H0531am 01

H0531am 01

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session, 39th Parliament official rePort of Debates of the Legis Lative a ssemb Ly (hansarD) the honourable bill bari Soff, SPeaker iSSn 0709-1281 Tuesday, May 31, 2011 Morning Sitting Volume 24, Number 1

Pro Vince of britiS h colu Mbia (entered c onfederation July 20, 1871) lieutenant -Go Vernor h is h onour the h onourable Steven l.

Point, obc Third Session, 39th Parliament SPeaker of the leGiS latiVe a SSeMbl Y h onourable bill barisoff eXecutiVe council Premier and President of the executive c ouncil .............................................................................................................. h on. c hristy c lark Deputy Premier and Minister of finance ............................................................................................................................h on. k evin f alcon Minister of a boriginal r elations and r econciliation ...........................................................................................................h on.

Mary Polak Minister of a dvanced e ducation .................................................................................................................................h on. n aomi Y amamoto Minister of a griculture ........................................................................................................................................................... h on.

Don Mcr ae a ttorney General ........................................................................................................................................................... h on. barry Penner, Qc Minister of c hildren and f amily Development ................................................................................................................ h on.

Mary Mcn eil Minister of c ommunity, Sport and cultural Development .................................................................................................. h on. ida c hong Minister of e ducation .........................................................................................................................................................h on.

George a bbott Minister of energy and Mines and Minister r esponsible for h ousing.........................................................................h on. r ich c oleman Minister of environment ....................................................................................................................................................h on. Dr. t erry l ake Minister of f orests, l ands and n atural r esource o perations......................................................................................h on.

Steve Thomson Minister of h ealth .................................................................................................................................................... h on. Michael de Jong, Qc Minister of Jobs, t ourism and innovation ................................................................................................................................... h on. Pat bell Minister of l abour, citizens' Services and o pen Government .............................................................................. h on.

Stephanie c adieux Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General .................................................................................................................h on.

Shirley bond Minister of Social Development and Minister r esponsible for Multiculturalism ............................................................ h on. h arry bloy Minister of t ransportation and infrastructure ................................................................................................................h on. blair l ekstrom leGiS latiVe a SSeMbl Y l eader of the official o pposition ......................................................................................................................................................a drian Dix Deputy Speaker .................................................................................................................................................................................... l inda r eid a ssistant Deputy Speaker ..................................................................................................................................................................Dawn black Deputy c hair, c ommittee of the Whole ...................................................................................................................................Douglas h orne c lerk of the l egislative a ssembly...................................................................................................................e.

George MacMinn, obc, Q c c lerk a ssistant ..................................................................................................................................................................................r obert Vaive c lerk a ssistant and l aw c lerk................................................................................................................................................. ian D. izard, Qc c lerk a ssistant and c lerk of c ommittees ............................................................................................................... craig h.

James (on leave) c lerk a ssistant and a cting c lerk of c ommittees ................................................................................................................. k ate r yan-l loyd Sergeant-at-a rms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary l enz

alP habetical liS t of MeMberS a bbott, h on. George (l) ........................................................................ Shuswap a ustin, r obin (nDP) ................................................................................ Skeena bains, h arry (nDP) ....................................................................Surrey-n ewton barisoff, h on. bill (l) ............................................................................Penticton barnett, Donna (l) ................................................................ c ariboo-c hilcotin bell, h on.

Pat (l) ..................................................... Prince George–Mackenzie bennett, bill (l) .............................................................................k ootenay e ast black, Dawn (nDP) ................................................................n ew Westminster black, iain (l) .............................................................. Port Moody–c oquitlam bloy, h on. h arry (l) ............................................................burnaby-l ougheed bond, h on.

Shirley (l) ...........................................Prince George–Valemount brar, Jagrup (nDP) ................................................................ Surrey-fleetwood c adieux, h on. Stephanie (l) .................................................Surrey-Panorama c antelon, r on (l) ..............................................................

Parksville-Qualicum c handra h erbert, Spencer (nDP) ................................Vancouver–West end c hong, h on. ida (l) ..................................................... o ak bay–Gordon h ead c houhan, r aj (nDP) ........................................................... burnaby-e dmonds c lark, h on. c hristy (l) .................................................Vancouver–Point Grey c oell, Murray (l) ..............................................Saanich n orth and the islands c oleman, h on. r ich (l) ........................................... f ort l angley–a ldergrove c onroy, katrine (nDP) .............................................................. k ootenay West c oons, Gary (nDP) .........................................................................n orth c oast c orrigan, k athy (nDP) ..................................................... burnaby–Deer l ake Dalton, Marc (l) ..............................................................

Maple r idge–Mission de Jong, h on. Michael, Qc (l) .............................................. a bbotsford West Dix, a drian (nDP) ............................................................Vancouver-kingsway Donaldson, Doug (nDP) ......................................................................... Stikine e lmore, Mable (nDP) ................................................... Vancouver-kensington f alcon, h on. k evin (l) ..........................................................Surrey-c loverdale f arnworth, Mike (nDP) ............................................................

Port c oquitlam fleming, r ob (nDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan l ake f oster, eric (l) .......................................................................Vernon-Monashee f raser, Scott (nDP) ............................................................a lberni–Pacific r im Gentner, Guy (nDP) .........................................................................Delta n orth h ammell, Sue (nDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green t imbers h ansen, c olin (l) ............................................................

Vancouver-Quilchena h awes, r andy (l) ............................................................... a bbotsford-Mission h ayer, Dave S. (l) .................................................................... Surrey-t ynehead h eed, k ash (l) ................................................................ Vancouver-fraserview h ogg, Gordon (l) ............................................................... Surrey–White r ock h organ, John (nDP) .......................................................................

Juan de f uca h orne, Douglas (l) ..............................................c oquitlam–b urke Mountain h oward, r ob (l) .....................................................................r ichmond c entre h untington, Vicki (ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, c arole (nDP) .........................................................Victoria–b eacon h ill k aragianis, Maurine (nDP) ........................................e squimalt–r oyal r oads k rog, l eonard (nDP) ........................................................................... n anaimo k rueger, kevin (l) ............................................... k amloops–South Thompson kwan, Jenny Wai ching (nDP) ...........................

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant l ake, h on. Dr. t erry (l) .....................................k amloops–n orth Thompson l ali, h arry (nDP) ..........................................................................f raser-n icola l ee, r ichard t . (l) .......................................................................burnaby n orth l ekstrom, h on. blair (l) .......................................................

Peace r iver South l es, John (l) .........................................................................................c hilliwack l etnick, n orm (l) ........................................................k elowna–l ake c ountry MacDiarmid, Dr. Margaret (l) ......................................... Vancouver-fairview Macdonald, n orm (nDP) ....................................c olumbia r iver–r evelstoke Mcintyre, Joan (l) ..................................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Mcn eil, h on. Mary (l) .................................................Vancouver–f alse creek Mcr ae, h on.

Don (l) ................................................................... c omox Valley Mungall, Michelle (nDP) ..........................................................n elson-creston Penner, hon. barry, Qc (l) ....................................................c hilliwack-h ope Pimm, Pat (l) ..........................................................................Peace r iver n orth Polak, h on.

Mary (l) ...............................................................................l angley Popham, l ana (nDP) ...................................................................Saanich South r alston, bruce (nDP) ................................................................

Surrey-Whalley r eid, l inda (l) .............................................................................r ichmond e ast r outley, bill (nDP) .................................................................. c owichan Valley r outley, Doug (nDP) ............................................n anaimo–n orth c owichan r ustad, John (l) ........................................................................... n echako l akes Sather, Michael (nDP) ......................................... Maple r idge–Pitt Meadows Simons, n icholas (nDP) ...................................

Powell r iver–Sunshine c oast Simpson, bob (ind.) .....................................................................c ariboo n orth Simpson, Shane (nDP) .....................................................Vancouver-hastings Slater, John (l) ..............................................................boundary-Similkameen Stewart, ben (l) ..................................................................... Westside-kelowna Stilwell, Dr. Moira (l) ......................................................... Vancouver-l angara Sultan, r alph (l) .....................................................

West Vancouver–capilano Thomson, hon.

Steve (l) ........................................................k elowna-Mission Thorne, Diane (nDP) .................................................c oquitlam-Maillardville Thornthwaite, Jane (l) .......................................... n orth Vancouver–Seymour t revena, c laire (nDP) .................................................................... n orth island van Dongen, John (l) .............................................................a bbotsford South Y amamoto, hon. n aomi (l) ................................. n orth Vancouver–l onsdale Y ap, John (l) .......................................................................r ichmond-Steveston liS t of MeMberS bY riD in G a bbotsford-Mission .......................................................................r andy h awes a bbotsford South .....................................................................John van Dongen a bbotsford West ......................................................h on.

Michael de Jong, Qc a lberni–Pacific r im ..........................................................................

Scott f raser boundary-Similkameen .....................................................................John Slater burnaby–Deer l ake ................................................................... k athy c orrigan burnaby-e dmonds ......................................................................... r aj c houhan burnaby-l ougheed ...................................................................h on. h arry bloy burnaby n orth .............................................................................. r ichard t . l ee c ariboo-c hilcotin ........................................................................Donna barnett c ariboo n orth ................................................................................ bob Simpson c hilliwack ...............................................................................................

John l es c hilliwack-h ope .......................................................... h on. barry Penner, Qc c olumbia r iver–r evelstoke .................................................. n orm Macdonald c omox Valley...........................................................................h on. Don Mcr ae c oquitlam–b urke Mountain .....................................................Douglas h orne c oquitlam-Maillardville...............................................................

Diane Thorne c owichan Valley ................................................................................ bill r outley Delta n orth ......................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ...............................................................................Vicki h untington e squimalt–r oyal r oads .....................................................Maurine k aragianis f ort l angley–a ldergrove ...................................................h on. r ich c oleman f raser-n icola........................................................................................ h arry l ali Juan de f uca .....................................................................................John h organ k amloops–n orth Thompson ............................................ h on.

Dr. t erry l ake k amloops–South Thompson ...................................................... k evin k rueger k elowna–l ake c ountry ...............................................................n orm l etnick k elowna-Mission .............................................................. h on.

Steve Thomson k ootenay e ast ....................................................................................bill bennett k ootenay West ............................................................................ k atrine c onroy l angley.......................................................................................h on. Mary Polak Maple r idge–Mission .....................................................................

Marc Dalton Maple r idge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................Michael Sather n anaimo ......................................................................................... l eonard k rog n anaimo–n orth c owichan ......................................................... Doug r outley n echako l akes ..................................................................................

John r ustad n elson-creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall n ew Westminster ..............................................................................Dawn black n orth c oast....................................................................................... Gary c oons n orth island .................................................................................. c laire t revena n orth Vancouver–l onsdale ........................................h on. n aomi Y amamoto n orth Vancouver–Seymour .................................................

