1998/99 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 36th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

MONDAY, MAY 3, 1999

Afternoon

Volume 14, Number 20

[ Page 12159 ]

The House met at 2:06 p.m.

Prayers.

J. Sawicki: With the indulgence of the House, my introduction today might be a little bit longer than usual. It being May 3, I rise to once again ask the House to acknowledge a very important and proud event in Polish history -- that is, the passing of the constitution of 1791, which was the first codified democratic constitution in Europe. It is very timely that on the weekend there was a companion event in our modern day, which I attended on behalf of the Premier, where the Polish and Hungarian communities gathered to celebrate their entry into the NATO western alliance. It was something they did with great joy, celebrating their hard-earned freedom and democracy in the modern day.

My guest this afternoon in the gallery is Hanna Jazlowiecki. She is a local poet who has written some 200 poems. She is also just finishing her autobiography, which tells of some of her experiences as a member of the Polish underground Home Army and as a prisoner during the Second World War. I would like to ask the House to welcome Hannah and to extend good wishes to the Polish-Canadian community for the historical event and the modern-day event as well.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Today in the members' gallery we have some visitors from Germany. Peter Maier-Oswald is the consul general of Germany in Vancouver, and he is accompanied by Consul Rolf Papenberg, who will shortly be leaving B.C. for a posting to Poland. Would the House please join me in making them welcome.

Oral Questions

COST OF SKYTRAIN EXPANSION

G. Campbell: Hon. Speaker, from the outset, this government has been less than honest with B.C. taxpayers about the true cost of the misguided plan to expand SkyTrain. Taxpayers have been deliberately misled to believe that the cost of building the SkyTrain will be only 8 percent more expensive than conventional light-rail transit. Today a new study is out, which shows quite clearly and conclusively that the costs of SkyTrain could be up to 113 percent higher than the cost of light-rail transit -- and that provides less service.

[1410]

My question is to the Premier: why doesn't the government listen to the experts and learn from its fast ferry fiasco and put the brakes on SkyTrain before it's too late?

Hon. G. Clark: I have a question for the Leader of the Opposition: why are you opposed to everything? I want to know: why are you opposed to everything? SkyTrain is enormously popular in Vancouver. The latest poll shows that 74 percent of British Columbians want SkyTrain in the lower mainland.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members . . . .

Hon. G. Clark: It makes sense. Why should the people in New Westminster and Burnaby get SkyTrain and the people in Coquitlam get a bus service?

We believe in SkyTrain technology. It works. Not only that, we've negotiated with Bombardier to build them right here in British Columbia and create jobs right here in our province.

The Speaker: Finish up, Mr. Premier.

Hon. G. Clark: The analysis shows that if we did conventional rapid transit with grade separation at busy intersections, the cost differential is small indeed. More importantly, SkyTrain works. It's successful. It's a British Columbia success story. It's time to reap the benefits of jobs here in British Columbia. We intend to get on with the job . . .

The Speaker: Thank you, Premier.

Hon. G. Clark: . . . and build SkyTrain all the way to Coquitlam.

The Speaker: First supplementary, Leader of the Official Opposition.

G. Campbell: I'm surprised that the Premier would turn to the polls for a justification. Eighty percent of British Columbians would like him out of office, for goodness' sake.

I understand that the Premier has difficulty with some technical information, but I think it's important for him to take himself out of the political realm and listen to what the experts say. Those are the Sierra Club of British Columbia, the Fraser View Rate-Payers Coalition, the Better Environmentally Sound Transportation people, Burke Mountain Naturalists, the West Coast Environmental Law and Transportation 2000.

This coalition has made it very clear. They care about public transit in the region, as do we on this side of the House, but what they also care about is that we simply can't afford to continue wasting the taxpayers' money. This project is going to cost GVRD residents $2,400 per household. For the people that live outside of the region, it will cost $1,540 for every household. And this . . .

The Speaker: Your question?

G. Campbell: . . . is at a time when the government is saying to people in the province -- in the northeast, for example -- that they only have enough money for transportation maintenance; no improvements.

My question to the Premier is simply this: why on earth is the government wasting 1.5 billion taxpayer dollars on a system which will cost $6.9 million more a year to operate and won't even deliver on the services that they were originally promised?

Hon. G. Clark: Negative, negative, negative -- on everything. This Leader of the Opposition opposed commuter rail to Mission. They opposed every single investment in infrastructure. They opposed the Island Highway, and now they're opposing SkyTrain.

Anybody who knows Vancouver knows that we need rapid transit and we need it now. It's long overdue. Anybody

[ Page 12160 ]

who lives in Vancouver -- as the Leader of the Opposition does, I guess -- should know that taking out two lanes of traffic in the lower mainland and trying to build a trolley car down the middle of Broadway simply wouldn't happen. The time has come for a first-class transportation system in the lower mainland, one that doesn't rely on cars but relies on state-of-the-art technology, which we have in SkyTrain. It makes perfect sense to expand the SkyTrain system. It would do more for land development around the stations and a livable region than buses or bikes or any alternative would, and that's why we're determined to proceed.

The Speaker: Second supplementary, Leader of the Official Opposition.

[1415]

G. Campbell: You know, hon. Speaker, this Premier and this government have already soaked taxpayers for $445 million for fast ferry Ferraris that are stuck in a garage and won't work. Why on earth would the Premier think it makes sense to spend $3.2 billion for a Lamborghini that won't work, that simply won't get you from . . . ? Taxpayers want a transit system that they can afford, which will get them where it's supposed to -- which is the northeast sector -- in the most affordable possible way. Light rail transit is the way to do that. Every expert knows that; every community knows that.

The only people that don't know it are the NDP, and they're wasting more taxpayer dollars. Will the Premier not agree to put a halt to this and come forward with a transit plan that people can afford, that will work and that we can get on with right away?

Hon. G. Clark: The Leader of the Opposition says that the fast cats won't work; they'll sink. Now he says that SkyTrain won't work. It's a Lamborghini, but it won't work. It works. Maybe you haven't taken it, hon. member. Maybe you drive all the time. But take SkyTrain. It works, and people like it. And it's about time it was expanded.

The people of the lower mainland will have a clear choice in the next election between those who want to build the province with state-of-the-art technology, who want to build the province with SkyTrain -- that works, that is popular -- or those nattering nabobs of negativity on the other side that oppose every single investment in this magnificent province. I know which they'll choose: this side of the House, again.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, members.

R. Neufeld: I've got people in my riding who have to fly all the way to Edmonton to get a CAT scan. At the same time, they're being forced to pay $1,500 per year so you can buy a Cadillac transit system in Vancouver. Will the SkyTrain master tell us why the government is purposely choosing an option that is twice as expensive as other available transit options?

Hon. G. Clark: It is shameful for that member to try to divide this province, when that member knows that the Fair Share program . . .

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members . . . .

Hon. G. Clark: . . . for his constituency -- $113 million . . .

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, order!

Hon. G. Clark: . . . that we have given to that constituency, a special deal, because it makes sense for that constituency and makes sense for British Columbia . . . . Shame on him! And $600 million more for health care this year, when that party wants to cut health care . . . . Shame on him! Shame on him for not recognizing the investments we've made in his constituency -- in the road work in his constituency. He's setting up a false choice -- a false dichotomy -- by setting up that we should not invest in his constituency if we don't invest somewhere else. We will act in the public interest.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. G. Clark: Whether that member likes it or not, we will invest in roads in his constituency. We will do Fair Share in his constituency, even though it's a special deal for his constituency, because it's in the public interest and it's right for British Columbia, just like SkyTrain is right for the lower mainland.

The Speaker: First supplementary, the member for Peace River North.

R. Neufeld: Well, shame on this Premier for saying that I would divide this province. I can tell you, hon. Speaker, that if you took a poll where I live or anyplace in rural B.C., 74 percent of the people would not approve of a system that costs twice as much and does not deliver the service -- just like the fast ferry fiasco, hon. Speaker. Residents of the Okanagan, the interior and the rest of British Columbia are being forced to pay for an overpriced SkyTrain system that serves only this Premier's ego. Can the Premier explain why he is recklessly wasting hundreds of millions of dollars on an overpriced transit system, when a cheaper, ground-level transit system is available?

[1420]

Hon. G. Clark: It's interesting, coming from that member, who used to belong to a party that built the Coquihalla -- which had a 100 percent overrun -- and now has joined . . . .

An Hon. Member: It works.

Hon. G. Clark: And it works. Yeah, it does work.

Now he's joined a party that wants to sell off B.C. Rail -- a lack of investment in his constituency and commitment from the people in the north . . . . Look at what has just happened. That constituency -- the northeast of British Columbia -- is doing extremely well because of what we have done with respect to natural gas. Last week we announced Louisiana-Pacific -- a huge investment in the north of British Columbia. Unlike those members, who want to play off one region against another and who want to pick and choose, this side of the House governs for all of British Columbia -- the north as well as the lower mainland.

[ Page 12161 ]

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, members.

FAST FERRY ENGINE SPEED

D. Symons: Thinking of this government's acumen for financial investments, I want to ask a question of the Minister Responsible for B.C. Ferries. In this government's desperate attempt to appear to be meeting the announced performance of the fast cats, I have learned from my usual reliable sources that they cheated -- they cheated on it. The engine governors were bypassed, so that the engines could run higher than their manufacturer-rated speed. Can the minister confirm that this cheating took place to fake the fast cats' performance?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, members.

Hon. G. Wilson: I think that member opposite gave away the answer when he said that he went to his usual reliable sources, which are totally unreliable. I can confirm that there has been no cheating at B.C. Ferries. The fast cat program is now on track and will come into service as planned. I think that member opposite should go back to his sources and tell them to check it out, because he's wrong again.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, members. You're interrupting your own member.

First supplementary, the member for Richmond Centre.

D. Symons: Actually, I have more faith in my usual reliable sources than I do in the reliability of this government. The truth of that will actually come out when they're in operation, if they ever get to be. The manufacturers of that engine -- MTU -- placed those governors on the engines to prevent them from running at excessive speeds. I wonder if the minister would table in the House today all the engine warranties, so the taxpayers can be sure that if that has been done, they're not on the hook for more costs.

Hon. G. Wilson: That member knows that we have made open all of the information that he's requested of the B.C. Ferry Corporation. If he wants to take a look at the warranty provisions, all he has to do is pick up the phone and ask.

FOREST RENEWAL EXPENDITURES

G. Abbott: According to one of B.C.'s largest silviculture contractors, Dirk Brinkman, Forest Renewal B.C. has wasted up to $1 billion. Mr. Brinkman says that inflated union-only contracts and redirected funds to pay for government programs have contributed to this billion-dollar waste. Can the Minister of Forests tell us why his pet project has wasted $1 billion, when thousands of forest workers are now without a job?

Hon. D. Zirnhelt: I'm not sure which of the many thousands of Forest Renewal projects that have benefited communities he would describe as my pet project. It might be the one in his back yard, restoring the watershed.

But, you know, hon. Speaker, this opposition is loose with figures. Mr. Brinkman thinks we wasted the money because we haven't spent it for his industry. Forest Renewal dollars have been spent on retraining workers, on community economic development plans, on value-added and on restoring about 150 watersheds. Of course, those might not be Mr. Brinkman's priorities, but they're the priorities of British Columbians.

