2008 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2008

Morning Sitting

Volume 26, Number 7

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Throne Speech Debate (continued)

Hon. K. Krueger

R. Austin

H. Bloy

H. Lali

L. Mayencourt

[ Page 9771 ]

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2008

The House met at 10:02 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

M. Farnworth: It's my pleasure to introduce, on behalf of

the opposition, this year's intake of interns. I know the government side will

be doing that. We in the opposition have our interns, and I would just like to

take this moment to introduce them.

They are energetic and enthusiastic, and I know they're going to

do a terrific job. They are Angela Chaisson, Ned de Beck, Selena Mitchell,

Travis Patterson and Ian Reid. Will the House please make them most welcome.

Orders of the Day

Hon. B. Penner: I call continued debate in response to the

excellent throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. K. Krueger: When we adjourned last evening, I was

close to the end of my remarks in reply to the throne speech. I was speaking

briefly about the B.C. geological survey, which is a wonderful scientific

heritage for British Columbia and does great work with student teams every

summer — 39 students last year — leading, actually, to new discoveries by the

teams themselves.

It is the surging mining sector, we believe, that is going to

bring a lot of hope to the people and communities of the interior in the face of

very difficult times brought on by nature, climate change and market forces.

I want to speak now about safety in the mining industry. The

industry in British Columbia takes great pride in its safety record and the

performance of its workers in that regard, and I want to spotlight those

results. There is a constant and dedicated collaboration between highly skilled

and experienced public servants in our ministry — mine managers, the workers

themselves and their unions. Injury rates have been cut to half their numbers in

the last ten years. Mining is now one of the safest heavy industries in B.C.

Every mining permit issued in our province has safety as its

first, last and constant focus. B.C. mines have rescue teams who practise

constantly and compete regularly at regional and provincial levels. I have

attended a number of these meets and find their skills inspiring. They work fast

and well and practise very hard in the knowledge that at any time their skills

may be tested in dramatic ways, saving human lives.

[1005]

Last summer a wall of the Pavilion quarry not far from Cache Creek

collapsed upon an excavator, burying the machine and its operator under some 13

metres of rubble. It was late in the evening, and I heard that they still hadn't

found the machine. I prayed for the operator through the evening but didn't

really have much hope that he would be discovered alive. But the Highland Valley

rescue team was on the scene very quickly, worked through the night and rescued

the worker who was quietly waiting for them, huddled in the footwell of his

machine.

The aggregate industry is a vital component of mining in our

province. British Columbians consume an average 12 tonnes of aggregate — that

is, sand, gravel and crushed rock — per year in the rehab and maintenance of our

infrastructure. Roads, bridges, hospitals, schools, public buildings — 12 tonnes

per British Columbian per year.

The industry is tremendously busy with all of the construction

that's going on in this hot economy. Last spring there was a tragic accident at

a Fraser Valley quarry, in which a young woman was killed while operating a mine

truck on only her second day at work. There were three further fatal accidents

over the next several months, each one a worker operating a piece of heavy

equipment.

These tragedies occurring over a short period of time were a

shocking departure from the safety record of our industry. We responded by

calling the Aggregate Producers Association to Victoria and agreed with them on

goals to instil a safety culture in workers, with particular care for new

workers.

They're working hard at it. They're producing, similar to what the

construction industry has done, a Green Hand–Gold Hand program, where new

workers are mentored by experienced workers who have the gold indications on

their hardhats. "Safety first" is to be modelled by everyone in the industry.

The association has a long-term plan, and government is working

with them. We committed to and delivered a best-practices guide for workers to

carry with them and have in their machines. It enhances the health and safety of

workers at our many aggregate mining operations, providing useful and practical

guidelines to assist managers, supervisors and the workers in the industry to

maintain the safest and healthiest possible work environments in the growing

industry. It was written by several of our inspectors, people with long

practical experience in the industry.

The inspectors play an important

part in ensuring the continued

health and safety of B.C.'s mineworkers, and their presence in the field has

been significantly increased. The chief inspector has required names of all new

workers in the various operations to be provided to him, with records of their

training. B.C. has long been a world leader in mine safety, and we want to

ensure that we uphold this reputation and keep all mines, including quarries,

safe.

I want to speak briefly about reclamation — briefly, because I'm

running out of time. But it is something that we have every reason to be very

proud of in British Columbia. Our modern approaches to mining in B.C. require

that no permit is issued without a detailed reclamation plan fully agreed upon.

Bonds are set to ensure that work will be completed and paid off.

[ Page 9772 ]

Several weeks ago we announced that Fording River operations

received the 2007 Mining and Sustainability Award for its efforts to promote

sustainable development in the B.C. mining sector. The company is a leader in

mining reclamation and is working hard to ensure that mining only leaves a

minimal footprint on the land, protecting water and wildlife in the Elkford,

Fernie and Sparwood areas. Over 650 hectares of the mining area that this site

has used have been revegetated.

Reclamation is an ongoing process at Fording River and other sites

all around B.C. In fact, in 2005 metal mines reclaimed 13,315 hectares. In 2006

— 10,171 hectares. Coalmines reclaimed 7,948 hectares in 2005 and 8,021 hectares

in 2006. It's a lot of land, and we're proud of those achievements.

I want to speak — again, I only have a limited time to do it, so

it'll be short, but I'd like to have a lot of time for it — about our successes

with first nations. There are excellent partnerships at work in British

Columbia, in various places around the province. The partnership between the

Tahltan First Nation and NovaGold at Galore Creek is legendary for its success.

The Taku River Tlingit and Adanac, in developing a mine at Ruby Creek, also have

a wonderful collaboration.

[1010]

The Upper Similkameen Indian band has signed a protocol with

government, with regard to how industry advances within their traditional

territory, and it's a model. The Blueberry River First Nations signed four

different economic agreements with government last year. That is going very well

as well.

Barrick Gold and the Tahltan First Nation have a partnership at

the Eskay Creek mine, which employs about 35 percent first nations people — 35

percent of the workforce.

The Pavilion quarry and lime plant, which I mentioned earlier,

where the accident took place, employs about 28 first nations people.

The Orca Sand and Gravel operation at Port McNeill is a

partnership between Polaris Minerals and the 'Namgis First Nation. It plans to

produce high-quality construction aggregates for major urban markets, has a

brand-new, beautiful shiploading facility and is a going concern.

When I visited there, the Chief of the first nation said: "Do

everything you can to make sure this operation succeeds. We own outright a 12

percent stake in it." And they actually provide more than 50 percent of the

workers in that giant quarry. They actually built the infrastructure. The owners

delivered the materials. They built it themselves, and now they're operating it.

A couple more words about some successes around the province. We

were tremendously pleased to enter into a public-private partnership to clean up

the problems at Britannia mine, and now we have pure water flowing from that

mine and a museum — a heritage that we can all be proud of.

We're working hard to clean up the issues on the Tsolum River from

an old copper mine that was closed in the '60s. It's been leaching into the

river and causing tremendous problems for fish. We're a long way toward getting

that fixed.

We can afford to do these things because of the leadership of our

Premier and the successful working of the plan that we laid out to restore

British Columbia's economy. Mining is a big piece of that plan, a big piece of

that success. It will continue to be and will grow as a component of our

provincial revenues and of the economy.

R. Austin: I rise today to give my response to last week's

Speech from the Throne. I'd like to begin by thanking the people of my riding,

Skeena, for affording me this honour of representing them in this chamber.

[K. Whittred in the chair.]

Now, traditionally, the throne speech is the government's attempt

to try as best they can to make out that everything is going well in our

province and that the government is going to perhaps do a whole bunch of things

that will make things even better.

In the case of my part of British Columbia — and in particular,

I'm talking about the communities in Skeena that I represent — things are not

going so well, and even this government occasionally accepts that the northwest

part of British Columbia has not become a part of the best place on earth.

What the good people of Skeena have done is make many of the most

horrendous sacrifices in the hope that the good times that we had previously

would come back. In fact, we had a much better economic go of things in the

1990s. I say this not just as a partisan point of view, but I can back up my

statement with real facts, many of which have once again been confirmed in the

recent census that was completed last year. People have moved away from all the

communities in northwest B.C., looking for jobs elsewhere, as the collapse in

the forest sector has destroyed so many jobs.

As though we don't have enough problems with one resource sector,

we also have to deal with another giveaway of a great public resource. I speak,

of course, of this government's decision to change the intent of the B.C.

industrialization act to allow Alcan to move from an industrial company,

manufacturing aluminum, to an independent power producer that also makes

aluminum.

The northwest has thus lost the security of knowing that whenever

Alcan eventually decides to build a new smelter, it would at least use all the

power to smelt rather than this approach that this Liberal government has done

and allowed Alcan to do whatsoever it wishes with that power.

Last year we actually saw the example of this government going to

court, alongside lawyers for Alcan, and essentially saying that the aluminum

industry that has been in northwest B.C. for the last 50 years just happened by

happenstance. The government lawyers stated that the original intent was for

this to have been a hydro project and that really we are lucky to have had an

aluminum industry in this province at all. I think it is very sad, and it shows

that the government has written off northwest B.C.

[1015]

[ Page 9773 ]

The Speech from the Throne spoke very enthusiastically, of course,

about the excitement of hosting the Olympics in 2010. I certainly acknowledge

that people are getting excited about this prospect. But honestly, my

constituents in Skeena have far more important things on their minds than a

celebration of sporting and cultural achievement in two years' time.