Jane Thornthwaite o ak bay–Gordon h ead ............................................................ h on. ida c hong Parksville-Qualicum ..................................................................... r on c antelon Peace r iver n orth ................................................................................Pat Pimm Peace r iver South ...............................................................h on. blair l ekstrom Penticton................................................................................... h on. bill barisoff Port c oquitlam ..........................................................................Mike f arnworth Port Moody–c oquitlam ...................................................................... iain black Powell r iver–Sunshine c oast ................................................. n icholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie .............................................................h on.

Pat bell Prince George–Valemount ...................................................h on. Shirley bond r ichmond c entre ............................................................................ r ob h oward r ichmond e ast ................................................................................... l inda r eid r ichmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich n orth and the islands .....................................................

Murray c oell Saanich South ................................................................................ l ana Popham Shuswap ...............................................................................h on.

George a bbott Skeena .............................................................................................. r obin a ustin Stikine ........................................................................................Doug Donaldson Surrey-c loverdale .................................................................h on. k evin f alcon Surrey-fleetwood ...............................................................................Jagrup brar Surrey–Green t imbers ..................................................................Sue h ammell Surrey-n ewton ................................................................................. h arry b ains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................ h on.

Stephanie c adieux Surrey-t ynehead ........................................................................... Dave S. h ayer Surrey-Whalley.............................................................................. bruce r alston Surrey–White r ock ....................................................................... Gordon h ogg Vancouver-fairview ................................................ Dr. Margaret MacDiarmid Vancouver–f alse creek ........................................................ h on.

Mary Mcn eil Vancouver-fraserview ........................................................................k ash h eed Vancouver-hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-kensington .................................................................Mable e lmore Vancouver-kingsway..........................................................................a drian Dix Vancouver-l angara .................................................................Dr.

Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant ..........................................Jenny Wai ching kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ......................................................... h on. c hristy c lark Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................................... c olin h ansen Vancouver–West end ...............................................Spencer c handra h erbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................eric f oster Victoria–b eacon h ill .......................................................................c arole James Victoria–Swan l ake.........................................................................r ob fleming West Vancouver–capilano ............................................................. r alph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ........................................................

Joan Mcintyre Westside-kelowna .............................................................................ben Stewart Party Standings: l iberal 49; n ew Democratic 34; independent 2

CONTENTS t uesday, May 31, 2011 Morning Sitting Page introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 7627 introduction and first r eading of bills ................................................................................................................................ 7627 bill M209 — e lection finance a mendment a ct, 2011 b. Simpson Standing order 81.1 ................................................................................................................................................................ 7627 a doption of government business

schedule h on. r . c oleman J. h organ Standing order 81.1 (Speaker's r uling) ............................................................................................................................... 7628 Orders of the Day Government Motions on notice ........................................................................................................................................... 7629 Motion 11 — Government changes to harmonized sales tax (continued) r . a ustin G.

Gentner c. t revena J. brar b. r outley Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room c ommittee of Supply .............................................................................................................................................................. 7641 e stimates: Ministry of finance (continued) b. r alston h on. k. f alcon M. Mungall D. Donaldson

7627 tueSD a Y , MaY 31, 2011 The h ouse met at 10:04 a.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Prayers. [1005] Introductions by Members H. Bains: This morning, visiting this great house of democracy are students from c ougar creek e lementary. They are around the vicinity, i'm told. i haven't seen them yet, and i will be meeting them after. They're grades 5 and 6, accompanied by their teacher and their parents. So please help me welcome them to Victoria. Introduction and First Reading of Bills bill M209 — election finance aMenDMent act , 2011 b. Simpson presented a bill intituled e lection finance a mendment a ct, 2011.

B. Simpson: i move that a bill intituled e lection finance a mendment a ct, 2011, be introduced and read now for a first time. Motion approved. B. Simpson: The fundamental principle of democracy is one person, one vote. h owever, that fundamental principle is undermined by money , specifically the ability of candidates in political parties to raise money from organizations which do not have voting rights and the ability of people with financial means to enhance their vote and, therefore, their influence through cash donations.

The current freedom of organizations and individuals to donate huge sums to political parties significantly undermines the one-person, one-vote principle. This bill addresses that issue and supports the principle of one person, one vote by restricting the right to donate to candidates and political parties to registered british c olumbia voters only. The bill also levels the playing field by capping individual donations at $1,000 per year. This is a radical change from the current system that would create a fundamental shift in the relationship between candidates and political parties and the voting public.

The e lection finance a mendment a ct would restore accountability to the electoral system by ensuring that the principle of one person, one vote is honoured and reflected in how election campaigns are financed. i move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the house after today. bill M209, e lection finance a mendment a ct, 2011, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the h ouse after today. Hon. R.

Coleman: before i do the orders of the day, i have a motion i'd like to put to the h ouse. it's on the order paper. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. Standing Order 81.1 a DoP tion of Go Vern Ment bu Sine SS Sche Dule Hon. R.

Coleman: [Pursuant to Standing o rder 81.1 (2), all remaining stages of bill (n o. 2) intituled budget Measures implementation a ct, 2011, bill (n o. 8) intituled international interests in Mobile e quipment (a ircraft e quipment a ct), bill (n o. 11) intituled Y ale f irst n ation f inal a greement a ct, bill (n o. 12) intituled Police (independent investigations office) a mendment a ct, 2011, bill (n o. 13) inti- tuled Miscellaneous Statutes a mendment a ct (n o. 2), 2011, bill (n o. 14) intituled c oastal f erry a mendment a ct, 2011, bill (n o. 15) intituled Municipalities e nabling and V alidating a ct, (n o. 4) and all uncompleted e stimates shall be completed and disposed of on or before 5:30 p.m., Thursday, June 2nd. a t 5 p.m. on the date mentioned, the Speaker and the c hair of the c ommittee of the Whole will forthwith put all necessary questions for the dis- posal of all uncompleted e stimates and remaining stages of the said bills without amendment or debate and divisions called on sections of the said bills shall be taken in accordance with Practice r ecommendation n o. 1. a ny divisions called on the e stimates or second or third reading of said bills may be taken in accordance with Standing o rder 16 and all other divisions will be covered by Practice r ecommendation n o. 1.

Proceedings under this motion shall not be subject to the provisions of Standing o rder 81, or the Standing or Sessional orders relating to times and days of the sit- tings of the house.] a t the same time, i'm tabling with the motion a proposed

schedule for legislation and motions within the h ouse over the next three days. J. Horgan: i rise to speak to the motion. it was brought to my attention over the past number of days. i've been making efforts with the Government h ouse l eader to endeavour to find an opportunity to complete the debate on the bills that are before the h ouse, to find an opportunity to fully debate a $40 billion budget on behalf of the people of british c olumbia. The Speaker will know that prior to the beginning of this session this l egislature sat for four days over a ten- month period — four days, hon.

Speaker. [1010] The expectation, i believe, of the people of british c olumbia is when they elect legislators, they send 85

british c olumbia Debates7628 t uesday, May 31, 2011 representatives to Victoria to respect and protect their interests. i think there's an expectation — all members have that expectation; all their constituents have that expectation — that we will be in this place doing the people's work until we're finished. i have a great deal of respect for my colleague the member for f ort l angley–a ldergrove.

We have done our level best to work within the parameters of a fixed schedule, which we all agreed to some ten years ago in this place, but not once in the six years that i've been a member of this place have we stuck to the calendar. e very single year there's an amendment. This year we sit for four weeks to discuss $40 billion of public money.

We were told at the start of this session: "i t will be a light legislative load. a couple of bills — that's all we'll have." fifteen pieces of legislation and a motion amend - ing tax policy in british c olumbia introduced yesterday reducing the ability of the people of british c olumbia to take their collective wealth and provide services in cranbrook, c astlegar, c omox, c ourtenay — right across the province. That's why we come here. That's why we have elections. People will know we have a fixed election date in british c olumbia, apparently, but it's still at the whim of the member for Vancouver–Point Grey.

We are under the expectation in this place when we come here that there are rules. The Government h ouse l eader today stood and amended the rules. The Government h ouse l eader stood in this place and said to 84 other members: "t ough luck. So sad. So sorry. We're done Thursday at five o'clock come hell or high water." That's the position of the government. That's the position of the Government h ouse l eader. We have made every effort, and there will be back- and-forth.

We'll be in the corridor debating whether we have had sufficient time for this or that and thus and so. but ultimately, it strikes me that this is a question of principle. it's a question of principle about why we are here. Why do we have elections?

Why do we select an individual man or woman to come to Victoria to repre - sent the interests of british c olumbians if we only do it at the whim of the government? i fully understand and respect the government's desire to advance their agenda. n o question about that. n o question at all. but the executive council has at their disposal 40,000 staff and now, come five o'clock on Thursday, $40 billion to spend.

The role and function of the 85 members sent here by the citizens of b.c . is to scrutinize that expenditure, to hold the government accountable — good or bad, left or right, n ew Democrat, l iberal, whatever they want to call themselves on the other side. The "h ey, just vote for us; we're not the n DP" party is what i seem to hear from them more than anything else. if that's how they want to characterize themselves, that's fine. if they want to be completely absent of any moral compass, any set of principles that will guide them other than "we want to cling to power as long as we can," that's fine.

That's absolutely fine. but the people of british c olumbia watching today, those in the gallery who came here to watch democracy unfold, have seen the guillotine slammed down on debate in this place. They've seen the government use their majority , use their ability to contort, to bend the rules to their will. i reject that. Those on this side of the house reject that. i sense that the Speaker is going to tell me that he's had wisdom from the c hair that a discussion about what we're doing here is out of order. a re you going to ask me to sit down? i'm standing until you do. Mr.

Speaker: Y es, Member, i'll ask you to sit down. Members, pursuant to Standing order 81.1(2), and i'll read it: "a Minister of the c rown who from his or her place of the h ouse, has stated that an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of section (1) of this Standing o rder in respect of proceedings at one or more stages of a public bill, may propose without notice a motion for the purpose of allotting a specified number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at one or more stages of a public bill.

The motion shall be decided forthwith, without debate or amendment. a ny proceedings interrupted pursuant to this

section of this Standing order shall be deemed adjourned." J. Horgan: h on. Speaker, in your recitation you made no reference to the budget estimates. i understand that this is an extraordinary amendment, and as much as the guillotine and closure time allocation has been used on legislation in the past, in my six years here and in a brief, brief discussion with the clerk, i'm of the understanding that the budget estimates have not been truncated in this form in the past. i seek your counsel on that. [1015] Standing Order 81.1 (Speaker's Ruling) Mr.

Speaker: h on. o pposition h ouse l eader, the estimates have been, in the past, subject to this order. So with that, i will propose the motion at this point in time. [1020] Motion approved on the following division. Yea S — 44 r ustad Mcintyre r eid Thomson l ekstrom bell Yamamoto Mcn eil c hong Polak Mcr ae c oell h awes k rueger l etnick Sultan barnett l ee

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7629 Dalton h eed c adieux Penner c oleman c lark f alcon bond de Jong abbott h ansen MacDiarmid Yap Stilwell c antelon l es Pimm h ogg h oward Stewart f oster van Dongen horne bennett Thornthwaite Slater na YS — 33 S. Simpson D. black fleming f arnworth James kwan r alston Popham b. Simpson a ustin k aragianis brar h ammell l ali bains Dix Mungall chouhan Macdonald c orrigan k rog Simons Gentner e lmore Donaldson f raser b. r outley c onroy h untington c oons Sather h organ t revena [1025] Orders of the Day Hon. R.