[1425]

Motion without Notice

Hon. D. Lovick: I rise, by leave, to make a motion, if I may. By leave, I move that this House recommend to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor the appointment of Mr. Brent Parfitt as acting ombudsman, as a statutory officer of the Legislature pursuant to

section 6(3) of the Ombudsman Act, Revised Statutes of British Columbia, 1996 ,

chapter 340, to exercise the powers and duties assigned to the ombudsman for the province of British Columbia.

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Petitions

M. Coell: I have two petitions -- one with 33 signatures from the peninsula and one with 78 signatures from Pender Island -- of people in opposition to spraying for the gypsy moth.

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate

(continued)

H. Giesbrecht: Continuing my comments on the budget from Thursday last week -- I spoke about the choices this government had made in this budget, the choice made to increase services in health and education and the choice made to cut taxes in these economic times -- I guess that the choice has been to invest in people. Budgets are about choices.

The opposition has been totally fixated in its comments on the deficit and debt and in painting a picture of gloom and doom and trying to paint a picture that what we all want is what they've done in Alberta -- or so it seems, anyway. The record shows, of course -- and I use a January 11, 1999, Globe and Mail

article -- that B.C. spends about $450 per person more on health care than Alberta and about $200 per person more than Ontario, which suggests that if we were to do like Alberta, we could save $1.8 billion; and if we did like Ontario, we'd save about $800 million. If we consider that and if we consider that our personal taxes for anything up to about $100,000 a year in income are the second-lowest in the country, then I think it paints a rather different picture. But I digress, so let me get back to the point.

As the Liberals often say, as they're fixated on deficits and debt . . . . I noticed, with some interest, that the B.C. Business

[ Page 12162 ]

Summit didn't call for a balanced budget this year. They call for $1.5 billion in tax cuts and $1 billion in spending cuts. That would have left a $500 million deficit. Of course, if you ask the B.C. Business Summit the same question that we often ask the Liberals opposite -- as to what they would cut in order to reduce spending by $1 billion -- they shy away from that answer. They just don't want to get into that kind of detail at this point, which I think is somewhat -- I would use the word -- cowardly of them. But it's the nature of it that you try to shy away from those kinds of answers.

My colleague the member for New Westminster made it very clear last week, in terms of the cuts or the costs, that the changes that the opposition wants to make involve a $3.5 billion cut in programs and services. I won't go into those kinds of details, because they were done very well by my colleague the member for New Westminster. So it's not enough to go into just the generalities; there is some obligation that members opposite have for being very specific in what they would cut in terms of programs and services.

[1430]

For northwest British Columbians, the difference between this government and the Liberals opposite is no clearer than it is on the Skeena Cellulose issue. I'm getting letters from northwest mayors, business people, workers, loggers, contractors and, yes, even the chamber of commerce, asking the government to continue assisting Skeena Cellulose in the next phase of its restructuring, and I want to thank them for their assistance in this regard.

I know for a fact that the members opposite are getting similar letters. Yet last week the member for Kamloops-North Thompson spoke and pleaded for -- I should say, rather, demanded -- a subsidy or bailout for Highland Valley Copper. I use the term "bailout" because they're so fond of that term. We were supposed to subsidize them with cheaper hydro rates. Their hydro rates run at something like $36 million per year -- I think that's what he said. My reaction at the time was: maybe he's got a point. Interestingly enough, the government and the job protection commissioner are in fact negotiating some kind of an arrangement to assist Highland Valley Copper.

But, interestingly enough, ten minutes later in his address he talked about public money being squandered on SCI -- or Skeena Cellulose. Now, Skeena Cellulose involves about four times as many direct jobs as Highland Valley Copper does. I ask myself the question, of course: what makes the northwest of British Columbia so different that it doesn't get the same kind of compassion from the opposition Liberals as, say, Highland Valley Copper might? You know, you need to be a little bit consistent in terms of the applications and the pleadings that you make. If it's good enough for Logan Lake, then why isn't it good enough for communities like Prince Rupert, Terrace, Hazelton and Smithers?

It's the nature of the opposition that they would say anything, do anything and promise anything, and hope that nobody will ever remember what they said when they go from one community to another. But my constituents certainly are recognizing that, and of course, I do not hesitate to tell them the kind of comments they make in the House about Skeena Cellulose.

Twenty-five hundred jobs across the northwest -- those are direct jobs, and that doesn't include the indirect jobs that are related to it. The folks in Skeena and the folks across the northwest, I think, deserve the same kind of treatment.

I noticed that the same member, the member for Kamloops-North Thompson, talked about debt and deficit, and in the same speech -- I made a list of them -- he asked for more money for municipalities, for government vehicles, for Highland Valley Copper, for MacMillan Bloedel, for something called the Ponderosa Lodge and for Royal Inland, for doctors, for a Clearwater multilevel health care facility and for research and development.

[W. Hartley in the chair.]

So on the one side, they talk about cutting spending, and their economic plan is for a $3.5 billion cut in services; on the other hand, they ask for more spending. I think that kind of inconsistency is noted, and I think that people, certainly in the riding of Skeena, can understand that, based on their positions on Skeena Cellulose.

This budget is about making choices. When the economy is struggling and when markets and commodity prices are poor, then I think that government has an obligation to invest in people. That's what most of the experts tell us. And you invest in those essential services that people rely on. I think that's what making choices in budgets is all about; I think that's what good government is all about.

J. Cashore: Hon. Speaker, sometimes people who are observing the debates notice that MLAs may be wearing a particular ribbon or a pin. Today I just want to mention that this white ribbon is in recognition of Youth Week, which has been proclaimed in British Columbia. That's why we're wearing a white ribbon today.

[1435]

This is the thirteenth time -- the thirteenth year -- that I, along with other members of the MLA class of 1986, have taken the opportunity to stand up and speak on the budget in this province. I'm getting to the point where I feel that's a lot of years. That's a lot of time to be operating in this arena.

An Hon. Member: Is this it?

J. Cashore: The hon. member asked the question: "Is this it?" Yes, hon. member, I have indicated publicly that I will not be seeking re-election; I indicated that about 14 months ago. But lest he get his hopes up, I know that we are going to find an outstanding member who will someday be in cabinet and who will be able to carry on what I think has been a very significant service to the people of the Coquitlam area.

During the time that I and the member for Port Coquitlam have been in a position to recognize the needs of a long-neglected part of our province . . . . At the time when, prior to a fairly recent metamorphosis, the members opposite had existed in their earlier lives as members of the Social Credit government, the people in that area knew just to what a significant extent -- even when they had a Social Credit MLA -- they were utterly ignored. Their needs were ignored by the government of the day.

It's a great privilege for me to represent the citizens of Coquitlam-Maillardville. I just want to say to hon. members that through those years I have enjoyed outstanding support in that area. I think it's a result of following a very basic approach. I've always taken it as my position -- even during my years in cabinet -- that it was my role to represent the citizens of Coquitlam-Maillardville to Victoria, and not the

[ Page 12163 ]

other way around. I've been consistent in that approach. I believe that the citizens there have appreciated that approach.

I think this approach comes through in the budget that I'm very honoured to support in the House today. After all, it boosts health care investment $615 million, it boosts education funding $39 million, and it reduces small business taxes to an amount that's lower than that which is found in Alberta. I think this is the result of a government that listens to its citizens. Government has listened, and government has responded.

As a result, we will see more nurses, more beds and shorter waiting lists within our health care system. Indeed, health care operational funding is increasing by $478 million and capital funding by $137 million for much-needed facilities. In the same period, education funding is increasing by $45 million.

In the area of health we will see 58,000 more surgeries, up to 10,000 new chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatments, 700 more cardiac operations, 1,000 more hip and knee operations, breast cancer screening for 38,000 more women and $15 million to hire 400 more nurses.

Health care funding in the province has increased every year for the past eight years in a row, and this is in the face of drastic cuts in funding from the federal government at a time when all of the other provinces have been cutting back, raising tuition fees, cutting health care, closing hospitals and indeed, in some instances, cutting kindergarten.

This province has been maintaining those services and expanding because of the importance of investing in the future with regard to a healthy community and with regard to a very outstanding and effective education that ensures that our young people will be able to take their place with regard to stimulating a healthy economy and protecting a sustainable environment. So in the area of education, we see more teachers and smaller class sizes.

[1440]

All in all, we see funding for education up $45 million this year. Since 1991, the funding for education in the face of those federal cuts is up 23 percent. This means that there will be up to 300 new teachers for kindergarten to grade 3. In this budget there is $341 million for capital costs to reduce crowding, to eliminate up to 560 portables, to provide 13 new and replacement schools and to ensure that there are 103 schools renovated in the province.

Education is about our future, and nowhere in the province is that more significant than in district 43, in the Coquitlam area, where we have seen one of the most rapid growth areas in Canada over the last 20 years. When we turn to Coquitlam, we realize that in district 43, in this budget year alone there will be a significant reduction in the number of portables in schools. This will indeed address the issue of crowding. I know that the people of Coquitlam-Maillardville are very happy to see that happening.

If we look at infrastructure and capital improvements in the area of education and we look back at the capital improvements from 1973 until 1990, we will find that district 43 was a hotbed of activity because of the unrest among parents. Parents were holding angry meetings. They were meeting with government officials and expressing a great deal of anger, because the growth that was taking place was rampant and the infrastructure being provided was almost nonexistent. Parents were meeting, they were having rallies, and they were sending petitions to Victoria. Very little was happening during that time.

Since I became the MLA and then a member of the government in 1991, and since the member for Port Coquitlam -- the minister responsible for economic development . . . . Since he became an MLA in 1991, we have seen more in those eight years in terms of providing school construction in that area for some very significant needs than in the previous 30 years -- a very significant accomplishment. This resulted in significant new schools at every level. It resulted in eliminating portables. It resulted in renovations.

Renovation of some schools to make sure that we make the best use of what we already have is very significant. I just point out that during my time we have seen the fire at Roy Stibbs Elementary School and the fastest rebuilding of a school after a fire in the history of the province. We have also seen the renovations at Mountain View Elementary School and at Millside Elementary School.

I turn now to transportation, a topic which is always able to evoke a great deal of interest -- witness question period today. I want to give a great deal of credit to the Premier for the leadership he has shown in this area. Were it not for the Premier and his legacy during the past eight years, we would not see the West Coast Express. We would not have seen transportation issues addressed in the way that they have been.

Indeed, if residents of the area stop to think about it, if some of the infrastructure needs that have been addressed had not been addressed, it would be an absolute nightmare for the people of the area because of the way in which previous governments allowed rampant growth without providing infrastructure.

We come to the issue of SkyTrain, which has been in the news and was indeed in question period today. We have heard the reassurance from the minister responsible for SkyTrain, who is also the Minister of Finance, that the province is going to build SkyTrain and is going to ensure that that building is done from the Glen Drive area of Broadway to New Westminster and that the addition to Coquitlam Centre will be in place by the year 2003.

[1445]

We've heard some expressions of concern from some of the local government officials and from the mayor. They have expressed some concern, but I remind all of our members and all of our citizens that some of these discussions are still underway, and the province has made commitments here that are very firm. It may be that there is some discussion about the cost of the additional infrastructure that may be required at some time.

