Burnaby's ongoing commitment to sustainable development. Key achievements include: 25 percent of the city's land is preserved for park and green space; $20.5 million Burnaby Lake rejuvenation project to protect the lake and its plants, birds and fishes; LEED-standard or green-building standards for all civic buildings; first community to declare World Rivers Day; Canada's first Blue Community; the food scraps program; rain garden project. I could go on and on, but I won't.

I want to wish the mayor the very best of luck and keep my fingers crossed and hope to be able to soon congratulate the city of Burnaby and Derek Corrigan for being green champions.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY

B. Bennett: The Columbia River Treaty is an agreement between Canada and the U.S. signed in 1964 to manage flooding and to optimize the generation of electricity. As a result of the dams and the reservoirs that were created after the treaty, much beautiful and valuable bottom land, farms, multigenerational homes and even communities were lost forever, submerged under the rising levels of one of Canada's greatest rivers, the Columbia.

[1355]

The province receives $150 million to $300 million each year from the generation of power in the U.S. and hundreds of millions in benefits from energy generated right in the Columbia Basin in B.C. In fact, 40 percent of our electricity that we generate is generated every year in the Columbia Basin. The Columbia Basin Trust was formed to receive some of those benefits and to distribute and invest them in the Columbia Basin.

Now, an important milestone is coming up soon. The year 2024 is the earliest date either Canada or the U.S. could terminate the Columbia River treaty, but only if one of the parties gives advance notice by 2014 — not

[ Page 7655 ]

far off. The U.S. is working hard to determine their best interests in terms of flood control, power generation and the management of endangered fish species. B.C. is starting to do the same.

The three Kootenay opposition members and I have embarked upon a non-partisan effort to ensure that the Columbia River treaty continues to benefit the people of our region and continues to benefit all of the people of B.C.

The work that government will do over the next year in preparation for 2014 will impact all British Columbians. There's no question about that. There are billions of dollars at stake. But it will also have a profound impact on the people that we four MLAs represent, and it is therefore our duty to set aside politics and help B.C. to be fully informed and fully prepared for the decisions that lie ahead.

VICTORIA INTERNATIONAL

CYCLING FESTIVAL

R. Fleming: Bike to Work Week is well underway in communities across British Columbia and most notably here in greater Victoria, which, as everybody knows, is the cycling capital of Canada.

So with cycling on the minds of many this week, I'd like to bring the attention of the House to the upcoming Victoria International Cycling Festival, which is a multi-event festival. It's the largest cycling venture on the province's calendar in all of British Columbia. Last weekend the festival kicked off with a Tour de Victoria, with over 1,500 riders including Tour de France hero Ryder Hesjedal.

It was an inaugural event that is sure to become an annual feature in my community, and more big events are happening. This Sunday, June 5, a massive all-day family bike festival, sponsored by Thrifty Foods, kicks off. Two weeks later, on Sunday, June 19, the district of Saanich and community partners, including the University of Victoria, will present the Saanich Cycling Festival.

Victorians have always embraced cycling enthusiastically. It is now part of our regional identity, and indeed, it is part of our regional economic development pitch to investors and to new employers. We have very well-utilized regional trailways and municipal cycling networks.

But the point of this festival is that even more people can be drawn to cycling. By showcasing it as a fun and accessible thing, the festival aims to show that cycling is in fact for everyone, for fun, for health, as an easy way to get to work, school and shopping. The point the festival society is trying to make is that you don't have to dress from head to toe in spandex to get involved in cycling. In fact, they actively discourage that at the festival.

I think I would just like to say this. The festival has already started as a tremendous success. It will continue throughout the summer, and it's thanks to tireless creative volunteers who are showcasing our region as a cycling leader, promoting healthy lifestyles and commuting and recreation and racing patterns. I want the House to make them all welcome and, indeed, to join them at this festival.

JU-JITSU PROJECT FOR YOUTH

R. Cantelon: As a young person emerges from their late teens into adulthood, it can be a very challenging time as they try to wrestle with the decision: what am I going to be when I grow up? They see some of their friends going to university and technical colleges. They see some embark on careers and other jobs. Sometimes their youthful exuberance can express itself in ways that aren't viewed as positive by the rest of society. Sometimes, even so, they could end up on the streets, for example, in some difficulties.

City councillor Al Greir took the initiative to reach out to these people to try to help them find direction in their lives, to try to help them build confidence. He partnered with his friend Joe Friede, and together they established the Vancouver Island German Jujutsu Foundation. The role here is to use that discipline to help build mental and physical discipline with them and to help them develop confidence and self-respect.

They've run two program initiatives. One is Life Without Fear, which helps people to stand up and be confident about themselves in any circumstances, and the youth ambassador, which helps to develop these young people into role models for other young people facing the same challenges.

[1400]

It's a pilot program sponsored by the Solicitor General, and it's been very, very successful. They hope to continue. There have been 19 enrolments, and I'd like to congratulate Rory Van Vliet as the first graduate of the program. He's an outstanding young man who aspires and in fact is already being very effective as a leader among his peers. He's taken work with the fire department, with the search and rescue. He's taken first-aid courses and now has secured permanent employment. He's an outstanding example and becoming an outstanding citizen.

I'd like the House to join me and congratulate Al Greir and his friend Joe Friede and others, especially Rory Van Vliet, for their accomplishments in helping the youth come out the right way in our society.

Oral Questions

COST OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION

ON HARMONIZED SALES TAX

A. Dix: Everyone in B.C. knows that the B.C. Liberals misled people in the last election about the HST. In fact, according to the Premier herself…

[ Page 7656 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: …about all her colleagues, they were sneaky — well, perhaps with the exception of the member for Burnaby-Lougheed. But what's the Premier's record? She said two months ago that she wouldn't change the rate of the HST or even talk about it before the election because that would be "buying votes," and then she did the opposite. In her own words, she went out and bought votes. She promised: "I'm not going to be out there cheerleading and trying to give people some kind of snow job." Now she's spending $5 million in taxpayers' money on partisan ads.

Interjections.

A. Dix: Oh, I know. Sneaky.

She promised equal funding for both sides in the debate. She broke that promise. She promised that the referendum will be conducted in the same manner as a provincial election, and she broke that promise.

How can the people of B.C. believe anything the B.C. Liberals or the Premier have to say about the HST?

Hon. C. Clark: I'd like to welcome the Leader of the Opposition. I'm glad he showed up today. It's nice to hear him with a question about the HST. I'm delighted to have my opportunity and get up and speak to it.

Of course, the member for Cowichan Valley was so eloquent today. He talked a lot about going backward to the decade that we saw in the 1990s when 50,000 people fled the province. I think he reminded all of us about what the future could hold if we go back to a party where they're talking about having a 12 percent tax for British Columbians versus a 10 percent tax. I think that when British Columbians fill out their ballots on the 24th, they're certainly going to be making their own decision about it, and we will live by the verdict that they hand us.

But I do think, though, when they're faced with that decision, when they're faced with the decision for the opposition's call for a 12 percent tax or the government's proposal for a 10 percent tax — which, after all, is a whole lot better for B.C. families, I think — I know which one they'll choose.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

I want to remind members on both sides of the House: we want to listen to the question, and we want to listen to the answer.

The Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

[1405]

A. Dix: You know, I have to say, hon. Speaker, for the Premier, that it's not every day you bring in closure on yourself.

She wants a 7 percent tax on a sandwich in a coffee shop. I want a zero percent tax. She wants a 7 percent tax on children's sports programs. I want a zero percent tax. She wants a 7 percent tax on bicycles. I want a zero percent tax.

Now, if the Premier had kept her word, there would be third-party spending limits in this referendum campaign. If the Premier had kept her word, there would be disclosure of who paid for the ads, and the Premier's taxpayer-funded stick men wouldn't be allowed. They're costing us $5 million — money that could be better spent keeping group homes open for people with developmental disabilities. Partisan B.C. Liberal ads in a provincial election put out by the provincial government would be illegal.

The Premier has changed the rules, broken her word to stack the deck. So why doesn't she do the people of B.C. a favour and put a stop to those partisan ads today.

Hon. C. Clark: You know, for over a year now the members of the opposition have been saying that the government didn't do enough to talk to people, that the government didn't do enough to listen to people. What we've done is we've gone out and we've listened to British Columbians. We've listened to about 300,000 British Columbians. It's the biggest listening exercise in the history of the province.

We are communicating with British Columbians. We are making sure that British Columbians have all the information they need to be able to cast an informed ballot on this issue. And I think, while the member can come up with all kinds of excuses and all kinds of reasons in advance why he thinks people might not vote his way on it, the real reason that people will probably — I hope — decide not to support the New Democrats' position on this is because they want to increase taxes by 40 percent on iPods, on furniture, on new cars.

When they're talking about a 12 percent tax versus a 10 percent tax, that's exactly what they'll be presenting British Columbians with. And you know what? I think that when they go to the polls, British Columbians are going to say: "Shelve the 12."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

A. Dix: I'd like the Premier to tell us one person in British Columbia who thinks it's a good idea for them

[ Page 7657 ]

to spend taxpayers' money on partisan ads in this referendum — one person that she talked to. The stick men, you know, don't really exist in time and space. They don't really exist.

Other than the advertising executives that she contracted to do the ads, can she name a single person in British Columbia who thinks it's a good idea, when her government is closing group homes for adults with developmental disabilities — closing group homes — to spend $5 million on partisan ads on the HST?

