British Columbia Hansard — Monday, December 1, 2003

H1201pm-05

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, December 1, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 19, Number 5 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Honourable Iona Campagnolo 4TH SESSION, 37TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Claude Richmond EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council................................................................................. .........................Hon. Gordon Campbell Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.............................................................................. ..................... Hon.

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.................................................................................... ..............................Hon.

John van Dongen Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon. Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon. George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon.

Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon.

Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon. Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon.

Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon.

Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon.

Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management.................................................................................... ..................................Hon.

Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon. Judith Reid Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection..................................................................................... ....................................Hon. Joyce Murray LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................. ..............................................................

John Weisbeck Leader of the Opposition ....................................................................................................... ...........................................................Joy MacPhail Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ........................................................................................... .............................................. Harold Long Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .............................................................................................. .........................................E.

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

James Clerk Assistant/Committee Clerk................................................................................................ ............................................ Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms ............................................................................................................... .........................................................A.A. Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ..................................................................................................... ........................................

Anthony Dambrauskas Legislative Librarian.......................................................................................................... ............................................................. Joan A. Barton Legislative Comptroller ........................................................................................................ .................................................................Peter Bray Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker by the Queen's Printer, Victoria.

Rates: single issue, $2.85; per calendar year, mailed daily, $298. GST extra. Agent: Crown Publications Inc., 521 Fort St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1E7. Telephone: (250) 386-4636. Fax: 386-0221. www.leg.bc.ca Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.

Party Standings: Liberal 75; New Democratic 2; Independent Liberal 2. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) ....................................................................... Shuswap Anderson, Val J. (L) .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)............................................. Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Pat (L).........................................................................Prince George North Belsey, Bill (L).................................................................................

North Coast Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................... East Kootenay Bhullar, Tony (Ind. L) ................................................................. Surrey-Newton Bloy, Harry (L).................................................................................. Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).........................................Prince George–Mount Robson Bray, Jeff (L)......................................................................Victoria–Beacon H ill Brenzinger, Elayne (L) ...............................................................

Surrey-Whalley Brice, Susan (L) ............................................................................Saanich South Bruce, Hon. Graham P. (L)................................................ Cowichan-Ladysmith Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Cheema, Hon. Gulzar S. (L) ..........................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Chong, Ida (L)................................................................ Oak Bay–Gordon Head Christensen, Tom (L) .............................................................

Okanagan-Vernon Chutter, Dave (L) ........................................................................... Yale-L illooet Clark, Hon. Christy (L) ..................................................Port Moody–Westwood Cobb, Walt (L) ............................................................................. Cariboo South Coell, Hon. Murray (L) ........................................ Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L) .............................................. Fort Langley–Aldergrove Collins, Hon.

Gary (L).........................................................Vancouver-Fairview de Jong, Hon. Michael (L)....................................... Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................... Comox Valley Halsey-Brandt, Hon. Greg (L) ..................................................Richmond Centre Hamilton, Arnie (L)............................................................Esquimalt-Metchosin Hansen, Hon.

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

Surrey–White Rock Hunter, Mike (L) ...................................................................................Nanaimo Jarvis, Daniel (L)...................................................... North Vancouver–Seymour Johnston, Ken (L)............................................................ Vancouver-Fraserview Kerr, Brian J. (L).............................................................. Malahat–Juan de Fuca Krueger, Kevin (L).................................................

Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...............................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lee, Richard T. (L).......................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L)................................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L) .......................................................................... Ch illiwack-Sumas Locke, Brenda (L) ...........................................................

Surrey–Green Timbers Long, Harold (L) ...................................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................... Bulkley Valley–Stikine McMahon, Wendy (L).............................................Columbia River–Revelstoke MacPhail, Joy (NDP) ..........................................................

Vancouver-Hastings Manhas, Karn (L) .............................................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Masi, Reni (L) ...................................................................................Delta North Mayencourt, Lorne (L) ..........................................................Vancouver-Burrard Murray, Hon. Joyce (L) ........................................................... New Westminster Nebbeling, Hon. Ted (L) .......................................... West Vancouver–Garibaldi Nettleton, Paul (Ind. L)..................................................Prince George–Omineca Neufeld, Hon.

Richard (L)...................................................... Peace River North Nijjar, Rob (L)...................................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Nuraney, John (L) ...............................................................Burnaby-W illingdon Orr, Sheila (L) ...........................................................................Victoria-Hillside Penner, Barry (L)....................................................................... Ch illiwack-Kent Plant, Hon. Geoff (L) ......................................................... Richmond-Steveston Reid, Hon.

Judith (L)............................................................Nanaimo-Parksv ille Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................... Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L) ................................................................ Kamloops Roddick, Valerie (L)..........................................................................Delta South Sahota, Patty (L).....................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Santori, Hon. Sandy (L)..............................................West Kootenay–Boundary Stephens, Hon.

Lynn (L) ........................................................................ Langley Stewart, Ken (L)...................................................... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Stewart, Richard (L) ...................................................... Coquitlam-Maillardville Suffredine, Blair F. (L) ................................................................Nelson-Creston Sultan, Ralph (L)....................................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Thorpe, Hon.

Rick (L) ..........................................................Okanagan-Westside Trumper, Gillian (L)................................................................Alberni-Qualicum van Dongen, Hon. John (L) ................................................Abbotsford-Clayburn Visser, Rod (L).................................................................................North Island Weisbeck, John (L).........................................................Kelowna–Lake Country Whittred, Hon.

Katherine (L) ...................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wilson, John (L)........................................................................... Cariboo North Wong, Patrick (L)............................................................Vancouver-Kensington LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................... Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman ..............................................Hon.

Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum.......................................................................G illian Trumper Bulkley Valley–Stikine ..............................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North..............................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds............................................................................Patty Sahota Burnaby-Willingdon......................................................................

John Nuraney Burquitlam ........................................................................................ Harry Bloy Cariboo North ..................................................................................John Wilson Cariboo South .................................................................................... Walt Cobb Chilliwack-Kent ............................................................................. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas .................................................................................

John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke....................................................Wendy McMahon Comox Valley .......................................................................... Hon. Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville .............................................................Richard Stewart Cowichan-Ladysmith .......................................................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Delta North.......................................................................................... Reni Masi Delta South................................................................................

Valerie Roddick East Kootenay .................................................................................. Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin...................................................................Arnie Hamilton Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................... Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops ....................................................................... Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ........................................................Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country...............................................................

John Weisbeck Kelowna-Mission ................................................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Langley ............................................................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Malahat–Juan de Fuca .....................................................................Brian J. Kerr Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................... Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows .............................................................Ken Stewart Nanaimo..........................................................................................

Mike Hunter Nanaimo-Parksville ...................................................................Hon. Judith Reid Nelson-Creston.......................................................................Blair F. Suffredine New Westminster ..................................................................Hon. Joyce Murray North Coast ........................................................................................Bill Belsey North Island........................................................................................Rod Visser North Vancouver–Lonsdale.......................................... Hon.

Katherine Wh ittred North Vancouver–Seymour .............................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head .......................................................................Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon .................................................................... Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside.................................................................Hon. Rick Thorpe Peace River North .............................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South .......................................................................

Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley ....................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................... Karn Manhas Port Moody–Westwood......................................................... Hon. Christy Clark Powell River–Sunshine Coast.......................................................... Harold Long Prince George North................................................................................Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson................................................Hon.

Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................Paul Nettleton Richmond Centre......................................................... Hon. Greg Halsey-Brandt Richmond East .......................................................................... Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ................................................................ Hon. Geoff Plant Saanich North and the Islands ............................................... Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South...................................................................................

Susan Brice Shuswap .............................................................................. Hon. George Abbott Skeena.............................................................................................Roger Harris Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................. Hon. Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Brenda Locke Surrey-Newton ............................................................................... Tony Bhullar Surrey–Panorama Ridge................................................. Hon.

Gulzar S. Cheema Surrey-Tynehead .......................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley ...................................................................... Elayne Brenzinger Surrey–White Rock ...............................................................Hon. Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard................................................................. Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview............................................................... Hon.

Gary Co llins Vancouver-Fraserview ...................................................................Ken Johnston Vancouver-Hastings .......................................................................Joy MacPhail Vancouver-Kensington...................................................................Patrick Wong Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Rob Nijjar Vancouver-Langara....................................................................Val J.

Anderson Vancouver–Mount Pleasant............................................Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................... Hon. Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena............................................................ Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill.............................................................................Jeff Bray Victoria-Hillside.................................................................................. Sheila Orr West Kootenay–Boundary.................................................... Hon.

Sandy Santori West Vancouver–Capilano ..............................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ................................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Yale-Lillooet .................................................................................. Dave Chutter

CONTENTS Monday, December 1, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Tributes....................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 8303 Jomar Lanot P.

Wong Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 8303 Statements (Standing Order 25 B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 8304 Volunteers in Burquitlam H. Bloy Mountain pine beetle symposium W. Cobb United Way I.

Chong Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 8305 Funding for HIV/AIDS strategy J. MacPhail Hon. C. Hansen Closing of long-term care beds in Golden J. Kwan Hon. C. Hansen Damage to Prince Rupert gas pipeline B. Belsey Hon. R. Coleman Changes to laboratory services P. Nettleton Hon. C. Hansen Cancellation of 2004 B.C. Disability Games R. Stewart Hon. G. Abbott Regulation of agriculture industry S. Brice Hon.

J. van Dongen Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................ ................................................... 8308 British Columbia Railway (Revitalization) Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 89) (continued) B. Belsey J. Les B. Kerr Hon. R. Coleman R. Visser J. Wilson R. Harris H. Bloy Hon. G. Plant V. Roddick Hon. R. Thorpe B. Penner B. Lekstrom Hon. J. Reid

Committee of the Whole House ................................................................................................... .......................................... 8333 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2003 (Bill 90) J. Kwan Hon. G. Plant S.