But the fact is that I find it absolutely amazing that we saw the kind of question that we saw here today from the Leader of the Opposition, when polling has indicated that 94 percent of the public want to see improvement in transit in that area and that 74 percent want to see the SkyTrain extension to Coquitlam. Why would he be taking the tack that he is taking, in the face of those kinds of wishes being stated by the citizens of the province? And why would he undermine the member for Port Moody-Burnaby Mountain by standing up and calling for a system that would be, simply, hopelessly inadequate?

If he had taken the time to talk to those who he likes to call his friends in business . . . . If he went and talked to all of those who operate businesses along those corridors about the way in which business is shut down, sometimes for over a year, during the construction of light rail transit, I certainly don't think he would have been asking those questions that he was asking today. Indeed, when you have the

[ Page 12164 ]

construction of a SkyTrain system, it's possible to localize the construction and remove it from having major impacts on the commerce of the area, and the area is able to carry on while that is taking place. This is simply a head-in-the-sand attitude. Anybody who goes to Montreal, Toronto, Calgary or Edmonton and visits the kind of controversy that took place in those jurisdictions when those systems were built would find that it is penny-wise and pound-foolish to avoid addressing these urgent infrastructure needs.

There has been some discussion by municipal politicians with regard to the level of support the province is putting into this. I just want to point out that if we look at the annual provincial contributions for the year 1996 that have gone into building transit systems such as SkyTrain, in Toronto the Ontario government has put in 34.9 percent; in Ottawa the Ontario government has put in 21 percent; in Calgary the Alberta government has put in 10.3 percent; in Montreal the Quebec government has put in 3.9 percent; and in Vancouver the provincial government has put in 41 percent.

This is a recognition of the need to address the needs of the citizens, and those needs are also the health care needs that relate to the very important issue of getting people out of cars and ensuring that we are able to improve air quality -- and we all know there is a direct relationship there.

Within those same jurisdictions that I just mentioned, the stats that I have are for 1996. For both Ottawa and Toronto, the Ontario government has already eliminated operating-support funding and has indicated that capital-support funding will be eliminated within four years. Again, as in the case of health care and education and also transportation, this government is making the choices to keep faith with those very urgent needs, which are also needs that address air quality and therefore our health.

I want to talk about some of the accomplishments in the area of transportation infrastructure that have taken place since I have represented the area, and that includes the building of the Broadway connector, the Johnson-Mariner connector, the Mary Hill bypass improvement where there was a bottleneck under the rail overpass, the high-occupancy vehicle lanes on the Barnet Highway and on the 401, the recent announcement of a fifth lane on the Port Mann Bridge and the work that is ongoing on the Cape Horn interchange.

The Minister of Transportation and Highways has announced that there's more to come with regard to that. He has announced that new work that is soon to be underway will see the new Lougheed on-ramp to the westbound 401 Trans-Canada Highway built near Coleman Avenue. Therefore traffic will be removed from the Cape Horn interchange, having quite a significant impact on that. Also, there is other design work going on so that we will be able to proceed with other changes that need to take place there.

Also ongoing is the work on the Braid-Leeder connector, which is going to be supported by a federal-provincial infrastructure grant. Because of some federal Fisheries and Navigable Waters Protection Act issues, that issue has been held up, but it will still be proceeding. So again, after 20 years of neglect by the previous governments, our government has be able to bring forward those kinds of amenities that recognize the needs of the local region.

[1450]

I want to turn now to the environment. Again, it was kind of ironic to hear the Leader of the Opposition referring to the Sierra Legal Defence Fund, the Sierra Club, the West Coast Environmental Law Association and other environmental groups. I would have to say that they're very strange bedfellows, when you hear their support being mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition, especially when you consider where -- it has recently been disclosed -- the political funding for that party comes from.

When you see the way the funding comes into that party from the forest industry, it is such that I think that when it comes to a time of choosing for the environment or choosing for their friends and insiders, the Leader of the Opposition will know that the environmental community won't be supporting that Liberal opposition, not by a long shot.

Just some of the things that have taken place in the Coquitlam area . . . . I made a commitment after the Social Credit government was planning to sell off the Colony Farm lands -- that beautiful green space, an island of emerald in a sea of urban sprawl -- and I was able to advocate on behalf of Colony Farm. Guess what: now it's a park, enjoyed forever by the people of the region.

Across the road at Riverview, we have made a commitment to protect the arboretum there, those historic trees. Some of them were planted around the turn of the century. While the government continues to determine what the health care needs will be for that facility, I continued to maintain that the future of Riverview is one which will ensure the protection of the green space, the protection of the trees and the integrity of the ecology, which is going to be very important for that region.

Also, we have seen the protection of the Burke Mountain-Pinecone Lake area, which has become a very popular destination location for those who want to enjoy the wilderness in one of our outdoor areas that has been protected, which people can reach within a matter of less than an hour and be enjoying what is a very pristine wilderness. There's also the protection of Widgeon Marsh and Douglas Island. Then there are other environmental initiatives, such as the deal that we worked out with B.C.

Hydro to control the water flows coming through the Coquitlam River so that the Port Coquitlam Fish and Game Club and other environmental organizations could carry on their salmon and trout enhancement work and continue to be keepers of the river.

I just want to take this opportunity to mention Fin Donnelly of the Rivershed Society of B.C. Fin is a local man who has really dedicated his life to protecting the ecology of our rivers. To that extent, he has actually made a historic swim down the Fraser River, stopping at various communities and raising public awareness with regard to the issues of the quality of the water, discharges from mills and other plants, and the impact of septic tanks along the waterway.

He continues, with his Rivershed Society -- to which he has appointed me as an honorary board member -- to make a very significant public contribution through his volunteer work. The Spirit of the Salmon Swim, which is an event that they continue to present, is one of the ways in which public awareness is raised.

I also want to mention at this time, while I have the opportunity, that Dr. Crosby Johnston, a man that I have known since 1972 -- a retired psychiatrist -- is today receiving an award from the Governor General of Canada. It's the Governor General's Caring Canadian Award for exemplary public service. One cannot begin to list all the work that Crosby Johnston has done in the community in counselling

[ Page 12165 ]

and working with seniors and in working for community betterment. I know that all constituents join me in congratulating him on this day.

[1455]

Also, I want to acknowledge the work of the Burke Mountain Naturalists, who the Leader of the Opposition referred to earlier. They are indeed exemplary, and they provide excellent advice. They are very willing to engage in dialogue and make available the benefit of the research that they have done with regard to protecting the environmental integrity of the area and therefore ensuring quality of life for future generations.

One event that the Burke Mountain Naturalists happen to be planning will be taking place on Tuesday, May 11, at Como Lake United Church. The guest speaker will be . . . . Actually, according to my notes, it will be myself. I will be speaking as the MLA for Coquitlam-Maillardville and also as the chair of the Muskwa-Kechika Advisory Board. I will be giving a talk on the new project, which is the Muskwa-Kechika in the northeast part of the province.

I know that the members for both Peace River North and Peace River South are very interested in it, because it's an example of the kind of work that can be done when you enable people of an area -- such as the people of the north, in this case -- to work together and bring people with many different perspectives and many different interests to a table where they can work for five years and hammer out a position where they're able to say: "This is how this region of the province should be handled from a land use planning point of view."

These two planning tables at Fort St. John and Fort Nelson were given the task . . . . In addition to addressing all those planning issues in the northeast corner of the province, on the other side of the Rocky Mountains in the north, they were also asked to address the special considerations of the Northern Rockies, or the area that has become known as the Muskwa-Kechika. They have recommended to government that that become a special management area. It consists of 4.5 million hectares, and one-quarter of that is to be an area that is protected.

Some of that area is protected as park at the present time, and the plan of the local people who had input into that was to expand that to 1.2 million hectares.

Here we have a very significant area that's larger than Nova Scotia and larger than Switzerland, but with the difference that if you looked inside that area right at this very time . . . . The members for Peace River North and Peace River South could correct me on this, but I would guess that at this moment in time there are probably fewer than 500 people resident within that area.

In the summer that will be different, and there will be a great many people who live in the area and a great many visitors to the area who will be going up into that region in riverboats, on backpacking and horse-packing trips. Again, compared to almost anywhere else in the world, it is an area that is relatively untouched.

It is a tribute to the people of the region that they want to ensure that the predator-prey relationships between the grizzlies, the moose, the elk, the caribou, the goats and all of those animals that are part of a balanced ecology will continue to be valued so that they will be available for future generations, while at the same time developing ways that will ensure that the planning for resource extraction in the area is done in a way that supports that.

[1500]

One of the things that I think is quite outstanding about it is the way in which industry -- especially the oil and gas industry -- has had input into this process with regard to a very positive environmental-integrity approach, which shows the very profound belief that it's possible to have a sustainable economy and protect those significant ecological values.

This is an example of excellence in land use planning, and I dare say, since I've had something to do with the development of the most recent approaches to land use planning going back to 1992, that it is perhaps the most successful example we have had to date. Indeed, it's an example that people throughout the world are interested in learning about.

I had an opportunity to take my place recently and speak in third reading of the Nisga'a debate. I pointed out that that debate has occupied four and a half years of my life. It was a great privilege to have had the role of shepherding that file for part of the time, along with the times that it was shepherded by other Ministers of Aboriginal Affairs. I want to mention that our Member of Parliament, Lou Sekora, a Liberal, was there at the celebration when the negotiations were concluded. He was up on the Nass River.

I know that he will be speaking passionately in support of the Nisga'a treaty when it finally comes before the House of Commons. I know that in doing so, he will obviously be disappointed in those provincial Liberals here in this House who have spoken against it, following what is obviously a political compass rather than the compass that would advise them that doing the right thing is achieving a settlement through hard-nosed negotiations such as those which did exist and then finding the kind of future that provides profound hope.

In conclusion, as I said, this is the thirteenth time that I have risen in this House to speak on the budget. Last week, when some reporters from Coquitlam were here to find out about a day in the life of three MLAs, it was kind of interesting to point out to them the contrasts that you might find by observing the chamber here, which some have likened to a Roman circus from time to time. School classes come and see the kind of excitement that takes place during question period, and they wonder if we can ever get along.

Yet I do advise these people that you will often find members of opposition and government talking together -- having friendly words together -- and indeed working cooperatively on a number of things.

Because that is perhaps not all that newsworthy, the public doesn't see that much of what goes on here, but it is my reflection that in a way we have three solitudes here: government, opposition and the media. All of us, in a way, have problems with each other, and all of us, in a way, depend on each other. When you look at what's happening in other parts of the world, it's in those places where people don't have the opportunity, through democratic process, to negotiate or deliberate or deal with those issues that are so important in the human arena that we see the tragedy of refugees . . . .

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, member. Your time is up.

J. Cashore: Hon. Speaker, it's a great privilege to be here today and to be able to comment on the pleasant vistas outside the parliament buildings, which remind us of the true beauty of British Columbia and all that we have to protect.

[1505]

Hon. S. Hammell: It is with pleasure that I rise to support the 1999-2000 provincial budget recently tabled in the

[ Page 12166 ]

House. This is a budget that responds to the priorities of British Columbians living both in my constituency of Surrey-Green Timbers and throughout our province.