They are more concerned about what this government is going to do

to help support a part of this province where many families — unfortunately, the

majority of families — are struggling just to get by from day to day. The

Olympics is not on the radar of people who cannot find work and have to think

about the prospect of leaving the area and their families to go look for work.

What we have seen in northwest B.C. over the last several years is a major shift

in our economy from having very well-paid jobs in the forestry sector to a

string of part-time jobs at much lower pay — jobs that simply cannot support a

family in any meaningful way.

People care more about their kids having to endure a four-day

school week in a province that claims to be in a boom. Why, for goodness' sake,

are several thousand children and their families not getting five days of school

like all other children in British Columbia?

I have families who are putting their kids on a bus before 7 a.m.

to get to school on time, and those children are coming home after 5 p.m. This

is a very long day for young children to have to endure. How does this help them

to learn?

The Minister of Education, when I brought this up, suggested this

is a local school board issue that should be taken up with trustees. But having

spoken to the trustees who had to make this decision, they say that it was the

school funding formula as well as the enormous loss of children out of our

school district that forced this decision upon them. In other words, this was

not a decision made in the best interests of children but, rather, a financial

decision made out of desperation.

What we needed to see in this throne speech was recognition that

with a huge budget surplus, it is ludicrous for some children in this province

to be going to school only four days of the week. There should be minimum

standards that kids and parents should expect in a province as wealthy as this

one. One of those things is the ability of every child to attend school for five

consecutive days. Parents are sick and tired of having to make arrangements for

one day of childminding a week during the school year. Others are angry and

upset that teenagers are being given the ultimate treat for them: a long weekend

every week.

People don't want to hear slogans about how the world will be

astonished at the great Olympic Games that we are going to put on. Maybe people

visiting this province should know that while we are spending countless millions

on a two-week Olympic event, we don't even give enough money to all of our

school districts to keep the kids in school for five days.

I'd like to spend a few minutes talking about the new relationship

that this government goes on about at great length. As I have said in the past,

I have given credit for the turnaround in the attitudes of this Premier from the

days when he opposed the Nisga'a treaty. However, having a document created with

some new ideas about how to work with, as opposed to against, first nations

interests does not mean a thing if there is no action to fulfil these words.

I have recently witnessed a meeting in one of the first nations

communities in my riding where the leadership expressed deep concern that there

was an attitude of "you must negotiate now or else." People were made to feel

that a gun was being put to their heads to come up with a deal at all costs. Is

that what a new relationship is all about?

The throne speech refers to incremental treaty agreements to "help

first nations benefit earlier in the treaty-making process." In other words, it

refers to business deals outside of the treaty process. This in itself is an

admission of failure on the part of the government. It is essentially saying:

"Look. We know that it is going to take many years to reach a treaty, so why

don't we give you a few crumbs now to keep you happy until such time as we can

get to a treaty?"

[1020]

The Auditor General, in his report last year into the state of the

treaty-making process, criticized this as having a negative impact on

treaty-making, because it takes away the incentive for all parties to come to

the table and do the hard part of actually making treaties. Many first nations

are so desperate for any economic opportunity that they will be forced to accept

less than what they would get in a full treaty if they were to follow this

approach.

Indeed, in one part of my riding where the Kitwanga band and the

Gitanyow people live, the rates of unemployment are over 90 percent. They are so

high that any crumb will be seen as impossible not to accept, even though every

day they have to witness truckloads of logs bypassing their communities, even as

their own mill has remained shut for many years now.

My hope is that we will see changes in legislation that will bring

some certainty to the treaty process so that both sides know what is meant by

the terms "consultation" and "accommodation." Right now, no one knows how to

deal with what the courts have said, and it is up to this government to define

those terms and, more importantly, the processes by which first nations can

achieve true reconciliation within the treaty process.

This government's throne speech talks about new legislation that's

going to "enable aboriginal authorities to assume legal responsibility for the

delivery of most child and family services." This is in fact a retread of an old

part from throne speeches in the past. This is happening in some areas of the

province.

I'd like to commend one agency in my area, and that is NIFCS,

which is following on from the Nisga'a, who of course took charge of their own

aboriginal child welfare agency as part of the Nisga'a treaty. Just before

Christmas NIFCS was able to negotiate an ability for them to handle every

section except for child protection.

All of the six nations in northwest B.C. now that are part of

NIFCS will take advantage of this and finally

[ Page 9774 ]

have control over their own children. This is a success for all those who

work at the Ministry of Children and Family Development as well as those who led

this proposal to ensure that they would have control over their own children.

What's missing in this throne speech from the previous years is

that there's no mention of literacy, or maybe just one reference to it. In the

past this was highly spoken of by the government. This is problematic because,

unfortunately, in northwest B.C. we have very low rates of literacy.

It's one of the challenges that our school district is having to

try and overcome. In speaking to those who work at the community college, they

are finding so many students who actually graduate from high school and yet

effectively don't have the kind of literacy skills necessary to continue with

further education. It would have been nice to see some more impact of literacy

coming into this throne speech.

There's no mention in the throne speech of the state of aboriginal

education in British Columbia. Once again, in school district 82 we have rates

of high school achievement amongst our aboriginal population that are less than

half that of the general population. When you consider how large our aboriginal

population is in northwest B.C., you have some idea of the scope of this

tragedy. Many young aboriginals are leaving school or dropping out of school

without the skills necessary to make it in our society, and I would like this

government to take note of that and to ensure that the school districts have the

ability to help to bridge this gap.

With regard to advanced education, Northwest Community College in

my riding is struggling to find enough students to fill all of their spaces. I

think this is in part because we really don't know what's happening with the

community colleges.

They seem now to be having to compete with the universities for

first- and second-year students,

whereas in the past it was more traditional for

the community colleges to take on the role of providing university transfer

credits for those who are in first and second years. Those students would then

transfer over to the universities in the larger urban centres to complete their

degrees with third- and fourth-year courses.

Now what we see is UNBC and other universities competing for these

first- and second-year courses, and that's making it harder for community

colleges to succeed at what I believe has always been their mandate.

In regard to employment and income assistance, there was no

mention in the throne speech of raising the shelter rate, even though everybody

knows that $325 a month is not sufficient for people to be able to find

accommodation. What this does is leave lots of families living in abject

poverty, and those children growing up in those families will be the problems

that we have to deal with in the future.

[1025]

With regard to energy and mines, the throne speech said that they

are going to find that the cost of producing new, clean electricity…. Even

though the price of "clean electricity unavoidably goes up, consumers will be

given new tools to help conserve energy and save money on their…bills."

There seems to be a mindset on the government side of the House

that energy costs are going to have to go up dramatically and that this is

entirely unavoidable. We on this side of the House disagree fundamentally with

that. We realize that the cost of producing new electricity will be more

expensive than all of the heritage projects that we have had traditionally in

this province. However, it is this government's policy of privatizing our rivers

and allowing those projects to go only to private enterprise and not be allowed

to be made by the state that is going to create much higher electricity costs

for all British Columbians.

It's not just those of us on this side saying that. We even have

the captains of industry — those who run big, industrial, electricity-consuming

projects all over British Columbia such as pulp mills and paper mills — who are

now realizing what the costs of this government's energy plan are going to do.

It is going to make the cost of electricity far higher, and that's

a great shame. This province was built largely on the vision of people who

realized that we could create cheap electricity from our natural resources —

from our rivers and our streams. Now that advantage has been given away in order

for a few cronies of the government to be able to open up IPP projects.

In fact, what we have nowadays under the new energy program is

B.C. Hydro essentially changing their policy simply to backfill the IPPs. As we

know, with IPPs the wind may not blow. There may not be enough water in the

stream to keep that IPP creating electricity. So it's now B.C. Hydro's job to

firm up that electricity power. In other words, B.C. Hydro now is working in the

interests of the IPPs rather than in the interests of the people of British

Columbia in maintaining low electricity prices.

Again to quote from the speech: "Green developments waiting for

provincial environmental approvals will be fast-tracked and given priority." I

love how this government claims that every single IPP project is green. I think

that just refers to the number of $20 bills that get to go into the pockets of

those who build the IPPs, rather than to the actual technology itself. Some of

those projects are far from green. I think what we're going to see now in terms

of "fast-tracked and given priority" is that we are going to now stop the public

from having input into IPP projects.

In my own neck of the woods we have three proposed projects on the

Skeena River. Depending on the size and the megawatts that are being produced

here, people in Skeena won't have an opportunity to speak in public meetings. In

fact, the local city and districts won't have any say as to whether those things

are approved, thanks to Bill 30 that was passed in early years in this session —

a bill designed to take away the rights of local residents to speak out and

discuss the merits of individual IPP projects in their ridings.

As I've mentioned, I represent a community that was once a

forestry town that today does not have a mill running in it. Yet there's very

little mention of forestry

[ Page 9775 ]

in the throne speech. This was once the prime industry that created and built

this province, and yet now there's hardly any mention of forestry.

We hear of pine beetle but only in terms of its environmental

effects. The forestry recovery program is a round table from this government. We

hear about Trees for Tomorrow. This is not about growing new trees all over

rural B.C. This is about urban forestation, investments in nurseries. This is

only good for urban areas. Already we've missed the 2009 planting season, where

we should have been investing in millions more trees to make up for what has

been happening.