Orr Reporting of Bills............................................................................................................. ......................................................... 8344 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2003 (Bill 90) Third Reading of Bills......................................................................................................... ..................................................... 8344 Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2003 (Bill 90)

8303 MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 The House met at 2:04 p.m. Tributes JOMAR LANOT P. Wong: Hon. Speaker, I would like you and the members of the Legislature to join me as we extend our condolences to the Lanot family. Their son Jomar Lanot, a grade 11 student at Sir Charles Tupper Secon- dary, was attacked and killed this past weekend. It's my hope that we'll be able to extend a comforting hand of support to them and for them to know their grief is shared not only by their family and friends but also by our whole community. Mr.

Speaker, I would like you and the members of the Legislature to join me as we extend our condo- lences to the Lanot family. Our hearts go out to them. Mr. Speaker: So ordered. [1405] Introductions by Members Hon. S. Bond: I would like to introduce several visitors that we have in the gallery today from the Col- lege Institute Educators Association of B.C. We're pleased to welcome today Cindy Oliver, the president; Roseanne Moran, the staff representative; and Dileep Athaide, the secretary-treasurer. I'm certainly looking forward to a productive discussion with them this af- ternoon.

Would the House please help me make them welcome today. S. Orr: I have introduced many people in this House, but today I have two of the most special people that I've ever had to introduce, simply because my husband and I created them and I delivered them. This is just a random sampling of my gorgeous, beautiful, healthy, good-looking, intelligent children. The first one, who I have just totally embarrassed — but I'm allowed to do that because I am, of course, their mother — is my eldest son, Robin.

Robin used to be a fish farmer — and I'm not even going to go down that path as to how I feel — but he is now moving for- ward, and he's going to become a free enterpriser. He is from Tofino. My other son is called Liam, and he is changing his career. He just launched his first album and went on tour in hip-hop music. To all of you who are probably not so informed in this, he is a rapper. I would like the House to make my sons incredibly wel- come. Mr. Speaker: They're both now a brilliant shade of red. R. Lee: In the gallery today we have Mr. Johnny Fong and Mrs. Susanna Fong. Mr.

Fong is a member of the Multicultural Advisory Council as well as a recipi- ent of the 2002 outstanding achievement award from the Ethno Business Council of British Columbia. He's the president of a well-run Burnaby company, Interna- tional Sources Ltd. Would the House please make them welcome. J. Kwan: The opposition joins in welcoming Mr. Johnny Fong and Mrs. Fong to the Legislature. In addi- tion to the long list of accomplishments that the mem- ber from Burnaby had identified for Mr.

Fong, he's also most recently been made an honorary member of the Chinese Cultural Centre, which happens to be in my riding and which also happens to be celebrating their anniversary with a fundraiser coming up, I believe, on Monday. I would invite everyone in this House to wel- come Mr. Fong, and I hope to see you at the Chinese Cultural Centre fundraiser. Hon.

J. van Dongen: In the precincts today is a group of auditors from the office of the auditor general of Canada, the office of the auditor general of British Columbia and the office of the auditor general of New Brunswick, who are collaborating on a joint examina- tion of the management of the sustainability of wild salmon and salmon aquaculture. I ask the House to please make all of these auditors welcome. P. Nettleton: A gentleman by the name of Ian Mott, of the United group of companies, has asked me to introduce him.

He indicates that he has worked coop- eratively to establish lands for the PNE in North Sur- rey. Please welcome Mr. Mott. B. Penner: It's a great privilege for me to introduce to the House Erwin and Leona Janzen of Yarrow, Brit- ish Columbia. They like to tell people that when I was a child growing up, I probably spent as much time at their house as at my parents' house because I was best friends with their late son, Dan Janzen. Together we embarked on many adventures and assorted mischief and had a great time right through elementary school, high school, college and university.

Today Leona and Erwin continue to be a source of considerable guidance for myself, so if you have any complaints, take them to them. Please make them welcome. [1410] R. Visser: Today in the House we have Ken Kapps, Aaron Badesso and Jack Lavis — all here from both TimberWest and Weyerhaeuser. I'm going to try to keep a straight face doing this, but what's important about these folks is that they have managed to bring to life for me and some of my colleagues the arcane and byzantine world of stumpage through their colourful regression analysis and market-sensitive….

Oh, I'll tell you, they have made my life new and complete, and I just hope the House can make them welcome today. P. Wong: I am pleased to introduce a high school mate of mine, Celia Chan, a computer systems analyst who came from Calgary to visit the Legislature. Also,

8304 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 in respect of Johnny Fong in the gallery, Mr. Fong co- chaired with me at the Chinese Community Forest Fire Relief Campaign, fundraising for the North Thompson fire relief fund as well as the Vanderbilt community outreach network, totalling over $300,000 this year. Would the House please make them most welcome. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) VOLUNTEERS IN BURQUITLAM H. Bloy: Today I would like to congratulate the 20 winners of the Local Hero Awards in Burnaby. I can only mention a few in particular. At just 12 years old, Greg von Euw has made a name for himself as a great protector of our salmon-bearing urban streams. I've known Greg's family for a number of years, and de- spite his young age, the folks at the DFO will tell you he's a wise little veteran when it comes to his stream. Fish are finally returning to Silver Creek to spawn, and we have Greg to thank for that.

Another nominee is Carol La Croix, who has been a Scouts Canada volunteer for many, many years. She's worked her way up through the ranks as a Beaver leader, and now she's an Area Service Scouter who has created a number of programs and successful hand- books. I've worked with Carol under her direction. She also played a key role in the formation of Camp Wood- chip for Beavers in North Burnaby. We also have Jay McGarva, who is a great volun- teer in Burnaby with the Burnaby Board of Trade, the Burnaby Symphony Orchestra and the Burnaby Metro Rotary Club. She also runs her own successful busi- ness.

We have Keith Beedie, who has provided funding to Burnaby Hospital, the Interurban 1223 restoration project and the Burnaby Christmas Bureau, to name just a few. Finally there's Jeanne Fike, who heads up the Bur- naby Family Life Institute. Jeanne is one of the best- known personalities in the Burnaby community be- cause of the outstanding work she does with new im- migrants and with women and children in abusive situations. It is clear that the spirit of volunteerism is alive and well in Burquitlam. I'd like to pass along my congratu- lations and sincere thanks to all 20 winners.

MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE SYMPOSIUM W. Cobb: Earlier this month I attended the moun- tain pine beetle symposium in Quesnel. There were local environmentalists, industry experts, community leaders, forest managers and first nations coming to- gether to find solutions to this epidemic. This year alone, the pine beetle has consumed four times more of B.C.'s forests than the summer fires. The fires have been subdued, but our forests are still under attack. The Premier is committed to taking whatever action is necessary to stop the beetles.

The symposium also brought about a chance to highlight the positive opportunities that exist to sal- vage the wood and sell it to new markets, while also expanding the value-added sector. The Premier spoke of his recent mission to China and their interest in wood products. However, as we discussed ways to stop the beetle and find positive ways to utilize the huge amount of beetle-kill, we found our efforts being sabotaged by large-scale environmental groups using inaccurate information to commit economic treason on British Columbia. I know the David Suzuki Foundation was invited to the symposium but declined.

However, they didn't decline the invitation to join in the boycott of B.C. woods, including beetle-kill and fire-damaged timber. A number of environmental groups have decided to m a k e i t t h e i r m i s s i o n t o d e s t ro y a s m a n y f o r e s t j o b s a s they can in B.C. I want to quote Ric Careless, at the B.C. Environmental Network, who did accept the invitation. He wished to separate himself from those radical enviro- terrorists. He said: "I would just like to say to the Pre- mier that I applaud your efforts in Asia to develop new markets. We are all in this together.

We don't need any more nonsense. This is yesterday's world." [1415] With support like this from local groups, I know we can move ahead and build a strategy to fight the beetle epidemic. I look forward to the Premier's report in January. I ask the international environmental groups to catch up with the times. Don't do any more harm to their fellow environmentalists or the hard-working families in the forest industry. UNITED WAY I. Chong: Today I wish to highlight one of our most significant and long-serving local non-profit charity organizations, the United Way of Greater Victoria.

The United Way promotes volunteerism and currently supports 39 community human care agencies in their efforts to provide a better life for all. Donations re- ceived are invested locally, and one in three Victorians will utilize a service offered by United Way–funded organizations this year. The United Way of Greater Victoria has a proud 60- year history of helping people and some years ago fo- cused its funding on five social priorities: poverty, iso- lation and loneliness, family stress and breakdown, violence in society, and substance abuse. On September 17 of this year campaign chair Dr.

Elizabeth Ashton, the president of Camosun College, kicked off the annual fundraising campaign by an- nouncing this year's community goal to raise $4.3 mil- lion. Last year's goal of $4 million was surpassed when $4.1 million was eventually raised. To date just over $3.6 million has been raised, and I believe this year's goal is achievable, even though the campaign is now winding down. It is through a variety of charity events, corporate donations and individual contributions that the United Way is able to succeed in reaching its goal.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8305 Just one example of a charity event is the annual Chinese community fundraising dinner generally held in October of each year. This event was initiated about six years ago under the stewardship of a Queen's Jubi- lee recipient community leader, Ms. May Lou-Poy. Her goal was to bring together community members, busi- nesses and organizations from the Chinese community where they can learn more about the programs and services of the United Way and its partner agencies. I am pleased to report that it is always a sold-out event.

However, the success is better measured by the num- ber of new donors who attend every year. Services of the United Way can range from provid- ing funds for a community organization to a volunteer driving and delivering a meal to a housebound senior, to a volunteer calling on a grief-stricken family due to the sudden loss of a family member. When you con- sider the wide range of services the United Way pro- vides for our community, it is no wonder so many lives are made better by the United Way and that their slo- gan remains "Change the world one way at a time." Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements.

Oral Questions FUNDING FOR HIV/AIDS STRATEGY J. MacPhail: Today is World AIDS Day. B.C. has the highest proportion of Canadian deaths due to AIDS. HIV is one of four leading causes of death in B.C. amongst people ages 24 to 44. R e c e n t l y t h e B . C . M i n i s t r y o f H e a l t h S e r v i c e s p u t forward an HIV strategy. AIDS prevention organiza- tions say that the strategy contains laudable goals, but they are concerned that the provincial government hasn't funded its objectives.