Hon. C. Clark: I don't know why the member seems to have an issue with us engaging with British Columbians and making sure that British Columbians have the information they need to cast an informed vote. This could be the most important vote on a taxation issue….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Premier, take your seat for a second.

Members.

Continue, Premier.

[1410]

Hon. C. Clark: I don't know what the member has against the government listening and engaging with British Columbians, making sure that British Columbians have the information that they need to be able to cast an informed vote on what could be the most important referendum on taxation issues that any Canadian has ever been asked to decide.

Now, there have been a number of things that have happened since I became Premier. We got the independent panel report which said that it's going to add a $350 burden under the old HST for families. I didn't believe that was fair. We also learned that British Columbians, when we went out and we listened to them, wanted to find a way to rebalance the burden of taxes so that we could raise it on business and lower it on families. We've done that. We've also gone out, and we've listened to 300,000 people.

The opposition, if they spent a little bit of time listening, would probably have heard by now that advocating for a 12 percent tax over a 10 percent tax is not what British Columbians want. We engaged. We listened.

I could be rigid. I could be stubborn. I could be ideological. I could be stuck in old-fashioned ideas. But if I was all those things, I'd probably be running as a New Democrat.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: We're not going to continue. It's your time, Members.

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON FAMILIES

C. James: I'd like to say to the Premier and the B.C. Liberals: if they'd been listening in the first place, they wouldn't have brought in the HST in British Columbia. British Columbia families, under this Premier and the B.C. Liberals, are paying up to 7 percent more on countless items in their day-to-day life.

This Premier and the B.C. Liberals want families to keep paying more now and after the referendum. The HST touches families in every part of their life, from birth to grave. Even prenatal classes, classes that have parents prepare a safe and healthy arrival for their newborns, are now fully taxed under the HST.

My question is to the Premier. Why is she taxing young families under her family-first agenda?

Hon. K. Falcon: I know that the math is difficult for the members opposite, but I'll try and walk them through this pretty straightforwardly. The fact of the matter is that if you're paying 10 percent on all your retail purchases — all your furniture, all your clothing, all of the purchases that people make every day in their lives — you're actually farther ahead than you are paying 12 percent under an inefficient PST-plus-GST system. That's actually how it works.

You know, I do think that there is something of interest I have noted. We have listened to now two days' worth of arguments from the NDP about why they don't like the HST. I heard all the different arguments, including from the Leader of the Opposition.

One thing none of us did hear, one thing none of us did hear was the impassioned arguments about why the PST makes sense, why they want to go against the tide of every other jurisdiction in Canada and around the world and go back to a retail sales tax. That's what we have yet to hear from the NDP opposite, Mr. Speaker.

[1415]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. James: It's very clear that the minister isn't listening at all. It's no surprise to anyone on this side of the House or the public in British Columbia, because the B.C. Liberals haven't been listening from the beginning on the HST.

The HST is costing families more. Parents want opportunities for their children to grow and to thrive. They want to provide them opportunities to learn, to discover their talents. We're coming up to summer, and summer camp now will be subjected to a tax. Parents will be paying 7 percent more so that their children can go to camp in July and August. They'll be paying 7 percent more for art courses, for sports camps, for tutoring, for hockey school.

[ Page 7658 ]

Again, my question is to the Premier. Why is she trying to force families to choose 7 percent over zero percent? How is that putting families first?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm not sure what part of listening to almost 300,000 people in the largest listening exercise in government is not listening to the people. What we actually did was listen, and we responded with what we heard, which was to reduce the rate to 10 percent and provide transition payments for families with children — $175 for each and every child and $175 for seniors under $40,000.

But you know, Mr. Speaker, I'm afraid I'm going to have to come back to the second edition of uncomfortable NDP facts, because clearly….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Yes, I'm afraid I'm going to have to. I would like to point out that when the NDP first ran in 1991, they promised not to raise taxes at all. In the first two years after raising taxes by nearly $2 billion, one of the interesting taxes that they raised was the PST rate from 6 to 7 percent. But they didn't just raise the PST. That's consistent with what they always do. They also expanded the coverage to include engine tune-ups, tire installation, appliance repairs, repairs to business equipment, alteration and repairs to clothing and shoes. If it moved, they wanted to tax it and tax it higher.

We want to move it lower. Mr. Speaker, 10 percent HST is far better any day than a 12 percent GST plus PST, which is the NDP's preferred approach.

B. Ralston: You'd never know from listening to the Minister of Finance that he's proposing a $2.6 billion tax increase to be paid by families and small business over the next two years.

Let's turn to something else that touches B.C. families. At this time of the year many parents are looking forward to the marriage of their children — the weddings of their children, yet these families are being forced to pay more under the B.C. Liberal HST. Does the Premier really think, based on what she said in the recent past, that British Columbians are going to accept her HST gimmick and be bought with their own money?

Hon. K. Falcon: Mr. Speaker, imagine. This is the same group that just voted against the motion that would reduce the tax burden on every family in British Columbia and increase it on large corporations. They just stood up, to a person, and voted against it.

Now, I know why they did that. I know why they did it, because they voted against every single one of the tax reductions for personal income taxes — almost 40 percent since we first got elected. They voted against every single reduction in the general corporate tax rate from 16½ percent down to 10. They voted against every reduction in the small business tax rate. They voted against the elimination of the corporate capital tax. Not surprisingly, they vote against another reduction for families and individuals across British Columbia, which is marching the HST rate down to 10 percent.

[1420]

In their world, I can't understand how their math works. How does their math work when we know from the independent panel report, which they were fond of quoting only a week and a half ago, using the same numbers, every single family at every single income level is ahead to the tune of $120 on average as a result of a 10 percent HST? Those are incontrovertible facts.

NDP math has never made sense to British Columbians, but they get that when you're paying 10 percent on everything, not 12 percent, you are better off.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

GOVERNMENT CHANGES TO

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

B. Ralston: Well, let's hear some B.C. Liberal Premier math. The Premier explained not too long ago that a 2 percent cut in the rate would create a fiscal disaster. She said: "We are going to have a $1.6-billion-bigger deficit, or we're going to have $1.6 billion fewer heart operations, special needs teachers, school facilities, hospital emergency rooms. I mean, that's where the money comes from, ultimately. So yes, government could cut it, but at what cost to the citizens?"

Indeed, to the Premier: at what cost to the citizens?

Hon. K. Falcon: Of course, this is often the case with the NDP. They selectively quote, so they missed the rest of what the Premier said, which was that we may have to raise other taxes to make up for the revenue. She's absolutely correct about that.

That's why we listened to British Columbians, and we rebalanced the equation so that families and every British Columbian at every income level will be net beneficiaries as a result of 10 percent HST. We are temporarily increasing the general corporate tax rate for large companies by 2 percent to help do that. That's exactly what happened.

I can tell you this. The Finance critic across the way and the Leader of the Opposition want to go back to a 12 percent PST plus GST, which not only doesn't make sense by almost any independent analysis, but also hammers the fiscal plan to the tune of over $3 billion to the negative. Yet every day in this House they say they want to spend more in health care and education, in parks — in every other ministry of government, spend more — and they want to do it with a budget decision that will cost them $3 billion to the negative. That makes no sense.

[ Page 7659 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

IMPACT OF HARMONIZED SALES TAX

ON SMALL BUSINESS

H. Lali: B.C. families are being hit twice by the B.C. Liberals because many are also small businesses. Small businesses can distinguish between fact and Liberal fiction, so they know that when the rate is zero percent, their customers, who are B.C. families, have more purchasing power, compared to the 7 percent Liberal tax increase.

In Kelowna the Friends Neighbourhood Pub, which is owned and operated by the Dhaliwal family, has witnessed a dramatic 15 percent decline in sales due to the HST. Why does this Premier's version of the so-called families-first agenda include punishing family-run small businesses like the Dhaliwals'?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm pleased that the NDP opposition has finally released some of the big guns to answer the questions here. I take this with some trepidation.

The two organizations that represent the vast majority of small business in the province — the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and Shelfspace B.C., which represents all of the retail outlets — have said that at a 10 percent HST rate, their members support it, to the tune of 83 percent for the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and 93 percent for retailers right across the province.

[1425]

Having said that, we certainly recognize — we've been clear, in fact — that the change we made to the .05 drinking law has had some impact on some restaurateurs, particularly on liquor sales. But of course when you make a change like that, you also have to balance that against some of the benefits. As the Attorney General has pointed out, there are 23 more people alive today as a result of not being involved in fatalities as a result of drinking and driving.

We will keep working with the restaurant association to make sure we can do everything we can to try and minimize that impact as much as we can.

CONDITIONS AT HOSPITAL FACILITIES

ON HAIDA GWAII

G. Coons: The B.C. Liberals promised health care when and where you need it, and that promise has been as good as their promise not to bring in the HST. One wonders when they'll make the next promise they won't keep.

The people on Haida Gwaii sure don't believe their promises. The northwest regional hospital district has practically been begging for support for Queen Charlotte General Hospital. They're using half an ATCO trailer at the edge of a parking lot for a morgue. Will the Health Minister get up in this House today and finally live up to their health care promises and give patients on Haida Gwaii the health services they deserve?

Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks to the member for the question. Actually, I am proud of the record of a government that has invested, over the last decade, $7 billion in improving capital infrastructure for health care right around the province. I am proud of a government that has taken concrete steps in the aftermath of the 1990s to actually train twice as many physicians in British Columbia as was formerly the case, train more nurses and health care professionals.