The government has even refused to give any money to struggling

homeowners that have had to remove trees from their own properties. This is a

problem even in the city of Terrace, now that the pine beetle has finally

arrived there. But people are getting bills of $5,000 to $10,000 to have trees

cut down safely out of their own properties. This is not their fault that this

has come, and I think there should have been some help in this regard.

[1030]

I'd like to move over to a

section in the throne speech with

regards to seniors care. The government is studying an independent living

savings account framework which would "allow citizens to choose to invest a

certain portion of their income each year, up to age 75, in a tax-sheltered

savings account that can be used for home care support, assisted independent

housing and supportive housing options."

We will wait to see what the legislation says on this, but what it

suggests in the throne speech is that, effectively, the government is trying to

get people to pay for their own health care in their senior years. It's saying

to those who can afford to buy a premium: "Go and buy yourself private insurance

for the future, because when you reach 65 or older, the government and the

public health care system won't be there for you." That is not what people in

Skeena want to see as health care when they arrive in their senior years.

The government is going to bring in a change to not allow smoking

in vehicles. Congratulations to them. That is a long overdue piece of

legislation but one which not necessarily the government should be taking any

credit for, but my colleague sitting here behind me from Nanaimo, who actually

brought this in last year as a private member's bill. It didn't seem to get

support from the House, the government side, at that time, but thankfully,

they've seen the light of day and are now bringing that in, in this session. We

look forward to that coming in.

I'd like to go back to a

section to do with health. The government

wants to define and enshrine the five principles of the Canada Health Act plus a

sixth, the principle of sustainability, in provincial law before the end of this

government's mandate. I am very troubled to think that we are going to see a

section brought in to amend the Canada Health Act or to add on to the Canada

Health Act, a portion or a law that would be seeking to limit the expenditures

of health care. We all understand that health care costs are rising in this

province, but if we put some kind of cap upon it, that is going to be rationing

health care for those people who need it.

I represent a part of British Columbia where, before people have a

chance to access the health care system, they also have to travel far to get

there. So already there are increased costs upon all of those who live in rural

British Columbia to try and get to the urban centres, whether it be Prince

George or Vancouver, to go and see the necessary specialists, for them to be

able to take care of their own health care needs. The notion that the government

might somehow now be bringing in a

section that would actually limit health care

dollars is very troubling.

We saw from last year, when the Premier and the Health Minister

travelled to some European countries as part of seeking to see what other

countries are doing with their health care system…. They came back, and one of

the things that I've heard so far from the Minister of Health is that this

government is going to be looking at changing from the block funding to

individual funding for hospitals. He mentioned that this had been done with

great success in the United Kingdom.

I would just like to state on the record that, having come from

the United Kingdom, the only place to get good health care in Britain is if you

buy private medicare. It's a very sad state of affairs, because in Britain they

once had a public health care system that was the envy of the world. If you go

and speak to British people today, they do not regard their public health care

system as the envy of the world any longer. The majority of those who can afford

it buy private medical insurance in Britain, and that is where this government

wants us to head. That is the truth. I still have lots of family living there.

In regard to labour and citizen services, the government will work

with industry and labour to develop pension-bridging opportunities for all the

workers nearing retirement. That is required in my part of the world as people

are trying to transition out of the forestry industry and trying to find some

other kind of training or other jobs. Many of them are still too young to

retire. So it is very important that they have some kind of pension-bridging

opportunities.

The difficulty for those who are living in the forestry sector is

that they have spent most of their lives doing one job with one industry, and it

is very hard for them to learn new things. There needs to be programs in place

so that they can have new training.

[1035]

I noticed that there is no mention in the throne speech of the

forest workers' safety report that came out recently from my predecessor — a

report that I think many of us on this side of the House thought was excellent.

Unfortunately, it got trashed the following day by the Minister of Forests, who

said that it wasn't part of his mandate to discuss things that would require

money to be spent.

In reality, I think those of us who work in forest communities

still see a lot of logging taking place even though the millworking jobs have

gone, and we need

[ Page 9776 ]

to see a forest safety network that helps to stop these tragedies on the

forestry roads. The logging roads need to become part of the general road

structure in terms of safety.

In regards to the overall tone of this speech, I'll wait for the

details to come out in legislation. A lot of it was kind of slogans and thoughts

without there being a great deal of detail. We'll have to see what actually

comes out this session. But I think many of the programs, good or bad, speak

very much to things that are happening in urban centres in the lower mainland

and to the Olympics, which is really not that relevant to those of us who live

in rural British Columbia.

I hope that the people of Skeena, who obviously will be

contributing financially to the Olympics, get something more out of this

government than what we see here in the throne speech. Later today in the

budget, hopefully we will see some details to that.

So with that, hon. Speaker, I will now thank you for the

opportunity to speak to the throne speech and pass on to the other side.

H. Bloy: It's a real honour and privilege to stand here

today as a representative of the great riding of Burquitlam, part of Burnaby and

part of Coquitlam. I've been honoured now for seven years to represent the

riding and to bring their views to Victoria. I can tell you I will be bringing

their views on the throne speech to Victoria, and I'm encouraged to support it

100 percent without question.

But I wouldn't be fair…. It's not just me in the riding. I have

some great staff who help me and a number of volunteers. I have CAs. I have

Katie Merrifield, Ann Mayo and Chanelle Jen, who is a university student from

Simon Fraser working part-time in my office. I also have staff in Victoria who

assist me: Katy Fairley; Sarah Morris, who's communications; and Sarah Elder in

research. It's because of them that allowed me to do the work and to help

represent the people of Burquitlam.

Just before I get into my positive speech — I believe this is the

best throne speech that I've ever heard — I just have to say a few things to the

previous member, for Skeena, who went on about the Terrace-Kitimat school board

and school going four days a week. We gave additional funding to all the school

boards. The Terrace-Kitimat school board made the decision originally to go to

four days a week. After receiving additional funding, they decided to stay at

four days a week so that they could offer more programs for the students in

their area. The school board, the school district, made the decision.

You know, he has many misinformed thoughts about the treaty

process. We've actually signed treaties. He really hasn't…. How can I say this,

now? Facts and the truth didn't seem to really interfere with the story that he

was about to tell. There are members from the previous NDP government that

support what we do. Cathy McGregor, former Environment Minister, supports the

run-of-the-water IPP projects.

There are a number of people that support what this B.C. Liberal

government is doing. This NDP government is against small business, and it's

proven over and over again. They are more against it — I hate to say it — than

Glen Clark was. They are against small business. The NDP provincial government….

I'd like to quote from Joan Sawicki, a former Minister of the Environment, Lands

and Parks: "Restructuring water rental rates to take advantage of the

environmental benefits offered by small hydro projects can help us meet our

goals. In fact, they reduce the rates."

[1040]

But I'm positive. I want to move ahead. I want to tell you how

happy I am to be able to talk about this throne speech, which is a throne speech

to make British Columbians better off in our community. Health care is a

monumental issue affecting every single British Columbian, of all ages,

backgrounds and walks of life. You don't have to be in government to realize

that to continue the way we do health care today is not sustainable. We have

increased health care funding by over 52 percent since 2001, and you can't keep

growing at that rate.

The health care initiatives in the throne speech build on the

input from the Conversation on Health and will improve care in the long term and

for future British Columbians. Our goal is an efficient, effective and

integrated health care system that promotes the health of all citizens and

provides high-quality education to everyone. There will be one public payer for

health services that will continue to deliver services through public and

private providers.

We are adopting new, effective strategies that will improve health

for all our citizens. You know, these strategies include expanding the role of

nurses where they can provide some treatment; of pharmacists, where they can

renew prescriptions; for paramedics, where they can release patients; for

midwives; for naturopaths; investments in research and prevention; establishment

of a B.C. patient safety council; and new patient care quality review boards in

every health region.

Health professionals certified to practise elsewhere in Canada,

including foreign-trained doctors, will be able to work in British Columbia.

That will include a restricted licence enabling foreign-trained physicians to

practise in areas of expertise. I just want to read from a press release. It

does mention me, but it's from the Association of International Medical Doctors

that they released after the throne speech. The Association of International

Medical Doctors of British Columbia was in attendance at the throne speech in

Victoria. They met with the hon. George Abbott, Minister of Health, and we also

had lunch together.

"We have been working with health care stakeholders for the

last four years and are encouraged by the cooperation we have received from the

Minister of Health and the assistance we have received from MLAs from Burquitlam

and Burrard.

"The throne speech yesterday highlighted some

extraordinary advancements that we have been advocating for, including the

introduction of health profession review board, new legislation to ensure that

foreign-trained doctors recognized elsewhere in Canada are recognized in B.C.,

residency positions to be expanded for Canadian citizens trained outside of

British Columbia.

[ Page 9777 ]

"The government is moving forward on the

subject of

immigrant doctor integration, and we look forward to learning more about the

details of these plans and working with the Ministry of Health, the College of

Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. and the UBC faculty of medicine to make these

initiatives work."

You know, there was an

article in The Vancouver Sun

shortly after the throne speech.

"The throne speech this week goes a long way to breaking

down the barriers that have prevented doctors trained outside the province from

practising here. It promised a new health profession review board that will

ensure qualified health workers can fully use their training and skills and not

be barred by unnecessary credentialing and licensing restrictions. …physicians

accredited in other provinces will automatically be able to practise in British

Columbia…."