Can the Minister of Health Services explain why at the same time that AIDS is on the increase in British Columbia, the B.C. Liberals are not funding their own AIDS strategy? Hon. C. Hansen: The new AIDS strategy was de- veloped by the Ministry of Health Planning, and my colleague the Minister of Health Planning has had re- sponsibility for that. Obviously, we work very closely with them. As Health Services is responsible for the delivery of health programs in the community, we've certainly been working with those community organi- zations.

I know my colleague has met with them on many occasions as that strategy was developed. We have recently added funding for new medications that are particularly important in the treatment of AIDS, and we're certainly looking to make sure that those programs are available to communities throughout British Columbia. J. MacPhail: Well, it's actually the regional health boards for which this minister is responsible now, health authorities that deliver the AIDS strategy. The cost of each new HIV infection is $225,000 in direct costs and $750,000 in indirect costs.

AIDS is on the in- crease in British Columbia, and infections are predicted to increase. AIDS prevention organizations are warn- ing that without any resources, new resources, the province won't be able to achieve its goal and the epi- demic will get worse.

These organizations are meeting with the government tomorrow. [1420] Again to the Minister of Health Services: what steps are he and his government prepared to take to ensure that the grave concerns of AIDS prevention organiza- tions and patients in B.C. are addressed with adequate dollars to fight the increasing spread of this disease here in British Columbia? Hon. C. Hansen: The member is quite right. It is the health authorities that have responsibility for the deliv- ering of the programs which fall under the Ministry of Health Services.

One of the things that we did to better integrate those programs with the other delivery of health services at the community level was to shift the funding for those programs and organizations to the health authorities so that they could actually be better integrated at the community level. At the same time, all of the funding programs that have been in place for AIDS programs have been maintained, and health au- thorities are now responsible for delivering those pro- grams at the community level. Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a fur- ther supplementary. J.

MacPhail: Well, it's not exactly as the Minister of Health Services said. When the provincial government actually transferred contracts for AIDS service organi- zations to the regional health authorities, funds were not transferred to support their work. That means that the prevention and educational programs have suf- fered. Even in the government's own strategy docu- ment released just a couple of months ago, they incor- rectly said that the incidence of HIV infections amongst drug users is on the decline, when in fact it went up last year. Today AIDS organizations are sounding the alarm.

A s r e c e n t l y a s t h i s m o r n i n g , M a x i n e D a v i s , e x e c u t i v e director of the Dr. Peter Centre, said things are getting worse here in British Columbia. They say that the pro- vincial government is not meeting its commitment to stop the spread of disease. When the minister and his government meet with these AIDS organizations to- morrow, will he commit to providing the dollars that health authorities need, and have made clear to the minister they need, to fight AIDS? Hon. C. Hansen: The member is not correct.

In fact, the funding for the contracts for those programs was transferred to the health authorities as part of their allocations, in each of the health authorities. We have given to the health authorities the flexibility, for the first time, so that they can actually meet the priority needs of their communities that they are trying to serve. I know the health authorities are working closely

8306 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 with those organizations to make sure that those needs get met as best possible within the financial frame- works that we have. CLOSING OF LONG-TERM CARE BEDS IN GOLDEN J. Kwan: Residents of Golden are very concerned about the closure of long-term care facilities in their community. The interior health authority has shut down eight residential care beds at the local hospital. Now the government is adding insult to injury by clos- ing four more beds at the Durand Manor, a residential care facility in Golden.

That's resulting in long waiting lists and patients being transferred out of the commu- nity. Residents are saying that they are having no luck in getting the attention of their local MLA. So let me ask the Minister of Health Services this question: why is his government breaking their promise and closing beds for seniors in Golden? Hon. C. Hansen: Again, I think the opposition members have some faulty research behind them. In fact, the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke has been a very vocal and active advocate for the residents of Golden on this matter.

She has certainly been to see m e m a n y t i m e s o n t h i s i s s u e . I a m p l e a s e d t o i n f o r m the member, because she may not be aware, that there is $530,000 allocated for the renovation of Durand Manor so it can better meet the needs of seniors in Golden. That's as a direct result of the advocacy and the work by the member for Columbia River– Revelstoke. Mr. Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J. Kwan: In fact, the residents of Golden just con- tacted us today with their concern. You know what, Mr. Speaker? Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please, hon. members. The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has the floor. [1425] J. Kwan: You know what? The residents of Golden are saying they're having no luck in getting their local MLA to respond to their needs. The renovation dol- lars… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J. Kwan: …that the minister mentions do not help the residents, because the fact is that the residential care beds are being closed right now, and the govern- ment is going to proceed with their renovations tomor- row.

The Minister of Health has actually received some 800 letters protesting this move and demanding that Durand Manor remain fully open until a replacement facility is available in Golden. Spending $530,000 on renovations to Durand Manor would still result in fewer residential beds, which will cause a problem for the seniors. How can the minister justify that move while he's moving the seniors out? Hon. C.

Hansen: I would just like to point out to the member that if you're going to renovate a room in a long-term care facility to modernize it and make it bet- ter available to meet the needs of the residents, it's usu- ally best to actually move the resident out of that room prior to commencing renovations. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please. DAMAGE TO PRINCE RUPERT GAS PIPELINE B. Belsey: My question is to the Solicitor General. Last Friday there was a landslide that took out a natu- ral gas line in the Prince Rupert area.

About 4,000 busi- nesses and homes were without heat and continue to be without heat. There are schools and businesses clos- ing, and there are a number of homes that have to rely on space heaters to warm their homes as well as possi- ble. They're eager to know when this gas line will be restored. In the meantime, every effort needs to be con- tinued to ensure that the residents of Prince Rupert and Port Edward and surrounding areas are comfortable during this difficult time.

Can the Solicitor General explain what is being done to resolve the situation and what efforts are being made to assist the residents af- fected? Hon. R. Coleman: The landslide actually took place on Friday. It was about a thousand feet across — about 350 metres. It took out a natural gas pipeline. This is an event that takes place in this particular area of British Columbia about once every two to three years. There's a lot of unstable ground there, and it does cause some difficulties. The gas line was taken out.

Over the weekend we were unable to actually get in there to repair the line because the unstable ground was still there, and the weather was too severe for peo- ple to get in there. They are working on it now. They expect to try and get in there and finish this, to get the gas line operating, in the next three to five days. I can tell the member that over the weekend 32 people spent nights in the evacuation centre within his community, because those were activated under the provincial emergency program.

Emergency social ser- vices, which normally runs 72 hours, has been ex- tended to the end of the event so that anybody who needs the assistance of emergency social services under the emergency program will have it. Nobody will be left wanting.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8307 At the same time, I want to say to this member and to this House that of all the events we've handled — and we've handled many emergency situations in the last year or so — the communities of Prince Rupert and Port Edward have been remarkable in the way they have adapted and handled this in a really strong, community-based manner with everybody helping out — neighbour helping neighbour. They should be commended. CHANGES TO LABORATORY SERVICES P. Nettleton: My question is to the Minister of Health Services.

Why has the minister rejected the offer of the British Columbia Medical Association and labo- ratory doctors to work collaboratively on the structure of lab reform and instead chosen a route of confronta- tion that has led to both a legal challenge in the courts and yet another arbitration with the doctors? What will the minister do? Furthermore, if the court ruling — expected any day now — rules against the govern- ment, will he resort to an order-in-council or legisla- tion? How will the minister respond? [1430] Hon. C.

Hansen: As the member knows, none of us in cabinet can comment on cases that are currently be- fore the courts. But I can reassure the member that we have developed an approach to lab reform, which is long overdue in this province, that will involve all of the labs, and that will involve both the public and pri- vate sector pathologists. Through the provincial lab coordinating office, we are embarking on a process of lab reform that we expect will provide better service to patients around the province and also provide a more cost-effective process.

Currently, with our lab service that we have today, we are by far the most expensive on a per-capita basis, and we are also significantly more expensive compared to even the second-highest province. Through this process, which is very much a collaborative process, we expect that we'll get better service and better value for the taxpayers of this province. CANCELLATION OF 2004 B.C. DISABILITY GAMES R. Stewart: My question is to the Minister of Com- munity, Aboriginal and Women's Services. My com- munity of Coquitlam was looking forward to being able to host the B.C. Disability Games this summer.

However, the Coquitlam school district decided to charge $36,000 for the disabled athletes to camp in a school — more than 20 times the actual cost to the dis- trict. That works out to about $80 a night per athlete, more than the local hotel. A great many of my con- stituents are outraged that the school district would try to make a profit off a group of disabled athletes. As a result of the decision, the 2004 B.C. Disability Games have now been cancelled. Can the minister tell us how this could have happened to such a worthwhile event? Hon. G. Abbott: I was recently advised by B.C.

Disability Sports about their very difficult decision to cancel the 2004 Disability Games. Certainly, it is not a decision that we welcome, but it is a decision that we understand, given the circumstances that confronted the games. We did check into this situation. Neither I nor any of the games society staff are aware of any precedent anywhere, where school facilities have charged for the Disability Games. It is, in short, an unprecedented situation. Certainly in Kelowna in 2003 and certainly in Nanaimo in 2005, there are no charges for school facili- ties for the Disability Games.

So it's sad and unfortu- nate that the games are lost for 2004, but we know that they will be very successful in Nanaimo in 2005. Mr. Speaker: The member for Saanich South. [Ap- plause.] REGULATION OF AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY S. Brice: I have a question today for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. I get such a rousing round of applause from my colleagues in the House here because they know that I am constantly advocat- ing for the issues that are important to the farmers of the Saanich Peninsula. The question I have for the minister is….

The farm- ers in my area contend that they are unable to bring heavy equipment onto their property to clear a stream or to dig a ditch without engaging in a pretty extensive process of permits. Adding to this is the fact that some of those are municipal, some regional, some provincial and some federal. I would ask the minister if the Saanich farmers can hear from him as to what he is contemplating in order to alleviate some of this undue workload. Hon. J. van Dongen: Certainly the issue of proper drainage is a big issue for agriculture not only in Saanich South but in many farm communities in British Columbia.