I also understand that there are still places in British Columbia that are confronted by challenge, as I indicated during the course of four days in estimates, and I am anxious to address those challenges in a constructive way and in concert with the member.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: They're mixing chemo drugs outside in a wooden shed because the hospital pharmacy lacks the space and adequate ventilation. The only reason they're not using the Tim Hortons for a care model is because there isn't one on Haida Gwaii. The hospital district says: "Though staff do the best they can, there is a tremendous negative impact on families and human dignity. We are past the make-do phase."

The situation at Queen Charlotte General Hospital is totally unacceptable. Will the minister do the right thing for patients on Haida Gwaii and ensure that the redevelopment at Queen Charlotte General Hospital goes ahead?

Hon. M. de Jong: In the last number of years the provision for cancer treatment in British Columbia has expanded dramatically to where we now have five centres right across British Columbia where people can go to receive cancer treatment, and another facility just being opened in Prince George was announced several days ago. So the provision for service has expanded dramatically.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. de Jong: If you look across the province at the provision of services that are now in place, it is an improvement, a dramatic improvement over what was in place ten years ago. In the last week I have had sub-

[ Page 7660 ]

missions from the member's colleagues that amount to over $3 billion in additional capital construction. We have spent $7 billion over the last ten years, and we have balanced in an appropriate way our desire to provide the very best to B.C. families with the capacity of the taxpayers to pay for the very best.

[1430]

M. Farnworth: We're not talking about the rest of the province. We're talking about Haida Gwaii, one of the most remote, isolated parts of British Columbia, where they're mixing chemo chemicals in an old smokehouse, where an ATCO trailer is functioning as a morgue, where an old greenhouse is the physiotherapy centre — the types of conditions that make Tim Hortons care at RCH look like Cadillac service. That's not acceptable to the people of Haida Gwaii.

They have used their own money to prepare a plan to change this situation, to actually put in place proper facilities. The question is really straightforward. When are the people of Haida Gwaii going to get some attention from this government and get some facilities that they can be proud of in the 21st century, instead of an ATCO trailer?

Hon. M. de Jong: Thanks to the member for the question. In fact, progress is being made. Progress is being made on the development of a plan that will see the hospital campus renewed and improved in a dramatic way.

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: I thought members were interested in hearing this.

Steps are being taken to employ and partner with the same talented agencies and individuals that have given us new facilities in places like Abbotsford, in places like Vernon, in places like the Lower Mainland, facilities…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. de Jong: …and partnerships that members of the official NDP opposition spoke against time and time and time again.

We are going to move ahead. We are going to move ahead in partnership with Northern Health. We are going to move ahead in partnership with the folks on Haida Gwaii, and we are going to ensure that the families on Haida Gwaii have the very best provision for medical health services right in Haida Gwaii.

[End of question period.]

Petitions

J. Horgan: I have a petition signed by 1,897 students, families, administrators, trustees and MLAs from the West Shore region in Victoria calling on the government to replace the aging, decrepit and obsolete Belmont high school with two new high schools. I do this gleefully. The AVID class, led by Ravi Parmar, collected almost 2,000 signatures in seven days.

Tabling Documents

Hon. S. Bond: Today I present the annual report of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia for 2010.

Hon. B. Penner: In the same vein, I rise to present the annual report for the Forest Appeals Commission, 2010.

S. Hammell: I would like leave to present a petition.

Petitions

S. Hammell: I would like to present petitions with over 4,200 signatures calling on the government to fulfil its promise to open an additional three neonatal care beds at Surrey Memorial Hospital.

K. Heed: I rise to present a petition generated by the Southeast Vancouver Seniors Society, South Van Neighbourhood House, Killarney Community Centre, Champlain Community Centre and Sunset Community Centre and signed by over 5,200 people who endorse and support the building of a seniors centre to serve the communities of southeast Vancouver.

Tabling Documents

Hon. I. Chong: I have the honour to present the annual reports of Islands Trust for the fiscal years 2008-09 and 2009-10.

[1435]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Coleman: This afternoon in this House we will be doing Bill 14, intituled the Coastal Ferry Amendment Act, 2011, till 4 p.m. From 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. we'll be doing Bill 12, intituled the Police (Independent Investigations Office) Amendment Act, 2011. From 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. we will be doing Bill 11, intituled Yale First Nation Final Agreement Act, under second reading. At 8:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. we will be doing Bill 2, intituled Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2011.

[ Page 7661 ]

In the committee room this afternoon we will be continuing with the Ministry of Finance estimates till 4:30; and from 4:30 to close, the Ministry of Energy and Mines.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 14 — COASTAL FERRY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2011

Hon. B. Lekstrom: I would move that the bill now be read a second time.

Bill 14 amends the Coastal Ferry Act. The amendments are required to enable the B.C. Ferry Commissioner to undertake a review of the act, as he has requested, in order to recommend to government potential changes that would better balance the interests of ferry users with the financial sustainability of the ferry operator.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

The commissioner currently does not have the authority to undertake this type of review. Currently the commissioner is required to release the final price-cap decision that sets the maximum fares for the period April 1, 2012, to March 31, 2016, by September 30, 2011. We are amending the act to provide a one-year extension to that deadline to enable the commissioner to conduct his review of the act prior to setting the final price-cap decision.

An amendment is also being made to extend the deadline for the province and B.C. Ferries to file any changes to the coastal ferry services contract with the commissioner by one year, to June 30, 2012. This will enable the commissioner to have the latest version of the contract prior to setting the final price caps.

As the final price-cap decision is being delayed by one year and the current price caps go until the end of March 31, 2012, the bill amends the act to provide a price cap for 2012-2013 of 4.15 percent for all route groups. This provides a balance between the interests of the ferry users and the financial needs of the ferry operator for that year, until the review is completed and the final price-cap decision can be delivered by the commissioner.

The amendments will also provide the ferry commissioner with the financial resources from the province necessary to undertake his review.

The act is also amended so that the ability of the ferry operator to request an extraordinary price-cap increase is withdrawn, and the ability to discontinue services is constrained until the commissioner releases the final price-cap decision on September 30, 2012.

These amendments are of a temporary nature and will only apply for setting the price caps for the upcoming four-year performance term, commencing April 12, 2012, and ending March 31, 2016.

I look forward to the debate.

G. Coons: I rise to speak to Bill 14, the Coastal Ferry Amendment Act, 2011. It's a great opportunity to look at where we've gone in the last eight years since 2003.

I remember back in September 2005, I think it was, standing in the House and talking about ferries and acknowledging that for close to 40 years, at that time, we'd had one of the best ferry systems in the world — one of the unique transportation networks, a marine highway that connected dozens and dozens of island and coastal communities and was a lifeline, a vital link and basically a marine highway that is vital to the economic and social well-being of the province.

When I talked about the Coastal Ferry Act — and we're seeing some amendments coming down through Bill 14 — I acknowledged that if it worked out the way that it was supposed to, where they were looking at predictable and fair fare increases and running it in a way that was businesslike and looking at adopting a commercial approach, there may not be too much with this approach.

[1440]

At the time, I started reading through it, and I acknowledged that there were some key issues, especially the one principle for the commissioner — and he's going to be looking at this in his review, which this Bill 14 gets down into — that the priority be placed on the financial sustainability of the ferry operators. There's a bit of a problem there, because there was no definition at all in the Coastal Ferry Act in 2003 for "public interest."

In the last eight years we've just seen a corporation basically gone wild, with fares skyrocketing anywhere from 45 or 50 percent up to 120 or 125 percent, depending on the route. The minister and I have had discussions about this, and sometimes we disagree, but we're trying to get closer with our numbers.

But it's been devastating to coastal and island communities as far as businesses and B and Bs and tourism and just day-to-day life of going from point A to point B with your family or to work or to school or to cultural events, sporting events. There's been a huge issue with that throughout the minor routes, specifically.

When we've looked at the cross-subsidization from major routes to other routes being eliminated as also one of the mandates…. The commissioner is going to look at that in his review. That's a huge issue. The moneymaking routes, the major routes, used to support and help some of the minor routes, because it wasn't meant to make money.

Our B.C. Ferries was not put there to be a moneymaker. It wasn't meant to be a profit centre. It was meant to be the social and economic driver of the province, and in 2003, when this B.C. Liberal government rammed through the Coastal Ferry Act, we saw a complete change to a quasi-privatized model of our B.C. Ferries. We've seen the result.

[ Page 7662 ]

Previously, in my final comments back in 2005 in this House, I said:

"We must restore public accountability to B.C. Ferries to ensure that the public has oversight over this creation and fares and oversight on how our fully integrated marine transportation network is being reduced to a flotilla of…floating profit and loss centres. We need a public inquiry. We need a special committee dealing with our marine transportation network. We need to do something to save our ferries."

That was six years ago, and that was just two years of me and some colleagues trying to study the Coastal Ferry Act and acknowledging that, hmm, there are going to be some difficulties. Here we are, amending the Coastal Ferry Act for the second time. We're looking at putting amendments in here because of a failed model that was put in, in 2003.

I put forward some motions about creating a special committee to strategize on what we need to do with our ferries, and this government failed to acknowledge that. We put forward, on this side of the House, a private member's bill that basically looked at restoring some accountability.