Coleman: i now call Motion 11 on the hS t , and in c ommittee a we'll be doing estimates of the Ministry of finance. Government Motions on Notice Motion 11 — Go VernMent chan GeS to harM oniZeD SaleS taX (continued) R. Austin: i'm very proud to take my place in the debate on Motion 11, the latest iteration of the how to fix the hS t for a government that, i think it's fair to say, has broken trust with the people of this province by bringing in this tax in the very first instance. h ere we are today, over a year after the 2009 election, still discussing the h St. [D. black in the chair.] Why are we here?

We are here, of course, because a government decided not to have this debate, not to have a fulsome discussion on tax policy prior to the last election. o h no. That wouldn't have been quite right. n o, instead what they decided to do was to pretend that while the world economy was spiralling into descent, that actually the finances of british c olumbia were still okay, that we would only have a deficit of $495 million.

That was the position of the b.c. l iberal Party prior to the '09 election. n ow, most people in british c olumbia, indeed most people around the world, looked at that and thought: "That's not possible." but oh, no. The b.c. l iberals kept that pretence up — that the deficit would only be $495 million. in reality, after the election the b.c. l iberals found themselves with a huge problem: a deficit that was actually 400 percent bigger than the one that they had gone to the electorate on — 400 percent bigger. So what we are discussing here at the end of the day isn't so much just an issue of tax policy.

What we're discussing here today is a matter of trust. Do people in british c olumbia still trust the b.c. l iberals to be honest with them around the hS t? a fter all, it was brought in to solve the big problem of this massive deficit. h ow did that solve their problem? Well, they got an extra $1.6 billion from the federal government to bring in a tax that they had promised they would never bring in. That's why we're here today. n ow, since they have brought in that tax, they've said a whole bunch of things about the hS t . They said it would be revenue-neutral.

Well, we then find out that it brings in hundreds of millions of dollars more than the PSt and GS t . They weren't honest about that. They misled the h ouse in regards to that. We discover later on that it's no longer revenue-neutral.

They said that if they brought it in and gave this mas - sive tax shift from business and corporations to people, that somehow corporations would, in their wisdom, take that benefit and flow it through to communities — either through lower prices in products and services, or they would reinvest those tax savings that they have been given and create jobs. [1030] Well, i want to speak just for a second about what happens when you continually give corporate tax cuts to big companies. i'm going to use just one example. in my riding there was a company that had a pulp mill in k itimat, the e urocan pulp mill owned by West f raser.

They received a very substantial tax benefit through a thing called the black liquor tax. That was actually a federal program. What did that company do with the $18 million that they received as a benefit from their investments in k itimat? They took the $18 million, shut down the e urocan pulp mill and used the $18 million someplace else in the province of b.c. That's just one example of how corporations, when they're given constant corporate tax cuts, don't necessarily put it back into the communities that they serve. Y ou know what, hon.

Speaker? it's not their responsibility to look after the communities necessarily. Their responsibility is to look after their shareholders' interests. it's the re - sponsibility of government here in the l egislature to try

british c olumbia Debates7630 t uesday, May 31, 2011 and help the people of british c olumbia, to make sure that we can create equal opportunities around the province for everybody. That's our responsibility, and this government is failing to do that. They also said: "Well, you know what? c ompanies will give back cheaper prices in goods if they get a savings on the hS t . They'll pass it down." Well, let's just look at that.

Y ou know, the government actually had a savings on liquor taxes. t he PS t and the GS t had a higher liquor tax than the hS t , a 3 percent savings on the hS t if you were to go to the liquor store after the hS t came in. What did the government do? They raised the prices of liquor — okay? They raised the prices of liquor. once again, there were no savings to british c olumbians from having the hS t .

So on all counts we can see that the government has weaved, it's bobbed, it's done whatever it can to try and make out that the hS t is a good thing for consumers, that it's a good thing for citizens in terms of job creation. u nfortunately, that's not the case.

This motion seeks to give a…. h ow shall i put it nicely? it's giving a financial inducement to people to vote in the upcoming referendum. it's saying to british c olumbians, who've already been misled through and through for close to two years on the hS t : "t rust us. t rust us just once. if you were to vote the hS t in at 10 percent, we'll reduce the hS t , and we will give some financial induce- ment to seniors and to all british c olumbia families that have a child under the age of 18." Well, first of all, i think it's hard to imagine that british c olumbians, after all they have witnessed in the last two years, could actually believe the government — that in the future, two years down the road, they will eventually take the hS t down to 10 percent. but that's up to british c olumbians to decide. i can certainly tell you, hon.

Speaker, that when i have been back in my community — and i've only spent one weekend back in my home community since this was brought in — people come up to me and say: "Y ou know what? i really don't believe it." e ven if they did lower this, there are still so many items that are not covered by the PSt -GSt which would be covered by a 10 percent hS t that, quite frankly, in the long run most families would be far worse off under the hS t , because at the end of the day this is still a huge tax shift from corporations onto individuals. l et's look at the record of the last ten years.

What have we seen in terms of tax policy here in british c olumbia? We have seen the costs for average families go up and up, while the corporate sector has seen continual benefits in terms of reduced corporate taxes. i think the anger that we see about the hS t wasn't simply the fact that british c olumbians know they were misled by a government that promised not to bring it in.

What really upset them was the notion that they are continually having to pay more and that corpora - tions are continually getting to pay less. i think this was the straw that broke the camel's back, because the hS t , when it was introduced, put a burden of $1.9 billion onto families. That's a whole heck of a lot of money onto families that wasn't there prior to the hS t being there.

So families said: "We've had enough." [1035] l ook at some of the introductions of taxes that have come on. it's not just tax policy. it's all the extra charges that come onto families. it's the hydro rates. it's icbc, creating such huge profits with what every british c olumbian has put into icbc that the government then drags $750 million out of icbc . it's MSP premiums that have gone up. a ll of these changes are not in any way progressive. t hey are regressive. Why? b ecause if a family that makes $40,000 has to pay the same MSP premiums as a family that makes $140,000, it's not fair.

So what we have seen in the last ten years…. if you look at the total tax take in the province of british c olumbia, you will see a reduction in the corporate sector, and you will see an increase to families in terms of how much they have to pay to make up for what has been given to the corporate sector. So they've had enough. i think that where i come from in northwest b.c. people are particularly upset because we haven't seen any benefits that have flowed through from corporations. i heard the other day the Minister of f orests making the argument that this is a good tax for the forestry sector.

Well, i can't speak for the whole province as he can, but i can speak for the northwest, and there isn't a single manufacturing facility left in northwest b.c. So even if there's a benefit coming through for the corporate sector in forestry, what are they going to do — suddenly reopen mills that have been torn down? n o, it's gone. it'll never come back now. it's a little bit too late, and it's too little — far too little. f or those of us who live in northwest b.c., we see this as something that has hurt ordinary families. it hasn't helped our regional economy in any way.

People feel that they have been misled time and time again, and they've had enough of it. a ll i can say is this. i am going to vote no to this motion, as indeed are all of my colleagues. When i go out from this place next Thursday, i am going to be speaking with constituents, and i'm going to be telling them why i will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum. i'll be voting yes to extinguish the hS t , to go back to a PSt -GSt regime because that is what is better for families. There's been too much burden put on them, and it's time for the corporate sector to pay their fair share. G.

Gentner: i, too, will be voting no against this motion, and there are a number of reasons. i want to focus on one particular aspect of it, and that's the hS t and the Stanley c up. That's why i cannot support this motion. l et me explain it this way. The boston bruins from Massachusetts have a 6.25 sales tax — period. h ere it

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7631 could be 12 percent, 11 percent, maybe 10 percent. i know the member from the South Peace is all happy and wonderful because he's supporting the boston bruins. h e probably bought his jersey in boston at a very cheap rate because there's no sales tax, or less sales tax, on that jersey than there is here. interjection. G.

Gentner: The northeast. but the Minister of t ransportation and infrastructure — we know he flip- flopped on the hS t , and now he's supporting it, like a fish out of water. a nd now he's supporting the big, bad bruins over there, knowing that in boston they don't have an hS t . Y ou know, in boston you don't pay tax on the a merican flag. it's exempt. Y ou don't pay on uniforms, team uniforms or sports jackets. in boston there's no tax on sporting events. They don't pay for the hot dogs, the banners and the programs for hockey.

They don't even have a parking tax when they go see the bruins. but here, you know, i wish our government would support minor hockey the way the Governor of the State of Massachusetts does. They're exempt on hockey tickets. There are no hockey expenses there on the hockey tickets.

Y ou watch the bruins, and there are no taxes on hockey hats. but the big, bad, ugly bruins don't have the hS t . [1040] o ur Premier donned a c anucks jersey, and any child in this province who wears an adult shirt — and most must, with the jersey of hockey, because they're large — has to pay the hS t . i hope, of course, that the Premier paid the hS t . The Stanley c up is coming to Vancouver.

The silver - smiths in boston don't pay a tax on servicing and polishing the Stanley c up, but in Vancouver, if we win, we will. a lthough boston has to pay 6 percent on the silver polish product, here we have to pay 12 percent on the product. l et's say we go organic and stay away from the abrasive, ammonia-filled commercial silver cleaners. l et's say, you know, with Mary e llen's solution, we use toothpaste — non-abrasive, organic toothpaste that won't tarnish the Stanley c up. n ow, the difference between boston and Vancouver is that there's no tax on toothpaste in boston, but there is here now in Vancouver. n ot only is it more expensive to shine the holy grail in Vancouver, but prevention against tooth decay is more expensive here in british c olumbia as well.

Mary e llen's old tricks don't even work in british c olumbia. if you can't polish the Stanley c up or your teeth with tax-exempt toothpaste, how can you and your teammates smile for the team picture?

When the Vancouver c anucks hoist the 35-pound Stanley c up, let it shine, Madam Speaker, let it shine. h allelujah, let it shine, and let's make sure it's without the burden of the h St . i say: "Go, c anucks, go. l et's defeat the bruins and kill the hS t ." i want to talk about prevention and how important it is for children to live a healthy lifestyle. h ockey parents — obviously not the Premier — have witnessed rink rentals for ice time, because of the hS t …. n ow, for the n orth Delta minor hockey, costs are going up, way up. r egistration for house team members is $600. f or a rep team member, it's an additional $250.

Y ou add on extra ice time, it's $100. Skates today are $400 to $500. a helmet is a hundred bucks. Pads and equipment, another $200. Sticks now are $100 to $150. So you add it all up, and you throw on the hS t . h ockey is not affordable in british c olumbia. Shame. Shame on the b.c. l iberals. i thought we were putting families first, but we're gouging families. i want to talk about hockey sticks. Y ou know what? There are very few hockey sticks that are even made in this country anymore. They're made overseas.