As an MLA who works hard for people living in Surrey and as the Minister of Women's Equality, I meet all sorts of people: single moms working on their high school diploma or university degree; senior citizens trying to get by on a small pension; and people working in all sorts of jobs, ranging from the service sector to professionals and from small to big business. But most of all, I meet with members of families -- individuals who are doing their best to pay off that mortgage, save for a summer vacation and be good role models for their kids.

As I meet with these people both in Surrey and throughout the province, certain issues are constant. Those are: protecting our health care, improving education for our children and making it easier for small business to develop and grow and provide the jobs that are always needed.

I am proud to say that this government has listened to those concerns, and in this budget we are responding. This budget is about improving health care. We've made a lot of progress in the past eight years to improve health care in B.C., in spite of drastic cuts in health transfer payments by the federal government. B.C. has maintained its commitment to health care funding, despite cumulative cuts in federal health transfer payments of $778 million since 1994-95.

This year we are increasing funding to health care by $615 million. This money will go toward more beds, more nurses and more surgeries. We will have shorter wait-lists, more chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatments and more money for Pharmacare spending. In Surrey $3.7 million will be available for funding the fifth vault of the Fraser Valley Cancer Centre. That's on top of the $62 million addition to Surrey Memorial Hospital. This is good news for individuals and families having to deal with this difficult and stressful disease.

Another one of our priorities is education. All provinces have had to make difficult funding choices in this area. Some have chosen bigger class sizes, more portables and fewer teachers. Schools have even been closed in some provinces, and I believe that in Alberta, parents are asked to pay for kindergarten. But not in British Columbia.

For this government the choice was easy. We believe every child deserves a quality education, regardless of their parents' income. Education is the great equalizer for all our people as well as for new immigrants who are establishing themselves here. It provides us as a society the opportunity to draw on the best from all the talent available. That's why we are reducing class size in the primary grades, for nowhere could we better spend our tax dollars to provide a strong foundation for our youngest learners. We are hiring 300 more teachers, building 13 more schools, renovating 103 others and retiring 560 portables, giving students more room to learn.

This year the operating budget for the Surrey school district is $313 million. This represents a 2.17 percent increase over last year. Per-student funding is $5,502.25 -- an increase of over $30 from last year's budget -- and we are reducing portables to boot. In September 1998, Surrey had 365 portables. We all agree that that is many, many too many. With this budget it is anticipated that the number of portables will be reduced to 285 in September 1999 and 205 in September 2000, and will be cut more than in half by September 2003.

[1510]

There is often more than one way to describe a deficit. When the administration of government changed in 1991, we inherited a huge deficit in the infrastructure in this province -- a deficit in school construction, hospital construction and long term care facilities -- at a time when immigration to this province was booming. Construction costs in schools since 1991 have been around $500 million in Surrey alone. Every high school in Surrey has been renovated or built. Last year two elementary schools were opened in Surrey-Green Timbers: William F. Davidson and Creekside. These are fabulous schools that are much welcomed by the surrounding neighbourhoods.

This year, building on this growth, the Surrey school district will see $4.5 million to fund school renovations and upgrades. Renovating our schools helps us upgrade learning environments efficiently and effectively. These projects will breathe new life into our schools and give our students, teachers and community a better learning environment -- all part of our plan to continue improving education in B.C.

In Surrey-Green Timbers this new funding means that Fleetwood Elementary will have improved access for students with special needs, Harold Bishop will have a four-room classroom wing replaced and Green Timbers Elementary will have a major addition. Three other schools -- Kirkbride, Simon Cunningham and Lena Shaw -- will also have additional classrooms built in order to reduce the class size for children in kindergarten-to-grade-3.

In this budget we are also continuing to improve access to post-secondary education. This helps to further support building B.C.'s economy as a well-educated and trained workforce, which is critical to our success in the global marketplace. I know that the continuation of the tuition freeze was welcome news to many of my constituents attending Kwantlen University College. By freezing tuition fees for the fourth straight year, we are keeping tuition affordable for B.C. students, and we are making history of a sort.

Think about it: a student who began their post-secondary career in 1996 and who graduates in 2000 will have finished their studies without ever having a tuition increase. How many of us can say that about our university days?

Another area we have focused on in this budget is small business. We've cut taxes for small business to help create jobs for people and to diversify the economy, because that's where the opportunities are for the future. We're lowering the small business tax rate to 5.5 percent effective July 1. B.C.'s rate will be lower than Alberta's, and we're going further. We will keep our small business tax rate lower than Alberta's, and any further reduction in Alberta's rate will be matched dollar for dollar in B.C.

We're working with business to cut red tape, including streamlining over 30 provincial regulations, opening 23 one-stop business registration centres and developing a more straightforward environmental assessment process. The new approach, called the business lens, will make government ask the right questions before we introduce or amend significant regulations. Communities have told us that they need a strategy to help them strengthen and diversify. We've listened. The budget includes $10 million to support communities to build and diversify local economies.

[1515]

If you will allow me, hon. Speaker, I'd like to spend a few minutes wearing my Ministry of Women's Equality hat and talking about how this budget does work for the women of British Columbia. As we know, British Columbia is the only

[ Page 12167 ]

province in Canada to have a freestanding Ministry of Women's Equality. This government is committed to making a difference in women's lives. To us this means ensuring that women's interests and concerns are reflected in all government programs and services. This government recognizes the important role women play in our province's social and economic well-being. The budget recognizes and encourages that role. This government listened to women's voices, and this budget listens to women's voices.

I am pleased to report that the ministry has received a small increase this year. Our priorities for the coming year will be to continue the important work we do in the areas of violence prevention, women's health and women's economic equality. But the global budget also has much to do with women.

Part of the Health budget includes increasing the number of screening mammography procedures by 38,000; reducing waits at the B.C.'s Children's Hospital by funding up to 800 more surgeries a year; investing $10 million in a new mental health plan; and launching a new tobacco program in schools, to encourage healthier lifestyles and help reduce smoking-related medical costs over the long term -- all of which affect women living in this province and their children.

A component of the Education budget allows for the hiring of another 300 teachers to work in grades K to 3 so that our younger children get more attention during their critical learning stage. A $50-per-week increase in student financial assistance for students with dependents and an additional 2,900 student spaces will open the post-secondary doors to more and more single moms.

Economic equality between women and men and economic security for women have been the major focus for my ministry. I am pleased that this budget helps small businesses, many of which are owned and operated by the women of this province. We all know that small business is one of the underlying strengths of B.C.'s economy. But are the members opposite also aware that women-owned small businesses are the fastest-growing sector? Women are opening up businesses at a rate three times that of men. Of the 379,000 self-employed people in B.C. in 1997, approximately 137,000, or 36 percent, were women.

The growth rate for women entrepreneurs in B.C. was 63 percent between '91 and '96. In 1997 women owned more than one in three of our province's small businesses, and between '91 and '96 they started up two out of three of all small businesses.

Despite this, women continue to tell me that they cannot get basic financing and startup information. That's why the ministry, in partnership with the Royal Bank and the Ministry of Small Business and Tourism, produced a business women's startup guide. This guide is a one-stop resource that provides the basics and will save women time and money in researching business startup information. Once women have made the decision to open a small business, they will benefit from the small business tax cut.

[1520]

Two other pieces of the budget which will have an immediate effect on women deal with social housing and the family bonus. In the budget, our government committed to increasing social housing by 1,200 homes over the next two years. I'm pleased to say that we are already acting on that promise. Last week this government, in partnership with the city of Vancouver, signed a $26 million agreement that sets the stage for the development of up to 1,000 units of social housing. Many of these projects will be located in Vancouver's downtown east side and will be beneficial to many women in need of adequate, safe housing.

Another area of concern to this government is the issue of child poverty. We recognize that for some families, it is difficult to make ends meet. That's why, in 1996, we introduced the B.C. family bonus -- a monthly payment to low- and modest-income families to help them stay in the workforce. This program was the most generous of its kind in the country. In this budget, we are renewing our commitment to the families in this province by increasing the benefit in the combined family bonus and national child benefit by 2 percent. That's $8 million more into the pockets of those families.

That's our agenda. Our priority is the family, those needing medical treatment, our children's education and the economy. If I may, I'd like to speculate on what a budget from the members opposite might look like. What would they do to health, education and small-business funding? What would be the impact of their budget on the women of this province? I would guess that the budget presented by the members opposite would do little or nothing to help women. As we've seen in Ontario, it is women living in that province who have been hardest hit by the Harris agenda.

Women are the ones who end up filling in the gaps and falling through the cracks caused by government's cuts to health care, education and communities.

I have to ask: would the opposition fund health care and education in our communities, or would they, rather, reward the wealthiest people of our province with huge tax breaks? Would they guarantee a budget with programs created to support the kind of communities that people of our province want and that the women of our province need? I am doubtful that they would.

The Leader of the Opposition has publicly promised tax cuts which see 35 percent of the benefits going to the wealthiest 4 percent of the population. But he has promised to do this while at the same time funding health care, education and child protection services, changing transportation accounting and balancing the budget. How will he do this without cutting from the budget? Where will these cuts come from? How many transition houses would be closed? What schools would be locked? Which conservation officers, foresters or firefighters would lose their jobs? How many small businesses would suffer?

In conclusion, let me say that this budget is about choices and priorities. Our priorities are clear and focus on things that matter to the people of this province: health care, education and economic growth. Our budget choices reflect those priorities. I am confident that this budget will enable us to make progress in achieving equality for women and making British Columbia a good place in which to live and work. I am proud to support it.

[1525]

A. Sanders: I rise on behalf of the people of Okanagan-Vernon to critique Budget '99. Since that fateful day in March when the budget was brought down, the budget has sort of been like a dream -- or perhaps a nightmare. Let's characterize that budget nightmare, and let's simplify that nightmare for everyone of every age in British Columbia to understand.

I'm going to picture a heroine, and I'm going to call her British Columbia. She is standing on the tenuous edge of a

[ Page 12168 ]

colossal precipice of NDP debt. She looks over the edge, deep into the economic abyss. She searches for the future, praying for a light -- praying for a beacon of hope -- in Budget '99. With her hands folded and her eyes closed she stands, when up sneaks the wicked Finance minister in her secondhand movie-of-the-week shoes and gives B.C. a push, using a rolled-up copy of the budget

summary.

Beyond financial equilibrium, beyond hope of regaining balance in her budget, B.C. falls, weighted by the lead burden of eight years of deficit and taxpayer-supported debt that this government has brought in. B.C. is in free fall. And as she spirals down, down, down into the economic abyss, she pictures, in her mind's eye, the smiling, bodiless talking head of the Minister of Finance chanting the current NDP mantra: "This is a budget of choices; this is a budget of choices; this is a budget of choices." And they are choices: they are the choices of nightmares.

Let's look at the organ music, if you will, to this horror flick: the

summary financial statements. The analysis of these figures is not for the economist or taxpayer who's faint at heart.