It pledged that Canadians trained outside the country in accredited

institutions will get residency positions to enable them to work here.

"This puts the onus on the B.C. College of Physicians and

Surgeons, which derives its authority from the Medical Practitioners Act to

amend its gatekeeper role to accommodate the government's more welcoming

posture."

I believe that the College of Physicians in British

Columbia and the Royal College of Physicians really have to change their outlook

on how we get people into British Columbia to practise their health care

services that they want to provide here. Just about every doctor — and there are

450 members of the Association of International Medical Doctors — could go

practise in the United States or anywhere out in the world, but they chose

Canada.

[1045]

They chose British Columbia, and the B.C. Medical Association has

to stop being an elitist group, stopping these people from working. They are so

restrictive that we had to come up with regulation so that they'll start

thinking the process and move forward. We have so much intellect in this country

that could be working for the betterment of all citizens of British Columbia,

restricted by a number of elitist professional associations, and this has to

end. I support our government's move to change this.

Meantime we have a provincial nominee program and a successful

Skills Connect for Immigrants program that will be expanded to help those in

demand for skilled workers. We have many health professionals here that may not

have the opportunity to practise as a doctor, but there are other areas of the

health profession that they can work. We're funding a working program to keep

them in the health profession, to use their ability to make a contribution to

British Columbia.

A few weeks ago I was honoured to attend the government

announcement that a total of 521 nurses from the United Kingdom have been hired

in the lower mainland over the last two years, the result of targeted provincial

recruitment efforts. The whole world is recruiting. It's not just British

Columbia that's short of nurses and doctors and health care practitioners. It's

everywhere in the world. We had a hard time recruiting, but with some of the

changes and the benefits and the great place that British Columbia is to live,

people want to come here and practise.

All recruits are qualified to practise in the United Kingdom and

may originally be from other communities around the British Isles as well as

countries such as Ghana, Jamaica, India, Zimbabwe and the Philippines.

Recruiting nurses to British Columbia is part of the province's health nursing

strategy. Since 2001 we've invested over $174 million, including $28 million in

2007, to help educate, retain and recruit the best qualified nurses.

British Columbia has added over 3,300 nursing education spaces

throughout British Columbia in this time period, an increase of 82 percent. This

is so unlike the NDP that…. In the '90s they graduated fewer nurses every year —

'92, '93, '94, '95, '96, '97, '98, '99, 2000. Every one of those years they

graduated fewer nurses in British Columbia. They couldn't read the information,

which was out there in the world, saying that we're going to have a shortage of

nurses and doctors. They did nothing; we did something. We stand, and we do what

we say we're going to do.

These increases in nursing education spaces have led to the

graduation of over 7,500 new nurses in the past five years, including 4,900

registered nurses, 2,200 practical nurses and over 300 registered psychiatric

nurses.

I had the privilege of opening, on behalf of the government, a new

clinic in Burnaby, the New Canadian Clinic. The clinic was established as part

of the Fraser Health's new primary health care network with startup funds

provided by the province's health innovation fund. It was great to see it and

the number of immigrants that go through this health clinic in Burnaby. I was

there at the original planning meeting about three years ago and have supported

it all the way along.

I can tell you the response from members of my riding has been

overwhelming. This valuable innovation ensures that all members of our community

have access to the appropriate and timely medical care.

New immigrants to British Columbia choose Burnaby as their home.

It is not unusual for new immigrants to rely heavily on emergency services for

health care delivery as it can be difficult to access primary health services

while they get settled in their new community. The clinic addresses these

problems by integrating health services with social supports of the immigrant

network in Burnaby and demonstrates the positive steps currently underway to

meet the provincial objectives of improved community health care services.

So we have the Fraser Health Authority, which is a partner of the

innovative fund from the province of British Columbia, and we have social groups

led by Jeanne Fike of the Burnaby Family Life Institute.

Burnaby is now one of the largest communities within the Fraser

Health Authority. Burnaby Hospital experiences 54,000 emergency triage visits a

year and provides a full range of services, including surgical, acute,

residential care to the community. There have been considerable upgrades, new

facilities and additions to Burnaby Hospital. Our government has recognized the

needs of the hospital and taken proactive steps to improve health care in

Burnaby.

[1050]

[ Page 9778 ]

In 2002 a specialized pediatric urgent care clinic opened. In 2003

there was a large mental health department relocation and upgrade. In 2004 there

was an addictions relocation and upgrade to all patient services, with

renovations of the old Cascade building. Relocation and renovation in 2004 of

transitional care increased its beds from 29 to 42, and oncology enabled an

increase of 6,000 out-patient visits to that unit per year.

Improvements in the restorative care unit also happened in 2004.

Planning is underway for emergency department waiting room and triage centre

renovations and upgrades, expected to start early this year and be completed by

the end of the year. Surgical programs have expanded with the opening of a sixth

operating room.

Burnaby Hospital has led the Fraser Health in hip and knee

replacements performed. The fall prevention and hip protector program has cut

hip fracture rates by 80 percent over the past four years.

All these good things that are happening in health care, and

what's going on. Again I look at the newspaper, and it says: "B.C. health plans

raise critic's pulse rate." I believe it should raise the pulse rate of the NDP

Health critic because of all the great things we're doing, all the things that

we said we would do and that we actually complete — not complaining and whining

and negative on and on.

He has never had a positive word to say. The NDP and the Health

critic are against expanded nurses and nurses having an expanded role of

practice. We're for it. They're against new doctors coming into British

Columbia. We support it. They're against pharmacists doing additional

prescriptions and other work and expansion of service provided. They're against

it. We're for it. You know, they're against paramedics releasing patients and

doing additional work. We're for it. The NDP is against it.

I am proud to stand here and support this throne speech, because

we move forward in a positive attitude. We are looking at new ways of

accomplishing and trying to provide the best health care service in British

Columbia and in Canada. I support it. The NDP is against it.

Over the last year we've been helping B.C. seniors stay

independent. We've launched the Premier's Council on Aging and Seniors Issues to

examine the coming demographic shift in the province and how to support seniors'

independence and health. We provided $4.2 million for 411 senior centre

societies to purchase and maintain their own heritage buildings.

The throne speech speaks of establishing ActNow seniors community

parks throughout the province and exploring the possibility of establishing new

independent living savings accounts, which will allow citizens up to the age of

75 to invest in tax-sheltered savings accounts for home care support, assisted

independent housing and supported housing options.

You know, we're for it. The member for Skeena, who spoke

previously, is against it. We're for it. They're against it. We want to move

forward. They only want to move backward.

Our government is reviewing our court sentencing — I'm going to

change a little bit now — in determining why sentences here tend to be shorter

for crimes such as theft, homicide, property crimes, fraud, impaired driving and

drug possession. That information will be used to create a community safety

strategy by the fall to ensure that we have safe communities.

We need to face challenges of poverty, mental health, mental

illness and addiction. We will complete and update the ten-year mental health

plan, ensuring that those with severe mental illness who require intensive and

sustained treatment are cared for in new and existing facilities at Willingdon

on south Canada Way and at the Riverview lands in Coquitlam. Also, a new

multi-year investment will be made in revitalizing the downtown east side.

The B.C. government provides 100 percent of traffic fine revenues

to municipalities to reinvest in public safety. This past year alone, Burnaby

was given $2.7 million. The province has unveiled its latest tool in the fight

against crystal meth: a $3 million school-based program, a public education

campaign called no2meth. Information for parents, students and teachers can be

found by visiting the www.no2meth.ca website.

[1055]

In 2006, in the provincial budget, this government committed an

additional $2 million to base funding over three years to health authorities to

continue targeted treatment programs for crystal meth users. This funding

bolstered programs and services targeting substance abuse and addiction. You

know, I heard a speech the other day that 40 or 50 years ago the worst that some

members would do was nothing compared to what's available to youth today. It's

just so destructive — the drugs that are available — that it was never there in

the past.

The throne speech introduced us to LiveSmart B.C. The new

LiveSmart initiative will reward smart choices and create competitive advantages

of higher productivity, lower costs, less waste and higher-quality products for

our industries. Consumers will get new tools to help conserve energy and save

money.

We will pursue a goal of zero net deforestation and launch a Trees

for Tomorrow program to plant trees in public spaces across the province.

Initiatives like the Pacific carbon trust will foster economic growth while

enhancing our environment as we move toward our goal of reducing greenhouse gas

emissions by 33 percent by 2020.

This ties in nicely with another area that our province is moving

forward in, in the fight against climate change: transportation. This is

extremely important to my riding of Burquitlam and to the province. The B.C.

Liberals have unveiled an aggressive, all-encompassing transit plan. In the

entire history of the province…. In fact, this is the most ambitious mass

transportation plan in Canada, and we should all take great pride in that.

By investing a proposed $14 billion in infrastructure, buses and

new expanded SkyTrain lines, our government is providing a commitment to

improving the lifestyle and transit options available in this province. It is an

ambitious goal to reduce greenhouse gases and protect our environment for future

generations.

[ Page 9779 ]

Twinning the Port Mann Bridge, expanding bus lanes, adding new

buses to the Burnaby–Metro Vancouver fleet — all these are important strategies

that result in more reliable, fast, green transit. The Evergreen line is

expected to be completed by 2014 and will connect Coquitlam Centre to Lougheed

Town Centre and, in turn, to the Millennium and Expo lines. These improvements

will serve to make public transit convenient and affordable.