We're supposed to claw money from the hS t , giving a break to manufacturers, thinking it's going to create more added value. but even our hockey sticks are no longer made in this province, in a province of wood. h ow will the hS t police deal with that new under - ground economy, the annual hockey used equipment sales that hockey teams put on with mom and dad? a re we going to tax the resales like we do everything else? That's what this legislation does.

We have an under - ground economy emerging, no thanks to the b.c. l iberals. f undraisers to help pay for all of this — you know, the expenses of hockey…. h ockey rentals are going up, and catering is going up, all because of the hS t . r enting a bus to go to a hockey tourney? hS t slapped on it. f ood for the trip, for the young 'uns, another hS t tax. bandages and medical supplies are now part of the hS t — used to be exempt. e ven the vitamins that get your little ones up for the game — hS t . [1045] Y our team accounting is now taxed. Massage therapy, if you need it, is taxed.

When you launder the smelly team equipment and clothing, it's now taxed too. but you know what? in boston most of all that is exempt. if it's not, they only pay 6 percent. families first from this government? i don't think so. n ot even a longtime hockey sponsor, t im h ortons, supports the hS t .

So when you watch the hS t Stickman on t V during the hockey playoffs, don't forget that the real stickhandling by the b.c. l iberals when it comes to fairness doesn't exist. it's blatant high-sticking. i want to briefly touch on this, and i'll surrender the chair because i know a lot of people want to speak. but briefly, the hS t referendum was originally going to be conducted under the r ecall and initiative a ct, which contains detailed rules for campaign finance. n ow, the b.c. l iberals decided to hold the referendum under the r eferendum a ct instead. The r eferendum a ct allows

british c olumbia Debates7632 t uesday, May 31, 2011 rules to be adopted and amended from the e lection a ct, which also contains detailed rules for campaign finance. but that's not what they're doing. The hS t r eferendum a ct does not incorporate or set any rules for campaign financing. The b.c . l iberals chose the h St referendum rules through an order-in-council, and the regulation that they passed has no campaign finances rules like those in any other election — shame.

The b.c. l iberals' rules don't require financial agents, registration of third-party advertisers, identification of an ad sponsor, disclosure of contribution expenses, limits on contribution expenses, or financial reports. The type of election on the hS t conducted by the b.c. l iberals is more than just high-sticking. it's more than just roughing. it's cheating, it's rigging, and they should not only receive a game misconduct, but they should be suspended for life.

This referendum ballot is about cheating. it's about disenfranchising voters who won't be registered, voters who will be away on holidays, voters who are transient. u niversity students will be away with no permanent addresses, no ability to go into an election booth and talk to an election official. it's about undelivered ballots. it's about ballots lost in the mail. it's about not knowing whether your ballot was received and counted. it's about third parties perhaps voting for others. it's about ineligible ballots from voters who have moved. it's about ballots sent to questionable and temporary addresses. it's about picking up discarded ballots in recyclable blue and yellow bags on the curbside for garbage day. it's about voter intimidation for employers and special interests.

The electioneering during a normal election is forbidden within a couple of hundred metres from the voting place. h owever, your fundamental protection and privacy is gone under this process, and perhaps your vote could be sold and bought.

That is the situation that's at hand. n ow, the government came out against the internet balloting process for the city of V ancouver. it was because, according to the Minister of c ommunity, Sport and c ultural Development, the election legislation was not in place, so he nixed it. n ow, the elections officer said that with physical ballots, observers do not need special- ized knowledge or qualifications to ensure that votes are properly cast and counted, but the technology on on-line voting inevitably turns the process into a black box which could undermine public confidence. i wish the b.c . conservatives could put that same concern about this process as they did with the on-line voting process that they nixed in the city of Vancouver. h on.

Speaker, with that, i will surrender the chair, but i do want to stress my outrage at the h St and how it's going to affect families, those who want to play sports in particular. a nd i also want to voice my outrage at the methodology that's being employed for this sham of a vote for the hSt . [1050] M. Dalton: i seek leave to make an introduction. Deputy Speaker: Please proceed. Introductions by Members M. Dalton: in the gallery today we have 33 students and their parents from a lexander School in a bbotsford. They're accompanied by their teacher Mrs.

Grieve, who is from Mission. i had the opportunity to talk with them on the steps just prior to coming here. Would the h ouse please make them feel welcome. Debate Continued C. Trevena: i am speaking on Motion 11. i think it will come as no surprise to either side of this h ouse that i will not be supporting Motion 11. it was brought in yesterday, four days before this h ouse is being closed down. We have met for four weeks in ten months. We are being asked to decide a significant piece of tax policy in a debate that is being truncated.

We've just heard that all proceedings are going to be shut down on Thursday evening, no matter whether they have been fully debated or not.

That is wrong. it is unacceptable in a democracy that a government should act so flagrantly. t ax policy is central to a government's role. it's how it earns the money to provide the services. but in this motion it is changing the way it wants to approach a tax which is already grossly unpopular, and it is not allowing full debate to do so. it is absolutely outrageous that we should even be debating this motion, because what we in this h ouse are being asked to do — and i'm not going to mince words; we don't have time, unfortunately, to mince words, to be loquacious — is to bribe the people of british c olumbia so that they will support keeping the harmonized sales tax when we have a referendum this summer.

Previous colleagues have talked about the way the ref- erendum is being held, but in Third World states, this bribery…. We would be condemning it. if some govern- ment in a different country was going to its people and saying, "We want you to keep this tax, so we will pay you to keep this tax," we would say: "That's outrageous. Y ou can't do that.

That's not the way the government works." Government policy is supposed to be thoughtful. it's supposed to be considered. it's supposed to be in the best interest of the people who they are representing, par - ticularly when it comes to fiscal policy. but here in b.c . it seems that it's okay. The people of b.c . are expected to accept that they're going to be patsies and that they can be bribed by their own government. it's not okay. it's not healthy for our democracy. it's not healthy for our fiscal policy. it is simply wrong, and i think the voters of b.c. recognize that.

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7633 i remember in high school history class in england learning about the evolution of the political process. i'd like members to cast their minds back to maybe 1832 when we had the r eform a ct which started to clean up the political process. in 1832 the r eform a ct got rid of rotten boroughs — those places where almost no one lived but a number of MPs were elected. Victorians were reform-minded.

They became zealots in ensuring that democracy worked, and by 1872 they also recognized that it was wrong for politicians to bribe the electorate. a t that time what happened was that politicians and their agents would take men off for drinks — it was only men who had the vote at that stage — and take them to the open hustings to ensure they voted the right way. There is not much difference in what we are seeing today in this motion. in cutting the rate of the tax, in offering people cheques — we are not seeing much difference.

That's 150 years of democratic tradition thrown to the wind. o ur present Premier clearly seems to think that bribery is good. Give people a cheque for each child and promise that an already regressive, already unfair tax bill will be less in 2014. This is a government that is unable to keep a promise for six weeks.

Why would anyone consider trusting them for a three-year time span on anything? a nd on the hS t of all things, which they promised not to bring in during the election campaign and six weeks later threw in people's faces, is stretching everyone's credulity. i know that my colleagues on this side of the h ouse have quoted the Premier's statements when she was running for the leadership of the b.c . l iberal Party, but those statements underline boldly and heavily the reasons people have every right to be angry about this crass piece of political manipulation. [1055] The Premier said: "We aren't going to be talking about trying to reduce it by a point or two" — the rate of the hS t — "before the referendum. i mean, i think people will see that as buying them with their own money." Y es, Madam Premier, people will see what's being done as buying them with their own money, and people will not accept it. n one of us should underestimate the people whom we represent, but i think the Premier and her finance Minister live in such a rarefied world that they don't understand that basic principle.

Y ou have to respect people's intelligence, and what people know is that the hS t has made life more expensive over this last year, and they will not be bought off. We have debated time and again in this h ouse over the last year the inequities of the hS t . it is not a fair tax. a flat tax is regressive. it costs more for consumers. Members from the government side can try to laugh it off, as they often do, but everything from coffee to haircuts to bikes to funeral costs cost more with a flat sales tax.

That cheque in the mail isn't going to be enough to make life more affordable for tens of thousands of people in b.c., nor is it going to make business better for the painters, the home renovators, the restaurateurs — those businesses that have seen their profits impacted time and again in the last 11 months.

That 7 percent puts a lot on a quote for a job. it puts a lot on a bill for a meal. it is a direct hit to individuals and to businesses. t o function well, an economy needs some fiscal cer - tainty. businesses need to know that they can trust the government to act rationally. individuals need to be able to plan around what they earn and what they have to pay for in goods and in taxes. i've got to say that i do not see how this government can continue to act as though it has any fiscal or financial credibility.

Guardians of our economy? n ot only has it had deficit budgets for five of the last ten years and not only did it have the largest deficit ever in b.c. in 2002, but then we get the arrogant, rampant financial promises. f rom costs for the convention centre — remember this, Madam Speaker? — $495 million budgeted for, and it turns out it cost nearly double that; or the b.c. Place roof, $577 million, $208 million over the original estimate, which according to the b.c. l iberals was based on a business plan…. So much for their business plans.

Then, of course, very sadly, the very memorable line in the last election about the budget deficit — $496 million and not a penny more. o ops, as the finance Minister likes to say. Just after the election it happened to be $2.8 billion, only reduced by the $1.6 billion payoff from the federal government to bring in the hS t — which of course is why we ended up with the hS t in the first place and a government that is so arrogant it doesn't think people recognize that for what it is.

These last two years the b.c. l iberals have shown their lack of control over economic policies and, after that oops moment of an unexpected $2.4 billion deficit —$2.4 billion is a huge amount of money — and the hS t , we had the on and off unilateral and unexplained income tax cut brought in by the previous Premier, which was then ruled out. n ow, the mistress of the popular airwaves, bending to what she thinks the public wants to hear, cuts the hS t and cuts a cheque to the people.

The Premier needs to realize that this is not a local radio show she's producing. it's about running a province, and the health and well- being of four million british c olumbians need it to be done well. it seemed for a fleeting moment in the b.c. l iberal leadership campaign that she did understand the true costs of playing with tax policy. [1100] if i might quote her again: "c utting the h St by 1 point is more than $800 million out of the budget this year and every year after that; $1.6 billion" — seems

british c olumbia Debates7634 t uesday, May 31, 2011 a familiar figure — "for a 2-point cut. We need to ask ourselves where we're going to get that money, because we are going to have a $1.6 billion bigger deficit, or we're going to have $1.6 billion fewer heart operations, special needs teachers, school facilities, hospital emergency rooms." i continue to quote the Premier: "i mean, that's where the money comes from, ultimately. So yes, government could cut it, but at what cost to the citizens?" bingo, Madam Premier. at what cost, indeed?

This scandalous bribery of the b.c . electorate, massive tax shift to the corporate sector will without a doubt mean cuts to services, cuts to schools, cuts to health care, cuts to people with special needs. We are daily raising in this h ouse the effects of those cuts — people being forced to leave group homes and left without any support, the impacts of poverty on women, the lack of help for our seniors. a progressive tax system and a progressive government look after the needs of the people first and foremost.