Not only farmers are frustrated, but also local governments and our ministry. We've had a lot of frustration on this issue. [1435] Really, the main culprit is the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We have worked very diligently, through many channels, to work with DFO on these issues. We have a committee called the Partnership Committee on Agriculture and the Environment. We've done a lot of work with DFO through that com- mittee. Our ministry has done a lot of advocacy on this issue on behalf of farmers. We have developed good relationships with the minister and senior management on these issues.

Still, that organization has failed to deliver and failed to break out of the bureaucratic, fraught-with-uncertainty and untimely process that it has. What we are doing now is putting the issue in the hands of a deputy ministers committee, along with a

8308 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 whole range of other issues with DFO. I will be work- ing with the Minister for Intergovernmental Relations to get this issue to a very high level within our gov- ernment and in our relations with the federal govern- ment. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. G. Halsey-Brandt: I call for further debate on second reading of Bill 89. Second Reading of Bills BRITISH COLUMBIA RAILWAY (REVITALIZATION) AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 (continued) B.

Belsey: It's my pleasure to rise and speak in sup- port of Bill 89, the British Columbia Railway (Revitali- zation) Amendment Act, 2003. One of the early founders of Prince Rupert, Charles Hayes, had a vision that Prince Rupert would become a major port. Now we have a Premier of a province and a Minister of Transportation that are going to see that vision come true. This is probably one of the most sig- nificant things that has happened in my riding cer- tainly in recent times.

I was there when Fairview Terminals was built back in the mid-seventies, and it was incredible — the amount of construction work, employment, for those living in the community. Many from outside of the community participated in building that structure. A little later on, it was expanded. They put on another length of wharf. A few months back I had a committee come up there, the Select Standing Committee on Finance, and I took them around to a number of the industries in my riding in the Prince Rupert area. One of the visits we made was to Fairview Terminals.

That terminal was built to handle what they called break-bulk freight and commodities. That has been slowly dying off, getting less and less annually. What has been increasing is containerization, until it's reached such a point in my riding that the buildings that used to house the crews, pulp and some of the products that were shipped through that terminal are now empty or house forklifts and tow motors, equip- ment trucks. None of them have moved, probably, in a year and a half to two years. Now we have an opportunity to convert that facil- ity to a container port.

That has everybody in my rid- ing, everybody in the north, excited about the oppor- tunity it is going to bring to northerners, not just in Prince Rupert. It's going to be exciting for people all across the north. Whether you're a specialty grain shipper in the Peace who needs to take genetically modified grain that can't be shipped with all the other grains due to the concern for cross-contamination….

They'll be able to put that grain into containers and take it into Prince Rupert and get it to the Asian mar- kets at least a day and a half quicker than they're doing now. [1440] If you're a log home builder in Smithers, you'll be able to take that log home, put it into a container and ship it to Asian markets, something that has been be- yond our ability — to ship products from the north. It was too expensive to load it into containers to get it all the way down to Vancouver and ship it out. We'll soon be able to do it through the port of Prince Rupert.

I want to share with you some of the local heroes that have worked so hard to see that port move ahead, the Prince Rupert Port Authority. Don Krusel, the CEO, and many of his staff — Shane, Joe, Dave, Michelle — have all worked tirelessly to move this project forward. The mayor and council, both in the present and the past, have worked tirelessly to promote this project and to get it moved ahead. There are many others across my riding and in the north — private citizens, busi- nessmen, companies, organizations — that see the benefit of building a container port in northern British Columbia.

This is a partnership, a partnership that means jobs and opportunities. The members opposite sit here in the House, and they are constantly reflecting on an- other broken promise. They like to use that: "Another broken promise." B. Penner: They would know something about that. B. Belsey: They would. What they don't understand, what they don't want to understand and what they go to great lengths to make sure the public doesn't hear is that it's a partner- ship.

It's a partnership for British Columbians, joining with a company that has a proven track record, an ex- cellent track record in their ability to move freight on rails across this continent. It's a partnership where what we've done is taken BCR and changed it into CNR. We took the B out, and we put a C in. The B is where the billion dollars comes from, the billion dollars that have gone into northern British Columbia and along the rail line. A billion dollars will be spent in British Columbia in northern communities along that rail line in the form of taxes, in the form of buildings and structures.

In my riding, $17.2 million is going to go into the conversion of a terminal that's not being used today, for putting in rail lines, purchasing cranes, straddle carriers. There's another $15 million that's been committed by CN to work on tracks so that they can handle containers, to work on the tracks between Prince Rupert and Prince George so that those tracks will be able to handle con- tainer freight. The other important aspect is that they're commit- ted to spend some of that $15 million on the changing of the current tunnel structures. The problem there is very simple.

To move double-stacked containers, a certain amount of clearance is required to get a train at full speed through those tunnels with that type of

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8309 freight, and right now that can't be done safely because of the movement of the trains. [1445] They have agreed to go in there and clean out those tunnels just enough so that they meet the safety toler- ances. Then they can move double-stacked containers, which that might be coming from any part of the east- ern seaboard of the U.S., any part of northern Alberta or maybe British Columbia. Those containers will be able to come right out to the port and head to the Asian markets.

Also, containers coming from Asian markets, landing in Rupert, can be loaded on rails and shipped right through to the east and mid-central U.S. and points further south. Prince Rupert is uniquely posi- tioned. It has train and rail service that CN has been operating for years, so to have CN now operate B.C. Rail is an excellent fit for our community. Something else needs to be mentioned. There were a number of meetings that I attended as we worked our way through this process, and every time I was asked what my concerns are about B.C. Rail. I mean, I don't live near where B.C.

Rail was servicing British Colum- bia, but I was always given the opportunity to say what was important about rail service, about who was going to take over that rail service on that north-south run, the B.C. Rail run. Every one of my concerns was addressed in this agreement. I applaud the minister for looking into that and taking those considerations. She and her staff have done an excellent job. We have a new leader for the opposition, and, you know, there's not a lot of difference between what she has come out with and what the member opposite, the past leader, has said in the past and certainly in this House.

She plans to travel around British Columbia, and I have no doubt in my mind she'll find her herself one day holding a meeting in Prince Rupert. I just hope those who have nothing better to do than attend that meeting will ask them some very important questions. I hope the longshoremen in Prince Rupert that have struggled, as we've seen this transition from bulk ship- ping to containerized shipping…. I hope those longshoremen go to that meeting and just suggest to her: "What's wrong with this B.C. Rail– CN partnership?" Tell those longshoremen that this is a bad deal, that this shouldn't happen.

They're going to be one of the bigger winners — a potential for 300 to 500 new jobs. They'll be the ones that'll be put to work. Again, their families will be able to live a lot better, certainly, than the difficulties they face today. Talk to the rail workers. Talk to the rail workers who are looking at the potential jobs in moving that freight around on those lines, who will do the mainte- nance work on those lines, who will do the mainte- nance work on some of that rolling stock. Talk to them, and tell them that this is a terrible deal, that this is bad for Prince Rupert, that this is bad for B.C. Rail.

You know, with the suggested up to 500 jobs in the Pacific Northwest, just think of what that means. I hope some of the teachers go to this meeting. If you bring 500 new jobs to an area, that's up to 500 families. That's families that own houses. Those houses will employ carpenters and plumbers and electricians. There will be more school teachers needed for those families, for the children that will be in our schools. There will be more nurses and doctors required for that kind of develop- ment, for that many new jobs. All of those are good points.

I hope somebody challenges that new leader, when she visits Prince Rupert, as to why this is such a bad, bad deal. [1450] This partnership and this deal that the minister and her staff have worked out mean billions of dollars over the life of the contract. I mentioned earlier the $17.2 million for containerization in Rupert, $15 million from CN's commitment to work on the track. There's ap- proximately $8.3 million in municipal taxes that will go to communities along the old B.C. Rail right-of-way.

On average, that's 4.5 times greater than the current funds that they get from the province for grants in lieu of taxes. That's a tremendous boost for these communi- ties. There's $135 million going to go into the north for the northern development initiative, and out of that, four regions will be developed. Each of those regions will receive $15 million. This is great news. This partnership, this agreement, is going to be a tremendous boost for northerners. Another exciting initiative that's come through with this deal is the new tourism and passenger travel service.

Imagine — with the improvements in passenger service that will come with this initiative — being able to get on a passenger train in Prince Rupert and heading to Whistler. It's un- heard of. Imagine being able to do that. I could get on a train there, head down to Vancouver, take a plane across and be in Victoria. It might be better than some of those air flights I've had down here. This is a tre- mendous opportunity for the province. I'd like to look at some of the comments that the member opposite, the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant made when she spoke against this agreement.

She said: "It's clear this deal is not what it was cracked up to be." Well, she's right. It's better than that. This deal is better than any of us could have imagined. This deal is putting money into the north. It's putting jobs first. It's putting northerners first in so many areas. T h i s d e a l i s b e t t e r t h a n a n y o f u s e v e r w o u l d h a v e thought. She also mentioned: "The lost dividends from B.C. Rail will go into the pockets of private companies." Well, think of it. That's another way of saying that prof- its are bad. That's what they built… An Hon. Member: They still don't get it. B.

Belsey: They still don't. …their whole decade on. Imagine an industry mak- ing a profit. Could there be anything worse? Imagine a company having a strong balance sheet. Could there be anything worse? Imagine a company with the money to expand and create additional jobs. Imagine a com- pany with a strong balance sheet and paying taxes. Imagine all that. It's a great thought.

8310 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 As I mentioned earlier, the dividends that will be lost from B.C. Rail…. Well, think of the 4.5 times greater taxes they'll receive compared to what they used to get from the government in payment in lieu of taxes. Another comment: "It's yet another broken promise. This government, this Premier, this Liberal govern- ment, has no credibility." Well, again I say that this is not a broken promise. The promise that was made was that we wouldn't sell or privatize B.C. Rail. We didn't sell it. We didn't privatize it. We still own the right-of- way.