Here are the facts about taking transit in the Burquitlam riding

as they stand today. The regular two-zone fare, Burnaby to Vancouver is $3.75

each way or $99 a month. From Coquitlam, three-zone or all-zone, it's $5 one way

or $136 for a monthly pass. You know, when you start to break that down, regular

transit users who purchase monthly passes pay, on average, $6.80 a day to travel

through all zones. Another perk of the monthly fare card is the fact that they

are tax deductible by the federal government.

Let's compare driving to transit. Consider that you pay up to $20

a day alone to park in downtown Vancouver in a safe indoor parking lot. That's

$800 a month. Add this to your car insurance for driving to work, the cost of

gas and maintenance. With the new B.C. Liberal provincial transit plan, our

government is making the provincewide improvements to transportation that will

position B.C. in line with the likes of London and Paris.

The aim is to provide a balanced transit response that meets the

needs of communities and passengers while doubling ridership, with more

frequent, reliable transit service in high-growth urban centres like Metro

Vancouver, Burnaby and Coquitlam.

The Gateway program includes three components: the Port Mann

Bridge Highway 1 project; the south perimeter road project; and the North Fraser

perimeter road project, including the Pitt River Bridge and the Mary Hill

bypass. The Gateway improvements mean there will be transit service across the

Port Mann Bridge for the first time in 20 years.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

It's our Transportation Ministry that's had a vision and that's

been looking at all of British Columbia. But you know, most of the people live

in the lower mainland and the Victoria area, so we have this vision. The express

bus service will be connected directly to HOV lanes and will not mix with

general traffic. Travel time for the full trip between Langley and Burnaby will

be less than 25 minutes, as fast as or faster than by car.

[1100]

The Gateway program will establish cycling and transit

opportunities across the corridor. It includes a $50 million cycling investment,

the largest single investment in cycling infrastructure in British Columbia.

Gateway will re-establish transit across the newly twinned Port Mann Bridge.

There are so many good times and so little time to talk about them

all, but part of our throne speech was about early education and allowing

four-year-olds and three-year-olds to come into the schools. This is going to go

to a special group to be reviewed. I support that. I'm excited, because we have

empty classrooms in all our schools because of the reduction of the growth of

our population.

I see these programs being run by non-profits. They're in the

schools. They're running a day care — all-day day care, after-school day care —

but we have them with non-profits running them. I think we can get it up and

running even sooner than when we talked about.

I'm excited about expanding our schools and where we're going. We

also have the StrongStart schools. I've been at a number of the openings, and

one was in my riding, Roy Stibbs School. It is a buzz of activity there every

day.

I would have to mention, because things are going so great, that

we will have the 2009 World Police and Fire Games in British Columbia. They'll

be in Burnaby, the lower mainland and Whistler. What an economic boon that will

be to the lower mainland — 15,000 police, fire and security services personnel;

25,000 family members; and over $100 million into the economy. That's because of

two firefighters, Jeff Clark and Miles Ritchie, who had the guts to start it

about four or five years ago. We're just putting the final touches now on what

will be the best games ever for the World Police and Fire Games.

I want to be explicitly clear. I want to make sure that there's no

doubt about where I stand and where my constituents have advised me to stand.

They said: "Stand up and support the throne speech." My belief is that it's the

best throne speech we've ever had.

When we came into government in 2001, we inherited a mess and

economic indignities. We as a province had been reduced from the number one

province in all of Canada to last place. We were relegated to putting our hand

out and asking for handouts. Despite everything that British Columbia has, we

were a handout. We were given money.

When we got elected, the first thing we did was cut income taxes

for people by 25 percent. We are putting dollars in people's pockets, while the

NDP are committed to taking dollars out.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, members.

H. Bloy: Every taxpaying citizen of this province got money

back when we reduced personal income taxes. We are for letting individuals spend

money — not like the NDP, who want the money. They want to spend it. They don't

think the citizens know how to spend it. They want it. We believe they can do

it.

When we came into government in 2001, youth unemployment was at

the highest rate ever, over 17 percent. We've now reduced that to 7 percent. You

know, we are for youth. We do things for youth. They're against youth. The NDP

is against supporting youth in this province.

Let's look at women. Over 176,000 new jobs have been created for

women in British Columbia since 2001.

[ Page 9780 ]

Today over one million women are working in this province, the highest level

ever.

[1105]

Since 2005 our government has been working with first nations and

Métis organizations and has focused on building capacity so that all first

nations people and communities can benefit from the economic and employment

opportunities currently available in British Columbia.

In 2001 there were 930,000 people working for small business, and

there were 337,000 small businesses in British Columbia. Today there are over a

million people working in small businesses in British Columbia, and the small

business numbers have increased by 11 percent.

We have heard the other side of the House criticize because they

know they are for big government and we're not for big government. We are for

regulatory reform. They're against regulation reform. They just want to add more

and more regulations to tie up business. They tied up business. By the end of

the '90s it was being choked to death. They choked small business to death. They

choked the mining industry to death in British Columbia.

Interjection.

H. Bloy: Let's just talk a little bit about taxes and

putting money in people's pockets. The member for Vancouver-Fairview says that

you can't increase spending and not increase taxes. Well, we know that side of

the House is for increasing taxes. That's what they're all about. They stand up,

and that's what we're for. We know they're against letting individuals keep more

money in their pockets. We're for lowering personal income taxes, and we've done

it twice.

We have this throne speech, and we're going to vote on it. How can

anybody vote against the commitment to upgrade the expansion of B.C.'s

Children's Hospital? I'll tell you that I'm going to vote for the expansion of

B.C. hospital. The NDP is going to vote against it.

How can anybody vote against nurses delivering more services in

British Columbia? I am going to stand up and vote for nurses delivering more

services. The NDP will vote against servicing more….

H. Lali: I stand here in this debate to take my turn to

speak on the throne speech.

Interjection.

H. Lali: Yes, you may heckle me all you want. The more

heckling, the merrier. I like it that way.

Anyway, I stand here to speak against the throne speech. Unlike

the member who spoke just before me, who is in enthusiastic support of this, I'm

not. There are quite a few reasons for that.

First of all, when you look at this throne speech…. I guess it's

probably the Liberals' commitment to recycling, because they're repackaging and

recycling announcements that have already been made — made twice and three

times, repeated four times — over and over again in the last number of years.

They make no commitment in terms of actually carrying out those promises, but

they make promises to make more promises.

That's what you find in this throne speech. It's nothing but

recycling old promises and making announcements on old announcements that were

already made two, three, four times previously. That's their commitment. It's

all a repackaging. Put a few new fancy words attached to it, and then put it

forward again. That's what they're doing.

There's nothing in here that's earth-shattering. There's nothing

in here that is actually going to help average British Columbians, the lower-

and middle-income earners of this province. There's no commitment to that.

There's nothing earth-shattering in this throne speech that was written in the

Premier's office and presented here last week. There's nothing.

There is one thing that is in this document, and that is the

admission of failure by this Liberal government over the last seven years

they've been in office. This is a clear admission of failure on a number of

fronts, not because of what it has in here but rather what it refuses to put in

the throne speech, what it refuses to do on behalf of average British

Columbians.

If you travel throughout the province, you will see the myriad

problems out there that are being exacerbated by the rule of this Premier and

the B.C. Liberals over the last seven years.

[1110]

Let's take a look at child poverty. There's nothing in this throne

speech except an admission of failure on that whole issue of child poverty.

Since the Liberals took office seven years ago, child poverty rates are the

highest of any province in the country. They went from the lowest in 2001 to the

highest of any province. This is something that members opposite are proud of?

Then you look at homelessness as well. That's the same story all

over again. There's a 150 percent increase in homelessness. People have been

shoved out of their homes. People who are mental health patients aren't getting

help. They're living out on the streets because there's nowhere to go. You've

even found, when you look across British Columbia, that this government has

closed transition homes for women.

First they cut the welfare rates. Then they tried to put it back

and say: "Oh, yeah. Look at us. We increased welfare rates." Well, you cut them

in the first place. You're putting people out on the street, and there's nowhere

to go. There are no programs in place, nowhere for folks to meet to be able to

deal with their problems. In the middle of winter a couple years back we had

people literally freezing in the middle of winter because they had no place to

go.

That's the reality. They can find a whole lot of money to put into

the Sea to Sky Highway and into Gateway and other projects in the lower

mainland, but they can't find small pockets of money to be able to actually help

people and get those rolls of homelessness down.

Health care is another admission of failure by the Liberals.

Basically, what the Liberal pronouncements — and what's here in the throne

speech coming from

[ Page 9781 ]

the government side — are saying is that really, you're only going to get

reasonable access. The responsibility is yours as an individual, and this

government is going to do nothing to actually reduce wait-lists. It's not going

to do anything to reinstate services, programs and health care that they had cut

across British Columbia, especially in rural communities, small communities like

the small communities in Yale-Lillooet. They're not going to do anything.

As a matter of fact, that access to health care for people who

lived in those small communities and the outlying areas of communities like

Merritt, Princeton, Logan Lake, Hope, Lillooet and other communities in my

constituency…. They had access to health care in those small communities. It has

been pulled out and concentrated in communities like Kamloops, Kelowna and

Abbotsford and in others like Victoria and Vancouver. They can't get access to

health care.