We wanted to return B.C. Ferries under freedom of information, because it was exempt from freedom of information. It was also exempt, is exempt, from the Ombudsperson. It's exempt from the Auditor General going in and looking at the finances.

So the accountability and the transparency that we've seen under this act for the last eight years have been dismal, and we've seen the impacts of that. But what did happen was that the last time the Minister of Transportation opened up the Coastal Ferry Act, they put it under freedom of information. So they did follow some of the suggestions from this side of the House.

Also, we had a concern during our private member's bill that the directors of B.C. Ferries…. Now, they created these two boards — you know, one ferry board and….

The directors of the board were getting outrageous compensation for what they were doing. We brought that forward in our bill, and lo and behold, the last time that we opened up the bill, the government listened to this side of the House and they did something with the directors' fees and honorariums that they got to make it more in line with public sector and Crown corporation honorariums.

[1445]

We have put forward other suggestions. We wanted to put in a definition of "public interest," and again, that was somewhat ignored. The last, but not really, to some degree…. When you looked at the last legislation they put in, they wanted to look at — and the minister is having a problem — the interest of the users and the financial sustainability of the corporation. He's having a problem weighing that out.

What we need is a definition of what public interest is. We tried to put that in, and hopefully, when we go through committee stage, there will be some amendments put in that will make the Coastal Ferry Act more conducive to working for the public.

When we look at where we've gone in the last eight years and how we got here, we've seen a lot of issues. When the Coastal Ferry Act was put in, it did not take in the interest of coastal communities. There used to be a committee, the coastal community committee, that was out there and worked on their behalf.

Then they created, through B.C. Ferries, a ferry advisory committee in each of the minor routes. For quite a few years the ferry advisory committee chairs of those 12 committees were strong advocates on behalf of their constituents, on behalf of the ferry service that we have, acknowledging and realizing the value and importance of our marine highway.

I referred to marine highway on a couple of occasions, because when the Coastal Ferry Act was put into play, this government, through amendments and consequential amendments, actually took ferries out of the Highway Act. So it was not part of our public transportation network. I think that was a huge sign on behalf of this government that they had abandoned and washed their hands of our vital marine highway, especially those communities and those people who live in those communities, who saw fares skyrocket. They saw ridership go down.

The minister and I have talked about price elasticity. I've talked about price elasticity with the commissioner and with B.C. Ferries.

Price elasticity. As fares go up, ridership goes down. As we've seen, the commissioner, in his review, is going to be looking at all types of issues like that, including demand and elasticity. In some of the studies that I've seen, as fares go up 10 percent, ridership goes down 7 percent. That's significant when we've seen fares go up on the major routes anywhere from 45 to 50 percent and on the minor routes anywhere from 80 percent to over 125 percent, depending on the route we're talking about.

When we look at the impacts on island communities, when we look at what happened with the Coastal Ferry Act in 2003, there are many, many issues that we've got to deal with. There's been a real restriction and hindrance of economic growth on island and coastal communities.

There has been a demand, through legislation, that B.C. Ferries has to find alternate service providers. They have to go out and find somebody else to try to take over the route.

B.C. Ferries, I guess in their wisdom, have decided not to even try to privatize the major routes that make lots of money, because they can probably privatize those. They go out and try to privatize the small routes, whether it's the northern routes or the Mill Bay route or other routes where they think they can find somebody to come in. But that alternate service provider has

[ Page 7663 ]

to come in with their own vessel and perhaps lease the terminals from B.C. Ferries.

[1450]

So it's not a moneymaker, and B.C. Ferries has never been a moneymaker. I've said that on many occasions. The comptroller general also indicated, when she did a report, that that's what B.C. Ferries seems to do. It's trying to make a profit. We've had a real change in the social and economic contract that we've had with coastal communities and island communities for 50 years.

This past year is the 50th anniversary of B.C. Ferries. We celebrate that — the workers, the people who are on the ships and at the terminals who ensure that we have the best service possible. But again, we've got a system that is in disarray, and it needs fixing. We've been trying to encourage the government to do this on many occasions.

When we look at a lot of the concerns that we've had with management…. We've got a CEO making a million dollars for running a monopoly. We've got a monopoly advertising at the Canucks games. I'm not quite too sure who their focus is on, but if you're at a Canucks game and you've got to get back to Victoria or Nanaimo or somewhere on the Island, I think you probably know that you're going to be taking a B.C. ferry after the hockey game.

There are a lot of issues out there that we've got to deal with. The last time we put in our private member's bill, we didn't talk about executive compensation because we didn't know how much David Hahn and the boys at the top made. We didn't know that David Hahn made over a million dollars and that the other three or four made up to $3.5 million a year, because they were exempt from freedom of information.

As soon as we found that out, oh, it hit the fan. The previous Minister of Transportation threw up her arms and went: "Oh my gosh. This is outrageous. We've got to do something about this." The million-dollar man at the helm of, it looks like, a sinking vessel.

The debt to B.C. Ferries is $1.4 billion. Their finances are very questionable. I've brought this up for the minister and asked him about it, and he's referred to the review that's coming up before us. But I think when we look at where we need to go with B.C. Ferries…. It's got no competition. It's a monopoly. It's a cruise ship transformation.

They run a vacation centre. There's a bit of a drop-trailer situation going on, where they tried to develop a new business, and it was seen as inappropriate by the commissioner. They've got the Operations and Security Centre and many issues that are not relating to a public service, to a marine highway being part of an essential link to communities and people that live on islands. There's no long-term vision or strategy.

Both the comptroller general and the ferry commissioner have acknowledged that they've scratched their heads. They looked at what's going on, and they said: "We can't find a vision." What's the vision that the B.C. Liberals had for the coastal ferries? There isn't one.

The Auditor General, when they did a review of the governance model — not the finances but under the governance model…. I found it a bit unbelievable that the Auditor General of the day sort of scratched his head and said: "Well, I couldn't find out the mandate or a vision or a strategy. I had to look at the legislation. I had to look at Hansard . I had to look at press releases." That's what the Auditor General said — no long-term vision, no strategy.

The ferry advisory committee chairs over the years have developed from: "Okay, let's try to make this work" to "This hasn't worked. Damage has been done, and we need to stop."

[1455]

What they've asked for is something simple. They've asked that while this review is going on, fares be frozen so that people can take a deep breath and go: "Oh, we just had a fare increase last April. Next June and next week we're having another 2.5 and 5 percent fuel surcharge."

Let's just take a break from the outrageous fares we've seen, and while this review is done, let's freeze the fares. You know, it's time that we treat ferries as an integral part of our highway.

Hon. Speaker, I've got another, say, ten minutes or five minutes I'd like to take before some of my colleagues have a chance to respond to this.

When we look at the monster created — a huge impact, with fares and fuel surcharges and ridership and the impacts on island and coastal communities, the unaffordable fares, the management issues….

Right now B.C. Ferries is trying to exclude 155 or 157 of their management, their senior officers and chief engineer officers. They want them out of the union and into management, and 80 percent of these officers are refusing to go. It's going to create a huge dilemma. We're going to have vessels tied up at shore. We're going to have a shortage of crew. I've brought this to the attention of the minister and the Labour Minister.

I think there are issues out there. There are issues of safety. The ferry captains or officers are saying there's an issue of safety when this happens.

As we go along with this, I'm going to look at amendments to be made. We're going to be looking at trying to make Bill 14, which is before us today, a better bill, which is going to work for the people.

When we look at and listen to people in communities…. I did a ferry tour. The minister probably knows that about two years ago I visited 28 communities. I sat down, I listened, had public meetings, and I heard the stories. That was 2½ years ago. That was before, probably, another 10, 15, 20 percent fare increases or fuel surcharges — huge impacts on communities. It's devastating, most of the ferry advisory committee chairs say.

[ Page 7664 ]

They've written a report called Ominous Clouds . I've passed that to the minister. It's outlining what's happened with the Coastal Ferry Act in the eight years. It's been one of disarray, a failed model. I just hope this government says: "We attempted to do something, and we failed. Let's sit down, have a long-term vision, have a strategy, listen to people and move forward."

On that note, I'm going to pass the floor to other colleagues of mine from ferry-dependent communities that rely on ferries, and they will have a chance to say a few words.

N. Simons: It's my pleasure to speak on the bill before the House, Bill 14, Coastal Ferry Amendment Act, 2011. I point out to those viewing at home that we have a very short amount of time in order to do this, due to some interesting arrangements around timing in this Legislature and a vote we took earlier today to say that no matter where we are in debate, we're stopping everything Thursday night.

I would also like to start by acknowledging the Minister of Transportation, the third since I became an elected member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast and, I would say, the first to actually take some action on the issue of ferry fares. I want to acknowledge him.

Despite the fact that he's a Bruins fan, in fact, he may have a couple of proper judgments inside that noggin of his. I understand his need to support the Bruins. It's something that…. You see a logo when you're five and you can draw it, and that'll get you locked in for the rest of your life.

That aside, I do think that there are some important aspects of this bill that need to be discussed. A little more time would have been helpful, but I will start by saying that the people of Powell River–Sunshine Coast are residents of the only entirely ferry-dependent constituency in the entire province.

[1500]

Out of 85 seats in this Legislature, it is the only one that you can't get to without using a B.C. ferry, unless of course you take an airplane or you have your own boat or you're a very good swimmer or you find some driftwood.

The impact of ferry fares on my constituents is significant. They are daily, they are costly, and they certainly dominate the discussions when we're talking about issues of provincial importance when I'm in my constituency.