Here's why: a total debt of $34 billion -- a 101 percent increase since this government came into power; a debt load of $8,582 for every man, woman and child in British Columbia -- up over $3,000 since this government came into power; a projected deficit of $544 million for 1998-99 and $890 million for 1999-2000; interest on the debt of $2.6 billion; no plan to balance the budget till 2002-03; no additional tax cuts for the next five years beyond those already announced; a plan to increase taxpayer-supported debt by 27 percent in the next five years -- up from 12.5 percent in 1991, when this government came into power.

Some choices!

The Finance minister says that this is a budget that chooses health care and education. Nothing could be further from the truth. Let's look at this MacFailure that's put taxpayers on the hook for $7.23 million a day in debt servicing alone. There is absolutely no way to siphon money out of health care and education faster than to owe it to the big banks in debt-servicing charges.

For those who kind of glaze over when the figures commence, that particular dollar figure -- $7.23 million a day -- could pay, under a different government, for one elementary school a day, three and a half high schools a week, 35 beds in the Vernon hospital that will not be built because of the interest payments that have to go to the big banks from the NDP government.

For the record, a hefty proportion of the new dollars earmarked for health care spending is actually coming from the federal government. Transfer payments are up $228 million over the budget forecast last year and up $500 million in additional money this year from the federal government. Let's hear the NDP credit the federal government for this year's increase in health care. So much for bragging.

[1530]

All the bragging about the right choices . . . . Let's be clear.

This is a budget of choices -- NDP choices, job-killing choices, economy-strangling choices -- all brought in by this government: choices to download 41 percent to the municipal governments, so the taxpayer is on the hook again; choices to download to municipalities, so fewer policemen and firemen are going to be there to protect our communities and our homes; choices to cut agriculture, of all things, 10 percent, so the Okanagan tree fruit industry will feel the bite -- and there's no question about that; choices to destroy family-supporting jobs in mining and forest-dependent communities and have those families move out of the province to seek jobs elsewhere, where the economy is better, along with our sons and daughters who have to leave to get their first jobs.

How about the choice to use legal aid taxation? This government that does everything for women used legal aid taxation as a profit-generating cash cow, a venture that government is taking money for general revenues from, rather than putting it into the legal care and legal justice for women, children, the disabled, WCB patients who need help and the mentally ill.

Then there are the choices that this government has made to leave the sick on gurneys in the hospital hallway, some in broom closets, and the elderly in acute beds when they don't need them, and the ill on surgical wait-lists. The rhetoric of compassion versus the actuality in service delivery that this government has done is beyond belief. Just think of the Vernon surgical wait-list; don't look at anything else. We have over 1,600 patients on the surgical wait-list. If you stand each patient on the shoulders of the next one, pile them up, you're going to have a surgical wait-list a mile and a half high -- just from Vernon. What about the other communities in British Columbia?

Here are the choices you give poor families in this budget. An extra $12 this year in the family bonus -- I'm sure the families are just kicking up their heels in anticipation of the windfall they're going to get. What can a parent buy with $12 this year? Let's ask the Finance minister.

This is a budget of choices. Let's look at some of the other recent choices the government has made that further gut health care and education and make this budget's promises even more fictitious. There was the choice to spend $300 million on Skeena. There was the choice to build Ferrari ferries, with a $200 million overrun.

There was the choice to censure debate on Nisga'a, when one single question uncovered a $71 million road expense that was not covered in the treaty. It's coming out of the budget. What other questions would have come out that are about money that will go into the budget from Nisga'a? Who knows? In this Legislature there are no questions, no answers, no debate and no democracy.

How about the choice to loan $25 million to a private company for the development of a theme park in Burns Bog? The member for Maillardville-Coquitlam was talking about how wonderful the NDP has been with the ecosystem. That's an interesting one, I must say.

It never ends. Now we're talking about the choice to build SkyTrain for around $3 billion instead of light rail for $1.2 billion, an overrun of close to $2 billion from the original recommendations and estimates. Then there's the choice to spend $10 million on Raiwind, a defunct or non-functional power plant in Pakistan.

It is a budget of choices -- Raiwind, SkyTrain, Skeena Cellulose, Nisga'a, Burns Bog, convention centres, you name it -- made by this government. There's $3 billion worth of choices just in those projects -- $3 billion that is not available to build 500 elementary schools, 250 high schools, 1,000 additional hospital beds for 18 years in Vernon because of the $3 billion spent elsewhere on what you could call the PPP list: the Premier's pet project list.

[1535]

You know, B.C. isn't your personal playground; it isn't your personal sandbox. We've got Raiwind instead of police-

[ Page 12169 ]

men in the communities this year. We've got Ferrari ferries instead of intermediate care facilities. We've got Skeena Cellulose instead of hip replacements. We've got legal fees for the Premier, ministers and civil servants -- a myriad of people -- to deal with all the scandals this government has brought in, instead of legal aid for battered women, the mentally handicapped and the poor. We've got quiet raises of 5 percent for unions during a recession, instead of transition houses.

We've got $75,000 in moving expenses for one NDP hack to move from Victoria to Vancouver, instead of protecting children in the Ministry for Children and Families. These are choices; make no mistake. They are indefensible; they are unconscionable; they are inexcusable; they are wrong.

Who do we blame -- the Premier? Premiers do come and go in British Columbia, especially in this government; but yes, I do believe that I would blame the Premier. The Finance minister? Yes, she should have stood her ground. She knew that this budget was the wrong thing to do, and she did it anyway. The cabinet -- smug faces regurgitating the script they were given? The back bench, glazing over their eyes to chant the mantra of choice: "The budget of choice, the budget of choice"? I blame them all.

I blame them all for seeing without vision, for hearing without listening, for experiencing without feeling the emotions, the worry, the anger, the frustration of their real boss: the voter, the taxpayer, the youth, our working people. Listen to those people, hon. Speaker. Those are the people that are stuck with this government's choices. They are the ones who pay the bill.

Let's stop this madness and look for solutions. There are solutions, and the NDP must amend this nightmare budget. B.C. needs a bold plan for economic renewal, with open, honest and competent government. We need to stimulate B.C.'s economy, create jobs, and protect health care and education. It can be done. It's being done in provinces across Canada -- except for British Columbia. Can this Premier achieve this? After eight disastrous years, the answer's painfully clear. Does this side of the House have solutions? Absolutely.

There are ten things that we could do in British Columbia today to make B.C. number one. How about starting with restoring a professional, non-partisan civil service, getting rid of all the friends and insiders that the NDP has put in place and putting in people who are there because they are professionally the best? There are many in the civil service now, but some of them have been put there for political reasons.

How about passing truth-in-budgeting legislation, so we could get back on the books all that are money off-loaded onto the Crown corporations, so the taxpayer would actually know the financial status of this province? Let's use some honest accounting practices when we do that.

How about balanced-budget legislation so that government couldn't spend money if it didn't have it? How about cutting personal income tax to encourage investment and job creation, and protecting health care and education with services focused on patients and students? How about enacting fair and balanced labour laws? There's a good one.

Cutting the regulatory burden . . . . The members of cabinet have said: "We're cutting the regulatory burden this year." Well, who brought in the burden? Who brought in those regulations? It was the NDP government, since 1991. It just about put the forest industry under water. Red tape, red tape, red tape -- red tape from the Red government.

How about protecting private property rights and increasing access to Crown land and resources -- not allowing expropriations? How about fighting for B.C.'s fair share in federal taxes and negotiating workable, affordable open treaties -- all things that we would benefit from in an economic way?

[1540]

It's never too late to do the right thing. Only a foolish government would look at the financial planning that hasn't worked for eight years, year after year, and still forge blindly ahead down the same old path that, for the last eight years, has gutted this province -- decapitated any kind of economic stability. There is no dress rehearsal for government. The taxpayer expects government to come in, to have a plan, to carry out the plan they were elected on and to be honest.

Interjection.

A. Sanders: The former Minister of Finance is talking about honesty. What's that about the pot and the kettle? Let's get some leadership, hon. Speaker. Let's get a new way.

Interjection.

A. Sanders: The former Finance minister says: "Let's get a plan." I would love to have you bring in a plan for once -- a plan you stuck to, something that actually stimulated the economy and brought jobs to B.C. Let's have a new government that is willing to control B.C.'s destiny and not let the big banks do it -- the way the NDP have this year, the year before and the year before that -- with debt servicing.

G. Abbott: It's a pleasure to rise and join in this budget debate. This is the eighth budget that this NDP government has produced. There is one thing, certainly, that we can say for this government and its budgets: they are consistent -- maybe consistently bad but consistent. Throughout the eight years -- regardless of whether times were good, bad or indifferent -- one could always count on the NDP to produce another deficit budget, and that's certainly been the case again this year.

There has been a lot said about this budget. I hope I can add a little bit that's fresh, but I'm sure that my colleagues -- and perhaps members across the way, as well -- have made some of these points about the budget. Much has been said about it -- very little of a positive nature, regrettably. We've heard, for example . . . . The member from Burnaby has given us a little bit of positive . . . about the budget, but outside of this chamber and apart from the members across the way, we have seen in this province remarkably little of a positive nature in respect to this latest NDP budget.

It has been widely condemned, certainly, by ordinary people. My constituents have found the increasing debt load and the persistent deficits entirely objectionable.

I'm sure the members across the way wouldn't agree, but I think that ordinary people across this province have said no to the economic approach of this government and that they are increasingly fed up with the way this province has been managed -- or mismanaged, to be more accurate -- over the past eight years. Media commentators have widely condemned this budget. Financial institutions and even bond-rating services have obviously given a thumbs-down to this budget.

Now, I know that members across the way would probably take great exception to the commentary of organizations

[ Page 12170 ]

like the B.C. Chamber of Commerce or the B.C. Business Summit, but I hope they can agree that the B.C. Central Credit Union is a fine and non-partisan institution. I think that the comments they made on the budget hit the mark directly. I'll just quote from a couple of comments by the B.C. Central Credit Union in respect of this budget: "Borrowing money and increasing the debt to cover operating costs is not a viable long-term strategy."

An Hon. Member: That's what Tommy Douglas used to say.

G. Abbott: Yes, exactly -- that's what Tommy Douglas used to say in Saskatchewan. I think that's what Roy Romanow, as well, says today in the province of Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, this government still seems to be trapped into a much earlier way of economic thinking -- nineteenth-century, I guess, is the way one might characterize it.

A couple of other quotes from the B.C. Central Credit Union that I think hit the mark: "Over the long run, an unabated spending-and-debt approach will result in poorer economic performance." I think that is certainly right on the mark as well. We are seeing, every day, the consequences of long-term mismanagement of the economy in British Columbia. We see it in our resource industries; we see it in all industries. We see it in people losing their jobs -- unnecessarily, I think -- in British Columbia.

[1545]

Another quote: "B.C. needs to have a lower tax regime and cost structure if it is to enjoy above-average economic growth. Other elements will also be needed, but this economic requirement is critical. And to achieve that goal, tax cuts and surplus budgets will be necessary in the not-too-distant future." Again, I think we have to say: right on; that's exactly the point. In order to get our economy moving in British Columbia, we need those tax cuts. We need to move back to surplus budgets in British Columbia in order to restore economic confidence.