When they made those massive cuts to health care, the Liberals —

between the years 2001 and 2004, when they made those massive cuts to health

care and education and social….

B. Lekstrom: Tell the truth. Tell the truth.

H. Lali: Hon. Speaker, I think the member opposite is

impugning my reputation. I ask the hon. member to withdraw his remarks.

B. Lekstrom: I can't withdraw the truth.

Deputy Speaker: Members, I am listening to the debate, and

what I would advise you to be is very courteous to each other.

H. Lali: I think the courteous thing for him to have done

was actually to withdraw his remarks. Since he's not going to withdraw his

remarks, hon. Speaker, I can only tell you that, from this side, when we say

things, the truth really hurts members opposite. That's the problem. The truth

hurts that member. My good friend from Peace River South can't handle the truth.

As I was saying, the massive cuts to health….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member.

Just so that we're clear and fair, I've ruled on the matter, and

it's over.

H. Lali: No problem. I'll continue on, despite the heckling

of my friend from Peace River South.

[1115]

In any case, as I was saying before I was rudely interrupted by

members opposite, the fact of the matter is that the Liberals, when they took

office, between the years 2001 and 2004, made massive cuts to health care

services and programs, especially in rural British Columbia. They closed

hospitals all over British Columbia. They cut wings out of hospitals. They

pulled out services. They pulled them out of communities like Lytton.

They actually were going to shut down the hospital and not rebuild

it in the community of Lytton. What they had promised to do…. They actually put

a phone booth in there, with a toll-free number to call in case you got into an

accident on the highway in the Fraser Canyon. When people were phoning that

number, they were put on hold for anywhere from 30 minutes to two hours. That

was their idea of health care.

The fact is that they took health care out of those small rural

communities in this province and concentrated it into the larger urban centres

in rural British Columbia and into Victoria and Vancouver. That's the reality.

There were cuts made to health care in Merritt, in Princeton, in Lytton, in

Lillooet. In Ashcroft they closed that hospital down and turned it into a

diagnostic treatment centre. That's their idea of health care.

If that's not a cut, I don't know what it is. That's the reality

in this province — the massive cuts to health care under this government. And

this document is nothing but an admission of that failure on their part.

The Liberals had promised, that Premier across the way had

promised, when he took office in 2001…. Oh, after they actually gave away the

store, the $1½ billion in tax breaks to large corporations and the wealthiest

people in this province…. After they had given away the treasury, the store, and

created the largest deficit in the history of this province, $3.5 billion….

It was under that government in the year 2004. They did it. But

the promise the Premier made at that time was: "When the budget is balanced, we

will put those services back." Well, he has not done that. The budget sits at a

$4.1 billion surplus, and yet we've got massive, massive cuts to health,

education and social services in this province. The Premier has promised to put

that money back, and he has failed to do so in their third successive balanced

budget now, and there are record surpluses.

Hon. Speaker, you get the wealthiest in this province, the large

corporations, who are continuing to get tax giveaways from this province. Yet

people in my community and communities all throughout the province…. In northern

British Columbia, the north Island, in the Kootenays, in the Cariboo, in that

member's riding in Peace River South and also Peace River North, they're

suffering. They can't get access to health care in their communities because of

the cuts that were made by this Liberal Premier and the Liberal government, and

they've refused to acknowledge that.

I'll tell you one thing. This document, the throne speech, is

nothing but an admission of failure on the part of the Liberals. It's right here

in this, because they've refused to put that money back. You know, it's also an

admission by the Liberals that they are going to continue to abandon rural

British Columbia when it comes to actually divvying out the goodies in this

province.

I want to talk about…. There are a couple of lines in the throne

speech about first nations and all of this foofy stuff that the Liberals put in,

in terms of reconciliation and all this sort of stuff. But when you talk to

aboriginal people, when you talk to the aboriginal leadership in this province,

they will tell you that it's just mere words. There's no action behind those

words.

[ Page 9782 ]

The first nations of this province, in an era of prosperity, are

still waiting, because it isn't happening on reserves. It is not happening for

first nations people, who are continuing to be denied their rightful place in

society. They continue to be deprived of educational and employment

opportunities in this province.

If any one of these Liberals wants to go around the province and

tour those aboriginal reserves, they will find the highest unemployment rates —

perhaps some of the highest — on reserves anywhere in the province. And match

that with anywhere in the country even, because they are not feeling the

prosperity that they're talking about. They're not the ones that are getting

access to education and employment opportunities.

When the metal hits the road, that's what it's all about. It's

about how many educational and employment opportunities are being shared with

aboriginal people in this province. That's where…

I. Black: …the rubber hits the road.

[1120]

H. Lali: The rubber hits the road. Thank you very much.

You're getting me too excited, hon. Member.

When the rubber hits the road — that's what it is. When the rubber

hits the road and you look at it…. The aboriginal people are saying to members

opposite: "What have you done for us?" They don't have an answer because they

haven't. Aboriginal people continue to be denied by this Liberal government in

terms of access.

Really, I talked about health care. You've got at least 50 percent

of the aboriginal people who are living on reserves all throughout rural British

Columbia. When they deny access to health care to rural British Columbians, they

are denying access to health care to aboriginal people, because most of those

aboriginal people in rural British Columbia live on reserve, not in communities.

So their access to health care is even further than those of non-aboriginal

people who actually live in the communities in rural British Columbia.

Hon. members across the way stand up here and take credit for

supposedly doing all these great and wonderful things on behalf of environments

and parks. There's a figure in here that the Liberals across the way pound and

thump their chests and brag about from the rooftops to say, "We've got 14

percent of this province that is in parklands now" — 14 percent, as they're

saying.

Well, hallelujah. When they formed government, they actually

realized there's an environment out there and there are parks that need to be

created. What they refuse to tell you is that when the NDP was in office, we

took the area that was protected in parklands from 6 percent…. We had promised

to do 12 percent, double it — according to the Brundtland report of the United

Nations — but it was 12.5 percent.

We did it. We created the parks. We're the ones who brought in the

environmental legislation, and these guys across the way are trying to take

credit for the work that the New Democratic government of the 1990s did on this

side. Shame on you. Shame on you, Liberals, for trying to take credit for work

that you didn't even do. I can't believe it.

They continue to take credit for things that they didn't even do,

and then they turn around and say that their forestry management and their

practices for environmental management are the best in the world.

When we brought in legislation to protect the environment, to

bring in forestry practices, these guys voted against it. Now they're sitting

there on the other side bragging about stuff that they didn't even do. I can't

believe it. They can't even try to take credit for stuff that they've done.

They're trying to take credit for stuff they didn't even do. Shame on them.

They voted against it. Time and time again when it came to

forestry practices or environmental management or parks, those individuals

across the way that were on this side of the House got up one after the other,

one by one, and voted against it.

Now they're trying to take credit for stuff that they didn't even

do. What a shame. At least they could stand up there on that side and say: "Look

at the NDP work. They did all this. It was a good thing to do." Oh, no. They're

not going to say that. They're trying to take credit for stuff that we did.

What you find is that last year the Premier had the balloons

flowing, the ribbons and all those party hats and stuff like that when he made

this grand announcement on greenhouse gas reduction, the climate change and all

of that stuff. It actually followed two weeks after our leader on our side and

our Environment critic and our Forests critic…. They were there for the

announcement of a green plan for British Columbia, which we had presented. The

Premier, on the other side, realized: "Hey, this could be a winning issue for

me." So he gets together his band and his hoopla, and he makes this grand

announcement last year.

But you know what? He didn't put any money into it. There was no

plan, there was no strategy, and there were no targets.

Here we are over a year later, and still he's trying to repackage

that same hoopla and the bandstanding that he did 14 months back. He's trying to

do it again.

Interjection.

H. Lali: Grandstanding, bandstanding — same difference.

Hoopla, party atmosphere. That's what the Premier tried to do.

Interjection.

H. Lali: You didn't get a hat. The hon. member didn't get a

hat. Would somebody please get the hon. member a hat, because he didn't get his

hat? He wants his hat.

[1125]

The one thing the Premier is doing is imposing a carbon tax. He's

going to impose a carbon tax on carbon fuels. The Minister of Finance sits there

saying: "Oh, it's revenue-neutral." But where's the neutrality? When you impose

a tax on somebody…. Neutrality really means that you give the equivalent amount

back somewhere

[ Page 9783 ]

where somebody is doing something that's going to help the environment.

That's what revenue neutrality is. All it is, is just a shameless tax grab by a

money-hungry government. That's all that the Liberals have done.

Let's get on to forestry again. I'm back at forestry. It's our

number one industry in this province. A lot of people in my constituency and the

constituencies opposite, especially those rural members — Peace River South is

another one of them — depend on forestry. But you know what has happened? By

2001 in some areas of this province there was a 15-year backlog in terms of

reforestation under a previous Social Credit government. But we got rid of that

entire backlog by the year 1998. It was done. The backlog had all been cleared.

The Liberals have now, again, created another backlog in this

province in terms of how much reforestation has to be done. Through their own

admission in this document, they say there's a 700,000-hectare backlog. That's

what they're admitting right now. What's their answer to figure out all of this?

It says Trees for Tomorrow. That's what these members opposite are saying.