I'd like to start by saying that since 2003, when the government proudly introduced the Coastal Ferry Act — proclaiming in a press release that the act would result in stable fares, more jobs and better service — what we've seen is an absolute skyrocketing of the daily cost of living for residents of Powell River–Sunshine Coast.

The costs of ferries are built into the cost of food; they're built into the cost of building material. They're built into costs of goods and services that we all consume on the Sunshine Coast, but they also are the cost of every export that we provide that isn't using barge service.

I think when you consider the impact of a 125 percent increase in a ferry fare for a resident of Texada Island, an island that is not only a wonderful place to visit and a tourist destination with wonderful historic and heritage values, there are also industries on that island where workers and businesses suffer greatly when prices of ferries seem to rise exponentially.

I'm pleased that there's a review. It's a review that's been asked for by successive members of the opposition. I believe that in fact it's been called for by ferry advisory committees, by regional governments and by municipal governments from Gibsons to Powell River and Sechelt, and I think it's good that there's a review. I'll say it's good that there's a review. I worry, though, that we're going to see an almost 6 or 7 percent increase while it's being reviewed.

It kind of reminds me of a joke that a police officer once told me about. Okay, I'll have to tell that story. You get to a stop sign. You don't quite stop, and you continue. You know, you think you've stopped. You've done a stop. If you learned to drive in Quebec, you know what I'm talking about.

The police officer pulls you over and says, "You didn't stop at that stop sign," and you say: "Well, I really did. I mean, it was almost a stop. You can't really tell the difference." The police officer says: "There's quite a difference between slowing down and stopping, and you didn't stop." You say, "Well, I slowed down to almost a stop. It was as good as a stop."

The police officer says: "I'm sorry. There's a significant difference between slowing down and stopping." "You can't tell me," the irate driver says, "that there's a difference between what you saw and me slowing down and stopping," at which point the police officer pulls out his truncheon and starts hitting him on the head and says: "Would you like me to stop, or would you like me to slow down?"

In this particular instance, we have an increase that's coming while we're talking about maybe not increasing the fares. I'd like the minister to stop, not just slow down. Don't allow these increases to happen pending the review. I think a review is called for. It's necessary. But pending this review, we see a 2½ percent….

Interjections.

N. Simons: I only have ten minutes.

We have a 2½ percent fuel surcharge coming into effect in a couple of days. We also have next year's 4½ percent increase.

If you look at Langdale-to-Horseshoe Bay, Horseshoe-Bay-to-Langdale, a ferry route that's used by hundreds of commuters every day, we've seen an increase since

[ Page 7665 ]

2003 of over 75 percent. That's a significant daily cost for every single commuter going to Vancouver to work or to support their families on the Sunshine Coast.

Powell River-to-Comox is the route taken by people who are going for hospital services, going to visit loved ones in seniors care facilities, going for shopping or going to the Island. They are being required to pay a significant increase as well, upwards of 70 percent in terms of increases in fares, and that is a significant impact on every family living in Powell River–Sunshine Coast.

I would also point out that despite the fact that Powell River–Sunshine Coast is one of the most beautiful vacation spots in British Columbia and easily accessible from the Lower Mainland and from the Island, we've seen tourism numbers significantly decrease, not due to weather or anything else but due in large part to the cost of bringing your family over on the ferry.

[1505]

The ferry rates. If you're pulling a tent trailer as my parents used to do with their Volkswagen bus and their little Apache and five or six kids in the bus…. We would probably never have come to the Sunshine Coast. This is something that I think every sector of community on the Sunshine Coast is impacted by, and I would sincerely hope that the minister will ensure that the review is done in a fulsome way, also a wholesome way, that actually looks at the issues that are concerns to residents.

One issue I think I did not see in the outline of the ferry commissioner's review is the importance of surveying public opinion. I don't know anyone who has had a survey on ferry service on the Sunshine Coast, and if they have, I'd like them to let me know. But I understand that surveys for public opinion should really attempt to reflect the true feelings of the community and not simply be an attempt to put the best light on that particular service.

If you're going to do a survey of an individual travelling on a B.C. ferry, I recommend that you do that survey on morning trips, afternoon trips and evening trips; perhaps in springtime, perhaps in winter and perhaps in summer. But if you do them all on a bucolic afternoon on a Saturday where there's no lineup and the food is piping hot and the coffee is better than usual, you might actually find people saying everything is fine.

If you talk to residents who are the most dependent on these ferries, you need to know the truth in order to be able to actually create public process or public policy that is reflective of the needs of the public. Powell River–Sunshine Coast, as I said, is a community of mixed economies, and none are left unimpacted. That's a double negative. All are impacted by the price of ferry fares.

I would just like to make sure that residents on the Sunshine Coast are aware that there is a review taking place and that they are aware of their opportunity to contribute to this review, and I would say that I certainly will be relaying my concerns and the issues that I have about B.C. Ferries to the commissioner. I think that's something that every resident on the Sunshine Coast who has expressed concerns about ferries should do, I would recommend.

At one time, residents on the Sunshine Coast — I include Powell River, obviously, the pearl of the Sunshine Coast — were able to have residents' cards. That gave them priority, and that gave them assured loading. It gave them a lower price, as far as I know. I was not around at the time. Such ideas as those should be contemplated by the commissioner as well.

I know that there are a number of residents who have contacted me about different issues around ferry services that have caused them consternation. One is to arrive at a ferry terminal when there are very few cars in the lot, yet to find out the deck space is already significantly taken up by reservations, and not everybody can afford reservations. So I think that it's important to make sure that we limit the ability for B.C. Ferries to get the most out of every passenger by limiting the percentage of deck space for reserved passengers.

Other issues around safety and health, around the attempt to, well, not decertify but weaken, I would say, the union by continually trying to exclude managers, captains and engineers from the bargaining unit, I think, is not good in a ferry service, shall we say.

There are a number of issues. I could go on. The asbestos in these ferries is a concern for our health. On some of the minor routes we're not blessed with the ability to go to the spa as we travel across the Georgia Strait. We're hopeful that the washroom facilities are working. We're hopeful that in fact the elevators will get our friends who maybe have mobility issues up to the top.

On too many occasions, unfortunately, we've seen porta-potties on the car deck for the disabled to use because the elevator is out of service or washroom facilities are not working because of problems with salt water, etc.

[1510]

The review. Unfortunately, we're going to get hurt while the review is going on. It would have been nice if, as I said earlier, the minister could have allowed the prices to be maintained as they are. We've seen a cost-of-living increase over the years. It's about 2 percent, but the ferry increases have gone up 8½ percent. That is unsustainable. It's unsustainable from any perspective, partisan or not.

I think this is an important issue for the public or the transportation system of this province. The contributions of Powell River–Sunshine Coast to the economy of this province are significant. People do not want feel that they are being given no choice in their transportation options. In fact, I've heard people use terms like that they're hostages to the ferries or that they're basically at the whim of Ferry Services.

[ Page 7666 ]

I would like to point out, lest there be any attempt in the future to say that I have made critical comments about Ferries, that I'm not making any disparaging remarks whatsoever about any of the people that work on B.C. ferries. We know them. We all know that they're hard-working and that they deserve our respect and thanks.

I think what we really have here is a structural problem created by the Coastal Ferry Act that disallows cross-subsidization. An example of how this cross-subsidization problem impacts us. If a ferry from a major route happens to forget to stop and crashes into a ramp, causing that ramp to become unusable, then the little ferry from another place might come along and have to wait. If that little ferry has to wait too long, then eventually it will incur overtime costs. Those overtime costs will be borne entirely by the small-ferry routes and not by the larger-ferry routes.

In terms of equality, in terms of fairness…. I think that if this review could do something about fairness, wouldn't that be a lovely result? I'm going to be hopeful that it will. I'm going to be hopeful that residents of Powell River–Sunshine Coast have the opportunity and take full advantage of the opportunity to express their concerns, as the minister suggested to me when I met with him recently.

In fact, I like to point out to people that I met with him two days before the review was announced. I like to take credit for that, but I know I can't. I know that this was the result of a lot of work from ferry advisory committees, regional governments — all sorts of people advocating for safety and good service on the Sunshine Coast, Powell River and Texada Island.

With that, I'm just pleased to have had the opportunity to say this is….

Interjection.

N. Simons: I'm not being negative. I'm being positive. I just say there are important….

Interjections.

N. Simons: I'll come back next week. I'm hearing members….

I'm pleased with the review of the Coastal Ferry Act. I hope it brings changes that bring fairness to residents of the Sunshine Coast and Powell River, and I thank you for this opportunity.

C. Trevena: I think that residents who live on the islands and who rely on the ferries would look at this review as well overdue. In fact, I think that if they could go back a few years, they'd like to turn back the clock and be in a position where the ferries were part of the highway system, where it was realized that B.C. Ferries is an integral part of the way that we live and communicate on the coast.

Those of us who live on islands are contributing to the economy and have every right to live on the islands, as do people who live up in the remote parts of the northeast and who therefore have access to the roads. In fact, in the congenial spirit of this debate, I wrote to the minister about this and mentioned that the people in his constituency are driving on very nice roads. I've been through his constituency, and I've been on some very nice paved highways. They are not paying every time that they get on them.