We still own those tracks. We have a partner now that's running the rolling stock and running the service. That's a good deal for British Columbians. [1455] There have been a number of letters and comments made by people around the province. I'd just like to mention a few of them — one from John Winter, presi- dent and CEO of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce. I'd like to read his statement: "Today's agreement between the B.C. government and CN Rail is a win on all accounts. This is more than a billion dollar injection into the B.C. economy.

This is about opening the interior economy in a way that we've not seen in decades. "Cutting rail transport costs by an average of 7 percent and knocking two days off the shipping time to Chicago will help to secure the jobs of tens of thousands of interior forest workers." Another one from Darcy Rezac, Vancouver Board of Trade: "This is an important signal to the world that the province is open for business and is nothing short of an excellent business deal for B.C. We congratulate both CN and the province on the excellence of the agreement.

"This is a vote of confidence in B.C. by a high-quality investor, CN — one of the leading railroads in North America. Particularly noteworthy is that this is a landmark public-private partnership that will distribute the benefits widely throughout the province and especially in the northern communities.

This partnership gets the provincial government out of the business of railway operations." There are many from financial institutions and the investment community — one from Morgan Stanley: "Given past labour and congestion issues at other west coast ports, it is quite conceivable that Prince Rupert could evolve into a significant growth engine for CN in the future.

As a sign of that potential, CNI announced that it is now shipping iron ore from the Upper Michigan iron range to Prince Rupert for vessel delivery to China." This is about creating jobs and opportunities, and this is the spinoff you get when you put together a good deal. Let me explain this just a little more, because it's worth mentioning. We have a coal terminal in Prince Rupert, Ridley terminal, that has been struggling for two, three or four years now with the elimination of a couple of coalmines that are no longer economical.

They have struggled to try and find other products and to find other sources of product and other markets to ship to. They have worked extremely hard. Greg Slo- combe, the CEO, and his staff have worked very hard to find another product that they could ship through the coal terminal that would be able to come in and be handled by their railcars, their stack of reclaimers and their conveyer systems to get the coal into piles and then out of piles and onto ships. Well, they found something.

They found iron pellets from Michigan iron range, a company in Michigan that needed access to the Asian markets. [1500] When the minister brought this deal together, what she gave them the opportunity to have those iron pellets loaded on railcars. They can be loaded on ships. Those ships can go to the north end of Lake Michigan, up into the Thunder Bay area, off of those ships and onto the rail lines, be moved directly through to Prince Rupert and be taken into the Ridley Terminals facilities for shipping to Asian markets. This is a great opportunity.

That's a fine example of how you can make a deal, a partnership, with another group and how the community can benefit from it and how the north can benefit from it. I n c l o s i ng , I ju s t wa nt t o s a y t hat t he m i ni s t e r , he r staff, the Premier, B.C. Rail and CN should be com- mended for what they've done for my riding, for the community, for the people, for the families and for all of northern British Columbia. I take my hat off to them. I thank them all very much, and thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity. J. Les: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this bill.

In this House, we get many opportunities to speak, but I have to say that on this particular bill I r e a l l y w a n t e d t o s p e a k . J u s t s o t h a t y o u ' r e v e r y c l e a r , Mr. Speaker, I want you to know that I am absolutely, fully, completely and unalterably in favour of this leg- islation. It is probably one of the more important pieces of legislation that we've dealt with so far in our term of government. I, as well, want to congratulate the minister and her staff for all the hard work they did to bring this deal home.

For sure it took an awful lot of work, and it was an awful lot of work that was done in the face of a lot of orchestrated opposition by self-interested groups. So it wasn't a slam dunk at anytime along the way. The minister persevered. She exhibited tenacity and, I think, came away with a deal that was far better than many, if not all, of our skeptics were even prepared to think about. It really is one of these signature events in the history of the province.

I think that as a government, we have demon- strated clearly that we're prepared to reorganize the assets of the province in a way that they can do some real good for the province, for the people of the prov- ince and for our collective future. There is no question that the British Columbia railroad was a real asset. There's also no question that that asset was seriously underperforming in its current configuration. By the same token, there's also no question that as we move forward with this new lease with CN, the assets of B.C.

Rail are going to contribute to the economy of the prov- ince in a way that they have not been able to for quite some time. Some of our skeptics have asked: would W.A.C. Bennett have approved of this deal? I have no qualms

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8311 at all in suggesting to this House that he certainly would have. I was a great admirer of W.A.C. Bennett. He truly was one of the great builders of this province, and he would have recognized, as we stand here in the year 2003, that in the modern era this is how you build the province.

Much as he undertook initiatives in his day that added significantly to the economic potential of this province, he would have recognized instinc- tively that this arrangement with CN Rail is a huge step forward and will bring great economic growth to the central and northern interior of British Columbia. One of the more immediate benefits that we see with this lease to CN is that, of course, there's a billion dollars that CN invests in this lease. Given that billion dollars, one of the first things we will be doing is dis- solving $500 million worth of debt.

Some people have kind of waved that off and said: "Well, that's not really that important, because B.C. Rail was responsible for that debt." Somehow they try to leave the impression that British Columbia taxpayers were not on the hook for this money eventually. Well, I have to tell you that taxpayers in British Columbia certainly are on the hook for that money, just as they were on the hook for the $860 million that was written off some years ago. That $860 million, I regret to inform this House, we're still paying interest on, and we'll be paying the interest on that money for a long time to come.

My grandchildren will still be paying the interest on the $860 million that was written off on B.C. Rail. [1505] I would really like to see a day when members of the opposition understand simple economic facts like that, but they set their hair on fire, and they've got all kinds of weird and wonderful explanations on how that's not so. Again, I underline: the $860 million worth of B.C. Rail debt that was written off will be paid for by our grandchildren for a long, long time to come.

When they try to suggest that the $500 million of debt that was written off with this deal somehow wouldn't have ended up on the plate of taxpayers, they are sadly mis- taken. We have altogether too much of a long litany of government misadventures in British Columbia, where we have the fast ferries, for example — $465 million essentially all written off. You know, we've gotten be- yond that nightmare in some ways, but again there's $465 million that's been written off, which our children and our grandchildren are going to have to pay the interest on for years and years and years to come.

That's in addition to Skeena Cellulose, another several hundred million dollars worth of debt written off. These government misadventures have got to stop. With B.C. Rail we have accomplished that, in addition to providing many more opportunities for the future. There is no question that anytime major changes are implemented, it's tough for a lot of people. I under- stand that; I get that. Everybody wants to make pro- gress, but nobody seems to want to make change very often. Certainly, change can be disorienting and can be disruptive.

I'm sure there will be some restructuring in people's lives that will need to happen as a result of this B.C. Rail deal as well, but some of our opponents have tried to invent every Chicken Little scenario that they could possibly imagine and get people to believe. Given that we're talking about railways, I remem- ber — I think it was about 15 or 20 years ago — when railways across Canada decided that cabooses were an archaic feature of the past and really weren't necessary anymore on our modern-day trains. So they brought forward an initiative to get rid of cabooses on the ends of trains.

If you had listened to the public debate at the time, you would have thought that trains were going to be derailing everywhere and that there was going to be a train wreck at every train crossing. Well, the cabooses were duly removed, and I am not sure there's any indi- cation that there's been any commensurate loss of pub- lic safety or safety of operating trains on railway sys- tems anywhere. But we were assured back then and reassured many times over that this was going to det- rimentally affect the safety of railroading in Canada. We've been given many doomsday scenarios around the B.C. Rail deal as well.

I suspect what actu- ally will happen is that we will be looking back five, ten, 15 or 20 years from now, and we will all very much in unison be in agreement that this was one of the major turning points in British Columbia's eco- nomic history — that it was and it is, in fact, a very, very good deal for the residents and for the taxpayers of British Columbia. When we look at the financial performance of B.C. Rail as it is today and we compare that to CN, we see some very interesting factors as well. Before I get into those comparisons, I want to point out that CN Rail also has a very interesting history.

It was at one point a federal Crown corporation, and it had the apron strings cut some years ago. It is now fully in the private sector, and it is one of the three top railways in all of North America. It is the envy of railroading in North Amer- ica. It's been a huge success story, and it started right here in Canada. I'm not sure about other members in this House, but I'm very proud of that — that a Cana- dian railroad has had such an impact on the economy of North America. [1510] If we look at some of the comparisons between B.C.

Rail and CN Rail, we find that CN Rail processes about 260 carloads of freight per employee per year. That compares to 127 carloads per employee per year for B.C. Rail, so you can readily see that CN processes about twice as many carloads of freight per year per employee. In terms of railcars per locomotive, CN has over 4,000 railcars per locomotive where B.C. Rail has only 1,400. CN Rail has 207 annual carloads of freight per kilometre of track where B.C. Rail has only 76.

So on some of those very direct economic comparators, we can readily see where the efficiency of the BCR railway operation is going to be immensely improved as this arrangement goes forward. There's one thing that makes an economy hum more than anything else, and that is efficiency of operation. Those efficiencies will

8312 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 translate into lower prices and greater availability of cars to the shippers of this province. One of the things that I am most excited about is what this will do for communities like Prince George and Prince Rupert. My colleague from North Coast was speaking earlier this afternoon about all of the tremendous benefits this deal will provide to Prince Rupert in terms of making it a major deep-sea port on the Pacific Rim.

Positioned as it is, at a location where shipping from Prince Rupert as opposed to Vancouver gets you a day and a half closer to Asian ports, and then when you factor in railroading from the American Midwest to Prince Rupert instead of to other west coast ports — how that gets you another day or two closer — there is absolutely no question whatsoever in my mind that the port of Prince Rupert has an enormous future ahead of it. I feel particularly good for the member for North Coast, given the extremely hard work that he puts in on behalf of his constituents in the North Coast riding.

It's satisfying to me to see this major new initia- tive moving forward, which is going to provide some payoff for all the hard work that he's put in, in his rid- ing. The city of Prince George, as well, is going to be a major transportation hub not only in terms of the rail- road but in terms of the airport. A significant amount of the money out of this deal is going directly into the airport in Prince George for a major upgrading pro- gram there.