Without providing a solid, equitable start in life through child care and education, without providing security for people with public health care and a social safety net, we are a much poorer society, both morally and economically. l et's not delude ourselves. The neoconservative approach of cutting public funding to the bone means we are less able to compete nationally and globally. h ealthy, well- educated people who are not worrying about the high cost of housing and who know their children will get the same equitable start in life that they were able to get are going to be more productive.

They do not have to be bribed to support a government, because the government is worthy of people's support. This government is not. it is tired, and it is moribund. it is so desperate to hang on to power, with no agenda except being in power. it is willing to undermine our democratic processes by bribing the people on whose behalf it is supposed to be working. Madam Speaker, i will not be party to that sort of politics, and i will not be supporting this motion. J. Brar: i also rise to speak against the motion, and let me tell you why. The question for me and for the people of b.c. is very simple.

The question is: why should the people of b.c. trust the b.c. l iberal government on anything they say about hS t? That's the question, because the b.c. l iberals have lost the trust of the people of british c olumbia, and the people of british c olumbia don't trust them on anything they say about the hS t .

That's because the b.c. l iberal position on the hS t has been changing almost every minute, every day. before the election the b.c. l iberals told the people of b.c. that they had no plans to impose the hS t on the people of b.c., and the b.c. l iberals told the people of b.c. that the hS t is not on their radar. That was before the election. They gave that commitment in writing to the c anadian r estaurant and f oodservices a ssociation.

They also gave that commitment in writing to the Greater Vancouver h ome builders a ssociation. but that was before and during the election campaign. a s soon as the elections were over, they changed their mind.

Then Premier Gordon c ampbell and the b.c. l iberals betrayed the people of b.c . by doing just the opposite. in less than two months the b.c. l iberals broke their major promise that they made to the people of b.c. during the election, and that was not to impose the hS t on the people of b .c. c learly, they misled the people of british c olumbia. c learly, they deceived the people of british c olumbia. c learly, they did not tell the truth to the people of british c olumbia, because they knew.

They knew very well that telling the truth means losing the election. [1105] That was the situation, and that's why the people of british c olumbia don't trust the b.c. l iberal government anymore. That's why they don't trust this government. Madam Speaker, if you look at the story, during the election they made another promise to the people of british c olumbia, and the promise was that the deficit would be $495 million, not a penny more.

That was before the election, and that was during the election. t hat was the commitment made by the Premier and every member of the b.c. l iberal Party to the people of british c olumbia. but as soon as the election was over, the people of british c olumbia found that the reality was way different than that. The deficit, in fact, was $1.8 billion, almost four times larger than originally forecasted by this government. c learly, on this issue, as well, b.c. l iberals misled the people of british c olumbia.

That's why the b.c. l iberals have lost the trust of the people of british c olumbia, and that's why the people of british c olumbia don't trust this government on anything they say about the hSt . [l. r eid in the chair.] The story goes on. When the b.c. l iberals went down big time in the polls, former Premier Gordon c ampbell appeared on bct V to announce 15 percent income tax cuts to buy back support from the people of british c olumbia, on a prime-time t V program.

People were mad to see this low level of politics, bribing people with their own money to get back their support, and his popularity went down even further. it went down even further. So the people of b.c. finally forced the former Premier to step down because of his deception around the hS t . What happened next? The b.c. l iberals flip-flopped and decided to withdraw the 15 percent tax cut announced by their own Premier. They did not get what they wanted to get from the people, bribing them to get back their support. Guess what happened. They withdrew that 15

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7635 percent tax cut given to people because the people did not respond the way they wanted them to respond. That's why the b.c. l iberals have lost the trust of the people of british c olumbia, and that's why the people of british c olumbia don't trust this government on anything they say about the hSt . a nd the story goes on. o nce upon a time the b.c . l iberals promised — during the election, again — that the b.c. l iberals would provide the best education system so that no child is left behind. Soon after the elections were over, they started closing schools.

They have closed 175 schools in the province of british c olumbia. c learly, they were not honest with the kids of this province and with the people of this province, and that's why they have lost the trust of the people of british c olumbia. a nd the story goes on. o nce upon a time the b.c . l iberals made the promise to the people of british c olumbia that they would not sell b.c. r ail. but as soon as the elections were over, they actually sold b.c. r ail.

That's why the people of british c olumbia don't trust the b.c. l iberals, and they don't trust anything the b.c. l iberals say to the people of british c olumbia about the hS t . The story i just told you clearly tells us there is a clear pattern, that this government says one thing before the election and does completely the opposite after the election. The b.c . l iberals have become masters of misleading british c olumbians.

The b.c. l iberals have become masters of deceiving british c olumbians, if you look at the last election patterns. [1110] They continued to say one thing before the election and continued to do completely the opposite after the election.

People thought, and i also thought, the new Premier probably will be different, but the new Premier is not a change in any way, Madam Speaker. a s a radio show host, the new Premier had this to say about the hS t : "it is an insult to british c olumbians for the government to, first of all, have brought in this tax in what most of us regard as a very, very sneaky way, and then to refuse to bother explaining why they did it. They can't even be bothered to mount a defence, and i think that is an insult. That is an insult." cknW , July 28, 2010.

She also said that it seems impossible that the tax wasn't contemplated before the spring ballot. "i just don't think it is possible that that could be the case." cbc news, Thursday, a ugust 13, 2009. Just a few days ago the b.c. l iberals now decided, and they made the announcement, that they are going to reduce the hS t by two points. That was the announce - ment made, again, to buy back support of the people of british c olumbia just to win the referendum. That's the story.

The current Premier pointed out…. before she flip-flopped on this move as well, this is what the current Premier said: "We aren't going to be talking about trying to reduce it by a point or two before the ref- erendum. i mean, i think people will see that as buying them with their own money." That's what the Premier said during the leadership race. a s soon as the leadership race is over, now the Premier is there to support it, basically to direct her finance Minister to reduce the hS t by two points.

That's why this government has lost the trust of the people of british c olumbia, and that's why the people of british c olumbia don't trust this government on any- thing they say about the hS t .

The Premier of british c olumbia — i'm talking about the new Premier of british c olumbia, Madam Speaker — made three specific promises to the people of british c olumbia, three promises on the hS t , during the leadership race. a s soon as the leadership race was over, the new Premier changed her mind and completely, completely changed her position on that one. before the leadership race the Premier promised to the people a June 24 referendum. a fter the race was over, she broke her promise to have the referendum on June 24. instead, ballots will be sent out June 13, but the vote will not end until July 22, with results not known until a ugust — merely a month short of the original September 24 date, rendering the change almost useless.

The second promise. before the leadership race the Premier made the promise to the people of british c olumbia to "provide equal funding to both sides dur - ing the referendum period, as was done in the electoral reform referendum." a fter the race was over, she broke that promise to the people of british columbia, as well, and now has decided to spend $7 million of the taxpayers' to convince the people of british c olumbia to support the hS t — $7 million. n ow the situation is like this.

The pro-hSt funding is roughly about 78 percent, the anti-hS t funding is just 4 percent, and arguably, neutral funding is 17 percent. h ow is this referendum is going to be a fair process? This is not going to be a fair process. [1115] The other promise the Premier made. before the leadership race the Premier promised: "The referendum will be conducted in the same manner as a provincial election." a s soon as the race was over, she broke that promise as well and now is choosing a mail-in vote instead of her promised election-style vote.

The list of those realities, the list of those broken prom- ises, the list of l iberals' broken promises before and after the election goes on and on. When we talk about the hS t , it is very clear that the hS t will hurt b.c. families and small businesses. The reality is that the hS t is an unfair tax on british c olumbians. The hS t transfers $1.8 billion in taxes paid by big businesses now onto the backs of b.c. families and small businesses. big business will pay less, and the people of british c olumbia will pay more, and small business

british c olumbia Debates7636 t uesday, May 31, 2011 people will pay more. i know i am mindful of time as well, Madam Speaker, but the bottom line is that the hS t will drive up the cost of many things for b.c. families. The cost of restaurant meals will go up. The cost of many groceries such as snack food and other prepared food like salad, sandwiches and heated food will go up. School supply costs will go up. Services such as taxi fares will go up.

The cost for live theatre, movie tickets, amuse- ment parks, campground fees, museum admission and whale-watching tours will go up. a ccounting services costs will go up. Veterinarian care costs will go up. o ther professional services like architects and real estate agents will go up. c lasses like yoga, dancing and martial arts will go up. Membership fees for clubs and gyms and player fees for team sports will go up. f acility and ice rink rental will go up. h aircut costs will go up. The list goes on and on.

This is going to cost b.c. fam - ilies way more than b.c. families were paying under the GSt and PS t system. hS t is also going to hurt small businesses and the economy of british c olumbia. it's going to hurt the res - taurant and food service industry, the construction and real estate industry, the tourism industry, the taxi indus- try and the veterinarians. Thousands of people will lose jobs because of the hS t . The restaurant industry alone forecasts that the hS t will cost them up to 12,000 jobs. The tourism industry predicts that it will cost them up to 10,000 jobs.

That's why lots of british c olumbians are opposed to the hS t , which includes the b.c. r estaurant and f oodservices a ssociation, the c ouncil of t ourism a ssociations of b.c., b.c. c are Providers a ssociation, the f ederation of c ommunity Social Services of b.c., the r ental o wners and Managers a ssociation of b.c., the u nion of b.c. i ndian c hiefs, and the list goes on. i would like to conclude by saying this. There is no winner among the people of british c olumbia or among the small business community of british c olumbia.

The only people who are winners in this game are the cor - porations and the wealthy people who are friends of b.c. l iberals. That's why the b.c. l iberals are doing al - most everything possible to buy back the support of the people of british c olumbia. i would like to conclude by saying the message from the people is very clear. These 700,000 people signed a petition to stop the hS t , to eliminate hS t ; 700,000 people came out.

They came out because their message is very clear. [1120] The message is that b.c. l iberals cannot continue deceiv- ing the people of british c olumbia. b.c . l iberals cannot continue betraying the people of british c olumbia. e nough is enough, Madam Speaker. We must stop the hSt . i will vote yes to get rid of the hS t , and i will be vot - ing against this motion in this h ouse. B. Routley: it is indeed a joy to rise in this h ouse and talk about an issue that's important to the constituents in the c owichan Valley.

Y ou know, in talking to people throughout the c owichan Valley…. i talked to restaurant owners who said that this is already impacting their business. a pool and spa owner said that in the past he had lots of orders, lots of work for pools and in-ground pool construction, and these are not cheap projects. We're talking about $100,000 to $150,000 pools, and he has had none — zero, nada — since the introduction of the hS t . The consumers understand that it's a huge bill on any kind of construction work. So it's affecting new-home builders, it's affecting home renovators, and it's affecting roofers.

Senior care. i was sitting next to a fellow, having my lunch, and it turned out he had five senior care facilities. i said: "Y ou know, the hS t has winners and losers. a re you one of the winners in this deal?" h e said: "n o, i'm not." h e said: "a s a matter of fact, i buy food to feed to the seniors, and guess what. i have to pay hS t on the food that i hire in and those prepared meals that i bring in — pay those suppliers the hS t — and i have no alternative but to hand it on to the seniors." So that's what's happening to seniors — more costs.