However, I think that one of the real problems with B.C. Ferries in its present iteration — and I hope it will be examined with close scrutiny by the ferry commissioner and taken on board by the minister — is the issue of fares. My colleagues have talked about the fact that we have the fuel surcharge coming up. We have the 4½ percent increase coming next year, even though a review is on.

[1515]

There has been a call both for freezing the present fares and also for rolling back.

On this side of the House we have a friendly debate about who represents the communities with the most ferries, who has the most ferries in the communities and which are the most ferry-dependent communities. I think we're still working this one out, as many of us live on Vancouver Island, which is also ferry-dependent.

However, when you are relying on ferries, you are very, very conscious of the cost, so the concept of freezing and potentially rolling back fares is very, very germane. People are exceedingly frustrated about the fact that they are paying more and more. They're going to be paying while the review is going on…. By this time next year they'll be paying at least 6 percent more, and this is supposed to be a good thing. On minor routes it was going to be 8 percent, but that was rolled back.

I would just like to cite some examples of what this means. I think if people start to listen to real figures about what it means, they will start to understand why we who live and work and rely on the ferries are so angry about the fact that it's become a commercial proposition rather than part of our highway system, that we are expected to pay when people who get on the roads don't have to pay at all.

It costs to get from Campbell River to Quadra Island. I use that as an example. It's a very busy route. I confess I live on Quadra Island. My office is in Campbell River. I'm doing that route a lot. I often take my bike along because it is easier to walk on than to take the car and because it is much, much cheaper. To go from Campbell River to Quadra Island in a car with two people, it costs $37.95. I actually have my ferry tickets here; I will not use them as a prop. One car, two people, a ten-minute ferry ride: $37.95.

[ Page 7667 ]

It's no wonder that people are being forced to leave the islands. It is no wonder that people are worried about their business. It's no wonder that we have a tourism sector that is trying to build up and that is really frightened it cannot maintain itself.

This weekend on Quadra Island we have the studio tour. It's a really nice event. All the artists on the island — the potters, the artists, the glass-blowers — all the people on the island will open up their studios and invite people in. But when you're talking about almost $38 just to get to the island…. That's before you pay for the gas, because it's quite a big island, before you buy a meal and before any items I hope you buy from the studios. You're talking, effectively, a hundred dollars at least for a day trip. If you're staying overnight, as we hope people are, it's that much more.

I think it's this reality that is not understood by so many people when they say: "Oh, it's just the ferries; it's not something we've really got to worry about." It has a serious impact.

We also have these Coast Cards that are supposed to bring down the fares, but I'll use the same example. It's $37.95 for one car, two adults, a ten-minute ferry ride Campbell River to Quadra Island. So you get a prepaid card. You have to put at least $80 on this card before it can work, and there are many people who cannot afford $80.

There are many people who live on the islands who are struggling to get by. It is not a place for the elites. It is becoming a place for elites because of the ferry fares, but there are many people struggling to get by who find it a real difficulty to put that $80 on their card. But you have a card, and it still costs $23.15 for two people and one car.

It is now cheaper when the water taxi is running in that route, which it does at peak hours, for a foot passenger to take a water taxi than it is to take the ferry. There is something absurd in that situation, when the ferries are part of our highway system and should be integrated into the regular working life of the islands.

[1520]

Madam Speaker, as I say, we have this friendly debate on this side of the House about who has the most ferry-dependent communities. I have a number. I have the Campbell-River-to-Quadra run, the Quadra-to-Cortes run. There are a number of areas that aren't ferry-linked. But also up-Island, we've got the big route from Port Hardy to Prince Rupert and to Bella Coola and Bella Bella in the summer and so on, and also the Alert Bay–Port McNeill–Sointula — the triangle ferry, as it is now.

I'd like to raise a couple of points about that as well. I've been talking about the fares from Campbell River to Quadra Island. Short run, extraordinarily expensive to take the ferry. From Port McNeill to Alert Bay, ferry fares there have gone up 104 percent. Alert Bay is not a wealthy community.

For those who don't know it, it's a small island. It used to be a very busy fishing community. It's now an island which has two communities. It's got the First Nations 'Namgis community — very active, very involved with the other community, the village of Alert Bay.

They work very well together, but these are not rich people. These are people who are struggling just to make ends meet. The fishing is gone. There is very little work there. We have real difficulties for people to find a living, and yet there it costs $44.20 for the same situation — two people and a car. So $44.20 to get over on the ferry — 104 percent increase.

That isn't sustainable. When you talk about sustainability of ferry fares — and this is something that the commissioner will be looking at, the sustainability of it — you've got to look at the communities and how communities and how people in those communities can live. How families are expected to take the kids over to the hockey. These are their homes. The 'Namgis First Nation is not going to go anywhere. They are staying in Alert Bay. It's their land, their territory. They don't want to leave.

They want their kids to play hockey. You've got to get on the ferry. You've got to go to McNeill. You've got to get from the ferry terminal to the arena, and that's just if you're playing in McNeill. If you're going anywhere else, you've got the added costs.

These fares are really hurting small communities. That's why when we talk about freezing…. I really don't think freezing is enough. I think we have got to start looking at rolling them back. We're not looking for any Cadillac. We're not looking for a cruise ship. We're not looking for something that is going to give us a spa or the hot breakfast or anything like that. We just want, basically, a road that will take us there and back.

My colleague was talking about asbestos. The Quadra Queen on the Alert Bay run had problems with asbestos. It was fixed, and a few days later it broke down again. I have to say that the people in the communities, in Sointula and Alert Bay…. There was a very quick response from the ferries. But still, they had a ferry that didn't work. They didn't need a Cadillac; they just wanted to be able to get from their community to go and do their business.

Likewise, I understand that the Powell River Queen on the Quadra–Campbell River run is going to be having a makeover. Again, it's not a Cadillac that is wanted. It is a simple roadway.

We live and work on islands because there is a community there — because there are businesses there, there are families there. People have lived there for many years. It is not, as has been so often said, a lifestyle. It is a community.

I always come back to my puzzlement — I'm not originally from B.C. — of being on Highway 1 and driving across Canada, and you get to the ferry, and you get off

[ Page 7668 ]

on Vancouver Island, and you're still on Highway 1. So what's the difference? Why are people having to pay for linking those two pieces of road? Why are people having to pay exorbitantly?

I hope that in the ferry commissioner's analysis in the six months, he looks seriously at the way that our communities work, the way that our infrastructure as a whole province should work, a government's commitment to upholding that infrastructure. Unless a government commits to upholding an infrastructure, we can just basically walk away with it.

We have to get the government commitment to uphold the infrastructure. As the government will uphold its roads and as the government will uphold the bridges, the government has got to uphold the ferry system.

[1525]

I hope the commissioner looks at that. I hope the commissioner goes further than the indications that we have seen, which is just saying that we're going to hold on with the increases. I hope the commissioner will look, at the very least, at a freeze, and I think that people in the coastal communities would want to see the fares rolled back. I know that's what I'm hearing from my constituents. They want to see the fares rolled back.

I hope the commissioner realizes that B.C. Ferries became the way it was, by W.A.C. Bennett, because ferries were not seen to be a profitable proposition. Ferries were seen as part of our highway system. They were not supposed to come in raking in a profit. They were not supposed to come in as cruise ships. They were there to support and sustain our coastal communities.

Madam Speaker, that's what ferries are supposed to do. I hope this review will ensure that, once again, we can claim B.C. ferries as our B.C. ferries.

L. Krog: The great thing about being a Liberal, a B.C. Liberal in particular, is never having to say you're sorry. You just bring in more legislation that recognizes the fact that you made a mistake a while ago and that it needs to be fixed.

Even a free-enterpriser of stern stuff like W.A.C. Bennett understood that there were certain things that had to be accomplished through government, not through private enterprise. You know, T.C. Douglas said it best. What government does for us is it does collectively what we cannot achieve individually.

W.A.C. Bennett understood that if the economy of British Columbia were to prosper, if the people who lived on Vancouver Island and in ferry-dependent communities up and down the coast were to enjoy their share of British Columbia's full prosperity, it required an effective ferry system that was affordable by British Columbians.

For several decades it was operated that way, and then we got into the wonderful last decade of deceit, as one of my colleagues referred to it. And what's happened? Between 2003 and today, ferry fares have increased 45 percent on major routes and 85 percent on minor routes, and the general inflation rate has only been 11 percent.

Hon. Speaker, if that's an example of good fiscal management and the sound economic policies of the Liberal government, I must tell you that those figures stand out in stark contrast to what they say and what they have in fact delivered. We have anything but a family-friendly ferry service anymore. We have a ferry service that is regarded by the public and understood to be absolutely essential but not terribly effective.

The fact is that ridership is down. The fact is that people are having to make serious choices about whether they can continue to live on Gulf Islands anymore or pursue and support careers in the Gulf Islands.

In my community I can tell you that we are the major port centre on the east coast of Vancouver Island. We are completely dependent on ferries for a whole series of things. We have this ridiculous situation where we are now in this chamber still pretending that somehow this ferry corporation is this independent entity divorced from government, unrelated to the B.C. Liberals.

Yet what we're doing is legislating a fare increase. That's part of what we're doing here today. We're literally legislating a fare increase. My friend the member for North Coast, who has been a very effective ferries critic for the last several years, has made it very clear. Opportunities were offered by the opposition through a private member's bill, through advice, through criticism and through questions as to how to operate the ferry service effectively.