That's going to employ a great deal of ad- ditional people, and perhaps we'll see the kind of growth at the Prince George Airport that we've seen recently in Kelowna, where that airport is one of the fastest-growing airports in all of Canada. I have no doubt that that kind of future is available to the Prince George Airport as well. There are enormous amounts of economic growth that can happen in the heartland of our province, and I really believe that with this deal, we have unlocked the barriers to that growth.

The other communities, all the way from North Vancouver on up, are also going to feel an immediate benefit in terms of their tax revenues. This is very sig- nificant. It's an increase of about $7 million in local tax revenues that these communities are going to enjoy. I know, having been involved in municipal politics for a while myself, that's going to be very welcome to the mayors and the councillors of those various communi- ties.

I would hope, in addition to maybe finding new things for that money to do, that they would pass some of that along in terms of a property tax decrease for their residents in their various communities. I think that's another way of passing along a benefit of this B.C. Rail arrangement to the folks in the communities along the line. [1515] So as I've examined this deal, I've come to the con- clusion that it is a very sound proposition. It enables the heartlands of British Columbia to fully take advan- tage of all of the opportunities of the future.

We all know that an integrated transportation system — whether it's by rail, by air or by road — is extremely important for an economy to advance and to move forward. With this deal, you're going to see that in the several years ahead, there's going to be a tremendous ramping up of transportation infrastructure. There's going to be a new confidence in the heartlands of this province. There are going to be new opportunities for many, many employees and their families. It's one of those times in the history of this province where we have done something we can all feel tremendously good about.

I've noted in the last several days that those who were predicting gloom and doom before this deal was made public have had to reposition a little bit in terms of their rhetoric. They're now probably in the "yeah, but" phase, but they have had to say that the deal looks pretty good. That comes from some people who were most vociferously opposed in the weeks and months leading up to the announcement.

Hopefully, as time moves forward, they will look at the results as they flow, they will get beyond the "yeah, but" stage, and they, too, can become enthusiastic participants in what's going to be part of the economic renaissance of the heartland of British Columbia. With that said, I join other members of this House who have spoken enthusiastically in favour.

I would encourage the members of the opposition, as they get used to all the good things that are included in this deal, to maybe change their minds, as well, and come out in favour so that we can move forward in a united way in British Columbia and provide opportunities for all of the residents that we represent. B. Kerr: I rise to support the British Columbia Railway (Revitalization) Amendment Act, 2003. I think it's a tremendous deal.

I have to say that I wasn't plan- ning on speaking because, being on Vancouver Island, I didn't think it would affect us that greatly, except to the extent that it affects British Columbia as a whole. I thought I would let my colleagues who are more af- fected by this specific act speak on it — the people that are on the rail line, the municipalities on the rail line. But some of the comments that have been made by the opposition members and the members opposed to the act have just compelled me to stand and speak and address some of those more specific issues they've commented on.

I think there are some times when you hear things, and you just say: "Boy, that's why I entered politics." With some of these arguments against this particular act, I've certainly heard that. When I was going to speak, I sat down to crunch some numbers. Then I realized that my colleague from West Vancouver–Howe Sound actually did a very ade- quate job of doing an analysis on the financial state- ments of B.C. Rail to look at where B.C. Rail really is. I ' m s u r e s o m e o f t h e f e e l i n g s a b o u t B . C . R a i l a r e sentimental.

Like my colleague from Chilliwack-Sumas mentioned, it's like the caboose. I get stopped at a train crossing sometimes, and I count the trains going by, w h i c h I ' m s u r e a l l o f u s h a v e d o n e . E v e n w h e n w e ' r e on holidays with our kids, we've all counted the trains going by. We wait for the caboose and it's not there. It's sort of a funny feeling. It's like something's missing,

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8313 but there's no real purpose for that caboose, so it's not there anymore. M y c o l l e a g u e f r o m W e s t V a n c o u v e r – H o w e S o u n d mentioned the increase in debt, the reduction in sales, the poor return on capital. All that leads to a decrease in investment and no ability to open up the north with a decrease in investment and no ability to increase capital that you need to compete in the marketplace. It is a competitive marketplace, and it is losing a lot of its mar- ket share to alternative delivery services.

He looked at the financial statements, and he said: "Well, this com- pany is weak. It can maintain the status quo, but it can't expand and deliver what we need in an expanding economy." I think that's absolutely critical, and I think that's what we're going to get with this deal. As I mentioned earlier, I'd like to comment on some of the detractors of this deal. I'll quote them, because I pulled out Hansard, and I've taken some quotes from what they've said. The first comment I'd like to discuss is from the member for Prince George–Omineca. [1520] You know, the easiest thing in the world is to say no.

I quite often think of bankers. When you go in to get a bank loan, the easiest thing in the world for that banker to do would be to say no, because he can quan- tify his risk and he knows he'll never have to have that risk. But he can't quantify the lost opportunity cost. That's what we're talking about here if we don't go ahead with this deal. Should this deal have been done ten years ago? Maybe it should. If it had been done ten years ago, how much better off would we be? We don't know, because we can't quantify that lost opportunity cost.

But we can certainly quantify the $800 million that w e h a d t o w r i t e o f f b y h a v i n g B . C . R a i l a s a C r o w n corporation, and we can certainly quantify the $500 million more in debt that we are. The easiest thing is to say no, because you can never be wrong . I'd just li ke t o give you a quote from the member for Prince George–Omineca. He stood up, and this is a quote: "What I'm about to say may alarm some because I'm cautiously accepting of what has been achieved by this unified effort coming from all corners of the province. But I will be voting against this B.C.

Rail bill on principle." E x c u s e m e ? H e t h i n k s i t ' s a g o o d d e a l . H e r e c o g - nized a unified effort from all parts of the province, but on principle he's going to be voting against it. I'm try- ing to figure this out. Are his principles no to new jobs? Are his principles no to economic development? Are his principles no to fulfilment of the future potential of the north? Are his principles no hope for the future? They're certainly not my principles. I don't know. Maybe he's just trying to cop out and take the easy way out by voting no.

Then he doesn't have to worry about, when he goes back, retracting what he's been saying by making all the comments and the suppositions he's been making in the past. Cer- tainly I don't know where his principles lie, because my principles are for growth. They are for economic development. They are for opening up the future po- tential of the north, and they are for creating new hope and prosperity in the north and all the along the line of B.C. Rail. Now, I have the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. I'd like to quote one of the things that she said. She was speaking of B.C.

Rail, and she was going on about how we say the time to deliver to Chicago would be less. We can deliver the product faster now to Chicago. We're saying that's a real plus, and, Mr. Speaker, it is a plus. Her comment was: "CN already has the capacity." She said in the press conference: "They have a new train that's already doing it, and the president of CN is proud of his company's achievement in cutting the time from nine days to 90 hours." So he's saying essen- tially that CN has the capacity to do that, but B.C. Rail doesn't have the capacity to do that. CN has the capacity to do that.

Here's where the synergies come in. If CN takes over B.C. Rail and be- comes a partner with B.C. Rail, then B.C. Rail can do that, and that's what we need for the north. What she's suggesting, I would assume — I'm not sure, but I guess — is that we should continue to fund a company that's not competitive, because CN can out-compete us with the new locomotive they have, and we don't have the capital or the capacity to get those type of locomotives or cars that can do that. But in her idea…. B. Penner: Skeena Cellulose. B. Kerr: I'll get on to that in just a minute. I was going to get on to it.

My colleague from across the way mentioned Skeena Cellulose. I was going to bring that up. We've pumped in $800 million in this transaction, supporting B.C. Rail. We've written off $836 million. We've got $500 million of debt that we can now pay off. We've written off $400 million, which I'll mention soon. I would imagine what the member for Vancouver– Mount Pleasant would have us do is continue to pump money into this non-competitive entity similar to what happened in Skeena Cellulose where they pumped in — I think it was — $300 million to $400 million. To what end, what result?

Eventually it went under be- cause if a company can't compete now, it won't be able to compete in the future if it only has sufficient funds to keep it going. You need money. You need additional money to keep things going to expand, to replace existing equipment, to modernize. That's what a company needs. That's the capacity that the B.C. Rail corporation didn't have, and that's the capacity that it will have now under this deal. Again, I support this deal be- cause, regardless of who got it — who bid for it, who got it — it will give the capacity to open up the north.

Now I'd like to comment on the member for Vancouver-Hastings. Some of the comments she made, I just lit up because sometimes we need reinforcement in our political life. I lit up, and I said that's why I got into politics. She has just said the exact reason why I got into politics. I'll get on to that in a couple of minutes.

8314 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 [1525] She said: "I note the government said it's not profit- able. Isn't that awful B.C. Rail had to write down the debt accumulated by the Bennett government in the eighties?" She said: "Nobody got upset when they in- vested $600 million." She said: "My government" — meaning the former government — " w a s f o r c e d t o write off $600 million in debt." You know, the point is not about who invested in it and who didn't invest in it. The point is about risk.

Why should the provincial government, the people of British Columbia, take on the risk when we can have another entity take on that risk and provide greater service? There's an expression: "Why buy the cow when you get the milk free?" Why do we have to own the entity when we can have every- thing we need to develop the province without having to take on the risk? The member for Vancouver-Hastings wants us to continue to take on the risk. Then she complained about how it wasn't really a billion dollars we're get- ting.

Really, it's only $750 million we're getting, be- cause $250 million of that billion is just buying tax credits. Well, that means we'll get $250 million more. I don't care if they're buying tax credits. They're tax credits we wouldn't get with B.C. Rail as a Crown corp. We're still getting that $250 million. It's still a billion dollars cash the government is going to get to be able to open up the north, pay off the debt and still have money to do even more development. The real comment she made, the one I just have to mention here because it was the one that really woke me up….