Y ou know, you have to give it to these l iberals, though. i was there minding my own business, having a wonder- ful time watching a c anucks game. What could be more harmless than that? What could be more enjoyable? What could reduce your blood pressure and just have a wonderful time — watching a c anucks game? but there, hidden in…. a s soon as there's a commercial, there it was, lo and behold. i have to give it to them. These l iberals and their spin doctors are really, really crafty. Stick men.

Go figure. but you know, they had it figured out. a ny stick man looks way more honest and trustworthy than any l iberal ever could. What kind of l iberal could they put up? So for $5 million, give or take a billion, they hatched yet another jiggery-pokery l iberal plan. Stick men. The people of b.c., i know, will see through the stick men. They know full well that these l iberals are going to be sticking it to them. That's who they're going to be sticking it to. These guys with their commercial should be in h ollywood, or maybe in Disney.

Maybe they could do a sequel: "r un for your life. h ere come the stick men." i can see it now. They could even tell a story about nice politicians sending out cash to all good girls and boys under 18, but no, that would be just too unreal. Well, apparently not. n ot here in british c olumbia. n ot with these b.c. l iberals. a nything is possible.

More jiggery- pokery, trying to buy votes with people's own money. it's a pattern. it's a pattern that, sadly, we have to hear over and over again. it's for the sake of transparency, for the sake of the people of b.c. who come down here. i'm glad there are a few folks listening. Maybe for the first

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7637 time they're hearing that this is the pattern that goes on. This is what really goes on in british c olumbia. [1125] This government said they weren't going to sell b.c. r ail, and they did. They said that they weren't go - ing to rip up health care contracts, and they did. They said they care so much about education, and then they closed community and rural schools all over british c olumbia and ripped up teachers' contracts, and it took the Supreme c ourt to bring some fairness back in the province of british c olumbia.

They said that they had to order paramedics back to work, and i spoke in this h ouse on behalf of paramedics that i know.

They said they had to order the handful of people that weren't working back to work because there was a big pandemic coming. n o pandemic. in the 2009 election they said emphatically and on multiple occasions: "We will have a $495 million debt and no more." The post-election September budget fore- cast was updated to $2.8 billion. by the time the fiscal year was over, the official deficit came out as $1.8 billion, almost four times larger than originally forecast. in the 2009 election they said the hS t is not on their radar, but they even put it in writing to the homebuild - ers and other groups: "We're not contemplating the hS t ." The b.c. l iberals deceived british c olumbians on the hS t , promising no hS t during the election and then bringing it in just days after. it was later revealed that the government was considering the hS t in the months leading up to the 2009 election. a s a radio show host, the new Premier had this to say, apparently on cknW , July 28, 2010: "i t's an insult to british c olumbians for the government, first of all, to have brought in this tax in what most of us regard as a very, very sneaky way" — and that they then refused to bother explaining why they didn't do it properly.

"They can't even bother to mount a defence, and i think that's an insult."" There you go. There's something we can agree with that this Premier has said already. a lso, we know the Premier's Progress board was recommending the h St back in December of 2008, and it was the Premier they were directing their recom - mendations to. The Premier's Progress board are a hand-picked group of individuals, hand-picked by the Premier to give recommendations. Y ou can still go on line and print off the 2008 December Progress board report where they're recommending — what? — the h St.

"o h, it's not on our radar." it was being recommended by the hand-picked people for the province of british c olumbia's Premier at the time, and they say that it wasn't on their radar. only after 700,000 people signed a petition and the people of b.c. — all over b.c. — rose up in protest…. only then did they admit:"We could have handled it better." o h, my my. We could have han- dled it better. o h, so much better. They're so repentant now.

They get on, they stand up, and they say now: "o h my, oh my." Y ou know, if they could have rammed it through, they would have rammed it through and down our throats, and we would have had to just eat it up. but no, they now stand before the people of british c olumbia somewhat repentant, somewhat now acknowledging: "o h, we could have handled it better." in fact, the whole plan that originally they were intro- ducing and saying was the best thing they could do for british c olumbia, they have crumpled up and thrown it away. a nd now they are bringing in a whole new plan, throwing out the baby with the bathwater, throwing out a whole new set of principles and policies that that party has long held as important — even things like corporate tax cuts.

My, my — all of a sudden. Y ou know, when we were talking about it when we had leadership, people talking about the corporate tax…. "o h," business said. "o h, is that so? o h, that's just awful. imagine. W e've got the socialists at the door. Somehow this is going to be just so awful. it's going to cramp investment in british c olumbia." [1130] The facts are that there wasn't any investment in british c olumbia as a result of this government's policies. There should have been a flood of investment with corpor - ate tax cuts in c anada and in the province. Where's the evidence?

The fact is that we were losing jobs — a steady stream of major family-supporting jobs leaving the province. Where were they investing? u nited States, c hina. biggest corporations. o h, but we need to help those poor corporations. They are suffering. Did you know that, folks? They're suffering. They're having a terrible time. it's just awful. Y ou know, we need to really think about those poor corporations. What were we thinking? We should empty out our pockets and pay everything we can to help those multinational rich corporations, because they're going to come flood - ing in. o h, that's the promise.

That's been the promise over and over. That's been the promise since 2001. o ver the last ten years we've been fed a steady stream of what are now known to be broken promises. i don't have sufficient time. h owever, just the ones i've already related are why no one can believe the promises in this motion. Y et this bunch says: "Just trust us. Just trust us one more time.

We're not making it up this time. o h, we made it up before, and we didn't really mean it, and we're really, really sorry. but this time we have a wonderful plan that goes into the future, and if you just look way out there, way out to 2014, you can trust us this time. We've got it right. o h yes, we've got all the spin doctors working." Y ou know, it's interesting. During the campaign for the premiership of the l iberal Party, we heard the candidates, and one of the candidates was suggesting that maybe we should just have a vote in this h ouse and get rid of the

british c olumbia Debates7638 t uesday, May 31, 2011 hS t . That was a good idea. That was a fine idea, bril - liant — apparently overruled. t old something about ready, fire, aim. Wasn't that what we heard — "ready, fire, aim"? o h no. Well, a lot can change. So now they're saying…. Somebody said something about bribing people with their own money. That would be really, really bad. c an you imagine how bad that would be? interjection. B. Routley: o h, name names. n ame names. interjections. B. Routley: That could be the current Premier of the province.

My goodness, it's unbelievable. n ow we're going to bribe people with their own money. Y ou know, we're going to hire a whole bunch of people. There's a real efficient plan. We're going to hire a whole bunch of people to write cheques. So if you're a millionaire mom, if you make $100,000 a year and you've got little ones at home, you can look forward now to a cheque cut by the b.c. l iberal Party. isn't that a wonderful plan? n ow, what would that be for? is that for lunch money for the kids? n o, i don't think so. n o. This is a desperate attempt to salvage the hS t through a package that people will understand.

This is mean-spirited right from the beginning. People understand when you're transferring money from their pockets right to the richest people and the richest companies in b.c . n ot one shred of evidence, no connectivity. We're not connecting the money. a ll those millions of dollars — we're not connecting those millions of dollars to anybody. [1135] We're not saying: "Y ou know what? We'll give you millions and zillions of dollars if you create jobs." n o — no such plan. n o connection to jobs. Just a kiss and a promise. it's a cruel hoax. More snake oil salesmen scams.

This is one of the worst ones perpetrated on the people of british c olumbia. They even promised to pay anyone with a child. Y ou're going to get a cheque. The l iberals have provided misinformation on the hS t every step of the way, underestimating the cost to families, inflating the economic benefits and claiming it was revenue-neutral. They claimed that the economic benefits were going to be wonderful. o h, and they brought in Jack Mintz. Y ou know, we didn't have a study. Wouldn't it have been thoughtful to think about studying?

Y ou're going to have the most major corporate tax transfer in the history of british c olumbia, and you're going to do it without even consulting anyone other than the Premier's Progress board, which just happen to be running some of the biggest, richest companies. o h, there's no self-interest there, no self-interest at all. a ll of a sudden we're going to try and wring ourselves out and turn into families first. Y eah, corporate families first. That's what it's all about. corporate families first. We all know.

Working families all over british c olumbia know. f orest workers know when they're having their pockets picked. They know that when they're laid off and they're out of work, and we've got a government…. Y ou know, they say the forest industry is going to get $140 million. That should be good for you. o kay.

Well, let's figure that out for a minute: $140 million goes to all these major corporations, and you know what? i'm the first one to say that they've had a difficult time because of global markets. but giving them $140 million and then trying to tell the people of b.c. that they're going to somehow trickle that back down to you? c ome on. When you go to buy a 2-by-4, it has nothing to do, absolutely nothing to do, with $140 million break that they're giving these corporations. That's going right into the bank, right into the coffers of those big corporations.

When you go to buy 2-by-4s, is anyone, including any b.c. l iberal, honestly going to stand up and tell the people of b.c. that when they go down to h ome Depot, they're going to get a deal on 2-by-4s because they gave $140 million to the biggest forest companies in british c olumbia? n ot on your life. What about the mining companies? i was sitting on the finance c ommittee. h ere i was listening, and i couldn't….

My jaw just about fell down to the table, because there is one of the big corporate cheeses saying his mining company…. it's only $10 billion in the last five years. i said to him: "Well, what are you going to do with this $50 million to $80 million tax break for oil and gas and for mining? What are you going to do with your cut of the tax break?

When you buy and sell in world commodity markets, just exactly how do you explain the b.c. l iberals' plan?" it's been carefully articulated by the b.c . l iberals. i've heard them, over and over. it's been carefully articu - lated that we're going to give them all of this money, and we're going to somehow magically, presto chango, get it back. it's going to be wonderful. We'll have pockets full of coal or copper or gold or something that's all going to come rushing back to the people of british c olumbia. a bsolutely false. absolutely false, and they know it's false.

Their original h St claims have been contradicted by the latest so-called expert panel. let's just talk about that. [1140] first there was this panel. We had Mintz. o h, by the way, i forgot to mention that Jack Mintz is a highly credentialed economist. e verybody understands it. Y ou can hire economists. if you're a company and you want an economist to come in

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7639 and tell you good things, he'll come in and tell you good things. if you want him to come in and tell you bad things, you can hire one to come in and tell you bad things. if you want to hire economists like Jack Mintz, who just happens to work for brookfield, one of the major companies…. o h, there's no self-interest there. "o h, we're crystal-clean. Y ou can look in our pockets. There's nothing there. it's all, all purely non-self-interest. o h no, no, we just are here serving the wonderful people.

Y eah, that's what it's all about — talking about how we're going to serve people and start…." We all know that it's not revenue-neutral now. n ot revenue-neutral. They came in, and the previous finance Minister sat in that chair over there and said it was going to cost the province $113 million. a ny of you folks hear that? i heard that — $113 million. We were going to lose money on the deal. o h, yeah, we were going to lose…. isn't it terrible? it's just terrible. We're going to lose $113 million. The province of b.c. is going to suffer, and we're suffering for a good cause.