Yet this Liberal government still continues to pretend that this farcical arrangement where the taxpayer through the government of British Columbia…. The citizens of British Columbia are the only shareholder in the corporation, yet somehow it is divorced from government control. Yet here we are legislating a fare increase and finally establishing what many have called for, for a very long time. That is a review of how B.C. Ferries operates.

[1530]

It is astonishing to me that at a time when you have the head of the corporation making a million dollars a year; when you have a government that built its ferries overseas and boosted the German economy, put tax dollars in Berlin instead of Victoria; when you have a government that insisted it needed to be operated in a businesslike manner for the benefit of the corporation itself, that same government, through that process, allowing that to happen, saw literally hundreds of millions of dollars of economic activity taken out of this province.

This is the very same government that yesterday, happily, with the opposition, supported a motion to try and revitalize shipbuilding in British Columbia by ensuring

[ Page 7669 ]

we get our fair share of federal shipbuilding contracts for the department of defence and for the navy.

If there was ever a dumber idea, it had to be that — the concept that you would build your ferries overseas when there was the expertise, the knowledge, the workforce, the skills, the training, the desire and the economic necessity of doing it here in B.C. All of those things were in place. Instead, we built them overseas. Then — surprise, surprise — guess what. They really don't suit the run.

In an age when the government pretends to be so strong on the issue of reducing carbon footprint, so pro-environment, so desirous of putting us on the cutting edge, these things are gas hogs. They suck up fuel like they're great sponges drifting across the Strait of Georgia. So what does the government do? They tie them up. They tie them up at the docks because we can't afford to operate them. What a complete farce this has been.

Hon. B. Penner: Can we talk about the fast ferries?

L. Krog: The member talks about the fast ferries. I must admit that when I hear the Attorney General start to heckle, I know I've sunk one of their battleships in the little game over here, and I'm delighted to do so.

I think British Columbians would rather have a FastCat built in British Columbia that actually ran once in a while any day over ferries built in Germany that are tied up at the docks. I think the members on this side of the House and British Columbians would love to see British Columbians at work earning money and paying taxes in British Columbia and supporting the social services that this government can't seem to manage. I think British Columbians would love to see the Attorney General sitting over here asking the questions of government instead of the reverse.

What we're talking about here, as I said when I started my remarks, and I'm going to have to close soon, is an admission by this government once again of failed Liberal policy. We have this farce of an independent corporation. We have a ferry system that can't operate appropriately. We've got a ferry system whose costs are going out of control, and we've got a government that's finally, only today, admitting that it's made a mistake and is requiring review by this legislation.

Best thing that's happened. At least it's a tiny demonstration of some honesty from this government — that they're going to have a review, that British Columbians will, hopefully, have an opportunity to hear why this ferry corporation is operating the way it is.

One final note on behalf of one of my constituents who was just so thoroughly disturbed by this, and the member for North Coast mentioned it already. The concept of B.C. Ferries having to spend the money it does on advertising, when it is the only ferry service connecting Vancouver Island of any substance, is beyond belief. Why we're advertising at Canucks games and spending that kind of money when fares are rising is beyond belief. It's offensive to my constituents. I want it on the record that I likewise find it offensive.

Let the ferry corporation do what it does best, if it can, and that is transport people back and forth as cheaply and safely as possible. But let's not pretend any more that this corporation has been managed appropriately since the Liberals set it up. Let's move forward. Let's hope this review does the right thing, and then let's hope that this government has the courage to do the right thing and follow the recommendations if they make sense.

B. Routley: I'm happy to rise again and have this opportunity to speak out on behalf of the fine people of the Cowichan Valley. Certainly, part of the important infrastructure that we have in the Cowichan Valley is the ferry service, the Mill Bay–Brentwood ferry.

[1535]

You know, I've seen reports from the B.C. Ferry Services. I have with me here the Opportunities for Enhanced Efficiency in Performance Term Three , October 2010 document, where the ferry service is being looked at. They are talking about the possible elimination of route 12, the Mill Bay to Brentwood ferry.

Now, we know that what they say is partially true. They talk about the fact that a major part of the traffic…. Of the over nine million cars every year, 25,000 vehicles per day, only a small percentage of them — and they talk about 1 percent — actually utilize that ferry route. They make the claim there's an alternate route available.

Well, let me be the first to add that when we have a crisis…. I'll give you some examples. We just had one. The entire highway system going north from Victoria, the Malahat highway, was shut down as a result of a major oil spill. Not only was there the environmental catastrophe; there was the fact that that entire system was shut down for hours and hours.

It kept getting delayed. The Ministry of Transportation kept saying, "Oh well, it'll be open maybe at eight o'clock," then "at nine o'clock" and "maybe at midnight" and on and on right through the evening. People were forced to drive huge distances around, and I know for a fact that that ferry had lineups. People were there.

There was actually a constituent in the Cowichan Valley that had heart surgery. Fortunately, he was able to go over to the Brentwood side and take the ferry home. The staff there were very understanding and recognized that this was an urgent and important matter, and they allowed him to get home in a timely way.

There were a lot of people inconvenienced. But people were making the point — and certainly phoning our office — saying they're very thankful that there's the opportunity to have that alternate route.

I myself have taken the route. I remember a big snowstorm several years ago. My wife and I were travelling up the Malahat, and we got turned around. It was simply

[ Page 7670 ]

too unsafe to go the rest of the way to the top. We turned around, went down, got in the lineup for the ferry, and we were very grateful that that ferry was there.

Now, I understand that the government has made some changes. They brought in a different ferry, and they're working on some infrastructure. But the residents and people of the Mill Bay area, including the chamber of commerce in Mill Bay and the Cowichan Valley regional district, have contacted me. I've sat down with Gerry Giles and gone through this important issue and said that I'm very supportive, that we need to have that infrastructure.

It's important for the people of British Columbia, it's important for Island communities, and it's certainly important for the people of the Cowichan Valley, for tourism opportunities. It's a beautiful route to take over to go to Butchart Gardens, for example. People quite often do those kinds of things. The fact is that as tourists come through in the tourism season, there are spinoff benefits to communities like the Mill Bay region as a result of that service.

It's an important part of our system. We want to make sure that that's continued. Right now we look at the ferry system in this bill, Bill 14, Coastal Ferry Amendment Act. The government clearly understood that there was public pressure, that the public were outraged. We think, being as skeptical as I might be from time to time, that this government is playing politics with the people of B.C. They've foisted this off to a later date, and they've put a cap.

Suddenly now they want to manage. Originally, "Oh, we've got to have this independent body to manage things; we can't possibly be managing things" — totally against the original vision of W.A.C. Bennett.

I have spoken in this House before about W.A.C. Bennett. If he were to come back today, he'd have to be a New Democrat. Why? He would understand that infrastructure is important, as our ferry system. In fact, it was W.A.C. Bennett, when I was just a kid, that bought back the ferry in 1961 for $7 million. What a deal. For seven million bucks he bought the Black Ball ferry.

[1540]

He understood, and he used to stand here in this House, this very House. He would stand here and say that the purpose of the ferry system, the reason we ought to own it and not some American company, is so that we can take care of the transportation needs of British Columbians.

That was visionary. That was understanding our tourism opportunities, the opportunities for our island and coastal communities, certainly the people on Vancouver Island and all of our needs for every truckload of goods that comes to Vancouver Island. This is one of those opportunities.

This government likes to give buckets full of cash away to big business. But when it makes sense to subsidize something that helps every island community and helps families, I might add, move back and forth more easily to visit family members…. I've talked to more than one member in the Cowichan Valley that has said to me that they used to go over and see their brother or their mother or their pal more often on the Mainland. When it was reasonable, they would do those kinds of things.

Now that this structure has been…. We've got the million-dollar man running things. We've got all this board of directors. Now it's become a cash cow. They're cashing in every time you go there. Even if you park your car to pick up a friend, they want to cash in. The way this government sees the future is cashing in.

As has been said here, every time you increase the fares by 10 percent, ridership goes down by 10 percent. Do they care? Oh, well, they woke up now, and they say: "Maybe we better put some kind of cap on here." Well, about time that we thought about putting some kind of cap on here, but it's almost too little, too late.

It is so, so difficult for families throughout British Columbia to get back and forth to see one another. They've actually damaged the ability of families to connect.

You know, it's part of our transportation system. We've got millions of dollars spent on infrastructure all over B.C., on roads and bridges and all the rest of it, yet they can't have the wherewithal to understand that it makes sense for government to intervene and give a fair hand to the people on island communities. Instead, it's user-pay. We're going to gouge them — just fleece them some more and make it impossible for tourism operators.

You've got the chamber of commerce sitting down with us and saying: "You know what? We need this. We need you to talk some sense into them." We're trying our best to come down here and talk about what's important. It's important for our communities. It's important for tour operators.

When you think about it, if you lower the cost of fares, you increase the opportunity for people to go and have tourism opportunities — to eat at restaurants, to stay in hotel rooms.

My wife and I, when we first moved to the Duncan area from Lake Cowichan, one of the things that we liked to do was go over to Saltspring Island and stay in one of those lovely hotels in Ganges and experience the life over there. Well, now it's prohibitive. I used to go over there with the kids and walk through the mall and have a good time. Now it just doesn't happen because it's so onerous, so costly. It actually takes so much money to get over there. It's a night's stay.

Wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense to have the ferry system be reliable, be affordable for families and allow them the opportunity to move back and forth more freely and to actually promote tourism — the things that they say are important to them? However, they are acting against the interest of common sense in this matter.