You know what? Here's what they're going to do: a new Trees for

Tomorrow program would launch a large urban afforestation initiative. Millions

of trees will be planted. Where will they be planted? In back yards, school

yards, hospital grounds, civic parks, campuses, parking lots and other public

spaces across B.C. They forgot one item in here. They forgot one item to

include. What's that, you ask? They forgot our forests. It lists everything

elsewhere they're going to do it — Trees for Tomorrow — but they forgot the one

area where they should be replanting trees. It's our forests.

They do say something in here. They say they're going to plant 60

million seedlings — it's on page 21 — over the next four years. What does that

translate to? Eighty-six trees per hectare. This room is a lot smaller than a

hectare. If you put 83 trees…. According to the rules of replanting, the

silviculture industry, you could probably put 86 trees in half of this room.

It's maybe about 1/20 of a hectare, maybe even less than that. Eighty-six trees

per hectare. But where are they putting them? Back yards, school yards, parks,

campuses and all that sort of stuff. But they forget that they've got to put

trees in our forests.

The other major item that I want to talk about is what the Premier

had announced about a month, a month and a half back, and they brag about it in

here. They said that we are going to have the most massive expansion of our

transit program ever in the history of this province. What they said is that

they're going to spend $14 billion. Mind you, what they — the Premier and the

Minister of Transportation — forgot to tell people in British Columbia is that

$4½ billion of that was already announced.

Remember what I said about the Liberals' commitment to recycling?

It's repackaging and recycling old announcements. A third of those announcements

are actually already announcements that were made once, twice, three, four times

over the last seven years by this same Liberal government. So they made that

again.

Let's say it's about $10 billion. But there are a number of things

they forgot. First of all, where's the money? They don't tell you where the

money's going to come from. But what they are hoping is: "Oh well, we'll get

some money from the federal government. We'll get the municipal and the regional

district entity to put in some money, and we'll put in some money ourselves."

Well, the municipalities and the regional districts weren't

consulted on this. They didn't even know about it. The federal government wasn't

consulted either. They didn't know anything about it. It was just an imaginary

plan — a plan in the imagination of the Premier. The money was going to somehow

come from some imaginary place, like from regional and municipal governments and

the federal government, but there's no commitment where the money's going to

come from.

[1130]

That was the one thing. The other thing that the Premier forgot….

He says that this transit announcement is going to put in a SkyTrain, commuter

rail, buses, these new super buses. Where are they all going to go? The Premier

says they're going to go to the lower mainland, to Victoria and to Kelowna. I

ask the Premier: is there not a British Columbia beyond those three major urban

centres in this province?

When you look at the constituency of Yale-Lillooet, with its

30,000 square kilometres, seven municipalities, four regional districts, 29

independent first nations, and probably a total of about a hundred communities

nestled all over the 30,000 square kilometres…. What's in it for my

constituents? Well, I couldn't find mentioned anywhere in the Premier's

announcement a community that was in my constituency.

The fact of the matter is that in this Premier's imaginary $14

billion announcement, my constituents are going to get an imaginary zero in

funding. That's it — zero in terms of funding. There is no benefit. Yet when you

look at rural British Columbia…. Rural British Columbia, through its resources

economy, generates most of the wealth in this province. We make such a huge

contribution to the treasury here in Victoria, and out of that imaginary $14

billion announcement by the Premier, we get a big fat zero for the constituency

in Yale-Lillooet.

It repeats itself. Whether it's Cariboo South, Cariboo North,

Peace River North, Peace River South — constituencies of members opposite —

Buckley Valley–Stikine, all of these constituencies….

Some Hon. Members: Bulkley.

L. Mayencourt: Buckley is the cough syrup.

An Hon. Member: It tastes bad, but it works.

H. Lali: But it works. You guys are watching way too much

TV. Backbenchers on the Liberal side: you have way too much time on your hands.

While the members opposite are drinking Buckley's syrup, I want to

point out to you, hon. Speaker, that they're not getting any Buckley's syrup

from the Transportation

[ Page 9784 ]

Minister or from the Premier when it comes to this imaginary $14 billion

transit announcement.

Where are they? How come they're not voicing their concerns? How

come they're not standing up here alongside the rural Democrat MLAs on this side

of the House? How come they're not standing up beside us and joining forces with

us and demanding from the Premier: "Where's the money? Where's the beef? Where's

the beef for rural British Columbia? Where's the money for us? Where are the

transportation needs?"

A true transportation infrastructure plan would have included

other items such as ferries, rail and airports. And, oh yes, the one very, very

important thing — which I don't think is very important to the Premier, except

when he's dealing with the Greater Vancouver area…. Except for that, he's

forgotten that there are roads and bridges all across rural British Columbia.

The rural British Columbia that generates the wealth and that

needs those roads and bridges for all of those trucks that bring in all of the

coal, the ore, the lumber, the logs, the gravel and everything, they need an

effective transportation system as well. The Premier somehow forgot about roads

and bridges. Where are most of those roads and bridges? They're in rural British

Columbia.

The Premier abandoned rural British Columbia right from day one

when he took office, and all he offered to the people of rural British Columbia

was: "I am going to have a heartlands strategy." We found out what that strategy

was. It was massive cuts to our health, education and social services. It was

the neglect of our transportation infrastructure. It was the deliberate

dismantling of the forest industry by this Premier.

He has turned his heartlands into the hurtlands; that's what the

Premier has done. He's forgotten. He's abandoned rural British Columbia. He's

abandoned rural British Columbia when it comes to health care. He's abandoned

rural British Columbia where we're still continuing to get closures for schools.

The Liberals have closed the school in Hedley as of June 30 coming

up — the small school that was there. They have closed over 130 schools across

this province, and still counting. It continues to this day. That's what this

Liberal government is doing. It's abandoning the educational aspirations of the

people of rural British Columbia.

[1135]

It is abandoning the forest industry, because it has refused to do

anything about the pine beetle infestation that has taken place. It is

devastating our forest industry. It is devastating small towns across rural

British Columbia. You've got so many people that are moving because this Liberal

government, through its neglect and abandonment of rural British Columbia, has

allowed 45 sawmills to close in this province.

Never in the history of British Columbia have we ever had this

many jobs eliminated in the forest industry. Never have we ever had this many

mills closed in a period of time in British Columbia as we have under this

Liberal Premier and this Liberal government. That's the reality. It's the

abandonment of rural British Columbia.

Now, I talked about health care earlier. What's happening now is

that the Liberals are doing nothing to bring doctors into some of those

communities where they need doctors. The community of Princeton is a prime

example. The Liberals are doing nothing to attract new doctors into that

community. Now they're planning to close the emergency room in the hospital in

Princeton, and it's a shame.

If you leave Hope, when you're driving down from Vancouver through

the interior on Highway 3, it's 135 kilometres from Hope to Princeton, and they

want to close down the emergency room at the Princeton hospital. What a shame.

It repeats itself in community after community after community in rural British

Columbia, because this Liberal government continues to abandon rural British

Columbia. It ought to be ashamed.

So when you talk about this transit plan, there is no money for

the transportation infrastructure of rural British Columbia, with the sole

exception of three or four pet projects that they're putting into their ridings.

An Hon. Member: Kicking Horse Pass.

H. Lali: With the exception of that — Kicking Horse —

because the federal government has come up with the money to match it. That's

the reason that's happening. Other than that, they have abandoned rural British

Columbia. It's a shame. It's a real shame.

I don't know why it is that these members opposite, especially my

Liberal colleagues from rural British Columbia, are getting up in this House one

after the other and saying how proud they are of this throne speech and how

great it is, when all that has happened is the clear abandonment of rural

British Columbia.

I ask my colleagues across the way, specifically my friends from

the Maple Ridge area and people up in the north and my friend from Peace River

South, to stand up, join the New Democrats, join us on this side of the House,

and tell the Premier that you're not going to take the abandonment of rural

British Columbia anymore.

I know if I stand here for another half an hour, I can convince

some of my friends opposite. They are willing to come forward, and they will.

All they need is a little bit more debate. I can just see the member opposite.

If they would stand up and join the New Democratic MLAs and put the pressure on

the Premier so that he stops abandoning rural B.C. That's what he has to do and

what these members have to do.

Just join us, stand up for rural B.C. for once in your political

lives. I tell you, you're abandoning rural B.C.

Anyway, I will be standing up when the vote is going to take

place, and I will be voting against the throne speech.

Deputy Speaker: Members, before I recognize the member for

Vancouver-Burrard, I would just like to remind all members that there are no

props to be used in the House. I notice the throne speech has been used from all

sides, and I advise you not to.

L. Mayencourt: The member for Yale-Lillooet has always been

and continues to this day to be a hard act

[ Page 9785 ]

to follow, but I'm grateful for the time that I have right now to be able to

speak to not just my constituents but to other people in the province and to the

people in this chamber.

First off, we have a new Lieutenant-Governor in British Columbia.

Steven Point took over from Iona Campagnolo just a few weeks ago. Last night, we

— members of the opposition, members of government — all took the opportunity to

join him for dinner at his home, and I want to thank him very, very much for the

true honour that that was.

[1140]

Madam Speaker, when the Lieutenant-Governor got up to speak — and

I know you were there with us — he instantly revealed to us the kind of man that

he is. He's a humanitarian. He cares about kids. He cares about our province. He

cares about first nations. He is our first Lieutenant-Governor to have first

nations heritage. He has a strong sense of justice and a great, great deal of

compassion for the people in British Columbia that sit on the margins — the

folks that are vulnerable, that have not yet been welcomed or felt themselves

being welcomed into society. I really enjoyed his sense of humour as well as the

very compassionate things that he had to say about those people.