The member for Vancouver-Hastings has a habit. She likes to hold up pieces of paper. She got up in question period and held up a piece of paper like this, and she said that business analysts were predict- ing that as a result of buying B.C. Rail, CN will get — wait for it — a minimum 18 percent return on their investment. They're going to make a profit. Isn't that exactly what we want them to do — make a profit? Why else would anybody invest in something if they didn't plan on making a profit? Well, she's talking as if "profit" is a pejorative. It's not a pejorative in my lexicon. Profit is a great word.

When I see profits, I see expansion of an economy, I see reinvestment in new capital equipment, and I see new jobs. Profit is a good word. You know, profits to a cor- poration are like breathing to a person. If we don't breathe, we die. If a corporation doesn't have profits, it dies. You have to have profits to carry on. Without profits, you won't exist. In my lexicon, profit is a good word. [K. Stewart in the chair.] Now, she actually quantified the profits.

She said: "It's going to be a minimum of 18 percent return on their investment." I don't want to go through the mathematical calculation of what that is, but let's just look at it, because there's something that nobody has mentioned to date. I've got a secret. Maybe we should just share it in this House and not share it with the members of the opposition, because I think maybe this is the problem they had in the past decade when they were running in the nineties. They didn't understand about profits. Here it is. Here's the secret: companies that make profits pay income tax. An Hon. Member: No. B. Kerr: They do.

It's amazing the way it works. That's how they contribute to the social programs we have in British Columbia — through income taxation. Now, I would like to go on with the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and the member for Van- couver-Hastings. They went on and talked about the $137 million in dividend income we're not going to get back, which they got from B.C. Rail. Over 20 years we got $137 million in dividend income that we're going to forgo. They also said there was no difference between tax- supported debt and taxpayer-supported debt.

Let me tell you, if we did in fact get $137 million from the Crown corporation, if they weren't using money to pay off this entity-supported debt, they would have got that much more. There is n't a differe nce. Debt is debt. When you pay money to service debt, that much less is used to pay for social programs. [1530] Here's the kicker: $137 million over 20 years.

If CN lives up to the expectations the member for Vancouver- Hastings has and gets an 18 percent return on its in- vestment, without going through the calculations, that works out to about $17 million a year — the provincial portion of the debt that we'll collect as a government. If we multiply that over 20 years, it comes to about $351 million.

Let's work this out: $137 million, plus all the risk, plus writing down $836 million of debt, plus accumu- lating $500 million more debt and get $137 million; or no investment, $500 million in the province's coffers that can be used to open up the north, no risk, no writ- ing down of future assets and $350 million of revenue coming over to the province in 20 years. Gee, where am I going to place my money? I don't know how these people can say anything. What really got to me when I heard that was that the former government was all about making sure nobody has a profit and nobody pays income tax.

We're not about that. We're about expanding the province — creating jobs, creating capital investment, inviting businesses back into British Columbia. The more busi- nesses we invite back into British Columbia, the more work CN will probably get and the more profit they will get and the more taxes they will pay. When they pay more taxes, we can put more money into social programs. It's a connect-the-dots; you don't have to be a rocket scientist. Those are some of the things I wanted to bring up that I think are vitally important.

Here we have an in- crease in tax revenue to the province; we have opening up the north; we have huge potential revenue; we've got no more debt. We've got more money coming to all

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8315 the municipalities along the line, which will allow them to develop their communities better. They'll get more property from the redundant assets that are go- ing to be given to some of the municipalities from which they can create an even greater tax base for themselves. In absolutely every respect, Mr. Speaker, this is a win-win situation. It's a win for the province because we're going to get more money without the risk, and it's a win for CN because they're going to make a profit. With that, I'm going to sit down and turn the floor over to somebody else.

I say that I support this deal 100 percent. I think it's absolutely terrific for the province of British Columbia. Hon. R. Coleman: I rise to speak about the B.C. Rail Investment Partnership and this piece of legislation, because it's good news for British Columbia. It takes the leadership of a Premier who has a vision for the province and the hard work and leadership of a minis- ter to get it to where it is today. We should be thankful that both of those people have been working on behalf of British Columbians to achieve this for all of us.

Before we get into what this partnership is about, maybe I'll try and crystallize for the members of the opposition and the member for Prince George– Omineca what it means. You see, as we came through this process, you continually heard members of the opposition say that B.C. Rail was profitable, but they always wanted to ignore the fact that somebody some- time had to write off $850 million in debt against this company, and it owed another $500 million. In my math, that's $1.3 billion in debt — money that's got to come out of the pockets of B.C. taxpayers.

The $850 million just went right out of health care, education and social programs, because it had to be written off. Of course, the opposition says…. Actually, this is what they think. They think the way to make a busi- ness profitable is that you start it, and you burden it with successive amounts of ridiculous debt until such point that the debt is so groaning that the company can't survive.

Then rather than actually recognizing you've got a bad business model here, you write off the debt and let them start back at the beginning again so they can then go along and accumulate some more debt until the pressure groans on the company again and write it off again. [1535] That's how Crown corporations look at it. That's how — before we became government, without profes- sional boards that would actually go out and analyze a company — governments looked at Crown corpora- tions. At least, socialist governments did. They went out and spent $500 million on the fast ferries.

They actually bought a pig in a poke; it doesn't work. Who pays the bill? The taxpayers of the province. It over- burdens, again, another Crown corporation with the ability to actually function, to think forward and to make an investment in itself, because it's under debt. Debt that is badly, badly put together because — you know what? — governments can't run rail services. Governments shouldn't be in the business of running a rail line. We own this property, Mr. Speaker. We own the right-of-way. We own the land. We own the railbed, and we own the tracks. We still own the railbed, the right-of-way and the tracks.

We still own the B.C. Rail company. We actually own B.C. Rail. But what we did is woke up one morning and said: "Maybe if we could find a private partner that knows something about running a railway that could be internationally inte- grated into a North American system, that might actu- ally pay off for the people of British Columbia." Now, somebody must have figured that was a pretty good idea, because CN is paying the province $1 billion for the right to run a railway on our rail system — the one that we own as a province. It's a billion dol- lars to acquire the outstanding shares of the company, B.C.

Rail Ltd., along with a right to operate on B.C. Rail's railbed over a 60-year lease. The railbed, like I said, is going to remain in public hands. Now, what does that do for us? Think about it. Holy mackerel, you've got to think about this. This is great. We've already had to write-off the $850 million. That's gone for B.C. taxpayers. But the $500 million that was accumulating — which would have put a burden on the company down the road that would have had to be written-off — is now going to get paid off because of this new investment coming into British Columbia.

That means for every single year after this deal is made, British Columbians are going to save a mini- mum of about $30 million in interest. Think of how much that interest is, if you wanted to compound it. Just think of the straight multiple: $30 million times 60 years is $1.8 billion. But everybody knows that interest compounds.

Everybody knows that the compounding loss of oppor- tunity that you'll have if you actually don't pay off that debt to begin with is such a multiple that you can't even imagine how that alone is so good for British Co- lumbians — for the opportunity for taxpayers' money to do other things like help with policing, help with schools, help with education and health care, help with post-secondary education, to actually put the fiscal h o u s e o f g o v e r n m e n t i n o r d e r s o t h a t w e c a n d o t h e things we need to do. We need to do this with companies like this, be- cause it is not our business.

We'll hold our asset. We'll own our asset, and we'll make it work for the benefit of the taxpayers that own it. That's what this partnership is all about. This is nothing new. People have been do- ing partnerships in housing with non-profit societies and municipalities for ages, successfully putting to- gether projects where the asset is used to leverage for the long-term success and benefit to a community. That's what we're doing here — something that's abso- lutely spectacular for the people of this province.

Imagine that at the same time you could do it, you could get rid of a staggering amount of public debt that faced you for the future, for your generation and the generations beyond. At the same time, recognize that the burden of that debt along with just the basic main-

8316 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 tenance costs of the railroad were such that it would n e v e r , e v e r b e a b l e t o b e c o m e a n i n n o v a t o r . I t n e v e r , ever would have been able to be visionary, because it never would have had the capital or investment money to go forward and do the great things it needs to do. So what do we get as a result of this, in addition to a billion dollars and paying off the debt? CN is actually going to go out and purchase 600 more centre-beam c a r s .

N o w , w h a t t h e v a l u e o f t h a t i s t h a t w e k n e w , when we had our people go — we put in a professional board and good management who had a look at B.C. Rail — that our shippers were saying to us: "You know what? We don't mind using this railroad, but we never know whether we can get a car on time. We never know when we want to ship our product whether the cars are going to be there with the capacity to move our product to the marketplace." [1540] W e k n e w t h a t w e w o u l d h a v e t o m a k e a n i n v e s t - ment in additional railcars.

Oh, that would be more debt in addition to the $500 million we already had. Now we have a partner that is going to go out, in addi- tion to the billion dollars it's giving us for the right to run the railway, and make the investment in the cars. That's going to increase the capacity for our forest shippers in particular, because this is where the major- ity of forest products in British Columbia come from — along this corridor and in this area.

The 1,500 boxcars will help ensure that customers have access to railcars where and when they need them, and faster transit times will also improve the availability of the cars by 800 cars. You see, one of the things we talked about when we were talking about this thing is the Chicago express. We talked about synergies between two railways com- ing together. We talked about better planning as far as you ship things.

Everybody knows, if you've ever been in any business that moved any goods and services, that if your truck is on the road for two days — or your railcar — when you could be using it for only one day, you'll actually get two days if you had it out there for only one day. But if you do that with a railway, it's the same compounding effect. Imagine this. You have 500 railcars that have to take three days to go somewhere and take three days to come back.

If you could send them in a day and a half and get them back in another day and a half, you could get them out in another day and a half and coming back in another day and a half. That's like giving your- self double the number of cars, and that's what this deal does. Just by improving the shipping times, im- proving the efficiencies, it's like adding another 800 cars to the rail system on top of the 600 new cars that we brought into the system, and that's pretty impres- sive. What's more important is that we've always known we need to open up gateways.