A final quote from the B.C. Central Credit Union: "Most provinces are running budget surpluses and reducing debt, at least relative to GDP, while B.C. is heading in the opposite direction. This unnerves and puts off investors . . . and the result is less investment spending." So that -- from a very fine and, I think, non-partisan institution, the B.C. Central Credit Union -- is some very incisive analysis with respect to where this latest NDP budget is taking this province and our economy.

I think that another -- I hope members opposite would agree -- fine and non-partisan institution is the Institute of Chartered Accountants of B.C. Again, I won't read into the record all they had to say. But I think one quote here would be useful to make the very important point that is provided by the chartered accountants. They say: " . . . high debt levels are a deterrent to investment, and economic growth . . . . The province's increasing debt will make it very difficult to lower taxes and make it very difficult to sustain current levels of spending on important services such as health care and education." This is the Institute of Chartered Accountants.

Again, I think the point is a critical one, and I'll be making it elsewhere in my comments today. It's that if we really want to protect health care and education in this province, as members opposite have said over and over again, we can protect those services in both the short term and the long term only with sound financial and economic management. We clearly are not getting that from this government.

The bond-rating services -- again, these obviously are fiercely non-partisan -- look only at the issue of financial and economic performance of governments and economies in making their decisions and recommendations around bond rating. The Canadian Bond Rating Service had this to say about the NDP's latest budget: "CBRS further believes that B.C.'s deficit spending during this period . . . may not necessarily stimulate the economy as intended and will exacerbate the government's deteriorating fiscal position." Of course, both bond-rating services now have done a downgrade on B.C.'s credit.

We are now double-A-minus, from AA prior to this budget. I think that is most unfortunate in a number of ways. It tells us what the rest of Canada and what the rest of the world see when they look at British Columbia as a place to invest. They're saying thumbs-down to this NDP budget.

Interjection.

G. Abbott: Absolutely.

The Finance minister is here, and I'm delighted to hear her cackling her contribution to this debate. She says: "It's just a few million bucks -- big deal. It's just a few million bucks; it's not a big deal." Who cares if our credit rating is downgraded? It's not a big deal. The cost of it wouldn't even cover the overrun of the Nisga'a propaganda campaign, for heaven's sake. It can't be a lot of money; it's not a big deal.

But it is, hon. Speaker. If those millions of dollars were used in a better way, we wouldn't have the ridiculous wait times for hospital operations in my riding. That's unfortunate, and it's unfortunate that we have to listen to this cackle from the Finance minister. It's most unfortunate to hear from the Finance minister, further undermining her very limited credibility here in British Columbia.

[1550]

The downgrade costs may be small in comparison, for example, to the overrun on the fast ferries. Of course, we're now looking at -- what? -- $250 million and counting in overruns on the fast ferry project. Perhaps it's unfortunate. The minister says: "Oh, it's just a drop in the bucket -- a few million bucks. It's nothing compared to the overruns that we've run up in fast ferries and a whole lot of other areas." That's obviously reflective of the performance of this Finance minister and this government. They ignore the pennies; they ignore the dollars. It has to be hundreds of millions or billions of dollars before they have any concern at all for it.

Interjection.

G. Abbott: Obviously the Finance minister is feeling very sensitive about this budget at this point. It's unfortunate to see that, but . . . .

An Hon. Member: Maybe she's got a 7 percent solution.

G. Abbott: Maybe she's got a 7 percent solution. Perhaps that's it.

I think that the budget is one of the best tests. It's one of the best areas from which to draw evidence of a government's ability to manage projects and to manage the economy. Of

[ Page 12171 ]

course, this minister and this government are pathetic failures on both counts. They've been unable to manage the smallest of projects or the largest of projects. It doesn't matter -- large or small, the government always manages to screw it up.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

This is a government, after all, that has taken the B.C. economy from number one in new economic growth to number ten. From number one to number ten -- it's one of the remarkable non-achievements of this government.

Clearly this NDP government and this Finance minister have destroyed the confidence of British Columbians, of Canadians and of people around the world to invest in this province. They don't want to start a new business in this province. They don't know what they're getting into here, because of the financial instability that this government has created. They don't want to expand their businesses in British Columbia, because this government penalizes British Columbians for investing in their own businesses and investing in their own province.

Obviously we can't hope to see new jobs created in British Columbia, because of the performance of this government. Without the confidence to invest here and without the prospect of return, we're not going to be seeing the creation of new jobs in British Columbia. People don't invest in this province -- or anywhere else -- because of government edicts, directives or accords. Regrettably, this government remains wed to the outmoded view that somehow governments can direct people to create new jobs. It doesn't happen.

People don't invest because they're directed to; they don't create jobs because they're directed to. They don't invest because they should or must create jobs. They invest because of the prospect of a return on their investment. Regrettably, that has been lost in British Columbia, particularly in the forest industry.

Hon. A. Petter: Now is the time to quote Adam Smith, George.

G. Abbott: That's right -- Adam Smith. I'm glad that the Minister of Advanced Education recalls his training in Wealth of Nations in political science 101 or wherever it was that he was treated to that particular tome. Adam Smith was right: people do invest. People do invest because of the prospect of return on investment. If that fundamental truth still escapes the Finance minister and the Minister of Advanced Education, I think that's unfortunate, because it is a fundamental truth.

[1555]

Obviously confidence in prospects of return have been lost, at least in large measure, here in this province. Why? Obviously the reckless policy adventures of this government, particularly . . . . I want to talk today about the forest industry, but I'm sure it holds true for a broad area as well. The policy adventures of this government have had a terrible effect on the prospects for economic growth in this province. It's ironic that the NDP was elected in '91 and re-elected in '96 on phony claims of financial responsibility.

I think we all remember, back in the 1991 campaign, the then leader of the NDP saying that they would throw away the credit card and they'd be balancing the budget. Perhaps even the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs remembers this commercial back in '91, with the NDP leader claiming: "Throw away the credit card. We're going to balance the budget over the business cycle" -- I think he called it.

I guess that always pulls into question what the heck the business cycle is in British Columbia. We've now gone eight years under this NDP government, and after eight years we still haven't seen a balanced budget. I don't think they are even claiming to anticipate one for at least another two or three years. Maybe the cycle is one that is simultaneous with the re-emergence of Halley's comet or something. I don't know; I'm not sure what cycle they have in mind. Clearly it's a cycle that is something beyond a decade, and we just seem to pile deficit budget upon deficit budget here in British Columbia.

The product of all that, of course, is that we have seen this NDP government double the provincial debt over its term. We have seen the total provincial debt move from just over $17 billion to very close to $35 billion -- a doubling of the debt of British Columbia in the life of this government. I think that is absolutely shameful. We are now spending in the neighbourhood of $2.7 billion annually to just service that debt. You can imagine the things that we could do in British Columbia if we had the flexibility of that money.

When you look at it on a daily basis -- and I think it's fair to do that -- that's $7.3 million a day in debt servicing alone. That is a ridiculous and unfortunate number that we have to look at on a daily basis.

Clearly that money could be better spent on health, education, and child and family services. There are a whole lot of areas where it would be far better to be spending on that than on simply servicing the debt from year to year. Obviously the Finance minister has a different view of that, and that's fair enough. That's obvious in her budget. The Finance minister chooses to take us further and further into debt. The Finance minister's answer is to continuously pile on further deficits and further debt and keep that debt-servicing cost growing every year. That's the choice that this NDP government chooses to make.

We also heard a couple of other things that people have said in the past. The Premier has told us that balancing the budget is just about the easiest thing that he could ever imagine doing. What he really meant, I think, was that pretending to balance the budget was just about the easiest thing that he could ever imagine. That is, in fact, what they did. You'll recall again, hon.

Speaker, that back in the 1996 election the Premier didn't say: "Well, we've pretended to balance the budget." He didn't say: "I think we might have balanced the budget." He said: "We have balanced the budget." He claimed that not only had they balanced the budget for 1995-96 but that they were going balance it again in '96-97. The reality was that what the Premier did was sit down with Tom Gunton, Aunt Jemima and Betty Crocker and really cook up a couple of whoppers.

[1600]

An Hon. Member: A recipe for disaster.

G. Abbott: Now, that's what they did back in the 1996 campaign. It was, as my colleague says, a recipe for disaster, a complete set of a couple of whoppers there that they served up to the people of British Columbia, and claims that there were two surplus budgets when in fact, as I think the auditor general's report clearly shows, the government knew full well that there were not going to be two balanced budgets in British Columbia in and around the 1996 election campaign.

It's amazing that this NDP government have not only recorded eight consecutive deficit budgets, doubled the debt . . . .

[ Page 12172 ]

An Hon. Member: Is that a record?

G. Abbott: I think it is a record. They've doubled the debt in that same period of time. At the same time, they've done a number of other things which one would have thought would have helped them out of the mess they were in. They have, over the same period, gutted grants or transfers to municipalities. The UBCM, I think, estimates the cuts since 1991 to be in the magnitude of $800 million -- again, a remarkable figure, given what they've done in a variety of other areas.

The NDP have allowed health care to deteriorate in this province, particularly in rural B.C. In my constituency of Shuswap, we have ever-growing waiting lists. I've had constituents who've waited a year or more for vital heart surgery. I've had constituents who have waited and continue to wait upwards of 18 months for joint replacements. I think that is not only unfortunate, it's shameful. They've also brought our resource industries to their knees through excessive taxes and regulations, and I want to talk a little bit more about that presently.

At the same time, this government squanders millions every month on advertising. The one thing they never scrimp on is blowing their own horn about what they've been doing in this province, even though typically it's nothing you would want to advertise. I guess the latest example of this is the budget itself. If you could imagine this, the government is spending $700,000 to advertise a budget that they should be outright ashamed of. I mean, that should be one of the biggest embarrassments this government has ever come up with. Yet we see hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent to promote this budget -- remarkable.

At the same time, the NDP's wasteful, reckless, ill-conceived socialist adventures have been effectively embodied in things like the jobs and timber accord. You'll remember . . . .

Interjection.

G. Abbott: The member from Burnaby clearly remembers, hon. Speaker.

Twenty-one thousand new jobs, the Premier and the Forests minister promised back in 1996. They said: "We're going to get more jobs out of our forest resource one way or another. In fact, we're going to direct the companies to produce more jobs -- 21,000 more direct, new forest jobs more." Obviously they've been a complete failure in that regard, and it's not surprising. Again, the NDP's views here are based on a preposterous and, I think, outmoded notion that government can create or cause to be created any specific numbers of new jobs.

I know that the members opposite disagree with this notion, but again, jobs are a product of investment. Without the will, without the desire to invest, there won't be new job creation. The members opposite say, "Well, the government can create those jobs," but that's not true -- at least, not in the long term; in the short term, perhaps. But in the long term, we need to have a favourable investment climate where people have the ability and the desire to invest and to create new jobs in the province.

[1605]

So what has the NDP done to our resource industries, and specifically forestry? When the NDP came to power, back in 1991, B.C. had one of the most efficient, most productive forest industries in the world. In fact, our industry was in many respects the envy of the world. Where have they taken us today? Well, I guess the recent forest industry conference that was sponsored by PricewaterhouseCoopers back in January or February of this year paints a pretty sad picture of where this government's reckless policy adventures have taken the B.C. forest industry.