[ Page 7671 ]

Instead, oh, it's no problem to give more than $100 million a year back to the biggest banks in North America. Oh, that ma8kes sense. What do you think? Does that make sense? Let's give money back to the banks in North America. Instead, we could have provided honourable service to the good people of Vancouver Island and island communities and businesses, and they would have thrived. They would benefit in a major way. There's no question about that.

[1545]

Now, I am concerned about what's going on here with our Mill Bay–Brentwood ferry, and I want to ask the minister to pay particular attention to the safety concerns that I'm about to address, the fact that we have had serious safety issues as a result of this. That includes seniors getting over the Malahat in snowstorms and that. We need to have that infrastructure and that option available.

When you're pushing people that are not able or don't feel safe challenging that Malahat in wintertime, forcing them to have no other alternative, other than an even longer ride around, going through Port Renfrew — I know people that did that; you can get there from here — it's not acceptable to think for a moment about shutting that opportunity down.

With that, I'll take my seat. Again, I would encourage you to think carefully. Make sure that we keep the Mill Bay service for the community, for the businesses.

D. Routley: I'm rising to bring some concerns about Bill 14 from my communities. I represent a number of communities on Vancouver Island that are dependent on ferries. In fact, I think all communities on Vancouver Island can count themselves as being ferry-dependent communities.

In my particular constituency I represent the areas that encompass the Crofton terminal of the Crofton-Saltspring run. I represent the community of Chemainus, which has the terminal that leads to two other islands that I represent; Thetis Island; and Kuper or Penelakut Island. I represent the area of Nanaimo, which is home to the Duke Point terminal of the major route, Duke Point–Tsawwassen. I also represent the island of Gabriola, which has a ferry run from Nanaimo to Gabriola. So ferries are an incredibly important issue to the people I represent.

When we examine what it means to be a coastal British Columbian, we cannot really separate the identity and the nature of what a coastal British Columbian is from that ferry service. It is so integral to everything that we do — the development of our communities, our society; the development of our economy; and the provision of services, both emergency and essential services, as well as the provision of goods and services. So much of what we depend on is transported by B.C. Ferries.

It also has a distinct human rights component. I would make the argument that there's a distinct human rights component that needs to be discussed here and needs to be considered by anyone reviewing the act. I'll explain that.

This is particularly true when we examine the lives of children. So many of the schools that we represent are dependent on ferries in order to participate in intermural sports, where teams can have such a difficult time travelling to events, to tournaments. It's a very costly proposition for any school to send a team of youngsters on a trip to schools that are really in the same school district. They're neighbouring schools, yet these kids have a very difficult time participating.

The human rights issue of ferries and what they represent to Vancouver Island communities is no better represented anywhere than on the run between Chemainus and Kuper Island, or Penelakut Island.

The Penelakut people, the Penelakut First Nation, used to inhabit the foreshore of Chemainus Harbour. Chemainus Harbour now is home to a sawmill and several developments and the community of Chemainus. When the community of Chemainus was developed, the people of the Penelakut First Nation were essentially shipped to Penelakut Island, which was also in their territory and now is their reserve.

The people on Penelakut are so challenged economically. There is virtually no economy. There are many homes that don't even have running water more than a few hours a day. The conditions are terrible. The people are suffering a level of poverty and a level of exclusion and isolation that should be absolutely unacceptable to any British Columbian.

[1550]

I'm sure the minister would agree. If he visited Penelakut and saw the community and the standards which they endure, he would be horrified, as I am. Despite that, it's a beautiful and thriving community that does its best to develop and to offer its children and its community the experience they deserve.

I attended a ferries meeting on Penelakut Island, and I was hearing from the people of the island just how concerned they are about the rate increases. I should say that the rate increase for prepaid ferry fares on the Chemainus-to-Penelakut run over the past eight years has been 114.9 percent — a 115 percent increase for people who get to Vancouver Island to do shopping or to take their kids to the doctor or do whatever they must do. When they come back, many of them are forced to collect bottles and cans and turn them in for a refund in order to afford the ferry fare back.

When I was at this meeting, one of the elders, a woman from Penelakut First Nation, was in tears as she described the shame she felt when, after collecting bottles and cans for hours and being unsuccessful in generating enough money to get back on the ferry, she took the money she had down the ferry ramp and handed it to the deckhand who, of course, couldn't take her money.

[ Page 7672 ]

He told her: "I'm sorry. I can't take it." They know each other. All the people in these communities are so well connected, and we support each other.

This lady was refused her passage on the ferry. She refused to leave the ferry, so eventually the RCMP was called to remove her from the deck of the ferry. She was taken by the elbows up the ramp. Someone in a car waiting to get on board gave her the money to get back to Kuper, to Penelakut Island. She made it home, but she left her dignity, or a large portion of it, there on the dock in Chemainus.

This is a terrible example of what it means to increase the cost of living on ordinary British Columbians in this way. This is an essential service to people. These folks — it's not as though they have an option. It's not as though there are other options like driving around a toll bridge or something of that nature. This is their lifeline. This is their only passage.

I think that's a really powerful example of why it's so important for us to take very seriously these issues. They may seem small to people who earn the kind of living that we do, sitting here as members of the Legislative Assembly, but when people are living in abject poverty, that kind of increase has that kind of impact on their lives.

This ferry system ought to be run in the public interest. It is a part of our public highways, our marine highway system. We on this side of the House believe that. We call on the government to recognize that and return it to being part of the highways system.

The communities on Gabriola Island, which is connected to Nanaimo, had the same increase — 115 percent over the same time. Small businesses are suffering and finding it so difficult to develop and thrive. I was told by one Gabriolan that the most endangered species on the Gulf Islands are working families. It's impossible to operate a business when this kind of increase is imposed on an operator.

Many of these businesses are exactly the kinds of businesses that we're looking to, to diversify our economy and to provide green employment. They're tourism-based businesses, and they're suffering. The people of Gabriola…. There's a thriving arts community. They rely on people coming to the island to see what they can offer, and it's happening less and less.

This was all set up when B.C. Ferries was removed from the highways system and put under the Coastal Ferry Act. The B.C. Ferries Corporation is a pseudo-privatization with one share. It's not really a private company, but it has one share, and it's owned by one person, and he's sitting on the other side. That's the Transportation Minister.

They've claimed that they did this in order to end political interference with ferries, but then what do we see? We see just before the last election a $20 million injection from the government in order to decrease fares when they needed a political boost. For two months they put in $20 million for a one-third discount. In fact, ridership went up. It only proved the point that price elasticity is having its toll.

[1555]

In the last eight years we've seen one million fewer passengers on B.C. ferries. We've seen car traffic decline by 3.5 percent and passenger traffic decline by 5 percent. This is because of the increased fares. This is because the B.C. Liberal government fails to recognize the public interest value of the B.C. ferry system. It is not a cruise ship line. It is transportation infrastructure, part of the network we depend on. It's a marine transit system, and that's the way it should be treated by this government. We're calling on this government to do just that.

There's been so much hypocrisy — the hypocrisy around political interference. First we see this tearing apart of the public interest mandate of B.C. Ferries because of an effort to reduce political interference, which wound up being such a hypocrisy. Then we see the building of ships in Germany, and this is supposed to give taxpayers the best value.

Well, you know what, Madam Speaker? The super C–class ferries were built in B.C. They're still doing a great job. They carry 24 fewer cars, but they do it at much lower costs, because these German ferries are gas-guzzling machines that are eating up resources. In fact, the ferry corporation can't afford to run them a good deal of the time and have them tied up at the docks.

Those ships were such a good deal, and yet everything to maintain them has to come from Germany. Even lightbulbs for those ferries have to come from Germany, at a cost of $7 per lightbulb. It's absolutely ridiculous. This is the fine deal these Liberals have negotiated for British Columbia. If we had built more ferries in this province, we could have provided employment and training that could have helped equal the balance, closed the gaps that the B.C. Liberals' policies have created in this province. Some of the poverty in this province wouldn't be so bad if we were able to train young people in those industries.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

It's really tragic that we see such a fine ferry system — probably one of the best in the world, if not the best in the world — being robbed of its essential mandate, which is public-interest delivery of public services. We're not asking that the fares be zero, but we are asking that the fares be frozen now. This review, in fact, legislates another increase. People on the coast of British Columbia, people on Vancouver Island, the people I represent, don't need a study to know that fares are too high. They don't need a study to know that B.C. Ferries has forgotten, because of the Coastal Ferry Act, its public interest mandate, its primary purpose.

[ Page 7673 ]

What we need to do is not to engage in another study, but to remind this B.C. Liberal government that that ferry system does not belong to them. It's not a plaything for their agenda. It is a public institution — a publicly owned, publicly operated infrastructure piece that is essential to the transit realities of all the people living on the coast of British Columbia.

We would call on the government to offer a fare freeze. We would call on the government to return B.C. Ferries to the Highway Act. We would call on the government. It showed more of its hypocrisy today by supporting a motion that would encourage the federal government to allow B.C. to be the home of one of the shipbuilding hubs, so that all federal ships need to be built in Canada. Well, shouldn't all British Columbian ships be built in British Columbia, Mr. Speaker? Isn't their call on the federal government proof of another hypocrisy in their policy?

I know the minister is listening, and I know he's a reasonable fellow and will take under good consideration all that he's heard here today. But essentially, it can all be boil