We've always known that in order for goods and services to move, for indus- trialized provinces like ourselves and particularly those with resource communities, you have to get your goods and services to the marketplace. You've got to retain the ability to do that, and alternatives, and get them through ports and what have you into an interna- tional marketplace. You have to keep your rates com- petitive so that you will continue to attract the cus- tomer and so they won't go find an alternative way of delivering those products to the marketplace, because you need to be competitive.

What's going to happen is that the shippers that are actually on interline shipping in this deal are going to get about 7 percent for interline rate shipment cost re- duction, combining savings also from the rate reduc- tions to about $7 million annually. They're no longer going to be subject to additional switching at the Van- couver interchange, helping further reduce transit times from Prince George. Now, that doesn't sound like much, but it is. It's like what I said a minute ago.

If the car is moving and it's getting there quicker and your goods and services are getting there quicker and you're getting paid, your accounts payable are coming in quicker. That means you can reduce your interest costs of the operation of your company or your carrying costs. You can actually pay your staff and look for an expansion and moderni- zation of your mill, because you're actually getting the business done.

The downstream benefit of improved shipping ac- tually affects the actual operation of a business, the actual operation of its efficiencies long-term and the investment it might want to make in expanding the mill in Quesnel, Williams Lake, Prince George or in and around Prince Rupert. That's simply because peo- ple will recognize that by getting the savings and get- ting these products to the marketplace, they can actu- ally expand and access more of the marketplace, be- cause they know they can deliver those goods and ser- vices better.

One of the things I like about this is the improved access to marketplaces, and there are a number of them, amazingly enough. It's like a buffet of great things to do with shipping and getting products to the marketplace, and I want to tell you about them. You're not going to hear it from the members of the opposi- tion.

You might get an epiphany on the way to the fi- nalization of this deal from the member for Prince George–Omineca, but he doesn't want to vote for it because he doesn't want to believe that anything good could be done in the province — particularly right in his riding, where this has a huge impact. However, I stray. The improved access to markets is this way. You're going to cut down about 30 percent of the shipping time from Prince George to the lower mainland. That gets all of those products into that system quicker.

It moves them back quicker, as far as getting the cars back and the efficiencies in the system, like I mentioned before. Then you're going to have this Chicago express. Can you imagine? Prince George, in the centre of Brit- ish Columbia, will have a Chicago express into the ma- jor commodities trading market of the United States and its connections — two days shorter as a result of the Chicago express.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 8317 When our forest companies go down and our min- ing companies go down…. Anybody else with a com- modity that comes out of British Columbia can go down and say: "You know, we can get our products to you quicker than you can possibly imagine from any other area. You think we're a long way away. Well, let me tell you something. We've got this express that runs out of Prince George. We actually move this stuff through. We'll get it down to you.

We'll ship you the goods and services on time so they can get into your marketplace." [1545] CN has got this figured out. They've made a deal with Great Lakes shipping recently, and they have some other ore they need to move back out, so they want to bring it up through and out to the port of Prince Rupert into the Orient. Oh, another market to be opened up. But this one's remarkable because we're going to put a $15 million investment into the port of Prince Rupert, and CN's going to make an investment there.

On top of that, they're actually going to go along that rail line and fix it, so that the tunnel is a little bit higher and so they can do double-stacking of contain- ers and turn Prince Rupert into an international ship- ping port. They're going to be moving goods and ser- vices across to Rupert. What's so important about that? It's a day and a half closer to the Orient, to the Pacific marketplace, than Vancouver or Seattle or the other ports on the west coast — a day and a half.

Now we're going to move it quicker to start with, and then we're going to get it into a ship and a day and a half quicker to the Asian marketplace. You don't think that this guy wants to see his product get there quicker and get paid quicker? You don't think the guy at the other end of that wants to get that product sooner so he can get it into that huge market that he wants to sell it into and get his return on investment? This is great news for Prince Rupert.

This is great news for the whole north- ern corridor, as far as being able to ship goods and ser- vices across the north into the gateway that we're going to build. There's more. We have an airport in Prince George. Prince George is a hub of an area of British Columbia where you have Quesnel and Williams Lake. You have the northeast and the northwest. You have all kinds of opportunities that are going to come out of the Olym- pics and everything we do with resorts and everything else. What do we need to do? We need to be able to get people into these communities.

So we're going to do an expansion at the Prince George regional airport, and we're putting $4 million into that to boot, as a result of this deal. That's just going to make the access and the movement of people and investment easier into Prince George and the entire north region and the Cariboo- Chilcotin.

What's even more important is that this initiative, as it was done by the Premier and the Minister of Transportation, was done with keeping the entire prov- ince of British Columbia in mind and particularly rec- ognizing that the huge opportunities to open up the north and create jobs and opportunities up there had to be dealt with. Let's just talk for a second about Prince George as a gateway up there. We're going to have a new office for northern development initiative, which I'm going to talk about in a second. The province is going to pro- vide, like I said, the $4 million to the airport.

A B.C. north division office will be established, ensuring bet- ter service, improved forest shippers, located so the 75 percent of B.C. forest shippers that are located within 200 miles of Prince George will particularly be affected by having that office there. CN is also going to invest in jobs in Prince George, with a wheel shop, and make an investment in there of $1 million in a state-of-the-art wheel shop that will ac- tually have people working in Prince George and learning another trade and bringing opportunities to that city.

I'm sure as CN sees the ability of northerners just in that one wheel shop and the other things that we do, CN is going to say: "You know what? We got some other operations across North America and across these lines that should be in these communities, be- cause we've got skilled workforces and we've got a dedicated group of people who are hard-working and committed to building the province and building and performing for us. Maybe we should invest even more and put more in there." There are also benefits for every community along the line.

We had a thing called grant in lieu of taxes that we did with regard to communities across British Columbia, where Crown corporations came through. Canadian National is actually going to start paying taxes, the level of property taxes which exponentially in communities….

I know the member from Williams Lake, the member from Prince George and the mem- bers from all along this line have already identified this in their speaking, or will do — the fact that the finan- cial benefit of that coming into the tax base of the local community can start to enhance services at the local level for other issues and other things that they want to do in local communities with regard to this. That's im- portant, because I think those tax dollars have to come to communities.

Those tax dollars need to come to local governments so that they can do what they need to do. [1550] There are other benefits. One that I like particularly is, just as an example — and I know it's going to hap- pen in communities along the line — that the excess lands that aren't used for the railbed, the right-of-way and the tracks are going to be made available to the communities for redevelopment. This is just an unbe- lievable opportunity. Whether you take the community of Squamish, which will get about 71 acres down on the waterfront area or close to it….

Some of it is water- front in Squamish, where they could actually do an entire redevelopment of that community, which is in between Vancouver and Whistler and at the hub of a couple of other significant resort developments that are on their way to British Columbia. So you can see that if they get that opportunity to reinvigorate an entire community with good community planning as they

8318 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2003 build a base for their revitalization in Squamish, it will have an impact on the affordability of housing and activities all the way up and down the Sea to Sky corri- dor. This is good. In Prince George they're actually going to get some land for a park, and they'll have other redevelopment opportunities in that community, as well, off the lands from B.C. Rail.

If you look at the north, we're actually opening up a line that had been previously closed, so we can move the grain and other issues in and out of that area with regard to shipping and that sort of thing. Then there is this whole concept of actually invest- ing some of the money that comes from this particular deal in northern communities directly to northern communities — in addition to paying down the debt for all British Columbians, saving the interest for all British Columbians, saving the operating costs for all British Columbians.

One of the biggest and most im- portant things for all British Columbians is that the breadbasket of opportunity that's up there, that area of development and tax base that actually supports health care and education, needs to be supported by all British Columbians through this deal. That's why there is going to be a number of things that take place up there. There will be $60 million di- vided among four regions: Prince George, the Peace, the northwest, and the Cariboo-Chilcotin and Lillooet.

That's money that's going directly into those communi- ties so those people can decide where to invest it, whether it be for the benefit of tourism, other forms of development or other types of infrastructure for the benefit of their communities. They are the people that have been there for us for a long time, feeding British Columbia with taxes and support from the rural regions.

Then there's the $50 million for a general trust to support cross-regional investments tied into this other $60 million, and a $25 million endowment with the interest used to support the operations of a northern development initiative centred in Prince George. Great stuff, because it gives people in those regions the seed capital to actually go out and come up with initiatives and ideas to build the future of their communities, build their resource-based communities and build other opportunities in there, this beautiful area of the province that they call home.

It is good because there's also another $15 million for a first nations benefit trust, a trust that will go to the first nations along the line with regard to this, so that they can also seek out and go after the opportunities. You know, some people are going to ask you about the process. Now, I'll tell you. As a member of cabinet, I can tell you that the minister and this government processed this right down the line. I know that the people who were involved, the MLAs from all across the regions, were part of a process to discuss this, to work on it, to get what was best for the people of the province where B.C.

Rail served. I can tell you that we do not do process that isn't fair. We do fair process, and when the fairness commissioner reports out on this deal, I am confident that everybody will find out that this was handled properly, correctly and fairly for the benefit of all British Columbians. That's how it should be; that's how governments needs to perform when it does a deal like this. [1555] The frustration that's put out there by our oppo- nents in opposition is: "Darn. They did it.

They actually got an unbelievable deal for British Columbians, and they kept the asset." That deal pays down debt, rein- vigorates areas of the province, creates all kinds of job opportunities and opportunities for people in all areas of British Columbia, and they did it fairly. And while they did it, which was very frustrating for the opposi- tion to this deal, they refused to breach the professional protocol of how a business deal is done with people when you have confidentiality agreements about trade information that shouldn't be shared between bidding and competing partners.

That was the process, and as we went through that process, we were really looking for four things. Com- munity benefits. I think I've described those — up and down the track, whether it be taxation or jobs or in- vestment opportunities or improvement of a rail line or shipping quicker and actually saving all businesses money, getting more investment and seeing this huge explosion over the next number of years in northern and central communities in British Columbia as a result of the B.C. Rail deal. I

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H1201pm-05
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H1201pm 05
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	679fd0c5020d8483837f54ca21079c610fde4150

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