I'll just quote briefly from the paper that was presented by Mike MacCallum of PricewaterhouseCoopers: "After unusual items and write-offs, we estimate the industry will report what we believe will be the largest loss in the history of the forest industry in British Columbia, about $1 billion after tax." Absolutely shameful. It's almost unimaginable for this government -- historic . . . . To see our forest industry, at a time when we are seeing record housing starts in the United States -- a record demand for lumber . . . .

That we in British Columbia have a forest industry that has lost $1 billion, an unprecedented loss in our history . . . . And it's not at a time when there isn't demand for lumber. This NDP government's callous disregard for the impact of its tax and regulatory policies has clearly brought our industry to its knees.

Where does the $1 billion come from? I think this is notable, as well, if we are looking for bright spots; we won't find many, I'm afraid. Here's how the $1 billion is made up: a $50 million loss in lumber, a $10 million loss in plywood, a $400 million loss in market pulp and a $45 million loss in other timber commodity areas, for a total operating loss of $455 million in 1998.

Additionally, there are $545 million in write-offs, write-downs and unusual items. For example, Bowater just abandoned, as everyone knows, a $60 million investment in Gold River. Canfor has written off a $173 million investment in Howe Sound Pulp and Paper. There's a $100 million write-off at Selgar, a $27 million write-off at Interfor, a $60 million write-off at MacMillan Bloedel, and a $125 million write-down by Slocan at their Fibreco plant. Obviously these do not reflect confidence in the B.C. forest industry.

Interjection.

G. Abbott: The reason why is that this government, including the member for Skeena, has turned this industry from a sound, reliable, productive and efficient forest industry into one that has now lost, over the past three years, in the neighbourhood of $1.5 billion. It's astonishing what this government has done to the forest industry with a regulatory overburdening that is unmatched anywhere in the world.

When this government brings in a Forest Practices Code, it doesn't fool around; it brings in a metre of paper and makes sure that the professional foresters and the companies in this province are undermined at every turn. I mean, why have a Forest Practices Code that costs only $5 a cubic metre when you can bring one in that costs upwards of $20 a cubic metre?

The consequence of all that is that people lose their jobs. We haven't seen any 21,000 new forest jobs, as the Premier promised. We have seen losses in the neighbourhood of 16,000 jobs at this point. For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers say: "Direct and indirect employment is estimated to be down 16,000 jobs in 1998, with a further fall of 10,000 jobs projected for 1999."

[1610]

It's not a happy situation that we face in British Columbia. One would have hoped that this government might have

[ Page 12173 ]

learned something from eight years in government, but no, they come back again with an even heavier burden of taxes and regulation and certainly another budget that inspires absolutely no confidence among the people of British Columbia.

There won't be any B.C. turnaround without a forest industry turnaround. There won't be new jobs, new investment and all the indirect jobs in the communities, and there won't be any recovery in government revenue from this resource until the forest industry turns around.

Clearly what we need is a change of government; we need an election. We need to elect a new government that has some sense of where this province has to go in order to turn its forest industry and all its industries around and to get this province back on the right track. This is a government that hasn't learned from its eight years. People have no confidence in this government. Until we have a change of government, there will not be any restoration of the economy in British Columbia.

I say to the members opposite: abandon this budget, call an election, and let's get on with the business of turning things around for this province.

B. Goodacre: It should come as no surprise that I'll take a slightly different tack on this debate than the previous two speakers did.

The constituency that I represent, Bulkley Valley-Stikine, has a rather unique set of characteristics, taking up about 23 percent of the province and having only 33,000 people living there. I thought I'd walk through my constituency to relate the kind of interface that the communities in my riding have with the provincial government and with this budget.

I'll start with the small community of Atlin in the northern part of my riding. Atlin has been around for about 100 years -- since the Yukon gold rush. It's a small community these days of about 600 people, with the Taku River Tlingit first nation comprising about 40 percent of the population there.

Atlin also has a very interesting distinction for a small community only 100 years old. There have been four books on Atlin published to date, and I would recommend that everybody in this House read about the history of that place. Current things going on in Atlin . . . . It also has the distinction of being one of the few places in British Columbia that has no organized government. There's no regional district in Atlin, and there's no municipal government there. They're going through a governance study right now. Hopefully, at the end of that, they will officially have a local government that will speak on behalf of their residents when dealing with other levels of government.

Another thing that's worked with Atlin and Lower Post, another small community at the northern part of my riding, is that their relationship with the territory of the Yukon has been enhanced through a cross-boundary agreement between British Columbia and the Yukon to work on helping the residents in that area to have greater access to services in the Yukon -- services that normally would be provided by British Columbia. That makes it easier for people to have the services they need and have those services paid for by the province of British Columbia -- like health care, highway maintenance and things of that nature.

Moving down, Highway 37 is a 700-kilometre road that was the recipient of two wonderful budget allocations in a row which allowed us to move forward with improvements on that highway connector, the shortest route from the western United States to Alaska. It had been the object of some concern up until about two years ago due to the condition of that road and the impact it was having on tourism. I'm really happy to report that that has been turned around and that we're now getting extremely wonderful reports from tourists coming up through that area.

[1615]

One of the things that we hear most often about Highway 37 is, of course, the wonderful scenery that people get a chance to see when they do go through there. One of the smaller communities on that road is Good Hope Lake, which is a small Kaska Dene community that's just a few kilometres from the site of the Cassiar mine that unfortunately closed down a few years ago. With it went a lot of services that this small community needs. Over the coming years it's really important that we work closely with the Department of Indian Affairs to assist that community to rebuild itself and to have the health care and education needs met in that community.

The other three communities in the northern part of my riding are all clustered around Dease Lake. They are Telegraph Creek, Iskut and Dease Lake. The three communities combined have a population of around 1,500 people, and they're located a good hour and a half from each other. The needs that small communities like these have . . . . Again, only Telegraph Creek is covered by a regional district. The kinds of things that the communities in other parts of British Columbia take for granted, like recreation centres and ordinary municipal services, are not, generally speaking, available to these communities.

They look to the federal government and to the provincial government for direct contributions to services that they need -- not on a regular basis but on a periodic basis.

Right now, for example, all three communities are working on trying to get the necessary funding to build recreation centres in their communities. Since the closure of Cassiar, a lot of the population that was previously in Cassiar has moved down to Dease Lake, and there's a growing need for the people living in that area to have recreation services. We're looking forward, over the next couple of budget terms, to assisting those people in getting their needs met in terms of recreation needs.

From that part of my riding it's about 500 kilometres to the next community, which is the Gitxsan community of Gitsegukla. Gitsegukla has got a development corporation happening right now that put together a two-pronged approach to trying to recover the economic situation in their community, and that is with the efforts on the part of that community to grow industrial hemp. They've got a test plot in there that is doing quite well, and this year they will expanding on that.

We're hoping, over the coming years, to see the growth of a community-based enterprise around hemp, much the same as the people of Europe have experienced over the last five or ten years. We're quite hopeful that we will see some wonderful things coming out of the movement into hemp by the people of that area, with their great background in crafts and home-based enterprises.

The Gitxsan people themselves, throughout all of their villages, are currently negotiating with the provincial government about resource use on their house territories, and we expect that over the coming years we're going to see some tremendous benefits to the communities as we learn to work closer together on the management and development of the resources in the traditional territories of the Gitxsan people.

[ Page 12174 ]

[1620]

Moving along the highway, we get to the small community of New Hazelton and environs, which came about at the time when the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway came into the area -- around 1910. It's been a nice little community that had an ongoing forest industry and a small service centre for the Hazelton area. It continues to be an attractive place for people to seek that special rural lifestyle that only areas like ours can offer. The people who live in New Hazelton are very dedicated to the kind of life they lead.

We just recently announced a water project that shows . . . . In the small Wet'suwet'en community of Hagwilget, which is adjacent to New Hazelton . . . . The two governments are working together and obtained an infrastructure grant to improve their water supply. It's a real wonderful thing for me, living in that area, to see the growing cooperation that exists between the aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities of our area.

The community of Hagwilget is located right next door to the historic Hagwilget Suspension Bridge, a bridge that was built across the Hagwilget Canyon, crossing the Bulkley River at Hagwilget, joining Hagwilget and Hazelton. It was built in the thirties and continues to be a marvellous structure that tourists enjoy having their pictures taken on. Unfortunately, it was built as a single-lane structure.

We certainly hope to see the day when we'll no longer need to rely on that bridge as a sole transportation link to Hazelton and Kispiox, and when we will see the final construction of a bridge that was cited in the early sixties to be built on the other side of Hazelton. I don't think we can make that announcement quite yet, but we're certainly hoping that before too long into the twenty-first century, we will be able to announce that bridge as well.

The community of Hazelton is another two or three kilometres down the road. It's an area shared . . . . There's about a 30- or 40-acre townsite that's shared between the Gitandoiks village of the Gitxsan . . . . About 13 acres is dedicated to the old townsite of Hazelton, the village of Hazelton, which was the original landing spot for the sternwheelers that came up the Skeena River in the late 1800s and during the time that the railway was built. In terms of non-aboriginal communities in our area, as an ongoing settlement, that community is probably one of the oldest, next to Port Simpson. It's been around for over 150 years.

Up the valley we find a couple more Gitxsan villages: the village of Glen Vowell and the village of Kispiox in the Kispiox Valley. Their relationship with the provincial government is an ongoing discussion about the road leading up to that area. It's an unpaved road for the most part, which services an area of logging that's been very active for quite a few years. Every spring the phone calls come in about fixing that road, and we continue to push the Ministry of Highways to pay attention to Kispiox Road. Each year there's a few more improvements, and each year we continue to push for more.

The Kispiox Valley, of course, is also the home of some of the best steelhead fishing in the entire world and, each year, attracts people up there for that very purpose. Kispiox also has just opened a beautiful, new community school. It's a real tribute to their community that they have shown the kind of belief in their community and in their future that they're moving forward with wonderful facilities like that school. In GlenVowell they're working on putting together a healing centre, which again will be a wonderful facility for the area.

[1625]

As we move down Highway 16, we get to the community of Moricetown, a Wet'suwet'en community that is working with our provincial government right now on developing plans for development in their traditional house territories. Moricetown had an official opening, just a couple of years ago, of a value-added facility called Kyah Forest Products, which is an absolutely top-rate value-added facility that FRBC played a role in putting together and that has provided steady employment for 30 to 50 people in a community of 900 for the last two years.

The quota system, when the Americans decided that drilled studs could no longer go into the United States free of quota, caused a little bit of a problem for Kyah. But they very quickly rebounded and had only lost their second shift for a period of three months before they were able to ramp up their production one more time.

Smithers is another 30 kilometres down the road, moving down Highway 16. Smithers is my hometown. Smithers is the home of . . . . Close to 40 percent of the people who live in Bulkley Valley-Stikine live within about 20 minutes of Smithers. So the population in Bulkley Valley-Stikine is quite skewed towards the Highway 16 end. It's a real pleasure for me, who likes to travel around this province, to travel around my riding, because it takes a long, long time to get from place to place when I want to see the northern part of the riding.

In Smithers we've had some real benefits from the health and education focus of this government, inasmuch as we got one new school, a substantial upgrade of another school and a recent completion of a long term care facility that will have its official opening fairly soon. The beds are now beginning to be filled. The town of Smithers is also working with the Ministry of Highways at this time to expand to four lanes the road going through Smithers. The studies are underway, and hopefully the work should be beginning fairly soon.