The cause is so wonderful. a pparently, the l iberals woke up one morning, and they said: "Y ou know, we need to do something desperate, something bold. l et's give all the money of the middle class of b.c . to the richest corporations. Surely that's going to work." n o study. Then they bring in a study, Jack Mintz, after the fact, and he writes a study that just happens to be totally opposite to the study that he gave in ontario. but now we form…. "o h well, maybe we should have another independent panel." This is scene — what? — 23 in this movie. it's a night- mare, but it's a movie nonetheless. [Mr.

Speaker in the chair.] n ow they're offering a whole new tax policy, totally remaking a policy that they said just weeks ago was the greatest single thing that they could do for b.c. a pparently, now they admit they were wrong on that count, too, and they are — get this — even back-pedalling on corporate tax cuts that they said were so desperately needed to drive new investments, desperately needed to create jobs. a ll of a sudden, not so much. They were desperately needed, but now not so much, not anymore. n ow they claim they're going to get 2 percent back.

We're going to get a little back from the corporations — temporarily, mind you, temporarily. They're not talking about any temporary tax for ordinary british c olumbians. n o, no, you're going to pay and pay and pay some more, but they want to talk about a temporary tax for the big - gest corporations who have had tax break after tax break after tax break. h as it resulted in investment and jobs? Zero. n ada. n othing. Those are the facts. i remember when they ridiculed our n DP leader recently for suggesting the same kind of corporate tax. Y ou know, it's so hypocritical. What do they do?

They tear a page right out of the nDP playbook — eh? That's what they do. They figure: "Well, you know, they must have sat that down…." it's interesting. a ll the same corporate speakers said just months ago, when our leader was suggesting such a thing: "o h, the sky is falling. This is terrible. This is going to be destroying the economy of the province of british c olumbia for sure." a ll of a sudden now, not so bad.

"it's not so bad. it'll all be good. o h, it'll all work out. it's just going to be wonderful." [1145] n ow a wholesale new set of claims. if these guys were like the road crew…. h ave you ever seen the road crew that are patching…? Y ou know, they patch over the potholes; they patch over the busted-up highway — eh? h ave you ever seen that? Well, that's what we've got here. They're patching up their principles. They're patch - ing up their philosophy. o nly weeks to go, and they're rejigging their policy — desperate moves by desperate people.

"t rust us," they say, after a decade of jiggery- pokery. n ow let's not forget this Premier…. l et's get this right. Just a few weeks ago this Premier said — and i don't want to get this wrong: "c utting the hS t by 1 point is more than $800 million out of the budget this year and every year after" — oh! — "$1.6 billion for a 2 point cut, and we need to ask ourselves…." interjections. B. Routley: Y es, we do.

We need to ask ourselves where we're going to get that money, because we're either going to have "a $1.6 billion bigger deficit" or we're going to get "$1.6 billion fewer heart operations," $1.6 billion fewer special needs teachers. School facilities and hospital rooms are going to close. it's going to be terrible. it's going to be tragic. it's going to be awful. in fairness, i think she was speaking to her radio audience. Some of these l iberals might call it a ready- fire-aim approach, but i think it was a rare moment of unvarnished transparency for our Premier, clearly very comfortable with flip-flops.

More than 700,000 british c olumbians signed an initiative petition, which eventually triggered this ref - erendum scheduled for September 24. The opposition and several business groups argued that the delay would cause too much uncertainty. but we had the Premier candidate come riding in on her white charger, and she announced: "o h, we've got to do this way more quickly than that. h ow about June 24? That would be a really good day. l et's go with June 24." Whoops. o h.

Y eah, then there was the announcement, a total flip-flop, that now we're going to have a mail-in vote that ends July 22, with final results not expected until mid-a ugust — a mere month short of the original

british c olumbia Debates7640 t uesday, May 31, 2011 date. Whoa. What is that? What kind of plan is that, totally remaking the rules as we go along? n ow they're spending a minimum of $7 million — tax- payer dollars. This is after they shredded a leaflet. More than half a million dollars for a leaflet. Y ou know what i believe, hon. Speaker? Somebody picked up the leaflet, and they opened the page, and there inside of the leaflet was a list — $880 million we're going to give to the con - struction industry, $140 million to manufacturing, $140 million to…. Y ou know? a nd $80 million for oil and gas.

Somebody in the shop over there, somebody and their 2,000 employees or more that are dealing with them, finally woke up and read the document and said: "Whoops. This isn't going to work. if we actually send this leaflet out to the good people of b.c. and they open it up and look inside…." [1150] it is all about giving their money away — $2 billion — to the biggest companies and corporations in b.c., fleecing the people of b.c. a t the end of the day, that was what they had in mind. Y ou know, hon. Speaker, as a candidate running for Premier, there was a video out.

Do you remember the video? i was just saying this morning that when i was crawling on my hands and knees under the veneer plant up at the Y oubou sawmill, when i was climbing around under there on my hands and knees, picking up sawdust and rolled-up bits of veneer, i had no idea that i was going to end up in this l egislature and have the opportunity to speak up on behalf of working people, the people of british c olumbia. i had no idea how desperately the ordinary british c olumbians — sawmill workers, forest workers, families all over british c olumbia — ordinary people, people like me and my family, who started out in a little cabin for $40 bucks a month up in Y oubou and started out at a wonderful…. i thought i was making out like a bandit, going from a dollar-an-hour minimum-wage job to $3.28 back at the Y oubou mill in 1970.

Thanks to my union, we worked on sharing the labour rates with the people of british c olumbia, taking care of ordinary british c olumbians. i always thought that the people of british c olumbia would have the right to elect people that would take care of their interests. i thought that there would be people in Victoria whose job it was to read all of the mail, to look at what's going on and to say, in balance: "o ur job is to look after ordinary british c olumbians, middle-class british c olumbians, the working people." but i was shocked, amazed and really disheartened to find out it's not so, hon. Speaker.

The other party on the other side are taking care of the cor- porate interests of all of the multinational corporations, all of those people. They're gifting millions of dollars — mil- lions of dollars. a t the end of the day, they expect payback time, and these liberals have delivered in spades. n ow they're reworking this desperate plan to try and ram it down the throats of ordinary british c olumbians, but we all see through their stick men.

We see through the stick men. a t the end of the day, just like the stick men, it's transparent to all to see that you're there to stick it to ordinary british c olumbians. Y ou know, as candidate, i remember this Premier said that few issues have caused more anger and as many problems to the b.c . l iberal Party as the h St . W ell, duh. a t the end of the day, people don't like it when you stick it to them. no. "i've heard from people all over b.c.," she said. "The tax does need to go to referendum." a nd she says that government should provide equal funding.

Get this one: we were going to have equal funding — another jiggery- pokery move by this government at the end of the day. [1155] So let's stop and pause there for a minute. l et's camp there for a minute or two. h as there been equal funding? h as there been equal funding? n o, no. crumbs from the table. Meanwhile, there are unfettered rights for big business to go and do their thing, to tell their employees whatever they want, to ram it to us. Y ou know, no equal funding, no facts. a nd factual information — talk about a vacancy. There's no factual information that's going out.

They're not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They're telling poor women, moms, that at the end of the day, they're talking about the hS t . but they don't tell the transparent truth, and they don't tell them what they'd be entitled to under a PS t -GSt model. They don't tell them the truth, what the GSt would have provided. Y ou know, another one we heard: "o h well, we're going to have this referendum conducted in the same manner as a provincial election." a s Premier-designate, the Premier said, repeatedly promised, even, on the June 24 referendum…. it was in her swearing in.

She talked about the June 24 referendum. but on a pril 8, 2011, c lark — the Premier — broke her promise, and we have the referendum on June 24. instead…. Y ou know, revenue-neutral. They said it was going to be revenue-neutral, and it's not revenue-neutral. a t the end of the day, this is now $820 million that they're gou- ging people in british c olumbia on — $820 million. Mr. Speaker: h on. Member. h on. Member, will you please take your seat. interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. h on. Members, based on the

schedule that was put before me this morning, i will now put the question on Motion 11. [1200] interjections.

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7641 Mr. Speaker: Members. Motion approved on the following division: Yea S — 47 r ustad Mcintyre r eid Thomson l ekstrom bell Yamamoto Mcn eil c hong Polak Mcr ae c oell h awes k rueger l etnick Sultan barnett l ee Dalton h eed c adieux Penner c oleman c lark f alcon bond de Jong abbott h ansen MacDiarmid Yap Stilwell h ayer c antelon l es Pimm h ogg h oward h untington Stewart f oster van Dongen b. Simpson horne bennett Thornthwaite Slater na YS — 33 S.

Simpson D. black fleming f arnworth James kwan r alston Popham a ustin k aragianis brar h ammell l ali Thorne h organ bains Dix Mungall chouhan Macdonald c orrigan k rog Simons Gentner e lmore Donaldson f raser b. r outley c oons Sather D. r outley t revena c onroy c ommittee of Supply (Section a), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. R. Coleman: i move the h ouse do now adjourn, Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Silver Streak from commit - tee. h on. r . c oleman moved adjournment of the h ouse. Motion approved. Mr. Speaker: This h ouse stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The h ouse adjourned at 12:05 p.m. PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM Committee of Supply e Sti Mate S: Mini Str Y of finance (continued) The h ouse in c ommittee of Supply (Section a); D. h orne in the chair. The committee met at 10:30 a.m. on Vote 27: ministry operations, $103,516,000 (con- tinued). B. Ralston: i had hoped and expected to continue with questions of Mr. bourque from the b.c. Securities c ommission. i gather he's not here at present, but he will be here later — early this afternoon, i expect. What i wanted to talk about, to begin with, is the financial a dministration a ct.

That's a statute admin - istered by the Minister of finance and the Ministry of finance.

Section 72 concerns guarantees and indem - nities. i believe the minister may have a copy of that

section before him. but if not, i'll read it. it's relatively brief — certainly the relevant section. interjection. B. Ralston: n o, it's with respect to the financial a dministration a ct that relates to the giving by the government of an indemnity or guarantee of the per - formance of an obligation.

Section 72(1) reads: "

(1) The government may, subject to this section, give an indem- nity or guarantee the performance of an obligation. "

(2) The power given by subsection (1) is in addition to any power conferred by any other act. "(3) a n indemnity, and a guarantee other than a guarantee referred to in

section 74 (2), must not be given under this

section or under any other a ct by or on behalf of the government except in compliance with the regulations of the l ieutenant Governor in c ouncil." The relevant regulation under the financial a dministration a ct is the guarantees and indemnities regulation, b.c. regulation 258/87. The first two sections concern indemnities. i'm sure the minister is familiar with it or will be shortly. "a n indemnity may only be given…on behalf of the govern - ment if (

a) prior written approval has been given by the Minister of f inance, or (

b) the director of the risk management branch of the Ministry of f inance, or a person specified by the director for the purpose of this section, has given prior written assurance that the purpose for the indemnity has been reviewed and accepted by the risk management branch." a s the minister knows, this

section was something that was referred to by the Deputy Minister of finance and the Deputy a ttorney General in a release dated

british c olumbia Debates7642 t uesday, May 31, 2011 o ctober 20, 2010, where, under the authority of this act and this section, they claim to have released Mr. basi and Mr. Virk from their liability to repay an indemnity arrangement they'd entered into with the government. c an the minister explain, from the perspective of the Ministry of finance, how that indemnity in respect of Mr. basi and Mr. Virk was entered into? [1035] [P . Pimm in the chair.] Hon. K.