I also want to start by thanking the people of Vancouver-Burrard.

Vancouver-Burrard is my riding, and it has been for the last seven years. I want

to tell you what a great honour it has been to represent the people of the West

End, Coal Harbour, Concord Pacific, the downtown south. All areas of my

community have just been a joy to work with.

I really feel so fortunate to be able to do that and, in the

hustle and bustle of the days that we live in, have an opportunity. We have a

community that stops and has coffee together and talks on the street and helps

little old ladies cross the street — all of those sorts of things.

I'm very, very proud of my community. I'm proud of the

organizations that serve my community, like the West End Seniors Network, the

West End Citizens' Action Network and many, many others that have really reached

out to our community and filled gaps as volunteers. They've come forward and

said: "You know what? We want to make our community safer. We want to make it

more friendly. We want to make it greener. We want to make it more reflective of

who we are culturally."

Those people go out every day and do that sort of stuff. It's a

great honour to be in this House and be representing those individuals here in

this chamber and to have some…. Maybe it's a little bit of bragging rights to

the fact that I represent probably the best riding in the whole province of

British Columbia.

Interjections.

L. Mayencourt: There are a lot of seconds here that are

moaning.

I also want to thank my staff. The member for Burquitlam, just a

few minutes ago when he was speaking, acknowledged the fact that there are

legislative assistants here in this building. There are research officers. There

are communications people.

I have two Sarahs that work for me in that department. I've also

got my LA, who is Kevin Dixon. In my office in Vancouver, I have Cris Garvey,

Diane Rogers and Craig Jangula — all of them working very, very hard for the

people of Vancouver-Burrard and also working with me on things that are

important to me as an individual but also as a politician.

When we listened to the Speech from the Throne, I was so delighted

because almost with the first paragraph we started on a project that I was

really passionate about and I really wanted to see go forward. That is a project

called Stehiyaq, which is going to happen in the Tzeachten band's traditional

territories, part of the Stó:lô Nation.

Hon. B. Penner: Also known as the riding of

Chilliwack-Kent.

L. Mayencourt: Also known as the riding of Chilliwack-Kent,

which I think is the second-best riding in the province.

An Hon. Member: Oh, you're digging a hole.

L. Mayencourt: Okay, it is a bit gratuitous. I'll stop.

I really want to say that I was very touched when I saw Chief Joe

Hall here in the chamber and when the very first paragraph talked about the

province making a significant contribution to the creation of Stehiyaq.

What is Stehiyaq? Stehiyaq is a therapeutic community for first

nations people that's going to be a healing centre. It's located in the

beautiful Chilliwack valley. I've been out there. I've had the tour from the

first nations band that has been trying to put this together for the last couple

of years. Chief among those, of course, was Joe Hall.

It was very wonderful to be out there. There's something magical

about Centre Creek, which is where this is located. It's an old prison that was

decommissioned several years ago. Sometimes when people think about old prisons,

they think about the scary parts — the bad history of it. When you walk onto

Centre Creek and the Stehiyaq property, you recognize almost immediately the

healing qualities of it. There's a river that runs through it where individuals

from the first nations band will jump right in, in the middle of winter, to

cleanse and heal themselves. You can feel that kind of vibe and energy in that

place. I really was delighted to see that happening.

[1145]

You know, I've talked many times in this chamber about therapeutic

communities and the value and the new lessons that we can learn from those

particular examples that are most notably located in central Europe. I think

that when we look at treatment communities or therapeutic communities, it's not

just about addictions. It's about a whole host of things. It's about having a

holistic approach to dealing with people with a number of challenges — for

example, those with mental health issues.

[ Page 9786 ]

I could see very soon the possibility of not just tossing our

people with mental illness onto the streets but actually building a community in

which they feel very welcome, where they are contributing, where they're doing

something important with their lives, where they feel as if they are loved and

cared for. That is what a therapeutic community offers.

I think that we have to really concentrate on some of the

messages. We've been talking for the last little while about Riverview in this

chamber, and I think it's a brilliant, brilliant discussion that we're having. I

think it's time for us to recognize that mental health institutions are not what

we saw in One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest . They can be very humane, very

caring, very clean, very safe places for individuals that are battling whatever

demons they have, trying to find stability in their life so that they can be

part of society. That's the direction that we need to be heading in.

I am very, very encouraged by the discussion around Riverview. I

know that there are members here that feel very passionate about ensuring that

that is reserved for people who are in the recovery stages from mental illness,

and I support that 150 percent. I think the site of Riverview is so gorgeous. It

is such a place of beauty, it has so many wonderful trees and calm places to

walk and sit, and all of that makes for a really wonderful environment down

there.

I've been to Riverview a few times, and I've seen the new approach

that we're taking at Riverview with mental health housing accommodation there.

They've built a couple of cottages there. One of them is Connolly house. I want

to tell you, Madam Speaker, that it's a wonderful thing, because it's creating a

community within a building. Instead of having, you know, hundreds of people on

a ward, there are 15 people that live in one of these lodges. They all have

access to their own laundry services. They all have access to a community

kitchen. Yes, they have someone there that does cook for them, but they also….

If they want to make popcorn, they can make popcorn. If they want to have pizza

on a Friday night, they can put one in the oven and away they go kind of thing.

We are helping people in those kinds of settings become more and

more independent. It is a wonderful way to create a community. They have a

central hub and then five wings, if you will, that come out from there. People

don't sleep in hospital beds there. They sleep in beds. They sleep in normal

beds, the kinds that you and I have. It's just so much out of what we come to

expect out of mental health institutions. The change is happening, and the

secret is the community that is created for those people inside of those

settings.

I want to talk for a minute about housing, because this has been a

really important part of my life. The last little while, the last three or four

years, a lot of my focus has really been on housing — housing the homeless,

mental health and addictions. I want to talk about housing. The other day we

were in Nanaimo, and Gary Korpan — who is the mayor of Nanaimo and a member of

the Premier's Task Force on Homelessness, Mental Illness and Addictions — got up

to introduce our Premier. I want to tell you, Madam Speaker, the way that he did

it resonated so strongly with me that I want to share it with you today.

Over and over again, we hear that when we do not deal with the

mentally ill, when we do not deal with the addicted, when we do not deal with

the homeless in a compassionate way, it costs people; it costs people's lives.

Since 2001 our government — our Housing Minister, our Premier — have led the way

on housing across Canada. We've built thousands and thousands of suites for

people.

Just last month we brought another 1,200 units of social housing

together through buying some single-room occupancy hotels on the downtown east

side. All together we've bought 18 of those hotels to provide stability, to give

people an option to live in a safe, clean and affordable site.

[1150]

When Gary Korpan stood up, he said: "You know, when the Premier is

here today, when the Housing Minister is here today, these guys aren't just

dealing with housing. They are saving lives." Madam Speaker, that is exactly

what our housing strategy is about. That's exactly what we're doing. That is

exactly why we take this new direction with mental illness. This is why we are

blazing a new trail, a new model for addictions in British Columbia. It is worth

our time and our effort, and I am so proud of those two gentlemen.

What they are doing in this province is unprecedented. There is

not a single province in Canada — not Ontario, not Quebec, not anywhere — that

is doing anywhere near what we are doing on the housing file.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to be part of a team that has

put that together. Each and every year we have increased — almost doubled — the

housing budget, and that is something significant. It means that thousands and

thousands of British Columbians have secure housing for the first time.

We're also working on housing at risk. We know that there are

folks in our community — single moms, single fathers, people that are vulnerable

— who need support to keep the security of their housing. Our rental assistance

program is helping thousands of British Columbians provide housing for their

kids, making them live in safe places, giving them safe playgrounds and an

opportunity to not be stigmatized by the label of social housing — that no one

knows they're getting a subsidy, that they have the privacy and the dignity that

they are so entitled to.

I want to tell you that I am so proud of that program. I am so

proud of our SAFER program, the Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters, where literally

thousands of seniors, not just in my riding but across this whole province, are

getting a subsidy from this government — some as high as $500 per month — to

make sure that they have stable housing. They can make a choice. They don't have

to move out. They don't have to leave the community they helped to build to find

safe, affordable housing.

[ Page 9787 ]

They can stay where they are. That is important to people.

As I watch my father age, as I watch my mother age, as I watch

friends and their families, I see over and over again the horrible, horrible

choices that must be weighed by children of senior parents when they have to get

them some help. They can't afford to live where they're living anymore, and the

SAFER program provides the resources to help them stay in that neighbourhood.

That means a whole lot to every one of us. It means so much to our parents, and

it's important that we do that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about addictions, but I

do note that it's time for our break. I'd like to hold my spot here. I have some

things I want to talk about in addictions. I have some things I want to talk

about in community courts, about outreach teams that we've started, our green

agenda and the legacy that we are building in British Columbia for our

grandchildren — not for our kids, not for ourselves but for our grandchildren —

because that's where it's at. That's the legacy that we have to do. When W.A.C.

Bennett created a legacy in British Columbia, he created a legacy for my kids,

so I want to talk at length about those things.

At this point I'd like to reserve my spot and move to adjourn

debate.

L. Mayencourt moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Penner moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this

afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:54 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.

Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.

Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

TV channel guide • Broadcast

schedule

Copyright © 2008: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

ISSN: 1499-2175