In Smithers we have also had a tremendous working relationship with FRBC and our local college, which has worked quite diligently in the retraining of forest workers, helping people through the transitions that we've seen happen in the forest industry in our area and also training people for the watershed restoration work that comes with FRBC -- the tremendous backlog of environmental degradation that we are hoping to address with the help of FRBC over the years.

Also in Smithers we've just had the resource management plan, the LRMP for our area, finalized and accepted. Included in that was a designation of a park area for the Babine Mountains which, as anybody that's been in our area realizes, is one of the most spectacular tourist attractions that you'll ever want to find anywhere in the world. We're very pleased that we have one more wonderful attraction set aside that tourists and locals and all people living in British Columbia are going to be able to enjoy for all time to come.

Moving down the road again, we have the small village of Telkwa. I keep thinking of Telkwa as a very small place, and it certainly is by British Columbia standards. It's got about 1,600 people living there. But the second-largest community in the Yukon is Watson Lake, and it's the same size as Telkwa. So we make the people of Telkwa feel a little bit better by comparing them to the communities of the Yukon, which makes them a very large place.

[1630]

What we're working on, with the Telkwa people, in terms of this budget, is that they are looking for changes to upgrade

[ Page 12175 ]

their water system. Hopefully, we'll be able to come through with the money necessary to do that this year. The improvement of their road structures proceeded last year, and we were very pleased to see some improvements in the coalmine road which goes up on the other side of the river in Telkwa and was in serious disrepair. Outside of the main corridor of Highway 16 is the small Babine Lake first nation in Fort Babine, which has about 300 people living there. They're right in the midst of the big logging shows at Nilkitkwa, which is about two hours' drive from Smithers.

They're working with the provincial government and the companies to ensure that inclusion of the aboriginal people in logging plans and in jobs is something that we take more seriously as we move more and more into the areas of the aboriginal peoples' traditional territories.

On down Highway 16 again, the community of Houston has 4,000 people living there and two of the most efficient sawmills in all of British Columbia. When you fly into Smithers from Vancouver, you fly over Houston. When I flew into Smithers last weekend, it was a pretty sight to look down at the log yards in Houston and to notice that both log yards were full. People are working in the woods, people are working in the mills, and things in Houston are moving along quite well, thank you very much.

The Northern Touch Wood Forum in Houston just a couple of weeks ago attracted a tremendous amount of local interest, and it showed that people in our area are alive and well in the forest industry and looking forward to a wonderful future.

The health centre in Houston is the one irritant that continues to plague us in terms of trying to get 24-hour health care into Houston. We're working with the health council in Houston right now -- the provincial government is -- and, hopefully, that issue will be resolved shortly.

The land and resource management plan, the LRMP, for the Morice forest district is something that we will be seeing fairly soon. They were one of the last forest districts to be included in the plan. Hopefully, that will be proceeding soon, because some of the areas of that forest district are subject to some serious land use conflicts that can only be resolved when people get to the table and actually have an opportunity to share their concerns and work out solutions that are good for everybody.

Moving on down Highway 16, we make a turn down to Babine Lake, to the small communities of Tachek and Granisle. Granisle, of course, was the community that was created when the Bell copper mine was built many years ago. When the ore reserves were exhausted, they were left with a community infrastructure and very few people to live in it. So the community of Granisle has done some wonderful things in last few years to attract people -- mainly retirees -- to live in that community, and they're creating a whole new sense of what that community is and what that community can be.

We're extremely hopeful that over the coming years the changes that they're making now will bear fruit over the long haul.

The small community of Tachet, just outside of Granisle, is a Lake Babine first nation community that is, again, working with treaty issues and also development plans on their territories. Hopefully, we will also see some significant improvements there over the coming years for that community, which is quite literally a community in serious trouble right now.

[1635]

The final part of my riding ends up on Highway 16 at Burns Lake, just an hour's drive from Granisle. The community of Burns Lake is a thriving community. About 40 percent of the population of the Burns Lake area is first nation. There are five separate first nations there, which are all extremely active right now in dealing with the provincial and federal governments, working on plans to improve the lot of their people.

As we're all aware, having gone through the Nisga'a debate, the statistics for first nations people in terms of economic, social and health situations are not wonderful, and the communities of the Burns Lake area are probably right along the norm in terms of the kinds of problems they're faced with. It's really wonderful for me to see that both the federal and provincial governments, through the treaty process and other processes, are starting to take a more serious look at a more holistic way of approaching the needs of first nations.

Burns Lake is probably one of the communities that could benefit a great deal from this more sensitive approach to life in first nations communities.

Burns Lake is also getting a new school, and that's, again, a wonderful feature of the health and education focus that our budget is taking. As we probably all remember, Burns Lake was one of the communities heavily involved in the rural doctors' dispute, and some of the policy changes that came out of that situation have indeed helped matters for the people of Burns Lake and for the supply of physicians in that area.

One of the big issues facing the Burns Lake community right now is their application before the provincial government for a community forest licence. They have put together an absolutely wonderful proposal that I hope and pray will come to fruition very soon. The community has put a tremendous amount of effort into realizing that local people working together can make multiple use of a forest resource to really improve the lot of everybody in the community. We'll be learning soon about the disposition of that forest licence, and I certainly hope that they will prevail.

The northern development fund that was created as part of the settlement with Alcan after the Kemano completion situation includes the Lakes District area. Of course, the flooding from the Alcan dam -- the Kenney Dam -- impacts the people on the south side of François Lake, which -- for those folks who don't know the area -- is very near to Burns Lake. This fund is meant to help people and communities that have been impacted by the flooding of Alcan to deal with their development concerns, and even now we've got . . . .

Both the Skin Tyee and the Cheslatta have been working with Alcan over the years and quite recently -- separate from the northern development fund -- to reclaim a graveyard in Skin Tyee's area that they had to vacate at the time of the flooding. Also, the Cheslatta are working on an underground logging thing through FRBC and on other projects from a fund they received as a result of their being flooded out by Alcan many years ago.

That is a nice little tour through Bulkley Valley-Stikine. The coming year for my riding is one in which we will continue to do what we've always done: build ourselves up and work together as communities. We will continue to work hard to preserve the lifestyle that keeps us there and that attracts people to our part of the world. I look forward to another year of working with the people in this chamber to make Bulkley Valley-Stikine a better place.

[1640]

[ Page 12176 ]

E. Walsh: I am pleased to stand in support of the budget for '99. As we and members opposite have heard in the last few days, this budget is about putting people first. It's about everyday, average British Columbians -- people that we know, that we live with, that we work with and that see every day. And the budget is about choices. We've had many, many comments about the choices that need to be made for budgets and for people that live in British Columbia. This side of the House has chosen to protect health care and education for the people of British Columbia.

I am proud of the choices that we have made to protect health care and education. It is truly unfortunate that the corporate opposition Liberals, who sit in the chamber across from this side of the House, call this budget a disgrace. I think it is a disgrace that they would call it such, a budget that is definitely working for the people of British Columbia -- the low-income, modest, average British Columbian. Even to suggest putting balanced-budget legislation before people is a shame; that is a true shame. Especially at a time of economic downturn, putting forward balanced-budget legislation suggestions is not only shameful, it is disgraceful.

What would the opposition Liberals have the people of British Columbia believe? Would they have people believe that balanced-budget legislation would cure all the problems and all the concerns and issues that must be met in the province? I have a scoop for them. Let us ask them: what do they really mean by their suggestion of balanced-budget legislation? Let's ask them what they're not telling British Columbians. Let's ask them what effects their bottom line is going to have on the average-, modest- and low-income British Columbian. The promises that the Liberal opposition have made in the last few months and today and last week are, without a doubt, rife with duplicity.

Let's talk about the budget for a few moments, just to refresh their memory. I know that they really want to hear this, because they've forgotten some really important points here. Some of the highlights, I know, are going to make them very happy -- and if not them, their families and friends.

We're increasing our health care investment by $615 million. Now, isn't that exciting? I think it is extremely exciting. We're hiring 400 new nurses. We're investing $21 million to create 480 long term care beds. We will also have 58,000 more surgeries -- wonderful, wonderful news. There is $3.5 million to reduce pediatric surgery waits. We're increasing the number of screening mammographies by 38,000, we're funding 5,000 additional chemotherapy treatments and 5,000 new radiotherapy treatments, and we're also increasing the number of heart, knee and hip replacement surgeries -- which I'll talk about a little bit later -- by 1,000.

We're going to continue to build on the progress that we have made in the past year. I know that the members opposite are really keenly interested in hearing this. That includes, actually, investing $10 million to reduce backlogs at hospitals across the province, reducing wait-lists at B.C. Children's Hospital by funding more than 800 more surgeries a year.

[1645]

This is only just the beginning -- these are only a few -- of the actual progress that's been made in the past year: $10 million in a new mental health plan, and a new tobacco plan, which my colleagues were talking about earlier, in school programs to encourage a healthier lifestyle. Those healthier lifestyles affect everyone in this province, and they affect everybody in these chambers.

I know that the roughly $4 million that's been spent in the Cranbrook hospital for a new radiography unit for Sparwood and for upgrading and improvements to the OR and the maternity wing and those areas isn't important to the opposition Liberals, but it is important to the people of Kootenay. The people of Kootenay know the importance of good health care, and they know the importance of this work that needs to be done, which unfortunately isn't free.

I'm amazed that the Liberal opposition again, because of these needs and because of the cost to meet these needs, would put balanced-budget legislation before people. It is amazing and shocking that anyone would put books and paperwork before people.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you can't access or afford health care, then there is a very real and very good possibility that you will die. Ultimately, that's the end: you'll die. I know it's a shock, and I know that it's something new, probably, for many people to realize this. But faced with this reality, I know that our choice to protect and to fund health care is the right one. It's the right choice for all British Columbians.

Let me read what is being said in the province next door, which I live right next door to -- the province of Alberta that the opposition members are so enamoured with. Remember, I live next door to that province. The Edmonton Journal -- well, that's a little bit further north than where I live -- says: "Proposed changes to legislation governing hospitals in Alberta will open the door to the 'possibility' of more private health care, Premier Ralph Klein says.

The changes, which will give the government the power to approve private hospitals, could spark the growth and development of private health care facilities, Klein said Thursday." And a comment: "There is now no question that they are paving the road . . . for private, for-profit health care facilities . . . . We'll . . . have doctors double-dipping, doctors working in the private and public systems." Also, an advisory committee will be set up to recommend private facilities. That's sad.

There's another one here. This is another document from the Edmonton Journal : " . . . everyone involved must realize private, for-profit health care will cost society more, even if it reduces government costs, said the former chair of the federal government National Forum on Health and current chair of public health services at the University of Alberta. 'Permitting insidious privatization is not the answer,' he said."

Then it goes on, and this has something to do with what I want to talk about in just a few moments also. That's because we hear from the opposition how great health care is in the United States and how people don't have as long waiting lists in the United States. Well, Dr. Tom Noseworthy from the forum stated that the U.S. system gives better service to the rich but much worse service to the poor. This is what he told the audience