Falcon: t o the f inance critic of the opposition, i understand the a ttorney General actually was canvassed rather extensively on this issue during his estimates. The questions, though i'm pleased to provide whatever answers the member likes, obviously don't directly relate to the budget estimates for the Ministry of finance for the '11-12 year. a s the member would know, the indemnity agreement on the basi-Virk matter actually dates back to 2005 and was a decision….

The subsequent more controversial decision to forgive, ultimately, the legal fees owing by these two excluded employees was a decision that was made by the Deputy Minister of finance upon recom - mendation by the Deputy a ttorney General. k ey to that was that neither the Minister of finance nor the a ttorney General were involved in that decision at all. i understand that the a ttorney General has actually ordered now a review of government's legal indemnity policy. That review is underway and is being led by the president of ubc, Stephen t oope. B. Ralston: in the case of the indemnities of Mr. basi and Mr.

Virk, the date of 2005 has been mentioned. c an the minister advise: who gave the prior written approval? Was it the Minister of finance, his delegate or the direc - tor of the risk management branch of the Ministry of finance? Hon. K. Falcon: i am advised that back in 2005, a recommendation was made from the Deputy a ttorney General to the Deputy Minister of finance to approve the indemnity, and that decision was made by the Deputy Minister of finance at the time. The Deputy Minister of f inance at the time, i am led to understand, is empowered to make those decisions under the

interpretation a ct. B. Ralston: Where in the public accounts is this reported? i imagine that an indemnity is classified as a contingent liability. i see the minister has the assistance of the comptroller general here today, so perhaps that could be clarified. [1040-1045] Hon. K. Falcon: i'm advised that, in 2005 when the indemnity decision would have been made by the Deputy Minister of finance upon recommendation of the Deputy a ttorney General, they were required to table all indemnities and guarantees in that fiscal year.

So it would have been recorded in that fiscal year that there was an indemnity that had been made with respect to the individuals involved. i'm also further advised that, essentially, in a case like this there's only a contingent liability that is identified if they can estimate what the costs are, if they feel that they can adequately estimate what the costs may be. in this case that wasn't felt to be the case, i'm advised. but what does happen is that every year as payments are made towards the indemnity — towards their legal fees primarily, i would imagine — that is reflected in the insurance and risk management account, which is all the costs that are being made with respect to indemnities and guarantees each and every year.

B. Ralston: i further understand that there's no upper dollar limit on the amount of an indemnity that can be given. f or example, theoretically, the deputy minister on behalf of the government could enter into an indemnity for $10 million, $15 million, $20 million, $25 million. There is, apparently, in the policy no limit. is that correct? Hon. K. Falcon: i'm advised that the policy does not set a limit. B.

Ralston: a nd further on the policy as it is now, the minister has said that the indemnities that have been given are disclosed. a re they disclosed by the name of the person who has been given the indemnity by the government, and if so, where in the public accounts is that disclosed? i hadn't noticed that previously. Hon. K.

Falcon: Member, with respect to the question, i'm advised that that information is not disclosed as part of public accounts. it is disclosed as a separate statutory report that's tabled by the Minister of finance, and that separate statutory report provides information on the giving of guarantees and indemnities, and it also names the individuals that received the indemnities and what the amounts of the indemnities were. B. Ralston: c an the minister advise when the report for the last fiscal year, the year just ended March 31, 2011, was filed? [1050] Hon. K.

Falcon: We're just confirming when the last filing was made. We believe it was likely in f ebruary, i'm advised. but with respect to the two individuals the member is referring to, i'm advised that that would have actually been tabled back in '05-06. i'm not exactly sure which year, but one of those years would have actually had the tabling with respect to those two.

british c olumbia Debatest uesday, May 31, 2011 7643 B.

Ralston: i gather that the list that's provided in the statutory report is not a continuing list in the sense that it lists all the outstanding indemnities. it simply lists the ones that are new in the reporting period. is that correct? i'd like to continue. u nder the present policy, what is the obligation of the delegate of the Minister of finance? u nder the act the Minister of finance is delegating his authority and his power under the statute to make an inquiry as to what might secure this indemnity by way of personal property, loan guarantees, securities or any other form of offsetting a reduction of the government's financial exposure.

Given that the regulation does refer to the risk manage- ment branch…. i assume that the government would be taking some steps to limit government liability, given that, as the minister has agreed, this is an open-ended, without-any-limit indemnity. The financial sky is the limit, potentially, on one of these indemnities. So what offsetting steps in the policy are taken to reduce that liability? [1055] Hon. K.

Falcon: i understand and am advised that the essence of the policy, i guess, if you sort of distilled it down, is that there is an assumption that the indemnity is provided, essentially, in good faith, in expectation that the individual has performed their duties on a good- faith basis and that they're considered innocent until proven otherwise.

That's the basis on which the indemnity is provided. i'm also led to understand that there was some security that was undertaken from the individuals. i don't have all the details. i think there may have been a charge on their mortgage or some such thing. u ltimately, when the decision was made as a result of a plea bargain, where guilty pleas were entered into from those two individuals, a decision was made by the Deputy a ttorney General and a recommendation made to the Deputy Minister of finance to relieve them from the obligation to pay back the legal fees — well, i'll let the a ttorney General and the Deputy a ttorney General answer as to the rationale behind that — presumably in return for receiving the guilty verdicts and some savings that may be realized from not having what appeared to be an interminable court process continue on.

B. Ralston: The policy that the minister has referred to — was it ever reduced to writing? The minister mentions a good-faith assumption of a presumption of innocence, so i'm wondering if it was ever reduced to writing. What was the nature of the financial disclosure required by the person making the application for an unlimited indemnity? a nd thirdly, was there any independent verification of the financial representations offered by the person applying for the indemnity? in other words, did you check it out? Was the story checked out at all? Hon. K.

Falcon: f or the benefit of the member and, frankly, for myself, i'll read into the record what the Deputy a ttorney General had to say when he provided a statement relating to this matter. if the member would just give me some forbearance, it's not that long, but it might elucidate things. B. Ralston: i have a copy. Hon. K. Falcon: Do you have a copy of that? o kay. Do you mind if i read it into the record? i've never read this before either.

With the member's forbearance, i'll just read this into the record, because i think it might help me as we go through this discussion. [1100] "it is important to clarify for the record the circumstances relating to the decision to release Mr. basi and Mr. Virk from their liability to repay their legal costs of the prosecution that concluded this week with their guilty pleas. "o n o ctober 5, 2010, it came to the attention of the legal services branch, Ministry of a ttorney General, that the special prosecutor had proposed resolution of the prosecutions through guilty pleas.

"Discussions then took place between the legal services branch and defence counsel, including with respect to their clients' liability to repay the legal costs." Then in brackets, "The indemnities provided that they would have to do so unless acquitted on all counts" — end of brackets. "l egal services branch referred the matter to me and to the Deputy Minister of f inance.

The Deputy Minister of f inance has authority under the f inancial a dministration a ct respecting this matter. h e and i considered the issue. a major consideration was the relatively small amounts that might be recovered from Mr. basi and Mr. Virk compared to the millions of additional dollars it would cost the government to continue to fund defence, pros- ecution and court-related costs through to the completion of the trial and to fund any appeals, with no guarantee of convictions. "based on the above, in our respective capacities the Deputy Minister of f inance and i decided to release Mr. basi and Mr.

Virk from their liability to repay. i communicated that decision to the a ttorney General on october 8, 2010. "n o one outside the legal services branch, myself and the Deputy Minister of f inance had any knowledge of this or involvement. f or clarity, neither the special prosecutor nor i communicated that decision to the a ttorney General on o ctober 8, 2010. f or clarity, neither the special prosecutor nor i communicated that decision to the attorney General on october 8, 2010.

"n o one outside the legal services branch, myself and the Deputy Minister of f inance had any knowledge of this or involvement. f or clarity, neither the special prosecutor nor the a ttorney General had any knowledge of the matter or involvement in this. "a letter is being sent today to counsel for Mr. basi and counsel for Mr.

Virk releasing them and their clients from the o ctober 14, 2010, condition that required they not discuss the above financial matters and that they refer all inquiries to the Ministry of a ttorney General." i think i can say with a high degree of certainty that when that decision came out, actually it was as much a surprise to me as i'm sure it was to every other member of executive council and, indeed, of government and the opposition, which is exactly why the policy, frankly, the framework needs to be reviewed and is being reviewed as a result of this.

british c olumbia Debates7644 t uesday, May 31, 2011 The a ttorney General has appointed Stephen t oope, the president of ubc, to undertake a policy review to provide real clarity on the policy going forward with respect to excluded employees. B. Ralston: Well, back to my question, was this policy reduced to writing in 2005? a nd since it continues now, pending the review, is it still the same policy in writing? i'm interested in a response to that particular question. [1105] Hon. K. Falcon: i'll just read into the record here, and it says under the act: "The indemnification policy for cer- tain civil" — in brackets — "non-criminal matters is set out in

section 73 of the Public Service a gency's Terms and Conditions for Excluded Employees . by extension, indemnity may be extended to other civil and to crim - inal matters on a case-by-case basis." That is really the extent of the policy, which is part of the problem. There needs to be, frankly, more clarity around the policy for excluded employees, which is what Mr. t oope is look - ing into. B.

Ralston: Then just to follow on the second part of the question i asked previously: was there any consistent application of a requirement for a financial disclosure? in other words, the senior public servant accused of a serious crime is getting the benefit of an indemnity that may amount to millions and millions of dollars. What obligation to disclose their financial assets was imposed upon them in return for that indemnity being granted by the government? Hon. K. Falcon: in terms of the obligations that were imposed on the employees specifically, the staff of the Ministry of finance don't have that information.

That's information that resides with the a ttorney General, who i understand is going through questioning on this very issue as we speak, in fact. i'm advised that they're going through extensive and detailed questions respecting the indemnity that was provided for basi and Virk and that they are better able to indicate what obligations were im- posed on those employees. My understanding is that there was some charge on their financial assets, but i only know that and our staff only know that from what we've read in the public realm. B.

Ralston: Well, as i understand what the minister has said, the Ministry of finance is responsible for the reporting of this information and presumably for assess- ing the risk and the contingent liability to the province. That's one of the paramount responsibilities of the Minister of finance. is the Minister of finance saying that the ministry and his officials just didn't know how this indemnity was formed and what conditions were put on it? is that what the minister is saying? [1110] Hon. K.

Falcon: a gain, just to sort of review. a s i mentioned earlier, what happens is…. back in 2005 — i believe it was in 2005 — when the recommendation from the Deputy a ttorney General to the Deputy Minister of finance at the time was to prov

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0531am 01
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0531am 01
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	77bdeb7405c38a0811d4845daf3830e346034b0a

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